Dell 2005FPW LCD and V Sync

[liquidmage]

Hello All,

I just ordered my Dell 2005FPW LCD. My questions is if my programs run at over 60fps should I turn on vsync? I mostly play WoW and I have an ATI X800XT AIW. My average frames at 1600x1200 6xAA and 8xAF with everything maxed are between 65-90 FPS. Should I enable VSync when I get my LCD?

I tried doing a search and browsed through 5 or 6 posts but did not find an answer.

Thanks,
Nick

 

[mathesar]

You pretty much have to enable Vsync on an LCD monitor,Without Vsync the screen tearing / seperation effect is much worse compared to on a CRT monitor.

 

[TwistedMetalGear]

A lot of hardcore gamers turn vsync off because they want to get frame rates in the 100s.

Though the truth is as long as you are above 60 FPS there is absolutely no difference, the picture is fluid smooth with no jerkiness whatsoever. Once you hit fluid smooth at 60 or so FPS the frame rate no longer has an effect, it just becomes a number.

And tearing, like response time on LCD's, is something that a lot of people either don't notice or simply don't care about. You know what I'm talking about, there are tons of people out there that say 8ms or even 12ms LCD's have no ghosting at all, and that is simply not true.

So it all depends on your eyes and your perception of screen tearing... Myself, it bothers the hell out of me seeing the screen break up when mouselooking horizontally in games. It looks horrible, so vsync is a must for me. And with most gamer CRT's running at 85Hz and above, you will be getting 85+ FPS which is absolutely no different than 300+ FPS.

It bothers me that people turn off vsync to get higher FPS. Do they not realize that once you hit 60+ FPS you are equivalent to the smoothness in real life?

As far as I know, vsync has absolutely no effect on framerate besides limiting it to your refresh rate, so your card will still be pumping out huge FPS amounts and just capping it at 85.

So yeah, turn vsync on, and enjoy games in motion.

One question, you said LCD's have more tearing than CRT's... This makes me a little nervous, do they still tear even when vsync is on?

 

[PKFGimpy]

It bothers me that people turn off vsync to get higher FPS. Do they not realize that once you hit 60+ FPS you are equivalent to the smoothness in real life?

Real life != 60 fps.

I don't know where you or other people get the idea that 60 FPS is this magical number at which the human eye is suddenly unable to percieve a distinction of motion.

The human eye can percieve motion to incredibly fine detail depending on the situation, probably into the 1000's of FPS.

One good example is to simply scroll your windows mouse across a dark screen at high speed. Your mouse pointer is being refreshed at 60 FPS, but you can easily and distinctively make out a "jumpiness" and lack of fluidity as the mouse pointer flashes from point to point across the screen.

If you ever wanted to render that mouse as a fuild motion across the screen you would have to sample the mouse pointer image thousands of times across the screen in a fraction of a second. This right here is proof that the human eye can percieve much more than 60 FPS, and that games can always benefit from a higher framerate.


And about the question of VSync, if your framerate NEVER drops below 60FPS, I recomend you turn it on. However, if your framerate drops to anything below 60FPS, it will suddenly drop the actual framerate to 30FPS. So your game will either run at 30FPS, or 60FPS.... and running at 30FPS when your card should be pulling off 59FPS SUCKS! Turning on triple buffering solves this problem, but its only supported in a limited number of games.

 

[mokkapoop]

what is VSync, and how do I enable it? I have the 2005fpw as well.

 

[TwistedMetalGear]

Real life != 60 fps.

I don't know where you or other people get the idea that 60 FPS is this magical number at which the human eye is suddenly unable to percieve a distinction of motion.

The human eye can percieve motion to incredibly fine detail depending on the situation, probably into the 1000's of FPS.

One good example is to simply scroll your windows mouse across a dark screen at high speed. Your mouse pointer is being refreshed at 60 FPS, but you can easily and distinctively make out a "jumpiness" and lack of fluidity as the mouse pointer flashes from point to point across the screen.

If you ever wanted to render that mouse as a fuild motion across the screen you would have to sample the mouse pointer image thousands of times across the screen in a fraction of a second. This right here is proof that the human eye can percieve much more than 60 FPS, and that games can always benefit from a higher framerate.


And about the question of VSync, if your framerate NEVER drops below 60FPS, I recomend you turn it on. However, if your framerate drops to anything below 60FPS, it will suddenly drop the actual framerate to 30FPS. So your game will either run at 30FPS, or 60FPS.... and running at 30FPS when your card should be pulling off 59FPS SUCKS! Turning on triple buffering solves this problem, but its only supported in a limited number of games.

Every 60+ FPS console and computer game I have played has moved across the screen WITHOUT the game objects skipping any pixels(aka "jerkiness"). This is why I used the term fluid smooth. So if no pixels are being skipped, how is it any different from real life smoothness? You can't get any smoother than pixel to pixel movement.

Now perhaps you are right about moving the mouse really fast to get some skippage to occur. I never noticed it though. Everything in 60+ FPS games reminds me of real life motion. Now 30 FPS I can easily see the difference, because you can see the game objects skipping pixels during movement.

 

[mathesar]

The problem with Vsync is that it doesn't just simply limit the framerate to your monitors refresh rate , it actualy hurts performance in some games ,. Good example is enabling / disabling Vsync in Doom 3 with the FPS counter onscreen ..without vsync I hit 60-100fps but yet with vsync enabled the game dips in the 30's very frequently. Same goes for Quake 4 & FEAR. This is why I prefer running high refresh rates without Vsync ,the higher refresh rates reduce the screen tearing to a minimum on CRTs.

 

[PKFGimpy]

Every 60+ FPS console and computer game I have played has moved across the screen WITHOUT the game objects skipping any pixels(aka "jerkiness"). This is why I used the term fluid smooth. So if no pixels are being skipped, how is it any different from real life smoothness? You can't get any smoother than pixel to pixel movement.

Now perhaps you are right about moving the mouse really fast to get some skippage to occur. I never noticed it though. Everything in 60+ FPS games reminds me of real life motion. Now 30 FPS I can easily see the difference, because you can see the game objects skipping pixels during movement.

The skipping is still there even at 60FPS, its just not as noticeable.

It's still pretty easy to see it though. Just load up Half Life or something and spin in circles wildly like some maniac lunatic. You'll be able to see individual frames rather than a smooth "blur" like you would see in real life. The only way you can mimic real life is to either increase the framerate to some obscene level, or fake it out with some kind of motion blur.

That being said, 60FPS is still a good benchmark for a framerate that appears as smooth as real life in the majority of circumstances 99% of the time you won't be able to make out any loss of fluidity.

 

[Variable]

When I play really dark games like Doom 3 on my Dell 2005 fpw, some lines seem to move slower when I turn left or right really quickly, almost lagging. Is that what screen tearing is?

 

[fatez]

The skipping is still there even at 60FPS, its just not as noticeable.

It's still pretty easy to see it though. Just load up Half Life or something and spin in circles wildly like some maniac lunatic. You'll be able to see individual frames rather than a smooth "blur" like you would see in real life. The only way you can mimic real life is to either increase the framerate to some obscene level, or fake it out with some kind of motion blur.

That being said, 60FPS is still a good benchmark for a framerate that appears as smooth as real life in the majority of circumstances 99% of the time you won't be able to make out any loss of fluidity.

I have a dell 2005 fpw and I set the refresh rate to 75 mhz and also turning off v-sync. So when I play counterstrike condition zero, I generally get from 99 to 100 fps or when I type developer 0 in console I get 200+ fps. I still see blur and everything. I guess because I moved around like a lunatic playing at 18+ sensitivity and shooting 3 to 4 guys at once. I once played at 60 fps because I turned v-sync on and did notice that I was moving really slow. I somehow can actually tell that it wasn't smooth as the above poster say. Even at 100+ fps on a LCD I can still see blur but that never happend on a CRT. I don't know if this help but I was playing on a crt for 8 years.

 

[mathesar]

When Vsync is disabled if your framerate exceeds the current monitor refresh this is when you see screen tearing , Idealy you want the framerate to stay below or at the monitors refresh rate to prevent this ..This is why a higher refresh rate is better when not running Vsync.

 

[powerade]

A lot of hardcore gamers turn vsync off because they want to get frame rates in the 100s.

Though the truth is as long as you are above 60 FPS there is absolutely no difference, the picture is fluid smooth with no jerkiness whatsoever. Once you hit fluid smooth at 60 or so FPS the frame rate no longer has an effect, it just becomes a number.

And tearing, like response time on LCD's, is something that a lot of people either don't notice or simply don't care about. You know what I'm talking about, there are tons of people out there that say 8ms or even 12ms LCD's have no ghosting at all, and that is simply not true.

So it all depends on your eyes and your perception of screen tearing... Myself, it bothers the hell out of me seeing the screen break up when mouselooking horizontally in games. It looks horrible, so vsync is a must for me. And with most gamer CRT's running at 85Hz and above, you will be getting 85+ FPS which is absolutely no different than 300+ FPS.

It bothers me that people turn off vsync to get higher FPS. Do they not realize that once you hit 60+ FPS you are equivalent to the smoothness in real life?

As far as I know, vsync has absolutely no effect on framerate besides limiting it to your refresh rate, so your card will still be pumping out huge FPS amounts and just capping it at 85.

So yeah, turn vsync on, and enjoy games in motion.

One question, you said LCD's have more tearing than CRT's... This makes me a little nervous, do they still tear even when vsync is on?

im sure im not the first person to correct u, but play some games that take some skill. Games like quake and hl mods take advantage of higher fps. Even 300+ chump. makes trick jumping / guns shoot faster etc. Believe what u want but its been proven

 

[kreidel]

I have a dell 2005 fpw and I set the refresh rate to 75 mhz and also turning off v-sync. So when I play counterstrike condition zero, I generally get from 99 to 100 fps or when I type developer 0 in console I get 200+ fps. I still see blur and everything. I guess because I moved around like a lunatic playing at 18+ sensitivity and shooting 3 to 4 guys at once. I once played at 60 fps because I turned v-sync on and did notice that I was moving really slow. I somehow can actually tell that it wasn't smooth as the above poster say. Even at 100+ fps on a LCD I can still see blur but that never happend on a CRT. I don't know if this help but I was playing on a crt for 8 years.

Other than eye strain and desktop space why would you settle for an LCD then? Or are those bigger factors than performance?

 

[TwistedMetalGear]

Honestly I think you're all on drugs.

Play Gran Turismo 3 or 4 and tell me that it doesn't look like real life fluidity. That's 60 FPS right there, perfect smoothness.

Even the insanely fast paced racers running at 60 FPS (Burnout series, Wipeout, etc...) move fluid smooth, I honestly don't think any pixels get skipped in those games.

I'm not really trying to argue, I'm just saying it as I see it... I'm actually really interested in this stuff, and I'm reading all of your responses, but no one seems to have a definite answer on things like "how many FPS can the human eye perceive"...

edit - And where has it been proven that 300 FPS gives you an advantage in games like Quake? Are you honestly saying that if you're running at 300 and I'm running at 100, you're going to have the advantage? There's no way.

 

[fatez]

Other than eye strain and desktop space why would you settle for an LCD then? Or are those bigger factors than performance?

Because I'm going off to college and needed the space and also, I must admit, watching a DVD on the LCD widescreen 2005 fpw beats a CRT anyday. Also a comparable CRT is really expensive plus I got a really good deal on the dell 2005 fpw. Also, I figured out if I used the LCD long enough I would eventually get used to it. I have the 2005 fpw for about 2 months now and notice less blur now than I first notice it.

 

[kreidel]

Because I'm going off to college and needed the space and also, I must admit, watching a DVD on the LCD widescreen 2005 fpw beats a CRT anyday. Also a comparable CRT is really expensive plus I got a really good deal on the dell 2005 fpw. Also, I figured out if I used the LCD long enough I would eventually get used to it. I have the 2005 fpw for about 2 months now and notice less blur now than I first notice it.

Just was wondering, I also have the 2005fpw and while it is a great monitor it is no CRT when it comes to gaming.

 

[Lantano]

Just was wondering, I also have the 2005fpw and while it is a great monitor it is no CRT when it comes to gaming.

How are dark games on the FP2005? On my wife's Samsing 930B playing FarCry all the shadows are light grey, good for cheating but kinda ruins the experience....

 

[PKFGimpy]

Honestly I think you're all on drugs.

Play Gran Turismo 3 or 4 and tell me that it doesn't look like real life fluidity. That's 60 FPS right there, perfect smoothness.

Even the insanely fast paced racers running at 60 FPS (Burnout series, Wipeout, etc...) move fluid smooth, I honestly don't think any pixels get skipped in those games.

I'm not really trying to argue, I'm just saying it as I see it... I'm actually really interested in this stuff, and I'm reading all of your responses, but no one seems to have a definite answer on things like "how many FPS can the human eye perceive"...

edit - And where has it been proven that 300 FPS gives you an advantage in games like Quake? Are you honestly saying that if you're running at 300 and I'm running at 100, you're going to have the advantage? There's no way.

If you were playing a twitch game like Quake or Unreal Tournament you would notice the difference. I mastered FZero-GX, probably one of the fastest racers ever made, and it ran at 60FPS and looked perfectly smooth to me as well. However, its not a twitch game like some first person shooters are, and i most certainly notice a difference between 60fps and 100fps in Quake or Unreal.

None of those racing games are twitch games.

Also, a professional FPS player will be at an advantage if he's running at 100fps while he opponent is running at 60fps. 100 FPS and 300 FPS might be stretching it a bit.