Blog Comments

    DJ Ms. White's Avatar
    This is pretty interesting, Festus.
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    deputyfestus's Avatar
    Allane's Avatar
    Woops, forgot to clarify in the frametime log: the red line is the actual frametime. Green is GPU frametime, and Yellow is CPU frametime.
    Alundil's Avatar
    We do a very similar thing in our surgery scheduling practices. We, of course, trend all surgical procedure times by procedure, surgeon(s) both for scheduled versus actual and that rolling average is used and the baseline for all new surgery schedule requests by same surgeon/procedure. That said, there are still many instances when the requested time will be quite different (+/-) from the statistical history. It's interesting.
    Alundil's Avatar
    I'm reminded about this video.
    Scott Fraser: Why eyewitnesses get it wrong | Video on TED.com

    Not that it was related to belief-persistence or self-confirmation bias but another interesting example of how our brain can "play tricks on our minds"
    Alundil's Avatar
    An excellent post (and point). One that would be beneficial to all (and for some more than others).
    Affinity's Avatar
    Just found this little gem of a piece. I love reading about EVE, the politics, battles, and drama, but I never can force myself to get into it. Seems very complicated, a time sink, and ultimately too cut throat of a video game for me.
    RhysJD3's Avatar
    There's also something for PC's that seems to be underneath it all. Whether it's visible on the screen or not, it's almost immaterial. You get more responsiveness the higher the FPS. You may not see it but the game plays more fluid for you. This is mostly your first person shooters but I've had it in other games. When you want to move 1/2th of a degree, you can do it.

    Also, sometimes it's less about the maximum fps rather than the minimum. If you can achieve a SOLID 60 or 120 fps, you're gaming experience should be pretty damn smooth.

    Getting 240 FPS but having major dips to sub 60 isn't going to do you much good.
    Imisnew2's Avatar
    The "frame rate" at which the eye can see is theoretically very big (like, millions of FPS). It's been proven we can see images (by the air force) displayed for 1/220th of a second. NVidia ran a study and found that the eye can perceive up to 200 frames per second (but didn't study higher fps within that study). However, as you said, the FPS is directly linked to the refresh rate of whatever your using (it's not necessarily equal to it, but these days, it's safe to say the refresh rate of computer monitors are generally equal to the FPS it's able to show).

    Whether you decide to invest in a 120Hz monitor or not is your decision, but I plan on at least trying one out in the near future.
    Madmax (Grape)'s Avatar
    Speaking from experience as someone that until a few months ago used a 120Hz monitor and a rig good enough to maintain 120 FPS constant, its a world of difference from 60Hz and 60 FPS. Much smoother. It is hard to go back to 60Hz on the laptop I am now using.

    But to your question, some games limit the net settings based on your FPS. Such is the case in CSGO. So on a 128 tick server if I am only getting 60 FPS I am limited to 60 ticks per second. Not good.

    And as to what the human eye can see, it is my understanding that we do not see in frames per second at all.
Page 1 of 63 123456112651 ... LastLast