What fps is acceptable?
- Thread starter Ackoman
- Start date
Read somewhere that usually something between 50 and 80. Exceptions exist.
For me, anything above 30 is "acceptable". Considering my hardware is a fair ways above recommended spec (Ryzen 5 3600, Vega 56 8GB, 32GB RAM), I'd hope for nearer 60.
I have a 60Hz monitor and whilst smooth, I can assure you that there is a difference between 60 and 90, 120, 144Hz - it's not so much visual as it just feels more responsive.
I have a 60Hz monitor and whilst smooth, I can assure you that there is a difference between 60 and 90, 120, 144Hz - it's not so much visual as it just feels more responsive.
I can immediately tell if my experience is less than 60fps; and I'm so spoiled for performance that anything less than 60fps is unacceptable to me.
The source I found said the average is in the region 24-30. Fighter pilots have been apparently been found to discern frames at up to 250fps.
30 for games is fine. I grew up with 10fps, if I was lucky.
I am extremely sceptical of anyone who claims that anything less than 60fps ruins it for them.
Yeah anywhere between 30FPS and 60FPS. Pretty sure I read somewhere that last gen consoles (Xbox one, PS4) only did 30FPS at max, didn't they?
30fps is fine but there is a difference between that and say 60fps. Here's a little demo, I recommend randomly clicking the button and then guessing what it's running at without looking at the toggle.
Last edited:
For me a steady framerate at 30 FPS is playable. I do notice a difference in responsiveness going from 30 FPS to 60 FPS, however I grew up gaming on console so my brain is just fairly well adapted to playing at 30 FPS I suppose. I think that I mainly notice FPS drops more than anything. I seem to be oblivious after awhile and get used to it if the framerate is low but smooth.
Yeah, my main gaming rig until 1995 was C64.
But in E: D the difference is relly noticeable, at least for me.
Some time ago I had an intermittent bug with my PC, sometimes the system would think it was connected to the monitor through VGA cable (or DP 1.0) instead of the DisplayPort 1.2 it actually is and capped framerate to 30 Hz.
Not really noticing that until launching E: D, then it was really obvious, the game felt choppy and unresponsive. Checking FPS confirmed the FPS drop. Rebooting and/or reseating the cable cured that.
Now, when E: D goes below 60 FPS, I usually notice that because of small stutters. Going below 50 starts to feel slightly choppy.
IMO 30 is good for 2D. There’s a reason why movies have a frame rate of 24FPS... most people can’t tell the difference visually between that and higher frame rates. Exceptions exist, of course, and higher FPS also allows for a quicker response time in twitch-based gaming. When people say they can tell the difference, that’s usually what they mean.
VR, on the other hand, needs to be as close to 90 FPS as possible. We can’t see the difference, but we can certainly perceive the desync between what our eyes see, and the head movements our inner ear senses.
VR, on the other hand, needs to be as close to 90 FPS as possible. We can’t see the difference, but we can certainly perceive the desync between what our eyes see, and the head movements our inner ear senses.
Yes - you can tell, from the feel of the game, when the FPS drops below a threshold (varies for people). My monitor has a max refresh rate of 60, so when games run at that speed and you turn quickly, the screen updates itself smoothly, and the experience is welcomed. Below that, and as you turn, you can feel it stuttering. All my FPS games are configured so that they output 60fps, so titles like Overwatch, even at 4K, produce steady at 60fps. EDO at 4K does not feel good, but at 1080p it's OK. Using Control+F in EDO I can see at 1080p, on the whole, its around 50-60, dipping into the 40s when on the ground around certain places. In space, and outside stations, it's mostly 60. However, pump it back to 4K (EDH does this with ease) and the fps nose dives.
Personally, in most games I target a 60fps minimum. I can tolerate less, especially in low motion titles, and prefer more in faster games, but 60 is smooth and responsive enough most of the time that after that minimum has been achieved, I'll start throwing performance at eye candy rather than more frames.
If you want to get to the point where a higher frame rate has no utility, it's well in excess of one-thousand. Contrast permitting we can detect visual stimuli of vanishingly short duration, identify even complex silhouettes that we see for less than a hundredth of a second, and glean information on motion and trajectory from even shorter duration.
We still stop being able to distinguish individual frames of motion at around 20 fps and most people will find 30-60fps 'smooth', but the upper limit where we can no longer perceive something, or no longer extract useful information from it, is extremely high.
If you want to get to the point where a higher frame rate has no utility, it's well in excess of one-thousand. Contrast permitting we can detect visual stimuli of vanishingly short duration, identify even complex silhouettes that we see for less than a hundredth of a second, and glean information on motion and trajectory from even shorter duration.
We still stop being able to distinguish individual frames of motion at around 20 fps and most people will find 30-60fps 'smooth', but the upper limit where we can no longer perceive something, or no longer extract useful information from it, is extremely high.
Stable 30 would make ED:O far more enjoyable for myself, I've lived with 30 to 45 for the better part of a decade and only as recently as November experienced consistent 60FPS across just about everything.
I'd say 30 is my bottom-line for functional, 45 is my average for enjoyment, I don't need any-more than 60, It spoils me enough as it is.
I'd say 30 is my bottom-line for functional, 45 is my average for enjoyment, I don't need any-more than 60, It spoils me enough as it is.
Always at least 30 should be the minimum by today standards if your hardware / graphics card ist above the stated minimum specs from the developer and your graphic settings are set up accordingly (no 4k resolutions, no overfancy shadows etc).
Yeah, to save film, and the projector's (projectionist's?) arm (they were originally hand-cranked). It then became a standard because it was just good enough, mostly because of motion blur.
Last edited:
45 is my minimum as below that VR can't reproject. EDO can't maintain that reliably for me. In Horizons I generally get above 80FPS in ultra and full G2 resolution. In EDO I've dropped the resolution to less than half and I still can't get above 45FPS reliably. I'm thinking of giving my old machine (980Ti and Odyssey+ headset) a go to compare... But then again I may just go back to Horizons for a few weeks while FD sort their stuff out...
Around 60FPS is my minimum for acceptable for a game like this.
For slower paced games 30FPS is fine but I notice it in aspects of EDO when it dips this low.
For slower paced games 30FPS is fine but I notice it in aspects of EDO when it dips this low.