- Joined
- Sep 17, 2014
- Messages
- 20,952 (5.97/day)
- Location
- The Washing Machine
Processor | i7 8700k 4.6Ghz @ 1.24V |
---|---|
Motherboard | AsRock Fatal1ty K6 Z370 |
Cooling | beQuiet! Dark Rock Pro 3 |
Memory | 16GB Corsair Vengeance LPX 3200/C16 |
Video Card(s) | ASRock RX7900XT Phantom Gaming |
Storage | Samsung 850 EVO 1TB + Samsung 830 256GB + Crucial BX100 250GB + Toshiba 1TB HDD |
Display(s) | Gigabyte G34QWC (3440x1440) |
Case | Fractal Design Define R5 |
Audio Device(s) | Harman Kardon AVR137 + 2.1 |
Power Supply | EVGA Supernova G2 750W |
Mouse | XTRFY M42 |
Keyboard | Lenovo Thinkpad Trackpoint II |
Software | W10 x64 |
So I have experimented a bit with frame limiting as apposed to Vsync and the only reason I was using Vsync on my laptop was to help keep GPU and CPU heat under control. But then you mentioned framelimiters and I was like hmm maybe I will try a framelimiter for help in controlling heat out put and tested my laptop at a 90FPS limit via Rivatuner Statistic Server (RTSS) and was pleasantly surprised that the extra 30FPS I get compared to Vsync 60FPS seems to make a lot of difference towards the good for control of cars in my race games and the heat out put only raised by about 10- 15 cels but the performance increase seems to be worth it! Thank you for a heads up on framelimiters
natr0n !!! Seems to be a good option if Ambient room temps permit!
If your laptop doesn't have a 90 hz screen, you can also back down to 60 (or perhaps test with 59 and 61/62 as well) FPS frame lock and it will give you best of worlds - lower heat than Vsync ON, lowest input lag. If you can hold 60 steadily, it'll not be tearing either, or maybe ever so slightly.
Contrary to what most people think, Vsync is not a 'cheap' way of limiting FPS Frame Limiters are most efficient.