Am I the only one that doesn't care about framerate?

[diegoaccord]

[dkoudijs]

well once you get to 30, the game is at least smooth enough for many people.

You reaching 22 in a bethesda game makes me concerned, since it will dip much lower once some action appears on screen.

I guess if you don't notice the slow frame rate, good for you.

 

The vast majority of people would notice the 22fps you are showing.

[tkitch]

Sub 30 is easily visible, and not pleasant.

 

I don't need 200 fps, but staying over 45 sustained is really preferable.

[Levent]

Yes.

[jaslion]

It's one of those things that when you simply can't get more you make do but the moment you start heading towards 60 and finally can play most if not all of your games at 60 you will have a very hard time going back.

 

Also like 22fps in fallout 4? How'd you do that that is a 1900mhz card so at least pretty recent and at least has 5gb of memory so at worst a 1060. Should not at all be at 22fps.

[Morrie Sells Wigs]

60 is definitely the preferred minimum.

 

However, some exceptional games have been 30fps on console.

 

I'd rather have a stable 30 than something higher that fluctuates constantly.

[porina]

It's ok to care about frame rate, to the extent that you know when you have enough. Lower is bad, but more isn't always better. Some games would be a struggle to play below 60fps, but others you might not even notice at 30fps.

[emosun]

For me anything over 30-40 is good enough. That why I love 4k and hate stupid 2k high refresh rate monitors that look worse and offer me nothing lol

[diegoaccord]

Here's a video with specs at the end after the game closes.

 

<mod removed>

 

[Dedayog]

Yes, you're the only one in the entire world that doesn't care about frame rate. /smh

 

Such an illogical and self serving question.  As if by not caring you're special or unique.  Or that to care about frame rates makes us elitist or bigoted.

 

We all care about frame rate to some degree or another, just like we all care about our car's speed in some way or another, or how good our food tastes in some way or another...

 

How much depends on a lot of factors.  To boil it down to such a simple question makes no sense.  

 

 

[diegoaccord]

^ You're mad bro.

[Dedayog]

1 minute ago, diegoaccord said:

^ You're mad bro.

Incredibly so.

[Cool_Evlo]

Honestly this is such a dumb question.

If I'm playing a competitive shooter, I want the best framerate possible, after all it means you have the upper hand. But if I'm playing a non competitive game that looks amazing, it kinda makes up for the lower framerate by just looking nice.

But hey, at least you got your dopamine hits from talking to people, something you dont do often!

[Gohardgrandpa]

I have to be over 60fps. I'll put the game on potato graphics if I have to. 

Seeing fallout at 22 fps makes my heart hurt 

[diegoaccord]

3 hours ago, Cool_Evlo said:

Honestly this is such a dumb question.

If I'm playing a competitive shooter, I want the best framerate possible, after all it means you have the upper hand. But if I'm playing a non competitive game that looks amazing, it kinda makes up for the lower framerate by just looking nice.

But hey, at least you got your dopamine hits from talking to people, something you dont do often!

 

Don't project yourself onto me, my guy. Only a shut in such as yourself gets mad and into gatekeep mode over stuff like this. I bet you're the life of the party.

[Toolhead1987]

once you play with a high refresh rate monitor with 100+ FPS you won't want to go back.
its like using HD650 Headphones and then  going back to a $30 pair of Skullcandy Headphones.

[Npiet1]

58 minutes ago, Toolhead1987 said:

once you play with a high refresh rate monitor with 100+ FPS you won't want to go back.
its like using HD650 Headphones and then  going back to a $30 pair of Skullcandy Headphones.

Nah I got a 144hz monitor and could easily go back. The difference between 60 and 144 isn't that great. It smoother yeah but, It's not like the difference between low and high graphics or 1080p and 4k. 

[Toolhead1987]

27 minutes ago, Npiet1 said:

Nah I got a 144hz monitor and could easily go back. The difference between 60 and 144 isn't that great. It smoother yeah but, It's not like the difference between low and high graphics or 1080p and 4k. 

well then I guess we agree to disagree

[IPD]

17 hours ago, Dedayog said:

Yes, you're the only one in the entire world that doesn't care about frame rate. /smh

 

Such an illogical and self serving question.  As if by not caring you're special or unique.  Or that to care about frame rates makes us elitist or bigoted.

 

We all care about frame rate to some degree or another, just like we all care about our car's speed in some way or another, or how good our food tastes in some way or another...

 

How much depends on a lot of factors.  To boil it down to such a simple question makes no sense.  

 

 

Well this just sounds like refresh rate elitism.  So yeah, you are precisely what you noted.  It is neither irrational or inane to prefer a higher resolution display for general use--and then adapting as needed to suit the game of choice. Sure, refresh rate matters some.  But I'll adapt my game settings until I achieve "acceptable"--rather than sack tapping myself with a sh***y, god-awful, p***-water 1080p crock-o-shite that has about 9999999 million panel offerings on the market right now.

 

And yes I am mad; I have far more right to be.  The market for displays does NOT cater to my needs (4k, 40"+, curved, 16:9).  You frame-rate master-race clowns can guess what I think you should do with your 1080p panels.

 

OP, no, you're not the only one.  Displays are the biggest compromise one has to make with a PC these days.  Quid-Pro-Quo would be to force the FRMR to only be able to use 1600x900, 1000hz panels.  That's about how cruel the market is.

 

P.S.

Never played Rocket League.  Looks like a reincarnation of CarBall from UT2k4.

[DennisCohle]

I recently started gaming again after being abstinent for about 12 years. I am not a competitive gamer and coming from average 30 fps back then i really love gaming at 60 fps right now. A little less is totally okay, definitely don't need more than 60 fps. 1080p on a 27 inch display is a sweet spot for me.

[Dedayog]

5 minutes ago, IPD said:

Well this just sounds like refresh rate elitism.  So yeah, you are precisely what you noted.  It is neither irrational or inane to prefer a higher resolution display for general use--and then adapting as needed to suit the game of choice. Sure, refresh rate matters some.  But I'll adapt my game settings until I achieve "acceptable"--rather than sack tapping myself with a sh***y, god-awful, p***-water 1080p crock-o-shite that has about 9999999 million panel offerings on the market right now.

 

And yes I am mad; I have far more right to be.  The market for displays does NOT cater to my needs (4k, 40"+, curved, 16:9).  You frame-rate master-race clowns can guess what I think you should do with your 1080p panels.

 

OP, no, you're not the only one.  Displays are the biggest compromise one has to make with a PC these days.  Quid-Pro-Quo would be to force the FRMR to only be able to use 1600x900, 1000hz panels.  That's about how cruel the market is.

 

P.S.

Never played Rocket League.  Looks like a reincarnation of CarBall from UT2k4.

Really not sure I understand what you're saying.

 

 I was saying that everyone cares about fps, to some degree that suits them.  That saying "I don't care, so you're all assholes" is incorrect to say.

 

I too do the tweak til acceptable, do you think a 1080Ti pushes a 1440p UW to 500+ fps?  No, I have to tweak to get what I like.  Or if my 1080p 1050Ti doesn't need tweaking?

 

Besides, 1080p clowns... Did you even read what I wrote or my sig at all?  

 

I was literally trying to explain how NOT fps-elitist I was, so again... I am unsure if you're responding to me or someone else and just quoted me.

 

You're mad because there are no 4k curved 40" panels?  Sorry man, sure there will be at some point.  Takes a bit, as other smaller curved screens are only a few years old still.  

 

*shrug*  You read my post wrong.

[Monkey Dust]

IMO frame rate consistency is more important than absolute FPS. Resolution vs FPS is a personal preference thing, though 22 is very low. More troubling is the fact your Codworth appears to have turned into a woman.

[diegoaccord]

You see I'm on a 4K60 monitor for all 3 PC Series X and Ps5. I'm not interested in the games the consoles support with 4k120 and I don't play the kind of games that would run 4k120.

 

I had a 1440p165 and no games I played on my PC ran over 60 anyway. And I had a 3080. 

[jones177]

I get low frame rate in Fallout 4 as well, but for different reasons.

 

Unedited Night Action.

 

<mod removed>

 

[BlackManINC]

On 10/25/2021 at 2:01 PM, diegoaccord said:

 Looks like you don't have a choice. I'd be outside on the porch, thinking about my life if this is the best I can get.