Tell Us Dammit: Does Frame Rate And Resolution Matter To You?

Something I've noticed more of over the last couple of years: an increased anxiety regarding video game performance. PC gamers have always discussed this, that's part and parcel of the experience: getting the best out of your gear and whatnot.

But with this generation of consoles we seem to be discussing it more and more. Does it matter to you?

I kind of empathise with it. Both the PS4 and the Xbox One are so similar in terms of their functionality and their performance, and most major releases are multi-platform. What else do we have to compare and contrast? Particularly if you're trying to decide which console to buy or want confirmation that you made the right choice.

So it's weird. These sorts of discussions become simultaneously relevant but totally irrelevant. Sometimes I'll watch comparison videos. Sometimes I'll think about those minor details. Sometimes I'll act like they matter, even when I know they don't.

Very strange indeed.

What's your take on it?


Comments

    To be honest if say frame rate is the only thing that's important to me. Nothing worse than shit going down and the frame rate dies in the arse

    A stable framerate is hugely important to me. Random hitches and stuttering can kill a game. A consistent 60fps is preferable but a stable 30fps > an unstable 60fps.

    I'm spoilt as a PC gamer because I can toy with settings to get the performance I want.

    Resolution and overall shininess is neat but won't sell me on a game.

      Totally agree, there is just no excuse for a non-locked frame rate in my opinion. Stable 60 is amazing, but if you can't hit that make sure it's a stable 30 (see Destiny and DRIVECLUB as perfect examples on the PS4).

      100% agree, and after playing The last of us on PS4 it sparked an Idea that really should be used more in games, while there would be limitations of course I would love to see options for maybe 2 presets, one for top notch graphics and another one that main point is too insure a stable frame rate, an excellent example is Bloodborune having the option to tone down a few things to make sure game play is always smooth as would be great!

    Frame rate matters to me in the sense that it needs to be steady. I don't care if it's 60fps or 30fps as long as it can maintain that on a consistent basis.

    Resolution does matter to me as part of overall image quality... I'd certainly much rather have 1080p than 720p. Whether I'd notice the difference between, say, 900p and 1080p I'm not so sure. But yeah, all other things being equal I'd much rather have 1080p, as long as the frame rate is fairly consistent.

    I think both are important but i'm struggling to make a decision of one over the other. Do I get a 144hz 1440p monitor or a 60hz 4k monitor?

    I have been trying to make this decision for the last few months and failing.

    Anything less than 60fps is unacceptable in this day and age however.

    Last edited 06/08/15 11:27 am

      I just went through the same decision, man it was hard. In the end I got the 144hz 1440 monitor and I think I made the right call. With my set up that gives me the ability to crank the settings and still get a solid frame rate (it looks friggin spectacular in Witcher 3, project cars etc). I was a bit worried about having to lower settings if I went 4k and 60hz to get a decent frame rate (even with a Titan x).

      I did a heap of research and I think 4k will be the target for my next build (or upgrading this one) I don't think the tech is quite there yet. Cant see the point in building a new rig that cant max settings (I'm a graphics whore....so sue me!!!)

      that's my 2 cents for what its worth. Good luck with the decision I agonized over it for a looong time.

      I got my very first gaming pc a week ago. I went for 144HZ 1440 Monitor, The acer predator with G Sync and I'm literally blown away! Its amazing.. And the control via a mouse over joypad (new to me) is just brilliant!

    Some games I like at 60fps, some games I like the additional viewing range of 1080p.

    BUT whatever the choice made by the developers, screen tearing is NOT ok! The last gen was littered with the disgusting scourge, and it's one area where the Wii u stood out.

    Screen tearing, ew.

    Resolution matters for about 2 seconds as my TV automatically changes from 1080p to 720p or whatever and a slight whiff of disappointment overcomes me, but by the time the game hits the first splash screen it simply doesn't matter anymore. Framerate is more important but only in the sense that it needs to be stable and playable. I honestly couldn't care less what the number is.

    I want 60FPS. That is all, the game can look like ass for all I care, I just want 60FPS.

    ARK for example, I don't care at all how pretty it CAN look, I just want 60 FPS. I suppose, always having a PC that wasn't like top of the line like 20,000 Titans or whatever I never really cared how games looked.

      Agree. 60fps minimum. Then add graphics effects on until u hit less than 60.

    Framerate matters. Playing action games that become turn based due to framerate drops or have excessive screen tearing is more or less a deal breaker. This of course can be solved by running the game with a 640*480 resolution (all the pros do it!) so maybe resolution matters too.

    In terms of a raw comparison, the fact that the PS4 could possibly deliver a better framerate or resolution over the Xbone definitely played a part in my purchase of a PS4, though it was a fairly mild factor.

    In terms of the actual numbers, I'm not particularly fussed. I like things to run at 60 fps (if I can run them at 120 on my PC it's even better, but nearly everything that isn't Source Engine seems to bottleneck before there), but if something's locked at 30 it's fine. If something drops badly (Blighttown springs to mind) then it's annoying, but I'm hardly going to go on a crusade to change it, just whinge about it briefly online.

    Resolution's a weird one, because I really like good image quality, but it's not as direct as a pixel count. To my eyes, a 900P image running SMAA with a temporal filter (or some equivalent) tends to look better than an unfiltered (or one with a standard FXAA implementation) image.

    But I do read/watch comparisons. I love to compare the differences between versions, but I do so for fun, not some base desire to show that x or y is worse, or that developer z is garbage for not running at 1440P.

      You forgot to mention that you're all about the bokeh.

        It's true. Bokeh is the only thing I care about in games. I'm happy with it running at one frame every two seconds if I can get some of that sweet Bokeh action.

    They matter and they don't.

    If I get a solid 30 FPS, I'm happy. But if it starts to dip consistently it becomes annoying. While I don't expect a 4k resolution it needs to be decent. But smooth is more important than high resolution.

    I'm firmly in the Not Bothered camp. Sure, I don't want to play a game that's jittering all over the place. Who does? But I couldn't tell th difference, unless maybe it was in a comparison video. And I think that goes for the majority of people who play games.

    As long as it looks good and runs well, I don't care about the number attached to it.

    As long as a game works. As above, framerate is key to that beyond anything else in terms of graphics. Resolution is important I guess too, but these days most games run at a minimum of 720p anyway so it's not so important anymore.

    I agree that steadiness is more important than a high figure. I do notice 60fps versus 30fps, but I'm not even sure I notice when a game is in 1080...

    As primarily a PC gamer I'd prefer a higher number, but as long as frame rate is consistently above 30 I'm fine. When something is unnecessarily locked to 30 it's mostly annoying and confusing...
    With res, if I can't run at native (currently 1080p) it's a bigger annoyance than it probably should be, but it is what it is.

    If I'm given the choice, I'll always drop the res to get a better frame rate, because to me dems grafiks are far less important than the gameplay.

    Tbh though as a majority console gamer, with only a single 770 4gb/4790 rig I cant push the thing that high anyway! I'll always choose framerate over res though.

    I have a monitor a 24560x1440 monitor at 144Hz powered by 2 x GTX 980's.

    Resolution and frame rate matter.

    Frame rate yes, not looking for a high number, just consistency so the game experience isn't ruined.

    If I'm playing a PC game (rare but it does happen) I notice it and I'll tinker with settings until I get a smooth frame rate

    Consoles though I've never noticed. Take Watch Dogs - reportedly 720P on Xbone- I have a 60" TV and it looks sharp as a tack!

    Not really.

    Stable frame rates are best, but I don't mind if they are 30 or 60 fps. I can run anything under 4k resolution so not really no.

    As long as the game play is good and consistency is maintained.

    After playing on consoles for such a long time, 30 Fps doesn't seem that bad anymore at 1080p. 60fps is nice, but to me not really that essential unless you are playing an online fps.

    At 4K i can only bear 30 fps being the minimum, it is extremely obvious when the fps dips lower than this. Preferably i would love it to be at 60fps, but once again this isn't a grave concern.

    The only time i need 75fps, is when I am using the Oculus rift. You will need the high fps or you will definitely vomit from motion sickness. Try using an Oculus at 30fps or even 60fps and you can kiss the rest of your day goodbye.

    Last edited 06/08/15 12:12 pm

    I posted this over at PCMR just two days ago. Read the truth.

    https://www.reddit.com/r/pcmasterrace/comments/3fqhum/the_peasantry_truth_of_why_30fps_is_superior/

    In order:
    - Stable 60 fps
    - Stable 30 fps
    - 1080 dpi and stable frame rate
    - 720 dpi and stable frame rate

    I don't give a stuff about resolution. I just want a consistent frame rate (higher equals better but not at the expense of stability

    This is why the WiiU rocks. It is such a smooooooth console (Splatoon peeps will know what I mean!)

    It does matter to me, but how much it matters depends on what we're talking about specifically. When it comes to the minor difference between two roughly equal consoles ports it doesn't matter at all. When it comes to 480p vs 4K then obviously it's a world of difference.

    I've never really been bothered by resolution. In an age when people are embracing pixel games (and other non-realistic art styles), I find it bizarre that on one hand, people obviously realise that resolution doesn't mean fun, but then they still cry when something is "only" 900p.

    When I got my Xbox 360, I didn't even have an HDTV, but the games were just as fun. The TV I have now only does 720p (and 1080i, but screw that). I still have a blast with games, and I seriously doubt my enjoyment would increase if I was playing them in 1080p.

    I'll even put up with a poor framerate if the game is fun (EDF!).

    I guess the bottom line is that I like playing games, not counting pixels.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now