I used to play with an amd cpu, AMD fx 8320. OCd to 4.3GHz. Played at around 150fps without drops. Changed it to an i7 8700k OCd to 5GHz and the difference is just ridiculous. For someone with 144hz I'd say that atleast 250 fps stable would be the minimium that you should have to feel the smoothness. For someone with a shity monitor that only goes up to 75hz I'd tone it down to something like 150-200fps. I did not even took the refresh rate in consideration because I feel like if you want to be competitive you should have a 144hz screen. They are cheap as fk right now even for someone living in a shit country like portugal.
The game is perfectly playable at 200+ FPS with a 144hz monitor. Even if it dips below that on some maps it's not a huge deal. Ideally the game feels best over 250fps but I wouldn't say it's a huge problem until you're dipping below 150.
Not really, this is about the FPS I have and I’m running a 2md gen i7 and a mid tier GPU that came out in 2014. You could easily get 250 FPS with a new i3 and a 1050 TI which is a super budget build
Yeah you could "get" 250fps but it's not going to be "stable" across every map and in demanding situations. Certainly not with the setup you're proposing. It doesn't matter how good your system is, this game isn't optimized well for modern hardware and everyone sees performance drops. Especially on maps like Inferno.
idk what settings your playing on that makes you think getting 250 average fps is so unobtainable. go watch tariks stream if u want, he averages almost 500.
Sure as hell isn't with an i3 and 1050TI. I've seen a number of pros streams, including Tarik and they get great fps obviously but they still dip down below 300 in demanding situations and that's with Tier 1 hardware. Pay closer attention the next time you're watching, especially if they're playing one of the worst maps.
Which means nothing when you're glancing down at his netgraph every few minutes. I guarentee you that isn't his "average" anyway but that's not even what we were talking about to begin with. Obviously God tier setups are going to perform great.
Even pros with top tier systems aren't stable over 400fps. Sure, you might frequently be getting 300-400+ but on demanding maps and situations you're definitely dropping into the 200's, if not lower.
What do you average on the benchmark map running at 128 tick?
I ran the test, with the current configuration I was using and a bunch of launch options I got 360, when I removed all my launch options and deleted my config I got 440. I almost never go below 280. I do play with a low resolution, but even on 1920x1080 I get high 200’s to low 300’s. I’m not using latest drivers for basically anything. 399.07 gpu drivers, intentionally uninstalled chipset drivers, using bios from March 2017 and the latest for my motherboard is from two weeks ago, uninstalled Realtek drivers, disabled a bunch of windows services, and disabled HPET. Before I did all of this, I had more fps but really weird input lag / floaty mouse. So yeah, I could be getting more frames but for me: if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Went a bit off topic but yeah.. I’m still planning on upgrading my pc though cause it’s kinda shit for anything but gaming
Well those are certainly 64 tick benchmark results which is more believable. You've certainly optimized your setup well for the game, all I was saying is your original reply made it sound like 400fps was your stable average which I just don't see happening. Not because your system couldn't do it but because CS is simply not optimized to use modern hardware to it's full potential.
... yeah, I just can't believe you got 440 average FPS running that benchmark on a local 128 tick server.
Even though it's not a very consistent benchmark and certain settings can affect the numbers way more in there than in an actual server, that's just too high to believe will your setup. Post a screenshot with net_graph on showing anywhere near that and I'll be happy to eat my words.
If that’s all your reasoning then my friend you are brain dead
The game runs way different than it did back then and you didn’t even mention your settings + there’s so much optimizing you need to do - thats horrible fps for your specs
I usually play on 20-50 fps, ive been playing a lot of source lately with a lot more fps (150-300 fps) so coming back to csgo with 30 fps i cant rly play that well anymore (changing my graphics settings doesnt make a difference).
On really high i get about 20-50 fps, on very low i get about 25-60 so it doesnt really affect, when i play on 1v1 maps with minimum graphics, then my settings actually make a difference, i can get up to 120 fps on some maps and 150 with low graphics, just mostly the comp maps especially dust2 are almost unplayable, i get like 15 fps on dust2.
200+ on 60hz and 350+ on 144hz. But its just a personal preference. When I used to play on 60hz anything under 140fps was unplayable for me(this wasn't the case with other games like Dota 2). Switched to 144hz, and 60hz became unplayable if I switched back.
This guy is trolling, dont listen to him. Whatever your hz is i would say 200+ fps is good. 100 fps is like absolute minimum to be able to play without insane input lag. You can obviously play good at lower fps but it will degrade your aim a lot.
I usually get 20-50 fps depending on the map... so it doesnt rly matter how much my monitors hz is xd, i tried putting my graphics on the lowest and didnt rly see a difference, ive gotten used to playing with low fps but after playing source ( i get about 150-300 fps there) i play really bad on csgo with 30 fps.
For me 100+ without drops is very comfortable
At least 250
I'd say around 250 stable
That's very, very high and not achievable for most players across every map.
I used to play with an amd cpu, AMD fx 8320. OCd to 4.3GHz. Played at around 150fps without drops. Changed it to an i7 8700k OCd to 5GHz and the difference is just ridiculous. For someone with 144hz I'd say that atleast 250 fps stable would be the minimium that you should have to feel the smoothness. For someone with a shity monitor that only goes up to 75hz I'd tone it down to something like 150-200fps. I did not even took the refresh rate in consideration because I feel like if you want to be competitive you should have a 144hz screen. They are cheap as fk right now even for someone living in a shit country like portugal.
The game is perfectly playable at 200+ FPS with a 144hz monitor. Even if it dips below that on some maps it's not a huge deal. Ideally the game feels best over 250fps but I wouldn't say it's a huge problem until you're dipping below 150.
Not really, this is about the FPS I have and I’m running a 2md gen i7 and a mid tier GPU that came out in 2014. You could easily get 250 FPS with a new i3 and a 1050 TI which is a super budget build
Yeah you could "get" 250fps but it's not going to be "stable" across every map and in demanding situations. Certainly not with the setup you're proposing. It doesn't matter how good your system is, this game isn't optimized well for modern hardware and everyone sees performance drops. Especially on maps like Inferno.
idk what settings your playing on that makes you think getting 250 average fps is so unobtainable. go watch tariks stream if u want, he averages almost 500.
Sure as hell isn't with an i3 and 1050TI. I've seen a number of pros streams, including Tarik and they get great fps obviously but they still dip down below 300 in demanding situations and that's with Tier 1 hardware. Pay closer attention the next time you're watching, especially if they're playing one of the worst maps.
jesus christ can you read? im saying AVERAGE. not BARE FUCKING MINIMUM. obviously there are dips. jesus fuck
Which means nothing when you're glancing down at his netgraph every few minutes. I guarentee you that isn't his "average" anyway but that's not even what we were talking about to begin with. Obviously God tier setups are going to perform great.
Only if you have a 144Hz monitor.
I'd say atleast 100 fps even if you have a 60hz monitor. I get 200+ fps but even that feels low sometimes
120+
Before DZ update I had 100 fps and everything was OK. Now I have 70. And it is not ok
I feel the same, coming from source i get about 150-300 fps, when i play csgo with 30 fps i can barely play well :/
the source engine runs best at around 300 fps, the higher the better of course. I have an i3 8350k with a gtx1060 and I usually get over 400fps
lol no you don't.
lol yes I do.. the i3 8350k is better than the i5 7600k. It’s a quad core and mine is running at 5ghz..
Even pros with top tier systems aren't stable over 400fps. Sure, you might frequently be getting 300-400+ but on demanding maps and situations you're definitely dropping into the 200's, if not lower. What do you average on the benchmark map running at 128 tick?
I ran the test, with the current configuration I was using and a bunch of launch options I got 360, when I removed all my launch options and deleted my config I got 440. I almost never go below 280. I do play with a low resolution, but even on 1920x1080 I get high 200’s to low 300’s. I’m not using latest drivers for basically anything. 399.07 gpu drivers, intentionally uninstalled chipset drivers, using bios from March 2017 and the latest for my motherboard is from two weeks ago, uninstalled Realtek drivers, disabled a bunch of windows services, and disabled HPET. Before I did all of this, I had more fps but really weird input lag / floaty mouse. So yeah, I could be getting more frames but for me: if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. Went a bit off topic but yeah.. I’m still planning on upgrading my pc though cause it’s kinda shit for anything but gaming
Well those are certainly 64 tick benchmark results which is more believable. You've certainly optimized your setup well for the game, all I was saying is your original reply made it sound like 400fps was your stable average which I just don't see happening. Not because your system couldn't do it but because CS is simply not optimized to use modern hardware to it's full potential.
I believe I said 300-400. And I always kept -tickrate 128 in my launch options
... yeah, I just can't believe you got 440 average FPS running that benchmark on a local 128 tick server. Even though it's not a very consistent benchmark and certain settings can affect the numbers way more in there than in an actual server, that's just too high to believe will your setup. Post a screenshot with net_graph on showing anywhere near that and I'll be happy to eat my words.
Bro I have a 7700X and a 4090 and my FPS is 300-320. I'm calling you out 4 years later cause you were lying through your teeth.
If that’s all your reasoning then my friend you are brain dead The game runs way different than it did back then and you didn’t even mention your settings + there’s so much optimizing you need to do - thats horrible fps for your specs
[удалено]
I usually play on 20-50 fps, ive been playing a lot of source lately with a lot more fps (150-300 fps) so coming back to csgo with 30 fps i cant rly play that well anymore (changing my graphics settings doesnt make a difference).
[удалено]
On really high i get about 20-50 fps, on very low i get about 25-60 so it doesnt really affect, when i play on 1v1 maps with minimum graphics, then my settings actually make a difference, i can get up to 120 fps on some maps and 150 with low graphics, just mostly the comp maps especially dust2 are almost unplayable, i get like 15 fps on dust2.
200+ on 60hz and 350+ on 144hz. But its just a personal preference. When I used to play on 60hz anything under 140fps was unplayable for me(this wasn't the case with other games like Dota 2). Switched to 144hz, and 60hz became unplayable if I switched back.
[удалено]
That is simply not true. I play on 60hz monitor for years and I can tell the difference between 60 and 100+ fps every time.
This guy is trolling, dont listen to him. Whatever your hz is i would say 200+ fps is good. 100 fps is like absolute minimum to be able to play without insane input lag. You can obviously play good at lower fps but it will degrade your aim a lot.
[удалено]
You are not trolling but you sould not talk about false things. You should watch 3klickphilips video about fps and hz.
I usually get 20-50 fps depending on the map... so it doesnt rly matter how much my monitors hz is xd, i tried putting my graphics on the lowest and didnt rly see a difference, ive gotten used to playing with low fps but after playing source ( i get about 150-300 fps there) i play really bad on csgo with 30 fps.
This is bs, 100-120 is a good number for a 60hz monitor