HIGH END PC! Games are not smooth when FPS is higher then monitor refresh rate.

[hippopotumus582]

HII.. 

 

i recently bouild new gaming rig. 

 

Im having some issues in games, i play games like Apex and mw.. and i have a g sync monitor.. and if i dont cap fps on like 155 or somethin, and i just use g sync, it keeps stutter and lags in games.. even tho im on 160+ fps all the time... i use g sync and fps still goes over 165.. it bounces up to lik 168/169.. Aaaand ive tried cap fps on 165 in nvidia.. still not smooth. BUT if i cap fps at like 160 instead of 165 it get smooth.. i dident have this issue before.. i dont know what causes it :s is it somethin broken with my new rig? System specs below.. :) 

Gigabyte ULTRA x570 MB

Ryzen 9 3900X (Water cooled)

ASUS RTX 2080TI

32GB Gskill Tridentz 3200Mhz ram

2TB SSD

850W seasonic plus PSU

 

[berberries]

i think the stuttering you are talking about is actually screen tearing. this occurs when more frames are pushed by the gpu than the display can handle. this results in parts of the display showing the next frame etc.

[hippopotumus582]

yee, but feels choppy when it happens, i do have g sync tho, shouldent that get rid of the tearing? 

[Alex Atkin UK]

5 minutes ago, hippopotumus582 said:

yee, but feels choppy when it happens, i do have g sync tho, shouldent that get rid of the tearing? 

Not if the frame rate goes over the maximum refresh rate of the monitor, you have to enable V-Sync so that the game never runs faster than the max refresh rate.

[berberries]

6 minutes ago, hippopotumus582 said:

yee, but feels choppy when it happens, i do have g sync tho, shouldent that get rid of the tearing? 

gsync helps when the framerate falls UNDER the refresh rate of the monitor. you need VSYNC to make sure it doesn't go OVER the refresh rate of the monitor.

[hippopotumus582]

aaah.. hmmm.. 

[hippopotumus582]

2 minutes ago, berberries said:

gsync helps when the framerate falls UNDER the refresh rate of the monitor. you need VSYNC to make sure it doesn't go OVER the refresh rate of the monitor.

i just dont get it how it can lagg when my refresh rate is 165, and in game it displays 167/169.. 

[hippopotumus582]

i

2 minutes ago, berberries said:

gsync helps when the framerate falls UNDER the refresh rate of the monitor. you need VSYNC to make sure it doesn't go OVER the refresh rate of the monitor.

feels like texture is wobbeling, shaking. and tearing. kinda, hard to explain 

[berberries]

1 minute ago, hippopotumus582 said:

i just dont get it how it can lagg when my refresh rate is 165, and in game it displays 167/169.. 

thats literally it. your gpu is pushing 169 frames which is MORE than 165. your monitor is receiving more frames than it can handle.. turn vsync on in the game settings.

[hippopotumus582]

26 minutes ago, berberries said:

thats literally it. your gpu is pushing 169 frames which is MORE than 165. your monitor is receiving more frames than it can handle.. turn vsync on in the game settings.

just tried cod now it stutters and feels choppy at 140fps as well, wtfs going on :s

[BlackManINC]

1 hour ago, hippopotumus582 said:

HII.. 

 

i recently bouild new gaming rig. 

 

Im having some issues in games, i play games like Apex and mw.. and i have a g sync monitor.. and if i dont cap fps on like 155 or somethin, and i just use g sync, it keeps stutter and lags in games.. even tho im on 160+ fps all the time... i use g sync and fps still goes over 165.. it bounces up to lik 168/169.. Aaaand ive tried cap fps on 165 in nvidia.. still not smooth. BUT if i cap fps at like 160 instead of 165 it get smooth.. i dident have this issue before.. i dont know what causes it :s is it somethin broken with my new rig? System specs below..

Gigabyte ULTRA x570 MB

Ryzen 9 3900X (Water cooled)

ASUS RTX 2080TI

32GB Gskill Tridentz 3200Mhz ram

2TB SSD

850W seasonic plus PSU

 

What is the refresh rate of your monitor? 

[PlayStation 2]

1 hour ago, hippopotumus582 said:

i just dont get it how it can lagg when my refresh rate is 165, and in game it displays 167/169.. 

There's almost certainly bad frame pacing going on. You can have a perfect 165fps and it still look juddery because the frame pacing doesn't match what's really necessary for it to display smoothly.

[BlackManINC]

15 minutes ago, handymanshandle said:

There's almost certainly bad frame pacing going on. You can have a perfect 165fps and it still look juddery because the frame pacing doesn't match what's really necessary for it to display smoothly.

@hippopotumus582

 

Yeah, I didn't see that. Well if your monitors refresh rate is 165, then all you have to do is cap the frame rate at 165 fps, problem solved. Exceeding the refresh rate will only cause you problems. 

[Alex Atkin UK]

2 hours ago, BlackManINC said:

@hippopotumus582

 

Yeah, I didn't see that. Well if your monitors refresh rate is 165, then all you have to do is cap the frame rate at 165 fps, problem solved. Exceeding the refresh rate will only cause you problems. 

Not to mention its extremely wasteful as you're burning more GPU and CPU cycles than necessary, using more electricity and pumping out more heat for zero gain.

 

Ideally you don't ever want to hit 100% utilisation of CPU or GPU as that WILL cause frame-pacing issues.

[BlackManINC]

2 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

Not to mention its extremely wasteful as you're burning more GPU and CPU cycles than necessary, using more electricity and pumping out more heat for zero gain.

 

Ideally you don't ever want to hit 100% utilisation of CPU or GPU as that WILL cause frame-pacing issues.

Yep, you especially don't want the CPU to hit anywhere near 100%. The day I start getting a usage rate close to that high is the day I'll consider upgrading to a new CPU. 

[Alex Atkin UK]

1 minute ago, BlackManINC said:

Yep, you especially don't want the CPU to hit anywhere near 100%. The day I start getting a usage rate close to that high is the day I'll consider upgrading to a new CPU. 

This is where people often get confused about exactly how much CPU you need.  A certain amount might be "enough" to reach a certain frame rate, but going over and above that can reduce frame pacing issues quite dramatically.  I noticed that going from an 8600k to a 9900k on Assassins Creed.

People forget background tasks on Windows can easily stall game code if you don't have a decent amount of spare resources.  Of course it depends how sensitive you are to frame pacing, personally I find it hugely jarring and don't even get me started on out-of-order frame delivery.

[BlackManINC]

17 minutes ago, Alex Atkin UK said:

This is where people often get confused about exactly how much CPU you need.  A certain amount might be "enough" to reach a certain frame rate, but going over and above that can reduce frame pacing issues quite dramatically.  I noticed that going from an 8600k to a 9900k on Assassins Creed.

People forget background tasks on Windows can easily stall game code if you don't have a decent amount of spare resources.  Of course it depends how sensitive you are to frame pacing, personally I find it hugely jarring and don't even get me started on out-of-order frame delivery.

I just set the "priority" setting for all my games to 'above normal' just to make sure it gets the attention it needs. I use a program called 'Process Lasso' which saves it so I don't have to keep resetting it. Setting it to 'high' can help, but I think 'above normal' is high enough when talking which process gets the resources. 

[Darkseth]

Cap your fps with MSI Afterburner Riva Tuner at Refresh Rate -2 (144 Hz Monitor --> 142 cap. 165 Hz Monitor --> 163 Hz).

That makes sure, you never run "past" the G-Sync/Freesync range.

 

There is no real benefit in having more fps than Hz - unless you take the Tearing because you "NEED" the extra 0,5 millisecond reaction time or something.

But if you want the smoothest motions, it's what i said. Cap fps at almost max Refresh Rate, end be happy.

[Alex Atkin UK]

1 minute ago, Darkseth said:

Cap your fps with MSI Afterburner Riva Tuner at Refresh Rate -2 (144 Hz Monitor --> 142 cap. 165 Hz Monitor --> 163 Hz).

That makes sure, you never run "past" the G-Sync/Freesync range.

 

There is no real benefit in having more fps than Hz - unless you take the Tearing because you "NEED" the extra 0,5 millisecond reaction time or something.

But if you want the smoothest motions, it's what i said. Cap fps at almost max Refresh Rate, end be happy.

I'm pretty sure vsync is supposed to handle that.  I remember reading a while back that NVIDIA changed its implementation with G-Sync so that its only used to prevent you going over the monitors max refresh rate.

[Darkseth]

V Sync is something different, that should NOT be used when you have Freesync/G-Sync available.
 

V-Sync active:

You NEED to have more than 144 fps at ALL TIMES, so you always have clean 144 fps.And even then, you might have increased input Lag.

If you ever drop below 144 fps, even fi it'Äs 143 fps, you WILL get Stuttering, aka Frame Doubling -> How do you fit 140 fps into 144 windows? Only if you double 4 frames. That will be 4 small stutters per Second. And so on.

 

If you have G-Sync/Freesync active, and cap your fps at 142 fps, you will not have only 142 fps (maximum) but G-Sync/Freesync will always be active --> Zero stuttering, perfect Frametimes, and very minimal input Lag.

 

 

 

Idk where you read that, but it's completely Wrong.

G-Sync is NOT only used to prevent the fps going above the Refresh rate (that would be no different from V-Sync. But G-Sync is actually exactly the opposite of V-Sync)
Below the Refresh rate, it works as it should: changing the Refresh Rate of the Monitor to the fps your GPU delivers.