Computer not running well.

[MattUCLA]

Hi

Lately I've been getting some performance issues on my rig. Atm I'm running an i7 3770k OC to 4.5hz, a gtx 780, and running win 10 off a ssd for boot and 2 more regular HDD for storage. I mainly play csgo and on the lowest settings there are times where I struggle to get over 200 fps and at time drop down to like 130. If anyone knows the source engine especially with csgo, the difference between 200 and 300 fps is noticable. I used to get much higher fps normally around the 300+ mark. I'm wondering if some of my hardware is malfunction or what is going on. Can anyone suggest any tests that I can run that would suggest if I need to replace something or perhaps it may just be as easy as wiping my drives and reverting back to windows 8.1. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated!

[AstroBenny]

Hi

Lately I've been getting some performance issues on my rig. Atm I'm running an i7 3770k OC to 4.5hz, a gtx 780, and running win 10 off a ssd for boot and 2 more regular HDD for storage. I mainly play csgo and on the lowest settings there are times where I struggle to get over 200 fps and at time drop down to like 130. If anyone knows the source engine especially with csgo, the difference between 200 and 300 fps is noticable. I used to get much higher fps normally around the 300+ mark. I'm wondering if some of my hardware is malfunction or what is going on. Can anyone suggest any tests that I can run that would suggest if I need to replace something or perhaps it may just be as easy as wiping my drives and reverting back to windows 8.1. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated!

Have you got lots of stuff running at Windows startup?

[PC-NOOB]

Ik this is kind of off topic but what benefit do you get by running a game at 300+ fps?

[MattUCLA]

Have you got lots of stuff running at Windows startup?

I feel like u do but it seems like everything is somewhat necessary. I get get a screenshot if you'd like.

[MattUCLA]

Ik this is kind of off topic but what benefit do you get by running a game at 300+ fps?

It's just with the source engine. It runs noticable smoother at 300+. Also I didn't mention that other games are running poorly. The new nba 2k game I was getting 100-120 fps and yesterday I was barely getting 60...

[Master Disaster]

There's literally no benefit in running a game at a higher FPS than your monitors refresh rate.

All your doing is chewing up RAM by filling the frame buffer with frames which are never actually displayed on screen, and as the frames never get displayed they can't have any effect on perceived smoothness.

Remember that it's only running at 300FPS in the frame buffer, your monitor cannot display any more than 1 frame per refresh cycle.

As a side note tearing is caused by multiple frames being crammed into a single frame by the GPU in an effort to use up the data stored in the buffer.

[AstroBenny]

There's literally no benefit in running a game at a higher FPS than your monitors refresh rate.

All your doing is chewing up RAM by filling the frame buffer with frames which are never actually displayed on screen, and as the frames never get displayed they can't have any effect on perceived smoothness.

Remember that it's only running at 300FPS in the frame buffer, your monitor cannot display any more than 1 frame per refresh cycle.

As a side note tearing is caused by multiple frames being crammed into a single frame by the GPU in an effort to use up the data stored in the buffer.

That's what I thought...and then I watched this:

What do you make of that?

[Master Disaster]

That's what I thought...and then I watched this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjWSRTYV8e0

What do you make of that?

That's a very credible theory, it's only problem is it's talking about latencies which are outside of human perception anyway.

Even fighter pilots have reaction times in the 200ms range so when your talking about a sub 10ms latency you should never notice the lag, and he is talking about single digit latencies.

It'd take more than that to convince me however I'm not saying it's not true, just that I'd need to see more evidence first.

I'd call it placebo, as he suggests in the video.

[AstroBenny]

That's a very credible theory, it's only problem is it's talking about latencies which are outside of human perception anyway.

Even fighter pilots have reaction times in the 200ms range so when your talking about a sub 10ms latency you should never notice the lag, and he is talking about single digit latencies.

It'd take more than that to convince me however I'm not saying it's not true, just that I'd need to see more evidence first.

I'd call it placebo, as he suggests in the video.

But reaction time is different to visual/audial/sensual response  (i.e you see it before you can react to it)..