Frame Time/Pace vs. Delay/Latency/Lag

[Traveler]

Hello again!

I would like to get a confirmation or correction to a following claim..

MSI Afterburner/RTSS cap gives better frame times/frame pacing, but adds 1ms delay.
Which one is more important for competitive advantage in eSport/competitive FPS game titles - is it frame times or latency?
It seems like we can't achieve both at the same time, we have to pick and choose to either have the lowest delay or most stable frame pacing while gaming.

[Zodasaur]

Hello again!

I would like to get a confirmation or correction to a following claim..

MSI Afterburner/RTSS cap gives better frame times/frame pacing, but adds 1ms delay.
Which one is more important for competitive advantage in eSport/competitive FPS game titles - is it frame times or latency?
It seems like we can't achieve both at the same time, we have to pick and choose to either have the lowest delay or most stable frame pacing while gaming.

Measuring frame times is the same thing as measuring latency.
As far as lowest delay versus frame pacing, they're both very important in having a competitive advantage over other players.
This is like asking if acceleration or top speed is more important in a drag race.
They're both very important, but without knowing extensive details about every aspect of the race, it's impossible for us to tell you which is more important from just going off of the very limited information you've told us about the race. Or in your case the game you're trying to have the competitive advantage in.

[TheKelz]

Hello again!

I would like to get a confirmation or correction to a following claim..

MSI Afterburner/RTSS cap gives better frame times/frame pacing, but adds 1ms delay.
Which one is more important for competitive advantage in eSport/competitive FPS game titles - is it frame times or latency?
It seems like we can't achieve both at the same time, we have to pick and choose to either have the lowest delay or most stable frame pacing while gaming.

From what I can tell, most competitive gamers do not cap their framerate. Not in CS GO at least. They all chase that highest FPS and seem to be fine with it. But, there are people like me, who prefer a much smoother experience with a bit of more input lag. I play much better and have a better K/D when my mouse feels smooth rather than when I have the highest FPS possible. As soon as I feel at least a small microstutter while playing, it becomes uncomfortable for me and I suck.

Long story short, you should try it yourself and see how it feels for you. If unlocked FPS feels smooth and good for you, then stick with it. If you feel like locked FPS feels better and you also play better with it, then you know the answer.

[Traveler]

From what I can tell, most competitive gamers do not cap their framerate. Not in CS GO at least. They all chase that highest FPS and seem to be fine with it.

At some point, you need to cap it tho.. at least that's my understanding from an earlier thread on this forum.
I was told that CS:GO "breaks" at about 1100 fps (online gaming), but how high does a ping have to be in order to experience that wasn't specified.
What is your experience in CS:GO with this setup.. like, have you ever tried to game with 1000+ fps in multiplayer mode?
Is it really possible that all this is just "feeling related"?
Isn't there a science behind it that doesn't care about how we feel and is very clear on what gives us an undoubted competitive advantage?

But, there are people like me, who prefer a much smoother experience with a bit of more input lag. I play much better and have a better K/D when my mouse feels smooth rather than when I have the highest FPS possible. As soon as I feel at least a small microstutter while playing, it becomes uncomfortable for me and I suck.

So, uncapped fps gives you microstuttering.. I thought it was screen tearing people complain about the most when they let the frames go to highest possible.

Long story short, you should try it yourself and see how it feels for you. If unlocked FPS feels smooth and good for you, then stick with it. If you feel like locked FPS feels better and you also play better with it, then you know the answer.

What if both capped and uncapped fps give me the same feeling of smoothness?
I am a long way from testing this myself tho.. I am in a process of assembling a decent and high fps capable gaming PC, but other things are a lot bigger priority to me right now, both financially and time-wise.
Even so, I am still very curious to have these conversations.
My only alternative to this is what?.. YouTube comment section on dozen different videos? Every fool these days has a YT account, but not many fools are registered on BlurBusters forum, so this is a safer bet and a place of quality

[Traveler]

Hello again!

I would like to get a confirmation or correction to a following claim..

MSI Afterburner/RTSS cap gives better frame times/frame pacing, but adds 1ms delay.
Which one is more important for competitive advantage in eSport/competitive FPS game titles - is it frame times or latency?
It seems like we can't achieve both at the same time, we have to pick and choose to either have the lowest delay or most stable frame pacing while gaming.

Measuring frame times is the same thing as measuring latency.
As far as lowest delay versus frame pacing, they're both very important in having a competitive advantage over other players.
This is like asking if acceleration or top speed is more important in a drag race.
They're both very important, but without knowing extensive details about every aspect of the race, it's impossible for us to tell you which is more important from just going off of the very limited information you've told us about the race. Or in your case the game you're trying to have the competitive advantage in.

I see your point.
How would you advise me to ask this question correctly then? What extra details/info do you need from me to give me a more precise answer?
We can use CS:GO as an example.

[Zodasaur]

Hello again!

I would like to get a confirmation or correction to a following claim..

MSI Afterburner/RTSS cap gives better frame times/frame pacing, but adds 1ms delay.
Which one is more important for competitive advantage in eSport/competitive FPS game titles - is it frame times or latency?
It seems like we can't achieve both at the same time, we have to pick and choose to either have the lowest delay or most stable frame pacing while gaming.

Measuring frame times is the same thing as measuring latency.
As far as lowest delay versus frame pacing, they're both very important in having a competitive advantage over other players.
This is like asking if acceleration or top speed is more important in a drag race.
They're both very important, but without knowing extensive details about every aspect of the race, it's impossible for us to tell you which is more important from just going off of the very limited information you've told us about the race. Or in your case the game you're trying to have the competitive advantage in.

I see your point.
How would you advise me to ask this question correctly then? What extra details/info do you need from me to give me a more precise answer?
We can use CS:GO as an example.

I believe that I understand your question from the second part of your post.
For CS:GO specifically, I feel that it would likely be easy to get a stable high framerate in this title. It's an old eSports game and even runs at a stable high framerate on my PC which is over 10 years old. So if your framerate is great as well, try turning on V-Sync and capping just barely under your monitor's refresh rate to see how the input lag feels to you personally. If the responsiveness feels good, then you're all set and ready to climb the ladder. If it doesn't, then you probably have Spiderman reflexes and would be better served with V-Sync off and take the more erratic frame pacing instead.

[Traveler]

I believe that I understand your question from the second part of your post.
For CS:GO specifically, I feel that it would likely be easy to get a stable high framerate in this title. It's an old eSports game and even runs at a stable high framerate on my PC which is over 10 years old. So if your framerate is great as well, try turning on V-Sync and capping just barely under your monitor's refresh rate to see how the input lag feels to you personally. If the responsiveness feels good, then you're all set and ready to climb the ladder. If it doesn't, then you probably have Spiderman reflexes and would be better served with V-Sync off and take the more erratic frame pacing instead.

I think a 1000 fps + 540Hz setup attracts me the most in every competitive shooter, CS especially.

[Zodasaur]

I believe that I understand your question from the second part of your post.
For CS:GO specifically, I feel that it would likely be easy to get a stable high framerate in this title. It's an old eSports game and even runs at a stable high framerate on my PC which is over 10 years old. So if your framerate is great as well, try turning on V-Sync and capping just barely under your monitor's refresh rate to see how the input lag feels to you personally. If the responsiveness feels good, then you're all set and ready to climb the ladder. If it doesn't, then you probably have Spiderman reflexes and would be better served with V-Sync off and take the more erratic frame pacing instead.

I think a 1000 fps + 540Hz setup attracts me the most in every competitive shooter, CS especially.

For sure that would be epic. I say go for it! I'm looking to get a higher hertz display too myself.

[Traveler]

I think a 1000 fps + 540Hz setup attracts me the most in every competitive shooter, CS especially.

For sure that would be epic. I say go for it! I'm looking to get a higher hertz display too myself.

Yeah.. and as I understood from this article here, screen tearing at such high fps is minimal (or way less noticeable) - https://blurbusters.com/faq/benefits-of ... resh-rate/

But what I didn't really get is the part where it says: However, if you use “VSYNC OFF” with ultra-high frame rates, visibility of stutters and tearing gradually reduces on average, the higher your frame rate goes above refresh rate.
So, 1000 fps on a 60Hz monitor vs. 1000 fps on a 540Hz monitor does what exactly when it comes to visuals? Like, what noticeable differences would we see?

[yeesecretalias]

I believe that I understand your question from the second part of your post.
For CS:GO specifically, I feel that it would likely be easy to get a stable high framerate in this title. It's an old eSports game and even runs at a stable high framerate on my PC which is over 10 years old. So if your framerate is great as well, try turning on V-Sync and capping just barely under your monitor's refresh rate to see how the input lag feels to you personally. If the responsiveness feels good, then you're all set and ready to climb the ladder. If it doesn't, then you probably have Spiderman reflexes and would be better served with V-Sync off and take the more erratic frame pacing instead.

I think a 1000 fps + 540Hz setup attracts me the most in every competitive shooter, CS especially.

This is the dream. I can run Aimlab/Kovaaks at 1k+ FPS on a 390hz IPS and the input is ridiculously instant. That 540hz TN from Asus seems like the next logical upgrade.
But. How many games can you really run at 540fps stable let alone 1k? Unfortunately software isn't keeping up.