Consistency is most important. A game that can put out 30fps, each frame taken at exactly 33ms intervals will feel smoother than a triple buffered 60fps game that's averaging the render time to 16ms by delaying certain frames.
Suppose the render time varies between 8ms and 30ms. You could try for 60fps, using triple buffering, soft lock with some tearing when too many expensive frames appear in a row.
Or you could aim for 30fps, forward predict the engine state 33ms and show the world exactly as it is when the frame appears on screen.
Triple buffered 60fps games completely negate the latency improvement of 60fps over 30fps, compared to rendering synchronized v-synched 30fps. Ofcourse still better than triple buffered 30fps.
60fps has advantages to image quality, twice the snapshots, twice the information (Although being able to see further into the distance at higher resolutions will help more) 60fps does make it easier to follow fast moving objects as they skip less space when traversing the screen.
Latency wise the advantage is negligible. Compared to input lag, display lag, human response lag, that 16ms is a tiny percentage. Consistency first, resolution second, 60fps third.
Existing User Log In
New User Registration
Register for a free account to gain full access to the VGChartz Network and join our thriving community.
