For me, anything 25 FPS or higher is 100% fine and I’ll be enjoy my time. I never play competitive online shooter games ever, though. All single player ones like GOW and the likes. I game on a 60 Hz 4k monitor. GPU is AMD RX 6600 alongside Ryzen 7 5700G and 32GB RAM. My games are set to meduim most of the time at 4k. Demanding titles are on low. Surprisingly, GOW and GOW Ragnarok are both set to ultra and I still get around 40ish FPS.
Depends on the game. If it’s not really demanding on reaction time, and the game is locked framerate I’m fine with 30, like Okami. However if the game is not locked FPS and I still can’t hit 60 FPS at least on my 1440p monitor I’d probably just play something else (because I know I could have better experience is I could run it).
However for shooter and reaction heavy games I always aim to max out my 144 Hz monitor, even 60 FPS can feel sluggish for me
Well, I first played Dragon Age Origins with the framerate fluctuating between 10 and 20 FPS. Wasn’t the most fun I’ve ever had, but ever since 30 - 60 felt like luxury. So yeah, anywhere from 10 to 30 is fine for me, but the more active a game is the closer to 30 minimum with a target of 60
For me, it highly depends. Turn-based strategy games, I can easily play at a much lower framerate (30 is fine tbh though I always appreciate more). FPS-style games? 60 is a bare minimum, but 100+ is what I would consider to be enjoyable.
25FPS and 480 pixels vertically is enough for me to get sucked in and forget the world around me.
Which is nice cause that way I can play open world RPGs like Kingdom Come on an old laptop.40 is fine, I can go lower depending on how nadlyO want the experience. I grew up relatively poor, I am not going to completely pass up on an experience I am looking forward to over a lower framerate.
I try to get 60 FPS, 30 is fine and i could live with 20
10 if the alternative is lag spikes
I only recently experienced the luxury of higher frame rates.
I’ll put up with 30. I usually don’t notice it after a while, especially if it’s steady.
60 is preferred, and I always aim for performance if I can.
I play a ton of simulation and strategy games (and some that I would hazard to classify as virtual railfanning/model railroading, like Railroads Online and Transport Fever 2) so I crank up the prettiness, download as much custom content as will load and enjoy the scenery at 20-40 FPS
40-45.
There are a lot of games at 30 I’ve played through just fine, but for FPS games that extra 10-15 is about my minimum unless it’s on console with aim assist. I grew up playing Saints Row 2 at single-digit framerates, but I just can’t do that anymore.
@penquin I never owned a monitor with more than 60 fps cause the newer ones are too expensive.
So I got used to the panels with bad colors and “low” fps. No free sync or gsync just good old vsync 😂
Also not sure if my 3070 would be able to get a 120 fps 2k screen working with high settings for games.
Back in the days of CRT displays I had a 120Hz Trinitron, to pair with the video card and 3D goggles (which shuttered each eye in turn) to give 60Hz per eye
No way could that system or video card keep up with anything more modern than Turok 1 but it was nice for the couple of years it was good enough.
I wish I still had that Trinitron, I’d need a deeper desk though
@psud I do like my displays cause they are so old right now and still working. One of them is that old that the most modern connection he got is DVI. To get that working I was forced to buy an adapter for my graphics card.
Because I got two displays the color of them is so different that if I move a window between them to be shown on both I can visually see how broken the colors are on both of them.
The also have issues with ghosting if there are fast movements. I still like them.
That made me laugh 😂. Simple is always good, as long as you’re having fun. 3070 would definitely do even 4k at 30FPS on medium or low. My RX 6600 does that easily on pretty much every game.
@penquin
Well as I said I do want a new one but that’s the case for 2 - 3 years now 😂The fate of a family father. You feel like you should pay for stuff which is more useful for the little ones. So the money is still good invested.
Highly depends on the type of game. For First person shooters, 120+ fps is a must. I skipped the more recent CoDs because I couldn’t get them to run at that target consistently enough on my PC without turning them into blurry DLSS smear.
Racing games, where motion is typically always going in one direction with only smooth direction changes, a lower framerate is fine (like 60 to 80), although the added smoothness from high framerate is obviously still nice.
Slower paced or turn based games I’m fine with going as low as 40 FPS, as long as it’s consistent without drops and frame pacing issues.
30 is acceptable for most games but stuff where the gameplay is mainly the movement itself (platformer, racing, first person shooter) needs to hit 60. I could go lower than 30 for the visuals on a lot of games but that’s the threshold where the interface starts feeling unresponsive and that really gets to me.
45
Also, 5
For the longest time I thought 30fps is good, but now I always want 60 fps - 50 is my minimum. Id rather drop some shadows, clouds, lighting.
Anything realtime needs to be at least 60 fps, the closer to my monitor 144Hz the better. Something like a city builder or turn based strategy or non-time-critical relaxed co-op stuff is fine to be 30+.
I’d never want to play any shooter at lower than 60, no RTS, no racing game and so on.
