FPS cap limit on a 144hz monitor? (2024)

#1

psychedelic

0 Frags+

just wonder what should i cap my fps to with a 144hz monitor.

just wonder what should i cap my fps to with a 144hz monitor.

posted about 3 years ago

#2

yungsally

1 Frags+

double +1 usually

double +1 usually

posted about 3 years ago

#3

JarateKing

18 Frags+

if you don't have anything fancy like gsync and you don't worry about overheating, uncapped will always give the least latency

any magic number (like x2 or x2+1) is based off the misconception that your frame renders will roughly line up with your monitor refreshes. They don't, and even a stable capped fps has very inconsistent frame times (they just average out to slightly below the cap, but individual frames can vary significantly), so you're gimping it unnecessarily.

Now if you do worry about overheating, or you really want a consistent capped fps for some reason, anything above 144 will be mostly fine, though increasing it higher as long as it's stable is generally better.

if you don't have anything fancy like gsync and you don't worry about overheating, uncapped will always give the least latency

any magic number (like x2 or x2+1) is based off the misconception that your frame renders will roughly line up with your monitor refreshes. They don't, and even a stable capped fps has very inconsistent frame times (they just average out to slightly below the cap, but individual frames can vary significantly), so you're gimping it unnecessarily.

Now if you do worry about overheating, or you really want a consistent capped fps for some reason, anything above 144 will be mostly fine, though increasing it higher as long as it's stable is generally better.

posted about 3 years ago

#5

mastercoms

5 Frags+

keep in mind that as your fps goes up, 1 frame increases mean less and less for the actual time latency

for example, a 60 fps cap vs 90 fps cap (30 fps difference) gets you 5ms less latency, while 144 vs 174 gets you 1ms

also, i would recommend having the highest stable cap you can get, so you have fairly consistent time steps of polling the mouse and such, while still having pretty low latency

keep in mind that as your fps goes up, 1 frame increases mean less and less for the actual time latency

for example, a 60 fps cap vs 90 fps cap (30 fps difference) gets you 5ms less latency, while 144 vs 174 gets you 1ms

also, i would recommend having the highest stable cap you can get, so you have fairly consistent time steps of polling the mouse and such, while still having pretty low latency

posted about 3 years agoedited about 3 years ago

#6

ScrewB

1 Frags+

Cap at like 800. The only reason to have a cap at all is to prevent the game from glitching out at extremely high frame rates. Otherwise the more frames the better.

Cap at like 800. The only reason to have a cap at all is to prevent the game from glitching out at extremely high frame rates. Otherwise the more frames the better.

posted about 3 years ago

#7

mastercoms

7 Frags+

Alright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.

HOWEVER, the way fps_max waits between frames seems to be horribly inefficient.

I think you should cap this to a high value that you don't reach, lower values are better (because it affects load times and in menus FPS, causing lots of power usage and frame spam).

Alright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.

HOWEVER, the way fps_max waits between frames seems to be horribly inefficient.

I think you should cap this to a high value that you don't reach, lower values are better (because it affects load times and in menus FPS, causing lots of power usage and frame spam).

posted about 3 years agoedited about 3 years ago

#8

insom

-3 Frags+

mastercomsAlright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.

HOWEVER, the way fps_max waits between frames seems to be horribly inefficient.

I think you should cap this to a high value that you don't reach, lower values are better (because it affects load times and in menus FPS, causing lots of power usage and frame spam).

so, is fps capped or uncapped better

[quote=mastercoms]Alright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.

HOWEVER, the way fps_max waits between frames seems to be horribly inefficient.

I think you should cap this to a high value that you don't reach, lower values are better (because it affects load times and in menus FPS, causing lots of power usage and frame spam).[/quote]
so, is fps capped or uncapped better

posted about 3 years ago

#9

hooli

6 Frags+

what part of 'cap to a high value that you don't reach' don't you understand

what part of 'cap to a high value that you don't reach' don't you understand

posted about 3 years ago

#10

JarateKing

4 Frags+

mastercomsAlright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.

Mastercoms and I discussed this a bit and experimented with it, and I figure it'd be worth sharing results here. I went as far as writing a program to roughly mirror what tf2's fps_max does (same method for frame limiting, but no frame logic or threading or anything like that). The model could be improved to be more accurate, but it's good enough to tell if frames are consistent or not.

Compared to the expected frametime from fps_max, individual frametimes would vary anywhere from ~3ms slower (under cap) to ~1ms faster (above cap). Over time, these would average out to slightly lower than fps_max (<1ms under). These numbers depend on a few things (what you set fps_max to does change these a bit, for one), but it's a significant variation in any case.

This is alright for most of fps_max's uses, since most of the time you don't really care about this variation. But monitors absolutely do, especially when you're talking about "matching frames to monitor refreshes." fps_max 2x or 2x+1 is based off this idea, and the idea doesn't work out in reality.

TLDR: fps_max isn't consistent enough for monitors, don't use 2x / 2x+1 or any other fps_max based off your monitor refresh rate. Mastercom's advice of being slightly higher than you can get ingame is what you should follow.

CBTCap at like 800. The only reason to have a cap at all is to prevent the game from glitching out at extremely high frame rates. Otherwise the more frames the better.

You just need to keep your fps below 1000, so you can go closer than 800. I don't know the details of the problem since I've never gotten close to 1000 fps, but it might already be fixed, or it might still be a problem with the variations mentioned above (so something like 997 might be safest).

As mastercoms mentioned a bit, your load times are affected by your fps_max -- things load faster if they have to spend less time re-rendering menus. Ideally there'd be another fps_max for menus (like in csgo and dota) but there isn't anything like that in tf2 currently.

[quote=mastercoms]Alright, I looked more into this. fps_max DOES produce a consistent frametime. It waits in between frames to get to the desired frametime.[/quote]
Mastercoms and I discussed this a bit and experimented with it, and I figure it'd be worth sharing results here. I went as far as writing a program to roughly mirror what tf2's fps_max does (same method for frame limiting, but no frame logic or threading or anything like that). The model could be improved to be more accurate, but it's good enough to tell if frames are consistent or not.

Compared to the expected frametime from fps_max, individual frametimes would vary anywhere from ~3ms slower (under cap) to ~1ms faster (above cap). Over time, these would average out to slightly lower than fps_max (<1ms under). These numbers depend on a few things (what you set fps_max to does change these a bit, for one), but it's a significant variation in any case.

This is alright for most of fps_max's uses, since most of the time you don't really care about this variation. But monitors absolutely do, especially when you're talking about "matching frames to monitor refreshes." fps_max 2x or 2x+1 is based off this idea, and the idea doesn't work out in reality.

[b]TLDR:[/b] fps_max isn't consistent enough for monitors, don't use 2x / 2x+1 or any other fps_max based off your monitor refresh rate. Mastercom's advice of being slightly higher than you can get ingame is what you should follow.[quote=CBT]Cap at like 800. The only reason to have a cap at all is to prevent the game from glitching out at extremely high frame rates. Otherwise the more frames the better.[/quote]
You just need to keep your fps below 1000, so you can go closer than 800. I don't know the details of the problem since I've never gotten close to 1000 fps, but it might already be fixed, or it might still be a problem with the variations mentioned above (so something like 997 might be safest).

As mastercoms mentioned a bit, your load times are affected by your fps_max -- things load faster if they have to spend less time re-rendering menus. Ideally there'd be another fps_max for menus (like in csgo and dota) but there isn't anything like that in tf2 currently.

posted about 3 years ago

#11

hooli

1 Frags+

thanks JarateKing, your posts are always informative and you make some really cool stuff

thanks JarateKing, your posts are always informative and you make some really cool stuff

posted about 3 years ago

FPS cap limit on a 144hz monitor? (2024)

FAQs

What is the best FPS limit for a 144Hz monitor? ›

Ideally, you'll want the game's frame rate to match the monitor's refresh rate 1:1 for an ideal experience. For example, your system should be outputting 144 FPS to get the full benefit of a 144Hz monitor.

Should I cap FPS to monitor Hz? ›

If you cap your frame rate to your monitor's refresh rate, you'll likely notice some minor hitching in your game. It's not bad to cap. It keeps your silicon cooler, helping with longevity of parts and reducing fan noise. Are FPS and refresh rates both the same?

Can my 144Hz monitor run 240 FPS? ›

Yes , you can get 240 fps on a 144HZ monitor.. Simple answer: Yes, but 96 of the FPS will be wasted. The monitor can only display 144 FPS, but your game can run at 240FPS, it isn't a problem. FPS is given by the GPU - yes you can get 240 in the screen.”

Can you get 500 FPS on a 144Hz monitor? ›

The monitor can't display more frames per second than its refresh rate. So a 144 Hz monitor can never show more than 144 full frames per second, just as a 60 Hz monitor can't show more than 60 FPS.

Is a 144Hz monitor worth it for 60FPS? ›

Answer: If you're playing competitive games, a 144Hz gaming monitor is definitely worth it. Not only does it provide you with a more enjoyable and responsive gaming experience, but you also get an advantage over your opponents who have regular 60Hz displays.

Can you play 200 FPS on 144Hz? ›

At 200 FPS and 144Hz, especially when the frames per second vary, you will get frame tearing and a variable high usage on the GPU. Ideally, this would give you a slight decrease in input lag. But in practice, it often ends up worse than a locked rate. Also, screen tearing can be distracting and confusing to watch.

Should I cap my FPS on 144 Hz monitor? ›

The only reason to have a cap at all is to prevent the game from glitching out at extremely high frame rates. Otherwise the more frames the better. You just need to keep your fps below 1000, so you can go closer than 800.

Does limiting FPS increase performance? ›

While many gamers aspire to achieve high FPS, limiting FPS on your gaming PC can actually enhance your overall gaming experience.

Does limiting FPS reduce input lag? ›

Not really. All v-sync does is cap the amount of frames being output by your computer to match the refresh of the monitor it is attached to. That also however depends on the way that the cap is achieved. Either through simple limiting of fps, or additionally through frame-skipping.

Is 240 fps overkill? ›

The first thing to remember about monitor refresh rate is that there's no such thing as overkill. So no, 240Hz isn't “too fast”. Remember, there are 360Hz and faster monitors out there, but we think 240Hz is becoming the new sweet spot for higher refresh rate.

Is 144Hz vs 240Hz noticeable? ›

In short, 240Hz makes fast-paced gaming incredibly smooth and fluid. However, keep in mind that the jump from 144Hz to 240Hz is not nearly as noticeable as going from 60Hz to 144Hz.

How much FPS do you need for 240Hz? ›

Ideally, you'll want to output at a frame rate of 240 FPS, though dips into the low 200s aren't a problem with G-Sync or FreeSync turned on. Playing a game at 60 FPS on a 240Hz monitor is not a problem, but won't be much smoother or more responsive than a quality 60Hz monitor.

How many FPS can the eye see? ›

Some experts will tell you that the human eye can see between 30 and 60 frames per second. Some maintain that it's not really possible for the human eye to perceive more than 60 frames per second.

What's the highest FPS monitor? ›

Introducing the monitor with the world's fastest refresh rate of 500Hzi, the Alienware 500Hz Gaming Monitor (AW2524H), a CES 2023 Innovation Award and Best of Innovation winner, delivers the world-class speed today's champions demand.

What is the minimum requirements for 144Hz? ›

For 1080p 144Hz you will need DisplayPort, Dual-Link DVI, or HDMI 1.3 (or higher), while 1440p 144Hz requires either HDMI 2.0 or DisplayPort 1.2. This author has been vetted and has the necessary know-how or education to be able to write about this topic. Learn more on our about page.

Is 144Hz vs 165Hz noticeable? ›

The difference between the two refresh rates is small, so a GPU that handles 144Hz will do 165Hz with little difficulty. This applies in particular to 1080p. As a rule, while 144Hz is fine on 165Hz, it's still better to set everything as close to the native specs of the monitor as possible.

Why 60fps feels choppy on 144Hz? ›

Judder occurs when the frame rate of your game can't be evenly divided by your monitor's refresh rate. So, in this case 60 fps can't be evenly divided by a 144hz monitor but a 120hz could do it perfectly. When this happens some frames are shown for longer than others and this is what causes the choppiness in the image.

Is 144Hz worth it for casual gaming? ›

Overall Better Performance. No matter how you game, you'll notice faster, smoother performance from 144Hz monitors. That applies to casual gamers or general hobbyists, not just pro gamers and Esports athletes.

Is 144Hz enough for Esports? ›

Summing up, we can say that a 144Hz (or higher) setup gives you a much smoother and responsive image, as well as a more direct and responsive connection to the game. This is an invaluable advantage if you're playing competitive games.

Does 144Hz affect aim? ›

If you have a 60 Hz monitor, our data indicates that upgrading to a 144 Hz monitor could improve your aiming significantly: 20% for stationary targets and 30% for moving targets! The jump from 144 Hz to 280 Hz produced a smaller, although still noticeable, improvement.

What are the disadvantages of 144Hz? ›

  • Lower battery life than 60Hz standard refresh rate.
  • Some phones force the scaling down of resolution to use high refresh. This is to keep battery life respectably high. In a way, you need to choose between high refresh and high resolution.
  • GPU needs to work harder so phone May heat up more when using 120Hz.

Should I use 144Hz or 60Hz for FPS? ›

Answer: For undemanding competitive games where you can easily reach around 144FPS, a 144Hz monitor is the way to go. If you care more about better graphics and visuals, and you mainly play new games, getting a 60Hz monitor with a better panel or a higher resolution may be a better route for you.

Does too much FPS cause lag? ›

High fps is desirable because it can make your games look smoother, more realistic, and more immersive. High fps can also reduce input lag, which is the delay between your mouse or keyboard actions and the corresponding response on the screen.

Can too high FPS cause lag? ›

Even a custom gaming PC designed for high FPS and high Hz can experience lag and choppy graphics. Laggy and choppy graphics can be caused by graphics settings like V-Sync, Windows Game Mode, or even your game's settings.

Does limiting FPS reduce temperature? ›

Limiting the frame rate not only saves power, but also reduces heat and noise, keeping your GPU cool and quiet. Power draw and efficiency is important to gamers.

What is the benefit of FPS cap? ›

This locks the maximum frame rate to the refresh rate of the monitor or TV. This avoids the ugly artifact of screen tearing, where two or more frames will appear at the same time.

Does limiting FPS make it more stable? ›

Yes it will help with the consistency of your frame timing, but only if you put the cap at a level that's below your typical average FPS. Putting an FPS limit of 165 will not help at all in scenarios where you might typically only get 150 FPS or less.

Does capping FPS reduce stuttering? ›

Yes, capping FPS lower than the monitor refresh rate can make games smoother. This is because it prevents the game from running too fast and skipping frames, which can cause choppiness.

Is 360Hz better than 144Hz? ›

As shown in the table, the time between each frame drops significantly when you go from 60Hz to 144Hz, reducing it by 9.73ms, but that number decreases to 2.77ms if you go from 144Hz to 240Hz, and 1.39ms from 240Hz to 360Hz.
...
Why Does It Matter?
Refresh rateTime between frames
144Hz6.94ms
240Hz4.17ms
360Hz2.78ms
1 more row
Nov 10, 2021

What fps is considered laggy? ›

Any time that little yellow counter drops below around 25-30 FPS or so, especially in fast-paced games, you're going to feel some amount of graphics lag. If it drops below around 15-20 FPS then you'll really feel it.

How much fps is too much for gaming? ›

PC action games are played best at 60 fps, but otherwise, a frame rate of 30 fps or higher should be fine.

What Hz do pro gamers use? ›

For esports, you are looking for a high refresh rate. Top pros with good sponsors and/or a lot of money will use 240Hz (or even more) but 144Hz is the standard for competitive gaming.

Why are 120hz 144Hz monitors better for the human eye? ›

A higher refresh rate means a smoother-looking screen that's easier on the eyes. So, if you're trying to ease your eyestrain, a refresh rate of 120 Hz is optimal.

Can humans tell the difference between 144Hz and 60Hz? ›

The average human, tasked with detecting what framerate he/she is looking at, can accurately guess up to around 150 fps. That is, they can see the difference in framerates all the way to 150 fps. Human eyes cannot see things beyond 60Hz.

How many Hz can a RTX 3060 run? ›

A 3060 card can definitely run on 240 hz. That is if you play Esports Titles like Csgo, Fornite, Valorant, etc.

Is 240Hz to 360Hz noticeable? ›

Now, as we've already established, the difference between 240Hz and 360Hz is not that big, however, the difference between 1080p resolution on a ~24″ monitor and 1440p on a 27″ display is huge – and a lot of gamers will prefer the sharper and clearer image quality of 1440p to the benefits of 360Hz over 240Hz.

Does refresh rate really matter? ›

Generally speaking, the higher a monitor's refresh rate, the more FPS your CPU and GPU will need to supply, and the more benefit you'll receive from higher performance options. With that in mind, games vary in how much load they put on the CPU and GPU.

What quality do humans see in? ›

According to scientist and photographer Dr. Roger Clark, the resolution of the human eye is 576 megapixels.

What is the Hz of the human eye? ›

Research by the American Air Force has found the resonant frequency of the human eyeball to be around 19 Hz. To determine that figure, 15 human volunteers were exposed to vertical vibrations in the range of 5-50 Hz and their eye movements were observed by monitoring reflection from the cornea.

Can you see 500 fps? ›

But while we have trouble distinguishing the intensity of flashes of light less than 10ms, we can perceive incredibly quick motion artefacts. “They have to be very specific and special, but you could see an artefact at 500 fps if you wanted to,” DeLong tells me.

What is the best max fps for 144Hz? ›

Ideally, you'll want the game's frame rate to match the monitor's refresh rate 1:1 for an ideal experience. For example, your system should be outputting 144 FPS to get the full benefit of a 144Hz monitor.

How many FPS is extreme? ›

Frame rate settings: High(30FPS), Ultra(40FPS), Extreme(60FPS) Style: Colorful.

What monitors do pro gamers use? ›

The ZOWIE XL line is basically the 'standard issue monitor' of the pro gaming scene, and this XL2540 is another favorite of the pros. The only difference between this and the XL2546 is that this one comes without DyAc.

How do I make sure 144Hz is working? ›

From the desktop, right click on the desktop itself and select Screen Resolution. Then select Advanced Settings, navigate to the monitor tab, and choose 144Hz from the drop-down menu. If you don't see a refresh rate of 144Hz, then go back to the first troubleshooting tip.

Can 144Hz run 120fps? ›

Pretty much any 144Hz monitor can support 120Hz.

Is 100 FPS good for 144Hz monitor? ›

The 144Hz monitor is only useful when your hardware supports 100+ frame rates, so that the games will run smoother.

Is 144Hz good for 120 FPS? ›

Pretty much any 144Hz monitor can support 120Hz. The issue is that some monitors don't support 1440p at 120Hz over HDMI. So if you are looking at a 1440p monitor, make sure it has support for it. I game on a 1080p 144Hz LG monitor and it's all good.

Is 120 FPS enough for 144Hz? ›

Yes, you can. Your refresh rate of your monitor just means that it has a maximum displayable amount of FPS, 144 in this case. So you won't be able to reach the maximum FPS you could, but 120 FPS isn't bad.

Is 144Hz monitor good for FPS? ›

If you want to use your monitor to play video games, the answer is yes. Having a monitor with a refresh rate of 144Hz allows you to better use the power of your graphic card. Otherwise, you will be greatly limited by your monitor and you will not be able to enjoy games at more than 60 frames per second (FPS).

Can you run 300 FPS on a 144Hz monitor? ›

It can't get higher frame rates as it's lacking good hardware. So basically if you try to run the same game on a 144Hz monitor nothing's gonna change. It'll still run at 40FPS. The 144Hz monitor is only useful when your hardware supports 100+ frame rates, so that the games will run smoother.

Should I cap my FPS to 120 in 60hz monitor? ›

But with a 60hz monitor, the ideal situation is that you never are below ~120 fps. I'd say that 60fps (60hz-60fps) would be the minimum you'd ever want to be at.

Can you get 120 FPS on a monitor? ›

The best 120Hz monitor we've tested is the Samsung Odyssey Neo G7 S32BG75. It's an excellent gaming monitor with a 165Hz refresh rate, and it performs very well at 120Hz. With its 4k resolution, it's also the best 4k 120Hz monitor available.

What FPS should I cap for 120Hz? ›

But, your frame rate should be close to your refresh rate. If you have a 120Hz monitor, try to cap your frames around 120–150. I'm not saying turn on Vsync, I'm just saying that it's better if you can run a frame rate that matches your refresh rate. You can run 240 fps, but it'd be better if you ran around 120 fps.

How many FPS can 120Hz handle? ›

A 120Hz display refreshes twice as quickly as a 60Hz display, so it can display up to 120 fps, and a 240Hz display can handle up to 240 fps. This will eliminate tearing in most games. Although you always run the risk of screen tearing with a framerate above your refresh rate, it's only to a certain point.

Is 240Hz better than 144Hz? ›

A 144Hz monitor can show 144 unique frames per second with 6.94ms between each frame, whereas a 240Hz monitor shows 240 frames with 4.17ms between each frame. What is this? This means that a 240Hz monitor can show a new image 2.77ms faster than a 144Hz display.

Can the human eye see 144Hz? ›

Some experts will tell you that the human eye can see between 30 and 60 frames per second. Some maintain that it's not really possible for the human eye to perceive more than 60 frames per second.

Is there a big difference between 120 FPS and 144 FPS? ›

When it comes to 120Hz vs 144Hz monitors, the 144Hz monitor is better because it has a higher refresh rate which allows you to receive information faster. A 144Hz monitor can show 144 frames a second, while a 120Hz monitor shows 120 frames.

Why are 120Hz 144Hz monitors better for the human eye? ›

A higher refresh rate means a smoother-looking screen that's easier on the eyes. So, if you're trying to ease your eyestrain, a refresh rate of 120 Hz is optimal.

Is 240Hz monitor overkill? ›

The first thing to remember about monitor refresh rate is that there's no such thing as overkill. So no, 240Hz isn't “too fast”. Remember, there are 360Hz and faster monitors out there, but we think 240Hz is becoming the new sweet spot for higher refresh rate.

Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Madonna Wisozk

Last Updated:

Views: 5869

Rating: 4.8 / 5 (68 voted)

Reviews: 83% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Madonna Wisozk

Birthday: 2001-02-23

Address: 656 Gerhold Summit, Sidneyberg, FL 78179-2512

Phone: +6742282696652

Job: Customer Banking Liaison

Hobby: Flower arranging, Yo-yoing, Tai chi, Rowing, Macrame, Urban exploration, Knife making

Introduction: My name is Madonna Wisozk, I am a attractive, healthy, thoughtful, faithful, open, vivacious, zany person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.