Does allowing FPS to go higher than display refresh rate increase fluidity in game?

[adithyay328]

Hello there! This is a question that I and my friends have been arguing about for months. My argument is that running FPS any higher than the monitor refresh rate DOESN'T help since the display won't even be able to output the extra frames. The argument of my friends is that the extra frames will change the frame output intervals, which makes the game look better. Please give a final answer with reasoning. Thanks for your time.

[AlwaysFSX]

The game is more responsive to inputs but you won't notice any more fluidity on your monitor.

[Enderman]

It can make it look worse due to screen tearing.

It will often make the game feel more responsive to your mouse movements though, especially with fps games.

[Glenwing]

11 minutes ago, adithyay328 said:

Hello there! This is a question that I and my friends have been arguing about for months. My argument is that running FPS any higher than the monitor refresh rate DOESN'T help since the display won't even be able to output the extra frames. The argument of my friends is that the extra frames will change the frame output intervals, which makes the game look better. Please give a final answer with reasoning. Thanks for your time.

It's something of an unresolved argument, it's hard to judge since it's very susceptible to placebo. Until someone does a double blind study with sufficient sample size, I won't come to any conclusions, but my expectation is that while the frame pacing things is a valid theoretical point I don't think it will be noticeable most of the time, and if it is it will be very minor. But I don't know, that's just my prediction.

[Enderman]

12 minutes ago, Glenwing said:

It's something of an unresolved argument, it's hard to judge since it's very susceptible to placebo. Until someone does a double blind study with sufficient sample size, I won't come to any conclusions, but my expectation is that while the frame pacing things is a valid theoretical point I don't think it will be noticeable most of the time, and if it is it will be very minor. But I don't know, that's just my prediction.

Why would it need to be a double blind test??

People have done single blind tests before, most people can notice a difference, depending on the game of course.

 

[Godlygamer23]

2 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Why would it need to be a double blind test??

People have done single blind tests before, most people can notice a difference, depending on the game of course.

Because people can unknowingly point out that one or the other is the higher or lower refresh rate/frame rate. That's why double-blind studies are used - to prevent issues like that from occurring.

[BloodyWaters]

It may cause screen tearing, which sucks. 

[Enderman]

2 minutes ago, Godlygamer23 said:

Because people can unknowingly point out that one or the other is the higher or lower refresh rate/frame rate. That's why double-blind studies are used - to prevent issues like that from occurring.

You literally let someone enter the room, and they play on two computer, and then say which one they felt was smoother.

How would a double blind test benefit that?

[Glenwing]

11 minutes ago, Enderman said:

Why would it need to be a double blind test??

People have done single blind tests before, most people can notice a difference, depending on the game of course.

 

I suppose if the subject never has contact with the test administrator until after the tests, then it wouldn't be necessary.

[Godlygamer23]

16 minutes ago, Enderman said:

You literally let someone enter the room, and they play on two computer, and then say which one they felt was smoother.

How would a double blind test benefit that?

I guess it depends on how the test is set up, but again, it's about preventing issues. It may not benefit anyone to actually perform a double-blind study. 

[Singhstar]

51 minutes ago, adithyay328 said:

Hello there! This is a question that I and my friends have been arguing about for months. My argument is that running FPS any higher than the monitor refresh rate DOESN'T help since the display won't even be able to output the extra frames. The argument of my friends is that the extra frames will change the frame output intervals, which makes the game look better. Please give a final answer with reasoning. Thanks for your time.

If i play cs go at 60 fps on my 60 hz i want to kill myself coz its so laggy but if i play at 400 fps at 60hz i acctuly see the diffrence its much smoother

[Glenwing]

23 minutes ago, Enderman said:

You literally let someone enter the room, and they play on two computer, and then say which one they felt was smoother.

How would a double blind test benefit that?

By eliminating the possibility of accidental unconscious hints about which one is which through body language, eye movements, etc.

[steffeeh]

Are we talking about having Vsync on vs off, or about the fact that you have a much more powerful GPU?

 

As for the latter...

Wether you get screen tearing or not is probably from case to case... heck I've even had a game run at 700 FPS on my 60Hz monitors and notice no screen tearing despite having deactivated all Vsync in my whole PC... coil whine is another thing though...

 

Anyway, while you won't get more than 60 frames outputted on a 60Hz screen, that framerate is never constantly 60 FPS. No I don't mean that it may go down to 55 and then up to 75 etc, I more refer to those quick lag spikes that the framerate counter can't pickup, but that an external program can. This is referred to as frametimes (long story short), and is the reason why we've started to see in benchmarks things called 1% lows, 0.1% lows, and 97% percentile on LTT videos.

My point is, if you have a game at 60 FPS on a 60Hz screen, and you perhaps have 1% lows at 45 FPS, well then you'll notice those lag spikes (not instantly see them, but they'll affect the overall impression) - however if you instead have a game running at 90 FPS on a 60Hz monitor and get 1% lows at 60 FPS, then certainly the overall impression will feel more fluid.

 

As for Vsync on vs off, having it turned off will decrease latency since Vsync introduce more input lag, then you may or may not get screen tearing by turning it off...

[Squanchy]

I lived at 60hz forever, and now I splurged and bought a 144hz last year, I can promise you the responsiveness of even being in windows is MUCH more fluid. Also in games, it makes the game feel a bit more "realistic" movements feels alot more responsive. Now if you're talking about turning off v-sync with a 60hz monitor, you will get screen tearing which makes the game the polar opposite, makes it unbearable imo.