5 ms·
In my opinion gaming on 30 FPS is extremely horrible. Especially with shooters. This has in part to do with the 33.3 ms response delay that you can get between
by highmastdon 6y ago
In my opinion gaming on 30 FPS is extremely horrible. Especially with shooters. This has in part to do with the 33.3 ms response delay that you can get between moving the mouse and the change being processed and shown on the screen. When compared to the reaction speed of ~200 ms, you add a 15% delay. Compare that to 144fps (6,94ms frametime) you loose only 3,5% which makes the perception much smoother
- wing-_-nuts 6y agoI understand PC players get a better gaming experience, but looking at the average specs of someone on /r/nvidia, my god do they pay a premium for it. I'm ok with 30 fps outside of VR, as long as it's stable and everyone's on an even playing field (i.e. same hardware). The next gen consoles will target native 4k60hz, which is nice. Consoles are fantastic value for money, and you're guaranteed to be able to run the newest games even at the end of a console's release cycle, which can be 8-10 years.
- QuixoticQuibit 6y agoNext-gen onsoles definitely aren’t targeting 4k60 as a standard. A few big launch ones are coming in at 4k30. Really unfortunate but not surprising considering the limitations of the hardware. A DLSS-like solution would’ve worked wonders on the consoles.
- cma 6y agoIt isn't 33ms delay unless you can render and process gameplay in 0 time or scan out through hdmi in 0 time.
- gruez 6y ago>Compare that to 144fps (6,94ms frametime) you loose only 3,5% which makes the perception much smoother Keep in mind that the total end-to-end latency is probably higher than 6.94ms. eg. with overwatch even running at 144hz will get you around 30ms of latency. https://youtu.be/OAFuiBTFo5E?t=331 https://youtu.be/OAFuiBTFo5E?t=331.