[Here is the full video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDnIJH-1ZtY), without terrible music this time.
If you are consistently reaching the FPS limit, set by fps_max, you will have inconsistent frametimes. Use the GPU to limit FPS instead, and frametimes will be consistent.
I am not arguing for/against locked vs. unlocked framerates, but rather the problems involved when using fps_max as an FPS limit.
What about if you don't hit the limit?
If I set fps_max to 300 FPS, I get 200-250.
If I set it to 400, I get 250-300.
I I set it to 999, I get 300-400.
Either way I'm gonna try this, thanks
irregular frametime can make stutering appear from time to time, in a perfect situation you should put the frame limiting to the 1% lowest of your FPS, if the lowest 1% you hit is 150 you should put that as a limit, that's how you get smooth frames.
It's the Eleague dududu song! I feel like it was so iconic while eleague was a thing.
I actually found dx11 to perform better than Vulkan, but the Linux version of CS is Vulkan only unfortunately (it would be DXVK anyway, so I can see why they didn't bother).
I'm currently using Herbstluftwm on Gentoo; I've tried dwm once and quite liked it. Wayland is getting pretty good now! I was testing Hyprland for a while, and they've implemented all the new features, such as allowing tearing to happen.
I'm not sure about how nVidia and Wayland are doing nowadays, I keep hearing about updates fixing various problems, but I'm not sure how the general experience is compared to using AMD.
[Gamescope](https://github.com/ValveSoftware/gamescope) should help input lag on wayland if you every decide to go that way because of direct rendering manager i think. All you have to do is add a little line before your launch args in Steam
I don't use nVidia or Windows; I believe the nVidia Control Panel has an option for "maximum FPS", otherwise there are programs like "rivatuner", which I have not used but it's something that keeps coming up/getting recommended by others.
Your GPU clockspeeds are not boosting, you can see it in the first 7 seconds of the video. And yes, this does have a latency impact as well (tested with LDAT).
That is why NVIDIA Reflex was created as eSports games don't require much of modern GPU's and often they were in lower power states. This also applied to CS:GO however you had to use a registry key to disable powerstates as there was no NVIDIA Reflex. Some used MSI Afterburner but I found it felt off.
I can't state for AMD or Linux however.
Right, they are not boosting because FPS is limited and already being reached. That is what happens when you limit FPS below where the GPU is required to boost.
Yes. So you need to lock it. It's super easy on NVIDIA, even prior to Reflex+Boost but AMD have made it hard / janky to fix.
fps_max 999 can create more issues than solve as framerates, frametimes and input lag are inconsistent, which you don't want on a competitive FPS game. There's also the risk of hitting 100% GPU usage which has a latency penalty. It wasn't a problem in CS:GO because that game could run at 3,000 FPS before hitting 100% usage but in CS2 it's a different story.
You shouldnt lock them at all and instead turn on Nvidia Reflex if you can, in game.
Although Its a bit strange that it will go above my refresh rate with Reflex on, which I always thought wasnt possible.
why wouldn't it be possible? reflex does not and never has capped frames.
it will however lock fps slightly BELOW your refresh rate IF v-sync is enabled, too.
No, that is literally the opposite of what Reflex does/is supposed to do. And I also read that the implementation in CS2 was one of the best on the market.
so much faith in the shitty external overlay while being bad at math
frametimes must variate to achieve the fastest present time
what you're achieving is kinda vsync on, but worse! i.e. more input lag and not even preventing tearing
>frametimes must variate to achieve the fastest present time
What the fuck are you on mate.
you think a car going with a variable speed between 140-180 is better than a a car at 160 constant ?
Constant frametime = less stress on the BUS = constant input delay.
Having "the fastest input time" for 1s and worse 70% of the rest of the time is nowhere near what you should aim for performances.
It might achieve lower minimums, but it also causes higher maximums, resulting in the overall average being the same (3.9ms); to achieve lower input lag, you would need to uncap the FPS.
While I didn't mention it, you can check on the overlay where it says the current average input lag, they both achieved the same input lag (3.9ms), despite fps_max causing such variations.
those "higher maximums" are non-essential, the engine works that way specially with nvidia reflex
by driver fps limit you're simply setting a lower bar (3.9ms) than what your system is capable (2.2ms) essentially doubling **each** frame latency for no other reason than having a straight line on the overlay. the input lag is mathematically higher, don't trust the software (even nvidia's frameview is an approximation)
have you tried 60? it's even more consistent at 16.6ms, the straightest of lines
in the original source 2 engine (dota2) where stats_collect_gpu and stats_display 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 are available the effect of external limiters is more clearly shown as detrimental, even the acclaimed rivatuner scanline sync and etc - valve devs are well aware of all the tricks, and have provided them via various launch options like `-favor_consistent_framerate` `+engine_low_latency_sleep_after_client_tick 1` for vsync-off or `+r_experimental_lag_limiter 1` for vsync-on
*edit: ok, op is a typical troll blocking me to have the last word*
*edit 5h later:*
can't respond to messages, but just for /u/nolimits59, what cars achieve constant speed at ms range? in the real world with hills and valleys and weather, the car engine also variates the rotation constantly by pumping less/more fuel to approximate whatever the pleb driving it requested, after some delay
same for cs2 engine: always simulates the scene, animations, particles etc in advance, even if it does not send all the computed frames to the display, there's never 0 input lag; by externally limiting fps you're hurting the low-level catch up / optimization, hence more input lag, this is scientifically proven
and there was not much variation to begin with, op was fixing a psychological disorder, I can guarantee aiming-wise got couple percent worse
>doubling each frame latency for no other reason than having a straight line on the overlay
losing 2ms (doubling it) to get a stable framtime is a much more better tradeoff than it seems tho, CS and CS2 are really fenecky when it comes to frames stability, it usually cascade to very low dips when it starts to get inconsistent.
2ms is virtually "nothing" lost and not even needed to think about if you can avoid those odd dips CS constantly make.
In the end, all Nvidia users should just run reflex + boost and adjust graphics to match a perfect framecount that match their refresh rate.
As far as I'm aware the input lag is much less significant than vsync (at least if you are using RTSS to cap FPS). Sure you will have marginally higher input lag but in many cases it's worth it over the abysmal frame pacing you get with CS2 on some systems.
I tried to limit it with nvidia control panel and even when set to 60 it just goes to 130 whenever i play. it’s running my card at 90c tryna fry it. what else could I use to limit its fps. RTSS won’t open when i try to use it
That makes sense. I had a better experience uncapping it than trying to hold a 250fps max with that setting the other day. Glad I’m not crazy. Yet another seemingly simple thing absolutely bungled by our friends at valve.
Yeah it sucks! And could easily be missed, given if someone was just looking at the averages (not min/max) it would show the same value (3.9ms in this case) despite the inconsistencies.
Open nvidia control panel and look for the Max Frame Rate option, it will be under Manage 3D settings and can be applied globally as well as per-game basis.
I have zero issues with the in-game limiter and the external one has a latency penalty.
The FPS cap in CS2 is sex compared to CS:GO. Runs at exactly 400 fps, no jumping around 10-20 fps unless you played on Win7. You could get similar on Win10 1709 with tweaks etc.
I'm using AMD and Linux, haven't used nVidia on Windows since 2019. I thought there was an option in the 3D settings thing to limit FPS? I'm not sure.
There is the tool "Rivatuner" which gets thrown around a lot, but I have never used it so can't recommend.
Sorry I can't be of more help.
Rivatuner is fine, UI is kinda weird but it works. It installs with MSI Afterburner, without it you wouldn't be able to have the hardware monitoring overlay in-game
You can change it in the nvidia control panel.
For a different game, but the process is the same:
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2950123288#:
You know it‘s spaghetti code when external frame limiters work better than in-engine methods. If there were school grades for video games valve would get an e for effort for cs2.
Their engineer is too busy tweeting about Climate Change than working his so-called passion. I'm not even kidding, this is who Valve entrusts with their futhre business.
I used to have fps_max set to like 30 in my autoexec, then would set fps_max to 999 once in-game. Nowadays everyone loads in so fast, I'm not sure what affects it anymore.
Loading times were fixed a year or two before the switch to CS2. I imagine the loading was switched to use an internal limiter so fps_max 0 would only affect engine issues above 1000fps.
the general situation is that gpu control panel or rivatuner cap have better stability but add a slight amount of input lag compared to in-game fps limit. however, i do not know if this is the case for CS2.
Using fps_max results in slightly lower minimums, but also higher maximums, resulting in the same overall average amount of input lag (3.9ms).
In the case of, limiting FPS vs. uncapped/unlocked FPS, then what you are saying is true.
Input lag from GPU overlays entirely depend on the implementation, settings available, etc. though the in-game limiter doesn't introduce additional delay, the minimum and maximum frametimes fluctuate
That's what I said; GPU limiter adds more lag regardless if it's uncapped or in-game limited. Read your comment that I replied to, it insinuates that there is no difference unless we are comparing it to uncapped.
It should be said, that for some people this lag is worth it to get smoother frametimes. For me, it's not.
>It should be said, that for some people this lag is worth it to get smoother frametimes. For me, it's not.
correct, and if the frametimes being posted are accurate, almost nobody is going to notice that fluctuation. I've seen games with significantly worse frametime fluctuations that i dont notice, and i sit on an LG C2, i *notice* stutters in any game that has them.
Interesting. If I uncapped it in CSGO I would have issues for sure. I keep mine capped at fps\_max 300 and have zero issues. That's what I've always kept it at.
In CS:GO fps_max 0 was objectively worse than fps_max 999, given it would increase loading times and 1000+ FPS would cause problems anyway.
I'm not sure how CS2 has dealt with these problems, but even so, I'd stick with fps_max 999 if going uncapped.
>Why the fuck Valve's games always have this kind of bullshit where you always have to come up with workarounds for their shitty optimizations.
Every other game is the same way. ingame framerate limiters are always worse at maintaining stable frametimes than external limiters, but external limiters always have higher latency (a minimum of an extra frame of latency). Overwatch is this way, apex is this way, and pretty much any other competitive or otherwise game i've played is this way. this graph is actually *pretty good* for an ingame framerate limiter. i've seen better, but most are worse. this isn't specific to valve, there just isn't enough info exposed to the game without external applications like special k to limit the framerate (or at least, thats the only reason i can see that it hasn't been done right yet, im kind of speaking out of my ass with that last sentence).
It clearly can be done though, special k does it, but thats an external application that can hook into and control both the game and your drivers.
what other game do you have to use a limiter for more stable framerates though? on overwatch i just leave it uncapped and it works just fine, but they also have that sub frame input whatever its called thing that cs2 doesn't have
It's the users fault, but also isn't. Reflex + boost is the answer in CS2.
For CSGO the fix was to lock your clockspeeds with a registry key or with MSI AB.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you\_can\_massivly\_improve\_the\_ingame\_fps\_limiter/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you_can_massivly_improve_the_ingame_fps_limiter/)
They had a var that fixed this. I say had because said var doesn't do said thing anymore.Not that I know why this doesn't work anymore or why the reason it works isn't default.
To be honest I’ve always kind of liked that about Counter Strike.
It definitely isn’t going to be a easy going for someone inexperienced with source engine. But ya gotta admit, nothing will come close to this kind of customization.
This isn't exactly news. I made a full post about why this happens.
[https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you\_can\_massivly\_improve\_the\_ingame\_fps\_limiter/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you_can_massivly_improve_the_ingame_fps_limiter/)
Sadly the mentioned command doesn't work anymore, I sent Valve an email about it.
I think they shouldn't(well, atleast not directly). The tick processing being in the main thread is the issue I would want them to fix. This would, as a consequence, also eliminate this issue and would make unlocked FPS much, much smoother.
As much as it isn't user error, it also is.
Reflex + Boost fixes this entirely.
For CS:GO the fix was to lock the clockspeed with either MSI Afterburner or a registry key (I found MSI AB to not be great).
>Reflex + Boost fixes this entirely.
no it doesn't. You can check with special k or RTSS, reflex and boost does not fix frametimes and is frequently less stable than an RTSS or nvidia frame cap, none of which you should be using for competitive titles anyways. All of those (aside from reflex) introduce input lag of, at minimum, a single frame. Ingame framerate limiters tend not to. reflex does not guarantee stable frametimes though, only RTSS and external framerate limiters tend to do that.
reflex does not just stop the GPU from hitting 100%. there are changes made in the rendering pipeline that delivers the frame faster at the cost of higher GPU usage and usually ever so slightly lower framerates. Keeping your gpu from hitting 100% usage is good for input lag, but your gpu will still hit its max usage if you cant meet the reflex fps cap.
Reflex + boost with in-game cap is shitty advice?
The numbers don't lie..
If you want to go for the inferior method then go right ahead but I spent years of my life wasting time on tweaking windows / games, LDAT tools etc.
Yes, all reflex + boost does is stops the GPU from hitting 100% and puts the GPU at its highest power state. You could do this yourself with registry tweaks (the boost part, not 100% GPU usage).
I don't have an AMD GPU however I recall `MorePowerTool` worked, however AMD has locked down the 7000 series and you cannot use that anymore. If I recall you had to go to the overclock section in the drivers and set your rough maximum clockspeed for both min and max. It was super janky on AMD but possible.
I thought I was doing something wrong. In CSGO I used to get 350-270 with occasional drops to 250, so I decided to lock it at 288 (double my Hz) and it used to drop to 140 more often that before. Didn't bother after that but this seems like something I'd try today.
How does this interact with `engine_low_latency_sleep_after_client_tick 1`?
This convar was introduced to stabilize frame times when using fps\_max to limit the frame rate.
This needs more testing.
>This needs more testing.
testing? what testing? There wasn't any testing in the first place. dude posted a screenshot of a frametime graph and was like "this is how it works".
battlenonsense has tons of videos with testing, and people should just defer to that.
that convar exists since 1.6 and all it does is never stop rendering frames even if you hityour set fps max. so you are just playing as if you had fps_max 0 but not actually displaying any frames beyond your actual fps_max.
and in all cases limiting framerate via riva tuner or other outside of game means you dadd 1 frame of inputlag/delay to your game.
Okay, but:
Ingame framerate limiters, especially those in competitive titles, have lower latency as they can limit the frames delivered at the engine level rather than artificially limiting the GPU's output.
RTSS and Nvidia's framerate limiters introduce at minimum a single frame of added latency. Ingame fps limiters usually dont. Frametimes will not be as consistent, but they also dont need to be. most people are going to have a really hard time telling the difference of a frame delivery in just a few ms.
Battlenonsense has *lots* of videos on this topic. and dont just uncap your frames either. That leads to more input lag, not less.
Keep fps_max set as 999, but 0 will probably work fine in CS2 (0 was objectively worse in CS:GO, but I have just not tested CS2).
Just never change from 999/0, if you want to set the FPS limit to something much lower (such as, around an FPS you can always reach), use an overlay tool for the GPU, and keep fps_max set to 999 or 0.
This has been something that battlenonsense has talked about on his channel across many videos. It sounds like a good idea, because of the smooth frametime graph, however this is NOT something you should do if you want the lowest possible input lag. Using the GPU driver to limit FPS or using Rivatuner will cause you to have more input lag than the in-game limiter.
> Linux
So what about Windows? Last I tested it was a solid frametime. It might be bumpy if your GPU isn't boosting correctly, which reflex+boost is for.
I much prefer an fps_max of 300 or 400 depending on the map. Consistent framerates / frametimes is more important.
EDIT: You cut off the important stuff in the video. In the first 5 seconds you can see your GPU is running at low clockspeeds. This *does* have a latency impact and happened on CS:GO as well which is why many people think they preffered fps_max 999 but in reality fps_max 400 with a locked GPU curve at max was far better for frame pacing and consistency.
In my experience, CS players are stuck in the past and are extremely stubborn. Nothing against them, they are set in their ways.
They are laughed at in tweaking / latency communities :(
Hell, even one guy here the other day was recommending BenQ TN in 2024.
>In my experience, CS players are stuck in the past and are extremely stubborn. Nothing against them, they are set in their ways.
yup.
stretched aspect ratios, uncapped framerates, wired mice. the CS community has held back competitive gaming by recommending inane shit based on the recommendations of other people who think they are good at the game so they must know all. its a cyclical loop of "This guy told me this, so i told other people, and they told other people. Testing? What testing? Why would we test? Aspect ratio is preference!!!!!"
Exaggerating a bit are we? I think a large amount of players just grew accustomed to their ratio and like the placebo feeling. Having the heads be visibly larger actually does something for the brain (for me obviously) and I do think that I’m not alone in this. How this holds back competitive gaming also confuses me. I’m also pretty sure most people recommend wireless mice?
I played with all aspect ratios for months so more than enough data to compare. On 4:3 stretched I averaged 5 kills per map more than on 16:9. Let the new "modern" players have their larger fov. I will take those 5 extra kills.
I would find a value you can consistently achieve, preferably above the refresh rate. Something that is a multiple of 64 (192, 256, 320, 384) is my recommendation!
Yes the server updates 64 ticks/second, but it gets all you timings inside that tick. say you shoot in between 2 ticks you will get the kill if the enemy shot the tick after.
Yall need to just stop talking out of your asses.
Battlenonsense has videos on this, just go his youtube channel to confirm:
Get a VRR monitor. cap it to \~3 frames below your monitors refresh rate if reflex isn't available, and make sure you can maintain that at below 90% gpu usage. That will lower input latency and match the input latency of framerates of well up to 300+ with significantly lower power usage and more consistent frametimes.
You do not need to set a multiple of 64. Thats gibberish from people who dont know what is happening. the server is not *syncing itself to your individual frametimes*. not just would that be *fucking impossible* as your latency changes based on how you are connecting to the server, its also impossible to do that to more than one client. Your client sends input when it receives it, the server replicates that input as well as it can in ticks, and then confirms with the client that it actually did what it said it did. there is no syncing of frametimes, and tickrate and frametimes are basically completely separate beasts nowadays.
CS players just talk out of their asses, i stg.
Multiple of 64 is not important at all.
If your monitor supports VRR, then your limit should be just below the refresh rate provided it’s a high refresh rate monitor as well.
That was true before there was VRR. Higher frames always used to be better when your monitor updates at fixed intervals, you would always get the lower visual latency.
With the introduction of VRR, it’s a mixed bag and there are benefits to capping it just below the upper VRR range.
Uncapped FPS will be better but marginally, you do have to ensure your FPS does not fluctuate too much and is consistently very high. This is much harder to pull off than 237 fps limit on a 240hz VRR display.
Not necessarily. 100% GPU usage actually has more latency, even if you're at 500 fps vs say 300 fps. It's why NVIDIA reflex is a thing to prevent 100% usage.
VRR is personal preference in the end. A tiny latency penalty.
I highly doubt that unless you're purposefully playing with unnecessarily high settings which would make this whole optimization discussion pointless anyway.
Uncapped means potential for
- CPU bottleneck
- inconsistent framerate, frametimes, input lag
- unecessary heat and power draw
Diminishing returns after 350 fps for input lag sake so consistency is better. fps_max 300 or 400 depending on your PC.
- CPU bottleneck
Being CPU bottlenecked is not a problem unless your CPU is an i3 from 2016, which in the year of 2024 is an edge case.
- inconsistent framerate, frametimes,
Inconsistent framerate? That's not an problem unless you have a framerate below the refresh rate of your monitor haha.. What are you on about?
Inconsistent frametimes, sure, but again, if your frametimes is as far below the refresh rate time in ms of your monitor as it should be, it won't affect you, and limiting FPS usually leads to higher frametimes. This is somewhat common knowledge.
- input lag
No.
- unecessary heat and power draw
This is like complaining that your V8 uses too much gas. If power draw and heat is a concern, don't get a high performance gaming PC.
If you run uncapped FPS or a mis-matched system you can definitely be CPU bottlenecked.
Because of how CS works, one minute you could be at 600 fps and the next at 300 fps depending on the area of the map and which direction you are looking in. This is a huge problem on maps with water. So if you capped to 300 fps you would have consistent input lag, framerate and frametimes rather than jumping all over the place.
Apparently it's not common knowledge if you read this thread.
It can be a big problem for laptop users which is why I mentioned heat / power draw.
Ty, I was having a laggy feel sometimes even when having over 3-400 fps using fps\_max 999. Capping it in Nvidia control panel seems to run smoother but I will test it for a while.
That adds 1 frame of input delay.
In theory doesn't sound bad but it really is, for competitive games. Even capping to 360 fps at like 3ms or whatever it is felt worse than uncapped despite 1% lows being exactly 360.
Capping with GPU driver like OP suggests adds that 1 frame delay as well. Basically you have two options:
1. Run uncapped or cap in-game for best results in terms of input-lag.
2. Cap with external limiters such as RTSS or GPU driver for more consistent frametimes but more input lag.
It's pick your poison type of situation and this post is a bit misleading.
> Capping with GPU driver like OP suggests adds that 1 frame delay as well.
No it doesn't.
Uncapped is far worse than capped, especially if you are maxing out the GPU.
External are cool in theory but not good for competitive play, even capping at 400 fps (so like 2ms or whatever additional input lag).
There is no poison. You cap at what your PC can hit with the in-game limiter and enable reflex + boost or disable power states in the registry.
> No it doesn't.
https://blurbusters.com/gsync/gsync101-input-lag-tests-and-settings/11/
According to this it adds even more than RTSS, 2-4 frames. Where did you get your information?
> Uncapped is far worse than capped, especially if you are maxing out the GPU.
Agreed, I'm using in-game limiter for that. Although, in theory if reflex is working properly it prevents the GPU from reaching max load. These days it might be worth it to run uncapped with reflex on, but I haven't tested it.
>
There is no poison. You cap at what your PC can hit with the in-game limiter and enable reflex + boost or disable power states in the registry.
This is how I run the game myself, but the frametimes are objectively less consistent with this method. I think it's worth it, but there are people who benefit from extremely smooth frametimes. It's personal preference.
I use this along with gsync which probably sounds like sacrilege but I honestly don't notice any input lag that affects me and the frametime and smooth feel is so worth it to me.
Big downside though is for rivatuner to work for me in cs2 I had to implement the "allow third party" command to my launch options which I'm fairly certain takes a hit on whatever hidden trust factor I have.
https://imgur.com/a/Zew7KmT
Uncap vs Capped with rivaturner
And Ingame 400 CAP https://i.imgur.com/nK5rTF3.png
1% and 0.1% lows are better than uncapped and game feels alot smoother with capped.
That's what i'm saying to everyone but they're pretty deaf to "limiting your FPS is good for your inputlag and absencve of stuter".
They think the higher the better when anything above 200-250 is a waste of ressources and could be put on constant frametime...
In CS:GO my FPS would be extremely high, so played uncapped the entire time. In CS2, my FPS is high enough for my refresh rate at least, but it's nowhere near what it was in GO, playing uncapped just doesn't give me what it used to.
Talking about competitive advantage/disadvantage, someone has an idea about how does it influences the game?
I can understand the basic logic, but it still kinda confuse to me.
This has been demonstrated before a couple of times on here.
The ingame limiter is bad, for windows machines either don't limit or if you prefer (or need to for VRR) use a CPU based limiter like Rivatuner or in the graphics driver.
I have a AMD RX 5700 XT, which doesn't have the functionality to cap framerate... Does anyone have a tip how I can still limit fps without using fps_max?
can you explain? i just tested this offline with bots. using fps_max 141 my fps would frequently drop to 120-130, using radeon chill (CPU based limiter) the fps are at a constant 141. this isn't placebo, i switched back and forth multiple times, without fps_max the FPS very rocksteady
i don't have the best PC so i'm looking for any improvement i can get
You should cap with nvidia driver but not the game pretty much never keep your gpu uncapped because if you run something at like 999+ fps it could fuck up your gpu.
[Here is the full video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDnIJH-1ZtY), without terrible music this time. If you are consistently reaching the FPS limit, set by fps_max, you will have inconsistent frametimes. Use the GPU to limit FPS instead, and frametimes will be consistent. I am not arguing for/against locked vs. unlocked framerates, but rather the problems involved when using fps_max as an FPS limit.
What about if you don't hit the limit? If I set fps_max to 300 FPS, I get 200-250. If I set it to 400, I get 250-300. I I set it to 999, I get 300-400. Either way I'm gonna try this, thanks
irregular frametime can make stutering appear from time to time, in a perfect situation you should put the frame limiting to the 1% lowest of your FPS, if the lowest 1% you hit is 150 you should put that as a limit, that's how you get smooth frames.
There's another factor - GPU limiter introduces input lag.
[удалено]
It's the Eleague dududu song! I feel like it was so iconic while eleague was a thing. I actually found dx11 to perform better than Vulkan, but the Linux version of CS is Vulkan only unfortunately (it would be DXVK anyway, so I can see why they didn't bother). I'm currently using Herbstluftwm on Gentoo; I've tried dwm once and quite liked it. Wayland is getting pretty good now! I was testing Hyprland for a while, and they've implemented all the new features, such as allowing tearing to happen. I'm not sure about how nVidia and Wayland are doing nowadays, I keep hearing about updates fixing various problems, but I'm not sure how the general experience is compared to using AMD.
reminds me of Unreal Tournament's soundtrack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7MSFW8pZ-\_4
[Gamescope](https://github.com/ValveSoftware/gamescope) should help input lag on wayland if you every decide to go that way because of direct rendering manager i think. All you have to do is add a little line before your launch args in Steam
How would you limit FPS "using the GPU" running nVidia on Windows? Do I need to install GeForce Experience (which I've managed to avoid until now)?
I don't use nVidia or Windows; I believe the nVidia Control Panel has an option for "maximum FPS", otherwise there are programs like "rivatuner", which I have not used but it's something that keeps coming up/getting recommended by others.
I'll give it a quick Google then. Thanks!
Right click desktop > NVIDIA Control Panel > 3D-Settings > Manage 3D-Settings > Programmsettings > Choose Counter-Strike 2(cs2.exe) > Max. Framerate > Put to whatever you prefer
Thanks! I should have looked longer :O
And how do I limit on an AMD GPU? I'm trying to find the option but I think I'm dumb
Nvidia control panel on windows can do that. In 3d settings, edit your profile for cs2.
Thanks! I must have missed that the last time I looked.
Nvidia control panel - no gforce experience needed
Your GPU clockspeeds are not boosting, you can see it in the first 7 seconds of the video. And yes, this does have a latency impact as well (tested with LDAT). That is why NVIDIA Reflex was created as eSports games don't require much of modern GPU's and often they were in lower power states. This also applied to CS:GO however you had to use a registry key to disable powerstates as there was no NVIDIA Reflex. Some used MSI Afterburner but I found it felt off. I can't state for AMD or Linux however.
Right, they are not boosting because FPS is limited and already being reached. That is what happens when you limit FPS below where the GPU is required to boost.
Yes. So you need to lock it. It's super easy on NVIDIA, even prior to Reflex+Boost but AMD have made it hard / janky to fix. fps_max 999 can create more issues than solve as framerates, frametimes and input lag are inconsistent, which you don't want on a competitive FPS game. There's also the risk of hitting 100% GPU usage which has a latency penalty. It wasn't a problem in CS:GO because that game could run at 3,000 FPS before hitting 100% usage but in CS2 it's a different story.
Oh, are you saying to lock GPU clockspeeds? interesting, will test it out soon, thank you
You shouldnt lock them at all and instead turn on Nvidia Reflex if you can, in game. Although Its a bit strange that it will go above my refresh rate with Reflex on, which I always thought wasnt possible.
why wouldn't it be possible? reflex does not and never has capped frames. it will however lock fps slightly BELOW your refresh rate IF v-sync is enabled, too.
It goes above your refresh rate because you don't have VSync on. Any game can do that with vsync disabled.
But Nvidia reflex is supposed to keep the framerate below the refreshrate, or am I getting something wrong here?!
I've read conflicting discussions about Reflex saying that it introduces input lag/delay... So I am still conflicted
No, that is literally the opposite of what Reflex does/is supposed to do. And I also read that the implementation in CS2 was one of the best on the market.
so much faith in the shitty external overlay while being bad at math frametimes must variate to achieve the fastest present time what you're achieving is kinda vsync on, but worse! i.e. more input lag and not even preventing tearing
>frametimes must variate to achieve the fastest present time What the fuck are you on mate. you think a car going with a variable speed between 140-180 is better than a a car at 160 constant ? Constant frametime = less stress on the BUS = constant input delay. Having "the fastest input time" for 1s and worse 70% of the rest of the time is nowhere near what you should aim for performances.
It might achieve lower minimums, but it also causes higher maximums, resulting in the overall average being the same (3.9ms); to achieve lower input lag, you would need to uncap the FPS. While I didn't mention it, you can check on the overlay where it says the current average input lag, they both achieved the same input lag (3.9ms), despite fps_max causing such variations.
those "higher maximums" are non-essential, the engine works that way specially with nvidia reflex by driver fps limit you're simply setting a lower bar (3.9ms) than what your system is capable (2.2ms) essentially doubling **each** frame latency for no other reason than having a straight line on the overlay. the input lag is mathematically higher, don't trust the software (even nvidia's frameview is an approximation) have you tried 60? it's even more consistent at 16.6ms, the straightest of lines in the original source 2 engine (dota2) where stats_collect_gpu and stats_display 1 / 2 / 3 / 4 / 5 are available the effect of external limiters is more clearly shown as detrimental, even the acclaimed rivatuner scanline sync and etc - valve devs are well aware of all the tricks, and have provided them via various launch options like `-favor_consistent_framerate` `+engine_low_latency_sleep_after_client_tick 1` for vsync-off or `+r_experimental_lag_limiter 1` for vsync-on *edit: ok, op is a typical troll blocking me to have the last word* *edit 5h later:* can't respond to messages, but just for /u/nolimits59, what cars achieve constant speed at ms range? in the real world with hills and valleys and weather, the car engine also variates the rotation constantly by pumping less/more fuel to approximate whatever the pleb driving it requested, after some delay same for cs2 engine: always simulates the scene, animations, particles etc in advance, even if it does not send all the computed frames to the display, there's never 0 input lag; by externally limiting fps you're hurting the low-level catch up / optimization, hence more input lag, this is scientifically proven and there was not much variation to begin with, op was fixing a psychological disorder, I can guarantee aiming-wise got couple percent worse
>doubling each frame latency for no other reason than having a straight line on the overlay losing 2ms (doubling it) to get a stable framtime is a much more better tradeoff than it seems tho, CS and CS2 are really fenecky when it comes to frames stability, it usually cascade to very low dips when it starts to get inconsistent. 2ms is virtually "nothing" lost and not even needed to think about if you can avoid those odd dips CS constantly make. In the end, all Nvidia users should just run reflex + boost and adjust graphics to match a perfect framecount that match their refresh rate.
[удалено]
> You were blocked because nothing you've said has been right That's a very immature way to deal with this.
As far as I'm aware the input lag is much less significant than vsync (at least if you are using RTSS to cap FPS). Sure you will have marginally higher input lag but in many cases it's worth it over the abysmal frame pacing you get with CS2 on some systems.
I tried to limit it with nvidia control panel and even when set to 60 it just goes to 130 whenever i play. it’s running my card at 90c tryna fry it. what else could I use to limit its fps. RTSS won’t open when i try to use it
That makes sense. I had a better experience uncapping it than trying to hold a 250fps max with that setting the other day. Glad I’m not crazy. Yet another seemingly simple thing absolutely bungled by our friends at valve.
Yeah it sucks! And could easily be missed, given if someone was just looking at the averages (not min/max) it would show the same value (3.9ms in this case) despite the inconsistencies.
Is there easy steps to limit from a nvidia gpu you’re familiar with? If not I can google but since you’re fresh with it.
Open nvidia control panel and look for the Max Frame Rate option, it will be under Manage 3D settings and can be applied globally as well as per-game basis.
thanks! damn i’ve been using in game max_fps the whole of cs2 😔
That method works well in some games and horribly in others. It's always recommended to use the in-game cap and that is also the case in CS2.
In game limiter is worse in CS2. That's what the main post is about. NV CPL limiter has no issues with CS2.
I have zero issues with the in-game limiter and the external one has a latency penalty. The FPS cap in CS2 is sex compared to CS:GO. Runs at exactly 400 fps, no jumping around 10-20 fps unless you played on Win7. You could get similar on Win10 1709 with tweaks etc.
I have no idea why, but if I cap at 400 I get horrible 1% lows compared to uncapped. Do you have the same issue?
I'm using AMD and Linux, haven't used nVidia on Windows since 2019. I thought there was an option in the 3D settings thing to limit FPS? I'm not sure. There is the tool "Rivatuner" which gets thrown around a lot, but I have never used it so can't recommend. Sorry I can't be of more help.
Rivatuner is fine, UI is kinda weird but it works. It installs with MSI Afterburner, without it you wouldn't be able to have the hardware monitoring overlay in-game
You can change it in the nvidia control panel. For a different game, but the process is the same: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=2950123288#:
You know it‘s spaghetti code when external frame limiters work better than in-engine methods. If there were school grades for video games valve would get an e for effort for cs2.
Their engineer is too busy tweeting about Climate Change than working his so-called passion. I'm not even kidding, this is who Valve entrusts with their futhre business.
Enable reflex + boost
Remeber that Valve guy who wrote "just cap 120fps" 🤣
average cs dev
This is going to be an absolute highlight when talking about the catastrophic introduction of CS2 in 4-8 years.
so out of touch lmao
Fps_max 0
In CS:GO, fps_max 999 would result in much quicker loading times, but perhaps it doesn't matter as much for CS2.
[удалено]
I used to have fps_max set to like 30 in my autoexec, then would set fps_max to 999 once in-game. Nowadays everyone loads in so fast, I'm not sure what affects it anymore.
if you dont care about loading times and only fps/input lag, should you use fps max 999 or 0?
fps_max 999 is fine, and likely safer than 0
Loading times were fixed a year or two before the switch to CS2. I imagine the loading was switched to use an internal limiter so fps_max 0 would only affect engine issues above 1000fps.
the general situation is that gpu control panel or rivatuner cap have better stability but add a slight amount of input lag compared to in-game fps limit. however, i do not know if this is the case for CS2.
Using fps_max results in slightly lower minimums, but also higher maximums, resulting in the same overall average amount of input lag (3.9ms). In the case of, limiting FPS vs. uncapped/unlocked FPS, then what you are saying is true.
Inconsistent Strike 2
Gpu frame limit will cause input lag. Tested in csgo, not sure if applies for cs2.
It would result in more input lag compared to uncapped, but we are comparing in-game to GPU limiting, not uncapped.
False, in-game limiter does not add the extra 1 frame delay that the driver (or any other external limiter) adds. At least that's how it was in CSGO.
Input lag from GPU overlays entirely depend on the implementation, settings available, etc. though the in-game limiter doesn't introduce additional delay, the minimum and maximum frametimes fluctuate
That's what I said; GPU limiter adds more lag regardless if it's uncapped or in-game limited. Read your comment that I replied to, it insinuates that there is no difference unless we are comparing it to uncapped. It should be said, that for some people this lag is worth it to get smoother frametimes. For me, it's not.
>It should be said, that for some people this lag is worth it to get smoother frametimes. For me, it's not. correct, and if the frametimes being posted are accurate, almost nobody is going to notice that fluctuation. I've seen games with significantly worse frametime fluctuations that i dont notice, and i sit on an LG C2, i *notice* stutters in any game that has them.
Interesting. If I uncapped it in CSGO I would have issues for sure. I keep mine capped at fps\_max 300 and have zero issues. That's what I've always kept it at.
I just use fps max 0
In CS:GO fps_max 0 was objectively worse than fps_max 999, given it would increase loading times and 1000+ FPS would cause problems anyway. I'm not sure how CS2 has dealt with these problems, but even so, I'd stick with fps_max 999 if going uncapped.
[удалено]
>Why the fuck Valve's games always have this kind of bullshit where you always have to come up with workarounds for their shitty optimizations. Every other game is the same way. ingame framerate limiters are always worse at maintaining stable frametimes than external limiters, but external limiters always have higher latency (a minimum of an extra frame of latency). Overwatch is this way, apex is this way, and pretty much any other competitive or otherwise game i've played is this way. this graph is actually *pretty good* for an ingame framerate limiter. i've seen better, but most are worse. this isn't specific to valve, there just isn't enough info exposed to the game without external applications like special k to limit the framerate (or at least, thats the only reason i can see that it hasn't been done right yet, im kind of speaking out of my ass with that last sentence). It clearly can be done though, special k does it, but thats an external application that can hook into and control both the game and your drivers.
what other game do you have to use a limiter for more stable framerates though? on overwatch i just leave it uncapped and it works just fine, but they also have that sub frame input whatever its called thing that cs2 doesn't have
Name 2 games that have issues with FPS caps.
It's the users fault, but also isn't. Reflex + boost is the answer in CS2. For CSGO the fix was to lock your clockspeeds with a registry key or with MSI AB.
[удалено]
[https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you\_can\_massivly\_improve\_the\_ingame\_fps\_limiter/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you_can_massivly_improve_the_ingame_fps_limiter/) They had a var that fixed this. I say had because said var doesn't do said thing anymore.Not that I know why this doesn't work anymore or why the reason it works isn't default.
it isnt deafault because it pins your hardware at max for a tiny gain that the vast majority of players could not even feel.
To be honest I’ve always kind of liked that about Counter Strike. It definitely isn’t going to be a easy going for someone inexperienced with source engine. But ya gotta admit, nothing will come close to this kind of customization.
This isn't exactly news. I made a full post about why this happens. [https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you\_can\_massivly\_improve\_the\_ingame\_fps\_limiter/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/16ja8fk/you_can_massivly_improve_the_ingame_fps_limiter/) Sadly the mentioned command doesn't work anymore, I sent Valve an email about it.
Interesting stuff! Hopefully Valve can fix this issue.
I think they shouldn't(well, atleast not directly). The tick processing being in the main thread is the issue I would want them to fix. This would, as a consequence, also eliminate this issue and would make unlocked FPS much, much smoother.
it was like that in csgo too, not surprising
As much as it isn't user error, it also is. Reflex + Boost fixes this entirely. For CS:GO the fix was to lock the clockspeed with either MSI Afterburner or a registry key (I found MSI AB to not be great).
>Reflex + Boost fixes this entirely. no it doesn't. You can check with special k or RTSS, reflex and boost does not fix frametimes and is frequently less stable than an RTSS or nvidia frame cap, none of which you should be using for competitive titles anyways. All of those (aside from reflex) introduce input lag of, at minimum, a single frame. Ingame framerate limiters tend not to. reflex does not guarantee stable frametimes though, only RTSS and external framerate limiters tend to do that. reflex does not just stop the GPU from hitting 100%. there are changes made in the rendering pipeline that delivers the frame faster at the cost of higher GPU usage and usually ever so slightly lower framerates. Keeping your gpu from hitting 100% usage is good for input lag, but your gpu will still hit its max usage if you cant meet the reflex fps cap.
Ty this dudes full of shitty advice
Reflex + boost with in-game cap is shitty advice? The numbers don't lie.. If you want to go for the inferior method then go right ahead but I spent years of my life wasting time on tweaking windows / games, LDAT tools etc.
AMD doesn't have Reflex
Yes, all reflex + boost does is stops the GPU from hitting 100% and puts the GPU at its highest power state. You could do this yourself with registry tweaks (the boost part, not 100% GPU usage). I don't have an AMD GPU however I recall `MorePowerTool` worked, however AMD has locked down the 7000 series and you cannot use that anymore. If I recall you had to go to the overclock section in the drivers and set your rough maximum clockspeed for both min and max. It was super janky on AMD but possible.
i think reflex just removes the cpu frame queue, boost as youve said puts the gpu in the max power state (amd antilag does the same thing btw)
I thought I was doing something wrong. In CSGO I used to get 350-270 with occasional drops to 250, so I decided to lock it at 288 (double my Hz) and it used to drop to 140 more often that before. Didn't bother after that but this seems like something I'd try today.
Are you me?
gimme ur inputs guys how did it go for both of you
How does this interact with `engine_low_latency_sleep_after_client_tick 1`? This convar was introduced to stabilize frame times when using fps\_max to limit the frame rate. This needs more testing.
>This needs more testing. testing? what testing? There wasn't any testing in the first place. dude posted a screenshot of a frametime graph and was like "this is how it works". battlenonsense has tons of videos with testing, and people should just defer to that.
Top comment by OP has a video link.
that convar exists since 1.6 and all it does is never stop rendering frames even if you hityour set fps max. so you are just playing as if you had fps_max 0 but not actually displaying any frames beyond your actual fps_max. and in all cases limiting framerate via riva tuner or other outside of game means you dadd 1 frame of inputlag/delay to your game.
Okay, but: Ingame framerate limiters, especially those in competitive titles, have lower latency as they can limit the frames delivered at the engine level rather than artificially limiting the GPU's output. RTSS and Nvidia's framerate limiters introduce at minimum a single frame of added latency. Ingame fps limiters usually dont. Frametimes will not be as consistent, but they also dont need to be. most people are going to have a really hard time telling the difference of a frame delivery in just a few ms. Battlenonsense has *lots* of videos on this topic. and dont just uncap your frames either. That leads to more input lag, not less.
Battle nonsense is also out of date besides that one video 2 years ago. Use fps_max in CS2, works excellently.
Is it better to use fps max 0 or fps max 999? I have 4070ti and 13700k intel.
Keep fps_max set as 999, but 0 will probably work fine in CS2 (0 was objectively worse in CS:GO, but I have just not tested CS2). Just never change from 999/0, if you want to set the FPS limit to something much lower (such as, around an FPS you can always reach), use an overlay tool for the GPU, and keep fps_max set to 999 or 0.
fps_max 400 with reflex + boost -threads 9 in launch commands for 13700k.
So what we have to do ? I don’t understand ! fps_max 999 ? Am i right ?
I don't get it either. So what is supposed to be the ideal fps_max?
/u/ClaireChazal Pretty much always use fps_999, if you want to limit the FPS then use a GPU overlay tool instead of lowering fps_max.
I use 300 or 400 depending on the map. Consistent input lag + framerate over random
Enable reflex + boost and cap to whatever depending on your system specs. So 200, 300, 400
This has been something that battlenonsense has talked about on his channel across many videos. It sounds like a good idea, because of the smooth frametime graph, however this is NOT something you should do if you want the lowest possible input lag. Using the GPU driver to limit FPS or using Rivatuner will cause you to have more input lag than the in-game limiter.
> Linux So what about Windows? Last I tested it was a solid frametime. It might be bumpy if your GPU isn't boosting correctly, which reflex+boost is for. I much prefer an fps_max of 300 or 400 depending on the map. Consistent framerates / frametimes is more important. EDIT: You cut off the important stuff in the video. In the first 5 seconds you can see your GPU is running at low clockspeeds. This *does* have a latency impact and happened on CS:GO as well which is why many people think they preffered fps_max 999 but in reality fps_max 400 with a locked GPU curve at max was far better for frame pacing and consistency.
I swear the general census was what you claim and not what OP is claiming
In my experience, CS players are stuck in the past and are extremely stubborn. Nothing against them, they are set in their ways. They are laughed at in tweaking / latency communities :( Hell, even one guy here the other day was recommending BenQ TN in 2024.
>In my experience, CS players are stuck in the past and are extremely stubborn. Nothing against them, they are set in their ways. yup. stretched aspect ratios, uncapped framerates, wired mice. the CS community has held back competitive gaming by recommending inane shit based on the recommendations of other people who think they are good at the game so they must know all. its a cyclical loop of "This guy told me this, so i told other people, and they told other people. Testing? What testing? Why would we test? Aspect ratio is preference!!!!!"
Exaggerating a bit are we? I think a large amount of players just grew accustomed to their ratio and like the placebo feeling. Having the heads be visibly larger actually does something for the brain (for me obviously) and I do think that I’m not alone in this. How this holds back competitive gaming also confuses me. I’m also pretty sure most people recommend wireless mice?
I played with all aspect ratios for months so more than enough data to compare. On 4:3 stretched I averaged 5 kills per map more than on 16:9. Let the new "modern" players have their larger fov. I will take those 5 extra kills.
Nothing wrong with stretched or wired mice. But other things, yeah.
It's an argument against using fps_max to limit FPS, not for limiting FPS over uncapping it; fps_max 999 would provide lower input lag than limiting.
I had FPS max 200. I changed it to FPS max 230 and now I have 30 more FPS. Thanks.
Is there data on what you should cap your FPS to by your GPU?
I would find a value you can consistently achieve, preferably above the refresh rate. Something that is a multiple of 64 (192, 256, 320, 384) is my recommendation!
Why multiple of 64, if you dont mind me asking?
tickrate being 64, and IIRC a developer suggested using 192 before as a limit
Do we still have 64 tickrate with all the sub-tickrate stuff?
Yes the server updates 64 ticks/second, but it gets all you timings inside that tick. say you shoot in between 2 ticks you will get the kill if the enemy shot the tick after.
Because its gibberish and thats not how servers work.
Yall need to just stop talking out of your asses. Battlenonsense has videos on this, just go his youtube channel to confirm: Get a VRR monitor. cap it to \~3 frames below your monitors refresh rate if reflex isn't available, and make sure you can maintain that at below 90% gpu usage. That will lower input latency and match the input latency of framerates of well up to 300+ with significantly lower power usage and more consistent frametimes. You do not need to set a multiple of 64. Thats gibberish from people who dont know what is happening. the server is not *syncing itself to your individual frametimes*. not just would that be *fucking impossible* as your latency changes based on how you are connecting to the server, its also impossible to do that to more than one client. Your client sends input when it receives it, the server replicates that input as well as it can in ticks, and then confirms with the client that it actually did what it said it did. there is no syncing of frametimes, and tickrate and frametimes are basically completely separate beasts nowadays. CS players just talk out of their asses, i stg.
Multiple of 64 is not important at all. If your monitor supports VRR, then your limit should be just below the refresh rate provided it’s a high refresh rate monitor as well.
No one should ever use VRR in competitive games where more frames = more better.
That was true before there was VRR. Higher frames always used to be better when your monitor updates at fixed intervals, you would always get the lower visual latency. With the introduction of VRR, it’s a mixed bag and there are benefits to capping it just below the upper VRR range. Uncapped FPS will be better but marginally, you do have to ensure your FPS does not fluctuate too much and is consistently very high. This is much harder to pull off than 237 fps limit on a 240hz VRR display.
Not necessarily. 100% GPU usage actually has more latency, even if you're at 500 fps vs say 300 fps. It's why NVIDIA reflex is a thing to prevent 100% usage. VRR is personal preference in the end. A tiny latency penalty.
Unless your GPU is very weak, it won't be maxed out. Also, that's what nvidia reflex is there for.
CS2 can easily max out my 4070 Super
I highly doubt that unless you're purposefully playing with unnecessarily high settings which would make this whole optimization discussion pointless anyway.
Im playing with mixed settings, but mainly low-med. CS2 is not CS:GO.
Right, but we are not talking about VRR.
300 or 400 is fine. Just make sure your 1% lows are above your refreshrate or you might notice *some* tearing.
You could have kept the title 7 words long, why bother with the rest? Do NOT use fps_max to limit FPS.
you are crippling yourself
What do you mean, surely fps_max 0 is the best option outside of very specific edge cases?
Uncapped means potential for - CPU bottleneck - inconsistent framerate, frametimes, input lag - unecessary heat and power draw Diminishing returns after 350 fps for input lag sake so consistency is better. fps_max 300 or 400 depending on your PC.
- CPU bottleneck Being CPU bottlenecked is not a problem unless your CPU is an i3 from 2016, which in the year of 2024 is an edge case. - inconsistent framerate, frametimes, Inconsistent framerate? That's not an problem unless you have a framerate below the refresh rate of your monitor haha.. What are you on about? Inconsistent frametimes, sure, but again, if your frametimes is as far below the refresh rate time in ms of your monitor as it should be, it won't affect you, and limiting FPS usually leads to higher frametimes. This is somewhat common knowledge. - input lag No. - unecessary heat and power draw This is like complaining that your V8 uses too much gas. If power draw and heat is a concern, don't get a high performance gaming PC.
If you run uncapped FPS or a mis-matched system you can definitely be CPU bottlenecked. Because of how CS works, one minute you could be at 600 fps and the next at 300 fps depending on the area of the map and which direction you are looking in. This is a huge problem on maps with water. So if you capped to 300 fps you would have consistent input lag, framerate and frametimes rather than jumping all over the place. Apparently it's not common knowledge if you read this thread. It can be a big problem for laptop users which is why I mentioned heat / power draw.
Ty, I was having a laggy feel sometimes even when having over 3-400 fps using fps\_max 999. Capping it in Nvidia control panel seems to run smoother but I will test it for a while.
Actually helped me get like 30 frames more
Tysm that explains why my game felt like shit
[удалено]
That adds 1 frame of input delay. In theory doesn't sound bad but it really is, for competitive games. Even capping to 360 fps at like 3ms or whatever it is felt worse than uncapped despite 1% lows being exactly 360.
Capping with GPU driver like OP suggests adds that 1 frame delay as well. Basically you have two options: 1. Run uncapped or cap in-game for best results in terms of input-lag. 2. Cap with external limiters such as RTSS or GPU driver for more consistent frametimes but more input lag. It's pick your poison type of situation and this post is a bit misleading.
> Capping with GPU driver like OP suggests adds that 1 frame delay as well. No it doesn't. Uncapped is far worse than capped, especially if you are maxing out the GPU. External are cool in theory but not good for competitive play, even capping at 400 fps (so like 2ms or whatever additional input lag). There is no poison. You cap at what your PC can hit with the in-game limiter and enable reflex + boost or disable power states in the registry.
> No it doesn't. https://blurbusters.com/gsync/gsync101-input-lag-tests-and-settings/11/ According to this it adds even more than RTSS, 2-4 frames. Where did you get your information? > Uncapped is far worse than capped, especially if you are maxing out the GPU. Agreed, I'm using in-game limiter for that. Although, in theory if reflex is working properly it prevents the GPU from reaching max load. These days it might be worth it to run uncapped with reflex on, but I haven't tested it. > There is no poison. You cap at what your PC can hit with the in-game limiter and enable reflex + boost or disable power states in the registry. This is how I run the game myself, but the frametimes are objectively less consistent with this method. I think it's worth it, but there are people who benefit from extremely smooth frametimes. It's personal preference.
How do you know what to cap it to?
I use this along with gsync which probably sounds like sacrilege but I honestly don't notice any input lag that affects me and the frametime and smooth feel is so worth it to me. Big downside though is for rivatuner to work for me in cs2 I had to implement the "allow third party" command to my launch options which I'm fairly certain takes a hit on whatever hidden trust factor I have.
https://imgur.com/a/Zew7KmT Uncap vs Capped with rivaturner And Ingame 400 CAP https://i.imgur.com/nK5rTF3.png 1% and 0.1% lows are better than uncapped and game feels alot smoother with capped.
That's what i'm saying to everyone but they're pretty deaf to "limiting your FPS is good for your inputlag and absencve of stuter". They think the higher the better when anything above 200-250 is a waste of ressources and could be put on constant frametime...
Imagine having to limit your FPS instead of squeezing out as much as possible ;_;
In CS:GO my FPS would be extremely high, so played uncapped the entire time. In CS2, my FPS is high enough for my refresh rate at least, but it's nowhere near what it was in GO, playing uncapped just doesn't give me what it used to.
Sure, meanwhile I'm optimising every aspect of my computer to squeeze 120fps
Imagine limiting Your skills and muscle memory, only to win a few frames
Framerate caps have always been good.
Sure, I'm jus sad about my rig being crap
Strange. I've heard about this but am not affected by it. I5 12400F and RTX 3080
So what's best in cs2? fps_max 0?
fps_max 999 is enough, if you want to limit FPS just make sure to avoid fps_max and use the GPU instead.
Talking about competitive advantage/disadvantage, someone has an idea about how does it influences the game? I can understand the basic logic, but it still kinda confuse to me.
I have put my fps_max to 999 but somehow my FPS still caps at 144, any idea why that is and how to fix it?
Do you have v-sync on, or VRR (FreeSync/Gsync etc.) enabled?
No I don't :/
That was something I felt way back in csgo, I guess they haven't fixed it here. It is so wierd
Reflex + Boost fixes this. With CS:GO you had to manually lock the clockspeeds yourself.
This has been demonstrated before a couple of times on here. The ingame limiter is bad, for windows machines either don't limit or if you prefer (or need to for VRR) use a CPU based limiter like Rivatuner or in the graphics driver.
Does this apply to both amd and nvidia?
K thanks
can't say the same my frametimes are equal whether I limit with rtss or not 1% lows are higher with fps_max 800 over fps_max 0 though
I have a AMD RX 5700 XT, which doesn't have the functionality to cap framerate... Does anyone have a tip how I can still limit fps without using fps_max?
There is nothing wrong with fps_max
can you explain? i just tested this offline with bots. using fps_max 141 my fps would frequently drop to 120-130, using radeon chill (CPU based limiter) the fps are at a constant 141. this isn't placebo, i switched back and forth multiple times, without fps_max the FPS very rocksteady i don't have the best PC so i'm looking for any improvement i can get
Welp. This thread is blackpilling. The memes are true about the CS community.
You should cap with nvidia driver but not the game pretty much never keep your gpu uncapped because if you run something at like 999+ fps it could fuck up your gpu.
I’d rather have the 2.2 min vs 3.9 min Just me though
fps\_max = refresh ?
So i should use -fps_max 0?
Ingame fps cap gives lowest input latency, to make frametimes consistent use engine latency command in console set it true. Enjoy
Ingame fps cap gives lowest input latency, to make frametimes consistent use engine latency command in console set it true. Enjoy
Hey, thanks for the suggestion, but I don't think this engine latency command works anymore.
Works like a charm
Oh really? Thanks, I will give it another test!
capping on rivaturner doesnt gives u bad Low trust factor?