Blur Busters Forums

Can someone tell me what setting is the best for the most even frametime/input lag in CS:GO?
I play with 120Hz on my BenQ XL2411Z
I am CPU bottlenecked (FX-6300 + R9 390).
I can limit my framerate in 3 different ways:
a) fps_max "x" in-game.
b) fps limit in AMD Crimson settings.
c) the new "chill" feature in AMD Relive which is suppose to reduce frametime according to AMD.
Out of the 3 options i found the chill setting when set to ,122 minimum fps - 300 maximum fps, to be the most consistent and the AMD frame limiter almost as consistens as the chill feature but it could also very well be placebo.

Which way (if any) should i cap my FPS with and what should i cap it to to get the most consistent frame time?

A. The in game cap is quite good and will be best for lowest latency.

AMD chill is more of a laptop feature and shouldn't really be used with CS:GO.

YMMV. For the most consistent input choose a value that gives you low fps variance (net_graph 1 will show this). You want that to be as close to 0.0 ms as possible.

LagBuster wrote:YMMV. For the most consistent input choose a value that gives you low fps variance (net_graph 1 will show this). You want that to be as close to 0.0 ms as possible.

which number in the net_graph should i be looking at? the number below or left to where the ping is?

LagBuster wrote:YMMV. For the most consistent input choose a value that gives you low fps variance (net_graph 1 will show this). You want that to be as close to 0.0 ms as possible.

thanks, guess i'll just stick to the in-game one then. where should i cap my fps?

The in-game frame capper is horrible. Very bad frame pacing, sometimes resulting in stuttering even though you get high FPS. CS:GO is one of those few games where you see people post "wtf it stutters but it runs at 300FPS." This is because the game's frame limiter is a joke.

I'd use RTSS for smoother pacing.

But, however bad the in-game limiter is though, it is (or rather: should be) a bit lower latency than RTSS. I don't know if anyone did any measurements though to compare RTSS with the in-game limiter.

BJORKEN22 wrote:which number in the net_graph should i be looking at? the number below or left to where the ping is?

You want to look at the top one, next to the fps value.

RealNC wrote:The in-game frame capper is horrible. Very bad frame pacing, sometimes resulting in stuttering even though you get high FPS. CS:GO is one of those few games where you see people post "wtf it stutters but it runs at 300FPS." This is because the game's frame limiter is a joke.

I'd use RTSS for smoother pacing.

But, however bad the in-game limiter is though, it is (or rather: should be) a bit lower latency than RTSS. I don't know if anyone did any measurements though to compare RTSS with the in-game limiter.

The AMD driver uses its own frame pacing implementation. It's on by default.

LagBuster wrote:The AMD driver uses its own frame pacing implementation. It's on by default.

Unless you set a target framerate, or enable vsync, you cannot do frame pacing, because you have no target frame time. If you use the average frame time, you don't do good frame pacing.

how high of a cap can you set such that the frame rate never drops below the cap?

iirc on my [email protected] + gtx970 computer, ~250 is pushing it.

flood wrote:how high of a cap can you set such that the frame rate never drops below the cap?

iirc on my [email protected] + gtx970 computer, ~250 is pushing it.

Sounds about right for your CPU at that speed.

I'm on an i5 2500K at 4.2GHz, and am using a 200FPS cap. On Nuke it can drop to 180, but that's OK with me. 90% of the time it sticks to 200.

(In ages long gone, the game could maintain 300FPS no matter what, and I was getting 500FPS on Dust2 even. But those days are long gone. The game just gets slower and slower with each update.)