hi all i know this sounds stupid (only if you know the answer) how does fps work, i mean do you actualy notice a jump by say 4-5 fps, ive been playing farcry 2 on my sons pc (ati x1900xt) and it runs great, no lagging or freezing, not sure how many fps he gets on it, will it run any different on my saphire 4890 oc when my new build is up and running also will the fps count when playing call of duty online its just a little confusing thanks guys take care
Let me try and explain the best I can. FPS stands for Frame Per Second. A frame a static image that the video card finished drawing completely, so the more you have per second, the more the animation is smoother. Here are 2 examples of a low FPS and a high FPS animation of a rectangular passing from one side of the screen to the other (you need Flash player plug-in if you don't have it): 5fps (1 second animation, repeating): http://www.helpweaver.com/5fps.swf 120fps (1 second animation, repeating): http://www.helpweaver.com/120fps.swf The above is an animation purposely made to be at these specific fps for demonstration purposes. As you can see, the more FPS you have the more smooth it goes... of course at a certain level you start not to see a difference. For example, if you have a game that goes at 500fps, 5 fps more, will not be visible. BUT a game that goes at 5fps, 5 more, will be much better. Still unplayable in my opinion, but better.
Some people have different rates they find acceptable (for example my friend will lower settings until he gets >40 fps but I'm happy with >28).
like capnPedro I adjust my settings as high as possible so that I get about 30ish fps to keep the graphics as shiny as possible, any more than this and I can't see a difference in smoothness.
cheers guys, i understand it a bit more now, cheers, but does this also make a difference hen playing online, say im playing call of duty with someone on line and im getting say 35fps and he is getting 15fps does that mean ill see him before he sees me, thanks guys take care
Theoretically yes, however it's really dependant on timing as such since if you both appear at the start of a new frame then you'd both "see" each other at the same time. However if you appeared during the time inbetween his change of frames then effectively since you're running the faster FPS you would "technically" see him first. The problem is that even at 15 frames per sec, the picture is cycling every 0.067 seconds (67 milliseconds) which isn't really much extra time to help you react. Ultimately make sure that to you the game runs smoothly, then worry about getting a higher framerate. Although if the game looks smooth to you then no amount of extra frames will help you since you aren't physically capable of spotting that extra millisecond or so they appear.
cheers for all the info vdbswong, you have been a great help matey, so realy buying big fast graphics cards is a waste of money, you simply wont notice the difference compared to a mid range card, take care m8
Well you'll notice a lot of difference in the graphics options you'll be able to use. A midrange card might get you a solid 30FPS on medium details etc but a 4890/GTX 285 will get you 30FPS with everything set to max in many current games.
Shhh! That's heresy round here! And really it depends at what resolution you game and how high you set the graphical detail (for example, anti-aliasing increments - 2x, 4x, 8x etc - just layer on progressively more strain to the 'card). So if you're gaming at 1024x768 at 0xAA, you won't be able to tell the difference between a 35fps mid-range 'card and a 120fps high-end one, but at 1920x1200 with 16xAA you'd see the difference between your mid-ranger (2fps) and your high-end (35fps)... Obviously, numbers are totally arbitrary but you get the point.
ohh i see, you have all been a great help explaining this, its much appritiated thanks guys take care now
Ive actually heard something with COD4 that if you play on a low resolution with the graphics settings turned down you can see people hiding in the grass since it doesn't render it. A few of my friends play like that so they can see snipers more easily. As far as needing a big beefy graphics card: It isn't necessary unless the current card you have is having problems hitting the aforementioned 28-35 FPS that a lot of people will find as the "sweet spot" for FPS games. If, however, your current card/embedded GPU isn't cutting the mustard, then purchasing a new card might be a good choice to help boost the frames so you can hit and consistently stay in that 30 FPS range
hi automagsrock im hoping i can get 30fps in most games with my 4890 oc, if not its got to go, cod 4 is the only call of duty game i cant get the hang of on line, i can play all the others online but not cod 4, its just not the same . ive now bought crisis (the 2 of them) and also farcry 2, just waiting till my pc is fully up and running, i just need vista 64 bit and a 24"- 26" monitor take care m8
I hear you there. I love COD4 but I swear, some nights when I get on and play I am so bad it makes me never want to play again You'll enjoy Crysis. It's a good time. And it should look quite good on that monitor
I'm the same with COD4, love in offline but I get crushed worse than CS online... Tell us how Far Cry 2 goes, as well!
FC2 online was crushing for me, not many people playing and those that were all had grenade launchers
I think it's the change in fps and the minimum that you notice the most. 60fps is ideal, 45 is alright, 30 is playable, but for me not ideal.
A real-time frame is the time it takes to complete a full round of the system's processing tasks. If the frame rate of a real-time system is 60 Hertz, the system reevaluates all necessary inputs and updates the necessary outputs 60 times per second under all circumstances. In other words, if you crank a game to anything greater than 60 FPS, and your monitor's frequency is set at 60Htz, then the extra frames are discarded. The monitor simply cannot process them. This is the reason why action movies look so much better on 100Htz TVs than they do on monitors, and why the new Viera range goes to 600Htz...I doubt even the human eye could react that fast, but I'll bet the image looks great.
This is just one of the reasons I want a 120Hz LCD.* But I would never ever play FC2 on there, it was a horrible game after the first hour, that is to say all further hours were the same, and I want to kill it with fire. *The other reasons are admittedly to do with my e-peen.
Crack out a new Panny Viera NeoPDP if you want the e-peen, 600Hz http://www.panasonic.co.uk/html/en_...rview/VIERA+|+600Hz+NeoPDP/2323941/index.html
I would call myself a somewhat Sensitive person in terms of FPS, I can see major differences between 25~29 when compared to 30~32, it all depends on what you feel comfortable with as other people mentioned I like having Low to Medium graphics with High FPS over High Graphics / Low FPS. PS: a Sapphire 4890 should experience much higher FPS then your sons current x1900xt.
