in game is it max 100fps...menu it goes up to 345fps and I dont see any difference running 1 or 2 gpu's(crossfire)
100fps max?
- Thread starter theR1
- Start date
Upvote
0
Im going to guess that your monitor is 60hz like most of them. In that case it wouldn't matter as you can only see 60fps anyways.
Upvote
0
Well since the game is still in beta I would wait for official release and hopefully there will be a driver update from AMD to fix this problem.
Upvote
0
Well if the OP monitor is 120 Hz as AOP points out then he would need to run at 120 FPS to match the monitor. However 120 Hz is only useful for 3D gaming so it should really be a non issue.
Upvote
0
Not true, some people can tell the difference between 60 and 120 fps.
Upvote
0
I definately can when I play PS3. If im gaming Ill turn my TV up to 120Hz, but if im watching a movie ill turn it back down to 60Hz. Watching a movie in 120Hz bugs the heck out of me, it looks to fluid and fake but playing a game in 120Hz is super smooth and nice (NO LAG!)
the problem with running stuff at 60hz is that if your fps drops below that you start to notice lag. The higher the Hz and FPS you get the better.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
You can disable the FPS cap in order to get over 100 fps if you edit just a couple lines in the .ini
bSmoothFrameRate=True
MinSmoothedFrameRate=0.000000
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=999.000000
bSmoothFrameRate=True
MinSmoothedFrameRate=0.000000
MaxSmoothedFrameRate=999.000000
Upvote
0
Anyone that seems to think that a 60hz refresh rate means you cant notice anything above 60FPS has clearly not played enough games with high frame rates.
Any game at 60 FPS feels and reacts differently than it does at 100 FPS wether or not you have 60Hz refresh rate or 120Hz refresh rate plain and simple.
Why would there be so many bind scripts for COD's that change your FPS cap for doing certain things, wait for it wait for it. Because it makes a huge differnece in the ability to jump onto a ledge or get the drop on someone coming around a corner. I want to say from old binds I have seen that UE likes 76FPS for things that require client interaction to the game world(jumping and manuevering), where as when on the run and gun it is best to have as high an FPS as possible so you are seeing what happens on screen faster, allowing for your personal reflexes to be as fast as possible if you are able to notice the difference in a higher FPS. Yes some people dont notice differences in FPS from 60 - 100, but there are far more people that do notice and would like to get the best performing experience as possible.
Any game at 60 FPS feels and reacts differently than it does at 100 FPS wether or not you have 60Hz refresh rate or 120Hz refresh rate plain and simple.
Why would there be so many bind scripts for COD's that change your FPS cap for doing certain things, wait for it wait for it. Because it makes a huge differnece in the ability to jump onto a ledge or get the drop on someone coming around a corner. I want to say from old binds I have seen that UE likes 76FPS for things that require client interaction to the game world(jumping and manuevering), where as when on the run and gun it is best to have as high an FPS as possible so you are seeing what happens on screen faster, allowing for your personal reflexes to be as fast as possible if you are able to notice the difference in a higher FPS. Yes some people dont notice differences in FPS from 60 - 100, but there are far more people that do notice and would like to get the best performing experience as possible.
Upvote
0
This is not because of the number of displayed frames but because of ****ty game engines. Even newest COD games have remnants from Quake 3 engine which had some physics "bugs" related to FPS the game was running on. This results in different feel when COD is running at 60fps vs 100fps even if you are still displayed only 60 fps.
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
I'm sick of people saying that because the human eye can only see 60 fps, when the fps is higher there is no difference. In most games you might not "see" the difference between 100 fps and 130 fps, but such small changes in fps can be "felt".
While playing any First Person Shooter you can definitely feel a small change in fps, even when it is above 60 fps. Anyone who disagrees with this theory has not played a video game competitively.
At the competitive level players will want the maximum fps, and they will want to keep it stable (Cap it at a certain number). This makes it so that the fps stays constant, and does not change too often. For Example: If the FPS range in a certain game is always 125-200 and it does not ever go below 125, it is best to cap it to 125 because this way those small fps changes won't be "felt"
While playing any First Person Shooter you can definitely feel a small change in fps, even when it is above 60 fps. Anyone who disagrees with this theory has not played a video game competitively.
At the competitive level players will want the maximum fps, and they will want to keep it stable (Cap it at a certain number). This makes it so that the fps stays constant, and does not change too often. For Example: If the FPS range in a certain game is always 125-200 and it does not ever go below 125, it is best to cap it to 125 because this way those small fps changes won't be "felt"
Upvote
0
Upvote
0
LoL ****ty game engine?
Probably one of the most fluid and easy to run game engines out there, and you call it "****ty". Makes total sense..
Upvote
0
I personally never said 100 FPS was an issue, but if someone is able to max out 99.99 FPS, and has room to spare why wouldn't they want to get as much as possible.
With the stat fps command on you can see your FPS to the right of the screen and there is another hopefully little number under your FPS. If you are able to produce a higher FPS your time it takes to draw those frames is less. Wouldn't it be better to be able to run 99.99 FPS at 13.01MS versus 50 FPS at 75.05MS? The answer is YES! So it should stand to reason that getting 120 FPS at 6-10MS would be even better.
With the stat fps command on you can see your FPS to the right of the screen and there is another hopefully little number under your FPS. If you are able to produce a higher FPS your time it takes to draw those frames is less. Wouldn't it be better to be able to run 99.99 FPS at 13.01MS versus 50 FPS at 75.05MS? The answer is YES! So it should stand to reason that getting 120 FPS at 6-10MS would be even better.
Upvote
0
I thought you said it was sorry
. I remember I guys being pissed off to only play at 75 FPS, he wanted more and said he was lagging
Upvote
0