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
unlimited has
+ better response on input (mouse/gamepad)
but also
- higher power consumption / heat
- screen tearing (display parts of 2 different frames)
oh and if you have a 60 Hz monitor those extra frames will just be dropped anyway
In fact the game ties all internal timing to framerate and it's as such far worse than just one such individual example. Bikes skid around all over the place, mini-games are unbeatable, so on, so on -- and the same is in fact true for quite a few games I have. I'm mostly "a legacy gamer" so most are old, but not even all, and it goes from simple puzzle games, via adventures, to action games, to...
That is, sometimes an FPS-cap is quite definitively needed. But there's of course also always the fact that if you're playing an e.g. puzzle-game on a 60Hz monitor that you have really no need for 500 FPS and might as well save power by capping to 60.
Altough in this case it probs makes no diff but as a generel question if my game would run slightly better performance wise if i cap it