• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

How many FPS is smooth to you?

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

How many FPS for a game to be considered Smooth?

  • 25-35

    Votes: 129 10.2%
  • 35-45

    Votes: 378 29.9%
  • 55-65

    Votes: 403 31.9%
  • 65-85

    Votes: 222 17.6%
  • 90+

    Votes: 132 10.4%

  • Total voters
    1,264
Valk said:
Since the human eye cant see more than 25 images in one second, Im comfortable with my fps at 25-30. its really kind of rediculous to have more, since you cannot see the minute detail changes at the higher frame rate. if you turn the camera swiftly, your eye naturally blurs the image since it cannot track the change of image locations quickly enough to redrew it crisp and clear.

So, i wonder what happened to using the motion blur feature in games. as far as i know, it has been supported in hardware since the voodoo 5.

even if i cant see the difference above 27.1 fps i can feel the difference at anything below 40fps when i turn around quickly in certain levels of doom3.nonetheless, i voted 35-45.
 
To be honest I think that "your eye can only see at 25fps" is BS. Go in to quake 3 and limit the FPS to 25 and make sure your monitor is refereshing at 75Hz, or if it's at 60Hz, set the FPS to 30 instead, both will look like s***.

The command is /com_maxfps for quake 3.

I think the reason for this is that TVs while they might show images at 25Hz, or slightly other speeds for different areas, the images them self are blured. Try pausing a dvd when something is going past the camera quickly like a car. Do you see an exact shape of the car like you would in a game? No. You see a blured image of the car because the film was taken using cameras that rely on exposure not renders.
 
35-45 and people should not have ANY reasons to complain because the human eye cannot tell the difference visually after 28 and above - unless of course you have things like fast forward and so on..

But the human eye doesn't need anything faster than 30 for things to look fluid and normal without stuttering in the motion of objects and scenes.

So anyone who tells you they can tell the difference between 30fps and 100fps is lieing totally. Unless of course they have bionic eyes or some such radical vision.

TV is 23 - 26 I think or around there and that is fine for our eyes...

007
 
007, I'm quoting my self so that you can read my post. Give it a go and you will see exactly what I mean, BS to only being able to see at 25fps.

MetalStorm said:
To be honest I think that "your eye can only see at 25fps" is BS. Go in to quake 3 and limit the FPS to 25 and make sure your monitor is refereshing at 75Hz, or if it's at 60Hz, set the FPS to 30 instead, both will look like s***.

The command is /com_maxfps for quake 3.

I think the reason for this is that TVs while they might show images at 25Hz, or slightly other speeds for different areas, the images them self are blured. Try pausing a dvd when something is going past the camera quickly like a car. Do you see an exact shape of the car like you would in a game? No. You see a blured image of the car because the film was taken using cameras that rely on exposure not renders.
 
007... my eye can see the difference between 85fps and 100fps, as well as 100fps and 120fps.

If you put two computers side by side and run them at 10fps difference (as long as it's not above 120fps b/c I haven't tried higher), then I guarantee I can tell you which is the higher fps and which is the lower.
 
Regardless, there is not much point to a FPS higher than the monitor's refresh rate. Even if your system can render at 400FPS, it normally won't do much if your monitor is only running at 85Hz.
It will, however, provide more margin for unexpected slowdowns.
If you put two computers side by side and run them at 10fps difference (as long as it's not above 120fps b/c I haven't tried higher), then I guarantee I can tell you which is the higher fps and which is the lower.
I know exactly what you mean. If I have two PCs running Fear Factor next to each other, I can easily tell which PC is the faster one. (The really funny part is, when I done this in a PC repair/upgrading class for a presentation, most of the students seemed to pay more attention to the women in the scene than the FPS counter. Of course, those students also liked to watch every system stress test with Fear Factor and especially liked to watch me do repairs. Most did not learn much about PC repair like that, and I think I know why. The good side is, I happened to be the best student in the class.)
 
WOW i can't belive i've never seen this thread before. i swear, play, and get used to a game @ 144hz/ frames, and if you see 90 frames, it will look choppy.
 
Last edited:
tells you they can tell the difference between 30fps and 100fps is lieing totally.
i play a game w/ my friends. guess the refresh rate. i can tell when a monitor is set to 60, 75, 85, and 100hz. just produce a blank white screen, and use your peripheral vision. you can see flashing. but frames vs hz is totally different though. i really can't tell the diff. above ~80 frames, but when a monitor is refreshing at 85hz, you can see flashing. i think when a tv refreshes, it doesn't turn black in between each refresh, but a monitor does, hence the flashing. maybe i should read up on this stuff first, and not just ramble assumptions...
 
For me it divers per game. I was doing well when I played quake 3, with that game you don't want your fps to drop below 125 because you won't be able to make some jumps because of that (monitor @ 120hz). I noticed a great amount of lag when I switched to lcd (60hz), for both my mouse as the visuals.
All other games are pretty ok above 50. It's not so much on how high they get, more about how low they go.
 
I think a 12ms LCD is close to a 85hz monitor.

12ms = .012sec
--> 1/.012sec --> 83.3 cycles per second --> 83.3hz... I think!

So if you're saying that your LCD gets 60hz, that means you're on a 16ms LCD, right (~62.5hz)?
 
Bout 60. HIgher is better only because it proves you GFX card can handle more to buffer if any big movement happens. If it never hits 40 or under im a happy chappy
 
60 fps for console gaming

100-120 fps on PC gaming (depending on the refresh rate, 100 hz = 100 fps, and 120 hz = 120 fps obviously. Vsync enabled to stop image tearing)
 
Back