Fixated on fps?

TDK1044 · 08-03-07, 10:53 AM

I read a lot of posts here that talk about what fps people are getting with SH4, and I can't help wondering why people are so fixated with fps instead of how the game looks and plays on their system?

I have a mid range system, and I had no idea what my fps was...nor did I care. I run with the event camera disabled because I don't like it, and I disabled volumetric fog for the same reason once the option was there to do so.

I run with patch 1.3 and TM 1.4 and a few other mods. I have 8X AA and 8X AF selected, and the game runs like a dream and looks stunning. If I hit Ctrl F8, I see that I get between 27fps and 40fps on the exteior camera views and a much higher fps within the sub.

The point is that when I'm playing the game, I have no idea when I'm seeing 27fps and when I'm seeing 40fps.

It's true that if I had a low end system delivering less than 20fps, then a video card upgrade could be an issue, but I can't help thinking that someone is happily playing and enjoying SH4, only to discover that he's getting an fps figure lower than he'd like, so he goes and invests in a new video card. If nobody had told him how to check his fps, he'd have been quite happy with the game the way it was.

A friend at work has SH4, and an all singing all dancing $3000 computer system to go with it. He has two powerful Nvidia cards driving his system, and I swear that SH4 looks and plays only marginally better on his system.....the main reason being his 30' wide screen monitor.

He's proud of his 88fps, and I don't have the heart to tell him it looks just like my game only on a better monitor.

I understand that RAM, CPU, Processor and video card all play a part in the gaming experience, but I think there's an element of 'the Emporer's new clothes' with this fps issue.

Don't let fps drive your decision regarding your video card, let your eyes be the judge.

SteamWake · 08-03-07, 11:02 AM

Pulls out a ruler and gestures towards his crotch :p

TDK1044 · 08-03-07, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteamWake

Pulls out a ruler and gestures towards his crotch :p

:rotfl:

AVGWarhawk · 08-03-07, 11:18 AM

I agree with the FPS deal. I never really bothered with it until I started looking at it and attempting to get more performance. I was perfectly happy with my game play and smoothness. Now I have turned into a FPS lunatic...tweaks, turn this on, turn that off......

Now I spend more time attempting to get better FPS than actually playing

. It has become more of a addiction than anything. My game plays at 20 FPS on outside view and I'm happy with that. Yet, in the back of my mind is always the question....will a better graphics card really make it better with the current system I have? One can only open the checkbook to find out. Unfortunate they only give you so many checks to write

Popeye the Sailorman · 08-03-07, 11:27 AM

FPS doesn't mean a thing to me, either. But what *DOES* is that miserably slow, laggy, cursor that I try SO hard to put where I want it... when running full graphics, wide open! It is Live-With-Able when I run full graphics and only 1024 Res... which is the way I am running...

Schunken · 08-03-07, 11:53 AM

The only things FPS matters to me is:

1. Flight Simulation (is a rubbish to land a 747 with 8 FPS....)

2. Car racing games (is crappy go into braking zone with 8 FPS)

but... I always adjust for 22-24 FPS... If I get more I use it to add eye candy... everything more than 22 FPS is perfect for me

In outside view of SH4 I be also happy with 15....it looks still smooth...

Andreas

SteamWake · 08-03-07, 11:54 AM

The only time I get cursor stutters is when the game is first loaded and at high rates of time compression.

Also the first time I change screens to say the exterior view it takes much longer to load. But after that first time there is little or no delay.

cali03boss · 08-03-07, 03:33 PM

Why we are so fixated on fps rather than how the game looks?

Is that seriously a question?

FPS has a LOT to do with how the game looks and plays. Missed frame rates can even damage your monitor if you have an old one.

Specifically, searching for the perfect fps is searching for a way to play the game in the speed the designers made it for. Playing it with a sub-standard fps not only limits you in time, but also in calculations. Aside from sitting on your nav map which has perfect fps, some people (like me) like to do their calculations from the bridge, with a pencil and paper. You cannot do this with a sub-standard frame rate since all your calculations will be off by certain half-seconds.

I've seen way too many times on this board guys just talking about their low fps, or low graphics so they simply 'upgrade' to a new video card. There is way more to getting good graphics than just a video card. First of all, motherboards can only support a certain transfer of information at each port (PCI or AGP). AGP has lasted so long because its transfer rate is so high that you can use the same motherboard and upgrade video cards for years. PCI-express is much different (which I assume most of you have). According to Ubisoft, all of their PC games require a minimum of a 500 motherboard chipset. The latest out right now is 690i. If volumetric fog is too harsh on your fps, or makes your crewmembers transparent...then its your MOTHERBOARD. SH4's volumetric fog may be DENSE(and thus require a high transfer speed), but it is not anymore complex than just pixilated dots(in other words...the video card has no problem rendering the fog....its the transfer speed that kills the fps).

SH4 was designed on multi-core machines and tested on intel quad cores with the latest SLI nvidia technology. If you want it to run perfect, you'll need a multi core machine with high ram, high bus transfer speed, and a MINIMUM of one 512mb video card.

SteamWake · 08-03-07, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cali03boss

Why we are so fixated on fps rather than how the game looks?

Is that seriously a question?

FPS has a LOT to do with how the game looks and plays. Missed frame rates can even damage your monitor if you have an old one.

Specifically, searching for the perfect fps is searching for a way to play the game in the speed the designers made it for. Playing it with a sub-standard fps not only limits you in time, but also in calculations. Aside from sitting on your nav map which has perfect fps, some people (like me) like to do their calculations from the bridge, with a pencil and paper. You cannot do this with a sub-standard frame rate since all your calculations will be off by certain half-seconds.

I think your missing the point.

Lets say you get 45 fps and I get 36. Chances are you would never really notice the difference but you CAN say you get higher fps.

Some folks will spend hundreds shoot thousands of dollars and hour after hour trying to get there fps from 32 to 40. Again you probably would not even 'see' the difference but you CAN say you get higher fps.

Personally if the game looks good plays smoothly Im happy and could care less what the actual fps is.

That being said if I do get a low fps and end up with stutters it drives me absolutly nuts.

cali03boss · 08-03-07, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Lets say you get 45 fps and I get 36. Chances are you would never really notice the difference but you CAN say you get higher fps.

oh is that a fact? And are you running 1080p widescreen HD?

If you are, then I'm surprised you don't note a difference.

If you aren't...then there you go.

longam · 08-03-07, 03:45 PM

It seems this all started with that 3d test program that everyone use to DL and brag about what there FPS where. I have a friend online that went insane buying the latest and greatest to get better results.

At this same time FPS (first person shooters) were becoming popular and the boasting of 90 FPS in game was funny considering the game engine compared to simulators.

cali03boss · 08-03-07, 03:48 PM

SH4 is notorious (and SH3) for its ghosting in HD.

Some may say its overkill to play sh4 in HD.....but.....i look at some of your guys' screen shots and just gag.

AVGWarhawk · 08-03-07, 03:51 PM

Quote:

You cannot do this with a sub-standard frame rate since all your calculations will be off by certain half-seconds.

How do you ascertain that you will lose a half second when all activity is stopping and starting?

Quote:

Some may say its overkill to play sh4 in HD.....but.....i look at some of your guys' screen shots and just gag.

Sorry that some do not have the equipment to satisfy your eye. Quite honestly the target FPS is 25. Basically any more is a waste for the human brain to really notice. If you can notice a difference from 35-45 FPS...what is your home planet? I certainly can not tell a difference. My rig handles 19-25 FPS on the bridge and it plays smoothly. Seriously, 100 FPS is not necessary for the brain to process uninterupted frames.

cali03boss · 08-03-07, 03:56 PM

Well my frame rate never gets THAT low. I meant the loss of time from a moderately low fps....like 20-25.

The main problem is the firing of torpedos you have configured for a certain speed. The clicking of 'fire torpedo' takes WAY too long in low frame rates to process the information completely and then successfully fire the torpedo.

...not to mention if during this period of rush time (since you have to work faster to calculate more times) you may forget to open the tube doors...and crapola.

FooFighters · 08-03-07, 04:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TDK1044

I read a lot of posts here that talk about what fps people are getting with SH4, and I can't help wondering why people are so fixated with fps instead of how the game looks and plays on their system?

I have a mid range system, and I had no idea what my fps was...nor did I care. I run with the event camera disabled because I don't like it, and I disabled volumetric fog for the same reason once the option was there to do so.

I run with patch 1.3 and TM 1.4 and a few other mods. I have 8X AA and 8X AF selected, and the game runs like a dream and looks stunning. If I hit Ctrl F8, I see that I get between 27fps and 40fps on the exteior camera views and a much higher fps within the sub.

The point is that when I'm playing the game, I have no idea when I'm seeing 27fps and when I'm seeing 40fps.

It's true that if I had a low end system delivering less than 20fps, then a video card upgrade could be an issue, but I can't help thinking that someone is happily playing and enjoying SH4, only to discover that he's getting an fps figure lower than he'd like, so he goes and invests in a new video card. If nobody had told him how to check his fps, he'd have been quite happy with the game the way it was.

A friend at work has SH4, and an all singing all dancing $3000 computer system to go with it. He has two powerful Nvidia cards driving his system, and I swear that SH4 looks and plays only marginally better on his system.....the main reason being his 30' wide screen monitor.

He's proud of his 88fps, and I don't have the heart to tell him it looks just like my game only on a better monitor.

I understand that RAM, CPU, Processor and video card all play a part in the gaming experience, but I think there's an element of 'the Emporer's new clothes' with this fps issue.

Don't let fps drive your decision regarding your video card, let your eyes be the judge.

I am looking for a new graphic card.. and yes a high fps would be nice.
But the main reason I want one is that TM1.4 (incl. leo's oceon mod) dropped my fps and now I have light stuttering..

That's pretty annoying..

08-03-07, 10:53 AM	#1
TDK1044 Ocean Warrior Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Georgia, USA Posts: 2,674 Downloads: 25 Uploads: 0	Fixated on fps? I read a lot of posts here that talk about what fps people are getting with SH4, and I can't help wondering why people are so fixated with fps instead of how the game looks and plays on their system? I have a mid range system, and I had no idea what my fps was...nor did I care. I run with the event camera disabled because I don't like it, and I disabled volumetric fog for the same reason once the option was there to do so. I run with patch 1.3 and TM 1.4 and a few other mods. I have 8X AA and 8X AF selected, and the game runs like a dream and looks stunning. If I hit Ctrl F8, I see that I get between 27fps and 40fps on the exteior camera views and a much higher fps within the sub. The point is that when I'm playing the game, I have no idea when I'm seeing 27fps and when I'm seeing 40fps. It's true that if I had a low end system delivering less than 20fps, then a video card upgrade could be an issue, but I can't help thinking that someone is happily playing and enjoying SH4, only to discover that he's getting an fps figure lower than he'd like, so he goes and invests in a new video card. If nobody had told him how to check his fps, he'd have been quite happy with the game the way it was. A friend at work has SH4, and an all singing all dancing $3000 computer system to go with it. He has two powerful Nvidia cards driving his system, and I swear that SH4 looks and plays only marginally better on his system.....the main reason being his 30' wide screen monitor. He's proud of his 88fps, and I don't have the heart to tell him it looks just like my game only on a better monitor. I understand that RAM, CPU, Processor and video card all play a part in the gaming experience, but I think there's an element of 'the Emporer's new clothes' with this fps issue. Don't let fps drive your decision regarding your video card, let your eyes be the judge.

08-03-07, 11:18 AM	#4
AVGWarhawk Lucky Jack Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: In a 1954 Buick. Posts: 28,253 Downloads: 90 Uploads: 0	I agree with the FPS deal. I never really bothered with it until I started looking at it and attempting to get more performance. I was perfectly happy with my game play and smoothness. Now I have turned into a FPS lunatic...tweaks, turn this on, turn that off...... Now I spend more time attempting to get better FPS than actually playing. It has become more of a addiction than anything. My game plays at 20 FPS on outside view and I'm happy with that. Yet, in the back of my mind is always the question....will a better graphics card really make it better with the current system I have? One can only open the checkbook to find out. Unfortunate they only give you so many checks to write __________________ “You're painfully alive in a drugged and dying culture.” ― Richard Yates, Revolutionary Road

08-03-07, 03:33 PM	#8
cali03boss Machinist's Mate Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	Why we are so fixated on fps rather than how the game looks? Is that seriously a question? FPS has a LOT to do with how the game looks and plays. Missed frame rates can even damage your monitor if you have an old one. Specifically, searching for the perfect fps is searching for a way to play the game in the speed the designers made it for. Playing it with a sub-standard fps not only limits you in time, but also in calculations. Aside from sitting on your nav map which has perfect fps, some people (like me) like to do their calculations from the bridge, with a pencil and paper. You cannot do this with a sub-standard frame rate since all your calculations will be off by certain half-seconds. I've seen way too many times on this board guys just talking about their low fps, or low graphics so they simply 'upgrade' to a new video card. There is way more to getting good graphics than just a video card. First of all, motherboards can only support a certain transfer of information at each port (PCI or AGP). AGP has lasted so long because its transfer rate is so high that you can use the same motherboard and upgrade video cards for years. PCI-express is much different (which I assume most of you have). According to Ubisoft, all of their PC games require a minimum of a 500 motherboard chipset. The latest out right now is 690i. If volumetric fog is too harsh on your fps, or makes your crewmembers transparent...then its your MOTHERBOARD. SH4's volumetric fog may be DENSE(and thus require a high transfer speed), but it is not anymore complex than just pixilated dots(in other words...the video card has no problem rendering the fog....its the transfer speed that kills the fps). SH4 was designed on multi-core machines and tested on intel quad cores with the latest SLI nvidia technology. If you want it to run perfect, you'll need a multi core machine with high ram, high bus transfer speed, and a MINIMUM of one 512mb video card. __________________ Sargo Class USS Sargo Last edited by cali03boss; 08-03-07 at 03:44 PM.

08-03-07, 03:48 PM	#12
cali03boss Machinist's Mate Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	SH4 is notorious (and SH3) for its ghosting in HD. Some may say its overkill to play sh4 in HD.....but.....i look at some of your guys' screen shots and just gag. __________________ Sargo Class USS Sargo

08-03-07, 03:56 PM	#14
cali03boss Machinist's Mate Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 123 Downloads: 1 Uploads: 0	Well my frame rate never gets THAT low. I meant the loss of time from a moderately low fps....like 20-25. The main problem is the firing of torpedos you have configured for a certain speed. The clicking of 'fire torpedo' takes WAY too long in low frame rates to process the information completely and then successfully fire the torpedo. ...not to mention if during this period of rush time (since you have to work faster to calculate more times) you may forget to open the tube doors...and crapola. __________________ Sargo Class USS Sargo

08-03-07, 11:02 AM	#2
SteamWake Rear Admiral Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 13,224 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	Pulls out a ruler and gestures towards his crotch :p

08-03-07, 11:27 AM	#5
Popeye the Sailorman Swabbie Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	FPS doesn't mean a thing to me, either. But what DOES is that miserably slow, laggy, cursor that I try SO hard to put where I want it... when running full graphics, wide open! It is Live-With-Able when I run full graphics and only 1024 Res... which is the way I am running...

08-03-07, 11:53 AM	#6
Schunken Medic Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 168 Downloads: 20 Uploads: 0	The only things FPS matters to me is: 1. Flight Simulation (is a rubbish to land a 747 with 8 FPS....) 2. Car racing games (is crappy go into braking zone with 8 FPS) but... I always adjust for 22-24 FPS... If I get more I use it to add eye candy... everything more than 22 FPS is perfect for me In outside view of SH4 I be also happy with 15....it looks still smooth... Andreas

08-03-07, 11:54 AM	#7
SteamWake Rear Admiral Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 13,224 Downloads: 5 Uploads: 0	The only time I get cursor stutters is when the game is first loaded and at high rates of time compression. Also the first time I change screens to say the exterior view it takes much longer to load. But after that first time there is little or no delay.

08-03-07, 03:45 PM	#11
longam Admiral Join Date: Jun 2005 Posts: 2,014 Downloads: 26 Uploads: 0	It seems this all started with that 3d test program that everyone use to DL and brag about what there FPS where. I have a friend online that went insane buying the latest and greatest to get better results. At this same time FPS (first person shooters) were becoming popular and the boasting of 90 FPS in game was funny considering the game engine compared to simulators.