I've got a 144Hz 1440p monitor and my FPS on Ultra seems to be locked to half my refresh rate at 72fps. Any ideas why that is?

[Constantlymat]

I play with V-Sync enabled on a 2060 Super. Sometimes I get 78fps for a split-second only for it to decrease back to 72fps. It never drops even one frame below that mark which leads me to believe that my GPU is more than capable to calculate more frames per second.

Any advise would be more than welcome.

[Salamand3r-]

Disable vsync.

[Constantlymat]

Damn. I thought you needed V-Sync to connect the framerate of the monitor to the framerate of the game. I didn't realize it limited the output so severely.

I changed it to adaptive and now I get 100-110 fps. Thanks.

[Salamand3r-]

Originally posted by Constantlymat:

Damn. I thought you needed V-Sync to connect the framerate of the monitor to the framerate of the game. I didn't realize it limited the output so severely.

I changed it to adaptive and now I get 100-110 fps. Thanks.

The reason is that if the game can't maintain the monitor refresh rate of 144, it's going to default to half (72) in order to o prevent tearing.

Assuming you have a Gsync or Freesync monitor (most modern high refresh panels are), you just just entirely disable vsync and enable Gsync.

[Ancient]

Originally posted by Salamand3r-:

Originally posted by Constantlymat:

Damn. I thought you needed V-Sync to connect the framerate of the monitor to the framerate of the game. I didn't realize it limited the output so severely.

I changed it to adaptive and now I get 100-110 fps. Thanks.

The reason is that if the game can't maintain the monitor refresh rate of 144, it's going to default to half (72) in order to o prevent tearing.

Assuming you have a Gsync or Freesync monitor (most modern high refresh panels are), you just just entirely disable vsync and enable Gsync.

That's double buffered Vsync. With only two frame buffers, you get that kind of behavior where either 1) you get more than the refresh rate and it caps at it or 2) when you get less than the refresh rate it caps at half.

Triple buffering addresses that, allowing Vsync to work at any variable FPS below the refresh rate, but can add a small amount (~5-10ms) of input lag.

Ideally, you're right, people should use Gsync/Freesync and then use a frame limiter (RTSS/NvInspector) set to 1-2 frames less than the refresh rate. I use a Freesync Premium Pro (Freesync 3.0) display and just enabling Vsync and triple buffering (in NvCpl and Vsync off in games) with that works fine for me to get a 144Hz lock and no tearing: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2056425940

[Salamand3r-]

Originally posted by Ancient:

Originally posted by Salamand3r-:

The reason is that if the game can't maintain the monitor refresh rate of 144, it's going to default to half (72) in order to o prevent tearing.

Assuming you have a Gsync or Freesync monitor (most modern high refresh panels are), you just just entirely disable vsync and enable Gsync.

That's double buffered Vsync. With only two frame buffers, you get that kind of behavior where either 1) you get more than the refresh rate and it caps at it or 2) when you get less than the refresh rate it caps at half.

Triple buffering addresses that, allowing Vsync to work at any variable FPS below the refresh rate, but can add a small amount (~5-10ms) of input lag.

Ideally, you're right, people should use Gsync/Freesync and then use a frame limiter (RTSS/NvInspector) set to 1-2 frames less than the refresh rate. I use a Freesync Premium Pro (Freesync 3.0) display and just enabling Vsync and triple buffering (in NvCpl and Vsync off in games) with that works fine for me to get a 144Hz lock and no tearing: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2056425940

Triple still has certain predictable caps, the math just gets more difficult.

Doom works well with the Windows DWM, so if you set it borderless it will sync frame presents without capping FPS.

Personally, on nVidia, I just use Gsync and Fastsync combined - that way if the game doesn't play well with the DWM's sync on present, Fastsync will still force it.

[Ancient]

Originally posted by Salamand3r-:

Originally posted by Ancient:

That's double buffered Vsync. With only two frame buffers, you get that kind of behavior where either 1) you get more than the refresh rate and it caps at it or 2) when you get less than the refresh rate it caps at half.

Triple buffering addresses that, allowing Vsync to work at any variable FPS below the refresh rate, but can add a small amount (~5-10ms) of input lag.

Ideally, you're right, people should use Gsync/Freesync and then use a frame limiter (RTSS/NvInspector) set to 1-2 frames less than the refresh rate. I use a Freesync Premium Pro (Freesync 3.0) display and just enabling Vsync and triple buffering (in NvCpl and Vsync off in games) with that works fine for me to get a 144Hz lock and no tearing: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2056425940

Triple still has certain predictable caps, the math just gets more difficult.

Doom works well with the Windows DWM, so if you set it borderless it will sync frame presents without capping FPS.

Personally, on nVidia, I just use Gsync and Fastsync combined - that way if the game doesn't play well with the DWM's sync on present, Fastsync will still force it.

Yes, it helps if you can assume WDDM version though and we still can't. I mean, WDDM versions vary greatly from Win 7 to Win 8/8.1 or then the actual current version we have in Win 10 1909/2004.

Someone on Win 7 will struggle to find predictability there. Same goes for those few poor souls on 8/8.1 stuck at WDDM 1.3/DXGI 1.3, which is even less supported today simply due to Win8's Vista-like lack of popularity. WDDM and even DXGI has changed so much since then that it is a good reason why we see a mass of developers dropping immediate support for anything below WDDM 2.0 and DXGI 1.4 (Win 10 as a minimum). It becomes a nightmare to make Win 7/8/8.1 support even work when your actual platform you've coded everything for is WDDM 2.7 or 2.9 and DXGI 1.6 (which is what is fully compatible with the latest versions of the Vulkan runtimes).

[Salamand3r-]

Originally posted by Ancient:

Originally posted by Salamand3r-:

Triple still has certain predictable caps, the math just gets more difficult.

Doom works well with the Windows DWM, so if you set it borderless it will sync frame presents without capping FPS.

Personally, on nVidia, I just use Gsync and Fastsync combined - that way if the game doesn't play well with the DWM's sync on present, Fastsync will still force it.

Yes, it helps if you can assume WDDM version though and we still can't. I mean, WDDM versions vary greatly from Win 7 to Win 8/8.1 or then the actual current version we have in Win 10 1909/2004.

Someone on Win 7 will struggle to find predictability there. Same goes for those few poor souls on 8/8.1 stuck at WDDM 1.3/DXGI 1.3, which is even less supported today simply due to Win8's Vista-like lack of popularity. WDDM and even DXGI has changed so much since then that it is a good reason why we see a mass of developers dropping immediate support for anything below WDDM 2.0 and DXGI 1.4 (Win 10 as a minimum). It becomes a nightmare to make Win 7/8/8.1 support even work when your actual platform you've coded everything for is WDDM 2.7 or 2.9 and DXGI 1.6 (which is what is fully compatible with the latest versions of the Vulkan runtimes).

Simple solution, people need to stop not upgrading their OS for whatever BS reasons they spew if they expect to have modern games perform correctly and optimally.

I get it, people want whatever privacy or stability they think they have by still using Win7, but it's largely an illusion, and if you choose to live in a dream world you don't get to complain that the real world is so much nicer and demand real world functions be implemented into your fantasy.