I get no microstuttering whatsoever. I haven't personally seen it on my system with this game.
do you have a 120 hz monitor by any chance? if not, 50 and 60 are easily distinguishable by the naked eye. 60 has smooth consistent notion, 50 does not.
60 frames per second gives you a new frame every time the screen refreshes, so it goes like:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 etc.
at 50 frames per second with triple buffered vsync one in five frames will stay on screen twice as long as the others, like so
1, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 etc. this is easily visible. that's why you've got some people locking the framerate to 30 fps. that gives you:
1, 1, 2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4, 5, 5, 6, 6 which is smoother than 50, even if it isn't giving you the same controller response times (although I know Criterion do some clever stuff on consoles to make 30 fps control more like 60, I don't know if that applies to the PC version), and even if you will occasionally have 1 frame less to react to things.
playing Hot Pursuit (which on my PC holds 60 some of the time and drops to 45 at other times) and playing Forza Horizons back to back this week really highlight the difference for me and for a racing game, i'd rather have a locked 30 than a cock tease 45 to 60.
it's less obvious if you aren't ever holding 60 fps, so if you're getting as you say 45 to 50 fps even that is often preferable to switching back and forth from buttery smooth 60, to noticeably jerky less than 60.
I can easily tell the difference between 59 and 60 fps. 58 and 59? not remotely.
a 120 hz monitor mitigates the problem somewhat, because instead of having a frame display for twice as long as the others, you have a frame displaying for 50% longer than the others, so if you're on 120, it's even less of an issue. it's a benefit of 120 hz monitors that I rarely hear people talking about. even sub 60 fps resolutions are smoother on a 120hz monitor. I try not to think about it too much though, because i'll talk myself into buying one if i'm not careful.
