FPS VS Frame rendering time

[GFriend]

Hi everyone. I am new to this forum.  

Probably an old topic but I am wondering why frame rendering time is still less commonly used than FPS when benchmarking different graphics cards? Do we have reliable (third party?) tools to record frame rendering time in real time?

[Glennieboyyy007]

most of the people want to know how many pictures they get to see per second. they don't care about the ms inbetween them, it doesn't say anything to them.

there is probably something out there to record the frame rendering time, but i don't know one.

[tarfeef101]

2 minutes ago, GFriend said:

Hi everyone. I am new to this forum.  

Probably an old topic but I am wondering why frame rendering time is still less commonly used than FPS when benchmarking different graphics cards? Do we have reliable (third party?) tools to record frame rendering time in real time?

Hey. Welcome to the forum!

Aside from measurement issues (if any exist, not even gonna think about it), there is a simple reason to use FPS over rendering time. FPS is in larger, round numbers, while frame rendering time is quite low, and requires more decimal points. Readability is important.

[tarfeef101]

1 minute ago, Glennieboyyy007 said:

most of the people want to know how many pictures they get to see per second. they don't care about the ms inbetween them, it doesn't say anything to them.

there is probably something out there to record the frame rendering time, but i don't know one.

Time between events is inversely proportional to amount in a given time frame. 

[GFriend]

12 minutes ago, tarfeef101 said:

Hey. Welcome to the forum!

Aside from measurement issues (if any exist, not even gonna think about it), there is a simple reason to use FPS over rendering time. FPS is in larger, round numbers, while frame rendering time is quite low, and requires more decimal points. Readability is important.

I totally appreciate this, tho imho it is more like whether we are more accustomed to see numbers like 72.5fps over 16 or 30ms frame time - and converting to each other is as simple as taking the reciprocal. 
Coz apart from the above simpler and perhaps better readability, it seems to me frame rendering time can better reflect issues like sudden drops in frame rate (dips?) in addition to whatever information FPS gives..

[tarfeef101]

2 hours ago, GFriend said:

I totally appreciate this, tho imho it is more like whether we are more accustomed to see numbers like 72.5fps over 16 or 30ms frame time - and converting to each other is as simple as taking the reciprocal. 
Coz apart from the above simpler and perhaps better readability, it seems to me frame rendering time can better reflect issues like sudden drops in frame rate (dips?) in addition to whatever information FPS gives..

Well the thing is frame time, like FPS, is measured thousands of times over a gaming session. The numbers we usually see are AVERAGE FPS and AVERAGE frame time. So, neither give us info about things like frame rate drops/dips (both are okay to say btw). However, both FPS and frame time CAN communicate that information if you don't only look at averages, but the entire game session's worth of data, at each point.

[Prysin]

2 hours ago, GFriend said:

Hi everyone. I am new to this forum.  

Probably an old topic but I am wondering why frame rendering time is still less commonly used than FPS when benchmarking different graphics cards? Do we have reliable (third party?) tools to record frame rendering time in real time?

Frame time benching has, until recently atleast, been very tedious to do. It requires techincal knowhow in order to read and present the information you are given. And to be fair, the majority of reviewers are potato-heads that only does "EZMODE" testing that anyone can do. 

 

As for "reliable tools"... not really.

We have FCAT from Nvidia, which is a bitch to set up and read the info from. But once you get used to it, it isnt half bad. 

 

Now AMD recently made a new tool called OCAT, this one is supposed to be more user friendly then FCAT. And should make it easier to bench frame timing.

 

Then there is the third way, which involves hardware based capturing cards, and these setups can cost you thousands of dollars.

[Mick Naughty]

Precisionx oc shows frame time. Unless youre trying to see everything like the difference with the monitor and cables too.