If you have higher framerates, do you have a gaming advantage?

[vawrvawerawe]

Will the person with a $10,000 PC be able to by default destroy the person with a $1,000 PC? Given there is not a huge difference in gaming skill level between the owners of each system.

If so, at what framerates do you begin to have a significant advantage?

[[Ion]]

I'd say no. A $1000 system can come close to maxing out most games (at least at a reasonable resolution) at this point. Beyond that, it's more just the ability to pull 100+ FPS at everything or run five 1080p displays at once. It's really more skill and reaction time that would be important here.

[SaltyFish]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

Will the person with a $10,000 PC be able to by default destroy the person with a $1,000 PC? Given there is not a huge difference in gaming skill level between the owners of each system.

If so, at what framerates do you begin to have a significant advantage?

*sigh* Oh dear gods, yet another vawrvawerawe thread.

The leap from 0 FPS to 1 FPS is probably the most significant. Anything after that becomes less so.

Cost of PC doesn't really mean much. As you go up, it's diminishing returns. At 10K USD, it's likely to go towards a 2x3 array of 2560 x 1600 monitors and the multiple GPUs to fuel the eye-candy. Likewise, there's a sense of what you use the money for. Headphones are generally better for sound positioning and cost less than speakers. So yeah...

[XL-R8R]

Originally Posted by SaltyFish

*sigh* Oh dear gods, yet another vawrvawerawe thread.

+1




Skill is the most important thing any gamer can poses... that's something you cannot buy and it shows..... there are plenty of people with 'inferior' computers kicking the outta people who spend $3000 on their PC.


Yes, more FPS surely helps..... however, in my honest view as a person who's played games for a loooong time (far too long!), it isn't a game changer to the extent most e-penis boosting people make you TRY and believe it is.

[Raw]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

Will the person with a $10,000 PC be able to by default destroy the person with a $1,000 PC? Given there is not a huge difference in gaming skill level between the owners of each system.

No, I don't think so. Well, let me put it this way... I get a steady 190-200 fps with COD BO 2 and everyone beats my ass.
I talk to guys getting 90 fps during the game and they slap me around.
Same with BF 3 but I get much less fps there.
So from what I see better fps doesn't seem to help.
The thing I take note to is my modem connection speed, that seems to make a difference for me.
My gaming has gotten better now that I bought my own Motorola modem, vs. cable companies modem.
The lag is gone for me and that seems to help.

[epicfail]

give advantage yes.

huge significant change no.
you can get use to playing with less, but i know when i use to play counter strike source on my desktop i would get 300+ constant, and if i would have 90, i did less good,
but there was some that played with 60 and kicked ass. it isnt a huge factor but it does a bit.

[Kreij]

Keep it on topic gents, if you have nothing to add ... move along.

[ALMOSTunseen]

Anything above 30 FPS is pretty much good.

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by epicfail

give advantage yes.

huge significant change no.
you can get use to playing with less, but i know when i use to play counter strike source on my desktop i would get 300+ constant, and if i would have 90, i did less good,
but there was some that played with 60 and kicked ass. it isnt a huge factor but it does a bit.

Let me put it this way: In RSV2 I'm basically an expert sniper when it comes to reflexes; my and friends will sit across from each other on the Streets map trying to best one another on who can pull the trigger first (i'm not really good, just a good sniper). The difference we are talking here is literally 10ths of a millisecond or less, I guess.

So in this case, would it matter whoever has a higher framerate? Because in this case we're talking an extremely small portion of a second, in which to be able to visually see the other player to click the fire button as fast as humanly possible (direct signal from eyes to brain to finger).

[SaltyFish]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

Let me put it this way: In RSV2 I'm basically an expert sniper when it comes to reflexes; my and friends will sit across from each other on the Streets map trying to best one another on who can pull the trigger first (i'm not really good, just a good sniper). The difference we are talking here is literally 10ths of a millisecond or less, I guess.

So in this case, would it matter whoever has a higher framerate? Because in this case we're talking an extremely small portion of a second, in which to be able to visually see the other player to click the fire button as fast as humanly possible (direct signal from eyes to brain to finger).

Teenagers and their silly exaggerations...

Lag has more to do with that than frame rate. It's more the game receiving a command (in this case, the fire button) and sending it to the server/host to update the game state. Frame rate is simply what *YOU* see. What's actually going on in the game is a whole different matter. Think of what happens during lag and low FPS.

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by SaltyFish

Teenagers and their silly exaggerations...

Lag has more to do with that than frame rate. It's more the game receiving a command (in this case, the fire button) and sending it to the server/host to update the game state. Frame rate is simply what *YOU* see. What's actually going on in the game is a whole different matter. Think of what happens during lag and low FPS.

Who's the teenager?? Definitely not me

Of course, that's the first thing. You see it, then your brain can register, then neural signals are sent out, then the muscles in your finger receive the transmitted request to move, then the button is pushed. Afterward, the signal is sent from the controller to the system, then the system to the ethernet, then into the ethernet, into the router, and out into the internet. Finally, the signal is received by the server, and the fire is recorded. Each thing happens in tenths of milliseconds.

So please think first before insulting people.

If the visible picture is increased closer to real-time, then the whole process can be moved tenth of milliseconds forward, thus giving a distinct advantage. Also, "Significant" is relative.

[Jstn7477]

I don't believe higher framerates give too much of an advantage if the gameplay is already fluid. However, I prefer having my 120Hz monitor and my games on VSYNC which greatly reduces the input lag versus 60Hz, and some game engines have a sweet spot for the best hit registration (e.g. 125 FPS for Call of Duty and 132 FPS [2x server tickrate] for Team Fortress 2 and other Source games).

At least in Source games, your framerate does determine how many game ticks you are sending back to the server, so it's always good to have your server FPS be equal to or greater than the server tickrate (usually 66.67). 60Hz VSYN in this case sucks for Source because you are limiting yourself to 60 game updates being sent back to the server per second versus 67.

[natr0n]

depends on how you configure the systems

example: I can destroy a guy with 10g comp with a $500 comp cause mine is finely tuned/oc'd

also,it depends on persons game skills. whats use of expensive comp if you're a noob ?

lol like a $100 mouse users think they own harder when i use a $9 one.

[SaltyFish]

vawrvawerawe, given your general impatience and defensiveness, I have serious doubts that you are anywhere over the age of 16.

Regardless, you are assuming your reaction time is on the order of ten-thousandths of a second. If you and your friends indeed have that kind of superhuman reflexes, there are plenty of studies that would pay you well for your participation.

Also, the human eye doesn't really notice anything over 30 FPS. The whole 60 FPS standard is used as a buffer for more intense scenes where the frame rate may take a dip. This means if one player has 120 FPS while another player has 800 FPS (and assuming monitors actually outputting such refresh rates), there isn't going to be any real advantage. Again, if you and your friends have such superhuman visual intake capabilities, there are plenty of studies willing to pay you well for your participation.

So even with astronomically high frame rates, and lightning fast reflexes (AND a ludicrous USB polling rate to support that), it would still depend on the game client sending commands to the server. Why? Lag/ping is usually on the order of milliseconds (1/1,000th of a second). If you really have that 1/10 of a thousand of a second reflexes (1/10,000th of a second) and the hardware setup to support that, then the signal to the server is the slowest thing in the chain.

For us mere mortals, it's mostly personal reaction time that's the weakest link. However in bad cases of lag, a player can run his game at 120+ FPS but his updates may not be reaching the server as fast as another player running his game at 30 FPS. In that case, the 30 FPS player can get his commands to the server faster and thus has "quicker reaction time". The flip case can also apply. A player may have a great connection, but his FPS may be crap (32X anti-aliasing on a low-end GPU, for example). Updates to the server will be sent and received quickly, but it won't be shown to the player. So even at 3 FPS, that player's commands may register faster than other players running at a higher FPS. But at 3 FPS, the screen is not likely to display relevant info.

[trickson]

Originally Posted by SaltyFish

*sigh* Oh dear gods, yet another vawrvawerawe thread.

Skill is more important.

[TRWOV]

As long as the framerate is fluid and not a slideshow I'd say you're in even footing. I think a high DPI mouse would grant a more significant advantage than a few dozen of extra fps.

[patrico]

as long as frame rates dont make the game choppy there should be no differance between highend machine and low end

[Frag Maniac]

In a word, no advantage with a $10,000 rig over a $1000 rig, provided the $1000 rig is speced sensibly and a reasonable res and settings are used.

Anything beyond $1500 in fact is typically decadence of the likes of super hi res, multiple displays, and/or water cooling, none of which are actually NEEDED to game effectively.

Just as gameplay and story quality are more important than graphics, gaming skill is more important than getting frame rates higher than you can visually perceive.

I see some people saying things like money is not an object now that I'm doing well, but what they don't realize is ANYONE can live beyond their means if they lose sight of practicality.

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by SaltyFish

vawrvawerawe, age of 16.

You should not rely on your understanding of humans to be remotely accurate since I am 27.
Do not make opinions about things you have absolutely no clue about, especially people. You should definitely not be relying on your intuition.
Remind me to never take any advice from you about anything.

[Frag Maniac]

Don't be too offended vaw, I get called a kid sometimes for merely pointing out a valid rebuttal to someone's rant, and I'm in my 50s.

There's so much nonsense on the net you can never count on being able to talk any sense into those spewing it, so just take it with a grain of salt.

[cdawall]

Until you buy over a 60Hz monitor you cannot see over 60FPS. My several year old GTX470 can do that in most games and when it couldn't I just dropped the settings. Never lost a game because he had a $30 bazillion computer and mine was a good bit less expensive.

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

You should not rely on your understanding of humans to be remotely accurate since I am 27.
Do not make opinions about things you have absolutely no clue about, especially people. You should definitely not be relying on your intuition.
Remind me to never take any advice from you about anything.

Considering you have made 30 threads (10% of which have been locked) in 7 days most people think you are between the age of 15-18. Then again most 15-18 year olds know how to use google so maybe 27 makes sense

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by cdawall

Until you buy over a 60Hz monitor you cannot see over 60FPS. My several year old GTX470 can do that in most games and when it couldn't I just dropped the settings. Never lost a game because he had a $30 bazillion computer and mine was a good bit less expensive.

lol

Actually I've been using google too. Last week I was a complete newbie with zero knowledge about building a computer. Today I am competent at an intermediate stage with a solid knowledge about what specs and hardware I need for my purposes, and have bought 95% of what I need and already received 70% of it I believe that my many posts are justified

And you forgot to mention already banned and banned reversed (although it was a mistake )

p.s. where the hell are your stars, cdawall?

[trickson]

Originally Posted by Frag Maniac

Don't be too offended vaw, I get called a kid sometimes for merely pointing out a valid rebuttal to someone's rant, and I'm in my 50s.

There's so much nonsense on the net you can never count on being able to talk any sense into those spewing it, so just take it with a grain of salt.

Hugs vaw ....

[TRWOV]

Originally Posted by vawrvawerawe

lol
p.s. where the hell are your stars, cdawall?

They didn't fit.

[vawrvawerawe]

Originally Posted by Frag Maniac

Don't be too offended vaw, I get called a kid sometimes for merely pointing out a valid rebuttal to someone's rant, and I'm in my 50s.

There's so much nonsense on the net you can never count on being able to talk any sense into those spewing it, so just take it with a grain of salt.

Exactly. There is so much crap out there, the only way to really sort through what is valid or not, is to talk with some real people who are actually doing it. Not just taking advice from the first website you come to, which is probably just advertising a product or pushing affiliate links.