Forum Discussion
RaginSam
3 years agoSeasoned Ace
@N00bdeagle I’ll check it out. From my understanding it’s always best to limit FPS within the game though. It would still be beneficial to have an option in game.
3 years ago
@RaginSam i wouldnt knock back an ingame option - but setting it at driver level is even better.
- OskooI_0073 years agoSeasoned Ace
Driver level fps limiters add 1 frame of lag compared to in-game fps limiters.
- GrizzGolf3 years agoSeasoned Ace
Why limit the FPS?
- RaginSam3 years agoSeasoned Ace
@GrizzGolf wrote:Why limit the FPS?
For a couple of reasons. With Gsync you’re supposed to lock the FPS slightly under the refresh rate of your monitor. The other is for a more consistent feel to the game and run it where your hardware can keep up. No point in running 200 FPS if you’re monitor is only 144hz.
There’s some exceptions like with the Source engine where FPS can effect the mouse input? This may be a factor for pros, otherwise probably not that big of a deal.
- RaginSam3 years agoSeasoned Ace@N00bdeagle It’s not better to do that at the “driver” level. The game is sending information, then it gets processed after, which actually adds latency. It’s not a driver thing.
- 3 years ago@RaginSam my understanding was
Kernel -> driver -> application so driver should be less latency but its not adding enough that you should be really concerned with it.
gsync shouldnt require you do do any thing locking fps under refresh rate was a trick to stop tearing and not use vsync , gsync and free sync have removed this issue but limiting fps is still good to save power.
- 3 years ago@N00bdeagle No, it is not better to set it in the driver, as it gives more input latency vs capping fps within the game itself...
About Battlefield 2042 General Discussion
Discuss the latest news and game information around Battlefield 2042 in the community forums.15,985 PostsLatest Activity: 22 days ago
Recent Discussions
- 3 hours ago
- 7 hours ago