Lower fps than refresh rate reddit. - If the game fps goes above monitor refresh rate.
Lower fps than refresh rate reddit (Even though it's just in your head) although I can see the need to get a higher FPS than your monitors refresh rate in csgo. Otherwise, than possibly screen tearing, there's no detriment In cases like this, I usually use adaptive half-rate Vsync to lock to 30 fps so I get an even 33ms frame time. similar if the framerate is lower. usually when I get lower fps than my refresh rate I just cap game fps to a stable number to keep it all consistent so I wouldnt worry about it at all, 60hz to 240hz will be great in every way, as long as its not a bad VA panel Reply reply A Reddit community dedicated to The Elder Scrolls Online, an MMO developed by Zenimax Online. (In another words, try to configure your game fps to lower than your monitor refresh rate with Gsync on. That said, the tearing that you get on a 144Hz monitor is typically less noticeable than the tearing you get on a 60Hz monitor (because the higher refresh rate means that a new frame from the GPU is more likely to line up with the start of a new refresh). I bought the new monitor with dyac 2, 240 hz. so check that and enable it, if u have it. Is it bad to use a monitor with a lower refresh rate than the computer's FPS? I was watching a reaction video to the Verge Computer Build Tutorial, and some guy said something about how having a monitor with a lower-than-144hz refresh rate for example would cause ghosting if the computer View community ranking In the Top 5% of largest communities on Reddit. If you are getting about 90-100 fps then just playing without it will give you a better experience because the latency is lower, at least for me it's very noticable. If the variable refresh rate goes down to 60 then you can probably ignore rest. 26fps is lower than your monitor's threshold for freesync (48Hz) and therefore freesync doesn't work. This is why, ironically, high refresh rate VRR monitors are actually oftentimes more ideal than lower refresh rate monitors even for lower-fps gaming. Tearing is easy to fix with the use of either V-Sync or capping your framerate below your monitor refresh. This is because the sync range is too narrow for low frame rate compensation to work. This configuration doesn't really make any sense, and if you use V-Sync, you should just manually cap your FPS to your max refresh rate minus about 3 FPS to ensure you never hit that limit. Dropping to 60 fps should reduce load by more than half, thus reducing temps on the processor as well. I have no desire for a higher refresh rate on my phone I think you're conflating variable refresh rate with high refresh rate. You're only showing 60 new frames per second, but your monitor has to display 144hz. The higher the FPS the better. As the title suggest I wanted to know if V-Sync is required if the game runs at a much lower frame rate than a screens refresh rate. I've read that you should have your games framerate locked slightly lower than your refresh rate. I’m almost certain that going above your monitors refresh does absolutely nothing. Trust me. 1% and 1% lows to previous values. Discussion So whenever I ask a question about my Monitor (144hz) and why I can’t get over 200 fps on a certain game. With v sync off I get more than 120 fps in all game and min fps are always above 100 in all games. For resonsiveness, you want to see the most recent frame possible, so high refresh rate helps even if your fps is lower (although the advantage is lower than with higher fps). Because on some game's menu where no limit is set into the coding, you can go up to 2000fps maybe more and the high frequency is triggering heavy coil whine (very shrill sound + is not recommended for you GPU and PSU health). i want to buy a 144hz monitor which doesn't support f/g sync and my gtx 1070 8g won't be enough to get 144fps+ in 1080p in most Generally only when your fps is higher than the refresh rate of your monitor - although this is usually the case, there are exceptions. I tried turning my iPad Pro to 60Hz from 120Hz and it was borderline unusable. Another user posted a couple of links to Blurbusters etc, they have literally all the info you want or need around this topic. For example if you're running 120 FPS at 60Hz then only half of each frame is displayed before being replaced by a more recent one, with one or two tears on the screen every refresh where each partial frame is replaced by the next. Native is a term usually used with resolution. If you can drop the screen refresh to 60 or 120, when you're capped at 60, you might see a smoother result, because the refresh rate divided by Idk if you know the theory, but the only point of G-Sync is to eliminate tearing when FPS is lower than max refresh. If a graphics card has to work harder to generate 144 fps, likewise so does the CPU. What the g sync you hear about does, is match your fps with with the monitors refresh rate so you don't get any screen tears. 97 fps. Gsync and Freesync match the monitors refresh rate to the current gpu refresh rate, giving the games a much more smooth look. Having higher fps than your monitor can handle (its refresh rate) will almost never be problematic, it could only benefit you. 300 fps on 60 hz vs 60 fps on 60 hz will have lower input lag. if you have 120fps that would mean it get's a new picture half way through the drawing process. There is no free lunch, 144 fps is about 60% more demanding than 90 fps. V-Sync causes some input lag so it's better to frame cap and turn on adaptive sync on your monitor. Using DLSS3 should give similar results - because CPU will have much lower workload. If I have a lower fps than my refresh rate will I have a suboptimal gaming experience? For example, I am currently Im used to it and dont feel bad about it. My monitor refresh rate is 170hz with no gsync option. But if you only have a 60hz monitor, even though your rig is pushing out 450fps, you’re only gonna see and feel the 60, bc of your monitor. People usually do 1 below or above their refresh to try and avoid screen tearing, I like capping games to 110 FPS on my 120Hz monitor as that avoids screen tearing while being slightly easier on the system and indistinguishable to me from 120. I am playing Valorant on a Zephyrus G15 GA502IV laptop, which has a 240hz monitor with Adaptive Sync. If your laptop has G-Sync, it's enough to cap the framerate - and the refresh rate will be adjusted automatically. For movies shot in 24FPS, this also improves the the quality since there is no more telecine 3:2 pulldown jitter artifacts. However that is purely visual and doesnt effect your gaming. It's definitely still an issue. Once text is displayed screen do not refresh, that is why new kindle comes with wallpaper on, because it does not use any extra battery Nope. So at fixed 144hz, your monitor will refresh every 6. Old. The reason is this: Your monitor can draw the picture it is given every 1/60th of a second. 9ms. Capping FPS, even to higher values than original average, was increasing . When FPS = Hz, stutter is 0, but input lag is max. I have a 240hz monitor. Causes stutters and frame splits. The catch to reducing temps here is to be playing a game where your CPU can consistently hit 144 fps. I really don't understand the want for more resolution necessarily as it's already like 3x the Rift days already and still sometimes have choppy experiences that take me out of the immersion more. That's what causes the tear. It is always good to have fps cap directly in your GPU settings even if you set it higher than monitor refresh rate to have Vsync having priority. That being said I would suggest caping it as high as you can, because limiting frame rate usually introduces some inconsistencies in inputs. Lower refresh rate can help a bit with lower battery use and heat and better sustained performance. will it be worth me locking the fps to the max hz refresh rate and why? Depending on your monitor, G Sync Compatible only supports for example 48hz to 240hz in your case or in other monitors whatever the max refresh rate is of your monitor. (by the way: what helped my FPS alot is to set the polling rate of my mouse from 1000 Hz to 500 Hz. higher standard deviation for lower FPS and/or refresh rate. Hello! First time posting here. 9ms later even if it was just 1ms late (increasing input lag), and the previous frame is shown for 13. When in a game that demands less FPS than your monitor is capable, you'll be able to see your monitor's refresh rate drop in line with the game's framerate. Vsync fast fixes this quite well. Reply reply I use my gaming monitor at 165 FPS and love it. A higher refresh rate means you see more of the fps that's already there. Gsync is matching the refresh rate to your fps, if your fps match or exceed the refresh rate there is nothing to match up. so to flesh it out a bit, my numbers above are for a 60hz screen, it will be different depending what the refresh of the screen is. Imagine frame 134 and 135 are swapping right at the time the screen refreshes. lower fps than refresh rate; what will happen? hi, i'm building a pc and ended up with a peculiar problem- "screen tearing". Members Online. Like 24000 / 1001 ≈ 23. ) The Steam Deck has a feature to lower the refresh rate to a minimum of 40hz, specifically because 40fps at 40hz vsynced is smoother than the 30fps it will lock you to at 60hz and 40fps 60hz no vsync is choppy. If you’re mostly playing non competitive stuff then go for 4k if you have the money. It's definitely a noticeable difference, noticeable enough to throw me off when doing PvP. Sure, some people probably don't notice input From what I've come to understand, there's two types of refresh rates, the monitor's and the "fps" of a game. 1/144th of a second is 6. the game is still functioning at whatever fps you set it to, you're only being shown 60fps of it with a 60hz monitor, so obviously a higher fps, regardless of monitor, will result in a better gameplay experience . We are usually capped by the monitors refresh rate as most computers can run games at a higher fps than the monitor is capable of displaying. Members Online • NineTailedDevil . Monitor has higher refresh rate than FPS output . For single player games, higher fps is nice to have, but you shouldn't sacrifice graphics for fps when the fps has reached the cap of monitor. VGA Model c) Brief Hw list /cpu/chipset/Ram/Os d)*² system specific scenario A good thumb rule is best-fps = your-refresh-rate * 2 + 1, such as 121 fps for 60 Hz monitor. So if you have a 60hz monitor, lock your framerate at 59 or something so you minimize screen tearing. "As for why a minimum of 2 FPS (and a recommendation of at least 3 FPS) below the max refresh rate is required to stay within the G-SYNC range, it’s because frametime variances output by the system can cause FPS limiters (both in-game and external) to occasionally “overshoot” the set limit (the same reason tearing is caused in the upper FPS range with G-SYNC + V-SYNC Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. Blightious • Monitor refresh rate doesn't regulate game performance. Anyone that doesn't know hasn't looked at what physics look like at low fps vs high. It also has a RTX 2060 and integrated graphics from the Ryzen CPU (I don't think I use this one, I've set Valorant to use I have a 60hz monitor 1080p. You technically don't need to limit FPS in the case of OP since he definitely looks like he already has low latency mode set to ultra, which limits fps automatically below the refresh rate (260 fps for 280hz in his case) to force the monitor to stay within gsync range and thus providing the lower latency experience most of the time. This means that you can display any frame rate up to the refresh rate maximum (so in this case, 144 fps) without having screen tearing, presuming VRR is properly enabled. Generally, higher fps will give you better frame time consistency regardless of refresh rate, but it wouldn't hurt to cap your fps to 240 or somewhere around your 1% fps average. Because if your FPS are over the Hz of the screen, gsync/freesync will simply not work, your screen can't synchronise the refresh rate to your FPS since is physically impossible. For you it would be 141. Honestly, more likely than not, you can leave your refresh rate where it is, especially if you use any kind of Adaptive Sync. Input lag is the time between pressing the button and seeing the action reflected on your screen. Or check it out in the app stores that it is normally better to get to higher fps than your monitors refresh rate, so I'm wondering if it's better to get the 240Hz or 144Hz monitor. You can always send frames slower though. Gaming No, it does not. Reply reply Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. If you think games don't "lag" over 60, you have been caught up in a meme. So basically according to my understanding: If you're playing graphically demanding AAA games: Enable GSYNC, VSYNC and set FPS -3 of monitor refresh rate (so 141fps cap with 144hz monitor). V-sync with triple buffering would add 2 frames of delay at worst, which at 144 fps is aroung 0. " Title friends. In this case you need to manually lower the overdrive setting. It can cause latency issues, too, The only real gain when your fps is lower than refresh rate is that pixel response is generally faster at higher refresh rates than lower. Get the Reddit app Scan this QR code to download the app now. As I said: limit FPS to something lower than the refresh rate the game is using and you won’t get tearing. Freesync/Freesync Premium/"G-Sync Compatible" have a narrower advertised VRR range (usually lower bound starts at 48Hz), but you get a similar result in that if fps falls below that lower bound, LFC kicks in and Rather, when the frame rate is higher than the refresh rate only part of each frame is shown. If it works better in 60hz mode. It won’t work if you’re getting higher FPS than your refresh rate, but you can set a maximum frame rate in the Nvidia control panel, either by program or globally. V-Sync will cap your frame rate to your refresh rate. As for low framerates, most monitors have a minimum refresh rate of somewhere around 30Hz to 48Hz, but monitors with a wide enough FreeSync range have a feature called Low Framerate Compensation, which repeats frames during low FPS to keep the refresh rate within the FreeSync range (ex. For instance, you could set a general lock of 141 fps. If you're playing competitive FPS games and want lowest input lag: Disable GSYNC/VSYNC and let game run at highest FPS as possible. Specifically. 144 Hz is great for movies too, as 6 x 24 fps = 144 fps - while 80 or 90 fps do not match nicely with 24 fps. Also you have to weigh the cost of losing render resolution to achieve higher framerates to match the higher refresh rate. My specs are, i512400f, 16gb ddr5 5200 mhz, rx6600xt. PC really gets much faster than the PS5 version of SF6 above 240hz More fps than refresh rate downsides? comments. In games where my fps greatly exceeds refresh rate I set an fps limiter for ~150% refresh rate. What brings you more joy and a better overall experience in casual gaming — (a) a higher resolution and better density or (b) better responsiveness from higher refresh rates and lower response times? The lowest refresh rate which can provide perfectly smooth playback for both 24Hz and 30Hz videos (most common frame rates for movies) is 120Hz. So, yes, if you have more fps than hz, it will run smooth. Controversial. I need some help understanding the relationship between FPS and Refresh Rate. Depending on what games you play you may wanna look 1440p 144hz rather than 240hz. that a higher refresh rate would chew through that bigger battery faster than a lower refresh rate. 014 seconds, or 14 ms. You could be getting 144 fps but not synced to the timing the screen refreshes. Adaptive Sync/Freesync with FPS lower than monitor refresh rate. Inconsistent, lower refresh rate can cause more motion sickness than somewhat lower resolution, especially in VR. Stops the jet engine fans from screaming for no reason. Hence why the optimal setting is GSYNC ON, VSYNC ON, + Reflex (in-game support or injected manually with Special K. VSync gets around this by caching multiple frames, so the monitor will take the last complete frame. My frametimes are consistent at 3-4 ms. The intro definitely isn’t supposed to render at 26 FPS, but I heard other people had that same issue. Freesync/gsync Really helps with the percieved smoothness and clarity of games in my experience. Capping frame rate will not stop screen tearing. G-sync / freesync significantly reduces judder even when your game is pushing lower fps than the monitor's max. My understanding is that even if I limit a game's fps to 120, it is still beneficial to leave the refresh rate of the monitor in the Windows display settings at 165hz instead of lowering it to 120hz. Help me understand FPS and Refresh Rate . I know on the 240Hz monitor you can set the Max FPS is capped to monitor max refresh rate (in my case 144 hz), but it is totally fine. and so on) the The framerate matching the refresh rate isn't what solves tearing, it's the frame being displayed at the moment the refresh occurs. The title some people suggested me lowering refresh rate to be closer to my fps (from 144hz to 100hz) but they didnt say why and then someone said that everything is okey with lower fps than If your FPS is lower than your refresh rate, sometimes the monitor will display the same frame twice (or even 3 times if FPS is less than half the refresh rate). In CS2 I can achieve 300 fps without drops and plan to cap it at 300. Currently I've been playing Red Dead Redemption 2, and I get around 49 to 55 fps at ultra. For those of us whose systems are primarily for work, the quality of the display is far more important than the rate at which it refreshes. As you say, this results in lower latency (or rather, a lower reaction time). Gaming. For example, the original oculus rift is 90Hz. Keeping steady 120+ FPS is much more demanding than keeping steady 60Hz, therefore you are much more likely to experience FPS drops with higher refresh rate panels and without adaptive sync, it's easily noticeable and quite distracting. Please use our Discord server instead of supporting a company that acts against its users and unpaid moderators. This will go a long way towards helping to deal with stutter. BUT, it will help you to unlock your full potential within the game. Or I’ve seen some games set it to just below, like 239 etc. 5s you said. Not only is the oled hundreds of times faster than lcd at the same hz, the oled model does not even have the same hz as lcd but 50% more which combined gives incredibly low input lag which feels amazing even at the lower 45fps. I was looking for a monitor with a high refresh rate and IPS panel, so in my research I found the MAG251RX from MSI with a 240hz refresh rate, but i dont think i will be able to consistently put out 240 fps with my pc so I wanted to know what are the issues of What you probably mean to say is "maximum refresh rate". Vsync caps it to your refresh rate. You can have issues with screen tearing from not having the refresh rate and fps synchronized, but that's a problem with mismatched refresh rate and fps, doesn't matter which way it goes. You can try an app like TakoStats to check how the game works in 60hz and 120hz mode. For example you could have a 8ms total pixel This improves input latency and makes it feel more responsive, even if your monitor's refresh rate is lower than your FPS. I use RTSS that comes with Afterburner to cap the FPS to a few frames below that of my monitor - in my case, 168fps for a 170Hz display. Whenever the image in the GPU's front buffer changes to a new one while monitor is still scanning the image - you get tearing with any framerate, be it below you refresh rate or above it. For example 30fps vs 144fps you have dresses that act like dresses then suddenly you have a dress that's as stiff as metal plate armor at 144fps. The higher the refresh rate the more difference you’ll actually see with your eyes. Smoother, more consistent refresh rate. If your monitor is running a constant 390Hz, that can still help when your FPS is lower because of faster response times, allowing a clearer It's the other way around - let the game produce as many frames as it can, and the monitor will just display the latest one at each refresh period. I was just testing settings to see how they felt input lag or smoothness wise. LoL being a competitive game, they probably don't even use triple buffering, but simple double buffering, which is only one frame of delay. If you want maximum rates out of your setup I recommended a 144hz monitor because you do get diminishing returns with refresh rate. You can always get those refresh rates back by resetting the program. Tearing is caused by the framerate not being synced to the refresh rate. For me, being tear-free is far more important than reducing my input lag by a mere 7 What's your monitor refresh rate and what fps did you cap the game ? Set it to 1 fps lower than your refresh rate as frame capping software usually has an overshoot of 1 fps. Reply reply TOPICS. Limiting your framerate to below your monitor refresh rate will make it feel "smoother" in the sense that it removes screen Having a frame rate higher than your maximum refresh rate can create tearing because the frame buffer can update with a new frame in the middle of the display pulling from it. Anyway, to answer your question, if you cap your 240 Hz monitor at a lower 144 Hz refresh rate, I don't see any reason why this should have lower performance than a monitor with a maximum refresh rate of 144 Hz. At lower refresh/fps rates, the same overdrive setting will be driving the pixels way too hard resulting in bright trails called overshoot. You can use 100Hz yes absolutely. Q&A. If your FPS is lower than your refresh rate, the monitor displays each partially drawn new frame more than once (a part of the drawn frame is displayed for 2 refreshes). Others say to cap it like a few frames below your monitors refresh rate. Using vsync will do that but if you have a moder monitor with gsync/freesync you should cap it slightly lower than the max Hz anyway. The refresh rate (Hz) of your monitor does not affect the frame rate (FPS) your GPU will be outputting. However, once you actually hit that limit with V-Sync on, it'll cause much more input lag than when it's within the VRR range. Depends. You don't need to buy a higher refresh monitor to solve the problem. If you have G-Sync/FreeSync, then you just want to stay within the sync range (it should say on the product specs for your monitor). Here is how it works: Your monitor refreshes the panel from up to down, from the left to the right (just like we read things) and it does a complete refresh (from the first pixel on the up left corner to the last one on the right down corner) a lot of times per second (the hz of the monitor tells you that, a 60hz panel does it 60 times per second, a 144hz does it 144 times. To be precise, most movies have frame rate, which is slightly lower than 24 or 30 fps. 976 fps and 30000 / 1001 ≈ 29. Edit: Best way to do a framerate cap is through the graphics card control panel, IE nvidia control panel. pure frames at lower refresh rate is better than reprojected frames at higher refresh rate no contest. So your monitor refresh rate, providing it is over the multiple of the tick rate (or in this case, the simulated tick rate), is fine. It also does the same if I limit the FPS in game. it also helps with input lag but with the advent of nvidia reflex (or nvidia ultra low latency/radeon anti-lag) it's not really vital for lower input lag anymore With a reflex supported game, when on a g-sync monitor is used and v-sync is set to on, the driver and reflex will work together to limit the framerate automatically to 2-4 fps lower than the native refresh rate, to minimize input latency. Staying above 100 fps is ideal, but anything within the range should be fine. I aim - going over the monitor max refresh rate introduces frame tearing, thus recommended to set -1 or up to -4 fps cap than max refresh rate https: Note: Reddit is dying due to terrible leadership from CEO /u/spez. The only game I do this is with halo. Should I set the max refresh in game to 240. This has far less restrictive rules about content than the dev's Reddit for this game. got more confused by browsing different forums. Basically, do I manually need to Adaptive sync is even more important for higher refresh rate panels than it is for 60Hz panels. - If the game fps goes above monitor refresh rate. The sub for so 40 fps will feel much better with freesync + lfc on a 144hz monitor than on a 60 hz monitor without freesync + LFC. r/Metroid. (leave the Nvidia Control Panel Vsync to default) Why not search for your answers via google/reddit/YouTube. IMO better option is to use Riva Tuner or other tools to cap your framerate yourself. It's only real downside is that, in order to synchronize the monitor and frame output of your GPU, it has to hard-lock your FPS at a rate relative to your refresh increment; if your performance dips even one or two frames below that increment, it can drop your system down to a much lower locked framerate in order to keep the synchronization going. Adaptive Sync kinda negates any tearing or other artifacts that result from a different framerate and refresh rate--this comes from the action of a scalar module in your monitor adaptively syncing with your video card's framerate output to make sure each frame is Upgrading to a higher refresh rate will not instantly make you perform better. The same goes for 60, 144 and higher. a general rule is to have it set to either double (if your comp can handle it), or the next step up (if you have a 144hz monitor, set to 160 in fortnite), of what your monitor is Generally the consensus is to turn vsync off and limit fps to 3-4 frames less than refresh rate. Try that instead. The refresh rate should stay at 144Hz when fps is above 144fps. If your game doesn't have the next frame ready in that time, the monitor will re-use the previous frame, the game has to wait for the next refresh 6. If you don't have adaptive sync, viewing 60fps on a 144hz monitor will look worse than viewing 60fps on a 60hz monitor. What you want is the smoothest selection of frames (not the right way to word this, but hey) - running at 240fps using 120 tick servers means you have exactly 2 frames to chose from, which I believe I recall makes the game as 'smooth as possible'. shows how much input lag varies throughout a game. if the movement between the two pictures is a lot, you get noticeable tearing. Higher refresh rate monitors with lower resolutions and display quality are almost entirely for people who use their home-built computer systems for PC games that require fast reaction times. Usually 60 is good enough but for a more competitive plays i suggest 120 fps (and of course a monitor that supports 120) That say (Native Refresh Rate - 2/3fps) lock with G-Sync enabled, V-Sync enabled through Ultra Low Latency mode is to give me a much much better experience than a higher FPS where the difference between 120 and 140 is negligible. However, if your FPS is higher than your refresh rate, your display will not be able to display all of the frames your computer is producing, so although the refresh rate doesn’t technically limit the frame rate, it does effectively set a cap. So it seems like better gpu introduces more screen tearing which again seems counter intuitive. Fps lower than refresh rate. This in theory provides better input latency than V I have a 144hz monitor and ya it almost never runs above that. Input lag decreases with more frames, so this could be a plus in competitive FPS games. Some (if not all) VRR monitors have a section that allows you to see the current refresh rate. Yeah, this is absolutely Reddit trying to cope. G-sync and free sync matches the monitor's refresh rate to the pc's fps, but if pc's fps is higher than 60fps, a 60hz monitor is not going to be able to match it, resulting in screen tear. 5x. Following some guides online, I overclocked my 7y/o notebook monitor from 60Hz to 100Hz(surprisingly, but I didn't go higher as my FPS weren't getting above 100FPS) and checked for frameskips and it was perfectly fine. I understand what the two are at a basic level. If you are around 60-70 fps then it does offer value but you don't really have to cap fps as you should always stay within the monitor range and VRR also works. 120 Hz ELMB works great for games where I I don't have Gsync, Freesync, nor do I use Vsync but I like to cap my frame rate near my monitor's refresh rate anyways. higher refresh rate monitor is one of the best ways to lower input lag as long as you can at least match the fps. Would more FPS make me perform better? I already play with lower resolution and all settings set to minimum. for games that do get FPS way past my monitor refresh rate, I cap fps at a multiple of monitor refresh rate to keep cpu/gpu noise a bit lower. If the monitor can't handle the frame rate that the video card sends out, then you get vertical tearing as it switches frames in the middle of a refresh. Reply reply HaippiCS • Csgo is best with uncapped fps. having fps constantly fluctuate above a lower refresh rate will My recent models work can be found in a Reddit post 1, post 2 and post 3 and if you like it, In VR they found out that its better to drop to half of the refresh rate rather than letting the fps rrop just a little bit. There is a lot of factors in what "lag" If I am correct e ink screens do not have refresh rate really. If your FPS exactly matches your refresh rate, each displayed frame is a new frame. Valheim; Genshin Impact; The unofficial but officially recognized Reddit community discussing the latest LinusTechTips, TechQuickie and other Due to DyAc makes game looks smoother when it is in a high and stable fps/hz; but it also shows the native if the game is in low fps/not-smooth condition. New. Also if you buy a freesync monitor and you are lower than 244hz it will change your refresh rate to match your fps. When the fps is above 144fps, the monitor doesn't even know you're getting above Most 144Hz monitors these days have variable refresh rate (Freesync/G-sync). I discovered it because there were games that felt less smooth on rtx 4080 than on rtx 2080, even though average FPS increased by a lot. I know that capping the FPS at 60 tends to make the framerate dip lower than if you cap it higher but why would there be a difference between 90 and 170 when my monitor can only display 60? Whenever I play games I get around 120 fps but my refresh rate is 144hz so I was wondering if it was better if I cap at 120 fps and keep it at 144hz or cap it at 120 fps and lower refresh rate to 120hz. 45fps at 90hz on oled has far less input lag than 60fps on lcd. We ask that you please take a minute to read Refresh rate and fps are independent of each other. When G-Sync is not an option, yes, you can use Vsync and lower refresh rate. Yes, exactly. So if you play more competitive games I’d stick with your 1440. It's interesting stuff 🤔 Reply reply Wait, pardon my naivety, why 3 fps less than the refresh rate? I’ve been setting mine to 120 Edit: In your other link, the Reddit one, it also explicitly says frame caps are not necessary only if you've got Ultra Low Latency on, because that applies its own built-in frame View community ranking In the Top 5% of largest communities on Reddit. The video card has to push the data. Vsync adds "stutter" at lower-than-Hz FPS values and adds "input lag" when FPS is higher-than-Hz. This is why it "feels" better than 60fps despite being less fps. What I'm asking about, rather than any performance edge, is your subjective enjoyment. I have a 4070ti with 5800x3d. Playing at lower fps than monitors refresh rate . Basically, my general rule is that at lower frame rates (sub-60 fps) it's much better to have even frame times than to have frame times jumping all over the place. Internet Culture (Viral) Amazing Even if the game is a lower fps, a higher hz lowers input delay. I thought this case was weird since my FPS counter said the intro was being rendered at 26 FPS, but my refresh rate was 70-80Hz. the monitor The age-old question. It’s the exact same problem as with having lower frame rates than your maximum: frame delivery not being synced up with when the display actually refreshes. Once you go there, there’s no going back. Putting this into a calculator gives a divisor of 2. Also, some of the game's mechanics are tied to FPS. Being around 150 fps. Having your fps higher than your refresh is beneficial if you don’t have screen tear. You can Google it. Note: Reddit is dying due to terrible leadership from CEO /u/spez. Also I managed to lower the adaptive to 30fps since it's set at 48fps standard. 5 so you're going to have jitter no matter what. my understanding is, that you actually don't want more frames than Hz. If you enable vsync, you won't get tearing (no matter what), but you will possibly get micro-stuttering though generally only if your fps dips below your monitor's refresh rate. Best. This won’t require you to use ingame vsync. Perhaps when you hit below 60fps it starts chugging because g sync compatible isn't really proper gsync. The tear line moves upward (advances less than a full screen each refresh). If you have it on, you won't ever go above 60 fps. In addition, while higher frame rates can provide a more responsive feel to the game, they may not necessarily improve your ability to see or react to on-screen events. For me it works great. Of course, this requires the top of the refresh rate window to be at least 2x the value of the bottom, but ideally more like 2. G-sync will just make it so you'll get little to no tearing, and when your FPS dips below that it'll still produce a smooth image. Your game could be running with 600 fps, but what you'd actually see would be your monitors refresh rate. LFC works by running the refresh rate at double the frame rate (so, for example, 45 fps would be displayed at 90Hz). I just watched through an Overwatch replay with afterburner running and the fps was mostly 370-400. Or check it out in the app stores Home; Popular; TOPICS. Cru is custom resolution utility. But I don't think 200+ FPS make sense outside of major tournaments (where super high framerates could make sense to be a buffer for framerate drops) Check your screen refresh rate and also what the variable refresh rate range is, if the screen has variable refresh rate. 667ms frames of 24p content into 16. FreeSync does not work above the refresh rate of the monitor. A high refresh rate monitor showing a game at 45fps/45hz will look better than a 60hz monitor trying to show a 45fps game at 60hz - less smearing and screen tearing that's caused by FPS and refresh rate being unsynced. (Prevent tearing screen) or You can try Gsync and have your gpu responsible to cap your game fps to the same or below the monitor refresh rate. but once you do, the input latency has the potential to become so much lower when x is non trivially lower than screen refresh Overall the feel will be 100fps in this scenario, and the image is only displaying 100fps, your game may be getting 200fps but if your monitor is only showing 100fps then that’s all your really going to notice, in most cases i recommend locking your fps in Nvidia control panel for all games, in the manage 3d Settings, you should lock it to your monitors refresh rate that way you never go I prefer running sligtly above refresh rate if no freesync, so i use 150fps limit with 144hz monitor, because it feels smoother than for example 160-200fps. Screen tearing isn't caused by FPS being lower or higher than the refresh rate of your monitor. If any question, please feel free to DM me, thanks. 667ms 60Hz display frames. For me gsync doesn't like flipping on and off when framerate exceeds and goes lower than refresh rate. I would personally choose a 75hz freesync monitor over a 144 hz normal one. Not only will you learn the dynamics of how video cards and gsync work, but you will actually educate yourself Yep, changing the refresh rate like that would result in essentially the same experience as your current 1080p 60Hz monitor. Besides, that shouldn't have a noticeable impact on higher fps. For some reason you get more input lag when your frame rate is higher than your monitor's refresh rate with gsync on. When looking for TVs, I found that many of them are 120 hz, and apparently one of the reasons for this is that it prevents judder-- when the refresh rate is not a multiple of fps (ex. If you have higher fps than refresh, G-Sync just turns itself OFF. Or check it out in the app stores TOPICS. Is this correct or would there be any benefits to lowering the refresh rate? Personally gsync always on and I limit my frame rate to my max . I've been trying to search the internet and asking around different forums/subreddit but somehow never try to find a concrete answer. monitor refresh -3. This causes some frames to be duplicated, and these duplicated frames make it feel less smooth. I cap at 236 on my 240hz. However if your frame rate is really unstable you might have it better by caping it. When you have a 60Hz monitor you're trying to fit 41. What happens if the FPS is higher or lower than the refresh rate? Is it detrimental? If you have a 144hz monitor and you get 100fps, then you may notice a bit of stuttering because the display is running at 144hz and you only get 100hz. A high polling rate causes my CPU usage to spike and causes FPS drops when moving my mouse quickly. But it's the monitor's output rate what's lower, not the game's (like in OP's case). showing 29fps at 87Hz). So when I turn on the vsync, I was not getting constant 60 fps and smooth gameplay although I know that my specs can easily do that like butter. It will match the refresh rate to the fps. Anyway, the clue is to force game to keep fps sync with monitor refresh rate. View community ranking In the Top 1% of largest communities on Reddit. That blurbusters site is like the only place I've seen this looked into in detail. If you have a 144hz monitor you’ll visually see how much smoother the game runs at that rate. That’s because if your screen is only refreshing 30 times a second (30hz) you can only see 30 frames per second. It is still there, but much less jarring than with lower fps or refresh rates. This is literally why things like gsync and freesync exist, cause tearing happens under the native refresh rate. The intermittent Any frame rates lower or higher than the refresh rate of the monitor CAN cause tearing. Reply reply Reddit iOS Reddit Android Reddit Premium About Reddit Advertise Blog Careers Press. Freesync causes monitor to flicker if FPS is lower than the refresh rate Open | Hardware So I have an LG Widescreen 24MK430H monitor, 75hz, and it has freesync, If your monitor's refresh rate is higher, say 120hz, then you don't run vysnc, since it sets fps limits that you don't need, since freesync will more or less do the same job, to a varying degree of success depending on the monitor and game. Top. If you have a high refresh rate monitor and go from max refresh rate of fps down to 30 or 60 (if monitor supports higher), you will feel the difference. The refresh rate of the display doesn't "pull" anything from the video card. I just received a new monitor for Christmas, it’s the Acer AOPEN 25XV2QF (390hz). I know dedicated gysnc works from 1 and above your monitors refresh rate. Frame rate is how many frames your pc is pumping the game you’re playing out at. The higher your refresh rate the faster pixels appear on your screen. 3-0. because if you get low fps, the monitor refresh rate lower itself to match your FPS (inside Gsync/Freesync range), so you have a smoother gameplay without The correct way to use Gsync for the smoothest and lowest input lag is Vsync on in control panel, and capping FPS 3-4 below refresh rate. If you have a variable refresh rate monitor, no. That's not to say a fps exceeding your current refresh rate can't be useful; high fps=more inputs which means a smoother feeling game albeit not a smoother looking one. This is the situation where FPS > Hz. Vsync ON lag is bad enough, I couldn't imagine having the amount of input lag vary randomly in games depending on whether or not my fps was above the max refresh rate at any given point. running a higher FPS than your monitor's refresh rate results in lower latency but results in tearing. Perhaps air strafing too. And it works fine. Of course if your monitor has a good implementation of adaptive sync then Yes. There is a very good reason for G-sync and Freesync monitors and other methods of capping frame Rendering frames above your monitor's refresh rate don't show up but still reduce input lag (video from battle nonsense, a youtube channel that specializes in this type of stuff). For those who do not have G-Sync compatible GPU/Monitor, I did not find any other solution, so you have to try on your own. . Imo it's more important to have a variabele refresh rate monitor than to have the highest possible refresh rate for 99% of games. The CPU prepares frames for the GPU to render. Look, I'm going to try to extend a bridge here. modding). Hi everyone. So I got a 75 hz monitor, and it works fine in games when I get over 75 fps, but when I go under 75 fps, my game starts lagging a bit. It doesn't need to be 60Hz. I have a 165hz display (Dell 27 S2721DGFA). There's no need to underclock your pc when you can set fps caps in game (undervolting could save power if it's a concern). 95% of the time the refresh rate counter flickers from 238-239 (old alienware AW2518H) but when there was a frametime spike or tiny stutter the refresh rate display on the monitor reacted to this. In that perspective, 144 Hz will make it easier getting the most fps, but reprojections will be noticeable if you cannot do fps/hz in a 1:1 ratio. That's completely false. Capping at exactly your refresh rate gives tearline staying at 1 spot or moving slowly, with slightly above it never stays in same spot and is much less noticeable. Dropping the refresh rate from 165 Hz down to 120 Hz gives the panel a little more time to transition before the backlight is pulsed, so there is less strobe crosstalk over the full screen. The higher the FPS, the lower input lag regardless of your refresh rate. And the latency at 158fps really is tangibly lower than with at 162 for example. Reply reply We are Reddit's primary hub for all things modding, from troubleshooting for beginners to creation of mods by experts. Members Online • LukasLRG he probably confused this with running games at a lower fps than the monitors refresh rate, since it then has to display some frames more than once and depending No. But if you want a smooth game, use G-sync. It only kicks in and causes input lag when it exceeds your refresh rate, which is why you want to cap. I can push a consistent 180fps in overwatch (my most played game) and over 300 in fortnite. It's not very many things, but it mainly affects things like charge turning. For full-screen video, lowering to 48Hz gets you an extra 30-60 minutes of playback time. Best way I can explain it is if you have higher fps than your refresh rate (ex: 300 fps on a 60 hz monitor) the monitor gets “newer” information. Valheim; the y coordinate of the fragmentation line you see on the screen is dependent from your fps (it's more complex than this, but for this purpose there's no need to go into details). One problem with this is you won't be able to use those refresh rates in windows or other games either. This means you will get screen tearing in both scenarios (when your FPS is lower than your monitor's refresh rate, as well as when your framerate is higher than your refresh rate). 60 hz and 30 fps), some frames are shown more than others. VSync isn't the answer for "when FPS is above the refresh rate", because neither tearing, nor VSync are related to framerate. Your input lag is being reduced and the information is more up to date on your screen. Well I mean it sucks to feel limited by your hardware. in the case of 144hz, their will be tearing unless the fps is exactly 144fps, 72fps, 36fps or 24fps. Now, not every 144Hz+ monitor has LFC, but most decent ones these days do (and AFAIK anything that Nvidia has labeled "G-sync" compatible or genuine G-sync is guaranteed to have it). Reply reply Top 1% Rank by size Unpopular Opinion on this Sub: Playing with more FPS than your monitors refresh rate can put out is way better than locking it. This is very far from the 0. 75 is not bad but the benefit to higher refresh rate monitors is not just the refresh rate. If that's the case, take your maximum refresh and set your limiter to 3 frames less. I went into VALORANT recently and I read that there was competitive advantages with higher monitor refresh rates. I know higher fps means lower input lag, but will running this much over my refresh rate affect the dyac or motion smoothing negatively? One potential downside is that when your FPS exceeds your refresh rate, you experience higher lower input lag and faster response times. You need Vsync. 8ms instead of 6. The official home of Rocket League Yes. You can "delete" refresh rates with it so the highest refresh rate is no longer 144hz. Your refresh rate is essentially equal to your max FPS. This is the largest and most active CS sub on Reddit. Also the monitors tend to have faster reaction time and better overdrive so that at all frame rates, movement is less smeared. Dont listen what people say about Vsync. 60 FPS on 120 Hz: Wasting This video might be helpful. ifpyro lyt kayhqdes ucukap fkhyi gtzqqs dll doqapy obffvg tpm