Upvote Upvoted 17 Downvote Downvoted
How I made TF2 run beautifully
posted in Hardware
1
#1
0 Frags +

I started a thread ages ago expressing my frustration with the game's awful frame pacing, tearing and the frequent FPS drops, which are harder to avoid if you play on a high refresh rate monitor. Now I have the Viewsonic XG270, which is natively 240Hz but has been calibrated by Blur Busters to offer exceptional motion clarity at lower refresh rates thanks to its "PureXP" backlight strobing. So CRT-like motion clarity with rich, IPS colours.

I created a custom resolution at 119Hz with a large vertical total (thanks to Custom Resolution Utility), which reduces the already-low crosstalk to the point where it's nearly non-existent in the center of the screen.
Using Rivertuner Statistics Server, I capped my FPS .001 below my decimal refresh rate, from 119.002 Hz to 119.001. This is to negate most of the input delay caused by V-Sync, which I enabled in-game.

I cannot perceive any lag and the game looks and feels beautiful, especially with the Mastercomfig Medium High preset. The RTSS frametime graph shows a flat line for the most part, with no noticeable spikes during gameplay. I've experimented with RTSS Scanline Sync, but it's harder to set up and didn't work very well with TF2. At least not on my system.

Anyway, I wanted to bring this up because I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere for TF2, and I think it's a game changer. Please refer to Blur Busters for a more detailed guide: https://blurbusters.com/howto-low-lag-vsync-on/

I highly recommend trying out your monitor's backlight strobing, if it has the option. Check this list to see if your monitor has a blur reduction mode: https://blurbusters.com/faq/120hz-monitors/

If you have a BenQ Zowie monitor, you can use the BenQ Zowie Strobe Utility to adjust the strobing to your liking.

Any questions and I'm happy to answer the best I can. I'd consider my knowledge pretty basic - I learned everything from that guide above.

I started a thread ages ago expressing my frustration with the game's awful frame pacing, tearing and the frequent FPS drops, which are harder to avoid if you play on a high refresh rate monitor. Now I have the Viewsonic XG270, which is natively 240Hz but has been calibrated by Blur Busters to offer exceptional motion clarity at lower refresh rates thanks to its "PureXP" backlight strobing. So CRT-like motion clarity with rich, IPS colours.

I created a custom resolution at 119Hz with a large vertical total (thanks to Custom Resolution Utility), which reduces the already-low crosstalk to the point where it's nearly non-existent in the center of the screen.
Using Rivertuner Statistics Server, I capped my FPS .001 below my decimal refresh rate, from 119.002 Hz to 119.001. This is to negate most of the input delay caused by V-Sync, which I enabled in-game.

I cannot perceive any lag and the game looks and feels beautiful, especially with the Mastercomfig Medium High preset. The RTSS frametime graph shows a flat line for the most part, with no noticeable spikes during gameplay. I've experimented with RTSS Scanline Sync, but it's harder to set up and didn't work very well with TF2. At least not on my system.

Anyway, I wanted to bring this up because I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere for TF2, and I think it's a game changer. Please refer to Blur Busters for a more detailed guide: https://blurbusters.com/howto-low-lag-vsync-on/

I highly recommend trying out your monitor's backlight strobing, if it has the option. Check this list to see if your monitor has a blur reduction mode: https://blurbusters.com/faq/120hz-monitors/

If you have a BenQ Zowie monitor, you can use the BenQ Zowie Strobe Utility to adjust the strobing to your liking.

Any questions and I'm happy to answer the best I can. I'd consider my knowledge pretty basic - I learned everything from that guide above.
2
#2
3 Frags +

Is Custom Resolution Utility needed or can you just make the resolution in the nvidia control panel?

Is Custom Resolution Utility needed or can you just make the resolution in the nvidia control panel?
3
#3
0 Frags +
alec_Is Custom Resolution Utility needed or can you just make the resolution in the nvidia control panel?

Yep! Nvidia Control Panel works too. I just use CRU because I have an AMD card. The AMD custom resolution option isn't very flexible.

[quote=alec_]Is Custom Resolution Utility needed or can you just make the resolution in the nvidia control panel?[/quote]

Yep! Nvidia Control Panel works too. I just use CRU because I have an AMD card. The AMD custom resolution option isn't very flexible.
4
#4
4 Frags +

I'm confused, was your problem that you couldn't get 240fps constant and so got screen tearing and input delay? I have the same monitor (love it) and run it with PureXP at 240hz and it's great, but that only really works because my pc can get 240+ fps constantly. I'm probably not understanding correctly but I don't quite get what this RTSS/vsync stuff actually give you practically speaking.

I'm confused, was your problem that you couldn't get 240fps constant and so got screen tearing and input delay? I have the same monitor (love it) and run it with PureXP at 240hz and it's great, but that only really works because my pc can get 240+ fps constantly. I'm probably not understanding correctly but I don't quite get what this RTSS/vsync stuff actually give you practically speaking.
5
#5
0 Frags +
bearodactylI'm confused, was your problem that you couldn't get 240fps constant and so got screen tearing and input delay? I have the same monitor (love it) and run it with PureXP at 240hz and it's great, but that only really works because my pc can get 240+ fps constantly. I'm probably not understanding correctly but I don't quite get what this RTSS/vsync stuff actually give you practically speaking.

Oh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.

[quote=bearodactyl]I'm confused, was your problem that you couldn't get 240fps constant and so got screen tearing and input delay? I have the same monitor (love it) and run it with PureXP at 240hz and it's great, but that only really works because my pc can get 240+ fps constantly. I'm probably not understanding correctly but I don't quite get what this RTSS/vsync stuff actually give you practically speaking.[/quote]

Oh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.
6
#6
0 Frags +

I mean even though the ingame fps limiter cant get you perfect frame time, it will get you the lowest input delay. I have tried capping fps like this, but the input delay is definitely there. Although the game is definitely smooth and jitter-free after you do this.

P.S. I still have slight tearing with this method (on laptop lol)

I mean even though the ingame fps limiter cant get you perfect frame time, it will get you the lowest input delay. I have tried capping fps like this, but the input delay is definitely there. Although the game is definitely smooth and jitter-free after you do this.

P.S. I still have slight tearing with this method (on laptop lol)
7
#7
0 Frags +
KZI mean even though the ingame fps limiter cant get you perfect frame time, it will get you the lowest input delay. I have tried capping fps like this, but the input delay is definitely there. Although the game is definitely smooth and jitter-free after you do this.

P.S. I still have slight tearing with this method (on laptop lol)

Sorry to hear that. I wish I knew why your laptop isn't benefiting from this method, but I suppose it's all about experimentation.

[quote=KZ]I mean even though the ingame fps limiter cant get you perfect frame time, it will get you the lowest input delay. I have tried capping fps like this, but the input delay is definitely there. Although the game is definitely smooth and jitter-free after you do this.

P.S. I still have slight tearing with this method (on laptop lol)[/quote]

Sorry to hear that. I wish I knew why your laptop isn't benefiting from this method, but I suppose it's all about experimentation.
8
#8
0 Frags +

Im pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998

Im pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998
9
#9
0 Frags +
scratchhIm pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998

There is definitely a slight trade-off here, if you are willing to increase a couple of milliseconds worth of delay 3-5 which isnt really noticeable for a smoother experience of the game, id recommend trying it.

[quote=scratchh]Im pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998[/quote]

There is definitely a slight trade-off here, if you are willing to increase a couple of milliseconds worth of delay 3-5 which isnt really noticeable for a smoother experience of the game, id recommend trying it.
10
#10
23 Frags +

why does this read like ur trying to sell me something

why does this read like ur trying to sell me something
11
#11
1 Frags +
WazrachOh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.

I haven't tried any of the other PureXP modes but it already looks razer sharp and I have no issues with the screen looking too blurry. In fact it's consistently impressed me how clear it looked, and that I am able to run it at 240hz and have tracking be super smooth. Does lowering the refresh rate make the input delay better in some way? Because I would much rather have a smooth 240hz experience than a 120hz one with a little less input delay and a little more clarity for motion blur. I have a 3600XT and 2070 super and my game runs very smooth so I don't really see any reason to drop it.

[quote=Wazrach]
Oh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.[/quote]
I haven't tried any of the other PureXP modes but it already looks razer sharp and I have no issues with the screen looking too blurry. In fact it's consistently impressed me how clear it looked, and that I am able to run it at 240hz and have tracking be super smooth. Does lowering the refresh rate make the input delay better in some way? Because I would much rather have a smooth 240hz experience than a 120hz one with a little less input delay and a little more clarity for motion blur. I have a 3600XT and 2070 super and my game runs very smooth so I don't really see any reason to drop it.
12
#12
1 Frags +

This is a pretty informative video on input lag, frame limiters, vsync etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZRuFaFZh5M

Also if use CRU at your own risk, if your monitor has display scaling mode then you can definitely benefit from it. If you have a laptop do not use it under any circumstance.

This is a pretty informative video on input lag, frame limiters, vsync etc. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ZRuFaFZh5M

Also if use CRU at your own risk, if your monitor has display scaling mode then you can definitely benefit from it. If you have a laptop do not use it under any circumstance.
13
#13
0 Frags +
KZscratchhIm pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998
There is definitely a slight trade-off here, if you are willing to increase a couple of milliseconds worth of delay 3-5 which isnt really noticeable for a smoother experience of the game, id recommend trying it.

milliseconds can decide a lot of fights in comp, as a person who's played lots of cs, I can guarantee you that a high refresh rate is more important than you might think.

[quote=KZ][quote=scratchh]Im pretty skeptical about lowering my refresh rate in any way after reading this stuff, but I think most people would be anyway as usually people div2+ arent gonna bother for the looks and would rather the best performance even if tf2 looks like a game from 1998[/quote]

There is definitely a slight trade-off here, if you are willing to increase a couple of milliseconds worth of delay 3-5 which isnt really noticeable for a smoother experience of the game, id recommend trying it.[/quote]
milliseconds can decide a lot of fights in comp, as a person who's played lots of cs, I can guarantee you that a high refresh rate is more important than you might think.
14
#14
2 Frags +

i mean in cs yeah but it's a different game in tf2 it might be more helpful to be able to keep track of everything happening than to be able to click a ms earlier

i mean in cs yeah but it's a different game in tf2 it might be more helpful to be able to keep track of everything happening than to be able to click a ms earlier
15
#15
0 Frags +

Honestly i might give this a shot. I've been wanting to play tf2 again but even with mastercoms it runs like trash compared to other more modern games. (I should be able to run it well enough with a 7700k@4.4gHz+RTX2070, but tf2 is a jank mess.)

Thanks OP, I'll try it out sometime and post my results here.

Honestly i might give this a shot. I've been wanting to play tf2 again but even with mastercoms it runs like trash compared to other more modern games. (I should be able to run it well enough with a 7700k@4.4gHz+RTX2070, but tf2 is a jank mess.)

Thanks OP, I'll try it out sometime and post my results here.
16
#16
0 Frags +
Nathanwhy does this read like ur trying to sell me something

Now that you mention it, I see why you said that. :P

I'm just pretty passionate about the little I do know.

[quote=Nathan]why does this read like ur trying to sell me something[/quote]

Now that you mention it, I see why you said that. :P

I'm just pretty passionate about the little I do know.
17
#17
0 Frags +
bearodactylWazrachOh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.
I haven't tried any of the other PureXP modes but it already looks razer sharp and I have no issues with the screen looking too blurry. In fact it's consistently impressed me how clear it looked, and that I am able to run it at 240hz and have tracking be super smooth. Does lowering the refresh rate make the input delay better in some way? Because I would much rather have a smooth 240hz experience than a 120hz one with a little less input delay and a little more clarity for motion blur. I have a 3600XT and 2070 super and my game runs very smooth so I don't really see any reason to drop it.

You'd just have to give it a try and see for yourself. :) I really, really recommend 224Hz over 240 though.

**on the Viewsonic XG270. I don't know why I'm being downvoted for that, it's just how it is. Chief Blur Buster, the very person who calibrated the monitor states that "224Hz looks better than 240Hz for both PureXP enabled/disabled (aka strobed/nonstrobed)".

[quote=bearodactyl][quote=Wazrach]
Oh nice! Have you tried lower refresh rates with PureXP? 224Hz is a lot better than 240Hz. The overdrive is much better and there's enough bandwidth for 10-bit colour.

You should really try out my 119Hz resolution. It's so glass smooth, it's unreal. It makes 224Hz and especially 240 look blurry in comparison. All you need to do is set the vertical total to 2269.

If you're comfortable with 224Hz PureXP and prefer it over 119Hz PureXP, I still recommend using the low-lag VSync trick. The goal is to remove tearing and improve the frame pacing so that the game looks and feels consistent.

Also, yeah - the game looked and felt pretty bad before. There are definitely better specs for super high refresh gaming, but I have the Ryzen 5 3600 and 5700 XT.[/quote]
I haven't tried any of the other PureXP modes but it already looks razer sharp and I have no issues with the screen looking too blurry. In fact it's consistently impressed me how clear it looked, and that I am able to run it at 240hz and have tracking be super smooth. Does lowering the refresh rate make the input delay better in some way? Because I would much rather have a smooth 240hz experience than a 120hz one with a little less input delay and a little more clarity for motion blur. I have a 3600XT and 2070 super and my game runs very smooth so I don't really see any reason to drop it.[/quote]

You'd just have to give it a try and see for yourself. :) I really, really recommend 224Hz over 240 though.

**on the Viewsonic XG270. I don't know why I'm being downvoted for that, it's just how it is. Chief Blur Buster, the very person who calibrated the monitor states that "224Hz looks better than 240Hz for both PureXP enabled/disabled (aka strobed/nonstrobed)".
18
#18
2 Frags +

I should mention this isn't a "guide", as such, hence "How I made TF2 run beautifully".

I personally don't find 224 or 240Hz as enjoyable anymore, even on games that don't drop below that in FPS. Some may prefer the extra fluidity of 240Hz, but I cannot stand motion blur at all. It's personal preference! I just urge everyone to give this a shot and see if you can find a new way to enjoy your games.

I should mention this isn't a "guide", as such, hence "How [i][b]I[/b][/i] made TF2 run beautifully".

I personally don't find 224 or 240Hz as enjoyable anymore, even on games that don't drop below that in FPS. Some may prefer the extra fluidity of 240Hz, but I cannot stand motion blur at all. It's personal preference! I just urge everyone to give this a shot and see if you can find a new way to enjoy your games.
19
#19
3 Frags +
DanceNumberHonestly i might give this a shot. I've been wanting to play tf2 again but even with mastercoms it runs like trash compared to other more modern games. (I should be able to run it well enough with a 7700k@4.4gHz+RTX2070, but tf2 is a jank mess.)

Thanks OP, I'll try it out sometime and post my results here.

Gave it an honest shot in both tf2 and overwatch.

What i noticed.

- Very little to NO stutter (tf2 has some minor stutter, overwatch was butter).
- 1-2 ms of perceivable input lag. Not the worse, and FAR better than stadard V-SYNC.

Overall, i'd say this is a better option for players who can't hold the FPS stable at something like 300+.

[quote=DanceNumber]Honestly i might give this a shot. I've been wanting to play tf2 again but even with mastercoms it runs like trash compared to other more modern games. (I should be able to run it well enough with a 7700k@4.4gHz+RTX2070, but tf2 is a jank mess.)

Thanks OP, I'll try it out sometime and post my results here.[/quote]

Gave it an honest shot in both tf2 and overwatch.

What i noticed.

- Very little to NO stutter (tf2 has some minor stutter, overwatch was butter).
- 1-2 ms of perceivable input lag. Not the worse, and FAR better than stadard V-SYNC.

Overall, i'd say this is a better option for players who can't hold the FPS stable at something like 300+.
20
#20
1 Frags +

Been using this for about a week, I can't definitively say it's not placebo but I did feel a significant difference in game smoothness. This works very well for other games as well. Much more preferable than having extra FPS and 2ms faster reactions.

Been using this for about a week, I can't definitively say it's not placebo but I did feel a significant difference in game smoothness. This works very well for other games as well. Much more preferable than having extra FPS and 2ms faster reactions.
Please sign in through STEAM to post a comment.