Firestorm PBR Release Is Out

[Nala Blep]

The faster SL moves away from OpenGL the better, and this is a solid step in the right direction.

Even older and midrange PCs will benefit from this in the long run. SL in its current state simply cannot properly utilize modern hardware. They cannot continue to take the minspec approach and expect it to stay alive.

If they continue along this path and get us into Direct X 11/12 or even Vulkan than people will see an explosion in performance. Yes this new client update is going to demand more resources, but the people quitting because they can no longer use their rigs from 12 years ago are just being unreasonable. Imagine running SL at max settings at a solid 144 FPS because it can finally use all of your CPUs cores, yes please.

PBR is a basic feature that has been an industry standard for a really long time, it allows us to create more immersive and realistic spaces, isn't that the entire point of Second Life? To create virtual worlds we can feel immersed in? I'm not going to sit here and pretend that these releases haven't been a little rocky, and yes the Firestorm client in particular needs some work, but being anti PBR/New lighting engine in general is just silly in my opinion.

 

Edited Monday at 03:43 AM by Nala Blep
Spelling things.

[Daniele Tatham]

3 minutes ago, Nala Blep said:

The faster SL moves away from OpenGL the better, and this is a solid step in the right direction.

Even older and midrange PCs will benefit from this in the long run. SL in its current state simply cannot properly utilize modern hardware. They cannot continue to take the minspec approach and expect it to stay alive.

If they continue along this path and get us into Direct X 11/12 or even Vulkan than people will see an explosion in performance. Yes this new client update is going to demand more resources, but the people quitting because they can no longer use their rigs from 12 years ago are just being unreasonable. Imagine running SL at max settings at a solid 144 FPS because it can finally use all of your CPUs cores, yes please.

PBR is a basic feature that has been an industry standard for a really long time, it allows us to create more immersive and realistic spaces, isn't that the entire point of Second Life? To create virtual worlds we can feel immersed in? I'm not going to sit here and pretend that these releases haven't been a little rocky, and yes the Firestorm client in particular needs some work, but being anti PBR/New lighting engine in general is just silly in my opinion.

 

Bull*****!!!

I may have been missing things in SecondLife, but never EVER, someting of the above mentioned. Techy, nerdy BS will feed the ones that watch too much YT videos mentioning crap like the holy grale of "raytracing". 100% of loss in performance for a EVENTUALLY 5-10% better look, not even a better feel. Kept up with AI generated frames between frames to give you the illiusion of having more frames than your card can generate. LOL!!! Thats like telling you, your 10$ note is now worth 20$ because i tell you so. Generated frames are what they are: genereated, not rendered.

Back to PBR: If you get 10% more shiny bling bling whatever BS for 100% more usage of your resources (CPU + GPU) is it worth it? It is NOT!!! In the end it is WASTED energy, that could be used better than for "mirrors" in SecondLife.

SL is, and has ever been, a social platform. What matters are the people and the emotional connections we create. If you desire something else, go somewhere else. There are dozens of platforms that will feed your desires better than SL can ever do.

Dani

[mygoditsfullofstars]

On 6/26/2024 at 7:18 PM, Zalificent Corvinus said:

LL Fail Devs release broken sh*te, Bloatstorm Devs imitate it

Some truly educated people here, its why I love these forums so much.

[mygoditsfullofstars]

9 hours ago, Nala Blep said:

If they continue along this path and get us into Direct X 11/12 or even Vulkan

Vulkan please so people have choices besides crappy Windows if they decide to change OS.

[Flea Yatsenko]

6 hours ago, Amir Seoung said:

I've read through some of the comments here (but not all 16) pages, and I had to go back to Firestorm 6.6 because of an issue I'm not seeing mentioned (so far in my limited scan of comments).

I am running a fairly powerful desktop (Ryzen 7900X, RTX 4080, 32GB RAM, fast NVMe drive), and with the new PBR Firestorm, I wasn't at all seeing a decrease in performance, except at Ultra settings, but even with the graphics turned way down, mirrors off, shadows off, my GPU is running at 100% and 10 degrees Celsius hotter than it was on the last viewer with Ultra settings.  Nothing I turned off seemed to change this, so I had to go back to the previous Firestorm.

Anyone else experiencing this?  I've no idea how to fix it.

PBR uses more of your GPU. It's like saying SL only used one CPU core before and it got updated to use two cores while adding more features, but now it runs hotter so it's a problem. If it's too hot, limit your frame rate. Best results are a division of your screen refresh rate, which is probably 60. So limit FPS to 30fps or 60fps depending on what you think and it'll stop going crazy on your GPU and making it hot. I assume you're getting over 60 with a 4080.

4 hours ago, Daniele Tatham said:

Bull*****!!!

I may have been missing things in SecondLife, but never EVER, someting of the above mentioned. Techy, nerdy BS will feed the ones that watch too much YT videos mentioning crap like the holy grale of "raytracing". 100% of loss in performance for a EVENTUALLY 5-10% better look, not even a better feel. Kept up with AI generated frames between frames to give you the illiusion of having more frames than your card can generate. LOL!!! Thats like telling you, your 10$ note is now worth 20$ because i tell you so. Generated frames are what they are: genereated, not rendered.

Back to PBR: If you get 10% more shiny bling bling whatever BS for 100% more usage of your resources (CPU + GPU) is it worth it? It is NOT!!! In the end it is WASTED energy, that could be used better than for "mirrors" in SecondLife.

SL is, and has ever been, a social platform. What matters are the people and the emotional connections we create. If you desire something else, go somewhere else. There are dozens of platforms that will feed your desires better than SL can ever do.

Dani

OpenGL vs Vulkan vs Metal vs DX12 has absolutely nothing to do with raytracing. OpenGL is actively making you get lower FPS in SL because it's highly out dated, not designed entirely for gaming, and has massive bottle necks.

Here's some nerdy stuff why Vulkan (and other APIs like it, like Metal, DX12, etc) are superior to openGL : https://www.historytools.org/products/opengl-vs-vulkan-what-are-the-key-differences

Here's some benchmarks, running the same test on the same hardware but using OpenGL and Vulkan. https://www.geeks3d.com/20210719/gravitymark-quick-test-opengl-vulkan-and-direct3d12/

AMD: 157fps Vulkan, 114 OpenGL. +37% in Vulkan

Nvidia: 128fps Vulkan, 91fps OpenGL. +40% in Vulkan

Basically, ditching OpenGL and switching to a modern graphics API is about a 40% increase in performance, just for changing the software. I imagine SL being so unique in how it renders things could see even bigger improvements. I'm sure @Henri Beauchamp could elaborate a lot more than I could ever. That's the difference between 40fps and 56fps in SL, or even 30 to 42fps.

Leaving OpenGL just means SL is going to run faster on your hardware, for free. Yes it'll probably make things get warmer. But if your computer is running SL slowly and you're only using 50% of your GPU and 20% of your CPU, wouldn't you want to use more of it? Of course it's going to get hotter but you have that hardware sitting there doing nothing.

[mygoditsfullofstars]

33 minutes ago, Flea Yatsenko said:

So limit FPS to 30fps or 60fps depending on what you think

Limitations of the human eye and the signalling it sends to the brain are worth pointing out here too - my personal opinion for those people who say they can feel the difference between 60fps and 144fps (or greater) I think is a placebo effect in many cases - and its why I personally recommend people cap frame rates to 60fps, unless you are interested in making your hardware work harder for no actual benefit you can actually perceive (and drive up the amount of power consumed and thus create more heat).

As someone that's well versed in electronics also, heat is the enemy of many types of components and shortens the lifespan of them (look up MTBF with components, they all have one, and heat shortens them, especially in the case of electrolytic capacitors).

If you tend to gut your system every couple of years and replace things, then the above is moot.

 

Edited Monday at 02:09 PM by mygoditsfullofstars

[Flea Yatsenko]

Just now, mygoditsfullofstars said:

Limitations of the human eye and the signalling it sends to the brain are worth pointing out here too - my personal opinion for those people who say they can feel the difference between 60fps and 144fps (or greater) I think is a placebo effect in many cases - and its why I personally recommend people cap frame rates to 60fps, unless you are interested in making your hardware work harder for no actual benefit you can actually perceive (and drive up the amount of power consumed and thus create more heat).

As someone that's well versed in electronics also, heat is the enemy of many types of components and shortens the lifespan of them (look up MTBF with components, they all have one, and heat shortens them, especially in the case of electrolytic capacitors).

If you tend to gut your system every couple of years and replace things, then the above is moot.

 

LCDs are horrifically blurry and nasty. You don't realize it until you scroll on a CRT or plasma and realize everything is perfectly legible on a CRT/Plasma and you can't read anything on an LCD. Higher refresh rates on LCDs are only for trying to reduce blur and it's not enough. They still look terrible.

[Nala Blep]

1 hour ago, Flea Yatsenko said:

PBR uses more of your GPU. It's like saying SL only used one CPU core before and it got updated to use two cores while adding more features, but now it runs hotter so it's a problem. If it's too hot, limit your frame rate. Best results are a division of your screen refresh rate, which is probably 60. So limit FPS to 30fps or 60fps depending on what you think and it'll stop going crazy on your GPU and making it hot. I assume you're getting over 60 with a 4080.

OpenGL vs Vulkan vs Metal vs DX12 has absolutely nothing to do with raytracing. OpenGL is actively making you get lower FPS in SL because it's highly out dated, not designed entirely for gaming, and has massive bottle necks.

Here's some nerdy stuff why Vulkan (and other APIs like it, like Metal, DX12, etc) are superior to openGL : https://www.historytools.org/products/opengl-vs-vulkan-what-are-the-key-differences

Here's some benchmarks, running the same test on the same hardware but using OpenGL and Vulkan. https://www.geeks3d.com/20210719/gravitymark-quick-test-opengl-vulkan-and-direct3d12/

AMD: 157fps Vulkan, 114 OpenGL. +37% in Vulkan

Nvidia: 128fps Vulkan, 91fps OpenGL. +40% in Vulkan

Basically, ditching OpenGL and switching to a modern graphics API is about a 40% increase in performance, just for changing the software. I imagine SL being so unique in how it renders things could see even bigger improvements. I'm sure @Henri Beauchamp could elaborate a lot more than I could ever. That's the difference between 40fps and 56fps in SL, or even 30 to 42fps.

Leaving OpenGL just means SL is going to run faster on your hardware, for free. Yes it'll probably make things get warmer. But if your computer is running SL slowly and you're only using 50% of your GPU and 20% of your CPU, wouldn't you want to use more of it? Of course it's going to get hotter but you have that hardware sitting there doing nothing.

Thank you. 

[Nala Blep]

11 hours ago, Daniele Tatham said:

Bull*****!!!

I may have been missing things in SecondLife, but never EVER, someting of the above mentioned. Techy, nerdy BS will feed the ones that watch too much YT videos mentioning crap like the holy grale of "raytracing". 100% of loss in performance for a EVENTUALLY 5-10% better look, not even a better feel. Kept up with AI generated frames between frames to give you the illiusion of having more frames than your card can generate. LOL!!! Thats like telling you, your 10$ note is now worth 20$ because i tell you so. Generated frames are what they are: genereated, not rendered.

Back to PBR: If you get 10% more shiny bling bling whatever BS for 100% more usage of your resources (CPU + GPU) is it worth it? It is NOT!!! In the end it is WASTED energy, that could be used better than for "mirrors" in SecondLife.

SL is, and has ever been, a social platform. What matters are the people and the emotional connections we create. If you desire something else, go somewhere else. There are dozens of platforms that will feed your desires better than SL can ever do.

Dani

The potential of PBR is astounding. The worlds one can build with this system are going to make anything else in SL look horrifically bad by comparison. 

SL is a social platform, but it requires immersive spaces to socialize in. There is no good reason to be against this update, wishing it to die means SL fades even faster than it already is.

Unfortunately your post shows that you really do not understand the systems we are discussing here. PBR is more than '10% more bling'.

[Anna Salyx]

15 hours ago, Amir Seoung said:

I've read through some of the comments here (but not all 16) pages, and I had to go back to Firestorm 6.6 because of an issue I'm not seeing mentioned (so far in my limited scan of comments).

I am running a fairly powerful desktop (Ryzen 7900X, RTX 4080, 32GB RAM, fast NVMe drive), and with the new PBR Firestorm, I wasn't at all seeing a decrease in performance, except at Ultra settings, but even with the graphics turned way down, mirrors off, shadows off, my GPU is running at 100% and 10 degrees Celsius hotter than it was on the last viewer with Ultra settings.  Nothing I turned off seemed to change this, so I had to go back to the previous Firestorm.

Anyone else experiencing this?  I've no idea how to fix it.

To answer the final questions.  No and No.

My rig: I9-7900X, RTX 3060 (12g), 32g Ram, NVMe drives.  Firestorm running alongside:  Firefox with <coughs> *lots* of tabs,  MS Edge for a couple of specific websites, Spotify, GIMP, Excel, Discord, OneNote, and Scrivener a few notepads, and some fire explorer windows.

Firestorm settings.  mid point high to ultra, mirrors, all shadows, realtime reflection, mirror resolution 2k, mirror update 2nd frame.

Firestorm is reported to be using ~40% of the GPU (will bump to ~75 if a mirror is actually in the viewport). total across the board GPU utilization is ~50 (~85)  I can't say on temp, since that's not a metric I normally monitor.  I've not compared this to the previous release of firestorm.

my full settings for reference

[Madi Melodious]

it never fails to amaze me how when something new comes out they start griping about how much it works their GPU.  They gripe like they are doing the actual work themselves.  If it works your gpu, and your gpu is with in specs, it will be fine.  Sure, your gpu will be warmer but as long as your cooling for it is adequate, all will be good. 

I work my gpu's outside of second life.  When I buy hardware I buy it based on specs and I expect it to perform at those specs.  I will also run hardware up to those specs for days or weeks.  I have yet to have a gpu or cpu fail because I over worked it.

I've taken a big role in AI art.  Some of that involves me making my own Lora's and Checkpoints.   Those can run my 4070 at 100% for days or even a week or more.  No issues at all.  It can still run SL at 4K, ultra, and get between 24 to 80 fps depending on what I'm looking at. 

Edited Monday at 07:49 PM by Madi Melodious

[Madi Melodious]

16 hours ago, Nala Blep said:

The faster SL moves away from OpenGL the better, and this is a solid step in the right direction

Moving away from OpenGL would be a mistake.  OpenGL allows SL to be ported and runs smoother on many platforms, Linux and MacOS come to mind.  The fact that the core code base is based on OpenGL is probably of great use to making the mobile app happen. 

Porting it to DirectX would limit it to the Windows platform without any real benefits.  

On a less important but very interesting note. Over the weekend I was able to get the Windows version of Firestorm to run on Linux using Proton.

[Flea Yatsenko]

Just now, Madi Melodious said:

Moving away from OpenGL would be a mistake.  OpenGL allows SL to be ported and runs smoother on many platforms, Linux and MacOS come to mind.  The fact that the core code base is based on OpenGL is probably of great use to making the mobile app happen. 

Porting it to DirectX would limit it to the Windows platform without any real benefits.  

On a less important but very interesting note. Over the weekend I was able to get the Windows version of Firestorm to run on Linux using Proton.

I hate to be that person, but Vulkan support is much larger than you think on Linux. The same people who made OpenGL are now behind Vulkan with AMD being a major starter of the whole thing. But Vulkan is cross platform and it's supposed to replace OpenGL. AMD really pushed it at first and it's kind of gotten a reputation as a Windows AMD thing, but it's controlled by the Khronos Group now.

The mobile viewer is a complete restart of a new client from scratch using the Unity game engine. LL has a ton of work to do to get the official viewer to support Vulkan or another API because they wrote their own graphics engine. The mobile viewer uses Unity, and Unity handles all the graphics stuff. It's not as easy as just checking a box most of the time, but Unity can create versions of the mobile viewer for Windows, Linux, MacOS, Android, game consoles, and more. And it can support different graphics APIs. Like LL could make a DX12 Windows version of the Unity client, then a Vulkan Linux client, then a Metal OSX client.

[Arielle Popstar]

1 hour ago, Anna Salyx said:

To answer the final questions.  No and No.

My rig: I9-7900X, RTX 3060 (12g), 32g Ram, NVMe drives.  Firestorm running alongside:  Firefox with <coughs> *lots* of tabs,  MS Edge for a couple of specific websites, Spotify, GIMP, Excel, Discord, OneNote, and Scrivener a few notepads, and some fire explorer windows.

Firestorm settings.  mid point high to ultra, mirrors, all shadows, realtime reflection, mirror resolution 2k, mirror update 2nd frame.

Firestorm is reported to be using ~40% of the GPU (will bump to ~75 if a mirror is actually in the viewport). total across the board GPU utilization is ~50 (~85)  I can't say on temp, since that's not a metric I normally monitor.  I've not compared this to the previous release of firestorm.

my full settings for reference

I think the problem at this point is that the whole PBR thing is promissory. Lots of hype about what it could do but other than a few mirrors and some bling, there hasn't been anything really substantially PBR.

For me that's going to take some enhancements of the avatars as builds are not something that overly impress me. 

[Madi Melodious]

8 minutes ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I think the problem at this point is that the whole PBR thing is promissory. Lots of hype about what it could do but other than a few mirrors and some bling, there hasn't been anything really substantially PBR.

For me that's going to take some enhancements of the avatars as builds are not something that overly impress me. 

PBR is like anything new.   There will be a few impressive things coming out but nobody will really know how to use it.  When EEP came out it was a mess.  There were no instructions, most of it was figuring it out.  I barely could make it work.   Now, I'm making almost real time solar eclipses with it.  

Now that firestorm has adapted it, give it 6 months and PBR will be just as common as materials when it came out.

Edited Monday at 08:28 PM by Madi Melodious

[Nagachief Darkstone]

12 hours ago, Arielle Popstar said:

I think the problem at this point is that the whole PBR thing is promissory. Lots of hype about what it could do but other than a few mirrors and some bling, there hasn't been anything really substantially PBR.

For me that's going to take some enhancements of the avatars as builds are not something that overly impress me. 

Fractal (A) is (probably) the first PBR sim on the grid, if you want to check out what a full PBR scene is like. Also I'd recommend setting probe coverage to Manual Only since everything is probed up properly. There's currently a bug with autoprobes where instead of being ignored entirely, they still get sampled on top of other probes, causing performance loss even when they're being overridden.

[Fluffy Sharkfin]

29 minutes ago, Nagachief Darkstone said:

There's currently a bug with autoprobes where instead of being ignored entirely, they still get sampled on top of other probes, causing performance loss even when they're being overridden.

So basically LL spent ages upgrading the engine to make it go as fast as possible but then left the handbrake on?  Nice! 🤣

[NaomiLocket]

15 hours ago, Flea Yatsenko said:

I hate to be that person, but Vulkan support is much larger than you think on Linux.

Hate to also be that person but it would still be a mistake to move away instead of being contextual generally. Apple M1 and M2 were only recently conformant with the latest OpenGL, OpenGL which reached what was considered zero overhead driver at its peak since its latest cards hardware support. OpenGL still works for the majority and widest band of cards with hardware support generally. Diving into early cyberpunk issues with Vulkan might be fun for people with 30/40 series, but expecting the latest several series of cards to be the norm and minimum or be stuck with software rendering for something like SL would be just plain wrong.

There's enough people piping up with "where's my promised FPS boost everyone kept saying" and "I can't work out why you're having problems" to kind of make that point. Vulkan would be neat for those of us that can make use of it properly, but thinking of it much more than OpenGL with better/proper threading would probably be a mistake.

Edited Tuesday at 11:59 AM by NaomiLocket

[AmeliaJ08]

23 hours ago, mygoditsfullofstars said:

Some truly educated people here, its why I love these forums so much.

Great isn't it? such a good look for the platform.

 

Edited Tuesday at 01:21 PM by AmeliaJ08

[AmeliaJ08]

23 hours ago, Flea Yatsenko said:

PBR uses more of your GPU. It's like saying SL only used one CPU core before and it got updated to use two cores while adding more features, but now it runs hotter so it's a problem. If it's too hot, limit your frame rate. Best results are a division of your screen refresh rate, which is probably 60. So limit FPS to 30fps or 60fps depending on what you think and it'll stop going crazy on your GPU and making it hot. I assume you're getting over 60 with a 4080.

OpenGL vs Vulkan vs Metal vs DX12 has absolutely nothing to do with raytracing. OpenGL is actively making you get lower FPS in SL because it's highly out dated, not designed entirely for gaming, and has massive bottle necks.

Here's some nerdy stuff why Vulkan (and other APIs like it, like Metal, DX12, etc) are superior to openGL : https://www.historytools.org/products/opengl-vs-vulkan-what-are-the-key-differences

Here's some benchmarks, running the same test on the same hardware but using OpenGL and Vulkan. https://www.geeks3d.com/20210719/gravitymark-quick-test-opengl-vulkan-and-direct3d12/

AMD: 157fps Vulkan, 114 OpenGL. +37% in Vulkan

Nvidia: 128fps Vulkan, 91fps OpenGL. +40% in Vulkan

Basically, ditching OpenGL and switching to a modern graphics API is about a 40% increase in performance, just for changing the software. I imagine SL being so unique in how it renders things could see even bigger improvements. I'm sure @Henri Beauchamp could elaborate a lot more than I could ever. That's the difference between 40fps and 56fps in SL, or even 30 to 42fps.

Leaving OpenGL just means SL is going to run faster on your hardware, for free. Yes it'll probably make things get warmer. But if your computer is running SL slowly and you're only using 50% of your GPU and 20% of your CPU, wouldn't you want to use more of it? Of course it's going to get hotter but you have that hardware sitting there doing nothing.

Yep. OpenGL drivers are included as a if-we-must type thing these days, there's very little effort made as far as ensuring they perform well due to an ever shrinking list of applications that use them.

A move to Vulkan is a necessity at this point, OpenGL won't be supported forever and on at least one platform is already on death row.

 

[Coffee Pancake]

It's not just that .. we need more than opengl to leverage the hardware we have.

[Nagachief Darkstone]

6 hours ago, NaomiLocket said:

Hate to also be that person but it would still be a mistake to move away instead of being contextual generally. Apple M1 and M2 were only recently conformant with the latest OpenGL, OpenGL which reached what was considered zero overhead driver at its peak since its latest cards hardware support. OpenGL still works for the majority and widest band of cards with hardware support generally. Diving into early cyberpunk issues with Vulkan might be fun for people with 30/40 series, but expecting the latest several series of cards to be the norm and minimum or be stuck with software rendering for something like SL would be just plain wrong.

There's enough people piping up with "where's my promised FPS boost everyone kept saying" and "I can't work out why you're having problems" to kind of make that point. Vulkan would be neat for those of us that can make use of it properly, but thinking of it much more than OpenGL with better/proper threading would probably be a mistake.

Staying on OpenGL would likely mean the end of Mac support, actually. Currently Apple Silicon have a hamstrung OpenGL translation layer to Metal that limits the texture sample limit to 15. With PBR, LL have hit that limit and can no longer add features to Mac versions of the viewer. Additionally, OpenGL is considered Depreciated by Apple and may completely remove it at any time, bricking the viewer instantly.

Additionally, Windows already runs Vulkan through the DXGI layer, it's not actually running natively. ARM Windows does not support Vulkan at all, only DX12.

What is likely to happen is using a translation layer to use the best possible API for each platform, DX12, Vulkan, or Metal.

[Paul Hexem]

On 7/1/2024 at 9:58 AM, mygoditsfullofstars said:

Limitations of the human eye and the signalling it sends to the brain are worth pointing out here too - my personal opinion for those people who say they can feel the difference between 60fps and 144fps (or greater) I think is a placebo effect in many cases - and its why I personally recommend people cap frame rates to 60fps, unless you are interested in making your hardware work harder for no actual benefit you can actually perceive (and drive up the amount of power consumed and thus create more heat).

Humans may not be able to look at 60 FPS and 144 FPS and say "I can see the extra FPS", but if you think you can't see a difference at all, that tells me you've never used a good monitor.

Edited Tuesday at 06:53 PM by Paul Hexem

[Scylla Rhiadra]

39 minutes ago, Nagachief Darkstone said:

Staying on OpenGL would likely mean the end of Mac support, actually. Currently Apple Silicon have a hamstrung OpenGL translation layer to Metal that limits the texture sample limit to 15. With PBR, LL have hit that limit and can no longer add features to Mac versions of the viewer. Additionally, OpenGL is considered Depreciated by Apple and may completely remove it at any time, bricking the viewer instantly.

Additionally, Windows already runs Vulkan through the DXGI layer, it's not actually running natively. ARM Windows does not support Vulkan at all, only DX12.

What is likely to happen is using a translation layer to use the best possible API for each platform, DX12, Vulkan, or Metal.

I am sure there are excellent reasons to move beyond OpenGL anyway, but . . .

. . . God Apple is a pain in the ******* butt.

The frickin' Princess of Tech is what they are.

[Nagachief Darkstone]

On 7/1/2024 at 8:58 AM, mygoditsfullofstars said:

Limitations of the human eye and the signalling it sends to the brain are worth pointing out here too - my personal opinion for those people who say they can feel the difference between 60fps and 144fps (or greater) I think is a placebo effect in many cases - and its why I personally recommend people cap frame rates to 60fps, unless you are interested in making your hardware work harder for no actual benefit you can actually perceive (and drive up the amount of power consumed and thus create more heat).

As someone that's well versed in electronics also, heat is the enemy of many types of components and shortens the lifespan of them (look up MTBF with components, they all have one, and heat shortens them, especially in the case of electrolytic capacitors).

If you tend to gut your system every couple of years and replace things, then the above is moot.

 

It's complicated.

There really isn't a "FPS" of the eyes. Your eyes are constantly sending visual impulses. It's up to the brain to interpret it. Subconscious information such as movement and trained pattern recognition can be acted on as fast as the body can move. Images that have to be processed by your conscious brain are only processed partially and your brain guesses quite a lot to save itself some energy. The center of your vision is where the brain spends most of its energy processing, the edges are only really sensitive to movement, which the subconscious can act on.