The truth about PRE-RENDERING 0?

Kudos to you brother.

That's all subjective, and from mine point of view it (could) look different than from yours or someone else. To put it simple, yes, there is a lag (even without V-SYNC), yes there is a tearing, and yes, both of them can be reduced (not removed) to acceptable values one wants.

For example, I don't use LCD, and i never have to deal with tearing, because i simple don't experience it. On the other hand, i will experience less lag than you, but i can't stand it, and unfortunately, with nVidia GPU's i couldn't get lag to acceptable level, maybe I'm too sensitive or something, but lag and stutter, i can't stand, i would probably have same opinion for tearing, but i don't have it.

 

Im not, I just think that if you dont know your stuff you should´nt be talking.

Btw, there is no pre rendered frames with opengl. Or at least you cant change it through the drivers. You can confirm this in the nvcpl.

 

And here I thought you were too lazy to contribute anything.. oh wait you didnt. Again.

 

But the difference is so small its negliable. Thats why there is the term 'power' when it comes to statistics, because such small differences might as well be statistical anomalies, sunspots, your mom using the dishwasher and affecting electrical output etc.

I dont really have a problem with the defaults though, I understand nvidia wants to show their stuff from the best side. Im saying is 0 has a place and it shouldnt be removed. In fact among fps fans this would be a selling point.

Ps sorry about several different posts

 

120 hz and 130+ fps has very little tearing.

 

CRT's have screen tearing also, just less of it because of the higher refresh rate.

There really isn't a difference between AMD/NV when it comes to input lag, and they both give you control of flip-queue/pre-rendered frames.

If you were as sensitive to it as you say you are, you'd notice the vertical tearing without V-sync..

 

Yes, they have, especially at 85Hz or lower. On the other hand, i never said they do not have.

Cant agree on that one, for you, maybe there is no difference, for me there is. As i stated before, it is subjective experience.

Sorry, i didn't noticed, give me one game that will tear to test it, i play only few games, and games i played before, never noticed (except under 100Hz, but i don't play most of the games under 100Hz). When screen refresh itself over 100Hz, possibility to tear is quite less than on 60Hz natural.

For my sensitivity, i didn't said I'm too sensitive, but maybe I am, and thanks to mine friends and people i know, I am probably, because they can't see what i point them to see. For example, if i say, game stutter, picture is not clear, they say "you are crazy" lol, than i say "look, do you see that?", and always answer is "no". So that's why i pointed that out, and said maybe.

 

You just couldn't let it go could you?

You're wrong about OpenGL. It can indeed be adjusted using the max pre-rendered frames setting, and it works perfectly. Are you using outdated drivers or something?

 

Let what go? You spread a lot of information that does have a nice ring to it, but seems false more often than not.

http://www.esreality.com/files/inlineimages/2012/88923-Untitled.jpg

"Latency caused by vsync and pre-rendering are related, but also somewhat independent of each other."

Nice and vague enough so that it doesnt actually mean anything. I could go on, but it would probably just be better for everyone if you started linking sources for your information.

 

I am the source of my information. Max pre-rendered frames applies to OpenGL ever since r300.

 

So at the end of the day in SLI does this make a difference/can it be changed in SLI or is alternate frame rendering the same thing?

Also if you can't see tearing your either blind or lucky to have your FPS match your Hz a very big majority of the time.

 

Don't know bro. I stopped building SLI rigs ever since GeForce 6. You could do some benchmarking to find out.

 

Hope someone who actually knows will answer.

For tearing thing, did you ever used CRT monitor, why you talk about things you don't know? There is no tearing on mine monitor when FPS is even double or triple than refresh rate (100Hz - 300FPS), what is so hard to understand here?

 

When it comes to screen tearing or input lag, ignorance is bliss. LCDs certainly had a big problem with tearing since day one. CRTs also tear, but usually not as noticeable.

 

If you don't mind VSync, then continue using it . Settings come down to a certain level of preference....

Now, on the real, VSync is a horrible setting to use you if you care to play FPS's more competitively. I'm not going to preach about all the cons of using VSync in FPS's, but it introduces more problems than it resolves. To name a few: Video lag (input lag or perceived input lag, delay, whatever you want to call it), mouse lag, unnatural movement, etc. You will be a step behind those of whom not using VSync as in FPS's, every moment and millisecond matters, especially in fast twitch shooters such as the Quake game series.

As for screen tearing, this is only partially true. Just because you don't use VSync, it doesn't mean you will have to endure screen tearing. There are a plethora of different settings you can use to reduce or completely eliminate this annoyance. Personally, I believe screen tearing has most to do with your drivers. If you deal with screen tearing, try a different driver-set for your GPU, but remember to use driver-sweeper if you change out your GPU drivers.

-T

 

Prophet,

I agree with your statement as I have researched this in the past.... but I always run into discrepancies regarding pre-rendered frames and opengl games.

I primarily play Quake Live which is opengl based, and I have tested pre-rendered frames from 0-3, where there are noticeable differences between 0, 1, and 3 (0 being the ideal setting).

If pre-rendered frames do not affect opengl games, why does it affect Quake Live when changing pre-rendered frames, an opengl game? This is not only my perception, but the perception of the QLive community when discussing pre-rendered frames. Anything but 0 (1 for few) is unacceptable as QLive is a competitive fast twitch FPS.

Some claim this to be a placebo effect, but I just don't believe this to be the case. There is a noticeable difference.

Your input?

-T

 

But it does, as I mentioned earlier.

Ironic isn't it?

 

Well if what rewt says is correct it seems different driver versions deal with it differently. I recently started a discussion on the premier ql forum, esreality about pre-rendered frames. Consesus there was pre-r f wasnt affecting opengl, and thats what it says in my driver, 296.x. You can check for yourself about the 300-series drivers because I guess rewt wants us to be as delusional and him since he didn´t provide any evidence. Please let us know (screenshot).

Placebo is a funny thing. People who think placebo is a placebo have a placebo effect. Arton Senna, a well known F1 driver was known for 'knowing his car and being able to give correct feedback in order to improve it'. That means that even among the worlds finest drivers he was able to make distinctions that others couldn´t. About 10 years ago people where talking about how many hz you could detect. This was just 1-4 years before flatscreens became common. Actually must have been 99-01 or something. Anyway I could easily see the difference up to 135-140 hz, while consensus was that noone could see a difference above 75-80 hz or so. Then a couple of years later the us millitary did some studies and they said ~110 hz or so iirc. Under hypnosis if you have like sizling flesh and show someone you have a redhot iron. You then blindfold them, and tell them you will burn them. You touch them with a piece of ice. They will get a burnmark, if they are convinced them they were touched with a redhot iron. Placebo makes it real.

The point is this: 1.) Placebo is a real effect. You always have a placebo effect whatever you believe (like rewt for example, he says his info comes from himself but that´s not correct, he got it from somewhere), or whether you not believe.

2.) There are people out there able to detect smaller differences / distinctions when it comes to this stuff. If you feel the difference its real. Even if it would only be placebo, its still just as real. You know a lot of the 'happy'pills (sorry cant remember the chlinical name for them atm) have only a few percent difference between the actice compounds and the placebos.

One guy somewhere claimed that the difference between 0 and 1 pre rendered was 5-15 ms. I can easily feel the difference in bfbc2, and if youcan feel it in ql, I believe you.

People like to throw the placebo name around without understanding it. My tip is to just ignore them.

 

Plenty of evidence above. Use the scroll bar on your browser or mouse. Next time, learn to take my word for it.

 

I could out plenty of facts you got wrong. I can think of at least 2 things that you said in this thread alone that are incorrect. Your word means less than nothing to me. Not only because you want me to take your word for it, but because you think you are 100% correct. Noone is 100% correct and people who think they are are in my experience more delusional than most. In fact I have only skimmed your posts briefly, its simply too much work for me to filter the correct from the incorrect.