Support NeoGAF

[Zeyphersan]

I wouldn't say the difference is "night and day," but it was definitely readily apparently.

There's often times when I'm playing at locked 60 fps and think "You know, we could go even higher..." Bring on the Gsync!

 

[Gattsu25]

I stop noticing 60fps after a while. I never stop noticing 30fps.

So bad looking.

 

[MauroNL]

The only thing I'm seeing is how awesome that Red Orchestra 2 gif is

 

[Metfanant]

60fps clips are obviously smoother, but the 30fps clips are far from slideshows

 

[cpp_is_king]

Whoever made this site should be executed for being a detriment to the human race. As someone who can tell a huge difference between 30fps and 60fps, the examples on thsi site are horrible, and I have to look really hard to tell a difference. They should have used webm for starters, and the difference is even more noticeable in fullscreen.

Another big difference between 30fps and 60fps comes in input responsiveness, and you can't convey that with any kind of image.

 

[xBladeM6x]

"Games are unplayable at 60 FPS! Anyone who claims to be able to tolerate 60 FPS is FULL OF SHIT!!!!"

Can't wait.

I can. :l

 

[LiquidMetal14]

Some of the best experiences in gaming have been 20-30fps. Love the comparison but the tone of the thread is a little off.

 

[LCGeek]

Some of the best experiences in gaming have been 20-30fps. Love the comparison but the tone of the thread is a little off.

In spite of it not because of it.

 

[QaaQer]

In spite of it not because of it.

or it just doesn't matter, like watching game of thrones from a dvd v bluray.

 

[NastyBook]

Those gifs were shit, so I honestly couldn't tell. That last two videos I've seen that convinced me were the clips from Bayonetta 2 and BF4.

 

[cpp_is_king]

or it just doesn't matter, like watching game of thrones from a dvd v bluray.

I used to be one of the people that swore up and down I couldn't tell the difference. Until I actually played games myself, on my own bigscreen TV, and saw it myself.

 

[QaaQer]

I used to be one of the people that swore up and down I couldn't tell the difference. Until I actually played games myself, on my own bigscreen TV, and saw it myself.

Oh there is a difference, just saying it might not make any difference in terms of enjoyment. Although I am speaking in broad terms as I'm sure there are people who cannot watch dvds or play 30fps games.

 

[OldAsUrSock]

120 must be a thing of beauty, I had an old CRT that went up to 90hz and it was amazing playing UT99 on that thing. Hell even looking the screen in general feels better with a higher hz.

60fps while smooth, after coming from 120fps you notice it is indeed choppier, but it is still playable for me.

I agree it has a huge impact. On consoles it makes games look shittier for a very marginally noticeable gain in smoothness.

For PCs I agree, you don't need to make the tradeoff. For consoles I strongly disagree. Perhaps you haven't seen any thread involving a new console game announcement these days. It invariably gets derailed by the same people whining about 60fps. At the end of the day the tradeoff in a fixed spec is definitely not worth it in most cases. If you want to game on consoles and have some physco-somatic disorder that makes you ultra sensitive to framerates, you're definitely going to be in the minority, #dealwithit.

How does framerate change from console and PC? 30fps looks bad everywhere all of the time.

 

[Gaffercake]

That's a fantastic website, thanks for posting! *bookmarked*
Should be in the OP, it's the perfect showcase for lots of issues with low framerates since it can be tweeked so much.

No problem, I also love that it provides a plethora of options, customising the speed of the object is one I particularly like.

In case anyone's missed it:

http://www.testufo.com

 

[sono]

I can easily see the difference between them in each example.

The 30fps seems quite jarring by comparison against the 60fps.

I am using firefox to view them.

 

[Resident4t.]

I can tell the difference really easily but I've never really cared. As long as a game can stay above 30 without fluctuating I'm all good.

 

[TheCloser]

I can tell the difference really easily but I've never really cared. As long as a game can stay above 30 without fluctuating I'm all good.

.

 

[Jim_Bob]

60fps over 1080p everytime for me.

 

[yiepekaiyei]

if you can't see the difference, you better go check your eyes.

 

[Crimsonclaw111]

It's easy enough to see, but it's even better to feel.

 

[SniperHunter]

hmm red orchestra 2 looks cool. I should have bought it when it was on sale

 

[Lebon14]

It's more noticeable in the BF4 running one.

This!
The Dirt 3 wasn't really noticeable, neither the BF4 racing but the BF4 running wasreally noticeable and much more smoother. The Red Orchestra one was really noticeable too.

 

[Sykra]

Clear difference, as expected.

 

[hesido]

Framerate affect gameplay... not visuals... unless it creates visual issues like screen tearing.

Don't agree. Detecting motion is a fundamental part of visual processing in our brains. Frame rate affects how we perceive motion. Higher framerate visuals has more samples for different points in time. It makes everything look more "in place".

 

[twobear]

this website confirmed what i already knew really

that 60fps is better, but that 30fps is absolutely fine a lot of the time

 

[ShadowkillXNA]

Nah, it really isn't.

For some it really is. I cant see any differences between any of those videos.

 

[matrixman92]

I honestly couldnt tell the difference in most of them, except for the red orchestra one. That one was pretty clear to me for some reason

 

[HariKari]

For some it really is. I cant see any differences between any of those videos.

It's your eyes or your display. The BF4 running one is as clear as can be, even for someone that doesn't know what they are looking at. It will just feel smoother.

It's night and day when you're talking about a fullscreen game.

 

[CrovaxPSO]

Side by side like that it's easy for me to tell, but I doubt I could say which is which if you randomly showed me one and not the other (without having seen the comparison already).

 

[Zee-Row]

The right is much smoother than the left

 

[cheststrongwell]

Look the same to me.

 

[Axass]

I see the difference clear as day.

Maybe those not seeing the difference are expecting to see a different speed in the images (because they equal bad framerate to slowdowns), while in fact it's all a simple matter of fluidity.

 

[mysocksarepink]

welp, I'm sold on red orchestra 2!

 

[Risible]

Has anyone ever done a large-participant double blind test with 30 vs 60?

I'll be honest, I can't see any difference between the two, but then again I'm older and my eyes are shittier than they used to be.

 

[Fotos]

I see the difference but I think it's just a matter of opinion. I would't say one is better than the other.

 

[CrazyArcadia]

This discussion of quality pops up for different things like music, photography, print, too.

As an example: Audiophiles will state that you need certain equipment and the music has to be compiled in a certain way (fidelity/compression) for it to really shine and be enjoyable. The majority thinks otherwise or just does not care enough and this is why we have MP3 and certain compression which is 'enough' for many, but not really ideal or even good. I looked up an article about that topic: http://saportareport.com/leadership/technology/2012/07/24/audio-fidelity-and-the-return-of-vinyl/ and I thought to myself...

"Mabye the crowd who will invest in sound equipment and rally for things such as the High Fidelity Pure Audio format to replace shitty MP3s is the equivalent to the crowd who will invest in a state-of-the-art computer to play the games at higher resolution and 60 frames per second."

I'm in both crowds. I care for music and sound quality, and I care for image quality. This was not always the case for me since I was so used to bad compression and bad framerates that it took some time for my brain to adjust to the obviously better quality. Listening to certain music with the right equipment and format vs. listening to the same music with MP3 and computer speakers... it's the same as playing Bayonetta on PS3 vs. playing it on Xbox 360.

Now I think it's obviously expensive and a hassle to get good audio equipment (it took some time and years of saving for me) so whatevs. But when it comes to gaming, one already kind of has the right eqipment for 60FPS with a HDTV and a state of the art console! I'd rather have developers concentrate on giving us 60FPS instead of giving us 11 explosions and 5 million particles. I also don't see why the "Can't see the difference"-crowd seems to be somehow against 60FPS... I mean, OK, you can not see the difference but many other people can so why be against it if you would not even recognize it? Though yes, not every genre needs it at all costs, that much I agree - adventure games, RPGs, hey even many of the cinematic action games which nowadays basically play themselves anyway. But every game which needs at least a little bit of timing or reaction is just better with 60FPS, for me at least. 30FPS is not "unplayable" but I would avoid any Arcade-style shooter, fighting game, racing game or even competitive FPS/TPS with 30FPS and lower. And it really is sad if it is unavoidable. I'm hoping for Last of Us PS4 to deliver..

edit. god reading what I wrote again, I really sound pretentious. Sorry about that :/

 

[iuuk]

Now I think it's obviously expensive and a hassle to get good audio equipment (it took some time and years of saving for me) so whatevs. But when it comes to gaming, one already kind of has the right eqipment for 60FPS with a HDTV and a state of the art console! I'd rather have developers concentrate on giving us 60FPS instead of giving us 11 explosions and 5 million particles. I also don't see why the "Can't see the difference"-crowd seems to be somehow against 60FPS... I mean, OK, you can not see the difference but many other people can so why be against it if you would not even recognize it? Though yes, not every genre needs it at all costs, that much I agree - adventure games, RPGs, hey even many of the cinematic action games which nowadays basically play themselves anyway. But every game which needs at least a little bit of timing or reaction is just better with 60FPS, for me at least. 30FPS is not "unplayable" but I would avoid any Arcade-style shooter, fighting game, racing game or even competitive FPS/TPS with 30FPS and lower. And it really is sad if it is unavoidable. I'm hoping for Last of Us PS4 to deliver..

edit. god reading what I wrote again, I really sound pretentious. Sorry about that :/

Probably because the -crowd sees your statement the other way around, and/or like what they're used to.

I do have to say though, this is the first time I actually see quite a difference and I don't know why. Those Dark Souls gifs people tend to post as displaying a massive difference do nothing for me, yet these somehow do (apart from the last one).

As far as sound goes, I find the difference between a 320Kb/s MP3 and Flac to be a lot smaller (even negligible at times) than source and equipment (especially speakers/headphones), so you'll always have people caring about one thing more than the other. The same with 30/60 FPS vs higher resolution / prettier pictures.

 

[ShadowkillXNA]

It's your eyes or your display. The BF4 running one is as clear as can be, even for someone that doesn't know what they are looking at. It will just feel smoother.

It's night and day when you're talking about a fullscreen game.

Nope. I can tell framerate differences when I am playing a game just fine, just not when viewing these videos and I watched them on two different pc's.
And framerate isnt that important to me anyway.
Steady 30fps with more eye candy should always be the goal as far I am concerned. Key word being steady.

 

[Whitechocolatekrispies]

I can try.

TL;DR:
On the x axis, you have brightness of the thing you're viewing.
On the y axis, you have the minimum frame rate that appears "perfectly smooth" (CFF)
The different lines show the dependence on other factors besides brightness.

More detail, for those interested:
1. graph. FoV fixed at 19° viewed strait on, shows color dependence in low light situations
2. graph. Graphs for 0.05°, 0.5° and 5,7° FoV, viewed strait on looking 35 degree to the side (peripheral vision)

Math (CFF model):


Oculus VR, worst case example:
Dark adapted pupil at 1cd/m2: 13mm2, log p = 1.1
215cd/m2 screen = 3.45 log Td
110 degree VR HMD full white, ultra low persistence flicker

centered eye: CFF = 89 Hz
35 degree right/left: CFF = 127 Hz

That's why Oculus is targeting 90+ Hz for their consumer model.

Cool beans. Never realised the perception of the frame rates smoothness was tied into the luminance of the screen.

I take it the retina sensitivity must "charge up" in order to signal. Hence a lower luminance would result in a slower response in your eye. Where as a high luminance would cause your retina cells to fire of faster allowing you to perceive the stutter.

Would also make sense for peripheral vision to have a better feel for frame rate. Lower density of optical nerves resulting in higher absorption of light per cell. More light, faster response.

 

[Weltall Zero]

As always, it's hard to believe people can't tell them apart. I find the right one jarring even when looking at both of them at the same time.

I'm so sorry.

Why? In today's era I'd prefer being able to enjoy games at 30FPS the same as 60FPS. In that sense I envy him.

These gif comparisons are always so terrible at demonstrating the massive difference.

edit- ok these might not be gifs but you get my point

You've made none, you just stated a conclusion that doesn't even apply.

I don't understand when people say they can't tell 30 from 60 fps when they are playing it.

30fps feels like moving through treacle compared to 60fps.

Some people can't tell the difference, the same way we don't all perceive colors the same (even aside from colorblind people, different people, especially women, can actually tell some colors apart that others can't). Refresh rate seems to be the same thing, although I suspect there's an (even) bigger "learning" component.

 

[OneUh8]

I can notice the difference. But actually playing the games is where you really will notice.

 

[TheBryanJZX90]

You need to go to a doctor STAT.

I was being sarcastic, unfortunately that's the kind of hyperbole people actually say about frame rate. I think the whole push to 60fps above everything else is just stupid.

 

[SMOK3Y]

I don't see the difference.

me either..

 

[Arrogant Bastard]

This shit is too funny. I cannot tell the difference in the OP, I see a slight difference in the BF running one...but it is so so minimal.

The Bioshock Infinite and F Zero gifs are night and day though.

I guess I have an eye or brain disorder.

The amount of BS that is flying from the superior I can tell folks is really absurd.

 

[ChronotriggerJM]

I definitely notice and appreciate the visual impact 60fps brings.

Still like 30 fps games though, doesn't bother me in the slightest.

That said, I still hope the world catches on to high framerate, both in games and especially film.

 

[SMOK3Y]

The benefice of 60fps is controller response... how can I see that?

Resolution is a visual feature... framerate except when causes screen tearing is a gameplay feature.

this.. as even at 60fps I find my wheel is delayed on screen to my inputs but if I let it run at 120+fps its 1 to 1 turn

 

[Roto13]

That site is a great example of how framerate matters much more in fast paced games than slow ones. It's important in that BF4 racing video but it couldn't matter less in the video of Wei Shen just strolling along the sidewalk.

 

[ScepticMatt]

I take it the retina sensitivity must "charge up" in order to signal. .

I think it's easier to think in camera terms. In low brightness, you need a longer, slower shutter speed (lower CFF) and bigger, brighter aperture (pupil area) to get enough light.

It is also one of the reasons why people have trouble seeing the difference in the souls gif.

And if you look at http://testufo.com/#test=framerates-text
you can test that as you lower the brightness the advantage of 60fps diminishes (besides LCD blur)

 

[CrashPrime]

It's a bummer that I can see the difference SO clearly because it just offers up disappointment in knowing so many devs target 30fps.

These are just short little looped clips and it's BLATANTLY obvious how much better 60fps is, and I am not even PLAYING the damn game. This is just purely watching videos ... throw a controller in your hand and you'll notice the effect with one eye closed, and an eyepatch over the other!

I am honestly SHOCKED at the amount of people who can not tell, or barely can tell the difference.

Here's the thing tho ... throw me a upscaled 720p video vs. a 1080p video and I'd probably be one of the folks saying "meh I don't see much of a difference".

 

[Always-honest]

Does this work on an iPad?