Forum
Can any PC setup run TF2 at a consistant 120fps with any config?
Created 3rd June 2011 @ 00:17
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 ... 12 Next »
Quoted from DarkSlayer
…
(please don’t give your opinions on whether YOU think you need 120 fps, or what the eye can detect or tick rate etc)
…
Unlocks & refresh rates are apparently some of the few subjects we can’t stay on topic with :P
on topic: Currently running a conroe based dualcore at 2.8 ghz, 8800GTS 512MB and 6 gigs of ram, and I sometimes drop to about 20 fps in middle fights (with maxframes config). Used to be over 60 at a ll times about 2 years ago, but all the updates have taken their toll on my fps :(
Quoted from Spike Himself
dat avatar
)), Also:
i5 750 @ 3.2Ghz (really should boost this tbh), 4GB 1600Mhz DDR3, GTX460, timedemo of a standard granary game as scout, 250 average, variability of 30, minimum of about 130 very occasionally in the open areas during fights, dx9frames.
Quoted from grimbar
[…]
Please stop posting. Formatting as some sort of maintenance move is trash tier, get good.
I always get a massive performance boost. :P
I always lol @ the people who talk about what your eye can see. Things just get lost in translation over the years I guess.
I wonder if there are people out there who _can’t_ actually see the difference between 60hz, 120hz. I’m pretty sure your eyes can easily distinguish well over 160 fps, as long as there is sufficient movement.
Also 300fps is far greater than 120fps and is a lot smoother. But 120fps with vsync on would be smoother than 300fps without vsync (on a 120hz monitor in this example). It’s a shame vsync gives you input lag, otherwise it would be orgasmic!
With vsync off, you want as many frames as possible, because the more frames that occur in the game, the more chance there is of a perfect frame (not a transition between two frames) landing at the same time as your monitor refreshes. While this statement might not be factually correct (I’m not sure tbh), that’s how I see it working in practice.
Snowie’s timedemo test: http://etf2l.org/forum/general/topic-10689/?recent=296036
Intel i5-2300 2.8GHz
AMD Radeon HD 6870 1GB GDDR5
8GB DDR3 RAM
Windows 7 Ultimate 64bit
nothing overclocked
Chris’ High Quality: 5125 frames 32.544 seconds 158.48 fps ( 6.35 ms/f) 13.113 fps variability
Chris’ DX9 Frames: 5125 frames 26.603 seconds 192.65 fps ( 5.19 ms/f) 16.904 fps variability
(ragdolls, gibs, shadows and facial features on in both cases)
SnowiE’s timedemo:
5125 frames 34.856 seconds 147.03 fps ( 6.80 ms/f) 15.933 fps variability
i7 950 3,2Ghz
6GB DDR3 1600Mhz
HD6870
Win7-64
Chris’ highquality config.
5125 frames 20.152 seconds 254.32 fps ( 3.93 ms/f) 34.787 fps variability
Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-2600 CPU @ 3.40GHz
4GB DIMM DDR3
XFX 6950 2gb
5125 frames 25.624 seconds 200.01 fps
i5-750 @4ghz wc
1600cl9 8gb g.skill
hd5850@800/1200
cfg maxed in menu and in cfg:
cl_burninggibs 1
cl_detaildist 2400
cl_detailfade 0
cl_maxrenderable_dist 6000
cl_new_impact_effects 1
cl_ragdoll_collide 1
dsp_enhance_stereo 0
lod_TransitionDist 6400
mat_antialinis 16
mat_bumpmap 1
mat_clipz 0
mat_motion_blur_forward_enabled 0
mat_picmip -10
mat_specular 1
mp_usehwmmodels 1
mp_usehwmvcds 1
r_fastzreject 1
r_lod 1
r_rootlod 0
r_waterforcereflectentities 1
mat_parallaxmap 1
cl_ragdoll_fade_time 50
why not use that thread then? since thats the whole purpose of it, to gather all the cpu stats
p.s. to look at stable 120+ on middle, the avg should be at least 170+ fps
Quoted from AcidReniX
I always lol @ the people who talk about what your eye can see. Things just get lost in translation over the years I guess.
I wonder if there are people out there who _can’t_ actually see the difference between 60hz, 120hz. I’m pretty sure your eyes can easily distinguish well over 160 fps, as long as there is sufficient movement.
Also 300fps is far greater than 120fps and is a lot smoother. But 120fps with vsync on would be smoother than 300fps without vsync (on a 120hz monitor in this example). It’s a shame vsync gives you input lag, otherwise it would be orgasmic!
With vsync off, you want as many frames as possible, because the more frames that occur in the game, the more chance there is of a perfect frame (not a transition between two frames) landing at the same time as your monitor refreshes. While this statement might not be factually correct (I’m not sure tbh), that’s how I see it working in practice.
I have never had more than 80fps in fire fights WITH Chris high frames config. Then at i42 I played on Sketch’s PC and he had like 300 fps and my mind was blown.
it seems like an appropriate time for me to post this
average fps: 305.65
32fps variability
CPU: Intel i5 750 @ 4.2
RAM: 4GIG DDR3 RAM
GRAPHICS CARD: 2x ati 4850 512mb in crossfire
RESOLUTION: 1920×1080
WINDOWED/FULLSCREEN: fullscreen
Video Advanced Settings (Options > Video > Advanced) –
Model Detail: low
Texture Detail: medium
Shader Detail: low
Water Detail: simple reflections
Shadow Detail: low
Colour Correction: Disabled
Antialising: 2x
Filtering Mode: Trilinear
Wait for vertical sync: Disabled
Motion Blur: Disabled
Field of view: 90
Multicore Rendering: Enabled
High Dynamic Range: none
Direct X Level: 8.0
viewmodels: changes between weapons
fps config: chris good quality dx8
the hardware alone in this pc is worth £380 find some excuses for bad fps now
case £80 +psu £80
cooling £150
Troll, i run a i3 530 with a hd5770 (full hd) and i have stable 120 with some rare drops on a quality boosted dx9 cfg. I dont see why you gotta use such a heavy cfg with such a beast pc.
Quoted from Martn
Troll, i run a i3 530 with a hd5770 (full hd) and i have stable 120 with some rare drops on a quality boosted dx9 cfg. I dont see why you gotta use such a heavy cfg with such a beast pc.
You probably don’t, could run it at nicer graphics for not much of a drop in fps
Quoted from Cloud
[…]
You probably don’t, could run it at nicer graphics for not much of a drop in fps
i do.
(i pretty much got all graphic things maxed, except for the cpu intensive stuff.)
Add A Reply Pages: « Previous 1 ... 5 6 7 ... 12 Next »
content rss