25:minimum FPS?

if i'm playing competitively online, i'll alter visual quality to get into at least the 40-50fps range, so if i do hit a dip in performance i have a buffer zone and probably won't lock up

but if i'm playing a single player game, i'm content down to about 18-20fps... i don't have a big deal with smooth performance until it starts jerking and freezing...

15+ FPS is smooth. The human eye cant tell the difference between 15 FPS and 100 FPS. stevendiep_100

It obviously can but you do make a point. A game that's slow-paced will probably still be enjoyable even down to 15 fps, a fast paced game won't however I'd say the minimum there would indeed be 25.

60 fps plus is the way to go in first person shooters and flight sims.

but in rts games 20 fps is more than enough.

in other genres im content with 30-40 fps.

If my memory serves me correctly, my 3D Animation professor mentioned that 30FPS is the standard, and you'll have to look really hard to notice a difference above that frame rate. In fast paced games, anything lower then 30FPS will give you the choppy feeling. Faster frame rate is always better. Then again, it can be bad to have too fast of a frame rate. If your FPS goes beyond your monitor's refresh rate, you might end up with tearing, which can look really horrible sometimes. The ideal frame rate is whatever the refresh rate on your monitor is.

For example, my Samsung 22" GTG has a screen refresh rate of 60hz. That means if I go over 60FPS, the video card is sending more frames to the monitor then the monitor can actually post. What you end up with is tearing. That's what vSync is for.

15+ FPS is smooth. The human eye cant tell the difference between 15 FPS and 100 FPS. stevendiep_100

The human eye can tell better difference by blurring. If you see something blurred you think it's moving fast, so if you have 15 fps on a crips and clear looking game, not blurred, you see the difference and it's slow.

[QUOTE="stevendiep_100"]15+ FPS is smooth. The human eye cant tell the difference between 15 FPS and 100 FPS. koza_76

The human eye can tell better difference by blurring. If you see something blurred you think it's moving fast, so if you have 15 fps on a crips and clear looking game, not blurred, you see the difference and it's slow.

correct..go to tweakguides and find the fps test somewhere..there is proof for alll those ignorant people. Not you tho.

where are all these dumbass stats coming from? the human eye can tell a huge difference between 20 and 40 fps, 40 and 60, and 60 to probably around 90-100. this is from experience, not some stupid "drr human eye 21 or 15fps DRRRR"

as for minimum fps, i would say 40

i remember playing railroad tycoon. I had 15fps and didn't even saw a difference on my old PC. Even more jerky experience was with simcity 4. Yes, it felt somewhat choppy and that. But what frames were on 10fps. That was strange thing to happen. It was still quite playable though. Cause there is no need for action in that game. It's just click and build.

For FPS 30 is the minimum frames you want, lower them and you will then notice jitters and slow points. This would probly be the same with a 3rd person game aswell. After 15 frames per second most people cant see any skips in between frames.However if the frames are higher you can see a dramatic boost in quality.hooded1man

Agree

QFT!

for FPS I like 30+ FPS, and I like it to be pretty smooth

for RPG/RTS I don't mind a little slow down as long as my mouse doesn't skip around 20 FPS isn't always terrible.

for most TBS it doesn't really matter as long as I can click stuff now and then. 15 fps is fine.

Wow, wtf @ all the people saying "20 is the max you can see", "human eyes read at 25 fps", "you cant tell the difference between 15 and 100 fps".

If you truely believe that you must either be a downy or have eyesight problems.

The average gamer needs 30 fps in a GAME to play smoothly, most films are recorded at 25 frames per second but film frames blur into one another. Games do not blur frames into one another.

In singleplayer games it is ok to have 30 fps, but even in multiplayer RTS games it is ok to run at 30 fps since CNC3 is capped at 30 fps.

Any competitive online fps player would know 30 fps is not enough, you need atleast 60. Some professional quake players need 100+ same with CS and UT.

Also, it is not just what we see. I need my CSS to run at atleast 150 fps because the game will be running at that rate, CSS servers should be running at 400+ fps to have good hit registration, CSS spam speed comes into play with higher fps as well. So dont think that just because you can see smoothly that the game is running as it was made to be.

nope 40 fps minzero9167

It's pretty subjective, but I'm with zero, 40fps min for any game, 60+ for fps for me personally...

where are all these dumbass stats coming from? the human eye can tell a huge difference between 20 and 40 fps, 40 and 60, and 60 to probably around 90-100. this is from experience, not some stupid "drr human eye 21 or 15fps DRRRR"

as for minimum fps, i would say 40

Crucifier

you can tell a difference and you can't. If you have badass computer, FPS shooter running at 30fps could be a problematic issue. That is because CPU can't order the commands so fast, the latency increases.

But if you would have a strong, powerfull PC for a game, and you would limit frames per second to 30 by a program, there shouldn't be any problem playing, because CPU is just fine sending orders to components.