fps ..bla duplicate journal name shit

by Deactivated6376 • 15 Dec 2006, 03:41 • Journals
do most people use the same monitor refresh rate as their fps, i.e if my monitor only supports 85hz, is it better to use 76fps in game (although i can handle 200 fps) and 75hz
Comments
35
▼
Lagger 15 Dec 2006, 03:50
refresh rate should be as high as possible. if you can't go above 85Hz and the tearing is bothering you and your gfx card consistently gives you >100 fps, consider turning on vsync. once the refresh rate reaches 140 or so, tearing is hardly noticed.
▼
Mztik 15 Dec 2006, 07:44
Turning vsync on? you kidding me? simply use slightly higher FPS than your refresh rate to prevent tearing and probably get the most consistent results for instance 120 Hz and 125 FPS in your case I suggest using 85Hz and 100 FPS would be fine. Playing with anything more than 125 fps is a waste.
Parent
▼
im a tree 15 Dec 2006, 08:13
250fps / 125hz mouse

imba! ¬.¬
Parent
▼
Adacore 15 Dec 2006, 09:15
idd :>
Parent
▼
im a tree 15 Dec 2006, 16:16
I use it! It's so awesome, your bullets hit where you aim!
Parent
▼
wipeout 15 Dec 2006, 12:32
What's wrong with vsync?
Parent
▼
Mztik 15 Dec 2006, 13:03
Bugged like hell in ET r_swapinterval 1 results in lower fps (not because it's being synced with your display refresh rate but actually is that bugged), it's got a whole host of other problems, which just generally make you play a lot worse; avoid it like the plague.
Parent
▼
wipeout 15 Dec 2006, 14:18
Never had any of the described problems.
Parent
▼
nage 15 Dec 2006, 05:53
r_mode 7 @ 75hz And Im using 76fps. Altough I can handle 125fps. ( Also with r_mode 8 its 75hz and 125fps but Im using 76fps and r_mode 7 .)
▼
im a tree 15 Dec 2006, 08:14
85hz / 100fps as mztik suggested
▼
Fets 15 Dec 2006, 08:35
85hz screen
125fps
1000hz mouse
▼
Cya 15 Dec 2006, 08:39
1000 hz ?

i don't think so the better is for sure 500 hz because lots of people have problems and lags with 1000 hz
Parent
▼
Fets 15 Dec 2006, 08:41
i don't...:O
Parent
▼
crawazaky 15 Dec 2006, 11:44
A lot of laser (most are from razer) can be used@ 1000hz without anyprobs
Parent
▼
pumu 15 Dec 2006, 10:32
85 fps and maxpackets ?
▼
Ronner 15 Dec 2006, 11:31
r_mode 6
100 hz screen
105 fps

As Mztik said, to get rid of tearing, just put your fps slightly higher than your screens refreshrate.

it's quite useless to get 200 fps on an 85 hz screen.
▼
Pray 15 Dec 2006, 11:40
r_mode 4
100 hz (my monitor only reached 100 hz @ 800*600)
100 fps
250 hz / 1000 hz (depends on ur playstyle)
▼
Mztik 15 Dec 2006, 12:23
legendary combo with 112.5 fov :P
Parent
▼
Pray 15 Dec 2006, 14:00
Ah YOU KNOW!! ;) And i don't mind giving some demos to show it works ^^
Parent
▼
Deactivated3050 15 Dec 2006, 12:03
r_mode 4
85 hz Screen
125 fps
500 hz G5
+ aimkey
▼
Silent_ 15 Dec 2006, 12:38
autoaim > aimkey
Parent
▼
urtier 15 Dec 2006, 12:32
r_mode 4
120 HZ screen
100 fps
▼
pumu 15 Dec 2006, 12:38
desktop 1024, 100 hz
wenn ich dann auf 800* und 120hz schalte, verkleinert sich der angezeigte bereich vom bildschirm
hast du da ne lösung? außer jedes mal neu einzustellen die groeße
Parent
▼
pumu 15 Dec 2006, 12:35
urtier: hz > fps ?

mztik, ronner: fps > hz ?





-> ????????????????????????????? <-

explain guys
▼
Ronner 15 Dec 2006, 13:29
"fps = hz" results in tearing

"hz > fps" is just plain stupid (Sorry urtier!)

"fps > hz" just a couple fps more than hz will get rid of tearing but having massive ammounts of fps more than hz is also just plain stupid and useless.
Parent
▼
urtier 15 Dec 2006, 13:53
Why is it stupid? It runs uber smooth and I can't complain about not hitting ppl
Parent
▼
Ronner 15 Dec 2006, 14:13
skill != settings ;-)

I know it's because with 100 fps you will send 100 packets as well and that's the reason why you have it this way. Putting 100 hz for monitor in this case, gives tearing ofcourse and that's why you have it on 120hz.

All quite logical.

It's just that ET is such a fucked up stupidly written game that fps has an effect on all kind of other things such as spread and in this case also on packet ammounts.

I'm not sure how many packets you will send btw with 105fps.
Parent
▼
wipeout 15 Dec 2006, 14:25
You would send 100 packets with maxpackets set to 100. However, in order to render 105fps you'd need to use vsync and therefore have a monitor which allows you to use 105 Hz.
Parent
▼
Ronner 15 Dec 2006, 15:08
maxpackets set to 100 doesn't send 100 maxpackets.. it merely represents the ammount of MAXIMUM packages you will allow the computer to send.

The actual ammount of packages you send is totally depending on your FPS however.
Parent
▼
wipeout 15 Dec 2006, 17:23
I know how it works. I was referring to 105 fps :P
But I made a mistake anyway. In theory it should send 105 packets. But somehow I doubt it actually does.
[one could find out with perfmon tho ... if he's able to get 105 fps ;x]
Parent
▼
Mztik 15 Dec 2006, 14:53
Would send half the fps so 105/2 you can't actually get 105 FPS I don't think like you mentioned ET is very poorly written setting FPS to com_maxfps 105 it'd try to run at 125 FPS or something silly like that. Stay away from r_swapinterval 1 however.
Parent
▼
Ronner 15 Dec 2006, 15:10
hmmm. I haven't had much unhittable complaints though, but 52.5 packages suckzors.

Well.. I wish I could use 100fps so that I would actually use 100 packets, however, 100hz+100fps = tearing.

perhaps urtier wasn't that stupid after all by setting his hz to 120 and his fps to 100. Though I remember I've done something similar and it gave me a more jerky screen as oposed to higher fps than hz.

and ofcourse im not gonna use r_swapinterval 1 roflol
Parent
▼
wipeout 15 Dec 2006, 14:23
You don't want to see every frame rendered?
Parent
▼
nSKunK 15 Dec 2006, 13:37
r_mode 8
76fps
85hz
100 maxpackets
500Hz 1600 DPI (mx518)
▼
Sick 15 Dec 2006, 15:19
r_mode 6
200 fps
75 herz <-- :(
Back to top