CS:GO video settings (low?)

[Fredrikmikael]

hello i saw a few pro Counter strike global offensive players video settings and many of them use somewhat low video settings such as

2x MSAA

2x anisotropic

low shader

very low shadow

etc..

 

and i also saw some use FXAA anti-aliasing, i've heard that is bad and can cause lost frames.

 

why do they use so low settings, is it because they want to maximize their fps or is it something else?

 

and 1024x768 at 4:3AR ( i think they stretch that )

 

are there any benefits to the resolution and settings and should i consider tuning down some of my settings ?

[WunderWuffle]

I too would like to know. This is one thing that I've never understood.

[DoubleY]

I get like 500FPS on my 780, so I don't see why they would turn down the settings... 

 

However I see why they turn off AA. It causes input lag. 

[Fredrikmikael]

I get like 500FPS on my 780, so I don't see why they would turn down the settings... 

 

However I see why they turn off AA. It causes input lag. 

 

i've seen some have AA on, like f0rest from NiP.

would like to know if that is for a reason or because he doesnt (didnt) know better.

[DoubleY]

i've seen some have AA on, like f0rest from NiP.

would like to know if that is for a reason or because he doesnt (didnt) know better.

I mean, it adds input lag that you will never notice. But pro's want those 1ms 144hz monitors with 10 bajillion fps cause they don't know better. I'm sure they say they notice a difference between 1ms and 5ms but they actually don't. Same thing with the input lag that AA adds. They say they see it, but I HIGHLY doubt they do. 

[tp95112]

Lower resolution makes models bigger so easier for playing.

[Giddyguy]

Gamers != PC/Hardware Enthusiasts and often times these gamers just hear things from others and follow. Many CS:GO players from twitch chats ive read put theirs on low so they can get 150+ fps (i guess they don't understand monitors have a limited refresh rate, my friend on a laptop does this). They also don't play at the native monitor resolution because they hear a certain aspect ratio is better. I personally play at my native resolution and go for max graphics withing 60fps.

[DirkaFat]

I believe many people play 4:3 because they are used to it. Some even say 4:3 have more benefits than 16:9, but I'm not too sure about that. Lower resolutions mean bigger player models.

 

 

Some players use AA to prevent jaggies on player models (and in general). I mean, it can be a bit hard getting headshots when the head of the other player is all full of jaggies (Particularly in long range, or when the player is behind cover and only the head is showing, in which case you would also have to deal with the jaggies on the actual object the player is hiding behind)

 

 

At least I think so. I may be wrong

[topsu]

So much facepalming to this thread.

 

Why the hell you think that pro games have no idea about refresh rates of monitor? O_o

 

Some use 4:3 because they are used to it and in cs1.6 and source you could have hud closer the crosshair which is now possible in cs:go anyways with console commands.

 

Lowered settings help you see enemies better when you do not have that unnecessary eyecandy around.

Awesome example is battlefield 4, and it definitely helps in games like cs:go too.

 

in cs video settings I turn everything to low to avoid different distractions in game like smoke puffs from the bullet shots and glass reflections from textures of the map. True Professional gamer doesn't need this stuff. -Markeloff

 

E:

 

Also this shows pretty nicely how the settings affect your game and visibility.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns9srRoDop8

[Fredrikmikael]

So much facepalming to this thread.

 

Why the hell you think that pro games have no idea about refresh rates of monitor? O_o

 

Some use 4:3 because they are used to it and in cs1.6 and source you could have hud closer the crosshair which is now possible in cs:go anyways with console commands.

 

Lowered settings help you see enemies better when you do not have that unnecessary eyecandy around.

Awesome example is battlefield 4, and it definitely helps in games like cs:go too.

 

in cs video settings I turn everything to low to avoid different distractions in game like smoke puffs from the bullet shots and glass reflections from textures of the map. True Professional gamer doesn't need this stuff. -Markeloff

 

E:

 

Also this shows pretty nicely how the settings affect your game and visibility.

 

 

very good video

[Blue fellow]

In CS:GO visibility is not really affected by settings much. It's not like the previous games where there was legitimate visibility issues on higher settings.

 

You can even argue shadows on high is better then low. It's all situational.

 

Resolution is preference. Some like 4:3 because there's less distractions on the side and it's a lower field of view. Some people like to play 4:3 stretched to just make things bigger while retaining the narrow field of view. Play whatever you like.

[Nicolas]

Pros play at low because they use 144hz monitors and they don't ever want to go below that, and the guys that use lower 16:9 resolutions I got no idea why they do it, but the ones that play with a 4:3 is because thye started in the CRT years and they prefer that res because they are used to it, also some say it helps you focus but idk about that

[csz]

As a former 1.6 "pro" (5 seasons CAL-i with TRU and dT, 1 CPL with dT) I can give you the answers you seek:

 

Why 4:3?

Steam came out in September 2003 and replaced WON for network identification in addition to all of the obvious benefits. CS had been out for almost exactly 4 years at this point, and for those of you being with the snarky "because they like black lines on the side" comments, during those first 4 years not only did *all monitors (both CRT & LCD alike) have a physical aspect ratio of 4:3, but LCD technology at the time was awful for gaming both in terms of display quality and latency (10ms would've been amazing).

 

Your average pro player at the time would be using something like a ViewSonic a91f+ CRT Monitor. This bad boy was about 70 lbs. with VGA inputs and was the shit at the time.

 

The muscle memory it took to get to a pro level with consistent no scope headshots was developed on a 4:3 aspect ratio, so when the next generation of top gaming monitors came out this was immediately felt using the new 16:9 aspect ratio. With the x:y ratio thrown off to such a degree, the touch was suddenly no longer there for the elite and rather than spend all of that time retraining those muscles it was much simpler to run the game letterboxed and keep those hard-earned aiming skills.

 

800x600 resolution:

DirkaFat was correct, the models were "larger" at this resolution or below. To be more accurate, the actual hitboxes were smaller for resolutions greater than 800x600, and thus aiming was more difficult. Remember CS1.6 (and beta 1, 3, 5.2, 6.6, etc.) wasn't built on the source engine, and this seemed to have been addressed and no longer relevant in CS:S.

 

Framerate/low graphics settings:

There are a few main issues here, all of which have to do with reducing latency (network, software, & hardware). Let's start with network. There is a relationship between network settings (cl_cmdrate, cl_updaterate, rate, etc) and framerate. Higher network rates would send and receive information more often per second, so it was important that your framerate was not slower than this, otherwise the information you received from the server telling you that the enemy has rounded a corner isn't actually displayed on the screen (and thus you can't react yet) if it were slower than this. Obviously you want to be able to receive and react as quickly as possible, so you wanted your fps_max to refresh your screen as fast as or faster than this information was polled from the server.

 

This brings us to the issue of disabling vsync. The hardware "in the beginning" had a maximum refresh rate of 60Hz. Back when the technology was far less beefy and software much less elegant, it was common for phase difference (framerate variation) to cause visual artifacts from more than one frame being rendered at the same time. To compensate from this, vertical sync was a hardware feature that would wait for each cycle of the monitor's native clock rate to push out the next frame. While vsync would provide a better visual experience with fewer artifacts, it also capped the framerate and thus the speed of which that visual information became available for you to react. With the original netcode, server-side compensation by synchronization for this was poor so even 1-3ms of a delay caused by this could mean all the difference. Better to have more artifacts and jitter than die.

 

Finally we arrive at low graphics settings. Rendering higher quality textures and models would also require more memory; additionally higher quality smoke, shading and antialiasing (smoothing) jagged lines, etc., requires more processing overhead on both the CPU and GPU. This would tax the system and cause a much lower minimum framerate, further exacerbating lag. That, combined with the fact that low quality smoke was easier to see through and jagged lines would make players stand out more in contrast to the background of low-detail texture were also advantageous.

 

Conclusion:

Back in the day these optimizations were more relevant based on the available technology and weren't arbitrary. You couldn't google "CS pro config/settings" like you can now, and when playing the best in the world, every millisecond would count.

 

Some of these optimizations either no longer have an impact on source mods or are simply preferences for the ones that started early and found that it clearly was not worth it to lose hard-earned skill just to fill a 16:9 aspect ratio.

 

Last but not least, some of these optimizations are still relevant because mathematically there will always be a tradeoff between quality and speed as long as more complex algorithms can be written to produce increasingly beautiful games and the hardware-software game of cat and mouse ensues. This, compounded with the fact that jagged edges set to smoother backgrounds are easier to see than smooth contours against complex, detailed backgrounds means that they are not just arbitrary or old habits refusing to die.

 

All that said, the degree to which this makes a difference is much higher at the most elite level. As your skills progress and are tested against better competition, "pro settings" will become more noticeable. If this doesn't describe you, don't expect to suddenly be a badass from tweaking your environment, but don't assume it's all bullshit either!

[-TesseracT-]

yeah sure, turn down the graphics settings to get a good fps, but don't play at 768p.. you will be at a disadvantage.