If you cannot maintain 60 fps, vsync will automatically drop you to 30 fps.
Its the nature of it.
So unless you don't risk going under 60 fps ever, i'd disable that, personally.
Why is that? Is 1/2 of the refresh rate better than, somewhere in between 30-60?
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
The culprit that caused the performance loss has been identified and a fix will be included in a patch ASAP.
@semi: because vsync is always used to prevent screen tearing, and i guess this is only possible by matching your monitor's refresh rate, or half of it. Works like this for any game. The fine print really is important though, imo
@semi: because vsync is always used to prevent screen tearing, and i guess this is only possible by matching your monitor's refresh rate, or half of it. Works like this for any game. The fine print really is important though, imo
using vsync with triple buffering you can have all the fps you want, not bounded to monitor refrashrate.
Thanks for the info about the problem. let's hope the fix comes soon!!
The culprit that caused the performance loss has been identified and a fix will be included in a patch ASAP.
Just wondering since theres a couple threads, one here in general (fps statistics) and one in tech support (performance problems), that say that you can submit either the fps statistics for your system or additionally plog's from your system so they can be looked at, so are they really getting looked at?
The threads seem kinda un-official and I have taken part in both so that it would be easier to fix these issues and I'm wondering if its worth it if they are getting looked at at all.
Can you explain in detail our vsync (double/triple) works beyond just capping fps ironhorse? Because you said earlier that with vsync if you can't stay at 60 it will drop to 30. Well when I ran vsync triple buffered it occasionally dropped to 55 for a few seconds or so and then capped back at 60. How is that possible if only 60 or 30 are available.
Iron you should encourage them to release a hotfix if it's really as bad as people say. I played for about 2 hours and I didn't notice anything overly bad as far as FPS, but then again maybe I wasn't paying attention.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
edited January 2013
In Google we trust:
hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=928593
Also a quote from a wiki on the matter, regarding triple buffering causing a 3 frame delay for mouse input:
"Video games, which use a wide variety of rendering engines, tend to benefit visually from vertical synchronization, as a rendering engine is normally expected to build each frame in real time, based on whatever the engine's variables specify at the moment a frame is requested. However, because vertical synchronization causes input lag, it interferes with the interactive nature of games,[2] and particularly interferes with games that require precise timing or fast reaction times."
Edit: quick calculations of triple buffering impact: 3 frame delay @ 60 fps = 1/4 of the average gamer reaction time(200 ms) that is delayed. At 30 fps, it's 1/2. ~99 ms delay.
Nooooo thank you.
@ironhorse ok, read that post, so we have to live with vertical tearing then? Also isn't a 3 frame delay at 60fps 1/20? That's WAY less of a delay than you stated.
IronHorseDeveloper, QA Manager, Technical Support & contributorJoin Date: 2010-05-08Member: 71669Members, Super Administrators, Forum Admins, Forum Moderators, NS2 Developer, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, Subnautica Playtester, Subnautica PT Lead, Pistachionauts
60 frames within 1,000 ms = 16.6 ms per frame, so multiply that by 3 and you have 50 ms. Which is 1/4 of my 200 ms reaction time. Rough calculation though, but you see what huge impact it can have, especially as your fps lowers
using vsync with triple buffering you can have all the fps you want, not bounded to monitor refrashrate.
Why would you do this instead of just disabling vsync?
Oh no i was just saying... to complete. not all v-sync work like that. maybe someone could have 3buffer on and thinking that v-sync was off because of the "not fixed 60 fps" thing..
The culprit that caused the performance loss has been identified and a fix will be included in a patch ASAP.
Excellent, can't wait.
Interestingly enough, I noticed a slight improvement with 238! I am still seeing lower FPS on average when compared to 235, but 238 is definitely running smoother than 237. I'd have to say I saw an increase of 5-10 FPS with 238, so its still chugging at times but not so bad I rage quit anymore.
Comments
Why is that? Is 1/2 of the refresh rate better than, somewhere in between 30-60?
@semi: because vsync is always used to prevent screen tearing, and i guess this is only possible by matching your monitor's refresh rate, or half of it. Works like this for any game. The fine print really is important though, imo
using vsync with triple buffering you can have all the fps you want, not bounded to monitor refrashrate.
Thanks for the info about the problem. let's hope the fix comes soon!!
The threads seem kinda un-official and I have taken part in both so that it would be easier to fix these issues and I'm wondering if its worth it if they are getting looked at at all.
So I'd still advise against it.
Poor fps or mouse input delay? I'll pass on both anytime.
hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=928593
Also a quote from a wiki on the matter, regarding triple buffering causing a 3 frame delay for mouse input:
"Video games, which use a wide variety of rendering engines, tend to benefit visually from vertical synchronization, as a rendering engine is normally expected to build each frame in real time, based on whatever the engine's variables specify at the moment a frame is requested. However, because vertical synchronization causes input lag, it interferes with the interactive nature of games,[2] and particularly interferes with games that require precise timing or fast reaction times."
Edit: quick calculations of triple buffering impact: 3 frame delay @ 60 fps = 1/4 of the average gamer reaction time(200 ms) that is delayed. At 30 fps, it's 1/2. ~99 ms delay.
Nooooo thank you.
As far as how vsync works, read ironhorse's link.
I just wanted to mention that I passionately love Alley Cat (your avatar), and it was one of my favorite games growing up.
That is all.
Why would you do this instead of just disabling vsync?
EDIT: and how does it work
Oh no i was just saying... to complete. not all v-sync work like that. maybe someone could have 3buffer on and thinking that v-sync was off because of the "not fixed 60 fps" thing..
I've never ever used v-sync.
Excellent, can't wait.
Interestingly enough, I noticed a slight improvement with 238! I am still seeing lower FPS on average when compared to 235, but 238 is definitely running smoother than 237. I'd have to say I saw an increase of 5-10 FPS with 238, so its still chugging at times but not so bad I rage quit anymore.