the only benefit I see capping ANY FPS is not heating your hardware too muchNoobsicle wrote:
the only benefit i see capping 60fps is giving more priority to resources for recording gameplay at 60fps
only applies if your hardware is potato though
forum
At what point does fps increases have diminishing returns?
posted
Total Posts
87
Topic Starter
I guess you could also argue that limiting framerates can be for reducing tearing; but with the extremely high framerates people play osu!, you're going to get screen tearing anyway. The new adaptive vsync technology with newer monitors also wouldn't change anything because they only apply for an effective range which varies from manufacturers.bigfeh wrote:
the only benefit I see capping ANY FPS is not heating your hardware too much
Maybe someday we'll get 144hz + monitors when consoles die and everyone realises that the human eye doesn't see in frames per second.
2000 FPS, no tearingPhilantropist wrote:
I guess you could also argue that limiting framerates can be for reducing tearing; but with the extremely high framerates people play osu!, you're going to get screen tearing anyway. The new adaptive vsync technology with newer monitors also wouldn't change anything because they only apply for an effective range which varies from manufacturers.bigfeh wrote:
the only benefit I see capping ANY FPS is not heating your hardware too much
beat this shit
I like youPhilantropist wrote:
Maybe someday we'll get 144hz + monitors when consoles die and everyone realises that the human eye doesn't see in frames per second.
game logic is entirely depending on fps? then a 60fps player will have 6ms less to hit a 300 on OD11? are you serious?
Yeah, we're serious. I have a consistent hit window that's over 16ms bigger than someone who plays at 60 FPSInfevo wrote:
game logic is entirely depending on fps? then a 60fps player will have 6ms less to hit a 300 on OD11? are you serious?
EDIT: When playing std OD10 +DT, you'll get 100s instead of 300s on about 22% of the notes just because you're playing at 60 FPS.
lol this is so bad =D then the whole idea of OD is pointless as it is now... they should just change it to how fighting games work. make OD 11 the hardest 300s (1 framers @ 60fps) and simply work their way down as the od drops...bigfeh wrote:
Yeah, we're serious. I have a consistent hit window that's over 16ms bigger than someone who plays at 60 FPSInfevo wrote:
game logic is entirely depending on fps? then a 60fps player will have 6ms less to hit a 300 on OD11? are you serious?
EDIT: When playing std OD10 +DT, you'll get 100s instead of 300s on about 22% of the notes just because you're playing at 60 FPS.
like
300s 17ms @ OD11
300s 34ms @ OD10 (2frames)
300s 51ms @ OD9 (3frames) and so on...
going one frame over or under makes it a 100. another frame would be a 50. something like that. if changing the the core mechanics is too hard, just apply a change to od so it isn't broken...
/me quickly adjusts up to 576fps...
well yeah, I feel like that's both a great idea I would never come up with but also retarded for some reason. That, and it's near impossible to implement, since FPS fluctuates a LOT (particularly if you don't have a frame buffer) and it'd absolutely tank performance on what already is a single threaded gameInfevo wrote:
lol this is so bad =D then the whole idea of OD is pointless as it is now... they should just change it to how fighting games work. make OD 11 the hardest 300s (1 framers @ 60fps) and simply work their way down as the od drops...bigfeh wrote:
Yeah, we're serious. I have a consistent hit window that's over 16ms bigger than someone who plays at 60 FPS
EDIT: When playing std OD10 +DT, you'll get 100s instead of 300s on about 22% of the notes just because you're playing at 60 FPS.
like
300s 17ms @ OD11
300s 34ms @ OD10 (2frames)
300s 51ms @ OD9 (3frames) and so on...
going one frame over or under makes it a 100. another frame would be a 50. something like that. if changing the the core mechanics is too hard, just apply a change to od so it isn't broken...
/me quickly adjusts up to 576fps...
of course it is retarded. =D
it is just a question of what is more retarded...
a method which has worked since forever for another genre but would cause inconsistency on really (like REAALLY) old machines for osu! or
a pointless od-table which doesnt apply to any standard fps in addition to a system which strongly favors having a better performance and higher framerate while trying to enforece low system requirements in beatmappng/storyboarding(sb load)/skinning. frankly, the latter doesn't make any remote sense whatsoever.
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
my suggested system can be applied to the current frame/game logic converter by scaling down game logic to 60hz (or setting this paremeter to 60hz globally for every player). then use an od-table like mine which is based on 60fps entirely. easy.
edit: fun fact: the current od-table requires you to have 10000fps combined with 10000hz polling rate of your system + keyboard to not have any disadvantage/miss out on ms to hit a 300. (this does apply to different ods across the board)
it is just a question of what is more retarded...
a method which has worked since forever for another genre but would cause inconsistency on really (like REAALLY) old machines for osu! or
a pointless od-table which doesnt apply to any standard fps in addition to a system which strongly favors having a better performance and higher framerate while trying to enforece low system requirements in beatmappng/storyboarding(sb load)/skinning. frankly, the latter doesn't make any remote sense whatsoever.
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
my suggested system can be applied to the current frame/game logic converter by scaling down game logic to 60hz (or setting this paremeter to 60hz globally for every player). then use an od-table like mine which is based on 60fps entirely. easy.
edit: fun fact: the current od-table requires you to have 10000fps combined with 10000hz polling rate of your system + keyboard to not have any disadvantage/miss out on ms to hit a 300. (this does apply to different ods across the board)
framerates fluctuate in EVERY system, regardless of... well, anything. Would you also mind pointing out which game works like that? Because someone should've lost their job over thisInfevo wrote:
of course it is retarded. =D
it is just a question of what is more retarded...
a method which has worked since forever for another genre but would cause inconsistency on really (like REAALLY) old machines for osu! or
a pointless od-table which doesnt apply to any standard fps in addition to a system which strongly favors having a better performance and higher framerate while trying to enforece low system requirements in beatmappng/storyboarding(sb load)/skinning. frankly, the latter doesn't make any remote sense whatsoever.
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
my suggested system can be applied to the current frame/game logic converter by scaling down game logic to 60hz (or setting this paremeter to 60hz globally for every player). then use an od-table like mine which is based on 60fps entirely. easy.
You have a stable framerate simply because you cap it, but since the point here is to get the highest number you can, capping it in this game is inherently retarded save for special cases. My FPS is anywhere between 2200 and 1800, averaging about 2000 during play. It gets updated about 2000 times per second.
Now tell me that's not a colossal performance hit
Scaling game logic to 60Hz is even more retarded because as stated, you miss notes playing at 60Hz. I mean, do I even need to explain this?
I have news for you, that shit was released in 2009. It was optimized to run on a PS3/360 at 60FPS. Anything that is not a potato will run it at 60FPS. Then again, SF4 was a flagship game made by an extremely talented developmental team, backed by a company with millions, if not billions of dollars at its disposal. This game... ahem, is not anywhere near as well crafted or funded. The frame rate in this game drops more easily than a grandma in a slippery shower.Infevo wrote:
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
Not true. osu! is, performance-wise, a solid game. In the name of fairness, I think I should point that outPhilosofikal wrote:
I have news for you, that shit was released in 2009. It was optimized to run on a PS3/360 at 60FPS. Anything that is not a potato will run it at 60FPS. Then again, SF4 was a flagship game made by an extremely talented developmental team, backed by a company with millions, if not billions of dollars at its disposal. This game... ahem, is not anywhere near as well crafted or funded. The frame rate in this game drops more easily than a grandma in a slippery shower.Infevo wrote:
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
nothing new here. but keep in mind osu! as a programm is way less complex. other than the cursor movements, hit lighting, score, life and error bar nothing has to be calculated real time. a whole play's map video data can be prebuffered without any complex algorithm involved (just imply you have the memory).Philosofikal wrote:
I have news for you, that shit was released in 2009. It was optimized to run on a PS3/360 at 60FPS. Anything that is not a potato will run it at 60FPS. Then again, SF4 was a flagship game made by an extremely talented developmental team, backed by a company with millions, if not billions of dollars at its disposal. This game... ahem, is not anywhere near as well crafted or funded. The frame rate in this game drops more easily than a grandma in a slippery shower.Infevo wrote:
btw. i dont need frame buffer for street fighter 4 on a fairly old computer and i have stable 60fps without any fluctuation and without vsync. fps fluctuation in osu! is kind of a bad argument...
It's extremely graphically efficient, but it has catastrophic frame rate drops way too often. It's been so bad for me that I've lost SS ranks on the last few notes twice in a row, just because my client froze for a second. I'd have an SS on Holy Virgin DT if it wasn't for that.bigfeh wrote:
Not true. osu! is, performance-wise, a solid game. In the name of fairness, I think I should point that out
Okay, so the video can be prebuffered. Your point? The video isn't being rendered, so the difference is effectively nonexistent. osu! is complex and needs to be precise on a millisecond level. A lot of stuff needs to be calculated real time, but yes, they're not incredibly difficult for the computer - hence the low minimum and recommended system specifications.Infevo wrote:
nothing new here. but keep in mind osu! as a programm is way less complex. other than the cursor movements, hit lighting, score, life and error bar nothing has to be calculated real time. a whole play's map video data can be prebuffered without any complex algorithm involved (just imply you have the memory).Philosofikal wrote:
I have news for you, that shit was released in 2009. It was optimized to run on a PS3/360 at 60FPS. Anything that is not a potato will run it at 60FPS. Then again, SF4 was a flagship game made by an extremely talented developmental team, backed by a company with millions, if not billions of dollars at its disposal. This game... ahem, is not anywhere near as well crafted or funded. The frame rate in this game drops more easily than a grandma in a slippery shower.
Now, it has come a long way since its inception and has obviously become more taxing on hardware resources since then. Your suggestion, however, takes this to a whole new level
Couldn't agree more. Freezes sometimes for me tooPhilosofikal wrote:
It's extremely graphically efficient, but it has catastrophic frame rate drops way too often. It's been so bad for me that I've lost SS ranks on the last few notes twice in a row, just because my client froze for a second. I'd have an SS on Holy Virgin DT if it wasn't for that.bigfeh wrote:
Not true. osu! is, performance-wise, a solid game. In the name of fairness, I think I should point that out
I disagree, your monitor may not be able to output past this, but due to the refresh rate of your device there is a difference in the way it feels. I currently play at around 1200 fps and once upon leaving chrome open and dipping below 400 at the opening of the map I began to notice massive stutter. Your eyes cannot perceive the difference, because their isn't any difference in what the monitor is outputting, but it feels stuttery because the video being processed in the computer is no longer effectively in sync with the mouse. This is why you can notice the difference between 60 and 240 on a 60 Hz monitor.bigfeh wrote:
Fun fact, you don't actually see the difference between 400 and 240 unless you have a 400Hz monitor, which doesn't existotoed1 wrote:
The answer to this thread doesn't really exist, what defines diminishing returns in this case? Your FPS will continue to have an effect all the way up to the refresh rate of your input devices. What defines diminishing is difficult. Frankly, I don't notice the difference between when I played at 600fps and playing at 1400 fps now. There is an obvious different sub 400 however, and playing at 240 feels like a slideshow.
if you notice stutter then it is not 60 frames @ a 60hz screen anymore. what you notice is either lag/delay of frames when the gpu tries to catch up while other processes take up too much of your ressources at once. if devices get out of sync you just get tearing or these so called "random 100s" everyone is complaining about. desync is not a direct cause for lower framerates. also when your system spontaneously gets overloaded by several processes then it might not be able to keep up the polling rates of your input devices as well. So even when your program keeps running with an acceptable framerate you wil notice stutter in your cursor movement due to this.otoed1 wrote:
I disagree, your monitor may not be able to output past this, but due to the refresh rate of your device there is a difference in the way it feels. I currently play at around 1200 fps and once upon leaving chrome open and dipping below 400 at the opening of the map I began to notice massive stutter. Your eyes cannot perceive the difference, because their isn't any difference in what the monitor is outputting, but it feels stuttery because the video being processed in the computer is no longer effectively in sync with the mouse. This is why you can notice the difference between 60 and 240 on a 60 Hz monitor.
keep in mind 400 frames per second does not always mean that frames are being displayed in consistently equal time distances. you can experience this stutter when several frames are being sent at once even though it doesn't make any sense regarding the program logic. This might also happen when some components (particularly processing units) need to catch up. All this is situational and depending on the individual setup, programs used, problem cause and so forth.
Well I can notice the difference between my usual 2000 and 120 because I see tearing at 120. It is not, however, any smoother at 2000 FPSotoed1 wrote:
I disagree, your monitor may not be able to output past this, but due to the refresh rate of your device there is a difference in the way it feels. I currently play at around 1200 fps and once upon leaving chrome open and dipping below 400 at the opening of the map I began to notice massive stutter. Your eyes cannot perceive the difference, because their isn't any difference in what the monitor is outputting, but it feels stuttery because the video being processed in the computer is no longer effectively in sync with the mouse. This is why you can notice the difference between 60 and 240 on a 60 Hz monitor.bigfeh wrote:
Fun fact, you don't actually see the difference between 400 and 240 unless you have a 400Hz monitor, which doesn't exist
now how you could shove so much bullshit and misexplained concepts into a single post is beyond me. Here we go
Let me be very clear here: there is no disagreeing with a fact. You can't see what doesn't existotoed1 wrote:
I disagree, your monitor may not be able to output past this, but due to the refresh rate of your device there is a difference in the way it feels.
What you saw was probably frame tearing, not stutter. There are more frames to be displayed than the refresh rate of the screen, so there can't be any stutterotoed1 wrote:
I currently play at around 1200 fps and once upon leaving chrome open and dipping below 400 at the opening of the map I began to notice massive stutter.
there*otoed1 wrote:
Your eyes cannot perceive the difference, because their isn't any difference in what the monitor is outputting
what what what what whatotoed1 wrote:
but it feels stuttery because the video being processed in the computer is no longer effectively in sync with the mouse. This is why you can notice the difference between 60 and 240 on a 60 Hz monitor.
what the actual FUCK did I just read? I feel like stabbing myself in the eyes right now
someone please call an ambulance I'm about to die of stupid overdose
just so we're crystal fucking clear: you CANNOT see the difference between 60 and 240 FPS on a 60Hz screen BECAUSE YOU CANNOT SEE WHAT DOESN'T EXIST AND THE SCREEN ONLY DISPLAYS 60 FRAMES PER SECOND
ZenithPhantasm
So you attribute what I notice from below 400 to be screen tearing and nothing but? If that is the case, than what is the point of having a mouse that has a refresh rate higher than the Hz of your monitor? Moreover, if it is just screen tearing, then their really shouldn't be a single problem playing the game at 120 with a 60 Hz monitor, so why don't we all lock to 120 or some number that is a multiple of our monitors refresh rate?
ZenithPhantasm
jesus fuck can you please stopotoed1 wrote:
So you attribute what I notice from below 400 to be screen tearing and nothing but? If that is the case, than what is the point of having a mouse that has a refresh rate higher than the Hz of your monitor? Moreover, if it is just screen tearing, then their really shouldn't be a single problem playing the game at 120 with a 60 Hz monitor, so why don't we all lock to 120 or some number that is a multiple of our monitors refresh rate?
have some mercy, this is just too bad
INPUT IS NOT TIED TO RENDERING, EXCEPT IN RETARDED CASES
HENCE THE FUCKING PROBLEM WITH THIS GAME
And you don't lock your fps in this game at all. Read the discussion ffs
on another note, you don't necessarily see tearing at high framerates.