Support NeoGAF

[OverHeat]

For me it’s 240 I don’t see a difference pass that. What’s yours?

 

[tusharngf]

120fps

 

[TintoConCasera]

60 for most games.
144 for fast paced first-person shooters like DOOM Eternal.

 

[Xyphie]

~100 is when it feels smooth for me. Can definitely see the difference at higher though.

 

[LazyParrot]

60 with a controller, 144 using MKB.

 

[AV]

Had a 165 before and could tell the difference between my current 120, but honestly this is fine.

I specifically bought a 4k120 OLED for my PC because it'll be a very long time before I can run new games at that spec no sweat.

 

[kikkis]

60. I notice 120 when going back to 60 but I very used to it get quickly and nothing bothers me.

 

[Warnen]

60 is great anything over 120 is hard for me to tell

 

[Schmendrick]

144,.
Past that I don`t really see a difference anymore unless we`re talking really fast paced twitch shooters like Q3A.

 

[Euler007]

60 with VRR. Frame times are noticeable when they double, not when they vary for a millisecond.

 

[DryvBy]

I don't really see a difference in 120fps from 60fps as much as I feel it. But it's not going to kill me to stick with 60 either.

 

[hemo memo]

60 is great for most games for me. Anything above 120 for me is hard to point out.

 

[YCoCg]

Depends on the display, I could tell the difference slightly on LCD between 240 and 360, but with OLED 240 was looked better and I couldn't see a difference between OLED 240 and 360.

 

[Scotty W]

60 had some rough edges, but I’d say at about 85 it is almost imperceptible, and by 100 it’s perfect.

 

[Danknugz]

60 because i only have at most 60hz panels and can't be bothered otherwise, saves money tooX maybe someday i'll jump to 60+ and i know 120 fps looks better but i'm fine.

 

[Belthazar]

It's 60 for me. 120fps does feel better, but not enough to sacrifice anything else for. But when I can play a game with everything at maximum quality + 120fps I certainly do.

 

[Heisenberg007]

I can notice the difference between 60 and 120, but 60 is (mostly) enough for me.

 

[Magic Carpet]

the quest 3 feels better at 120 than 90.
but I need to experience a VR helmet with more than 120 to know if more is better or not.

 

[reinking]

Once I get past 60 I do not notice as much as long as it is a steady frame rate. I find an unsteady frame rate to be more of an issue.

 

[OverHeat]

This thread is brought to you by your local optometrist

 

[Three]

I've tested this on my 240fps monitor and honestly I think most normal people couldn't tell the difference above 30fps in a test. At least people who are not playing competitively. So I would say there is diminishing returns even above 30 for most people. I've not experienced anything above 240fps myself but I would say for me personally 60fps is the sweet spot. Especially when trying to hit 240fps means compromising on something else more noticeable.

 

[NT80]

The difference between 30 and 60 is always very noticeable and makes a huge impact. I've only tried a little bit of 120fps and though the difference from 60 is noticeable it's nowhere near as much as going from 30 to 60.

 

[Soodanim]

As much as I can tell the difference going from 144 back to 60, 60 is fine.

Around 90 is where I stop being able to tell at a glance what fps something is.

 

[SpokkX]

With a controller 60fps is 100% fine. Anything above is noticable, but it does not really affect the feel of the game much

With a mouse and keyboard controls 120fps is really preferable though - 60fps feels a bit rough then

... 30fps feels like shit no matter the controller

 

[alphachino]

Just got a 240hz OLED. still waiting on delivery. I believe that will be good enough until 960hz in 2030

 

[ReBurn]

I never really think about it unless the game slows down

 

[Kilau]

I limit my PC to 60fps so I can enjoy console games still. I don't want to be chasing that dragon.

 

[Shodai]

120

 

[Ev1L AuRoN]

Visually I think 120hz is fluid enough, as for control response 280hz is the sweet spot for me (playing twitch shooters online on KB and M)

Technically, we can decouple display hz with framerate, Example: Using fastsync on Nvidia I can play a game with 300+ fps getting that crisp response time and having my 144hz monitor maxed out without any tearing or stutter.

 

[BennyBlanco]

Anything over 120 i barely notice. Going from 60 —-> 90 on the oled steam deck is very noticeable imo.

 

[captainpat]

Anything after 120fps is really hard to perceive irl gaming conditions. Like using this test ufo site. I can definitely see the difference between 120fps and 240fps but in an actually game I wouldn't be able to see unless you have two monitors running the game simultaneously.

 

[OverHeat]

The poor soul who voted for 30fps…@rofif is that you? Lol

 

[Diddy X]

30 is way too low fps no matter the game, 60 is where decent fluidity begins but still lacks fps to display fast movement correctly, 120 fps is pretty smooth for any circumstances, I also tried 144 and I don't think there is a big difference from 120, I'm fine here I don't believe I need more fps than that.

 

[Clear]

Sorry but the jump from 30-60 is vastly more noticeable than 60-120, so the tipping point for diminishing returns visually is definitely quite low.

 

[Borowski_1]

69

 

[Zathalus]

60fps is fine, but I can feel and see the difference up to 240fps. Not sure about higher, I've never owner a monitor that can go higher.

 

[OverHeat]

69

Naughty naughty

 

[StueyDuck]

Infinity frames...

It's not even conceivable

 

[twilo99]

One could tell by the results that most people here play single player games.

 

[Quasicat]

I bought an LG which does 120fps, which my friends noticed the difference from what they have at home. My neighbor has an OLED monitor that goes higher than 120, but I couldn’t see the difference between it and mine.

 

[Topher]

60 makes most games playable. 120 is the sweet spot for me though. Beyond that, can't tell the difference unless MSI afterburner tells me there is one. lol

 

[zeroluck]

On my ultrawide OLED there is an noticeable jump in clarity going from 144 to 175, while 60 to 144 is meh because the persistent blur is still there

 

[OverHeat]

60 makes most games playable. 120 is the sweet spot for me though. Beyond that, can't tell the difference unless MSI afterburner tells me there is one. lol

The framerate counter that keep me upgrading

 

[Skitso]

For fast paced m/kb shooters and virtual pinball, 240. Everything else, 144.

 

[Hrk69]

Everything above 90 is barely noticeable to me

 

[dave_d]

I will stick with what I always say. If it updates like it's a CRT with technologies like rolling scan (which would probably require at least 1000hz) then 60fps for the content is fine for motion clarity. (It would also mean it wouldn't require huge computing resources to hit that frame rate.)

 

[ssringo]

30fps is playable but almost always annoying even if I can get used to it.
~45fps is the point where a lower framerate stops bothering me.
60fps is the point where going higher doesn't do as much for me and has been my target fps for a long, long time. I don't really play games where microseconds of reaction matter.

I can tell the difference, visually, up into the 90-120 range and can feel the difference up to at least 144. Regardless of framerate I can tell when it's unstable or has drops of more than a few fps even if it doesn't bother me that much.

 

[Guilty_AI]

Only have a 60hz monitor so i can't tell anything above that, nor do i ever felt the need to.

 

[Pallas]

I can tell the difference between 30FPS and 60fps, anything above I can’t say since my experience has been minimum. So I’ll have to say 60FPS.

 

[Thick Thighs Save Lives]

80 - 100 with a controller, and 120 - 165 with m&kb.