| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
|
|
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Ralara
Caldari
the united
Negative Ten.
   |
Posted - 2009.04.17 13:42:00 -
[31]
 Originally by: Grez
Not being able to see more than 60 fps from your monitor is a myth, and anyone who says otherwise is just proving they know absolutely nothing.
It doesn't work that way. Your graphics card can produce much more than 60 FPS, yes. However your monitor, if it's a normal LCD screen has it's refresh rate at (normally) 60Hz. That means the screen updates its information 60 times a second whether all that's being displayed is a big red square or a 3D rendering at 500 FPS from the graphics card. You are getting 60 frames per second as a result of this.
Your graphics card can feed the monitor whatever it does but the monitor will never go above displaying 60 frames per second because the hardware inside the screen is set at that amount.
Therefore, it's kinda pointless having Eve generate more than 60 FPS for normal game-play - it's wasted resources - wasted heat and wasted electricity. Who cares if it's generating at 150 FPS? You don't see that.
The only time it really matters is when you're FRAPSing or something and you wanted to perhaps have it in ultra slow motion - have it record at the 150 FPS and then slow it down 5 times to 30 FPS etc. However unless you're doing that, it's pointless.
TLDR: You're doing it wrong :)
--
|
Leeluvv
The Black Ops
Black Core Alliance
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 14:16:00 -
[32]
Edited by: Leeluvv on 17/04/2009 14:26:54
(This is in CRT speak)
It is simpler to think of each horizontal line being refreshed at the refresh rate, so a 75Hz screen will refresh each line 75 times in a second. Having a higher FPS will not increase this, but it will affect what is actually displayed.
Simple example:
20 line screen
Vertical Refresh Rate at 20 Hz (i.e. how fast the horizontal lines are refreshed)
FPS of 20
(FPS synced/locked to Vertical Refresh rate)
Each line is refreshed 20 times in a second and this makes up a full frame, so each frame is shown for 0.05 seconds.
20 line screen
Vertical Refresh Rate at 20 Hz
FPS of 40
(FPS not synced/locked to Vertical Refresh rate)
Each line is refreshed 20 times a second, but the PC is producing 40 frames per second, so the top half of the screen will be the first frame and the bottom half will be the second frame. You only ever see half a frame and it is displayed for 0.025 seconds, but you still only see 1 screen display every 0.05 seconds.
This can cause 'tearing' or distortion in the image, because the item you have on screen in the top half may have moved in the lower half, so the image wont align correctly; HOWEVER, in FPS games it is often more important to see things as soon as posible so the image corruption is acceptable.
Disabling VSync is a hang up from FPS and other 'twitch' games and I cannot see any benefit to disabling VSync in Eve.
The human eye is usually happy with a static image being refreshed at approx 75 FPS, but this is lower for a moving image, usually 25 FPS.
TV is 50 or 60 Hz, but interlaced, so you actually only get 25 or 30 FPS.
Normal movies are 24 FPS.
To all those people claiming that they can't play below large FPS values, you are lying if you can happily watch TV or movies.
Lee
==
Sig to follow |
Sirani
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 14:25:00 -
[33]
Originally by: Elizabeth Joanne
Unless you have a CRT display or one of those new-fangled 120 fps panels, you'll never see more than 60 fps anyway. That's the refresh rate of most panels, and there's no way going beyond that.
That aside, if you absolutely, definitely need to see more than 60 fps on the meter, look at your graphics setting. Perhaps the patch made changes to the interval, and switching back to "Interval immediate" should turn off VSync and any triple buffering.
*sigh*
its not just about what you can see, trying playing the game at 150 FPS and then at 60 FPS, it *feels* slower and more sluggish
------------------- |
WarlockX
Amarr
Free Trade Corp
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 14:43:00 -
[34]
Originally by: Sirani
Originally by: Elizabeth Joanne
Unless you have a CRT display or one of those new-fangled 120 fps panels, you'll never see more than 60 fps anyway. That's the refresh rate of most panels, and there's no way going beyond that.
That aside, if you absolutely, definitely need to see more than 60 fps on the meter, look at your graphics setting. Perhaps the patch made changes to the interval, and switching back to "Interval immediate" should turn off VSync and any triple buffering.
*sigh*
its not just about what you can see, trying playing the game at 150 FPS and then at 60 FPS, it *feels* slower and more sluggish
are you on crack? how can it feel slower if it looks exactly the same?
-----------------------------------------------
Free Trade Corp - Flash page
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 14:48:00 -
[35]
Originally by: Leeluvv
The human eye is usually happy with a static image being refreshed at approx 75 FPS, but this is lower for a moving image, usually 25 FPS.
That's backwards. The human eye is "happy" with 0 fps for a static image. (You ever hear anyone complain that the refresh rate was too low on the Mona Lisa?) The greater the degree of motion being displayed the more frames are required to give the illusion of continuity. |
Red Wid0w
Caldari
Science and Trade Institute
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:04:00 -
[36]
Yes there is a difference between 150 and 60 fps. But it's not that you mouth-breathers think.
150FPS IS ACTUALLY SLOWER - YOUR PC IS DOING MORE WORK!! For no gain at all since monitor can't display it.
You might even notice controls becoming less responsive, since input generally runs in a different thread from graphics. With VSYNCH off you are letting the graphics thread run rampant and waste CPU resources. Not to mention fans having to work harder etc, you are actually wrecking your pc - KEEP DENYING IT!
60 FPS IS SMOOTHER. Because it's locked to 60fps - a CONSTANT smooth fps!
There's a good thread on SHC about 120hz lcds etc, that explodes lots of common myths.
ITT ppl with more money than sense claim to have 200hz displays etc.
|
Grez
Minmatar
Core Contingency
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:47:00 -
[37]
A game pumping out 150 fps, is running quicker, more responsive and generally doing everything it can/should do, a lot quicker than a game doing that at 60 fps, hence, a game running at 150 fps will feel more responsive, even if you can only see 60 fps from the monitor.
For example, the game is running on the computer, not the monitor. The hardware is plugged into the computer, not the monitor. Just because the monitor is displaying it at 60/75fps (in their most common settings), does not mean that the game is running at that speed.
Limiting a game to output at a certain frame rate can also cause detrimental effects to how the game is processes. Hence, a game can definitely, and will almost always feel, more responsive.
Those of us with computers that can handle the extra fps, are all free to do it, if you lock your FPS to your refresh rate using vsync, the computer is still going to be working as hard on other things, the only component that's not, is the graphics card, and they are designed to be worked at 100% (most gaming ones anyway).
Hence, there is no point to forcing vsync other than trying to solve any tearing issues you see, or if your graphics card cannot cope with 100% workload.
---
Grez: I shot the sheriff
Kalazar: But I could not lock the Deputy BECAUSE OF FALCON |
Highwind Cid
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:54:00 -
[38]
Originally by: johny B5
before the patch, i had 150 fps and higher with the highest settings, now i only have about 60 fps. why? please remove these stupid restrictions. this is not doom 3.
i recently bought a new grafic card, and cannot make use of it. i like my old fps back, wether i am able to see them or not. when i am in a battle situation with less frames than 60 frames, this is not acceptable.
ccp, please remove this useless restriction fast!
My spider sense is anticipating a new thread about John Doe's GPU becoming insanely hot while in stations...
|
Spurty
Caldari
Amok.
Minor Threat.
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 15:56:00 -
[39]
Someone is mixing up the fact that after the patch, something was really messed up with the client.
To get my client to draw nicely (not stuttering and the fps hanging around 42) even when in the station:
a) clear my caches
b) install nVidia's 182.50 driver
c) reboot Vista 64bit SP1
Now, everything is nice and smooth again. Prior to what I did, it was choppy, the updates to the screen were slow, the fps had dropped.
Not all of these things are tied to eachother I know, but I am confirming that I had this issue and I resolved it.
Originally by: Butter Dog
I think you'll find that 10 seconds > 1 month
|
Pottsey
Enheduanni Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:01:00 -
[40]
A game running at 150fps will have screen tearing and people appearing in more than one place at once. You might have the legs inches away from the body. Hardly what you need when trying to aim at a person.
All you're doing at 150fps is forcing the game to draw half frames or part of frames. How can half frames or less be more responsive? Unless you have mouse lag there is never a reason to not use vsync.
Perhaps you're confusing the FPS responsiveness diffrence with a mouse lag problem some people get with vsync. There are cases where vsync cause a mouse lag problem but that's not a FPS problem. Its not the extra FPS that stop the mouse lag.
______
How to Passive Shield Tank T2
|
|
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:46:00 -
[41]
Originally by: Pottsey
Perhaps you're confusing the FPS responsiveness diffrence with a mouse lag problem some people get with vsync. There are cases where vsync cause a mouse lag problem but that's not a FPS problem. Its not the extra FPS that stop the mouse lag.
That's not caused by waiting for v-sync, it's caused by double/triple-buffering (sometimes graphics cards support 5..9 buffers also). This utilizes the hardware better, but whatever is displayed, is delayed for 1+ frames, so the mouse is not as responsive as it could be. Double-/triple-buffering is not very useful without waiting for v-sync to switch between buffers.
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 16:56:00 -
[42]
Also, turning VSynch off just so you can SHOW OFF your "omfg, 279 FPS EVE, wtfbbq" is downright stupid, because it's KNOWN to have contributed a lot to premature frying of several video cards.
Also, like many, MANY people have said here before, if the monitor can only display 60 (or 75, or 100, or 120, whatever), there's no BENEFIT in turning VSynch off ("Interval immediate") other than the FPS e-p33n number on the FPS monitor. At best, you will see half a frame and half of the other with a bit of tearning in-between, but that's just stupid.
In EVE, at pretty much all times, VSynch should be turned on (Interval one) and left that way forever. It has no serious drawbacks (some MIGHT argue that it doesn't "feel that dynamic anymore" because they were used to the tearing effect) but a lot of benefits compared to the alternative (longer vidcard life, for starters).
_
The problem with EVE || Fit a ship || Get some ISK |
Hariya
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:00:00 -
[43]
Originally by: Gabriel Loki
Originally by: Lonzo Kincaid
what's the frame rate for human eyes?
They dont have one.
The US Air Force conducted some scientific research on this matter in 2001, and they concluded that their fighter pilots (people with near perfect human eyes) can in simulations still benefit from 250-275fps difference in how they perceive moving objects. That being said, more fps in computer games is good, and the human perception (subconsciously) can use as much as the technology will ever be able to provide.
TFT panels do commonly only 60 updates to the image per second. That number is tied mostly to the vertical refresh rate, but also into the fact that the all-digital processing unit that is handling the signaling to the grid should be cheap(ish) and the monitors are commonly designed for one exact and constant fps rate regardless of what the incoming signal would be. Some monitors do the 60fps better than others though, there are several tricks that can be used to fool humans think that the action is smoother (although it really is not).
|
Beth Noir
The Neuroeconomic Foundation
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:06:00 -
[44]
After a bit of testing, I'm sure there's something more to this which is causing the disagreement.
I'd noticed Eve had suddenly become much less smooth before reading this thread and checked my fps, was only getting about 45, which is very slow.
The default post patch is the 'interval default' setting.
Switching to 'interval immediate' fixed it, smooth again, getting around 130fps, BUT switching to 'interval one' also fixes it, smooth, and spot on 60fps on a 60Hz screen.
So, vsynch isn't the problem. There's something else about 'interval default' which slows things down. Best solution to keep everyone happy is 'interval one' (display and graphics advanced settings)
|
Feilamya
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:13:00 -
[45]
Unless you want to see ugly tearing or fry your graphics card, use "Interval One" and be happy with 60 FPS.
|
Cipher7
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:17:00 -
[46]
1) The human eye can only perceive a certain amount of frames per sec.
2) The monitor can only put out a certain number of frames per sec.
3) When you turn off vsync and get those "150 dps" rates, #1 your monitor doesn't display most of them #2 If it did, your eyes would get tired more quickly for no benefit.
60 FPS should feel really really smooth to most people, and for some people can result in eyestrain. Anything above 30fps is fine and really almost the limit of our human perception.
---
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:19:00 -
[47]
Originally by: Akita T
Turning VSynch off just so you can SHOW OFF your "omfg, 279 FPS EVE, wtfbbq" is downright stupid, because it's KNOWN to have contributed a lot to premature frying of several video cards.
It is also known to have caused the "omg EVE uses up 100% CPU time on the login screen" problem. ;-)
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Catherine Frasier
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:24:00 -
[48]
Originally by: Cipher7
your eyes would get tired more quickly for no benefit.
Um... your eyes are taking in a constant stream of input regardless of the fps on your display. It's not like they slow down to 60fps just because your game does and it's not like they "speed up" and get tired trying to keep up with faster displays. |
Feilamya
Minmatar
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 17:31:00 -
[49]
Edited by: Feilamya on 17/04/2009 17:31:19
Originally by: Cipher7
Anything above 30fps is fine and really almost the limit of our human perception.
This is only true for movies, and it has nothing to do with human perception:
http://www.daniele.ch/school/30vs60/30vs60_1.html
(Text does not cite any sources. If you really care, do your own research on it...)
|
Xianbei
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 18:15:00 -
[50]
wow the amount of armchair science in this thread is amazing
and how people can pound their chest and scream about something and be so wrong
is a testament to what the internet has become. the internet at your very fingertips
and you cant even be bothered to research before you post.
i was going to offer some constructive info and links but really there is no point
you can lead an idiot to information but you cannot make him un-stupid
|
|
|
Elain Reverse
Caldari
Shokei
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 18:26:00 -
[51]
If you are using V-sync you are basicly saying to graphic card to wait with rendering for next refresh rate of your monitor.
It make your GFX working less but also can lower overall or minimum fps and can even bring you microlags.
Its maybe not big issue with EVE but realy not nice for fps games.
|
Petra Katell
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 18:29:00 -
[52]
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
You're welcome.
|
Hariya
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 18:36:00 -
[53]
Originally by: Petra Katell
http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm
You're welcome.
You have just earned yourself a coupon for 1000 internets.
|
Gabriel Loki
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:10:00 -
[54]
Originally by: Grez
Limiting a game to output at a certain frame rate can also cause detrimental effects to how the game is processes. Hence, a game can definitely, and will almost always feel, more responsive.
No programmer worth his salt will put the whole game into a single thread, you can have vsync on, and the rest of the game will still run full throttle.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:10:00 -
[55]
Quote:
Unless you want to see ugly tearing or fry your graphics card, use "Interval One" and be happy with 60 FPS
I am using interval one but I tried with no v-sync and I did not see neither "ugly" tearing nor fried anything.
Buy something that does not suck?
Said that, I am happy I am still using a 85 Hz CRT monitor. I happen to see the difference between a v-synced 60 and a 75 and a 85 monitor (it's quite an easy difference spotting 60 => 75, almost invisible 75 => 85).
I have 11/10 visus though.
Quote:
Anything above 30fps is fine and really almost the limit of our human perception.
No way, I'd vomit if I had to follow a monitor at 30fps (not joking).
A television, that's fine as it's usually seen from a greatly bigger distance.
Basically to "feel" the frame rate, all you have to do is to turn your head sideways then look at the screen while turning it (not too fast). You'll see a feeling of "discontinuity" which is very detrimental if you play a game where you tend to "follow" movements around.
I.e. imagine the screen is >= 19" and a guy appears all to the top left. It's probable you'll instinctively turn your head / eyeballs (peripheral vision calls for attention to movement). In that turning, you'll feel the difference between a slow and a fast refresh.
Moreover older LCD monitors exibit a ghosting effect on high contrast images in movement, which further adds to the uncomfortable eye feeling.
|
Zeba
Minmatar
Honourable East India Trading Company
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:16:00 -
[56]
Originally by: Red Wid0w
Oh, and those 120hz LCDs are rubbish, they interpolate between frames basically.
Well as the owner of both a slightly 'older' model 1080p lcd with a 60hz refresh and one of the new fangled 1080p 120hz refresh screens I can tell you that your assumption is rubbish. Both have a 2ms responce time but the 120hz is sooooooo much smoother looking with action on the sceen. Basicially to the point my pc or blu-ray content or hd channels are like looking through a window at a real scene. Matter of fact I was so impressed I now use two 42" LG-70 on my computer to dual screen with. 
Originally by: Achar Losa
i might be just a 6 year old stupid boy, but he's a CCP dev writing in the forums!
|
Malphilos
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:19:00 -
[57]
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Basically to "feel" the frame rate, all you have to do is to turn your head sideways then look at the screen while turning it (not too fast). You'll see a feeling of "discontinuity" which is very detrimental if you play a game where you tend to "follow" movements around.
I hear that if you smash yourself in the face with a hammer you'll feel a bit of "discontinuity" too.
But why the hell would you do either of those things?
|
Gabriel Loki
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:23:00 -
[58]
Originally by: Malphilos
Originally by: Vaerah Vahrokha
Basically to "feel" the frame rate, all you have to do is to turn your head sideways then look at the screen while turning it (not too fast). You'll see a feeling of "discontinuity" which is very detrimental if you play a game where you tend to "follow" movements around.
I hear that if you smash yourself in the face with a hammer you'll feel a bit of "discontinuity" too.
But why the hell would you do either of those things?
So your OVER 9000! fps mean something?
|
Phantom Slave
JUDGE DREAD Inc.
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:30:00 -
[59]
There seems to be some misconception and alot of personal bias in this thread.
I prefer v-sync on. It's a personal preference. Some people prefer V-sync off, it's their choice.
***SCREEN TEARING, and what it means to you!***
Screen tearing can ONLY be seen on a moving object, faster moving objects means more tearing. If you're sitting in station just looking at your ship, you won't see tearing because there isn't alot of fast movement. Go outside the station and spin your camera around really fast. If your monitor is set at 60 Hz and your framerate is above that, you will notice that if you spin the screen fast enough the station will effectively be split up into parts for very VERY brief moments.
If you do not notice this with v-sync off then don't bother turning it on. If you DO notice it but it doesn't bother you then leave v-sync off. I notice it and it bugs me, so I use v-sync.
It's ALL personal preference. Some people just may not even notice it because they don't care. If you like v-sync then use it, if you don't then don't bother.
To those that are saying that v-sync lowers your system heat then you're not entirely correct. V-sync produces 2 frames for every frame the monitor shows, and if you have Triple Buffering on then you're producing 3 frames for every 1 that shows. It helps keep your framerate smooth because if something happens that slows down the GPU then it has extra frames to fall back on.
|
Vaerah Vahrokha
Minmatar
Dark-Rising
|
Posted - 2009.04.17 19:30:00 -
[60]
Quote:
I hear that if you smash yourself in the face with a hammer you'll feel a bit of "discontinuity" too.
But why the hell would you do either of those things?
Because if you want to perform a test, you "stress" the system?
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |