60fps Gaming

[Billie Kjergaard]

Thankyou for all the suggestions. I did check all your points, I had most of them already in line with your proposals (e.g. Nvidia drivers, V-sync settings, power settings). The only big difference was BIOS update and I updated the BIOS, but I am still capped at 60fps. I do not think it is a temperature issue, because most of the time the FPS stays at 60fps pointing to a possible limiter somewhere in the system.

No one can get 4k at 60fps even with a $10k system. It's just not happening right now. Maybe in 10 years from now (exaggerating a bit) we'll finally see Beta and if lucky, might see better optimizing, and the game will finally be able to have a more stable and higher fps. Though I doubt we'll ever see 4k at 60fps or higher, at least not without a new generation of video cards and CPUs.

I could probably sneak in better settings and still maintain good fps, but I'm not bothered by it cuz all I care about is the fps, not the graphics detail. With those settings I can usually stay around 55-60fps.

This means NO upscaling should be including in any post. That is not real optimization.. Remember not to use TSR as a AA method because the creator clearly stated its an upscaling method and it can tank performance unreasony at native resolutions.

Using Universal Unreal Engine 5 Unlocker is welcomed in showing what could have been better performance and make sure the resolution and screen percentages are correct. For instance, some recent games have set sg.ResolutionQuality below 100 without letting players know to change it back to full resolution/100(to hide bad performance).

Absolutely horrible performance for such a simple project. Same Perf as City Sample.

I made sure not to include much sky when monitoring performance since rendering the sky is pretty cheap and uncommon.

I appreciate you citing me for inspiration to the post, and I do believe that a good understanding of the performance of UE5 games matter, but I feel the need to say my piece at this point. This is just my opinion, not a declaration of right or wrong, or an accusation against anybody. The beautiful purpose of forums like these is that we can discuss differing viewpoints to come to a more correct conclusion as a community.

The biggest problem is most developers are using high end 4k cards or 1440p card because they can process the game making faster. But then they test the game at 4k and use DLSS or TSR to reach 60fps at fake 4k. They will upscale from a better, more fit resolution like 1080p or 1440p to upscale to a 4k ish image.

Which in fact, may not look like blurry hell.

As for consoles like the PS5 or Series X, I already stated this in another post. Sony and Microsoft advertised 4k gaming when both the PS5 and Series X are nowhere near 4k gaming cards(in terms of the current gen rasterization to resolution ratio). So studios have to use output resolution upscaling methods.

EDIT: Btw, when I say 1080p for a 3060, you can replace the GPU with a 3080, the game should ship at Native 4k. 1440p for RX 6750. These cards perform the same if they are playing at their targeted resolution. Just in case anyone missed the Current Gen Rasterization to resolution scale in the first post.

Which, again. That is stupid and insulting to the average wallet since playing at 4k is extremely hard even with $800+ computer budget.

This game has the same oxymoron of games mentality once again.

What this does is centralize reflections where they are needed, lower the reflection resolution, and then reconstruct a shinier/more clear output.

You might need to rid TAA and jittering upscalers like DLSS or these reflections will wobble.

Was helping a friend get better/less noisy reflections in a game.

Hopefully I can do a piece on that games performance here soon.

Because they force upscaling and temporal AA/output resolution upscalers. No option for FXAA. The gameplay looks terrible in real life as I suspected @Guillaume.Abadie . Why would the developers offer FXAA when your AA documentation describes it as a method that hurts image fidelity even though the temporal methods ruin motion. I have no doubt if CMAA2 or SMAA were offered in the engine, we would not have received such a poor presentation of this franchise.

For a solid 2 years there, RAM and graphics cards were painfully expensive. I surprisingly (and with a tinge of sadness) found myself writing about the cost benefit of buying off-the-shelf PCs instead of pushing my preferred DIY approach. But we're out of the woods now, and building your own quality gaming PC is once again affordable. In this article I'll show you the ideal hardware recipe for a rock-solid gaming PC that can hit 1080p/60fps on any game out there while cranking up the visual quality to ultra or high.

Since I started writing these in 2013, I've found the sweet spot for 1080p gaming to be around $750. The cost of entry hasn't dipped much during that time, but the performance (and in some cases hardware, as this build doubles the RAM to 16GB) you're getting per dollar has skyrocketed. I'll show you a few examples below.

I went back and benchmarked three of the games from my 2015 build -- roughly the same cost but with only half the amount of RAM -- and the performance uplift speaks for itself. Up to 86% higher framerates using the same visual quality settings! Technology marches on and gives us better eye dramatically more exciting candy for roughly the same expense.

Some notes up front: you'll find this build list over at PCPartPicker, where you can tweak the components, run your own price analysis and do further research. At time of publication, the below hardware totaled $739 (before taxes). I ran the benchmarks on my own Ryzen 5 2600 test bench using a different memory kit, but at the same 2400MHz clock.

Nvidia may have the fancy new RTX lineup and even a successor to the incredible GTX 1060 on the way, but the Radeon RX 580 still boasts a strong value proposition for 1080p gaming targets. Consider that it's obtainable for less than $170, and that value is clear. While Nvidia still holds the crown when it comes to power efficiency, I tend to choose Radeon because of the more affordable FreeSync monitor ecosystem. Simply put, the cost of entry is cheaper and the results are identical. As proof, look no further than Nvidia's official support of FreeSync.

Don't let the chunkiness (it's thicker and longer than AMD's reference RX 480) or silly name of this XFX model fool you; it's one of the best RX 580s out there. Especially at this price. Between the metal backplate, ample copper heatpipes and efficient cooling, you can't go wrong here. My one complaint is the location of the 8-pin power connector, but it's a minor inconvenience you'll likely only deal with once or twice.

Launched at $249 and now selling for around $150, the Ryzen 5 2600 was a significant improvement over the first-gen Ryzen 5 1600, and a sane alternative to the Ryzen 5 2600X. Six cores and 12 threads means you won't be hurting for CPU cycles when it comes to multitasking, streaming or gaming. And test after test shows AMD's Wraith cooler surpassing the typical stock CPU cooler offerings from Intel.

You could shave a few bucks here and stick with 8GB. You could even opt for slower 2133MHz RAM, but Ryzen thrives on faster speeds and we want to future-proof the system a bit. Consider that even your browser with a few tabs open can consume close to 4GB of system RAM. As for color and brand preference, I'm choosing XPG because it's affordable, well-reviewed and I dig the red. However, Corsair Vengeance LPX kits are another solid option.

The Auros Pro Wifi isn't bleeding edge, but that's not what we're shooting for. What it does have is a sharp color scheme (without being garish), durable build and enough connectivity to handle peripherals like keyboard + mouse, gamepad, headphones and external drives with USB ports to spare. The RGB bling is conservative, too.

This board also has some crucial perks: built-in WiFi + Bluetooth and dual PCIe Gen3 M.2 NVMe drive slots. No need to buy any extra dongles for connectivity, and room to grow if you take the NVMe plunge down the road.

As for space, many newer games are reaching install sizes of 100GB, so we need a roomy 2TB drive at minimum. For you SSD though, feel free to shop around. Kingston and Samsung also have quality SSDs in the same price range. It's all about striking when the deals are hot. By all means, if you can splurge for a roomier (250GB+) SSD, don't hesitate.

I chose this EVGA because it's 80+ Gold Certified and semi- modular, which makes for a cleaner looking build. If you want a fully modular option with a couple more bells and whistles, check out this EVGA SuperNova 650W PSU. But a word of warning: stay away from the 80+ Bronze variants. This is the component you want giving clean, reliable juice to your PC, so don't cut corners.

Tasteful tempered glass and RGBs (with 16 different modes) for $75? Sold. Major bonus points for this case get scored by its concealed compartments for PSU and drives, its three built-in 120mm front fans and cable management opportunities.

You saw the 2015 vs 2019 system comparison above, but those older games wouldn't be a fair representation of this build's capabilities. So what can a $750 build in 2019 handle? To find out, I ran a handful of newer and considerably more demanding games with the visual presets cranked up to their highest value (Ultimate, Very High, Ultra, etc. . .)

As you can tell from the numbers, Ultra 1080/60fps gaming is easily achievable and 1440p gaming is well within reach. Reduce the quality settings down one notch, and you'd have 50fps to 70fps across the board at 2560 x 1440 resolution.

Basically, make it yours. Head into the process knowing that building your own PC is a cathartic and rewarding experience, and that $750 in 2019 can get you one beast of a 1080p machine. Have fun and happy gaming!

The problem is with the adaptive refresh rate, the phone cannot handle 120hz, it is not designed around that, mainly 90hz is being used..that being said not even 90hz is able to be kept maintained and sustained throughout any game. COD Mobile is the same, with severe fps drops and stuttery even when selecting 60 fps mode with promotion on, PUBG is the same on 90fps mode, Archero, i doubt is runningat more than 60, maybe 90 fps at best. The phone keeps switching back to 60hz based on what the fuck is happening in the game, and then it detects that it's playing a game and it ramps up to 120hz for a while, then back to 60. The whole problem is easily avoidable by LOCKING THE REFRESH RATE WHEN GAMING. It aint hard for the phone to detect a fucking game being played. Given the fact that most pros are playing on apple merchandise, we may or may not see a problem uprising in 1-2 years. By that time a new phone will come out from them that will not have the issue. It will, sadly most likely never be fixed, and it affects all units. I have tested a 13 pro and at least 5, 13 pro max models. All have the same issue, some people will say theirs is fine, those are the people coming from phones running at 60hz or gaming at 60 fps or less. Coming from gaming phones with fixed high refresh rates, such as other ROG phones, I can tell, and so can you, we care about QOL, we can FEEL and SEE the difference. It affects all models across the board that have pro motion. The phone can NOT sustain 120hz, under no circumstance, not even in the system, not even when scrolling, it mainly uses 90HZ, and in games, you'd be lucky to have that, you'd actually be lucky to have even stable 60 fps, because the mobile phone is running at 90-120hz with promotion on, 60FPS gaming will feels worse than what the iphone 12 that has a 60 hz screen running a 60fps game. The solution is "when gaming lock the refresh rate, to a static fixed one, just like all the other phones do it"... it is absurd to have the refresh rate change based on what the game is displaying, not to mention that something is happening with the cpu/gpu when that happens, because when the drops occur, you lose responsiveness and raw frames, the phone is actually struggling, it isn't using the processing power.

3a8082e126