What are "playable" FPS?

[jaylim0512]

So I looked up the benchmark scores for an HD 6850 and it says on crysis 1920X1200: it runs at 24.1-36.1 FPS. Are these playable FPS?

And if I overclocked the gpu would it make a difference and by how much?

 

[SZLiao214]

You should be able to get like 3-4 frames as the 6850 overclocks pretty well depending on which one you got.

Your current set up is on the low end of what i consider playable. I prefer 60 frames constant with dips no lower then 45 during the big fights. You will notice a lot of stuttering when there are explosions and smoke.

 

[fffblackmage]

I kinda doubt OCing the GPU will make it smooth, but it'll help. I've had cases where OCing will make the gameplay less stuttery. Your best bet will be to lower some settings to boost FPS though.

 

[alcoholbob]

I always felt that 25+fps was pretty smooth/playable on Crysis, possibly due to the aggressive motion blur.

From the PCGH GTX 285/CPU scaling and Anandtech Intel X-25M SSD benchmarks, CPU and Hard Drive speed significantly effect minimum framerates in Crysis (up to 35% faster).

So while you can't overclock your hard drive, OCing your CPU should improve the overall performance.

 

[notty22]

Great question.
I always lower settings to get more fps.
In driving games its very important to get a good feel. 50+
I would say in Crysis, you need to stay over 30fps in high attack/explosion areas.

 

[12andy]

In Crysis, or in general?

IME, "playable" FPS is directly proportionate to the speed of gameplay. 25 FPS is doable in Crysis, while anything under 125 (or so) FPS in Quake Live could be felt, even on a 60hz LCD.

 

[Arkadrel]

i7 920 @ 3.8Ghz + 6850 Cyclone (860mhz) = ~28 fps.

Yes but the 580 would probably only be like ~34-35 fps.

Will the 7 fps make a huge differnce? meh...Probably not.
That said... I believe a i5 2500k@4.7 ghz sandy bridge would help things abit.

There arnt many *if any* games more demanding than Crysis 1 with everything on.
Crysis warhead? please runs much better, Metro2033? please runs much better than crysis.

So basically this is the worst fps you ll ever see these cards at most likely (within a year or so), unless by then something more demanding than metro2033 is released.

*PS: you can always turn down graphics to your likeling to get better fps.

 

[Powermoloch]

30 FPS is my limit for playable FPS for First person shooters.

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

Get a Gtx 460 SOC version the 1gb version. Crysis use the same effect that we see in movies called motion blur although the frame rates maybe lower you don't notice it due to that. Same as you don't notice a 24fps movie

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

60 FPS average metro maxed at 1600p.

 

[taltamir]

So I looked up the benchmark scores for an HD 6850 and it says on crysis 1920X1200: it runs at 24.1-36.1 FPS. Are these playable FPS?

nothing at all prevents you from playing crysis at a lower resolution... or lowering other graphics settings from max.

Playable is GENERALLY considered 30+ FPS, but personal taste matters too, for some its less for some its more.

Crysis is, to this day, the most graphically heavy game every created.. Your 6850 can max out the majority of games out there, and the few it cannot (ex: crysis) you can just tweak the quality settings to your taste.

 

[floogy]

I have a 6850 and it's true, you won't be able to max out everything and expect 100% smooth gameplay. Maybe 90% but it will stutter a bit. I turn off post processing and motion blur a lot because it bugs me and it's not the way I see the world in real life, my vision isn't that bad. Bumps up FPS significantly.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

About 80fps. I can handle 40fps in 3d.

 

[SirPauly]

Ideally would like to have 60 minimums but there is this problem called adding IQ and immersion, so usually sacrifice some minimums to pour on IQ -- usually around 40 for minimums. I'll even sacrifice some more if the IQ is a massive step in immersion and will settle for 30 minimums over-all but it has to be a massive step though.

 

[nitromullet]

I always felt that 25+fps was pretty smooth/playable on Crysis, possibly due to the aggressive motion blur.

From the PCGH GTX 285/CPU scaling and Anandtech Intel X-25M SSD benchmarks, CPU and Hard Drive speed significantly effect minimum framerates in Crysis (up to 35% faster).

So while you can't overclock your hard drive, OCing your CPU should improve the overall performance.

This is taken a bit out of context. The Crysis GPU benchmark is a flyby bench, so it's streaming textures and other data from the HD/SSD much faster than you ever would during gameplay.

Anand even comments on this himself in the review:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/2614/14

Edit: As far as fps goes, anything above 25-30 is playable in Crysis for me. Of course, faster is always smoother.

 

[happy medium]

it runs at 24.1-36.1 FPS. Are these playable FPS?

For crysis yes. Overclocking will increase fps by 3 on avg which will help alot more than you think..

 

[BababooeyHTJ]

LA Noire with a cap a 30 feels sluggish to me. The default cap of 30fps in Oblivion and Fallout stutter remover feels awful to me too. I'm content with a cap at 40 which is what I used in Oblivion, Fallout 3, and Far Cry 2.

 

[sandorski]

Vote++ Personal/Subjective

Higher, to a point, is always better, but back in the day I played some Unreal in Software mode at 13 FPS(Avg) and did quite well. I certainly wouldn't play a game at that FPS these days, but one can adjust and play. Though FPS dropping to 25-30 during a game is noticeable, it generally doesn't affect the gameplay, it just doesn't look as nice.

 

[skipsneeky2]

For me in fps games like BF3 and BC2 i like to pull about 55-60 frames average with minimum rate as of lately at around upper 30s being playable but not enjoyable in long dosages.

If i don't pull those average numbers i drop whatever settings to get that first being aa,then hbao if need be.

Caspian has become my stomping grounds for benchmarking my gpu and settings,if that map can pull 55fps average most other maps like Metro basically fly.:thumbsup:

 

[Corporate Thug]

RAGE

 

[lyssword]

I'd say for single player 30fps is not bad, but maybe online low fps may be more of a problem

 

[Zeze]

thirty fps (few number keys broken on my laptop) is good enough for fun single player games. My aging budget rig played Deus EX HR at thirty fps at 1080p and i was pleasantly surprised. I felt no problem later on after adjusting to it.

I was also very happy with Skyrim, boy that game scales well. I played it at full max all settings at thirty to 40fps on my old 4850HD. Very proud of it.

As for multiplayer, you need more fps. I play SC Two on medium setting just to get that super smooth 60-80fps. Dota Two runs very smooth at 60Plus fps as well.

**** this broken keyboard.


No profanity in the tech forums, please. You are in VC&G, not OT.

Moderator jvroig

 

[Yuriman]

I'd say for single player 30fps is not bad, but maybe online low fps may be more of a problem

This for me ^

I played through Crysis getting 25-30 low average on my 4870 and had no problems, but I'd never want to play a competitive online shooter with less than 40-50 minimum.

 

[Quantos]

Depends on the game in my opinion. I raided in WoW at something under 15 fps for a long time, and it was pretty playable (though I had a character that didn't have to move to much). For something like an FPS, though, I'd say 40 is closer to the playable threshold.

 

[RavenSEAL]

I'm a junkie for 60 FPS now, anything less makes me wanna flip a table.