If it's a fast-paced action game, 60 is a must. If it's turn-based, or otherwise just slow enough to not matter, I'll sometimes accept a stable 30 - but only if it's truly stable, any dips below that are not okay.
Weirdly enough, I actually care more about framerate on “pancake” (non-vr) games than I do on VR games. I can deal with 10fps in vrchat in a crowded instance. I need more like 20~30 for non-vr games.
That said, I get mentally exhausted when the framerate is <30 for an extended period of time in VRChat.
I have a very simple process for dealing with all of this - I never check my framerate in the first place, so I never know what it is.
I just play games If there’s noticeable stuttering or lag then I maybe try to do something about it, and if there’s not, then I just play and don’t worry about it.
That’s actually a good way of doing it. I used to be this way, but I don’t know how and why I started using a team’s built in FPS counter and mangohud. I’m going to stop using it so I don’t have to keep glancing it all the time. Thank you.
It’s not like I notice it more when I have a frame rate counter turned on, I’m just not questioning how bad or how often the drops are when I have it enabled.
Anything VR really needs to be 90 or more, but around 60 is good for most things.
I actually think the choppy framerates in Cyberpunk is actually really immersive so it's cool all the way down to 30 or with the smearing of dlss-performance, but most games don't give you progressive brain damage in the first 2 hours like it does
Competitive FPS/action games I want 120, story games with FPS 60, anything turn based or slow paced is probably fine at 30 or 40. It also depends on a lot of other factors. On my handheld (steam deck like) I aim for 30 or 40, but my main PC always shoots for 60 or higher.
That and I usually tune my settings so I get a bit more than 60, then lock the framerate to reduce stutter.
I think I'm a bit spoiled with my 144 Hz monitor; anything below maybe 120 FPS starts to bug me. Thankfully my PC is pretty powerful and I don't really play graphics-heavy games (mostly just Minecraft) so my framerate is usually quite stable.
I can comfortably play some games down to 12fps ±3ish, if it isn’t something that’s fast paced.
I have yet to play anything where I’m skilled enough for higher than 30fps to matter response-wise, and while I can notice the difference between 60fps and 240fps on my monitor, I gotta say it doesn’t do much for me.
Maybe I just don’t know what to look for, what I’m missing, or how to set up my laptop right, but who knows. My eyes could be stuck on 720p for all I know.
i am 100% with you. there must be something to it if it's that important to so many people but i genuinely can't tell the difference as long as it's stable
and if it does make a difference, for competitive games wouldn't you want it to be consistent between all players instead of "better" based on whoever has more horsepower? it all makes no sense to me
Maybe this has changed since I’ve upgraded my gaming specs but I used to average 14 FPS on Kerbal Space Program and had a great time with it, docking is a nightmare at that frame rate but otherwise it’s more than playable.
Back in my poverty gaming days I 100%-ed a pirated The Simpsons Hit and Run with potato graphics at slide show speeds, I’m talking like multiple seconds per frame with around 80% frame droppage.
Nowadays I just care that it looks decent and runs smoothly for the games I play, which is mostly Civilization and Stellaris
My personal minimum is a stable 40/s, which is roughly where I start noticing the lower framerate without paying attention to it.
With 30/s I need to get used to it, and I usually underclock (or, rather, power-limit) my GPU to hit an average 50 unless the game in question is either highly unstable (e.g. Helldivers 2) or the game is so light I don’t have to care (e.g. Selaco).
bin.pol.social
Najstarsze