1000 FPS in CS:GO????

I have a super-fast mega-PC. Let's use it to stare at the ground in CS:GO to see if I can reach 1000 FPS!
CPU: Intel i9 13900k
GPU: Geforce 4090
RAM: 2x32 GB DDR5 5600 Mhz

0:00 - Unlocking your PC's potential
2:09 - What about efficiency instead?
4:16 - What about framerates instead?
6:03 - High FPS BUGS???
8:58 - Low settings?
9:41 - Highest framerate corner in CS:GO?
13:46 - Pushing the highest higher
15:05 - Pushing the highest high even higher?

[whitenat]

3kiliks: *has the most powerful computer and the most FPS*
also 3kliks: *stares at a low resolution corner without moving*

[existentialselkath]

You can officially hit 4090fps on a 4090

[trulyinfamous]

I enjoy how your videos include subtitles. I never noticed them, but I always enjoy when creators go through the really not that great amount of effort to make them. Too many YouTubers, even educational ones, don't have any subtitles on their videos in any form. It's really annoying because it's a bit time consuming but not that hard. For the accessibility it provides the amount of work is worth it.

[callumcuda]

A little late to the party but I didn't see anyone in the comments talk about the fixated frame rate numbers at 10:43 so here's my best guess. The numbers are all fractions of 4096. The simple ones are the powers of two; 2048 and 1024 which are just 4096/2 and 4096/4 respectively while the other numbers are just the closest integers to the fractions 4096/3 and 4096/5. For example 4096/5=819.2.

My theory for why this is happening is something along the lines of the game measuring frame times in 4096ths of a second. If a frame
takes say 3 of these ticks to render, then the game sees this as a time of 3/4096 seconds which equates to 1365.33 frames every second. The calculation must be more complicated because you're getting fps numbers that aren't just fractions of 4096 but I would guess that at some point during the process it's doing something like what I described and then perhaps averaging over several frames to get the final number but it's worth more investigation.

I don't think the paper has anything to do with the phenomenon. It just happens to also be looking at integers that are close to fractions of 4096. Essentially what it's describing is taking the numbers from 0 to 4095 inclusive and then putting them into a certain number of boxes. you can see how this would result in the same numbers as you're getting because if you're trying to equally split these 4096 numbers into five boxes, you're going to get 819 in four of the boxes and 820 in one of them. That is what's displayed in the table which shows how many numbers are in each box when you split 4096 into anywhere from 2 to 10 boxes (It's a little confusing because the number m on the side is the number of boxes minus one.)

Edit: SOLUTION!!! The game seems to measure frame times in 65536ths of a second. When pausing your video and doing a bit of math I realized that all of the fps figures were fractions of 2^16 or 65536. This leads to the same the same math as before except this time a frame rate like 1376 corresponds to 65536/48 but it also explains all the other frame rates that the game can display like 1820 which is 65536/36. The reason these frame rates are sticky is that once you get to 2000+ fps the difference between the game taking say 32 ticks to render and 31 is a difference in the displayed frame rate of 66+. This means that if the real frame rate is holding steady at 2500fps plus or minus 100 then the only three possible frame times that the computer can see are 25, 26, or 27 65536ths of a second which it calculates as 2621, 2520, or 2427fps and so the 200 possible real frame rates get compressed down into only 3 that the computer can display. This isn't a problem at lower frame rates because at less than 256fps the difference between displayable frame rates is less than 1 frame per second.

[Kubak]

We all know that this is just Philip's way to flex with his brand new RTX 4090 gpu.

[Saymite]

As someone who used to write and maintain TF 2 config files I'm not surprised at all by these results.
While I was limited to sv_pure restrictions, obtaining 1000fps was a trivial task on 4th gen Intel CPUs, of course this was on a empty map staring into the wall, on an actual competitive match, 9v9 the frame rate would easily be reduced to a third, still it was really entertaining to see how low, or high, depending on the perspective, the game could go.

Also LOD biasing the game to look like Minecraft is always a treat.

[TrueKyanite]

Looks like Valve is gonna give you a special thanks in the next patch notes

[Lucavon]

Assumption about the speedup:
Probably caused by the way source calculates delta time. Delta time is used to ensure that physics (movement etc) are not bound to the FPS, but to the ticks instead, while also allowing higher FPS than the tickrate.
In this case, I assume that the original assumption was that a frame wouldn't ever be generated faster than 1ms (1/1000 sec --> reached at 1000fps), so the developers probably divided the value by 1000 to turn it into ms somewhere along the way.
Assuming 1500 FPS, we have 1500fps / 1000ms = 1.5.
Since the original code was written under the assumption that 1000fps would never be reached, this operation, fps/1000, would always result in a value below 1.0.
Now here's why a value above 1.0 is significant: delta time is usually used by multiplying vectors (e.g. your movement direction and speed) with the delta time. Since this is usually below 1, if the delta time is for example 0.5 (right in the middle between two ticks), the game would multiply your movement vector with something below 1 and thus emulate a "partial tick", putting you somewhere between where you were at the last tick and will be at the next tick. From the previous example, 0.5 would put you in the middle between those 2 positions.
Now, if that value, which was assumed to be below 1, happens to be something like 1.1 due to them doing 1100fps/1000, this means that at some point betweem the two ticks, you will actually have surpassed the point you were supposed to be at at the next tick.

This is just my assumption based on knowledge I gained while programming a few small games, and it may be wrong. Still, this explanation makes sense to me.

[Skylarr]

I'd bet the game running faster than intended is something to do with delta time values between frames. If they're only tracked to 3 decimal places, the minimum would be 0.001, but at above 1000 fps this might be rounded to 0 in some cases, which would mean the game thinks no time has passed between one frame and the next, and might skip ticks to "catch up", since it thinks it needs to, or something like that.

[Citiesinmotionplayer]

I'm a verifier for Portal on srdc, and one time someone actually submitted a run that had the game running at over 1000 fps. it appears that framerates higher than 1000 actually cause the tickrate to increase, going from Portal's default 66.67 to over 100 ticks per second. Needless to say we didn't accept that run :p

[BlackBirdMax]

This video brought a smile to my face. You somehow answered questions I didn't know I wanted to know in the best and dumbest way. Thanks!

[Dennis]

I've been waiting for this moment for a long time. Ever since I surpassed 40 fps by upgrading laptops, I've wondered how far we can go. Congrats on cracking 1000 fps!

[silicaaaa]

hey, wanted to tune in and let you know that the fps counter being weird and hovering around certain numbers is due to how CS internally calculates the fps it displays you. instead of doing it "properly" and counting how many frames are drawn it uses a rolling average which breaks at "higher" numbers due to the time between frames being so small it just can't hold that much info. a way more accurate fps counter would be the afterburner/rivatuner overlay thingy.

[JRPW]

Philip's gpu/cpu videos are so entertaining and more interesting than other tech channels. You focus on the less relevant benchmarks, but they are FAR MORE INTESTING! The power consumption was very interesting, thank E-Philip!

[Peterscraps]

13:13 your cat just looking at you disappointed like "really fart master? I thought all of this was behind you"

[CSarchitecture]

The bar graph starting @5:26 is getting comical. I cannot believe the 1% low is still above 400fps... WITH 3840x2160. I bet moving your mouse on CSGO felt like butter while still enjoying the visual clarity of 4K. I cannot help but to envy.

[hi_its_jerry]

i generally dont care for ads, but i gotta admit that what Phil did here with the nordvpn ad read was pretty cool. he knows his audience and was able to turn it into something actually new and informative instead of the usual boring and repetitive script ever other youtuber follows

[sapphyrusxyz]

the speedup bug is probably caused by cl_clock_correction, setting it to 0 might fix it. unfortunately I don't have the hardware to test that tho

[Collin]

hardware releases this year are so disgustingly fast even high fps csgo has met its match

[DTM]

Meow to your cat @ 13:03, confused me for a sec as thought it was mine behind me!

Awesome video as always, glad you have such a beast of a PC also!