120hz, Unreal games and SmoothedFramerate

[Marioysikax 89]

Those who has >60hz monitors want information does game support their display. One thing that has been bothering me is that many Unreal games like to use bSmoothFrameRate with value of 62 which gives best quality with regular 60hz monitor but caps the fps. 

Problem is that all the games that use it has fix in article but they are all said in differend ways and on differend sections! Here's only few examples: 

http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Mass_Effect#120Hz

http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Sanctum_2#Essential_improvements

http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Batman:_Arkham_City#120Hz

 

I was thinking as they all seem to be solutions to exact same problem with exact same engine should we just make generig fix to 120hz page and just link to it instead of re-writing solution differendly again as it's games config directory, Xengine.ini with X replaced with games ID and same values.

[Suicide machine 56]

I was thinking as they all seem to be solutions to exact same problem with exact same engine should we just make generig fix to 120hz page and just link to it instead of re-writing solution differendly again as it's games config directory, Xengine.ini with X replaced with games ID and same values.

I think it would be better to leave them in game's specific pages, even if this means a lot of copy-pasting of exactly the same solutions (asuming people test them, first). Some Unreal games encrypt their config files and I could almost bet there are some Unreal games where going beyond 62fps is going to break some elements of physics, AI behaviour or whatever. Forcing something from graphics driver panel is pretty much the only exception, I'd like to see so far. But this (frame smoothing), DxWnd and similar, I'd prefer having properly described for each game separately - especially if the solution takes only like 3 lines.

 

That's my opinion about it so far - I have not bumped into any issues with a page describing 120Hz and how to disable framerate limit. My biggest common problem so far is modifications section and how often they make getting to video settings section difficult via scrolling.

[JPulowski 1]

I think it would be better to leave them in game's specific pages, even if this means a lot of copy-pasting of exactly the same solutions (asuming people test them, first). Some Unreal games encrypt their config files and I could almost bet there are some Unreal games where going beyond 62fps is going to break some elements of physics, AI behaviour or whatever. Forcing something from graphics driver panel is pretty much the only exception, I'd like to see so far. But this (frame smoothing), DxWnd and similar, I'd prefer having properly described for each game separately - especially if the solution takes only like 3 lines.

 

That's my opinion about it so far - I have not bumped into any issues with a page describing 120Hz and how to disable framerate limit. My biggest common problem so far is modifications section and how often they make getting to video settings section difficult via scrolling.

I agree. Also some games (e.g. Deadpool) have hardcoded frame rate cap. And this method does not work with them.

[Nicereddy 109]

That's my opinion about it so far - I have not bumped into any issues with a page describing 120Hz and how to disable framerate limit. My biggest common problem so far is modifications section and how often they make getting to video settings section difficult via scrolling.

I think we may want to discuss moving modifications to the "Other information" section, especially since they seem to get very large very often. Although, that's somewhat irrelevant to this thread.

 

What I'd recommend doing is adding a section to the Engine:Unreal article which has a general overview of this. Keep the separate versions for each page, but also leave a note on each of those sections that says "For more information, see the Unreal Engine article." or something similar. This is what I do with Source engine games.

[Marioysikax 89]

I think it would be better to leave them in game's specific pages, even if this means a lot of copy-pasting of exactly the same solutions (asuming people test them, first). Some Unreal games encrypt their config files and I could almost bet there are some Unreal games where going beyond 62fps is going to break some elements of physics, AI behaviour or whatever. Forcing something from graphics driver panel is pretty much the only exception, I'd like to see so far. But this (frame smoothing), DxWnd and similar, I'd prefer having properly described for each game separately - especially if the solution takes only like 3 lines.

 

That's my opinion about it so far - I have not bumped into any issues with a page describing 120Hz and how to disable framerate limit. My biggest common problem so far is modifications section and how often they make getting to video settings section difficult via scrolling.

Well then we should at least have some kind of source/example to copy-paste from? Some pages have it as "essential improvement", some tell you to disable the option completely, some tell you to raise the value to 120 which isn't working with 144hz monitors and so forth. 

Should I just manually go, edit one page perfect and then just copy paste that to every single game that uses this fix?

 

I agree. Also some games (e.g. Deadpool) have hardcoded frame rate cap. And this method does not work with them.

I was specifically talking about unreal games that has smoothed framerate enabled with value of 62 and plain text ini files as there are tons of those and they all have literally same solution. 

 

E:

I think we may want to discuss moving modifications to the "Other information" section, especially since they seem to get very large very often. Although, that's somewhat irrelevant to this thread.

 

What I'd recommend doing is adding a section to the Engine:Unreal article which has a general overview of this. Keep the separate versions for each page, but also leave a note on each of those sections that says "For more information, see the Unreal Engine article." or something similar. This is what I do with Source engine games.

Well that sounds just perfect solution! BUT we still need some example to copy-paste that solution from as now everyone seems to be making their own versions of the solutions which may not work as intended for everyone.

[Nicereddy 109]

Well that sounds just perfect solution! BUT we still need some example to copy-paste that solution from as now everyone seems to be making their own versions of the solutions which may not work as intended for everyone.

 

I'm tired and have been editing Wikipedia lately (everyone there is a horrible person, we weren't even testing for that) so I may be mistaken, but is that sarcasm or do you legitimately like the idea?

 

Anyway, I think if we made an "Issued fixed" or what-have-you section on the Unreal Engine article as I suggested, we should be able to copy-paste it from there and then modify it on a per-game basis.

[Suicide machine 56]

Well then we should at least have some kind of source/example to copy-paste from? Some pages have it as "essential improvement", some tell you to disable the option completely, some tell you to raise the value to 120 which isn't working with 144hz monitors and so forth. 

Should I just manually go, edit one page perfect and then just copy paste that to every single game that uses this fix?

I'm assuming a lot of the pages which list this under essential improvements, are pages that were written before we had 120Hz solutions. I'd actually be with the idea of having one fix and copying it other pages, to be honest - especially, that I'm not native English speaker, so having a text ready on the page related to engine, which requires to copy the text and only change paths a bit would actually be extremely helpful.

 

 

 

I think we may want to discuss moving modifications to the "Other information" section, especially since they seem to get very large very often. Although, that's somewhat irrelevant to this thread.

Yes, that's what I've been thinking as well and I even did that for like 2 pages. But obviously - the discussion will require additional thread.

[Marioysikax 89]

I'm tired and have been editing Wikipedia lately (everyone there is a horrible person, we weren't even testing for that) so I may be mistaken, but is that sarcasm or do you legitimately like the idea?

 

Anyway, I think if we made an "Issued fixed" or what-have-you section on the Unreal Engine article as I suggested, we should be able to copy-paste it from there and then modify it on a per-game basis.

That's seriously best idea, sorry if I sounded sarcastic as I'm not native english speaker >_> (also lol @ portal joke)

So we (or I or someone) just make perfect version of fix to engine page and then manually copy-paste it to game pages with link to engine page. 

 

E: One thing I haven't found perfect answer is that if you actually raise smoothing value should you put it exactly the same as refresh value or 2 higher like it defaults with 60hz monitors in mind? 

[Garrett 220]

Having a sample on the Engine: page is a good idea but it should only be copied onto game pages where it is already present or is known to work since there exceptions to this as already mentioned.

 

The section definitely needs some standard name and position. I've been thinking about renaming 120Hz to encompass 144Hz and also be a standardised section name for uncapping, maybe something like "High frame rate (120Hz/144Hz)". Unacceptably low default caps (anything below 60 FPS) would still be a key point as always.

[Mirh 103]

That's seriously best idea, sorry if I sounded sarcastic as I'm not native english speaker >_> (also lol @ portal joke)

So we (or I or someone) just make perfect version of fix to engine page and then manually copy-paste it to game pages with link to engine page. 

 

E: One thing I haven't found perfect answer is that if you actually raise smoothing value should you put it exactly the same as refresh value or 2 higher like it defaults with 60hz monitors in mind? 

In my opinion the default fix would be to completely disable it.

Then, if a game use some weird physic engine -which screws gravity if simulation run above 60 FPS- we could note that. But those would be exception (goddamn you, Dead Space)

 

Actually, the correct row name should be "frame cap" instead of "120hz". Since 100% of times, I haven't seen issues with the refresh rate itself, but rather with the limiter

If I had a 120hz then (provided that the game is high-framerate friendly) I would still keep off the framerate limiter.. why should I enable it?

 

And I would also like further references about the "reports of game crashing" (in the Mass Effect article)

 

Also, I really dislike who use frame limiting as vertical sync, and who use vertical sync as frame limiting

[Marioysikax 89]

Having a sample on the Engine: page is a good idea but it should only be copied onto game pages where it is already present or is known to work since there exceptions to this as already mentioned.

 

The section definitely needs some standard name and position. I've been thinking about renaming 120Hz to encompass 144Hz and also be a standardised section name for uncapping, maybe something like "High frame rate (120Hz/144Hz)". Unacceptably low default caps (anything below 60 FPS) would still be a key point as always.

Well of course it would be applied only the games that the fix works. Thing was there's many of those games ::)

Yeah, 120hz is most common used but 144hz seems to be new standard and there's even 240hz monitors available. Then you have games like Payday which allows cap to be increased up to 135 which works with 120 but is under 144... Maybe just "High frame rate" would be good enough and comment is it limited to certain amount (many games also use 91 especially with online play) or is game completely uncapped.

 

In my opinion the default fix would be to completely disable it.

Then, if a game use some weird physic engine -which screws gravity if simulation run above 60 FPS- we could note that. But those would be exception (goddamn you, Dead Space)

 

Actually, the correct row name should be "frame cap" instead of "120hz". Since 100% of times, I haven't seen issues with the refresh rate itself, but rather with the limiter

If I had a 120hz then (provided that the game is high-framerate friendly) I would still keep off the framerate limiter.. why should I enable it?

 

And I would also like further references about the "reports of game crashing" (in the Mass Effect article)

 

Also, I really dislike who use frame limiting as vertical sync, and who use vertical sync as frame limiting

That may be the main problem as people don't seem to know which is actually better: completely disabling the smoothing or just raise it to match closer to monitors refresh rate? Some even suggest just raising cap to 999! :D

What I usually seem to find is that solid number on fps counter is far better than jumping uncapped one. That may also be the reason why so many devs but that "cap" in there in first place! Uncapped fps may sound like wonderful idea but usually it's actually worse. Also smoothing isn't cap as cap only locks framerate to certain number where smoothing tries to minimize spikes and smooth out gameplay overall. 

What I would do is to place smoothing value raising as main fix included in game specific pages and then linking to engine: page which also includes more depth explanation (if even needed) and disabling cap fix.

 

Most data on internet is inaccurate and said by random guys who got it working by editing config file and there's no solid data on which actually is the best. I guess that's just the case as higher framerate monitors aren't that usual.

 

As with Mass Effect page that crashing was edited by Tmpltd and then just carried over with edits. He's also the one that made the value 120 for some reason and added note about mod clipping audio and longer loading times so it may have been just him messing his computer. I can't find any evidence game actually crashing just because of this. 

 

I made first version of the fix. I would would love if someone ironed out spelling errors as said I'm not native english speaker <3

http://pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Engine:Unreal_Engine_3#Issues_fixed

[JPulowski 1]

I agree with changing 120Hz to High frame rate (HFR). It should not be for 120/144Hz users only, there are some users who hate playing with v-sync/frame-rate cap.

Also I would like to note that there are several methods for capping the frame rate. Or for vertical sync. Personally I use adaptive v-sync by NVIDIA whenever possible. If v-sync has some issues with a particular game then I active framerate limiter on NVIDIA Inspector.

[Marioysikax 89]

Thanks nicereddy for grammar correction! :3

There seems to be 27 games which has listed this as fix and I'm sure there's more. What I have researched that smoothed value should be little over refresh rate rather than exact number as it's smoothing instead of hard cap, games "capped" with this method to 30fps also has value of 32 in smoothing so this strengthen the fact. If screen tearing is visible games vsync should work or just force vsync/cap other way as smoothing is there to just - well - smooth instead of syncing or capping. As for crashing issue mentioned in Mass Effect page seems to be related to making config "read only" mode and it's also mentioned in Lost Planet 3 but then Warp seems to need it because of Origin file syncing. References are missing with all the cases so it's really hard to investigate especially when I do not own all of those games. I'm not sure why people put it in "read only" as games usually won't change that value unless you completely remove config file when game regenerates/copies new one. 

 

I'll just add note about "read only" crashing with {{CN}} but otherwise at least for me fixbox seems pretty fine now.

[Mirh 103]

That may be the main problem as people don't seem to know which is actually better: completely disabling the smoothing or just raise it to match closer to monitors refresh rate? Some even suggest just raising cap to 999! :D

What I usually seem to find is that solid number on fps counter is far better than jumping uncapped one. That may also be the reason why so many devs but that "cap" in there in first place! Uncapped fps may sound like wonderful idea but usually it's actually worse. Also smoothing isn't cap as cap only locks framerate to certain number where smoothing tries to minimize spikes and smooth out gameplay overall. 

What I would do is to place smoothing value raising as main fix included in game specific pages and then linking to engine: page which also includes more depth explanation (if even needed) and disabling cap fix.

 

Most data on internet is inaccurate and said by random guys who got it working by editing config file and there's no solid data on which actually is the best. I guess that's just the case as higher framerate monitors aren't that usual.

 

Well, I must have done the limiting FPS and forcing v-sync page for something!

And I would like to underline another time that's very stupid to use v-sync when you want to limit FPS and viceversa.. Because you are achieving the worst of both worlds

Limiting= Tearing can still be seen, but you have no delays, no additional stuttering

V-sync= Fix tearing. Framerate is choppy most of times if you don't enable triple buffering. Input lag

 

Btw, I think I could say it's a common opinion that framerate cap/smoothing reduce stuttering.. but how you said: what are the technical proofs?

My understanding says that w/o those things, GPU renders images as fast as it can.. If everything goes well, this should be the baseline and less complex situation possible.

Still, I would be pleased to be corrected..

 

EDIT: ok, the idea just comes to my mind. What if when you limit framerate, your computer has more time to prepare the following? It's against the KISS principle.. but do you know if somebody use this in their game engines?

 

EDIT2: are there any games which doesn't allow 120hz screen refresh rate?(≠frame per second)

This would be the only case when 120hz row name would still be accurate I suppose..

Edited November 10, 2014 by Mirh
added triple buffering link

[JPulowski 1]

Well, I must have done the limiting FPS and forcing v-sync page for something!

And I would like to underline another time that's very stupid to use v-sync when you want to limit FPS and viceversa.. Because you are achieving the worst of both worlds

Limiting= Tearing can still be seen, but you have no delays, no additional stuttering

V-sync= Fix tearing. Framerate is choppy most of times if you don't enable triple buffering. Input lag

 

Btw, I think I could say it's a common opinion that framerate cap/smoothing reduce stuttering.. but how you said: what are the technical proofs?

My understanding says that w/o those things, GPU renders images as fast as it can.. If everything goes well, this should be the baseline and less complex situation possible.

Still, I would be pleased to be corrected..

 

EDIT: ok, the idea just comes to my mind. What if when you limit framerate, your computer has more time to prepare the following? It's against the KISS principle.. but do you know if somebody use this in their game engines?

 

EDIT2: are there any games which doesn't allow 120hz screen refresh rate?(≠frame per second)

This would be the only case when 120hz row name would still be accurate I suppose..

There are some games yeah. Usually if a game supports 120Hz it also support 120 fps as well. But some games do not. You can easily see it by using FRAPS. It shows refresh rate as 120, but frame rate is capped around 60 fps.

Besides triple buffering there is also an adaptive v-sync option for NVIDIA cards. Personally I like it more than triple buffering.