30 fps lower performance threshold?
Good evening PG! Today began a dispute with one body... I argued that a system which gives 30 fps at the right settings is considered a system coped with the game.He said that 60 and no less and calling me a man, inadequate, etc .I understand that 30 is not comfortable and 60 it is at least for comfort... But 30 fps is considered the minimum for the same tests and reviews of system configurations!?If I'm wrong please correct me explain without going to the individual.Metr72
A strange companion, a silly dispute. The boys play on 30 fps, especially if there is no choice, sometimes it takes console and an example of a released mafia 3, and Yes, for many it is not comfortable, the smoothness of the picture is achieved at 50 frames and above the most comfortable picture, and many that play at a serious sistemnik, well, in General, pay attention to the fps, I notice a drawdown below 50 frames.
But 30 fps is considered the minimum for the same tests and reviews of system configurations - never seen such. If you test, show, in General, that is capable of system, which is the maximum frame rate (and even better - the average, minimum, maximum). On this, at least, tied the iron tests, and comparing them.
In General, the numbers are below, here's an example:
Example for Battlefield 1
As you can see, there are numbers and below 30.
If I remember correctly, the picture starts to lag at 25fps and below.
It's very simple 30 for single, 60+ for online.. if I have the game runs smoothly without freezes on high at 30 + fps.. makes sense to me to turn down the graphics to medium to get 60?? exactly the same smoothness and level of comfort
VOVAN WOLF
but such tests can wipe as they are designed to test for iron but not for games) turning off antialiasing and setting a few settings from ultra to high these cards will be given 2 or even 3 times more fps
No guys not understand... the meaning of the dispute was that 30 fps is considered a cinematic iron at least... or is it?If it is below 30 it is considered that the system does not drag the game at all. It is clear that we play sometimes 30-40 fps because of the hopelessness
VOVAN WOLF
Not well there is what is value? It's clear if pulling 60 fps for example the conditional game is great... But at least what?
Metr72
They have no threshold for what? If the system does not drag, they will note it in the review that in such a game the fps was lower in such settings, say below 30 frames, and in fact a screenshot or graphic it displays. For free! iron needed edges, or limits - minimum, maximum, what gives the iron. Review doing for users (gamers) that they already dellali insights whether or not to take the same video card. And a proper comparison, growth in %, min - max, in comparison (say 7-20%).
Look at this graph, which shows the minimum, maximum, and then fell to 28, and comparison percentage:
Example comparing graphics cards
Again, no matter how SAG card, they need to see, and display, for comparison or output.
There is no minimum, though if you think about it, whether reviews of the cards with fps below 20 frames - AND WHETHER it makes SENSE to do such a review, it's worth noting, that's all.
For me personally, 30 FPS is absolutely no discomfort. 25-a little discomfort, but still quite playable. Below-brakes, unplayable. BUT, this game depends. For example, in The Witcher 3, and 30 FPS are enough, but for DOOM already, ideally 50-60 FPS should be.
Metr72
Here's an example, there are numbers lower than 10 frames:
R9 285 vs GTX 980 Tihttp://www.anandtech.com/bench/product/1512?vs=1496
Metr72
You asked the question, the meaning of the dispute was that 30 fps is considered a cinematic iron at least
I replied - no, they compare the minimum and maximum, build charts and put the same video card, from weak to powerful.
Now again the question from you is: everyone decides for himself playable or not?
The tank. of iron, say, is not play, they compare and show the ACTUAL numbers on this gland. To solve it, playable or not, will be how to say, well, let's say - someone who buys a new graphics card, plays (compares performance), asks - coming or not (to buy the game or change the graphics card). The essence of the review in another, and playable or not is decided by the user or potential buyer, that's the point of reviews, to show the possibilities of the iron.
In General, the final answer for you, each experience is different, someone ready to play with some drawdowns, and someone will cut the game from the list or put on shelf, until that moment, until I get my high-end PC.
For the reviewers, and again, these are just numbers (and what they play and on what, and at what fps, this is not a review, it's a personal life).
Yes, the minimum is 30 fps for more less comfortable game.. but it's anyone.
I only play with the vertical sync, because notice any tearing or jerking. Since then, two years ago upgraded a PC to play less than 45-50 fps can not. So it all depends on the user.
Metr72
there are anchor points: 24фпс - cinematic fps Locke , at that fps can still be in the cheto to play (not the shooter) , the Witcher for example, or this, anything below 24 is already not playable for shooters\race it should be at least 30 fps, is not very comfortable, but you can play, then there is at least as comfortable as 42фпс(or 48, can't remember)... (AMD with their technology pricing States that this is the minimum quality threshold), which I by the way agree and 60 fps is a national quality threshold, ideally have fps of 70-80 frames , in order to have a reserve in case of drawdown, everything above is better , but barely noticeable.
It is worth noting that a gamepad is more convenient to play at framerate about 30 than slavomisla.
In tanks for example don't like drawdown even on the five frames below 60. And in the same mob and with 30 on the controller is very playable and comfortable.
If you take all games, regardless of genre, the controls (keyboard mouse or joystick ), any game mode : single or multi, I think the minimum requirement of a computer game to 60 fps + .
And I always thought was a misunderstanding, when the live broadcast of the same game tests components, say that the optimal solution is 30 fps, in with him in any competitive mode -I'll have a look. as they will bend. Especially on the computer where you played with 144 hz with Monica and allows iron to play at this level. And if you have the game in 60 fps, that is at least some chance to win, then 30 fps is just sad, without a chance, let you and dad nagibatorov.
Now, as for consoles, Yes most games are 30 fps or less, but the difference is the joystick, which limits the speed of movement of the camera and therefore the game is perceived more or less smoothly, more in multepleer -all are in equal conditions.
And now I brought forth the result :
1. If you play on the computer regardless of what game, with what method of control in which mode game computer min 60 fps.
2. In other circumstances you can consider 30 fps playable.
My personal opinion-Subjective.
Minya has a pitch hypothesis is that on large resolutions and large monitors the threshold of playable fps goes higher.
all because there are some high-speed objects that might have shifted by some distance for some time. next, to understand this you need to split the screen into many blocks. of course, you can get that on a small screen, these blocks are more dense and may exceed or be compatible with the resolution matrix. next to the mental pitch of experience we through that on screen cars drive and the screen scoring big. in the case of a 30 fps difference between the displacement of objects on the matrix will be greater because of the greater length of the segment jump of 60 and 120 fps respectively. the higher the fps the smoother respectively will drive the car.
but in practice after something like 800x600 and 1080p on the TV I big difference between not uzril. ie the border of playability about one. gentle it should be more noticeable on screens over a meter in 4K to 16K permissions peck-peck.
so MS still azhno such a value as the response matrix. the case is that the Ming is basically a very slow Maritsa and the TV is smears like shit, so it is likely that the min reversal Pixela on the Maritsa occurs more slowly than the NT monitor 120фпс from what I see as pixely run smoothly.
as for the playability that 30 fps is playable fps for me. the minimum that is 25 a at 24 peck my brain is Moog to understand that the game is beginning to respond to my desire with a delay and the camera rotation takes place smoothly. but when I played I was weak, hungry and disrespect.
if you conduct another experiment. let's say we have a game that works on the pitch read a lot of fps. if Progame to limit fps to 30 and play for a while it will look that everything is fine but if you squeeze the fps right at the time in my case to 60 with sungam - pitch brain will be dumbfounded like graphics heaven divorced and will wonder how it is in the stool then 30 fps before playing. will be seen such as more flying machines in Massapequa odecca Yes travon swaying and everything. however, there is such a disadvantage that some games imeet frame snap in time. otherwise loom the more fps the faster you can occur some processes in the game and I did not catch. that's why I sometimes prefer 30 fps, I, it is less kazhitsya like how I perceive reality.
30 fps is fine, it is possible to play, especially with a gamepad more and don't forget to enable vertical sync.
30 fps is playable is subjective only in the case if you have low requirements for gaming and if the iron does not allow you to get more.
If you are constantly vomiting at 30 fps how do you know that man gets used to everything and if you see 60 fps once a year in indie platformer then you can certainly argue that 30 fps is normal type but actually it is not. At 60 fps has a completely different feel from the game, the game becomes more obedient, the action takes place in the game smoother and more accurate. The level of immersion is higher.
also, 30 fps can be considered normal if you have poor eyesight or reaction is inhibited, in short, if you are not all right.
Here, for example if you give a game where you can play 60 fps and you can lock 30 which of you voluntarily to lock at 30 fps? I think there are only a couple of drug addicts for hundreds of people.
Oh and here is a example comparison, if you do not see the difference here or think that the middle and lower position with the juice you to the optometrist or psychiatrist.
