Is 40 FPS Viable For PC Gaming?

With 40 FPS gaming making a splash in the console and handheld PC scenes, Adam chats with Brad Shoemaker from @Nextlander about it's relevance on the desktop.

Follow PCWorld for all things PC!
------------------------------­----

#pcgaming #steamdeck #interview

[MrHasie]

More about frame rate consistency. It’s annoying when FPS varies wildly.

[soapa]

40 is just too low for me. It's all about that 41 FPS

[FirestormX]

I played Starfield at 45 fps and the difference between that and 30 was earth and space.

[reidypeidy]

Here from the Nextlander subreddit, I think 800p 40hz is the absolute sweet spot for the Steam Deck for me. It’s really opened up more games for me that felt too sluggish at 30. One issue I’ve seen though is cutscenes in certain games that are coded for 60 or 30 fps. It can get a little wonky when forcing 40 for those in the UI.

[peterwstacey]

Good discussion - imo it is a generational thing, but also depends on the genre. I played PC games in the late 90s (obvs with this profile pic) and if you hit 60fps you were doing well. With modern games, FPS shooters and racing sims need high FPS, but I can happily play Hearts of Iron 4, Doki Doki Literature Club and Stockfish happily at e.g 30fps. I have been told these are not really games, and to me that's where the snobbishness comes in. I dislike gatekeepers for genres or older hardware. Gaming should first and foremost be about fun.

[czefix]

40 fps locked with RTSS on gamepad with motion blur on is my sweet spot, mainly in RDR2

[NulJern]

It all comes down to who you are and what game.

[aaronwlkr]

I've been gaming on PC for decades. Today, with my older eyes, when fps drops below 50 I really notice it. I guess if it stayed under 40 all the time, it might not be so obvious. Some games I cap my FPS to 60 anyways, just to keep the heat down. Maybe I'll try 40 now lol

[Josh-balti]

Been doing this for a while, I have a 3 or 4 year old gaming laptop that is starting to show it's age now. Was getting sick of inconsistent variable frame rates that could bounce between 40 and 80 depending on the game. Started locking it out at 48 on Nvidia control panel (144hz monitor so that's the optimal framerate) and it feels so much better to play most things with a lower but consistent frame rate with no drops rather than a sometimes high framerate that can dip by 20fps. It's not ideal for racing games and shooters, but for RPGs, action adventures, strategy games, etc it works great. Also bonus tip, at these lower framerate's a bit of motion blur in the games settings is often beneficial, and can lead to the illusion of a higher frame rate

[Unicornpirate]

Personally I just set it to 45 fps as it just doubles the same frame at 90 Hz on my Steamdeck if I'm playing a modern 3d title. It's quite smooth and is often considered the new sweet spot for the OLED display. You can still do 40 fps and the panel will drop down to 80 Hz if your game runs better at that framerate.

[RurouTube]

On AMD GPU it is pretty easy using their Adrenalin software. There are 2 ways to do it, using Radeon Chill or Frame rate target control. Can be easily configured via global setting or per game setting. With Chill, there is even a hotkey to enable and disable it, thus if you set Chill to min 40 and max 40 (so it doesn't drop when there is no movement unless you actually want to use it which is fine) then you can simply press the hotkey to turn it on and off for any games. I feel like reviewers mainly use Nvidia GPU, thus forget that AMD actually has a much better and more functional software to control the GPU.

[LEGIT_ELITE]

Input method is the biggest determiner for me. Controller vs M+K

[ygelion]

When Forza Horizon 3 comes to PC back in 2016, I played that in 4k 45Hz with GTX1070. Very enjoyable

[ddlog]

40FPS might become the new 30FPS on consoles because of the parity with 120hz TV's, but we already have 500hz monitors on PC and we won't be moving backwards any time soon.

[Bakamanzz]

Playing on steam deck at lower fps like 40 is pretty damn good, the screen is adaptable since the screen refresh range can change, makes the whole experience so much better especially with battery life. Of course this conversation changes from display to display, for like tv that have 120 refresh, 40 will work well. But generally for monitors of 144 etc since there are so many of those, 40 usually feels worse in that case because it's not an even match. On steam deck i can get a better looking visual without much loss in gameplay at 40. Days Gone looks great and plays great at 40 for example since there's no fsr2 built in, so i can get a great experience at 100 resolution scale and hdr on steam deck oled. It's pretty nice!

[shortshins]

For a slow paced rpg or rts a consistent 40 with maxed out visuals is definitely do able.

[captaindestruction]

As someone who came over from console I was hoping my PC could do 60fps on every game or at least some of the games I viewed as less demanding like Starfield. Not being able to do 60fps without downgrading visuals really made me look at 40fps as a good target. Also a area I feel could be compromised for on console. If a dev can’t hit 60 at least give the option to do 40fps. Those extra 10 frames can really help and I doubt requires much tweaking to get running on console.

[coolkitty]

After getting a Steam Deck, I've spent a lot more of my time on there. Don't have the OLED, but no matter what game I play I always set the screen to 40Hz. I'm comfortable with a solid 30, but that 40fps makes a huge difference. If the screen/display can match 40, then it is definitely viable.

[johndoh]

First person shooters, no way. Third person shooters, I'd still rather have them up to 60 fps for 1% lows.

For slow games that require very little fast movement, sure. For fast action games, what I've never gotten into is people saying they need more than 90 fps for 1% lows. Eyes don't work that fast. I think it's a mental thing more than something a person actually notices. I can play anything with 1% lows being above 60 fps.

[tfharper]

Fondly remembering playing almost every older console at 30fps or less, and my first few years in PC gaming about 25 years ago at about 20-25fps at the most.

Chasing fps is silly.