Do you build up a tolerance to low framerates before playing a game that has a low FPS cap?

>>715976480 (OP)
I wouldn't accept that. These people are fucking cucks, you don't want at least 60 fps on launch and you're willing to take the sacrifice because you're a good goy? Holy shit how pathetic.

has there been any tests/studies for screen resolution to low fps? i go from 1440p 480hz competitive to casual 240p 30hz screen often and it doesn't bother me.

i have 24 fps glasses that i wear for a while before watching a movie

his personality sure seems to be big on videogames

Do you guys remember when the fucking console shitters were earnestly trying to convince the world that 30fps was "more cinematic" and that the eye "couldn't see above 30 fps" and that shit?
Then the moment these peasant machines were able to touch 60fps they sweept it all under the rug.
Like the fucking fatso influencers talking about body positivity until they can get their sausage fingers on some ozempic

I'll just wait for the fitgirl repack

The brain adapts immediately. In fact, it's insane to play something like Quake at 120fps, for example, then switch to 144fps for a minute, and finally go back to 120fps. Now 120fps looks terrible, like, I don't know, 45fps or something.
Similarly, if you're playing something at 30fps and switch to 40fps, you notice such an insane improvement that you start to wonder if 40fps should be the standard in the first place (but it's still garbage).

>>715977258
I personally don't see any difference between 120 and 45fps

>>715976714
you don't need more than cinematic 24 frames per second and as you can see console babies treat that as wide spread industry standard

>>715977385
You see no difference here?

>>715977616

>>715977616
the difference between 30 and 15 is insane. the difference between 60 and 30 isnt

tech question (that i could probably google)
if i have a 180hz capped at 144hz and my gpu is delivering 200gps what happen with the other 56 frames?

>>715978217
>if i have a 180hz capped at 144hz
forgot the word monitor somewhere in that sentence

>>715978048
I disagree.

>>715978217
You have screen tearing, I think, because the frames are drawn from top to bottom, and the screen rendering will contain information from the previous frame and part of the next frame.
You will probably want to limit the maximum frame rate to that of your monitor anyway, because otherwise you will make your GPU work harder than it needs to.
Perhaps there are some hardcore players autismo who do this for some reason, however...

>twitter screencap thread

>>715977616
30 and 60 very slightly. In games it does annoy me for a while (like when I played Okami) but eventually I get used to it
45 on my deck feels near identical to 60/120 on my desktop though, input lag aside

>>715976480 (OP)
Games with 60 fps lock are fucking unplayable for me. How do consoleniggers even tolerate this crap, lmao.

>>715976480 (OP)
It's cute he thinks it'll be 30 FPS, there will be drops all over the place during any CPU heavy moments. 3700x sucks nowadays