Zkuq said:
I wasn't talking about built-in framerate limiters at any point. All I talked about was V-Sync, so I'm not sure why you're talking about the framerate limiter. I understand why it doesn't look as good when you're using a built-in framerate limiter instead of V-Sync, though (it's because the frames don't always get timed the same as the refresh rate of the display device, which results in slight stuttering). Anyway, I google'd double V-Sync too now, and finally got more technical details about it. Now I can kind of understand why it produces better results, I think. Eh. Sort of. Or maybe not, now that I think of it. Aren't regular V-Sync and double/half V-Sync the same if you can't hit 60 FPS reliably (i.e. if V-Sync limits the framerate to 30 anyway)? The only reason I can think of why you might want to use double/half V-Sync instead of regular V-Sync is when you can hit 60 FPS a good portion of the time, but not always, and V-Sync keeps switching between locking the framerate to either 30 FPS or 60 FPS. What I mean about console games having the same issue: Don't they use regular V-Sync too (usually)? If so, why is the situation any different to using regular V-Sync on PC? Again, no built-in framerate limiters here, just V-Sync. |
I really dont know why consoles dont have that problem, you can use any tv or monitor and the experience would be the same so yeah would be cool to know. Sadly i cant find a definitive answer so must be magic :p







