What's the absolute lowest framerate you can stomach without keeling over and vomiting? For me it's 120

45. Anything below makes me feel like I'm playing a ps1 and I can't help but wanting to put a bat through my screen

20 is "ok" even slightly below is "acceptance" tier. But i would rather not go below 15, even with my shit PC and WoW back than it was a hard pill to swallow.

Anything below 25 I don't like. I usually play on 30-40 FPS. I don't like the ultra smooth look to anything over, it makes me uncomfortable

Depends on how the game handles it.
Back on my shitty laptop i could play PAYDAY 2 at only 20-30 FPS and fuck me did it feel good enough (and great for my younger more plebian counterpart), but for example on racing games like Forza Horizon 4, i literally cannot play it on my Xbox One anymoree because of the framerate, i legitimately start getting dizzy.

lower fps is more cinematic

Attached: silky smooth 24 fps.webm (1280x696, 2.82M)

23

LOL the human eye can’t see frame rates above 90 FPS.
>He fell for the 120hz meme

OHNONONO LOL

I have a hard time believing anyone finding under 120 FPS to be vomit-inducing.

Interestingly 45.

I find 30 to be incredibly slow and it feels genuinely sluggish and unresponsive, but i've found in the rare cases where I can't quite hit a rock solid 60fps, capping it at 45fps still feels great with none of the drawbacks of 30fps.

IT DEPENDS ON THE GAME YOU AUTISTIC RETARDS

You can play a turn based game at 1fps, but you can’t play a fighting game at 30.

and for us g/freesync bois its anything since its always smooth.

better buy a new monitor grandpa.

30, you fucking puss

I doubt you can play anything with 1 fps

24

I have a 144hz monitor for my pc. But I can still boot up my old ps2 every now and then and enjoy a games that chugs around 15-30 fps just fine.

Attached: lebowski.jpg (1280x720, 100K)

>scrolling through a menu at 1 fps
enjoy your torture

Is it only me or do games feel like they're smoother on video? I consistently get over 60fps on a game, but whenever i go to yt it seems so much more fluid.

More of her like

Attached: we.png (326x326, 155K)

>He fell for the 120hz meme
120 is a low framerate

24 and even then, that's in context
Prefer 60, only experienced 120 when playing Quake on some old-school nerd's rig.
The most important thing is a solid FPS. You get used to 30/24 very quickly if it is solid, but if 60 is solid and possible, why not? If it's variable, it's noticeable and of course, if you get frame drops at a lower FPS it's more noticeable than at a higher FPS. Stability is key!

It also depends on the genre. I'd never accept 30fps in a fighting game for example.

Smaller image has that effect

>15 FPS
Soul
>60 FPS
Soulless

Sauce?

>60 FPS
Soul
>15 FPS
Soulless

>tfw when played gta v at 30fps and it was fine

Attached: Whyisthereanarticle.png (469x751, 436K)

>>tfw when
>That feel when when

20ish. below that the input lag gets too high.

forgive my spergatory

i played through DS2 on PS3 which averaged around 23 FPS and i enjoyed it.

Jesus christ that actually hurt my eyes.

plebian

Attached: 1554997019900.jpg (480x304, 9K)

59, fps needs to be higher than 60 at all times. Indifferent to 144fps since I don't play fps

Repent, zoomer

60fps. My eyes are shitty and I cant tell higher frame rates. Also ur pic is 1fps LMfao

>Filthyfrank image
>Shitty Yea Forums meme
Go back

15 feels comfy, it's like it's 2005 again, back when things weren't shit

Is that a tranny?

I remember watching a video of some la creatura playing watch dogs 2 and literally fucking sperging out because the fps dropped by 5%

I’ve played games at 12fps and got so used to it that it looked normal.

entirely depends on the game. each game has wildly different framepacing. for example playing kingdom come at 60fps still looks like a juddery mess because the framepacing is all over the place.

*50ms input lag*

45 fps - the floor for the freesync range in my screen is 48 but I can now actually eyeball the difference without an fps counter. Playing racing games at 120fps is smooooooooth.

Webm semi-related.

Attached: The floor is now lava.webm (640x360, 1.94M)

>they never played dos/snes rpgs
Some of them may as well have been 1fps

ok retard

I can tolerate 30fps for non racing games. I prefer 60fps.

...

anything less then 144 fps is unplayable for me

I like to put at 45. Its a nice balance for my eyes and gpu performance

Yhea, kys

hmm this is clearly compressed/altered in some way, this looks worse than DVD quality

24 is the minimum

you need over 90 to stand a chance in multiplayer FPS. freak talents who can play at a high level on a 60 Hz monitor exist but they do much better on higher refresh rate as well.

16.6ms of consistent framepacing. anything higher is noticeable stutter and anything lower makes your PC run hotter

Attached: pc.webm (640x480, 1.85M)

sauce?

youtu.be/pUvx81C4bgs
youtu.be/Q1cmhZs1P54
youtu.be/knM4yFJpXkQ
Nothing.
Some low latency 60hz screens exist but they are mainly used in vr not in consumer tv/monitors
I only just upgraded to 3440x1440 3.5k 100hz and it's a massive step up from 1080p 60fps with drops to 30fps
The lack of response hurts gameplay more than refresh rate as well since u can run vsync fast or off at 60hz and have a more responsive game but NOTHING beats high refresh rate and resolution.
Al these seething console faps with their 24fps need to kill themselves they've fucked an entire generation of games and gamers with their 30fps garbage.
Blame amd bulldozer if you want but we all know it's devs who pushed the 1080p 30fps meme instead of dropping graphics to a more reasonable level
Hell if a fucking game cube and xbox 1 dreamcast and ps2 could do 480p 60fps surely these shit consoles could.
Even gen 7 was better gen 8 is a joke hopefully gen 9 with Zen 2 navi and better apis will put this low refresh rate garbage to bed.
Anything under 75hz is noticeable and under 48fps (gsync/freesync cut off) is unplayable for me now

Attached: unknown-01.jpg (7749x1518, 367K)

to feel ok it needs to be 60.

but 30 can be acceptable. at 25 it gets really ugly.

in some games like mmorpgs i have no problem to limit fps to 30 to not put so much strain the hardware.

When you're responsible for moving the camera around, your perception of movement is vastly different to merely observing movement.

there's a reason good directors dont do these kinds of scenes with that much texture.

25

I find 60hz laggy as fuck in menus even desktop and my phone.
High refresh rate > resolution.
Only reason I went to 3440x1440p was dogshit dpi on a 34" screen with 2k and text looked awful at 29"
Stutter/bad frame pacing is what kills me.
I can deal with 24-50 fps if it's smooth but lots of games have judder

Im forced to play Sekiro at around 45, below that it gets really annoying.
Im fucked at last boss fight because that area gives me around 35 average.

i'm actually enjoying torturing myself watching it on repeat

ITT Yea Forums has never heard of frametimes.

ok retard

Depends on the game.
GTA1 at 23fps is the closest a game has ever come to making me vomit.

This I thought I was getting old but 75 even 100hz gives u a massive advantage.
I only play seige so it rarely drops below 100fps with the garbage ao reflections and bloom turned off
Going back to 60hz in locked emulators and older games like halo was aids

Attached: unknown.png (2293x713, 205K)

SVP mastarrace

ok retard

Unless you have a ancient gpu and CPU that usually isn't a problem.
Frame times>fps=hz
Just went back to single digits up to 60fps in emulated x360 and ps3 its beyond bad.
Id rather play 30/60fps 720p then put up with that.
And I have
Used to force my ps3 and 360 to run at 720 or even 480p for more fps

>Unless you have a ancient gpu and CPU that usually isn't a problem.
>Frame times>fps=hz
People need to understand this.

Nothing causes me to vomit and I'll play anything, but I prefer 144Hz.

Actually that's a common misconception. The human eye can only see 40fps; 20 in each eye. Hence the term 20/20 vision.

40

what good is having 120/144/240FPS in your games if the frametime/pacing is garbage? this is the major problem with most AAA games.

>fps snobbery
Call me old but back in the good old days you were happy that you could even run the latest games on on your PC that was cutting edge just a year earlier. 40fps was absolutely fine.

How comes 30FPS looks smooth on PS4 but looks really fucking choppy on PC?

Attached: 1403723411154.jpg (640x560, 58K)

I think it's somehting to do with the mouse vs controller. Mouse you can make much faster turns which probably impacts it.

Most people have shitty high end tvs that process the image to make it seem more smooth, that and they're using a controller.

Probably because the game on PS4 has 33ms of frametime every frame, while the PC game has frametimes ranging from 5ms to 200ms, averaging at 33ms.

>this is the major problem with most AAA games.
You can't simplify it like that - there are a huge number of factors that lead to a gpu giving a good render time or not. CPUs tend not to be the limiting factor in this context but again, they can influence frametimes heavily.

Shitloads of motion blur and vsync. A mouse does highlight issues but if one used a controller they would look the same (assuming identical settings).

Because you have freesync/gsync turned off.

Human eyes can see well over 1000fps and our brains receive a sort of mixed 2000fps 576megapixel image.
Vr won't even be close to real no matter how good the graphics get it won't feel real.
We need to get 1000fps 8k+ even if the graphics are photo real it won't move or feel real to your eyes and other senses
Weirdly enough vr at 90hz was fine (psvr) but only low fps 2d makes me vomit.
Even 24fps movies (00-10s ((3d))) where OK but games at that 24fps was disgusting
Their brain does even if their mind doesn't if that makes sense.
For me it totally puts me out of the game kinda like a uncanny valley effect but for response/tactile/audiovisual pavlovian etc.
You know what I mean the movement just doesn't feel right even if it technically looks fine.
It's why I like digital foundry still as Richard and John are the only nerds to specifically point this out and prioritize smooth frame delivery over higher fps
I'd take 30fps smooth over 60fps judder but nothing under 100fps feels (real) or smooth anymore

monitor refresh rate

ok retard

ok retard

>what is freesync
>what is running at high details instead of ultra max
I have a 2080ti and I still turn crap off if the games I'm playing won't hit 100hz 7ms+
Frame delivery in modern games 5 years old or newer is pretty good.

I'm using same TV and xbox controller for consoles+PC. why do 30FPS look smoother on console than it does on PC? take monster hunter world for example, capping to 30FPS looks really choppy while on Xbox it looks better despite being 30FPS in your character's room too.

10

ok retard

I already fucking answered you you fucking blind fuck.

FRAMEPACING YOU FOOL. Your gpu is probably dying a painful death in the game. There is no secret sauce to consoles that makes them look smoother beyond placebo and retards who know no better.

Motion blur

This but it's more about consistency
Also this.
Modern TV + wireless controller gives around 100ms lag making 30fps not feel as bad
On pc with a decent wired kbm and monitor that hits 16ms or less your literally waiting for the game not the other way around
200ms? Bullshit not with a ssd or half decent hdd
Also this.
I turn off motion blur in every game as it just looks like shit.
Your eyes will naturally blur fast moving images anyway
Short answer is that pc games are designed for 60fps+
Console ports sync perfectly with 60hz TV's especially at half rate (30fps)
Long answer is above and digital foundry go into depth on this.
Well their is secret sauce but it's more short cuts rather than using magic blast processing marketing speak.

80+

Attached: World War Z - auto shotgun.webm (960x540, 2.94M)

game?

Anything above 60 is a meme

Nigger what about this is Yea Forums related

>200ms? Bullshit not with a ssd or half decent hdd
Stutters can definitely happen mate, for a variety of reasons.

t. too poor to upgrade to 144hz

Depends on the genre, really. For first person games, everything below 60fps is unacceptable for me. But I've been able to play third person games at as low as 45.

>200ms? Bullshit not with a ssd or half decent hdd
>5fps is only possible with a bad hdd

ok retard

Retard.

45

I don't vomit from pixels you fucking pussy

>constantly see people say 30fps is unplayable
>theres a good chance they played n64 games and had no problems with them when they were running at 12-24FPS.

this is why i never take FPS rants seriously.
just a bunch of babies crying.

Try it with a controller and it'll feel exactly like it does on consoles. Mouse controls make it feel choppier because it moves much faster. It's as simple as that. Plus the fact that you're sitting further away from the TV than your monitor.

What's wrong?

Motion blur

60 just reminds me of how fake everything is nowadays, there's no soul to that. 24 and 15 are unironically comfy

>all the hdd refreshlets crawl out of the woodworking
In my case yes it absolutely is.
Hence why gen 9 is using solid state
For me is 100% 5 years old seagates

The person I replied to.

every fps above 30 is pointless luxury

>high end tvs that process the image to make it seem more smooth
only retards leave that effect on when they play games though

Like 20 seeing how I grew up on 5th gen consoles.

>In my case yes it absolutely is.
Nobody cares about your case.

I meant what's wrong about it obviously, you dipshit.

GRIP

Attached: Threading the needle.webm (1920x1080, 1.79M)

>only retards leave that effect on when they play games though
So pretty much everyone playing AAA games that are available on PC on console

Not him but nothing runs at 144hz 4k so it's pointless for me.
3.5k at 100fps is doable on a 2080ti though
Except I had issues with them back then as well
Mainly headaches and eye strain
You legit have not experienced gaming to it's fullest until u go 100fps+ is better than raw 4k even
Sony and Microsoft do hence why gen 9 has ssds 10x+ faster than m. 2 drives
Is this officially out yet? I've had it since pre alpha but the online is dead
Fucking gorgeous game

Someone’s going to read this and believe it.

The claim about a frame time that goes up to 200ms, you absolute retard. You're literally braindead if you believe that absolute bullshit. That or your PC is from the 90s.

Stutters that long happen mate.

Holy shit you're dense. Do you realize consoles are essentially PCs? They also have RAM, a CPU, a GPU and an HDD. And those components are from almost a decade ago. Your belief that consoles are immune to stutters despite having similar but inferior hardware is delusional.

below 80 is generally pretty meh, but around 40 is when it really starts to suck.

Devs can account for that shit hardware though, they can't for all PCs. Also no additional software creating inconsistencies in the resources that are available.

Is this a lie then?

Attached: 1535589451460.jpg (711x457, 38K)

It's funny some games have over 150ms+ lag anyway like Rdr2 asscreeed and many other 30fps games.
Let him sit in his laggy filth while we enjoy 5ms godlike 100fps+

>Is this a lie then?
Polaris btfo
Vega was better than pascal but can't catch turing.
My 2080ti oc is smooth as fuck

to be fair, this was much easier to accept when you knew your next PC bought 1-2 years later would deliver triple the framerate. now you upgrade after 5 years and at best double your framerate.

>Is this officially out yet? I've had it since pre alpha but the online is dead
Came out november last year. The online was always going to be dead as its a fairly niche game.

A 5 year upgrade moved me from a 290x at 1080p to a VII at 4k AND pushing higher framerates. It was a monster upgrade.

>GRIP
what a SHIT ASS hud and what a shitty way to steal from rollcage.

Around 20.
Many old DOS games and NES games only really refreshed at 20-25 FPS despite being on a 60-75hz screen. I prefer higher framerates but low framerates don't bother me.
Whats really important is CONSISTENT framerates, a consistent 30 is better then 60 slingshoting down to 30 and back all the time. That shit drives me nuts.

I think there's only been one or two games I've played where I actually had any issues with the framerate.

Yes and mono sound was also fine back then.

Oh right.
Love the game looks gorgeous at 4k
I went from a 6970 to a 290 to a 770 4gb to a 390x to a Vega 56 then 1080 and finally a 2080ti
Wild fucking ride desu the Vega 56 was decent but like the 290 it had a stock blower
WHIRRRRRRRR
Damn I can't imagine going from my 290 to a Vega 2 holy shit I thought my jump from Vega 56/1080 was big
What screen did u get? I got 3440x1440p 100hz va Samsung panel massive upgrade from 60hz t260r 1920 1200p 60hz trash tn and a 29" LG ips 75hz
It's the same fucking devs you moron

anything under 90 is cancer
anything under 120 is bearable
144 is good (for now, havent tried 240)

Smoke him

Attached: 1548855616321.webm (700x544, 579K)

>220fps anything lower it’s plebeian race

I don't play anything below 60, but 110-165 gsync is the sweet spot. Unless it's an old game.

Attached: 1553990744497.gif (460x359, 77K)

>2 guys that used to change toilet rolls at game A
>lets copy game A lel!

psychnosis used to innovate. This is blatant plagiarism and nostalgia pandering, hard pass.

>What screen did u get?
Acer Nitro XV273K. Cost a fuckload but will last me for a long fucking time.

i really cant tell the diffidence based on this picture.

>What's the absolute lowest framerate you can stomach without keeling over and vomiting?
7 perhaps. I don't know. Pretty low for sure.
I honestly don't get the big deal. Higher framerates are obviously better, but I have never ever understood the sentiment of lower framerates somehow being unplayable.

>watching movies on a 15 inch black in white, mono CRT is just as good as watching them in a movie theater quit crying
no, you fucking retard.

Attached: 54pvitwfnor21.gif (190x182, 2.36M)

finally someone that gets it
everyone else is just retarded

>50fps file

>30 vs 60
>jpg

480hz is already a thing if you get a zisworks kit but it's limited to 540p
I agree with you only because most of the maps are kinda eh they have no flow or imagination like the stage 2 ones and just feel generic.
Game plays great though my only real issue is dead online.
Needs to go free 2 play instead of dying on the vine
1k usd wew good luck hitting 144hz uhd I Csnt even do 3.5k 100hz on a 2ghz 2080ti

Depends whether your using a controller or mouse. For a console game using a controller locked 30 is tolerable if the game isn't super fast. On PC for any mouse controlled FPS below 45 fps starts to feel like a slideshow presentation. Ideally you wouldn't ever want to drop below 60 in that scenario but rather hover around 90-10 fps.

>1k usd wew good luck hitting 144hz uhd I Csnt even do 3.5k 100hz on a 2ghz 2080ti
There is no point using it in 144hz mode since that disables freesync. However i'm not always going to be playing the latest and greatest games and even then as i'm not retarded I tweak settings to suit.

A simple example is deus ex mankind divided. Most review show 20fps at 4k because they turn on MSAA - disable that any my bone stock VII hits around 50fps in the big open areas and shoots towards 100fps inside at ultra.

Anything not as demanding as that makes 120fps migh more achievable. Besides, thats the point of freesync - so I can play at highly variable framerates and it be smooth as butter.

35 and below is when it starts to get nauseating
15 is when I'm throwing my hands in the air and stop playing

there's wipeout, and that's the only great pod racer there is. sadly. maybe ps5 will bring a new one.

Holy shit this is nauseating

You guys want frames? I will give you the realm of the GODS: youtube.com/watch?v=7Ys_yKGNFRQ

Attached: Earth and moon on the same pic.jpg (1706x766, 30K)

Would be better if 60fps was Ricardo

Attached: ric.gif (293x220, 633K)

it should be illegal to pan cameras at 24fps

>15 fps
>getting flashbacks to old 10 mb porn videos from kazaa
I didn't ask for this nostalgia boner

15: Swiggity swooty
30: FOR THE EMPIRE
60: *Pimp Walking Noises*

Attached: 1501060866832.webm (1280x696, 2.97M)

slightly, slightly better, if still trash. less juttering in the early bits

60 is fine, I don't need anything more than that. I always have to get a balance of looks good and frames, as I hate looks like ass and 60 fps.

>All the spoiled children in this thread who never experienced what it was like to finally get a Voodoo card and have Quake finally not be a slideshow

Well, shit. Looks like we're not getting any tourism out there for some time.

Attached: ... (3).jpg (400x300, 25K)

game depending

sp 60fps is okay but i may vomit
mp atleast 100 fps preferable 144

I went from playing N64 games to PC games and the difference made my head explode as a kid.

from another thread i remember it being the absolute most generic name possible, i think its asian oil dance party 2 or some shit.

unironically, 60 frames is about where i dont really want to play the game for being too choppy

Attached: FPS.webm (960x540, 566K)

motion blur?

Nope, it isn't. I downloaded that film in 10GB quality and it actually looked like that. Even then I thought to myself holy shit my fucking eyes.

It's probably still bad, but you can clearly see it blurring details in a compression style because it's a fucking 3MB webm.

Obviously it's still compressed but if anything that makes it less hard on the eyes.

30fps works if it's a slow-paced cinematic game

I played Witcher 3 at locked 30fps and it was good

>the face when when
When did it became that feel when and not the face when?

It was always that feel when. You're mixing tfw up with mfw.

>mwf I was corrected

Attached: ahyeah.jpg (306x165, 4K)

is this your first day on the Internet? Serious btw

No it wasn't. I hate this meme.

30 fps for vidya
18 fps for videos

>it's the horse blowjob again

it depends actually, the problem isn't really the FPS, it's more the consistency of it
I'll stomach a smooth 25 fps more than 60 with 35 dips

why the fuck is there tearing?!?!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!!!!

No but it is a south east asian prostitute so id advice against putting your cock in her cunny (mouth is fine)

the low frame one looks much better except for the tearing which is completely unnecessary and retarded by the retard who made the low fps clip

why is shit webm tearing so much, what a shit format by a shit company called google

>Human eyes can see well over 1000fps and our brains receive a sort of mixed 2000fps 576megapixel image.
Citation needed. Yea Forums told me real life didn’t have an FPS.

I play at 10 fps and have fun

Attached: 10fps_is_enough_for_fun.webm (640x360, 2.65M)

I can deal with 20fps with slight headaches (quit mh3u for that reason before picking it back). Around 40fps things are ok, from 80 on its maximum comfy. I felt a massive jump going from 60Hz to 120Hz, can tell the difference between 100 and 120Hz but can't feel 144Hz (my current screen)

300

Attached: 1546208620026.jpg (1200x1600, 161K)

for modern shit 30 fps anything 20 years or older I can handle under that

I played SR4 on my old shitty PC. The frame rate would drop to single digits every time I jumped into the hair. Still had a blast though.

Attached: CRlIXQjWoAAcV6T.png (599x421, 223K)

I clocked in over 300 hours into Stalker CoP with a framerate that reached its peak at 15 (unless I stared at the floor and such). If I fired my weapon while scoped in the game would become a powerpoint presentation. I can play literally anything and tolerate it now. I'm currently upgrading my build so I never have to suffer through this ever again

Attached: 1555006847979.jpg (575x600, 53K)

old games have higher framerates

60. 30 looks like utter garbage since taking the 144hz pill

Attached: 1534499586990.gif (200x200, 973K)

>old games have higher framerates
depends how old you're talking

I went to my brother's house yesterday to see his new fancy tv and it gives me motion sickness looking at it. It feels too fluid is that can even be a way to describe it. I don't think i'm a fan of 120 or 144 whatever htz it was. I'll stick with 60 fps for now.

frame rates aren't that relevant in older games since most world textures are static (at most being scrolled across the screen) and sprites have fewer animation frames than the frame rate.

With vanilla CoP? What kind of pre-historic toaster you're using? But if you're using mods (Misery) it's understandable, and I don't know if an upgrade will help that much (these pieces of shit are unoptimized as hell)

You're not alone, some things at a high fps make me queasy too, but I could probably get used to it if I switched completely.

31

Attached: download.jpg (246x205, 14K)

Recently I started dual boxing in an MMO using an old laptop and having a 60hz laptop screen next to my 144hz gsync monitor has been a real eye-opener, especially since the laptop can't even come close to 60fps most of the time.

>I started dual boxing in an MMO
?

Playing two accounts on two different computers at the same time.

Is it a F2P MMO or are you paying for two subscriptions at once?

Search human eye fps and resolution.
There's no concrete number since everyone is different.
This.
100hz+ is placebo unless the game your running has 100fps+ minimum.
Unless u play shit like csgo at 165-240fps/hz 100-120 is fine
Hell halo and emus run at 60hz and it's a massive difference feels like 30fps used to
Two sessions at once

they're all exactly the same

With vanilla CoP the game was slightly more playable yeah, but I got to the point where I tried to download every mod possible just to scratch the itch to play the game and also because I love to see what modders do with games, the GSC forum had a lot of russian shit that never popped up on the nexus that was really fun.
>I don't know if an upgrade will help that much
I burned myself out on STALKER for a good few years so I'll finally get around to playing through my backlog, most of the games on it aren't as fun as STALKER so I'm not as tolerant of their low frame rates

It's Everquest and I use krono to pay for my subs, which is like WoW tokens but freely tradeable.

I saw somewhere that the untrained eye can't detect differences in framerate above 250fps.

>shit like csgo
so any FPS then?

>sw sd ve
God how poor do you have to be

That's your media player being shit mate.

I regularly play N64 and PS1 games so like 15FPS
Of course higher is always better but I'm not going to be a crybaby when an old 6th gen console game gets ported to PC and it's capped at 30FPS.
The only games that really NEED to be at 60+FPS for me are first person shooters on PC, accurate mouse camera movement is a headache inducing at anything below, and games that heavily rely on precise inputs like fighting games and DMC-level action games.

He clearly spent all his money on MtG cards, leave the man be, he's probably just packing to protect his Liliana

Y'all 60hz 30fps 240i niggers need to upgrade to better screens and gpus you eyes and brain are used to it
1080p 30fps was the gold standard 20 years ago on pc and hdtv
It's all about 4k 144hz+ now and 8k 60fps very soon
Most fps don't run at 240hz unless u go 1080p low settings or even lower
I read that too but you wouldn't know until you tried.
480hz is kinda pointless with current lcd tech even with black frame insert backlight strobing or whatever it's called.
Once xled catches up we will see very high resolution refresh rate displays
20 years ago it was acceptable for 3d games not 2d
Not anymore dude 2d is dead

probably around 80

>Most fps don't run at 240hz unless u go 1080p low settings or even lower
on the contrary, most uncapped shooters go way higher. it's only games from the last 5 or so years that struggle to hit 200 fps and they will hit 200 fps in another couple years. think long-term. don't be an insect.

>It's all about 4k 144hz+ now
Isn't there maybe one or two good monitors capable of that and they're still over a thousand bucks? I imagine 1440p is still the sweet spot for most machines.

Should I shell out for a 144hz monitor in my next upgrade Yea Forums? I'm not falling for the 4K meme but I am thinking about jumping up to 1440 from 1080.

I'm already so used to crappy screens though, and I don't even know if I'll even notice it enough to justify a 200+ dollar purchase for one.

Make sure to get g-sync/freesync. That variable refresh rate is way better than just a high refresh rate in my opinion.

What are you talking about? Movies shot at 24fps are very static for a reason, it's absolutely terrible for movement, it has to have a focus on something that is fairly still or very well centered.
You either keep things very still or move it fast enough that motion blur is pushed to cover the missing frames, 24fps is shit and the only reason it's stuck there is because it's cheaper than finding a better solution.

>because it's cheaper than finding a better solution.
*implementing a better solution. It's clear as day what's better.

Absolutely. Also get 1440p if you think your machine can handle both it and 144fps in the games you want to play. Gsync/Freesync is also very nice to have and a bunch of cheaper monitors are now Gsync-compatable so you don't necessarily have to pay an extra $150+ for it.

anything under 25ish noticeably strains my eyes

Can go as low as 20 depending on the game. Saturn and N64 had several of 15-20fps games.

Yeah, read about that. I'm going up to a 1660 from a fizzling out 970 but all I saw in the local brick and mortar stores were FreeSyncs.

That's the only part I'm stickling on. Do I really need above 60FPS? I'm gettin old and out of the competitive games game. The most extreme I'm gonna be doing is some MHW coop with the boys and emulating.

Is this with the high res mode on? Everyone knows you play multi with it off.

I'm a simple man so 60

>Yeah, read about that. I'm going up to a 1660 from a fizzling out 970 but all I saw in the local brick and mortar stores were FreeSyncs.
I haven't read much into it, but I believe Nvidia announced this year that they're going to support a select number of freesync monitors that they consider not shit. I think you need to opt in to some sort of beta though.

I can stomach quite a bit so many older games with slowdown I have no problem with but now I play on PC and there is no way I will play below 30 and that's only for some games, the kind that aren't super fast paced.
As always, higher is better.

Thanks for the seizure bro

Attached: vVkoPPU[1].gif (250x250, 992K)

144hz and adaptive sync are probably the biggest improvements you can make for almost any game.
1080p: amazon.com/24-inch-FreeSync-Monitor-VG245H-Response/dp/B01JGYM5H6
1440p: amazon.com/AOC-AG241QX-2560x1440-Adjustable-DisplayPort/dp/B01NCTHS6E
If you don't want to spend a lot of money and don't have a relatively beefy system I'd say just get the 1080p.

TV post processing and bad frame sync

>If you don't want to spend a lot of money and don't have a relatively beefy system AND ARE PLANNING ON KEEPING IT THAT WAY EVERY YEAR I'd say just get the 1080p.
fixed.

Years of gaming on a poorfag rig have left me able to tolerate as low as 20 FPS, but there better be a good reason for it (e.g. the entire galaxy being at war in Stellaris). One thing I absolutely can't stand is high FPS with dips though, that is absolutely infuriating.

I'm playing witcher 3 at 144hz, there is no way it's even close to as good

>wanted to upgrade to 1440p and 144hz
>couldn't afford the monitor on top of the PC build cost
>stuck at 1080p

It hurts bros

>prioritize anti-aliasing
>1080p now looks as good as 1440p but you get better framerates
wow, that was hard.

I got used to 24 when i replayed some n64 games, even if it took a while. It's fine as long as the framerate is constant, without any drops.

I actually played video games in the 90s so I can tolerate low framerates like 20fps. That's not to say that I don't prefer 60 or 120.

Anything above 24FPS has a strange almost hollow feeling to it that puts me off.

too real user

which?

>PUBG
you really don't want to play it at 30fps. i have and it was dogshit. after i upgraded, i get like 90 and it's playable + i got grandmaster that one season

i mean, 30fps is bad for single player games as well, but you should at least post a single player game when talking about 30fps, OP

left looks better, right looks more blurry.

I'm looking at this from my PS4 and they all look the same. Dies it mean PS4 can actually make everything look like 60fps?

>60 fps like irl
>30 fps like in my vidya
>24 fps like in my movies
>15 fps like in my brain

Anything below 10947328904701289570982605978260597209487139085709836029174079810458970589714906857fps makes me go into shock and have seizures desu

It gets ugly at about 48.
That's when my tolerance is high.

Your tv might have motion smoothing turned on.

about 500fps

you are a massive fucking pleb if you don't turn off motion blur and/or screen shake as soon as you start a game

Is there an actual visual difference between 60 fps and anything higher?

fps like in my vidya

Attached: 1550998345412.jpg (800x520, 442K)

If you're actually using a monitor that supports it there's a big difference.

this is a troll post
this is a valid post
If you play the original half-life/counter-strike with the framerate unlocked through the console, you can actually tell a difference between 99fps and 500fps both in movement and the fps benchmark command.
at 99fps with the fps lock on, it takes you 2 seconds to turn 360 degrees, but with it off at 500fps+, you do the 360 almost instantly.
>inb4 "hurrr nobody can even tell the diff between 30 and 60, let alone 100 or above!"

moving a mouse cursor around on the desktop alone is enough to feel the difference, going above 60. dragging a window makes it more obvious. playing a game (with the framerate actually exceeding 60 fps of course) cements the experience and prevents you from ever going back.

ocarina of time runs at 20 fps and Yea Forums always says it's "the best gaem evar!"

Attached: 1547572883980.jpg (1280x720, 69K)

15

That's just the engine breaking then. That sort of shit shouldn't change with framerate.

>actually not a shitpost

youtube.com/watch?v=8LKUqBZl-U8
youtube.com/watch?v=3Zz0wKPmaj0

It's pretty sad we had games running at 500fps+ literally 20 years ago, but now we struggle to maintain even 30.

Industry has definitely taken a shit.

24 fps. I'm not a pissy faggot that complains about everything.

Depends on the game. For chess 1 fps is serviceable.
And back in the day I've bought a new video card after upgrading my monitor to the 1080p because stable 60 in DMC4 was out of reach.

16,66666...
>tfw living in the PAL swamps as a kid but still playing OoT and not giving a fuck

Believe it or not, it actually runs on Voodo 2/166MMX

Attached: 1531733395072.jpg (1024x768, 197K)

>lowest framerate
40 to 60 is playable frame rate...
>For me it's 120
no modern game run this good on any gpu even rtx 2080ti/titan.

What sort of ancient ass hardware were you packing that couldn't run motherfucking DMC4 at 60fps?

Depends on the game. But I like to get at least 60.
But some, slow moving games are ok at 30-40

4K fags... yikes.

Nothing wrong with this footage, aside from the obviously shitty video encoding.

Purely a bad example of what you're attempting to convey.

30 on consoles.
120 on PC depending on the game. Some are okay at 60.

Let's see. I think it was either 8600GT or 8600GTS with passive cooling.
Not *that* bad at the time. DMC4 is a pretty old game, you know.

Motion interpolation will always look like complete and total garbage.

I'm talking about 1080p...

I don't own a PS4 but from what I saw on a friend's place I noticed pic related, either caused by TV or his ps4.

Attached: Untitled.jpg (642x161, 50K)

just rape my eye senpai

Or makes everything looks like 15 FPS, which would explain why console peasant can gobble low framerate shit

I get motion sickness or something from this. what the fuck

depends on a game
but 60 is bare minimum

All the people replying with motion smoothing are retards. The simple answer is that the 1:1 input of a mouse is going to look and feel awful at anything below 60fps.

>but 60 is bare minimum
Have fun being able to never play the assload of great games that don't and will never run at 60fps because technical limitations.

Variable refreshrate monitor matters more than extremely high fps. As long as the game runs within the range of what the monitor can run in it's pretty good. Obviously higher the better but I only start turning settings down if I'm under 60fps.

too bad i guess

It's okay I'm sure zoomzoom would rather play Fortnite and CS:GO anyways.

you are projecting too much

Hello, friends! :3
This is a test post.

I can play most things at 1440p144hz but when I have to use my shitter laptop I can still manage at like 23 fps

The same low fps on different games in the same genre can feel radically different depending on their engines and how optimized they are. I've tolerated mid 20 fps on some games and eye vomited at locked 30s,45s on others

These videos were filmed at 60fps so you're purely retarded in this case. I have gigs and gigs of that stuff. Japan was filming things in 60fps, and also HD, 25 fucking years ago on VHS. Adjust your bitch eyes. Fake frame interpolation 60fps looks awful, if the content is created with it in mind it looks fine.

>I don't play anything below 60!
>posts a gif which doesn't exceed 50 without even noticing the lack
lel, tell me more about your sweet spot, captain obliv.

Around 20 or so. Takes me a while to get my eyes adjusted though. Tried RDR2 after a long hiatus and shit was a slideshow. After an hour or so, it felt natural again.

When I was a kid I got hooked on a demo of Hi-Octane on my PC. It was before I had a 3D accelerator card so the game was running at about 1 or 2 fps and at around 9 at best when looking straight at a wall. I don't know why I enjoyed playing it so much despite it barely being playable, but I think it has immunized me against low or uneven FPS in games.

Of course I prefer 60+. That was the joy of being a PC gamer at the tail end of last gen when games looked so much better there than on 360 or PS3. Still hoping for proper port of those Arkham games one of these days, including Origin.

Attached: hi-octane21[1].png (700x525, 321K)