Not getting the FPS expected

[g0ated]

So I have built my PC around 2yrs ago specs are below and one thing has been bothering me that in games like csgo and valorant is that I am not getting the fps I should be getting(400-500 fps). Now I know the human eye can't discern that much FPS but I still should be getting that fps level. I have no idea why this is a thing for my pc and over the course of those months I have install/reinstalled windows a considerable amount of times etc. Thanks in advance   

 

OS: Windows(debloated with microwin and winutil)

12700KF

3070ti

32gb RAM @ 3600Mhz

 

[podkall]

2 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

Now I know the human eye can't discern that much FPS

yes it can, especially with a good high Hz monitor,

 

3 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

I am not getting the fps I should be getting(400-500 fps).

and what exactly are you comparing?

 

I don't want to doubt your skills, but are you comparing same specs and settings?

[g0ated]

12 minutes ago, podkall said:

yes it can, especially with a good high Hz monitor,

I have a 240hz 1080 27" monitor and the difference above 300 fps becomes very hard to discern imho.

12 minutes ago, podkall said:

what exactly are you comparing?

No I am not comparing the same specs and settings, I am in fact, comparing it against ppl who have lower end hardware than mine, more specifically the i5 12th gen cpu + 3060ti which is getting 350+fps while I am only getting at most 300fps. This guy's hardware which is a 12400F + 3060ti is getting around 300fps on low competitive settings which I play on:

 

[Hinjima]

8 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

I have a 240hz 1080 27" monitor and the difference above 300 fps becomes very hard to discern imho.

No I am not comparing the same specs and settings, I am in fact, comparing it against ppl who have lower end hardware than mine, more specifically the i5 12th gen cpu + 3060ti which is getting 350+fps while I am only getting at most 300fps. This guy's hardware which is a 12400F + 3060ti is getting around 300fps on low competitive settings which I play on:

 

Well the average framerate in this video he is getting 277fps at low settings.. So thats lower than your 300fps.

[podkall]

2 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

I have a 240hz 1080 27" monitor and the difference above 300 fps becomes very hard to discern imho.

yeah because 240Hz is already almost 4 milliseconds per frame, while average human response time is 250ms and lower if you are an epic gamer

 

5 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

No I am not comparing the same specs and settings, I am in fact, comparing it against ppl who have lower end hardware than mine

but do you match the settings or not? because that's pretty crucial despite the hardware difference

 

also, is your RAM DDR4 or DDR5?

[Agall]

9 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

I have a 240hz 1080 27" monitor and the difference above 300 fps becomes very hard to discern imho.

No I am not comparing the same specs and settings, I am in fact, comparing it against ppl who have lower end hardware than mine, more specifically the i5 12th gen cpu + 3060ti which is getting 350+fps while I am only getting at most 300fps. This guy's hardware which is a 12400F + 3060ti is getting around 300fps on low competitive settings which I play on:

 

Human eye can see as fast as 1ms, aka up to 1000 fps, but that's assuming the monitor can refresh that quickly, which none can. Also, our brains smooth that out so we only see small changes and not actually at 1000 fps.

 

CS:GO doesn't exist anymore, so you're comparing CS:GO to CS2 which isn't 1:1. Valorant on the other hand would be something to gauge.

[podkall]

Just now, Agall said:

Human eye can see as fast as 1ms, aka up to 1000 fps, but that's assuming the monitor can refresh that quickly, which none can.

 

CS:GO doesn't exist anymore, so you're comparing CS:GO to CS2 which isn't 1:1. Valorant on the other hand would be something to gauge.

it's cs2 in the video too, they just call it csgo

[Agall]

Just now, podkall said:

it's cs2 in the video too, they just call it csgo

OP is talking about 2 years ago when they build the system, which would've been with CS:GO.

[g0ated]

38 minutes ago, Hinjima said:

277fps at low settings.. So thats lower than your 300fps.

its quite close imo even with my cpu overclocked

38 minutes ago, Agall said:

so you're comparing CS:GO to CS

See the vid its cs2 and when cs its means cs2

 

38 minutes ago, podkall said:

RAM DDR4 or DDR5?

DDR4

[g0ated]

Just now, Agall said:

OP is talking about 2 years ago when they build the system, which would've been with CS:GO.

Even then csgo was not giving me a high fps and cs2 is still not. I expected cs2 to be more optimized for newer hardware imo.

[Agall]

Just now, goatedpenguin said:

Even then csgo was not giving me a high fps and cs2 is still not. I expected cs2 to be more optimized for newer hardware imo.

Are you using ReBAR enabled in the UEFI?

 

Run GPU-Z and provide a screenshot while a game is playing in the background. That'll show enabled features and PCIe version.

[podkall]

Just now, Agall said:

OP is talking about 2 years ago when they build the system, which would've been with CS:GO.

yep, but why would they wait 2 years to make a post? they're comparing the video, but I doubt it's any faster, because video can also mean they're looking at different less/more demanding graphics which can alter the results

 

even throughout the whole match of logging average fps, you could end up with way different results due to things like interaction with enemy, how many times you see death camera that puts you in high fps corner as it zooms in a small area increasing fps, standing still, seeing smokes or not, etc.

[g0ated]

2 minutes ago, podkall said:

it's cs2 in the video too, they just call it csgo

in cs community when someone says cs it means the latest cs version in this case cs2, if it's another version it would be explicitly stated, sry for the confusion.

[Agall]

55 minutes ago, goatedpenguin said:

in cs community when someone says cs it means the latest cs version in this case cs2, if it's another version it would be explicitly stated, sry for the confusion.

57 minutes ago, Agall said:

Are you using ReBAR enabled in the UEFI?

 

Run GPU-Z and provide a screenshot while a game is playing in the background. That'll show enabled features and PCIe version.

I'll reiterate on this point, if you're not using PCIe 4.0 and/or ReBAR, it could point to where you're not getting the performance you're expecting. The other option too is to run Cinebench R23 all core single run to see what score you get. If you're dramatically off of baseline, then its a sign that you might not be getting the boost clocks on your CPU to reach those higher framerates.

[g0ated]

cpu boostclocks are fine, I have pcie 4, rebar and xmp enabled.

[Blue4130]

2 hours ago, goatedpenguin said:

cpu boostclocks are fine, I have pcie 4, rebar and xmp enabled.

Without a canned benchmark mode, it will e really difficult to compare CS2 from one PC to another. Like has been said, each run will have different elements on screen.

 

Used a known benchmark like the tomb raider bench mark or heaven benchmark or others like that.

[g0ated]

Similar maps ran on the game with many similar POIs, but you may be right that its not being done “neck to neck”

[g0ated]

Aight thanks everyone for the help. Turns there was a much awaited BIOS update and a Chipset driver was needed too, the performance is where it should be now