Counterstrike FPS

pcgeek* · **Counterstrike FPS -** 08-10-2011, 13:10 | posts: 13 | Location: Pretoria

Hi

I have a GTX 580 and my friend a GTX 480. Problem is when were playing he gets just under 300 FPS and I just over 60 FPS with graphics all set to max. His graphics not set to max - not sure what his settings are. Will the settings make such a big difference in FPS. I score much higher than him in future mark etc...

swISS · 08-10-2011, 13:18 | posts: 370 | Location: N/A

Just wondering, is this 1.6 or source?

Either way, It sounds like he's got VSYNC off and you've got it on. It caps your framerate to the designed Hz of your monitor.

Also, incase you're playing 1.6:

cl_fpsmax 101 / rate 25000 / cl_cmdrate 101 / cl_updaterate 101

GandraZz · 08-10-2011, 13:22 | posts: 375 | Location: Lithuania

fps_max (enter your monitors refresh rate)

All problems solved, less heat and power consumption.

pcgeek* · 08-10-2011, 13:27 | posts: 13 | Location: Pretoria

It's source, I have vsync on and my monitor is 60 hz. That makes quite allot of sense. Thanx. It still runs smoothly - would you say its better to leave vsync on or off>???

Deathspank · 08-10-2011, 13:34 | posts: 1,293 | Location: Wolverhampton/England

dude if you dont know about vsync you need to change your name from pcgeek to something else lol.

pcgeek* · 08-10-2011, 13:44 | posts: 13 | Location: Pretoria

Hahaha - i liked the name !!!! Could have been worse - PC guru or genius ;-)

pcgeek* · 08-10-2011, 13:45 | posts: 13 | Location: Pretoria

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deathspank

dude if you dont know about vsync you need to change your name from pcgeek to something else lol.

U gonna teach me something about vsync??? Good or bad???

Ti3Kob · *Last edited by Ti3Kob; 08-10-2011 at 15:09.*

Quote:

Originally Posted by pcgeek*

U gonna teach me something about vsync??? Good or bad???

It's basically synchronizing the refresh rate of your screen with the framerate of your game. Your GPU will use less power and run cooler, and it will take care of any tearing effect. If your screen is 60Hz, you'll get a framerate cap @ 60 FPS, theoretically the maximum your screen can display. 300 FPS on a screen refreshing only 60 times per second is pure energy waste and tearing generator.

Though, some "geniuses" around here will say running 300 FPS on a 60Hz screen will give you smoother experience. I'm yet to see that on any screen I've used to date. The result is generally some pretty bad tearing on contrasted images and at best some slight to heavy stuttering.

The downside of Vsync is that it'll generally introduce input lag. You'll have to enable triple buffering to reduce it (much), but it won't be totally eradicated. Depending on your sensibility, you will or won't feel the input lag, but I personally prefer a tiny input lag to screen tearing or stuttering.

Now the choice is yours, and only some testing on your screen with your eyes (or more precisely your brain) will give you an answer to "good or bad ?" question. On the hardware side, it's only good, thanks to the energy saving and less heat to dissipate.

I'd say you're better with Vsync+triple buffering always enabled unless you're doing some competition level FPS gaming.

pcgeek* · 08-10-2011, 15:09 | posts: 13 | Location: Pretoria

To Ti3Kob

Thanx - appreciate !!!!

Deathspank · 08-11-2011, 13:38 | posts: 1,293 | Location: Wolverhampton/England

noooooo, not the coloured text. its all going to kickoff again lol.

DwFMagik · 08-11-2011, 13:57 | posts: 28 | Location: Weymouth, England

Vsync off for gaming. MAx FPS > all.