Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community - View Single Post - Frametime Analysis - .1% lows seem meaningless
View Single Post
post #3 of (permalink) Old 11-06-2017, 05:19 PM - Thread Starter
New to Overclock.net
cssorkinman's Avatar
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 9,988
Rep: 499 (Unique: 279)
Originally Posted by Blameless View Post

FRAPS is counting the time of every frame.

166fps minimum is clearly incorrect, and is probably a 1s average. A ~20ms frame is a ~50fps minimum frame rate. The 1% and .01% frame rates are there to cull extreme outliers like that.

I'd argue, that in this case, the 0.1% is far more useful than that misleading average figure, or the single frame out of ~33k frames that falls significantly outside the rest.

The reason I think it isn't a good measure is because you would have to have 100 of those highest frametime images occur in the same one second segement of the bench in order to even come close to the threshold of human perception. If I interpret this correctly , there are only 33 such instances of frames taking that long to render across nearly a 3 minute benchmark.

If I recall the data comes from this section of BF1's single player mode , on a later run.


FPS is slightly higher whilst not recording and I recall a later run with the cpu cranked up a bit averaging 198 fps with the 200 fps cap.

I appreciate the reply.

cssorkinman is offline