Vsync is off but I still cant get more than 60 FPS in counter-strike 1.6

I tried just about everything. I changed resolution to the lowest resolution, changed brightness, changed the rates in game, my settings all seem good. Any ideas would be very appreciated.

I have a
HP Laptop T5250
Core2Duo 1.5 GHZ
RAM: 2 GB
VSYNC: OFF
Nvidia Geforce 8600 GS

In game:
FPS_Max 101
Cl_Updaterate 101
CL_Cmdrate 101
rate 35000


Please help me guys Thanks!

 

Check out the Nvidia control panel 3d settings, V-sync might be enabled from there.

 

Yeah, it's been disabled, still nothing has been working for me.. *sigh*

 

Tried different drivers?

 

ah, no idea what you mean by the drivers? How do I try different drivers?

 

http://www.nvidia.com/object/notebook_drivers.html

Download, Install and restart.

Your drivers are probably way outdated.

 

hmm, when I try to download one of the links, it says file not found.. darn it

 

Like when I click on vista 32bit, the link goes to a page saying file not found

 

Stupid Nvidia.

http://laptopvideo2go.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=22522

 

ah okay, it states for a geforce 6800 though and I have a 8600, would it still be okay to download this one? Thanks bro for your help

 

The listed GPU's on the page i gave you is what the original INF's support. This is why we overwrite the old .inf file with a modded .inf to add the compatibility to pretty much every nvidia mobile GPU.

90% of Nvidia mobile gpu users here use laptopvideo2go drivers.

 

Scroll down from there and you can see your GPU.

 

Umm just a question, why do you want/need more than 60FPS? Is the refresh rate of the laptop monitor even over 60Hz? I've heard that the FPS cannot(or at east don't properly work) exceed the refresh rate of the screen.

And besides, the naked human eye can rarely(if at all) discern much of a difference past 60-70 FPS and up >.>

 

A constant 30-35fps is all you need to keep things smooth.

A normal movie runs at 25fps and we dont notice frame lag.

 

Anything under the refresh rate in an FPS game causes at least some noticable mouse lag.
Movies appear smoother because they use multiple fixed camera positions, and when the camera is moving they keep it focused on a subject while the rest of the scene is blurred. This is why budget movies usually look bad no matter how good they try to act, becuase they don't know how to do these camera techniques.

It's been said many times though, there's no point in getting more frames per second than your refresh rate because it exceeds speed of the monitor, if your getting 300fps on a monitor that runs 60Hz, your only seeing 60 frames in a second anyway.

 

No, the cameras record at a higher FPS. Like the high speed cameras used in mythbusters that capture up to 250,000fps. Budget movie looks bad because they use budget cameras with budget lenses and budgtastic film.

On playback they limit it on 24-25fps because it looks smooth enough to the human eye.

 

clearly no one here has played actually played counter strike. the game doesnt play 100% smooth at anything less than 60 and there is still a clear difference between 60 and 100fps.

 

You do realize that this difference is obvious for the most part to hardcore gamers and that most people don't actually complain when getting constant 30 to 35 FPS, right?

 

bro go play the game and type max fps 30 and then change it to max fps 60 and then talk

 

What's the difference between 100fps and 60fps when the refresh rate is 60Hz? Someone should do a study on the placebo effect of knowing the frames per second in first person shooters.

 

counter strike specifcally likes high fps to play smooth. im not talking about refresh rates.
playing cs1.6 at 30-35fps like someone said is not going to be fun

 

Google refresh rate, then v-sync

I can play CSS on my 32" HDTV on 30hz and it looks fine.

 

there is a decernable difference between 30fps and 60 fps.
but on a laptop lcd, 60fps and 100fps 100 percent same. i have no idea what that dude is talking about.

 

i second that.

 

I agree with Dire. Anything that exceeds the refresh rate of the monitor won't matter. And there's a reason monitors are around 60-80Hz. It's because the naked human eye cannot discern much of a difference if any past that.

If there is indeed a difference between 60FPS and 100FPS, I honestly doubt it'll make much of a difference as for example between 20FPS and 60FPS say(since both examples have the same difference in terms of FPS).

And yodawg, I'd suggest googling what flipfire asked you to. FPS, V-sync and refresh rates are linked...

 

Yeah im aware of the the 60hz refresh rate on normal LCD screens. Im just saying it still looks fine on a 30hz screen.

 

I play CSS on my laptop and I must say that 120FPS and 60FPS are different for me. I see a difference between the two even though my monitor is 60hz. Call me an idiot or w/e that's fine but I do see a difference when it comes to those FPS. I try to play CSS as 100+ FPS.

 

Are you sure the FPS was not dipping down lower than 60fps? Lets say a couple of CT's threw smoke grenades.

 

a mod that is not careful about his words.. FTW

 

It stays normally at 130-140, dipping to low 100's. I play at 4xAA and 4xAF at 1680x1050 with a 9800m GS.

 

Well by my understanding...

FPS is how many times the GPU will generate frames each second.

Refresh rate is how often your monitor refreshes itself(or more its image) in a second.

Technically speaking, the GPU can render more frames than the monitor's refresh rate, but you won't see any more frames than the rate at which the monitor can refresh itself.

Therefore, by my understanding(unless I'm missing something), it makes no difference past the monitor's refresh rate how many FPS you've got because the monitor isn't changing its frames any faster past its limit and the monitor itself is not changing. Basically, it's not refreshing its image more often past its refresh rate speed so extra FPS will not yield a difference.

If anything, chances are that tearing might appear if you go that many FPS past your refresh rate I believe.

 

im talking about cs 1.6 not css. and im talking about fps under the assumption that the refresh rate is high like 120hz or something

 

Common laptop LCDs have a refresh rate of 60Hz though IIRC. Rare are the laptops screens which go higher than that.

Check this link(or this one). Apparently, general laptop LCDs have a slower response time than even 60Hz sometimes and high refresh rates aren't beneficial to those types of screens.

 

Ok, let's get a few things straight. If your laptop runs at 60Hz, you want 60fps. No more, no less. There is a difference between 30fps and 60 fps and most gamers can see the difference. However, above 60fps, there is little discernible difference in terms of smoothness because the screen is actually only still showing 60fps. In fact, higher framerates are actually bad for the experience because it creates judder.

Let's look at movies and Blu-Ray for reference. TVs are now coming out that are 120Hz. However, this is not because movies are filmed at 120fps. It's because movies are filmed at 24fps and Blu-Ray allows them to be played back at 24fps (DVD doesn't have this feature). 60Hz is not divisible by 24 (60/24=2.5). Therefore, on a 60Hz screen, the movie has to show one frame of video every 3 refreshes of the screen and then the next frame for 2 refreshes of the screen. This is the "3:2 pulldown" feature. Unfortunately, this causes a juddering effect, especially as the camera and background moves. Now, with a 120Hz screen, one frame of video is shown for every 5 screen refreshes (120/24=5). This works to eliminate the juddering effect caused by rotating between one frame per 3Hz and then one frame per 2Hz.

Of course, the easiest solution is to have the screen refresh rate equal the framerate. This is why CRT screens generally provide a smoother experience for films, because they can have variable refresh rates. Most CRT TVs can switch between 24fps for film sources and 30fps for NTSC sources (although they're interlacing only, subtracting from the smoothness since only half of the frame is actually drawn for ever refresh cycle). So, applying this logic to games and 60Hz laptop screens, you want the framerate to match the refresh rate (60fps and 60Hz) so that each frame is drawn concurrently with each refresh of the screen (60/60=1). Having less causes smoothness issues (not to mention motion blur, which is frowned up in games but considered necessary for realism in film sources), and having more causes judder (e.g. 100/60=5/3).

Hope this helps.

 

As stated in your second link, there is a difference between response time and refresh rate. I don't know if your post was a typo or something, but you can't really directly compare the two.

Also, to be concise, the PAL standard has a refresh rate of 50Hz, not 60. This is because AC power in PAL territories is 50Hz rather than 60. Converting it would require expensive modulators and amplifiers to be built in to the screen. I'm unaware of how many laptops that exist, however, that utilize the PAL standard (i.e. 50Hz) for their screens.

 

thanks man u really helped a lot

 

Get 60fps, use Vsync, be happy.

60fps is all you need, I can tell just from the last page in the thread that the monitor refresh rate has been explained. above 45fps is great gameplay but 60fps is perfect.

If your getting above 60 I would use vysnc to sync it with the monitor to prevent tearing and also you video card and cpu will thank you because you wont have them working harder for no reason.

 

Definitely not too much ppl here played CS 1.6 ... IN THAT GAME YOU CAN REALLY TELL the difference between 30-60-80 and 100 FPS... I don't know why, maybe is just the way the game is coded, who knows... But that is a FACT... And i'm not talking about CSS... It's the old engine... CS 1.3, 1.5 and 1.6, half-life 1 also applies... In those games 60 fps feels like playing COD 4 at 20 Fps... And anyone who played CS 1.6 will be agreed with me... Those who don't believe, try the game...

 

I've seen CS 1.6 at 60FPS and honestly I didn't find it that bad...

And that may be, but there are hardware limitations as already said. Getting 100FPS will not yield any difference(it might actually be detrimental) if your monitor does not have a matching(or higher) refresh rate.

I don't know how the game is coded, but it's been proven that increasing the FPS past the monitor's refresh rate has little to no impact on the smoothness of the screen(ex: the mouse moves at the same speed).

It's something else entirely if you're noticing a significant difference between 100FPS and 60FPS on a 60Hz screen.

 

Well i played CS from 1.3 to 1.6 (3 years...)... I didn't "see it", i played it... And i used an old CRT monitor with 85 Hz refresh rate at 1024x768 res... And it was always needed to unlock the fps over 85 to 100 to get a real smooth gameplay, because there was a difference... Now i play the game in my laptop's LCD which have 60 Hz refresh rate, and well, it's the same, 100 Fps or it will stutter...

Maybe it's like with movies... A movie is show at 24 Fps (i think, don't know the exact number) and it's smooth... But latest games at 24 Fps are not smooth at all... Because the sharpness, etc... They need at least 45~60 Fps to be smooth... Old games needed more (maybe is the motion blur in new games, who knows...)

I'm not giving a technical explanation, because i don't have it... I'm just saying, in that game, you can really tell the difference...

 

jose perez i agree with you 100% bro, finally someone who has actually played cs1.6 came on here to set it straight that cs1.6 needs all the fps it can get to run the way it wa meant to be played

 

I have played CS since the dawn of 1.1....

I guess you probably didn't even play enough of it everyday to experiment the difference of 100fps and 60fps.

It is no brainer not have it turned on as I see frames tearing severely - and I have been a photographer/cinematographer also. Do I have to say that I have sharp eyes without glasses telling the difference between 100fps and 60? Yes, in which I mean, the answer is no. I turn vSync for most of my games - Because that is the maximum frame rate my monitor supports. 60Hz, 60fps. Getting 80Hz monitor and turning on vSync - that's alright.

Getting over a 150fps on a 60Hz monitor? Pointless. Period.

Do remember frame post processing in movies are differed as of games - some games run well at 30fps. Crysis managed to implement it well - Not to mention the sequence of frame overlay standards - The act of transitioning from one frame to another. Movies are set at a nice 23.975fps

I need not explain any further as I do not like to come to an argument. However, I would gladly explain in detail if anyone asks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frame_rate#Computer_graphics

 

Well we're running out of direction in the post, but.... If you say you played Cs from 1.1 i just CANNOT BELIEVE you don't notice the difference between 60 and 100 FPS there... You must be the first person who played CS and say that 60 vs 100 Fps in CS 1.1 to 1.6 is the same...

 

I agree with whoever said that an experiment should be conducted to test the placebo effect of seeing more frames and what not.

 

Here is an interesting article on refresh rate vs. fps... it supports a few points of view brought up here:

http://www.100fps.com/how_many_frames_can_humans_see.htm

 

There is really not much to go on except personal experience at this point. From a technical point of view there should be no difference past a certain point. The fact that some of you are noticing a difference means that there is something wrong somewhere...

Either the technical part is completely off(or I'm understanding it wrong) or the difference you are noticing is not due to pure FPS(and only correlates with the increase of FPS). As in, whatever is increasing the "smoothness" isn't exactly FPS, but also increases as FPS increase.

As I said, it's possible to have more FPS then your monitor refresh rate, but the monitor isn't updating itself fast enough to keep up with the FPS, so theoretically, there should be no difference. If anything, tearing should appear because the monitor will skip a few frames when it refreshes itself.

Ex: I have a monitor that has 3Hz(for simplicity's sake)
I have 9FPS

So I have frames 1 through 9:
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

But the monitor only updates its image 3 times per second so it'll only really show frame 3, 6 & 9(random pick for simplicity's sake yet again) so in actuality, theoretically, you should get tearing rather than smoother gameplay past the monitor's refresh rate.

 

tell em joseperez!

 

I want to know the actual difference though. Is it the mouse moving faster, the movements being less blocky, the textures being more uniform? What is it exactly that makes such a huge difference?

It's nice to say that there is one, but the fact is that nobody is really trying to understand nor explain this difference, which doesn't help either side here.

Jose Perez even admits he has no clue as to what this difference is in terms of technicalities. He just acknowledges there is one.

 

i can't tell the difference after 60 fps, but i can easily tell the difference if it is less than ~50 because movement appears much less fluid and the reaction time between mouse movement and game movement is not in sync.

 

perhaps we should do an experiment where one group of users is given a fake fraps reading of 100 fps while getting about 60 fps and another group is given a 40 fps reading while getting say 60 fps or something of that type just to experiment. But then people would just claim that the 100 fps people were "tricked" or werent "real cs players" or they wouldn't see a difference =)

But to actually contribute to the discussion, Im about to upgrade the graphics card on my desktop so Ill see if i I see a difference between 50-60ish to a like 100 fps. =)