![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Here's my own article, or a mini-guide:
Triple Buffering with Vsync enabled offers the best visual image quality. However, 60 Hz refresh rate limits the frame rate to 60 fps with Vsync on. If Triple Buffering is not used and the frame rate dips below 60, then it automatically reverts to 30 fps which is 1/2 of 60 Hz. 30 fps causes two identical frames to be displayed in sequence for each refresh interval before it swaps to the next frame on the third refresh interval.
If it dips below 30 fps, then it automatically reverts to 20 fps, which is 1/3 of 60 Hz. That causes THREE identical frames to be displayed in sequence before you will be able to see the next frame. That makes the whole screen appear to be much more choppy in an ugly way. Below 20, and it would be 15 (or 1/4), and then 1/5, and so on...
With triple buffering, the frame rates can fluctuate freely below the refresh rate even if the computer is not powerful enough to maintain a minimum frame rate that matches the Vsync monitor refresh rate. Please keep in mind that with triple buffering on, it is strongly recommended that your computer is powerful enough to maintain at least 1/3 the frame rate of the refresh rate you're playing at. It's because triple buffering offers only 2 "back buffers". Or, you would be experiencing noticeably worse choppiness whenever the frame rate dips below 1/3 of the refresh rate. If Vsync is still an absolute must even with the frame rates dipping below 1/3 of the refresh rate, then you could add a third backbuffer through a special program called DXTweaker (type "3" in backbuffer count in the "Present Changer" module), thus making it "Quadruple Buffering". That would only be applicable for games that can be tolerated at such low frame rates such as The Sims 2 or Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.
60 Hz is rarely desirable, though. For one thing, on CRT's it causes screen flickering that is very noticeable and fatiguing to your eyes. Second, if your computer is powerful enough to run at 85 frames per second, why limit it to 60 in any games (except for Doom3 that is already capped at 60fps)? 85 allows for a much smoother gameplay that does look smoother and more fluid, regardless of whether Vsync is on or off.
If you just cannot or just do not want to enable Triple Buffering, then setting it at 60 Hz instead of 85+ Hz would only make sense if the game drops below 85 fps but stays above 60 fps. If you set it to 85 Hz with Vsync on, but your computer can only maintain like 65 fps minimum, then that is understandable since you do not want to experience drops to 1/2 of 85 Hz which gives only 42.5 fps. In that case, just turn on triple buffering! Besides, the small lag that triple buffering brings is usually preferrable to the horrible screen flickering at 60 Hz on CRT monitors. Just force it through DXTweaker or ATI Tray Tools if it doesnt work in DirectX games under Nvidia or ATI drivers.
Vsync at 60 Hz could also make sense with Doom3 / Quake 4 games that are capped at 60 fps. Most LCD monitor panels only do 60 Hz anyway, which sucks!
If you have a good CRT monitor, it would make even more sense to just upgrade your computer to something slightly faster so that you could do a minimum of 85. (ha ha..) That gets rid of the screen flickering that is so evident at 60 Hz.
Triple buffering with Vsync on is not recommended for extremely fast-paced multiplayer games especially when you play online, or for really fast racing games. Triple Buffering causes 32 ms of lag at 60 Hz since you will be looking at a frame buffer that was drawn 2 frames (or at least 2 screen refreshes) ago. If you want the absolute least lag when playing fast-paced games, just disable Vsync and Triple Buffering altogether. Vsync itself without triple buffering still causes 16 ms of lag at 60 Hz. However, without Vsync at 60 Hz (common on most LCD monitors), the screen tearing is much worse than at higher refresh rates like 85+ Hz. Some would find the screen tearing to be completely unbearable at 60 Hz, so Vsync is almost a "must" for any games on LCD's.
That's why CRT's still have a huge advantage over LCD panels for games, asides from the fact that most LCD's have an additional 10-50+ ms of variable lag. I can only pray that there will soon be LCD monitors that display 120 Hz in native resolution.
Edit: Added a link with more info. on Triple Buffering and DXTweaker:
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2006/articles/DXtweaker/
If you experience hitches at high resolutions with 4X FSAA after turning on Triple Buffering, you might be running out of video memory. Now would be a good time to upgrade to a card with more video memory. (Note that the hitches with "liberal" frame rates could sometimes actually be preferable to the *fractioned* frame rates caused by Vsync's default Double Buffering, which also causes a different kind of stuttered slow-down!) Anyway, the link above explains the math of the video memory used by Triple Buffering.
Any questions or comments?
Triple Buffering with Vsync enabled offers the best visual image quality. However, 60 Hz refresh rate limits the frame rate to 60 fps with Vsync on. If Triple Buffering is not used and the frame rate dips below 60, then it automatically reverts to 30 fps which is 1/2 of 60 Hz. 30 fps causes two identical frames to be displayed in sequence for each refresh interval before it swaps to the next frame on the third refresh interval.
If it dips below 30 fps, then it automatically reverts to 20 fps, which is 1/3 of 60 Hz. That causes THREE identical frames to be displayed in sequence before you will be able to see the next frame. That makes the whole screen appear to be much more choppy in an ugly way. Below 20, and it would be 15 (or 1/4), and then 1/5, and so on...
With triple buffering, the frame rates can fluctuate freely below the refresh rate even if the computer is not powerful enough to maintain a minimum frame rate that matches the Vsync monitor refresh rate. Please keep in mind that with triple buffering on, it is strongly recommended that your computer is powerful enough to maintain at least 1/3 the frame rate of the refresh rate you're playing at. It's because triple buffering offers only 2 "back buffers". Or, you would be experiencing noticeably worse choppiness whenever the frame rate dips below 1/3 of the refresh rate. If Vsync is still an absolute must even with the frame rates dipping below 1/3 of the refresh rate, then you could add a third backbuffer through a special program called DXTweaker (type "3" in backbuffer count in the "Present Changer" module), thus making it "Quadruple Buffering". That would only be applicable for games that can be tolerated at such low frame rates such as The Sims 2 or Elder Scrolls: Oblivion.
60 Hz is rarely desirable, though. For one thing, on CRT's it causes screen flickering that is very noticeable and fatiguing to your eyes. Second, if your computer is powerful enough to run at 85 frames per second, why limit it to 60 in any games (except for Doom3 that is already capped at 60fps)? 85 allows for a much smoother gameplay that does look smoother and more fluid, regardless of whether Vsync is on or off.
If you just cannot or just do not want to enable Triple Buffering, then setting it at 60 Hz instead of 85+ Hz would only make sense if the game drops below 85 fps but stays above 60 fps. If you set it to 85 Hz with Vsync on, but your computer can only maintain like 65 fps minimum, then that is understandable since you do not want to experience drops to 1/2 of 85 Hz which gives only 42.5 fps. In that case, just turn on triple buffering! Besides, the small lag that triple buffering brings is usually preferrable to the horrible screen flickering at 60 Hz on CRT monitors. Just force it through DXTweaker or ATI Tray Tools if it doesnt work in DirectX games under Nvidia or ATI drivers.
Vsync at 60 Hz could also make sense with Doom3 / Quake 4 games that are capped at 60 fps. Most LCD monitor panels only do 60 Hz anyway, which sucks!
If you have a good CRT monitor, it would make even more sense to just upgrade your computer to something slightly faster so that you could do a minimum of 85. (ha ha..) That gets rid of the screen flickering that is so evident at 60 Hz.
Triple buffering with Vsync on is not recommended for extremely fast-paced multiplayer games especially when you play online, or for really fast racing games. Triple Buffering causes 32 ms of lag at 60 Hz since you will be looking at a frame buffer that was drawn 2 frames (or at least 2 screen refreshes) ago. If you want the absolute least lag when playing fast-paced games, just disable Vsync and Triple Buffering altogether. Vsync itself without triple buffering still causes 16 ms of lag at 60 Hz. However, without Vsync at 60 Hz (common on most LCD monitors), the screen tearing is much worse than at higher refresh rates like 85+ Hz. Some would find the screen tearing to be completely unbearable at 60 Hz, so Vsync is almost a "must" for any games on LCD's.
That's why CRT's still have a huge advantage over LCD panels for games, asides from the fact that most LCD's have an additional 10-50+ ms of variable lag. I can only pray that there will soon be LCD monitors that display 120 Hz in native resolution.
Edit: Added a link with more info. on Triple Buffering and DXTweaker:
http://www.ocworkbench.com/2006/articles/DXtweaker/
If you experience hitches at high resolutions with 4X FSAA after turning on Triple Buffering, you might be running out of video memory. Now would be a good time to upgrade to a card with more video memory. (Note that the hitches with "liberal" frame rates could sometimes actually be preferable to the *fractioned* frame rates caused by Vsync's default Double Buffering, which also causes a different kind of stuttered slow-down!) Anyway, the link above explains the math of the video memory used by Triple Buffering.
Any questions or comments?
