Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
I bet if some1 actually studied this, they would find there is no competitive advantage for a higher frame rate.
Seems like the console lords just want to make their toys look better than the weak closed platforms that they are.
if you have a 7000 series AMD card use the preview beta driver and lock the game to 60FPS no vsync and then turn on fluid motion frames :-)
but your gonna get latency/lag ..so may not be ideal for multiplayer, but thats the only way I know how to get higher FPS.
100Hz = 50 fps cap
60Hz = 60 fps cap
i was not able to test other refresh rates due to those being the only ones available on my monitor but those were my results, im assuming if you had a 200Hz monitor you could get 100 fps cap since it seems to be capping based on your refresh rate you are running
as for the AMD fluid motion frames i get 144 fps but the game will still say 72 on the ingame counter since FMF uses frame generation technology outside of the game engine. with anti lag+ im getting way better frame times 8-10ms now where i was getting 13-16ms before without it
Makes sense why my friend says he averages 70+ fps then, as he is on a 144hz screen. I'm playing on my 120hz tv so capped at 60 then... some very questionable decisions made by devs.
Someone doesnt have a high refresh monitor or windows properly configured...