By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming - 30FPS vs 60FPS. Can you tell the difference?

 

Can you tell the difference?

Yes, clearly. 233 59.29%
 
Not really. 106 26.97%
 
See results. 54 13.74%
 
Total:393
Michael-5 on 18 October 2011

Anyone who said yes clearly is not human, and a wolf.

Humans can only see 26 or 29FPS (I forget).

What you do see in 30 FPS videos is a dip in FPS. If FPS dips, even slightly, a human can see it.

So if you are playing a game on PC, and your PC can handle the game at 30FPS smoothly, you don't need to upgrade the FPS for better visuals. If your playing console, you should play 60FPS because the FPS dip in both cases, but at 60FPS our eyes are more tolerable (we won't notice a drop to 45 FPS unless there is screen tearing).



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Around the Network
Galaki on 18 October 2011

Whether you can see depends on what console you own :)



Pre-order limited edition Blue Slime Condoms

Kynes on 18 October 2011
Galaki said:
Whether you can see depends on what console you own :)


Maybe this image has some truth in it, and only PC users (and some console users, too) can distinguish between 30 and 60 fps:

 



Zkuq on 18 October 2011
x_DMX_x said:
Here's how you tell the difference between 30FPS&60FPS.
Uncharted 3 is going to run at 60FPS I believe at 1080p.
inFAMOUS(The first one)30FPS native 720p
Compare those two games to see the difference.
OR Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare its run at 60FPS at 1080p.

No. Just no. The first two Uncharted games run at 720p, not 1080p. And it's been a while since I last played them but IIRC they ran at 30 frames per second. Could be wrong about that, though, and can't confirm it because my Blu-ray drive is dead. And CoD4 runs at sub-720p, but it is supposedly 60 fps.

All in all, you got quite a bit wrong here. :)



crissindahouse on 18 October 2011
Michael-5 said:
Anyone who said yes clearly is not human, and a wolf.

Humans can only see 26 or 29FPS (I forget).

What you do see in 30 FPS videos is a dip in FPS. If FPS dips, even slightly, a human can see it.

So if you are playing a game on PC, and your PC can handle the game at 30FPS smoothly, you don't need to upgrade the FPS for better visuals. If your playing console, you should play 60FPS because the FPS dip in both cases, but at 60FPS our eyes are more tolerable (we won't notice a drop to 45 FPS unless there is screen tearing).

just like someone posted a link in this thread, this is wrong. if someone shows you 250 fps and only one of it has a picture you can say which it was. with the logic a human can only see ~25 fps this wouldn't be possible. it's enough to show movies with only 24 fps to let you think these aren't only pictures but you can clearly see more than that.

 



Around the Network
Michael-5 on 18 October 2011
crissindahouse said:
Michael-5 said:
Anyone who said yes clearly is not human, and a wolf.

Humans can only see 26 or 29FPS (I forget).

What you do see in 30 FPS videos is a dip in FPS. If FPS dips, even slightly, a human can see it.

So if you are playing a game on PC, and your PC can handle the game at 30FPS smoothly, you don't need to upgrade the FPS for better visuals. If your playing console, you should play 60FPS because the FPS dip in both cases, but at 60FPS our eyes are more tolerable (we won't notice a drop to 45 FPS unless there is screen tearing).

just like someone posted a link in this thread, this is wrong. if someone shows you 250 fps and only one of it has a picture you can say which it was. with the logic a human can only see ~25 fps ths wouldn't be possible. it's enough to show movies with only 24 fps to let you think these aren't only pictures but you can clearly see more than that

No... I took a university level chemistry course and this was on my exam. I remember being surprised because I thought humans could see 60FPS, but we can't.

For a video shown at 250FPS, you just have a 1 in 10 chance of seeing a particular frame.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

ethomaz on 18 October 2011
Zkuq said:
x_DMX_x said:
Here's how you tell the difference between 30FPS&60FPS.
Uncharted 3 is going to run at 60FPS I believe at 1080p.
inFAMOUS(The first one)30FPS native 720p
Compare those two games to see the difference.
OR Call of Duty 4:Modern Warfare its run at 60FPS at 1080p.

No. Just no. The first two Uncharted games run at 720p, not 1080p. And it's been a while since I last played them but IIRC they ran at 30 frames per second. Could be wrong about that, though, and can't confirm it because my Blu-ray drive is dead. And CoD4 runs at sub-720p, but it is supposedly 60 fps.

All in all, you got quite a bit wrong here. :)

Exactaly .

Uncharted 2 run at 720p@30fps... and CoD run at 640p@60fps... but there are more framedrop in CoD than U2.



Joelcool7 on 18 October 2011

This depends I can't tell just looking at the games individually but if you place them side by side I am able to see a slight difference. In the end as you suggested if a 30 FPS game drops below 30 FPS it is very noticable but if a 60 FPS drops a bit you can't really tell. This adds polish to the game and in a way makes it more enjoyable on a visual level.

In the end I don't really notice unless they are side by side. If a game regularily dips below 30 fps then it becomes a huge issue!



-JC7

"In God We Trust - In Games We Play " - Joel Reimer

 

Chrizum on 18 October 2011
Michael-5 said:
crissindahouse said:
Michael-5 said:
Anyone who said yes clearly is not human, and a wolf.

Humans can only see 26 or 29FPS (I forget).

What you do see in 30 FPS videos is a dip in FPS. If FPS dips, even slightly, a human can see it.

So if you are playing a game on PC, and your PC can handle the game at 30FPS smoothly, you don't need to upgrade the FPS for better visuals. If your playing console, you should play 60FPS because the FPS dip in both cases, but at 60FPS our eyes are more tolerable (we won't notice a drop to 45 FPS unless there is screen tearing).

just like someone posted a link in this thread, this is wrong. if someone shows you 250 fps and only one of it has a picture you can say which it was. with the logic a human can only see ~25 fps ths wouldn't be possible. it's enough to show movies with only 24 fps to let you think these aren't only pictures but you can clearly see more than that

No... I took a university level chemistry course and this was on my exam. I remember being surprised because I thought humans could see 60FPS, but we can't.

For a video shown at 250FPS, you just have a 1 in 10 chance of seeing a particular frame.

That is not true at all. In psychological priming tests, subliminal stimuli can be offered in 1 frame on a 100 frames per second framerate and people can still "see" the stimuli. An easier test would be to just plat a PC game like Half-Life 2 on 30 fps locked and 60 fps locked, you'll notice the difference easily.



crissindahouse on 18 October 2011
Michael-5 said:
crissindahouse said:
Michael-5 said:
Anyone who said yes clearly is not human, and a wolf.

Humans can only see 26 or 29FPS (I forget).

What you do see in 30 FPS videos is a dip in FPS. If FPS dips, even slightly, a human can see it.

So if you are playing a game on PC, and your PC can handle the game at 30FPS smoothly, you don't need to upgrade the FPS for better visuals. If your playing console, you should play 60FPS because the FPS dip in both cases, but at 60FPS our eyes are more tolerable (we won't notice a drop to 45 FPS unless there is screen tearing).

just like someone posted a link in this thread, this is wrong. if someone shows you 250 fps and only one of it has a picture you can say which it was. with the logic a human can only see ~25 fps ths wouldn't be possible. it's enough to show movies with only 24 fps to let you think these aren't only pictures but you can clearly see more than that

No... I took a university level chemistry course and this was on my exam. I remember being surprised because I thought humans could see 60FPS, but we can't.

For a video shown at 250FPS, you just have a 1 in 10 chance of seeing a particular frame.

sry but than your exam isn't worth anything. almost everybody does this wrong. there is a difference between seeing more than 25 fps or just to need 25 fps to see it as fluent movement.

read the link and you see it, they made a test with pilots of the airforce i think. they showed them 250 fps and only one pic had a information and they knew which. only every tenth could say it if you would be right.

 

Edit: they didn't show them 250 fps they showed them only one pic in 1/220 second. that clearly shows that a human can see an information in less than let's say 1/100 second and not only every fourth time like it should be possible if we only could see 25fps.