Installera Steam
logga in
|
språk
简体中文 (förenklad kinesiska)
繁體中文 (traditionell kinesiska)
日本語 (japanska)
한국어 (koreanska)
ไทย (thailändska)
Български (bulgariska)
Čeština (tjeckiska)
Dansk (danska)
Deutsch (tyska)
English (engelska)
Español – España (spanska – Spanien)
Español – Latinoamérica (spanska – Latinamerika)
Ελληνικά (grekiska)
Français (franska)
Italiano (italienska)
Bahasa Indonesia (indonesiska)
Magyar (ungerska)
Nederlands (nederländska)
Norsk (norska)
Polski (polska)
Português (portugisiska – Portugal)
Português – Brasil (portugisiska – Brasilien)
Română (rumänska)
Русский (ryska)
Suomi (finska)
Türkçe (turkiska)
Tiếng Việt (vietnamesiska)
Українська (ukrainska)
Rapportera problem med översättningen
Another common fix for games (assuming the frame rate cap isn't the issue) is enabling triple buffering. Triple buffering is known to *possibly* introduce input delay so many developers don't opt for it as an option. However, triple buffering helps a game run that's struggling to *look* smooth despite maintaining a target frame rate, or even higher. The Final Fantasy Pixel Remasters are a good example of this.
I just would like to know why we should need to cap FPS ?
Put your screen the frequency you want and a Vsync ? What is the problem ? The Vsync of the game is not precise enough ? So why we should keep it ?
I am sûr you are right, i am just curious, i really want to understand ^^
Peace all, and thank you for the fix (my 2080Ti seams to do fluent 120fps when it can)
RivaTuner Statistics Server, a tool that comes with MSI Afterburner, has a very good frame cap function. The difference is, it stabilizes the frame time more consistently than other frame caps, and frame time is almost more important than frame rate.