why do we overclock...to get more "fps", right?...so how man

[T Rush]

first of all...movies in a theater only have 24 fps...so you could make the argument that the "eye/brain" only needs 24 fps to think changing images can be perceived as motion...now do note in the theater they show each frame flashed on the screen 3 times each for 72 'flashes per sec.' or 72 Hz refresh

and yes normal TV only uses 30 fps displayed two times each at 60 Hz refresh on the screen (HD TV can use the full 60 images per sec. at 60Hz)

 

but those are all non-interactive images so you don't really need to be able to tell exactly where a moving object is...only that it is moving smoothly across the screen...so when these images are filmed/taped/recorded to capture the moving object in motion on each frame in a blur ...even in a still frame, this blur makes the object appear as if it is in motion, as it is caught thru its movement during its transition thru space...as these images are strung together with changing frames this makes the object appear to move very smoothly across the screen, as you can't tell exactly where it is in each frame, and only that it is passing thru so much space per frame and then in the next frame moving thru alittle bit more space...now not only does this make it hard to tell where exactly the object is..but what it is as well

this is the key to making non-interactive images "OK" as being seen as moving with so few fps..is that they are using motion blur

 

in real life we don't see moving objects as blurry or flashing off and reappearing in the next spot ...try this right now if you like...spin your head around..so that the room moves past your eyes, you will notice as your eyes move past your CRT or TV with even a still image on it like this page(doesn't work with LCDs and still images as they don't flicker, but a game would change the frames displayed with moving images like the refresh of a CRT) ..notice with the CRT that screen appears as multiple images as it is flashing off and on as a new image is displayed(even though it is the same image it is hard to read the words on the screen)..where other items in the room are constant and you can tell what they are, I see this effect and my screen is at 85Hz now...this tells me my eyes/brain can see faster than 85Hz, and for a moving object I would need it to be displayed much faster than 85Hz to see it as well as I could see a constant non-flickering object in my room...this test would be the same as if I held my head and eyes still and swung the display back and forth on a rope...this would be much like a moving object in a game..as a still image on the screen would be flashing at 85Hz where the rest of the room stayed still(like the background in a game)...now if this is a bold object displayed on the screen(like a big red ball on a black background) I'm sure I could tell what it is...but I lose quite a bit of detail, as here the problem isn't that the ball is blurry(the image displayed on screen isn't blurring) but because it is flashing on and off, displayed in one spot and then reappearing in another

...look at this:

here is a "0"(the ball on the screen) in all the places it appears as it moves across in front of me

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 say that is the ball at 60Hz

00000000000000000 and that is the ball at 120Hz

..you can see that there is twice the amount of information displayed on not only where the ball is..but what it is

my eyes might be able to be tricked into thinking the ball is moving with it displayed at 60Hz..but at 120Hz I would have more information on the ball...this would be helpful if I am try'n to shoot it, or want to know if it was a friendly ball or an evil ball

 

you still might be asking if you can see or use any of this information that is displayed at these higher refresh rates or "fps"...as if it were text on the screen(to tell me if the ball was evil or not) swinging on the rope, I couldn't read it...try this...hold up a book or anything with a lot of text written on in next to what I have just written displayed on your CRT...now turn your head back and forth(with your eyes held straight moving with your head)...you will notice that the constant text in the book is still discernable as to what the words are....but on the display even 85Hz(85 fps) isn't enough to make the words readable as they move...your eyes/brain can see/use much more information than what the display can show at any Hz or "fps"...it isn't untill objects are displayed at near infinity Hz or fps that we have all the information like we can get from looking at a real object sitting or moving in front of us

 

the flashing of the refresh is the easy "give away" that the object displayed on movie screens or CRTs is not a constant image...so those rates need to be higher to trick us...the more subtle images are easier to trick the eyes/brain...as we can 'fill in' the missing information(what the blurry object is, or where and what it is until it is displayed again in the next spot) to try and make sense of it all, as we want to think those objects are moving(like the little 'flip books' we made as kids with the stick figure guy)...but this isn't the same as actually being given this information to know what is really happening, like when we see things that really are moving in real life

 

many old school gamers would play games at very low resolution so that they could use very high refresh rates on their CRTs and have higher frame rates in games...they found the 'eye candy' as more of a distraction...and wanted as much information displayed on the screen as possible...now most of the games are about how cool they can look...to enjoy moving objects on screen you may only need 24 or 30 fps if they were blurry(using motion blur), or only 40 to 60fps if they are not(in computer games blur would be a bad thing, as you need to tell what and where something is when it is in motion, blur would hide that info)...but to see more exactly where these objects are or what they are (closer to the information you would get in real life)you would need many more fps

 

most likely with computer games more is better...and with a game on computer right when things start to happen and you need to see what is going on to "make your move" is right when the computer has more work to do and the frame rates drop making it harder to tell what is going on...but just remember that you will only be able to see these frames on your monitor if the response time(LCDs) or refresh rate(CRT) is high enough to display them...so that the more important numbers when looking at frames per sec. are not those "175fps max" as its doubtful that those will be much use, if your monitor cant show them...but the average fps and even the minimum frames per sec. could be more important as that is when things are happening...when benchmarking/testing I always watch to see how low my frames might drop in any given slower point of the test...if these don't drop as low, most likely the average frames will be higher, and "in game" I'll have a better chance to see more frames and get more information on what is happening when 3 mobs jump out at me at once

[Demonithese]

interesing thread there Trush (nem0 says hi from the grave)

 

So what do you suggest the average gamer do where his fps may sink to 30? set his monitor refresh rate to 75?

[totalgeek]

Well thought out post.

 

But I OC, to be honest, just to do it. I'm a programmer by profession and have only 2 games installed on my machine World of Warcraft, HL2, and Civ 4. My rig is total overkill for most of the C++ work I do. But another thing that OC'ing gives me is 'security' and 'future proofing' if I was just getting the bare minimum in games or whatever I was doing I would be afraid that I would have to get a new PC soon. With the way my system is setup now I'm pretty safe in assuming it will take me all the way to VISTA and I'll at least get another year out of it.

 

Not taking the thread off topic because I see that you are explaining why its necessary to get higher FPS for games, but I also just wanted others to know that some may overclock not for games but just to do it.

[Smoken Joe]

You are makeing some incorrect assumptions:

1 frame rate is constant

2 your eye can perceve only 24 FPS

3 there is no benifit to more

 

The minimum FPS is the mot inportant factor it is that justter we all hate or the wait for part of the sene to finish loading.

 

 

2 higher FPS is quite notacable to most people in double blind reasearch do a google.

 

 

3 even when FPS are off the charts it is still of benifit as it becmes more smooth and often acts the same ways as AA.

 

 

Personaly it becomes obvious if FPS get under 60 not that the game can not be fun.

 

 

4 overclocking is an end in and of itself. Who cares if you need it it is fun having one of the best systems for a fraction of the cost of a stock top end system.

 

 

I dont know how many times review sites have complained they would need the gaming machine of the gods to play a game at max settings when mine did not even brake a sweat.

 

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

[Sinimeister]

You are makeing some incorrect assumptions:

1 frame rate is constant

2 your eye can perceve only 24 FPS

3 there is no benifit to more

 

Your 1st point is what matters the most to me -- you want to play a game without hiccups and runs smoothly on all occasions. Once you reach that point, THEN there is no more need for more FPS

[p0tter]

I think getting 60FPS with a high resolution and all the goodies turned on is what we strive for. If you play any of the top games (with a medicore system) in lowest settings with anti-everything turned off you will get good looking FPS, but image quality takes a hit.

 

When my 3000 was at 1.8 I was not able to run the resolution I use now with AA turned on.

[Guest Crusader]

Well thought out post.

 

But I OC, to be honest, just to do it. I'm a programmer by profession and have only 2 games installed on my machine World of Warcraft, HL2, and Civ 4.

 

Some programmer you are ... !!! lol :nod:

[ssR]

in my case i did it just cause my rig had all the potential i could ask for a decent overclock and i didnt want to waste it for nothing. cause ur kinda right in this case. i only play CS 1.6 and this game requires a 100fps stable to play it on a high level. my rig could provide that easily even when it was running on stock settings. thats why i stopped with my oc too cause i dont need more for now.

[totalgeek]

Some programmer you are ... !!! lol :nod:

 

HAHA Yeah thats 3 games huh? I'm not a game programmer so my math skills suck. I'm just gonna say I'm a Visual Basic programmer now which I don't mind as most of my VB 6 programming friends make more then me?!?

[szurlo]

HAHA Yeah thats 3 games huh? I'm not a game programmer so my math skills suck. I'm just gonna say I'm a Visual Basic programmer now which I don't mind as most of my VB 6 programming friends make more then me?!?

 

You know, they say there are three kinds of people in the world. Those that can count and those that can't.

 

 

P.S. There is nothing wrong with being a VB programmer. If you look at the tech want ads these days everybody is looking for them. I write tools for in-house use at my job in VB6, and I can whip out a simple text file parser with it in 15 minutes. Easy to use and gets the job done. Don't care what the C++ weenies say

[szurlo]

Oh, and to address the actaul topic in question. Regardless of what all the science says, I SWEAR I can tell a substantial differance between say 60fps and 100 fps. If money were no object my 6800GS would be 2x7800GT in SLI. I've never had a gamer friend say, "my system has too many FPS"

The only reason I have not OC'd this system is I had so much trouble with my initial build, thanks to Crucial, that I am now gun-shy.

[Burky]

As soon as my frame rate drops below about 80 (On CS Source, as it tells you) I start to notice it getting a little jerky. Generally I run Counterstrike at around 120fps with all settings set to max except I use anitialising 4x and anistropic 8x.

 

Szurlo; you should o/c your system even if you just up the fsb and don't change the voltage. I have run mine at 2.35ghz stable at stock voltage so it doesn't matter if you're gun shy, that's still another 350mhz you're cranking out at (almost) no risk at all. Take advantage of your DFI board!!!