Frames per second

[pauldiazberrio]

I'd like a little guidance on how to lock my frame rate. I understand the basic 30 and 60 FPS, but I've learned that 36 and 45 are multiples that can be used if desired. According to one author, 36 is a 50% increase of the cinematic 24 and that 45 is 50% of 30, which in turn is a 25% increase from the cinematic 24.

Resident Evil Village, for example, runs at 45fps on PS4, a figure the developers thought would be best for that particular console. More advanced ones run it at 60fps. Doom Classic used to run at 35fps.


I understand the equations, but not how why are used and how they factor into gameplay. Please, can you explain them to me?

[Jamebonds1]

Цитата допису crunchyfrog:

Цитата допису Jamebonds1:

Check your post. It said you didn't believe me that ps4 games can improved performance on ps5.

Yes, consoles always have VARYING RATES FOR GAMES.

That does not say what you think it says.

I was responding as per the explanations I gave - one game on the SAME console can have a good framerate and another have a bad one, for example Ventica on PS3 versus any Call of Duty game.

Why duid you wait until now to address this and ask instead of going through all those lies before? Come on, this is what I've been getting at. There is no dishonour in saying "I dont' understand" and asking.

So it seems the issue is you said something and it wasn't what you meant. I thought you meant something different.

So we could have avoided all this if you'd done this from the off just like the same situation in our very first conversation on here.

I get it, you're not good at English,and there's nothing wrong with that. But don't try to dodge it, because it gets nowhere. ASK.

Oh okay. Now I got it. Please make it more simply comment because I'm not good at understanding England's language next time.

[crunchyfrog]

Цитата допису Jamebonds1:

Цитата допису crunchyfrog:

Yes, consoles always have VARYING RATES FOR GAMES.

That does not say what you think it says.

I was responding as per the explanations I gave - one game on the SAME console can have a good framerate and another have a bad one, for example Ventica on PS3 versus any Call of Duty game.

Why duid you wait until now to address this and ask instead of going through all those lies before? Come on, this is what I've been getting at. There is no dishonour in saying "I dont' understand" and asking.

So it seems the issue is you said something and it wasn't what you meant. I thought you meant something different.

So we could have avoided all this if you'd done this from the off just like the same situation in our very first conversation on here.

I get it, you're not good at English,and there's nothing wrong with that. But don't try to dodge it, because it gets nowhere. ASK.

Oh okay. Now I got it. Please make it more simply comment because I'm not good at understanding England's language next time.

In that case I'll try but again, if you don't understand ASK.

There's absolutely no shame in doing that here.

[pauldiazberrio]

Oddly enough, for some reason, there are a number of curved, 4k monitors with a refresh rate of 100hz, available. Apparently, they're venerated more by their developers than they sell on the market. Judging by their on-line store descriptions, you should get them. Does 4k and 100 fps offer as spectacular a performance as they say?

[Jamebonds1]

Цитата допису pauldiazberrio:

Oddly enough, for some reason, there are a number of curved, 4k monitors with a refresh rate of 100hz. Apparently, they're venerated by their developers more than they sell on the market. Judging by their descriptions, you should get them. Does 4k and 100 fps offer as spectacular performance as they say?

To get 4k at up to 100 FPS, then you need a good system.

In my opinion as theater owner, I wouldn't said 4k literally make a difference over 1440p, unless you are 6 to 8 ft away from 50" 4ktv.

[crunchyfrog]

Цитата допису Jamebonds1:

Цитата допису pauldiazberrio:

Oddly enough, for some reason, there are a number of curved, 4k monitors with a refresh rate of 100hz. Apparently, they're venerated by their developers more than they sell on the market. Judging by their descriptions, you should get them. Does 4k and 100 fps offer as spectacular performance as they say?

To get 4k at up to 100 FPS, then you need a good system.

In my opinion as theater owner, I wouldn't said 4k literally make a difference over 1440p, unless you are 6 to 8 ft away from 50" 4ktv.

This.

It's not worth it. Funnily enough it's simple phsyics.

Unless you're sat rather close to the screen your eyes simply cannot resolve the extra detail so it's a a waste to go up to that amount.

Again, your bst bet is to ignore the numbers on papaer as they can mislead you. Go to any store of your chossing and demo them. Use your eyes and ears.

Typically I'm an audio nut, OP. I was lucky in that I qualified as an audio engineer back in the early 1990s. It tends to make a bit of a snob out of you. Once you hear really good audio right at the source of recording, well it spoils you.

So, whenever I bought audio equipment after that I'd research a bit first and get an idea of what I wanted to look at.

Then I'd go shopping and test them out but I'd take a couple of things with me - my own headphones I was familiar with, and a CD I was also implicitly familiar with.

The importance here is if you take something along with you that you KNOW really well how it should loook or sound, then you can easily test fairly. If you sit there are judge from some film or whatever the shop provide you have little frame of reference.

So in your case I'd foundn out what to go and test then go to a store or two armed with your own couple of BluRays or something and ask them to play them and sit down and check. Make sure you do try to view from the same distance you'd be sat at wherever you intend to use it and so on.

I think you'll be surprised how little of a diffrence there is if you sit any reasonable distance back.

[pauldiazberrio]

CRT monitors were able to go up to 120hz in their twilight years before the flat screen arrived, with a standard refresh rate of 70. I am actually surprised that monitors with higher refresh rates were conceived of.

I tested Cod: Ghosts at 70 FPS and that seemed to be a decent amount for me. Same goes for a number of other first person shooters. If 17% above 60 was already achieved with older technology, why not design modern monitors to make 70hz the defacto minimal frequency with 120 as its uppermost limit? What's the big idea behind the 75hz model? It only gives a 7% increase to an already good frame rate.

[crunchyfrog]

Цитата допису pauldiazberrio:

CRT monitors were able to go up to 120hz in their twilight years before the flat screen arrived, with a standard refresh rate of 70. I am actually surprised that monitors with higher refresh rates were conceived of.

I tested Cod: Ghosts at 70 FPS and that seemed to be a decent amount for me. Same goes for a number of other first person shooters. If 17% above 60 was already achieved with older technology, why not design modern monitors to make 70hz the defacto minimal frequency with 120 as its uppermost limit? What's the big idea behind the 75hz model? It only gives a 7% increase to an already good frame rate.

A lot of it has to do with the fact that sscreens aren't purely for games or computers. There's still TV and films and the indutry has distinct reasons why it workes on either 24.whatever FPS or 50FPS (here in PAL regions of old) or 60 FPS.

You can look this up as I won't bore you with the scientific explanations why.

[Jamebonds1]

Цитата допису pauldiazberrio:

CRT monitors were able to go up to 120hz in their twilight years before the flat screen arrived, with a standard refresh rate of 70. I am actually surprised that monitors with higher refresh rates were conceived of.

I tested Cod: Ghosts at 70 FPS and that seemed to be a decent amount for me. Same goes for a number of other first person shooters. If 17% above 60 was already achieved with older technology, why not design modern monitors to make 70hz the defacto minimal frequency with 120 as its uppermost limit? What's the big idea behind the 75hz model? It only gives a 7% increase to an already good frame rate.

That is only for high end monitor, and most monitors are 75 Hz. You can still find CRT, but keep in mind that it could emit radiation that can hurt your eye. 120 background is better than 60 Hz background.

[View]

I'm... just.. gonna leave this here.... https://blurbusters.com/gsync/gsync101-input-lag-tests-and-settings/3/