Is 25 fps lagging ?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Sort by date Sort by votes
as a general rule 30 fps is the minimum you should aim for.
on consoles they can get away with 25 fps because tv's usually have a slower responce rate @around 14ms compared to an average lcd monitor's 5ms
this will introduce bluring which helps disguise low fps. to a point...
if you have a screen with a solid 30 fps and another with a solid 60 you wont be able to tell the difference. what you would notice is if the fps dropped suddenly to say 45 then back to 60 you dont notice the fps as such you notice the change in smoothness a drop form 60 to 55 would go unnoticed by most people. so as long as the frame rate is constant you wont notice an increase in game smoothness over 30 fps... some people will refute this but it has been scientifically proven. you notice the change because your eyes are made that way
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
30 FPS is considered "good". And what most gamers try to stay at or above. 25 is not that bad, and you will probably not notice a difference between 25 and 30 while you are gaming in a fast pace situation.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
wow were did all the elite jerks go lol. Most of the time I see a question like this you see a bunch of " I would not touch a PC unless I was getting at LEAST 50 fps" lol. Reminds me of when I was playing wow back when NAXX was the big raid and was hitting 8 FPS on my laptop...now thats some real lag LMAO
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


ROFL so true. I remeber one guy saying he would refuse to play any game if he cant get 60+fps vsynced with 16xAA, because otherwise its not worth it.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
because now you cant play some games with 16xaa and get 60fps, even with the best hardware especially at anything over 25/16 without paying silly prices. them days are long gone...
now if you want to max out pc exclusives your looking at spending 2.5k and in these harsh economic times, its hard to justify that expense for gaming.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
The biggest problem with low fps is that the "scene" is frozen for the GPU when the rendering of 1 frame begins. So when the frame itself gets sent to the monitor, it already took 1/25s (for 25fps). Maybe even add a random time of up to 1/60 because of refresh rate. Also, the controller itself adds a small lag.
So:
controller lag = until your command gets to the game mechanics
rendering lag = when the game asks the GPU until the GPU sends it to the monitor (1/25 means 40ms, 1/10 means 100ms, etc)
monitor lag = newer monitors usually obtain the whole image before displaying it, some LCDs having 2-3 frames in the buffer (1 frame time=1/60s=16ms). Note: monitor response time is after the monitor lag. Currently you can only get it from detail reviews. It's different than response time.

The change from 30 to 25fps means an increase of 8ms (32ms to 40ms).
But a change from 25 to 20 means another increase of 10ms (40 to 50).

Now, if the lag in constant (like all scenes rendered in 40ms=1/25s), then your brain will adjust to it and you can still play it (maybe at even 20,15 fps, depending on what the game is about).
But if you have an average 25fps but 10 frames rendered in 30ms and 10 in 45ms, then the game may seem implayable, because the lag differs and the brain cannot adjust (some responses come too quick, some too slow).
 
Upvote 0 Downvote


It does depend on the game. RTS's you can get away with 30, maybe less, but a lot of those "elitist jerks" are that way because of a very common problem called "simulator sickness". I happen to be someone that experiences simulator sickness while playing 1st person and over the should view games that use the mouse to move with FPS below 40+. To maintain over 40+ FPS does usually require me to aim for 50+ average FPS.

This has nothing to do with being "better" than you, but rather, it's about not getting sick when I play games. Games are supposed to be fun. Getting sick while playing a game is not fun.

While simulator sickness is different for different people (some get headaches, others get motion sickness like symptoms) it is not a rare thing. The Air force did a study and found about half the population had some form of simulator sickness. What triggers it is often different from person to person as well. For me is sub 40 FPS.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Well I had never heard of that before sorry that you have that. But what im talking about is 90% of the time not what you are talking about. Im talking about the guys who come on here and talk trash about how a game under 50 FPS in unplayable not that it makes them sick just that the gaming quality sucks at those "bad" frame rates, usualy they end up telling people silly things like " I wouldent even bother gaming on your PC if thats all you can do" lol.

Side note tho because I have never heard of sim sickness: Can you play console games? Being that they are for the most part pegged at 25-30FPS?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Console games, due to not having a free flowing mouse, is not bad. I also believe that being further from the screen may help. The free flowing mouse when ever it has any sort of sluggishness causes me motion sickness (simulation sickness). If I play a game with keyboard movement, it is not as bad, which is a lot like consoles.

That said, I rarely play on consoles.

Here is a little snippet about it: http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/how-to/4219424
 
Upvote 0 Downvote

Interesting thanks :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom