What's the point of limiting framerate?

[Uncle Julian]

Ok I fully understand what vSync is, but in titles such as diablo 3, borderlands, and league of legends there is also options to set a frame-rate cap like 30,40,50,60,70, and 120 usually. Is this just a more user-customized version of vSync? I personally would opt for slight tearing instead of input lag, so I keep vSync off but should I change the other setting to accommodate?

[DeltrusDisc]

You prefer tearing? That's good... way to kill your hardware faster.

Limiting framerate helps keep your CPU/GPU from trying to do TOO much.

[Yalingo]

Limiting your frame rate will stop over consumption of resources from your system trying to push out max performance.

[Adam Jensen]

You should stop noticing framerate choppiness long before you notice any tearing so why worry about limiting framerates? Past 120 is pointless. Heck, past 60 is pointless and even 30 is acceptable to some people (me included, hell, I can handle playing WoW at 20 fps without getting annoyed.)

[Deleted]

I had Heating problems especially in Diablo 3 taking the advice of limiting the max frame rate completely solved the problem.

[Laize]

Ok I fully understand what vSync is, but in titles such as diablo 3, borderlands, and league of legends there is also options to set a frame-rate cap like 30,40,50,60,70, and 120 usually. Is this just a more user-customized version of vSync? I personally would opt for slight tearing instead of input lag, so I keep vSync off but should I change the other setting to accommodate?

People who tend to be really ignorant of how computers, displays, gaming and such all interact tend to be the ones to ask this question... and a simple google would provide the answer.

Say you're using a monitor with a 15 ms refresh rate. That means that monitor is refreshing itself once every 15 milliseconds or 66.7 times per second (With LCD monitors this isn't so cut and dry, however. That 15 ms refresh tends to be idealized and will likely result in a fair amount of ghosting).

Now say you have a GPU putting out 100 frames per second on a given game while the monitor is only capable of displaying 66.7 frames per second. That means that when the monitor is at the 10 ms mark for drawing its current frame (66% done) it will have received data for the next frame. Monitors, however, are rather stupid. They don't know it's the next frame... they just draw whatever data they're told for whatever pixel. The result is 2 frames mashed together on screen (usually along horizontal lines) which we call "vertical tearing". The reason is that this is most pronounced in vertical camera movement.

The reason for framerate limiting is it prevents your GPU(s) from drawing more than a certain number of frames per second. It's the simplest way of preventing tearing.

[Bullus]

also most monitors can't put out more than 60fps, 120fps being the top i am aware of (got an alienware one) what is the point in taxing your system when there is a physical cap to what can be displayed

i can get 150+ fps in wow, but my monitor can only ever display max 120 fps, why make those extra 30fps for no reason....

[Laize]

also most monitors can't put out more than 60fps, 120fps being the top i am aware of (got an alienware one) what is the point in taxing your system when there is a physical cap to what can be displayed

i can get 150+ fps in wow, but my monitor can only ever display max 120 fps, why make those extra 30fps for no reason....

I can already tell you you far overpaid...

But I digress. I'm not familiar with 120 Hz monitors actually displaying 120 FPS for anything but stereoscopic applications (In which case it's 2x displays at 60 Hz each).

I could be wrong, however.

[Pengalor]

You should stop noticing framerate choppiness long before you notice any tearing so why worry about limiting framerates? Past 120 is pointless. Heck, past 60 is pointless and even 30 is acceptable to some people (me included, hell, I can handle playing WoW at 20 fps without getting annoyed.)

I can see you've never played an FPS competitively >.>

[Uncle Julian]

People who tend to be really ignorant of how computers, displays, gaming and such all interact tend to be the ones to ask this question... and a simple google would provide the answer.

Say you're using a monitor with a 15 ms refresh rate. That means that monitor is refreshing itself once every 15 milliseconds or 66.7 times per second (With LCD monitors this isn't so cut and dry, however. That 15 ms refresh tends to be idealized and will likely result in a fair amount of ghosting).

Now say you have a GPU putting out 100 frames per second on a given game while the monitor is only capable of displaying 66.7 frames per second. That means that when the monitor is at the 10 ms mark for drawing its current frame (66% done) it will have received data for the next frame. Monitors, however, are rather stupid. They don't know it's the next frame... they just draw whatever data they're told for whatever pixel. The result is 2 frames mashed together on screen (usually along horizontal lines) which we call "vertical tearing". The reason is that this is most pronounced in vertical camera movement.

The reason for framerate limiting is it prevents your GPU(s) from drawing more than a certain number of frames per second. It's the simplest way of preventing tearing.

Wow I actually had no idea it worked that way hah. That's actually really interesting. So would you recommend me manually setting the framerate cap to 60, or checking the vSync option (or what if I have them both checked?) Is one way better than the another? And if so, how can I avoid the input lag which it brings along usually?

[DeltrusDisc]

I can already tell you you far overpaid...

But I digress. I'm not familiar with 120 Hz monitors actually displaying 120 FPS for anything but stereoscopic applications (In which case it's 2x displays at 60 Hz each).

I could be wrong, however.

Indeed you are wrong, proper 120Hz displays do actually display 120 fps, or in the case of when you do a 3D application, it is two different displays of 60 fps each.

This is where 240Hz comes in to get 120 fps in 3D. 240Hz is not very common yet, however.

[Deleted]

Enable vSync and Tripple Buffering, if your have significantly more fps then your monitor refresh rate. Use frame limiter as alternative, if your fps may dropp belove your refresh rate.

[Laize]

Wow I actually had no idea it worked that way hah. That's actually really interesting. So would you recommend me manually setting the framerate cap to 60, or checking the vSync option (or what if I have them both checked?) Is one way better than the another? And if so, how can I avoid the input lag which it brings along usually?

Checking Vsync will usually get data from Windows as to what the refresh rate of your monitor is and will enter that as the framerate limit. It's usually enough.

I'm afraid I don't get input lag with vsync enabled so I've never had to solve the problem myself. I do know, however, that this occurs most often in games that are ports from console (Bioshock being the worst offender according to my friends). I've not played Borderlands 2 but have never had any problems with VSync enabled in either Diablo 3 or LoL. I wouldn't blame the problem on Vsync itself, but something else.

Here's a picture of vertical tearing so you can see exactly what Vsync prevents.

http://zoneitastuces.com/wp-content/...en-tearing.png

---------- Post added 2013-01-14 at 04:09 AM ----------

Indeed you are wrong, proper 120Hz displays do actually display 120 fps, or in the case of when you do a 3D application, it is two different displays of 60 fps each.

This is where 240Hz comes in to get 120 fps in 3D. 240Hz is not very common yet, however.

Either way, buying Alienware means slapping a sticker on your forehead that starts a Price-is-Right-style game of "Guess how much I overpaid" in everyone else's heads.

[Bullus]

not like i have alienware laptop or desktop, it is a monitor...... built my system from scratch and of the choice of available 120hz monitors at the time, the alienware worked out cheaper (for better designed product) than the other 1-2 available at the time (was a code going around that gave 10 or 15 % discount or something on lcd monitors from dell)

you guys wanna pay more for inferior product cause you are scared of people thinking ya overpaid.... go ahead, i will be happily playing wow in 3D or watching the awesome trailess mouse on my desktop in 120hz

[Self Inflicted Wounds]

The info here is amazing and interesting.

[Sunshine]

Moved to computer forum.

[DeltrusDisc]

Going to vouch for Dell monitors as being some of the best in the industry (and thus Alienware) - since they tend to be calibrated LG displays, so hey, can't go wrong there and tons of enthusiasts and professionals all touting how much they love Dell's IPS displays especially is good enough for me. I don't doubt for a minute they can make a good 120Hz display and I doubt he paid too much more for the Alienware, honestly.

[Cyanotical]

I can already tell you you far overpaid...

Dell has some of the best monitors on the market, so........

[BicycleMafioso]

I can already tell you you far overpaid...

Alienware-branded 120Hz monitors are some of the best out there.

[ThatCanadianGuy]

The human eye sees a maximum of 60 FPS. Most of the time we see about 20-30 FPS.

Why make your PC work harder if it is 100% pointless?

At least that's what I've been told.