NVIDIA - Rocksolid 30FPS - SLI

It breaks physical effects in some games.
In Shadows of Mordor fabrics behave as thin rags.
And the difference in frequency is very noticeable.

 

I like to limit my FPS to 5 to get that 1900's pocket flipbook feel.

 

Not to begin a new silly thread.
Why switching on service of physics the cpu allows to see more details in frames?
I saw it in Tomb Raider and Shadow of Mordor.
I can't show it on diagrams, it intuitively. I didn't check other games so far. I am excited long ago by a question of various passes and smooth frames.
Forgive for the translator.

 

says you

 

Well i prefeer the Hobbit smooth 48 fps, that's cinematic too:nerd:

 

It feels like a sit comedy to me!
I hate also motion interpolation on tvs.. It's a matter of taste.

 

Sir, thanks a lot for this, playing Alien: Isolation @4k DSR with your suggested settings, and now i can be happy again with mine single gtx770.
While downsampling from 1440p affects dramatically the game responsiveness, at 2160p everything is soo smooth, this is a miracle, thanks :eyes:

 

Not sure if srs..

If trollin is on your agenda for today, please confirm so I can get on with what I'm doing here..

 

Eh. You're blessed then. I wish I was too, and I'm dead-****ing-serious about it.

To me anything lower than 59fps looks like absolute ****. So much that I can't stand the choppiness, whenever a new game would come out but my gaming rig at the giving moment couldn't handle it, I would just wait until i could.

That's what happened with Bioshock infinite, I only played it like almost a year after the release date, but playing it with ultra settings + 120+ fps made it one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had (that game was gorgeous)


But sometimes..I wish I was like one of the people I know, that can play choppy 720p games on a console and call it the pinnacle of gaming quality.

 

It says right in the nvidia driver "this setting does not apply to SLI" when you hover it (maximum prerendered frames)

 

I'll post some graph that shows different result for different values this evening.
Sure it could be placebo or casuality, but generally with the value of 2 stuttering variation are lightly lower

 

Because you need to enable frame limit is well and tearing won't go away completely with Adaptive VSync, because it turns it off when FPS drops bellow 60 and thus introduce tearing. This is why Adaptive VSync is piece of bullcrap.

 

While motion is matter of taste, lag is matter of standards. And your are damn low.

 

I don't know about SLI, but 1/2 Refresh rate Vsync+30FPS cap from RTSS with a pre-rendered frames limit of 1-2 always provided the smoothest motion and least input lag for me.


With The Hobbit, I think with film in general that they should come up with some kind of adaptive framerate or something. In scenes or panning that demand more unique frames to reduce flicker,judder and improve temporal quality, they should use a higher framerate. Someone did a study some number of years ago about this, filming at a really high framerate and deriving the final rates from there. 24FPS for static scenes and ones that don't need it, higher rates for those that do, like action scenes with a lot of motion.

 

The aim of above 30fps is to make things more realistic, not make things look like a slide show, as 30fps does. Not to mention the lack of responsiveness at 30fps. Very very much a personal thing, this "cinema experience" thing. I never could understand it.

I feel at high fps, especially around 120/144 fps at 144hz it's pretty incredible, very real if the game has great graphics, things suddenly become wayyy more immersive. :infinity:

 

Even a few Xbox 360 titles run @ 60fps, CoD as example, that is where you notice that the game reacts way better to input, plus that it feels more fluid.
Cinematic feel... for gaming?
I can understand that someone wants a steady framerate but 30fps, seriously?
You can as well throw one of those cards away btw.

 

Slideshow? hahaha that's the best laugh i've had all day considering 99% of all video media out there is at 30FPS or lower and nearly all cartoons aren't even animated at 24FPS keyframed...


Real life through my eyes doesn't look anything like 120hz+ The human eye isn't perfect and has TONS of defects with motion of it's own, not to mention persistent focus which makes problems in out of focus areas worse. If you believe anything else you are lying to yourself.

The only reason for the need of 60+Hz(Aside from certain games having input latency issues that are resolved from it. Like CS:Go) is due to deficiencies in display technology. Namely things like sample+Hold and persisistence. This is why they went with 90Hz for the Oculus Rift. And why 60-75hz looks basically perfect on a CRT monitor.

 

Stable framerate > Unstable framerate.
Stable framerate=consistent motion with no judder or stuttering.

Not every game demands 60+FPS and makes a significant difference.
And this is coming from someone who can't play a game like Counter Strike at anything less than 120+FPS.

30FPS due to the pacing of frame delivery looks and feels similar to 24FPS for film. For games that are trying to be cinematic and focus on storytelling and other aspects. 30FPS is an entirely legitimate claim.

So sick of the bigotry from people like you who cant understand different needs, uses and points of view outside their little closed in box.

 

Well 30 fps if it's fluid and smooth can be pretty alright, your eyes get used to it anyways.

Ofc more fps is better but sometimes - I actually agree - lots of fps can take away the "noticing" of the awesome graphics, sometimes it's so smooth you don't even look or it's just so fast.

 

Obviously you picked the wrong new years resolution uke2:. Life must not be too fun for U.

Regards