FPS opinion

[nikiforos 450]

Hello brothers in arms :)

I would like to ask a question about Frames per second and what is acceptable for you gaming.

I played the map of Fallujah yesterday , own mission, and the battle involved 100 AI soldiers and 4 heavy armor from both sides.

The lowest FPS during the battle was 32 FPS.

For me anything under 30 FPS is almost a no go . But I would like to here about your own opinion and your limits.

PS

This game is like a "drug" :)

[birtuma 28]

Everything under 25 is unplayable

25-30 is playable

30-60 is good playable

60 and more is perfect and really smooth...

[ziiip 1]

In ArmA2:

I'm ok when my FPS is above 40, and happy if its 45+. Below 40 sucks monkey bawls.

Edited February 23, 2011 by ziiip

[celery 8]

Over 40 is ok.

[Kristian 47]

I'm ok with over 25, but less than 25 begins to... feel like... unplayable I guess.

Over 30? Feels_goodman.png

[EDcase 87]

FPS can be deceptive.

Of course I prefer when I have 40+fps but sometimes I get around 25-30.

I noticed that when fps is low it helps to have Vsync:enabled in game AND turn ON Tripple Buffering in drivers.

Then low fps still feels smooth

[stk2008 14]

FPS can be deceptive.

Of course I prefer when I have 40+fps but sometimes I get around 25-30.

I noticed that when fps is low it helps to have Vsync:enabled in game AND turn ON Tripple Buffering in drivers.

Then low fps still feels smooth

Really V sync and tripple buffering? I may try this any one else confirm this?.

[Leon86 13]

Low fps is ok as long as there's no mouselag. I've put maximum pre-rendered frames on 0, pretty much eliminates lag. If I run benchmark 08 I lose 5 fps to that but it doesn't matter, the game is much more playable on low fps.

[Beagle 684]

Everything above 16 fps is playable. everything about 24 is comfortable and everthing above 32fps is pure luxury.

[Zipper5 74]

Anything above 15 FPS is playable for me. Anything above 20 FPS is... "Preferred". I generally get between 20 and 60 FPS in Arma 2.

[NeMeSiS 11]

FPS can be deceptive.

Of course I prefer when I have 40+fps but sometimes I get around 25-30.

I noticed that when fps is low it helps to have Vsync:enabled in game AND turn ON Tripple Buffering in drivers.

Then low fps still feels smooth

I find that it gives mouselag, i havent had it turned on since ArmA1.

Anyway, i prefer 25-30FPS.

[nikiforos 450]

Very interesting to read about your opinions and what makes you happy.

Sometimes I hit below 25 and I some some lagging especially in big missions.

[NoRailgunner 0]

IIRC here was someone who posted something in general about FPS in videos/games. There was also a little test so people could see the differences.

But I only found too many open threads using "frame rate" or "fps"...

[NeMeSiS 11]

IIRC here was someone who posted something in general about FPS in videos/games. There was also a little test so people could see the differences.

But I only found too many open threads using "frame rate" or "fps"...

This is the latest one i can remember and has some decent information.

[NoRailgunner 0]

Good find + http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

and http://www.boallen.com/fps-compare.html

[wolfbite 8]

As a soldier I'm not too bothered as long as its above 25.... Choppers and High speed low flying require higher speeds...

[Von_Lipwig 10]

I'm usually getting a steady 30-35 FPS, about 20-25 when Im recording. These speeds are playable enough for me. When it starts going below 17 FPS though it gets annoying, below about 12-14 is unplayable.

[Derbysieger 11]

everything above 20fps is playable when you're infantry or a tank commander. For aircraft everything above 25fps is playable. IMHO everything above 30fps is smooth even at high speed in a plane like the RKSL Typhoon

[Beagle 684]

everything above 20fps is playable when you're infantry or a tank commander. For aircraft everything above 25fps is playable. IMHO everything above 30fps is smooth even at high speed in a plane like the RKSL Typhoon

funny statement as a lot of FSX pilots were happy with 15fps when FSX came out.

[Derbysieger 11]

try flying the rksl typhoon at Mach 1+ below 100m with less than 25fps on chernarus and you get the idea. It is definately not nice to fly under those circumstances.

Edited February 23, 2011 by Derbysieger

[Guest]

I usually get between 10 and 30fps. I find that its ok but like others have stated, if you fly then you probably desire higher fps but I am usually on the ground:)

[Beagle 684]

try flying the rksl typhoon at Mach 1+ below 100m with less than 25fps on chernarus and you get the idea. It is definately not nice to fly under those circumstances.

That's a mod, that can hardly count since there is a reason why stock ArmA aircraft fly so slow.

[mosh 0]

I can deal with 15 at the lowest. Luckily that is rare, 40 + is about what I get... I think. I stopped checking a long time ago.

[Derbysieger 11]

That's a mod, that can hardly count since there is a reason why stock ArmA aircraft fly so slow.

Why? The question wasn't about acceptable fps without any mods. He simply asked what is acceptable for you...

It really depends on what you do with Arma2. I usually have 20+ mods enabled when playing in the editor. I can easily handle a chopper with 17-20fps but preparing for a strafing run with an A-10s GAU-8 isn't that much fun anymore.

Anyway what are we doing here? For one person everything below 30fps is a no go and the next one is playing happily with less than 20fps... So lets end this. You have your opinion, I have mine - everything's fine! :D

Glück auf ;)

[NeMeSiS 11]

Anyway what are we doing here? For one person everything below 30fps is a no go and the next one is playing happily with less than 20fps... So lets end this. You have your opinion, I have mine - everything's fine! :D

May be useful to know what people find acceptable for mission editors, though a poll would have been nice.