Blog: One of the best method to check your fps in CS:GO (old)

micronn
February 7th, 2014 14:02

This method (benchmark) is for people who want to check fps value after changes in bios, operating system, graphic card or game settings. It's really good method in finding the best pc configuration for top fps. It's not a new method (old CS 1.6 method) and was not invented by me but only reminded for CS:GO players.

___

REMEMBER!

All unnecessary programs should be disabled otherwise the result will be inaccurate/incorrect.


Game settings for tests (use them)

[INDENT][Video]
http://i.imgur.com/KwRVld3.jpg

[Game]
Launch options: -novid[/INDENT]

HOW TO TEST


[INDENT]1. Download demo.

One minute test - deathmatch + throwing grenades
http://www.mediafire.com/download/8qcqwxuyumfab4u/fps_test3.dem


2. Put it in csgo folder.

Steam/steamapps/common/Counter-Strike Global Offensive/csgo


3. Start the game.

Wait for the game to check the validity of maps in console.


4. Copy and paste in console.

developer 0; net_graph 0; cl_showfps 0; fps_max 0; clear
ENTER
timedemo fps_test3
ENTER
and do nothing more (don't open console!)
You can do these tests 3 times and pick the best result.


5. Wait to the end of the benchmark.

You will get result in console for example:
7487 frames 26.371 seconds 283.91 fps ( 3.52 ms/f) 18.328 fps variability

or

in a file named similar to my "sourcebench_graphic_card_model___os_user.csv"
it will be in csgo folder, you can open it with system notepad (notepad++ best alternative program).[/INDENT]

MY PC

[INDENT]OS: Windows 7 x64
CPU: Intel i5-3570k 3.4GHz (Turbo 3.8GHz)
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 660
RAM: Kingston Grey 8GB 1600MHz
HDD: WD Black 500GB 7200[/INDENT]

MY RESULTS

CS:GO update for 12/11/2014
Official NVIDIA 344.65 WHQL Display Driver (10/11/14)

[INDENT]fps_test3 on 1024x768
7487 frames 24.732 seconds 302.72 fps ( 3.30 ms/f) 22.011 fps variability

fps_test3 on 1920x1080
updating...
[/INDENT]

No fps boost after putting these commands in launch options:

-threads //automatically sets the used threads of cpu
-high //set high priority for csgo.exe process
-preload //preloading texture etc. before showing map
-processheap //fix for ram leak
-nojoy //disable joystick support
+mat_vignette_enable 0 //removes black vignette/shadow on the upper part of screen

List of things boosting fps:

- video game setting all on low,
- multicore rendering enabled (mat_queue_mode -1 or 2),
- other resolution (there is less fps on 1920x1080 but that's obvious and don't mean a bad thing, because fps can be stable too),
- "-threads x/2/4/8" can boost fps on some pc configuration,
- unparking cpu cores in Windows (more info: http://www.coderbag.com/Programming-C/Disable-CPU-Core-Parking-Utility,
- cl_drawhud 0 and mat_postprocess_enable 0 only for tests: http://www.hltv.org/?pageid=18&threadid=525938#r5045011,

Thanks in advance for interest and comments.
http://fb.com/officialmicronn
launch options?
2014-02-07 14:13
Added to blog, refresh page.
2014-02-07 14:16
Hello, can you please record a new demo with smokes, Molotovs, HE grenades blowing/burning in front of you, with those new animations? Unfortunately, for now the demo is out-of-date :-(
2015-09-28 00:16
Sure ;)
2015-09-28 11:53
Hopefully you won't forget about it :-D
2015-10-03 12:52
4770k @ 4.2GHz, HD 7970, 1600MHz DDR3, Windows 8.1 1024x768 all low 7797 frames 15.249 seconds 511.31 fps ( 1.96 ms/f) 154.162 fps variability Dunno what's the reason but i gain over 100fps more if i use windows 7
2014-02-07 14:19
Maybe Metro and some new processes? Btw. thanks for time and check your processes your variability is too big.
2014-02-07 14:31
edit: actually restarting pc raised my fps, there is no big difference between ht on or off disabled hyper-threading: 7797 frames 11.237 seconds 693.87 fps ( 1.44 ms/f) 52.882 fps variability enabled ht again: 7797 frames 11.018 seconds 707.65 fps ( 1.41 ms/f) 55.966 fps variability
2014-02-07 14:48
Nice, you found one thing increasing fps. Keep searching :)
2014-02-07 14:42
Thanks for edit.
2014-02-07 17:03
hyper threading: where is that? video settings?
2014-02-11 18:44
It's a feature of his CPU.
2014-02-11 20:34
google is the answer .p its done, ty
2014-02-11 20:44
#283
 | 
Italy artyshat 
with that beast hardware why playing on that low resolution? no 1080p? :(
2014-10-13 02:37
i7 4790 + gtx 770, and playing 1280x960 stretched, every graphic option on the lowest possible. Just preference things :D
2014-12-21 14:33
#361
 | 
Italy artyshat 
low settings too, but my monitor is 1080 so i put it on 1080, lower resolution pixels look like shit
2014-12-21 15:13
or enter the game and write net_graph 1
2014-02-07 14:44
#9
Australia eides 
it's harder to make comparisons in game compared to running a benchmark demo.
2014-02-07 14:45
Exactly.
2014-02-07 14:47
Yes, but then you will need to be in the same place on map, always aiming to the same spot to check the changes in fps. My method is faster, easier and more accurate then net_graph 1.
2014-02-07 14:47
net_graph reduces fps about 10-30. cl_showfps 1 is more accurate.
2014-02-07 14:52
True.
2014-02-07 17:10
oO never knew this, thanks
2014-02-08 00:40
where did u get that info?
2014-02-09 19:32
try it out?
2014-02-09 19:52
i did,its the same ty
2014-02-09 19:52
fps_max 0
2014-12-21 01:57
using fps_max 0 will cause very long map load times when doing offline mode.
2015-01-25 19:24
ohh no, we can't have that!
2015-01-25 21:23
well I do a lot of aim training in offline mode and it's rather annoying when a map takes 2 minutes to load. Perhaps you never do offline mode but I thought I would share that incase you did and didn't know why the maps took forever to load.
2015-01-25 21:33
#8
Australia eides 
cheers for this!
2014-02-07 14:44
You're welcome.
2014-02-07 14:46
I saw no difference with or without using: '-high -threads 4 +mat_queue_mode 2'. Q6600, HD7730. 1680x1050. fps_test1: 160.2 fps_test2: 148.3
2014-02-07 15:05
So it's the same like on my pc conf. Check other resolutions on one you will get more fps.
2014-02-07 17:02
#13
 | 
Portugal Knozz 
-disable hyper-threading [#5] where did you find that command?
2014-02-07 14:52
it's on your bios settings if you have processor that supports it, but i've updated my post and it was the pc reboot that made difference
2014-02-07 14:57
Thanks for edit.
2014-02-07 17:03
gj why should we use 2 demos? more action - more cpu-dependent test?
2014-02-07 14:58
Check 1 and 2 you will see the difference :)
2014-02-07 17:04
Before the update i've had somewhere around 70-80 on matchmaking. After the update it's only around 40fps. Everything is on low. Is it possible to bring to at least 70fps ?
2014-02-07 14:59
Yes, "mat_queue_mode -1" in console and check.
2014-02-07 17:04
before the updat ei had 200,now i have 300
2014-02-09 19:32
#18
Egypt Kar1 
Thx very much. I was asking about benchmark option like the one we have in counter strike source. Thx to ur method now i can play around to find best settings that give me best fps.
2014-02-07 15:03
You're welcome.
2014-02-07 17:05
Timdemo2: - 7797 frames 14.543 seconds 536.12 fps ( 1.87 ms/f) 45.974 fps variability -- [1600x900] -- [Hyper-threading ON] * i7-4770k 3,9Ghz * GTX760 * 8GB 1600Mhz
2014-02-07 15:27
Can you post your advanced video settings? And what is your Operating system?
2014-02-07 15:58
- Windows 8 - I've *mat_queue_mode "2"* in video cfg. - Very low, Medium, Low, Low, Enabled, None, Billinear, Disabled, Disabled, Disabled. But my FPS doesn't change much when I change settings.
2014-02-07 16:54
ty, did test with your settings and got 7797 frames 12.412 seconds 628.16 fps ( 1.59 ms/f) 57.635 fps variability. I have 4770k @ 4.2GHz & Radeon HD7970 with Windows 8.1 running. Have you tried Windows 7? I am unsure what causes performance difference between Windows 7 & 8. Atleast in the past (~1 month or so) i did fresh win7 install and got like 80-100fps more at same spot vs. Windows 8.1
2014-02-07 18:08
To be honest I don't really care much about FPS as long as the game feels smooth. But I surely think Windows 7 could do something about the performance. But not by a whole lot. Even though you're talking about a 80-100fps increase.
2014-02-07 18:26
Nice, thanks for your time.
2014-02-07 17:06
Timedemo2: - 7797 frames 31.902 seconds 244.41 fps ( 4.09 ms/f) 66.605 fps variability With: * 1920x1080 * Everything on highest possible (and motionblur) - in Advanced Video Settings * Same PC configuration
2014-02-07 18:42
What does this do? -preload +mat_vignette_enable
2014-02-07 15:31
#22
Turkey mtN` 
YEP
2014-02-07 15:44
-preload = preloading texture etc. before showing map +mat_vignette_enable 0 = myhyper.de/images/csgo_vignette.jpg
2014-02-07 17:07
#73
Turkey mtN` 
Unknown command "mat_vignette_enable" :(
2014-02-07 23:46
In launch options: +mat_vignette_enable 0
2014-02-07 23:47
#75
Turkey mtN` 
k ty
2014-02-07 23:48
But what does it do? I can't seem to see any difference on screenshot?
2014-02-10 12:19
Removing black vignette/shadow on the upper part of screen.
2014-02-10 13:05
Thank you thank you - need to use :)
2014-02-10 13:08
You're welcome.
2014-02-10 13:11
1 picture is enable (1) or disable (0)?
2014-02-11 18:47
Yes.
2014-02-11 19:00
.p its enable? didnt get it.
2014-02-11 19:07
+mat_vignetter_enable 0 = disabled picture 2
2014-02-11 19:51
ty micronn u r de best
2014-02-07 16:08
You're welcome.
2014-02-07 17:10
thank you <3
2014-10-14 21:12
the game itself should have a little benchmark like the Half Life 2: Lost Coast Benchmark
2014-02-07 16:14
even cs sauce got benchmark,i guess they didnt bother porting it over to cs go
2014-02-07 17:00
True, true.
2014-02-07 17:10
List of things boosting fps: - searching... ?
2014-02-07 17:17
Check #5.
2014-02-07 17:23
So, I'm curious, I never used -threads before, does it add any performance to the game or not? I'll test this at night when I get home.
2014-02-07 17:19
Yesterday it does, now not but you can keep it because Valve can screw it again ;]
2014-02-07 17:23
thanks for that so now commands like -high or -threads do nothing
2014-02-07 17:31
You're welcome. The do something but you will not get more fps with them.
2014-02-07 18:28
I`ve got the question. Im using 4x MSAA and 8x AF because game looks better and I`ve got same fps (even more on 8x af than on 4x) Dont this options increase input lag or make game more blurry ?
2014-02-09 14:10
MSAA - decreasing jagged edges and removes texture glow AF - better visibility on longer distance (2x is enough) Increasing input lag - some say yes, some no, I think a little More blurry - nooo, more blurry when using FXAA
2014-02-09 15:49
Sorry, do you recommend to limit the fps?
2014-02-07 17:37
limiting = pc should not overheat unlimiting = pc can overheat So when you have good cooling system you should not limit your fps, the best fps_max is default 300.
2014-02-07 18:27
#57
India Liu- 
timedemo 1 986 frames 5.475 seconds 180.08 fps ( 5.55 ms/f) 82.282 fps variability timedemo 2 7797 frames 45.836 seconds 170.11 fps ( 5.88 ms/f) 76.566 fps variability what does it mean ?
2014-02-07 19:31
Read the blog from the beginning ;] there is an answer.
2014-02-07 19:48
#68
India Liu- 
sorry but i dont know english that much its ok if you cant explain to me in 1 line btw i read it already
2014-02-07 20:26
You can test fps after changes in bios, os etc. So you can find the best pc conf for your fps.
2014-02-10 13:11
#353
paz | 
Turkey Mereko 
hi man. ive been trying to understand and do some stuff but i am a new PC master joiner. Wat is my bios and os? i wanna do your test thanks :) And gj with helping people a lot man we do need guys like you
2014-12-11 22:17
i have -threads 4 -high -processheap this commands now dont do nothing? so i dont need to put them in launch options right?
2014-02-07 17:51
They do something but you will not get more fps with them. Keep -threads and -processheap because Valve can screw fps again in new update ;]
2014-02-07 18:29
right thanks!! -threads or -threads 4?
2014-02-07 19:59
Preference, I prefer only -threads.
2014-02-07 20:04
but do the same job? have i5
2014-02-07 20:42
Without number sets automatically.
2014-02-07 22:36
#46
jOELZ | 
Other m0ELZj 
i5 3350p, hd 7770 14.1 driver, win 8, 8gb ram all low, except 4x af, 800x600, darude - sandstorm and chrome in the background... demo 1 986 frames 2.377 seconds 414.87 fps ( 2.41 ms/f) 23.840 fps variability demo2 7797 frames 17.945 seconds 434.50 fps ( 2.30 ms/f) 31.590 fps variability launch options: -novid -tickrate 128 +fps_max "141" -threads 4 -w 800 -freq 140 -high +mat_vignette_enable "0" +autoexec -preload
2014-02-07 18:07
Nice, cpu ghz? And why 800x600, you will get same fps with 1024x768 and better visibility. 2x af is enough, don't need more.
2014-02-07 18:30
#53
jOELZ | 
Other m0ELZj 
the cpu is at the stock speed, 3.1 GHz, just like everything else (well the gpu is an asus dcu version so it is factory oc'd to 1020mhz) i don't use these settings for the performance benefits they give, but rather because they remove any effects that could be in the way. also, i have fps max set to 141 because i don't really feel any need for 200+ fps, because it would just make the intel stock cooler go nuts, and i have a pair of hd 201's that don't isolate at all i play on 800x600 because i have a crt. on 1024 i would only be able to get 100 hz so i think + 40hz is worth the lost visibility. also i'm not sure if i'm on 2x or 4x af, either way it doesn't really make any difference.
2014-02-07 18:40
#60
jOELZ | 
Other m0ELZj 
crt > 60hz lcd any day are you unaware of how good crts are for gaming or what exactly is your problem? i obviously can not afford a +300e gaming lcd
2014-02-07 19:43
#203
 | 
United States sanders2s 
hah yea, i love my CRT @120hz. there's no input lag :D
2014-02-22 21:12
I owned a 144Hz LCD for a good while and my CRT is far better, so I'd say that CRT > everything, not just 60Hz LCD. Even Carmack said that CRT's have lower persistence than upcoming OLED panels. I play at 1024x768@155Hz, btw.
2014-10-11 10:20
What's the monitor model? The one that you use currently, that is.
2014-10-14 19:41
IBM P275.
2014-10-14 20:57
You're doing good ;] Thanks for your time.
2014-02-07 20:05
Redownloading all lightmaps 987 frames 1.781 seconds 554.12 fps ( 1.80 ms/f) 21.554 fps variability i5@3.3ghz gtx 560ti
2014-02-07 19:06
You have more fps then me, nice ;] 1. 3.3GHz while in-game? 2. GPU not overclocked? 3. Ram? Thanks in advance for your time.
2014-02-07 20:07
Im not quite sure what you mean about question 1. My CPU is not overclocked. 4GB of RAM. Try open BIOS and chance the CPU mode to performance. I earned some fps by doing that.
2014-02-07 20:40
Have it. OC Genie II: Auto OC to boost performance in 1 sec Btw. what os youre using and theme?
2014-02-07 22:39
Windows 7. Im using the old Windows 98 theme. I just set it to visual performance.
2014-02-08 14:44
Interesting, thanks.
2014-02-09 15:50
#178
rain | 
Portugal Cyborgy 
where to download OC genie?couldnt find it anywhere o_O
2014-02-16 03:19
It's mobo feature you can't download it. eu.msi.com/product/mb/B75A-E33.html#/?di..
2014-02-16 12:56
After some changes now I have :) 986 frames 1.700 seconds 579.94 fps ( 1.72 ms/f) 15.662 fps variability
2014-02-12 13:50
Cool :D I did a format C: and got 654 avg.
2014-02-12 16:06
Nice! Idk how is it even possible, worse cpu ghz than mine and still more fps ;]
2014-02-12 16:56
My pc: CPU: Intel core 2 duo E4500 2.2GHz GPU: Radeon 5450 DDR2 HAHAHA THIS IS BRAZIL :)) RAM: 8GB memory 800MHz My game settings: [Video] Resolution: 640x480 Advanced: Low and Off Multicore Rendering: Enabled [Launch options] -novid -noforcemaccel -noforcemparms -noforcemspd -refresh 120 -w 640 -processheap FPS TEST 1 987 frames 7.917 seconds 124.67 fps ( 8.02 ms/f) 21.823 fps variability FPS TEST 2 7797 frames 71.818 seconds 108.57 fps ( 9.21 ms/f) 19.173 fps variability
2014-02-07 19:34
Thanks for your time.
2014-02-07 20:16
what update 4.7mb?
2014-02-07 19:35
No information ;/
2014-02-07 20:16
[PC] Model: HP dv5 1040ez CPU: Intel Core 2 Duo P8400 2.26GHz GPU: Nvidia 9600M GT 512Mo DDR2 RAM: 4GB 800MHz DDR2 [Video] Resolution: 1024x768 Advanced: Lowest and Off Multicore Rendering: Enabled [Launch options] -console +autoexec -novid -noforcemparms -noforcemaccel -high -processheap [FPS TEST 1] 987 frames 8.010 seconds 123.22 fps ( 8.12 ms/f) 6.172 fps variability [FPS TEST 2] 7797 frames 73.040 seconds 106.75 fps ( 9.37 ms/f) 6.429 fps variability
2014-02-08 00:27
It seems that my old shit of (no, not laptop...)heater is the most constant one, lol
2014-02-08 00:46
PC specs: in my profile Settings: lowest possible, 1280x1024 Launch options: -language english -threads 8 -novid -tickrate 128 +fps_max 0 +cl_interp_ratio 1 +cl_interp 0 +rate 128000 Multicore rendering: Enabled (mat_queue_mode -1) Demo 1: 986 frames 4.327 seconds 227.87 fps ( 4.39 ms/f) 26.952 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 37.639 seconds 207.15 fps ( 4.83 ms/f) 27.049 fps variability With -processheap Demo 1: 986 frames 4.294 seconds 229.63 fps ( 4.35 ms/f) 26.321 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 37.500 seconds 207.92 fps ( 4.81 ms/f) 26.873 fps variability With mat_queue_mode 2 Demo 1: 986 frames 4.311 seconds 228.69 fps ( 4.37 ms/f) 25.595 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 37.725 seconds 206.68 fps ( 4.84 ms/f) 26.761 fps variability Without -threads 8 Demo 1: 986 frames 4.324 seconds 228.01 fps ( 4.39 ms/f) 26.371 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 37.631 seconds 207.20 fps ( 4.83 ms/f) 26.854 fps variability With cl_forcepreload 1 and +mat_vignette_enable 0 Unknown command "mat_vignette_enable" Demo 1: 986 frames 4.316 seconds 228.44 fps ( 4.38 ms/f) 27.626 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 37.603 seconds 207.35 fps ( 4.82 ms/f) 26.803 fps variability With multicore rendering disabled (mat_queue_mode 0) Demo 1: 986 frames 4.467 seconds 220.75 fps ( 4.53 ms/f) 6.971 fps variability Demo 2: 7797 frames 40.258 seconds 193.68 fps ( 5.16 ms/f) 15.821 fps variability So... I do agree with your conclusions.
2014-02-08 19:09
Wow, thanks for your time :D
2014-02-08 22:56
fps_test 2 336.15 fps 800x600 only 4x anisotropic on(355 2nd take) 342.59 fps 800x600 4x AF +2xMSAA 346.13 800x600 4xAF +4MSAA 345.54 2nd take on 800x600 4xAF +4msaa
2014-02-08 20:10
Stable rig ;] but why 8x6? Thanks for your time.
2014-02-09 15:51
[Video] Resolution: 1024x768 Advanced: Low and Off Multicore Rendering: Enabled [Launch options] -freq 75 -noforcemaccel -noforcemparms -noaafonts -novid -threads 2 -console -nojoy -nod3d9ex +mat_queue_mode 2 mat_dxlevel 81 -processheap +exec autoexec.cfg -fps_max 128 -tickrate 128 +mat_vignette_enable 0 -high -preload 986 frames 2.675 seconds 220.92 fps ( 4.53 ms/f) 5.997 fps variability Can I make something to get more fps ? :)
2014-02-09 17:45
-noaafonts - not working in GO -noforcem commands only works if -useforcedmparms is set. Can I make something to get more fps ? :) Just change things in pc and test fps with demos.
2014-02-09 17:48
Can I make something to get more fps ? :) Just change things in pc and test fps with demos. Can you suggest something what can I change ? :)
2014-02-09 18:01
When you have good cooling system, disable EIST and C1E in bios. Use classic theme in os.
2014-02-10 13:08
i forget about reply ;<
2014-02-09 17:58
HARDWARE MSI GE-70 Laptop Nvidia GeForce 765M 2GB 8GB RAM Intel i7-4700MQ @2.4Ghz (3.4Ghz intel boosted) CSGO SETTINGS 1024x768 Everything set to low. Multicore Rendering Enabled Multisampling 4X Filtering 2X LAUNCH OPTIONS -novid -high -freq 120 -w 1024 -threads 8 -tickrate 128 -preload +mat_vignette_enable 0 RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 1024x768 7797 frames 28.538 seconds 273.22 fps ( 3.66 ms/f) 29.174 fps variability RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 800x600 7797 frames 25.433 seconds 306.57 fps ( 3.26 ms/f) 27.947 fps variability RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 640x480 7797 frames 23.616 seconds 330.16 fps ( 3.03 ms/f) 31.848 fps variability RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 1280x720 7797 frames 29.575 seconds 263.64 fps ( 3.79 ms/f) 31.055 fps variability RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 1920x1080 7797 frames 40.560 seconds 192.23 fps ( 5.20 ms/f) 32.533 fps variability
2014-02-09 19:11
Wow, thanks for your time. It's look like your fps on 1920x1080 are sufficient too ;]
2014-02-10 13:09
Yeah, I would use a higher resolution than 1024 if it werent for the fact that laptops dont have dvi outputs, so Im stuck at using VGA adapter, which only gives 120Hz at a maximum of 1024x768 resolution :/
2014-02-10 17:39
120Hz better than full hd resolution :)
2014-02-10 18:16
yup :)
2014-02-10 21:12
Comparison between FPS_TEST2 & FPS_TEST3 RESULT:FPS_TEST2 @ 1024x768 7797 frames 28.538 seconds 273.22 fps ( 3.66 ms/f) 29.174 fps variability RESULT:FPS_TEST3 @ 1024x768 7487 frames 41.449 seconds 180.63 fps ( 5.54 ms/f) 26.632 fps variability FPS: Decreased by 92.37 FPS Variability: Decreased by 2.542 MS: Increased by 1.88
2014-02-10 21:19
It's not demo comparisons but configurations, use only fps_test3 to check best fps.
2014-02-10 22:03
Obviously, I know that. The reason Im comparing those results is to show that a server with several players/shooting/nades etc, takes up alot of fps, compared to just being on a server by yourself. And how big of a result it actually is. Just the same as if you put together all the results everyone posted, and compare the fps, depending on the hardware each user got. Which is actually something you should do, if not, maybe I should.
2014-02-11 01:23
this could probably help the forum by stopping those fps threads, if people already posted their average fps with that hardware :3
2014-02-11 02:29
Maybe you should add some themo with more players :D Phenom x4 955 Radeon 6850 6gb ram 1280x960 all low : 7797 frames 24.108 seconds 323.43 fps ( 3.09 ms/f) 22.499 fps variability 800x600: 7797 frames 24.108 seconds 323.43 fps ( 3.09 ms/f) 22.499 fps variability 1920x1080: 7797 frames 25.866 seconds 301.44 fps ( 3.32 ms/f) 20.989 fps variability Its only second test. First was around 430 fps.
2014-02-09 19:14
Thanks for your time, I'll try to record some more demanding demo.
2014-02-10 13:17
add some demos*
2014-02-10 18:18
no launch options 7797 frames 39.112 seconds 199.35 fps ( 5.02 ms/f) 16.097 fps variability 7797 frames 34.100 seconds 228.65 fps ( 4.37 ms/f) 39.414 fps variability -novid -processheap -threads 4 ( i am using a dual core CPU ) HD5770 4GB DDR3 CPU : INTEL G2030 Ingame settings : 1280 x 1024 bilinear 4x AA all low except for model / texture detail (high)
2014-02-09 19:17
#99
fox | 
World WEZZyx 
why threads 4 if u are using a dual core cpu
2014-02-09 20:00
that was what i was pointing out . I probably caps it at -threads 2 anyway . I`ll try a run with threads -2 and see if that changes anything .
2014-02-09 22:31
#101
fox | 
World WEZZyx 
I also have a dual core, and with -threads 2 the game was crashing, and I tryed only -threads and it worked fine. (And before the update I used -threads 4 , but I didn't see any difference
2014-02-10 12:12
#96
Lithuania pgz 
7797 frames 34.952 seconds 223.08 fps ( 4.48 ms/f) 11.789 fps variability TEST 2
2014-02-09 19:48
Guys, I will record new demo it will be more demanding and more accurate, I hope you will test your fps on few settings ;]
2014-02-10 17:07
Certainly :)
2014-02-10 17:41
Deathmatch + grenades, 1 minute or more, all dependent from pc power, the most accurate fps_test3: mediafire.com/download/8qcqwxuyumfab4u/f..
2014-02-10 19:39
Posted the result, replied to my old post
2014-02-10 21:22
link of botdm.cfg ?
2014-02-11 02:27
thanks man
2014-02-14 05:13
fps_test 1 --> 187 fps_test 2 --> 175 fps_test 3 --> 135 i52430m 6770hd 4gb ram laptop but when i log into a server i have something like 90-120
2014-02-11 13:40
Thanks for your time.
2014-02-12 13:54
poor laptop, amd athlon x2 m320 2.1 Ghz and hd4570m everything on low 640res t1: 133.22 fps, 13.8 var t3: 73.03 fps, 7.9 var 800res t1: 114.75 fps, 5.3 var t3: 74.82 fps, 8.2 var
2014-02-11 13:42
Yeah poor. Thanks for your time.
2014-02-12 13:55
micronn ADDED TO VALVE TEAM ! :D xD
2014-02-11 15:23
:D
2014-02-12 13:54
I did some testing with different start parameters to see if my system would gain any fps. The only thing i noticed is that mat_queue -1 and 2 seems to give the same fps and I lose around 50 fps using mat_queue 0 and 1. System: i3-3220 @ 3.30 Ghz, Radeon HD 7700 1GB GDDR5, 4 GB DDR3-1600, ASRock B75 Pro3 I tried 800x600 and 1024x768. I got the same FPS with both resolutions. First line FPS, second line the used start parameter: // all tests below are done with mat_queue_mode 2 7487 frames 38.308 seconds 195.44 fps ( 5.12 ms/f) 15.965 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -refresh 120 -dxlevel 90 -high -processheap -threads 4 -heapsize 3145728 7487 frames 36.621 seconds 204.45 fps ( 4.89 ms/f) 17.975 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 7487 frames 37.294 seconds 200.76 fps ( 4.98 ms/f) 17.673 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -threads 4 7487 frames 36.758 seconds 203.68 fps ( 4.91 ms/f) 18.173 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -threads 2 7487 frames 36.826 seconds 203.31 fps ( 4.92 ms/f) 17.190 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -high 7487 frames 37.417 seconds 200.10 fps ( 5.00 ms/f) 16.684 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -heapsize 1572864 7487 frames 36.609 seconds 204.51 fps ( 4.89 ms/f) 17.957 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -heapsize 3145728 7487 frames 38.131 seconds 196.35 fps ( 5.09 ms/f) 15.454 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -dxlevel 90 7487 frames 37.542 seconds 199.43 fps ( 5.01 ms/f) 16.272 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -processheap 7487 frames 37.398 seconds 200.20 fps ( 5.00 ms/f) 16.270 fps variability -console -novid -tickrate 128 -refresh 120 // different mat_queue_mode 7487 frames 50.630 seconds 147.88 fps ( 6.76 ms/f) 8.825 fps variability -novid -refresh 120 -tickrate 128 // mat_queue_mode 1 7487 frames 50.628 seconds 147.88 fps ( 6.76 ms/f) 8.756 fps variability -novid -refresh 120 -tickrate 128 // mat_queue_mode 0 7487 frames 38.349 seconds 195.23 fps ( 5.12 ms/f) 15.275 fps variability -novid -refresh 120 -tickrate 128 // mat_queue_mode -1
2014-02-11 15:50
-2=legacy default //Multicore Rendering Off -1=default, automatic //Multicore Rendering On 0=synchronous single thread //Multicore Rendering Off 1=queued single thread //Multicore Rendering Off 2=queued multithreaded //Multicore Rendering On
2014-02-12 13:59
#135
pabeL | 
Dominican Republic pabeL 
PC PhenomII x6 3.2 8gb vengance 1600 GTX 560TI CSGO SETTINGS 1024x768 Everything set to low. Multicore Rendering Enabled Multisampling 8x Filtering Bilinear LAUNCH OPTIONS -noforcemparms -noforcemaccel -noforcemspd -novid -threads 6 -high +mat_queue_mode 2 Results 7797 frames 25.335 seconds 307.76 fps ( 3.25 ms/f) 21.267 fps variability Dust2 bot 7487 frames 43.216 seconds 173.25 fps ( 5.77 ms/f) 10.333 fps variability DM dust2 986 frames 2.961 seconds 332.95 fps ( 3.00 ms/f) 9.427 fps variability nuke Help me
2014-02-11 21:39
Just try other settings with fps_test3 demo and find your best configuration.
2014-02-12 14:00
we cann't help you, you are AMD soldier!
2015-03-03 23:05
what does this noumbers mean ? 987 frames 2.101 seconds 469.75 fps ( 2.13 ms/f) 65.937 fps variability i should use 469 fps ?or what - what this test shows ?
2014-02-12 12:21
987 frames //all frames in-demo 2.101 seconds //rendering time, less = better 469.75 fps //max. fps, more = better 2.13 ms/f //smaller = better 65.937 fps variability //smaller = better Just try other settings with fps_test3 demo and find your best configuration.
2014-02-12 14:03
7797 frames 24.615 seconds 316.76 fps ( 3.16 ms/f) 41.417 fps variability enable/disable Hyperthreading or park/unpark cores has not effect
2014-02-12 13:57
I gained about 70fps after unparking cpu.
2014-02-12 14:04
I5 3570k @ 4.2ghz,HD 6970,8gb RAM FPS_TEST3 -> mediafire.com/download/8qcqwxuyumfab4u/f.. Results: Settings ALL LOW, AA/AF none/bilinear, 1920x1080 7487 frames 26.474 seconds 282.80 fps ( 3.54 ms/f) 18.830 1680x1080 7487 frames 26.364 seconds 283.99 fps ( 3.52 ms/f) 17.087 1600x900 7487 frames 26.203 seconds 285.73 fps ( 3.50 ms/f) 17.815 1280x720 7487 frames 26.254 seconds 285.17 fps ( 3.51 ms/f) 17.390 1024x768 7487 frames 24.564 seconds 304.79 fps ( 3.28 ms/f) 19.915 800x600 7487 frames 24.478 seconds 305.87 fps ( 3.27 ms/f) 20.972 Settings ALL MID, AA/AF 2x/2x, 1980x1080 7487 frames 27.929 seconds 268.07 fps ( 3.73 ms/f) 16.848 1680x1080 7487 frames 27.479 seconds 272.46 fps ( 3.67 ms/f) 16.560 1600x900 7487 frames 27.550 seconds 271.76 fps ( 3.68 ms/f) 16.857 1280x720 7487 frames 27.477 seconds 272.48 fps ( 3.67 ms/f) 16.308 1024x768 7487 frames 26.586 seconds 281.62 fps ( 3.55 ms/f) 18.122 800x600 7487 frames 26.533 seconds 282.17 fps ( 3.54 ms/f) 17.971 Settings ALL HIGH, AA/AF 4x/4x, 1980x1080 7487 frames 30.467 seconds 245.74 fps ( 4.07 ms/f) 17.106 1680x1080 7487 frames 30.019 seconds 249.41 fps ( 4.01 ms/f) 17.843 1600x900 7487 frames 29.899 seconds 250.41 fps ( 3.99 ms/f) 16.921 1280x720 7487 frames 29.801 seconds 251.24 fps ( 3.98 ms/f) 16.589 1024x768 7487 frames 28.516 seconds 262.56 fps ( 3.81 ms/f) 17.852 800x600 7487 frames 28.604 seconds 261.74 fps ( 3.82 ms/f) 17.764 Settings ALL HIGH/VERYHIGH, AA/AF 8x/16x, FXAA enabled 1980x1080 7487 frames 33.501 seconds 223.49 fps ( 4.47 ms/f) 21.259 1680x1080 7487 frames 31.115 seconds 240.63 fps ( 4.16 ms/f) 19.469 1600x900 7487 frames 30.242 seconds 247.57 fps ( 4.04 ms/f) 17.166 1280x720 7487 frames 29.708 seconds 252.02 fps ( 3.97 ms/f) 16.384 1024x768 7487 frames 28.381 seconds 263.80 fps ( 3.79 ms/f) 15.897 800x600 7487 frames 28.597 seconds 261.81 fps ( 3.82 ms/f) 17.401
2014-02-12 15:29
So you can easily play with full hd resolution, nice :) Thanks for your time.
2014-02-12 17:05
"- other resolution (there is less fps on 1920x1080 but that's obvious and don't mean a bad thing, because fps can be more stable)" This.
2014-02-12 16:12
Dependent from pc components.
2014-02-12 17:04
Agreed
2014-02-12 20:08
i5-4570 3.2 Ghz GIGABYTE GTX 760 8GB RAM 1600 CL9 Command line: -console -w 1024 -h 768 -refresh 120 -threads 4 -novid -high -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg 1024x768 - all low, 4xMSSA, Trilinear 986 frames 1.707 seconds 577.79 fps ( 1.73 ms/f) 22.103 fps variability 7797 frames 16.802 seconds 464.06 fps ( 2.15 ms/f) 30.652 fps variability 7487 frames 28.250 seconds 265.03 fps ( 3.77 ms/f) 16.199 fps variability
2014-02-12 16:16
I have similar results, but with none MSAA ;] Thanks for your time.
2014-02-12 17:02
how many fps_max?
2014-02-12 16:19
fps_max 0 Btw. timedemo command adjusting it to the max.
2014-02-12 17:00
in game please fps_max "129"?
2014-02-12 17:02
I used 0 with this method.
2014-02-12 17:03
AMD 965BE @ 4.25GHz Asus 7770 @ 1115MHz+1425MHz 8gb @ 1600MHz 800x600 @Global-HiGH, last low 1DEMO) 986 frames 1.707 seconds 587.79 fps ( 1.73 ms/f) 22.103 fps variability 2DEMO) 7487 frames 28.250 seconds 385.03 fps ( 3.77 ms/f) 16.199 fps variability
2014-02-12 19:59
Test with all low settings and with all demos ;]
2014-02-12 22:34
TEST1 987 frames 9.080 seconds 108.70 fps ( 9.20 ms/f) 4.382 fps variability ¸TEST2 7797 frames 75.236 seconds 103.63 fps ( 9.65 ms/f) 6.677 fps variability ST3 7487 frames 84.434 seconds 88.67 fps (11.28 ms/f) 6.580 fps variability WHAT NOW???
2014-02-13 23:37
WHAT NOW??
2014-02-14 00:16
Read the first headline in the blog, there is an answer ;]
2014-02-14 03:16
AMD FX 8120 @ 3.3ghz 8gb DDR3 1600 (PC3 12800)@ 1.65v 9-9-9-24 timing 2x r9 270x @ 1170/1500 mhz crossfired Results here drive.google.com/file/d/0ByFhWloTL5hhM2V..
2014-02-14 06:07
HARDWARE: CPU: i7-3630QM 2.4GHz GPU: NVIDIA GT650M 2x RAM: 8GB RAM CSGO SETTINGS 1024x768 Very low, Medium, Low, Low Multicore Rendering Enabled Anisotropic 2X 3x Disabled LAUNCH OPTIONS -console -novid -freq 144 -refresh 144 +exec autoexec.cfg -high -processheap -preload -threads TEST1 986 frames 3.968 seconds 248.49 fps ( 4.02 ms/f) 8.752 fps variability TEST2 7797 frames 29.356 seconds 265.60 fps ( 3.77 ms/f) 25.546 fps variability TEST3 487 frames 40.305 seconds 185.76 fps ( 5.38 ms/f) 14.822 fps variability Does that BIOS unparking cpu fix anything? I got huge fps stuttering on deathmatch... Shouldnt I have a better FPS with this hardware?
2014-02-14 16:03
Thanks for your time. Remove from launch options "-high -processheap -preload -threads" and test again. About unparking cores in windows on my pc I got about 70fps more.
2014-02-15 18:06
AMD 965BE @ 4.25GHz Asus 7770 @ 1115MHz+1425MHz 8gb @ 1600MHz 800x600 @ ALL LOW 1DEMO) 986 frames 1.707 seconds 663.79 fps ( 1.73 ms/f) 22.103 fps variability 2DEMO) 7487 frames 28.250 seconds 411.03 fps ( 3.77 ms/f) 16.199 fps variability 1024x768 1DEMO) 986 frames 1.707 seconds 633.79 fps ( 1.73 ms/f) 22.103 fps variability
2014-02-14 19:16
Really good results. Thanks for your time.
2014-02-15 18:07
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive update for 2/13/14 (2/14/14 UTC, 1.32.2.1) No fps lost.
2014-02-14 20:40
Specs and more: hltv.org/?pageid=18&threadid=525938#r499.. -threads 8 -novid -tickrate 128 +fps_max 0 +cl_interp_ratio 1 +cl_interp 0 +rate 128000 +mat_queue_mode -1 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 46.358 seconds 161.51 fps ( 6.19 ms/f) 16.677 fps variability With +mat_queue_mode 2 instead of -1 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 46.085 seconds 162.46 fps ( 6.16 ms/f) 16.539 fps variability Without -threads 8 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 42.441 seconds 176.41 fps ( 5.67 ms/f) 16.535 fps variability WTF? Hm, gonna test it again... With -threads 8 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 45.974 seconds 162.85 fps ( 6.14 ms/f) 17.012 fps variability DEMO 2: 7797 frames 37.812 seconds 206.20 fps ( 4.85 ms/f) 26.853 fps variability And again without -threads 8 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 42.391 seconds 176.62 fps ( 5.66 ms/f) 16.430 fps variability DEMO 2: 7797 frames 37.592 seconds 207.41 fps ( 4.82 ms/f) 26.750 fps variability Iiiiiiiiinteresting......... Without -threads 8 and with +mat_queue_mode 2 instead of -1 DEMO 3: 7487 frames 42.585 seconds 175.81 fps ( 5.69 ms/f) 16.665 fps variability I think I should remove -threads 8 from the launch options...
2014-02-15 13:38
You shouldn't use -threads 8 from the beginning.
2014-02-15 18:03
I did delete "-threads 8" from launch options and got a different result: TEST 1 with -threads 8 986 frames 3.968 seconds 248.49 fps ( 4.02 ms/f) 8.752 fps variability TEST 1 without -threads 8 987 frames 2.875 seconds 343.33 fps ( 2.91 ms/f) 11.996 fps variability
2014-02-15 17:39
You shouldn't use -threads 8 from the beginning.
2014-02-15 18:02
upload to the another place pls. can't download from mediafire
2014-02-15 18:50
command-high gives me 10 fps more in timedemo3 game with the game is much smoother but I think 1ms in the back of the image and the whole game, maybe I'm wrong. I have a question about this command -high. lansch option -novid -tickrate 128 +autoexec.cfg -language english -high . timedemo fps3 7487 frames 26.177 seconds 286.02 fps ( 3.50 ms/f) 20.477 fps variability
2014-02-16 03:18
You think you have more but thats a false result, sometimes with -high there are problems with keyboard and mouse, some kind of lags.
2014-02-16 12:59
It said I have 240~ fps, but when I play, I only 150-170~fps, only get higher fps when I face to floor or in a small area such as a short.
2014-02-16 10:58
Because it's a demo not a realtime gameplay. Btw. this is benchmark, read the first lines on this blog ;]
2014-02-16 12:58
it has just about real time while playing for dm or on a server good ping I have such a feeling, but the game seems so smooth everything perfectly, but have any delay in the image really, I think I want to know is what are the negative effects of this command-high
2014-02-16 13:32
Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M460 @ 2.53GHz, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5650, 4Gb RAM W7 64x 1600*900 all settings low: -steam -novid -threads -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg 986 frames 8.871 seconds 111.14 fps ( 9.00 ms/f) 5.657 fps variability 7797 frames 69.817 seconds 111.68 fps ( 8.95 ms/f) 6.941 fps variability 7487 frames 79.434 seconds 94.25 fps (10.61 ms/f) 7.120 fps variability -steam -novid -threads -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg -preload -nojoy -high -processheap +mat_vignette_enable 0 986 frames 8.763 seconds 112.52 fps ( 8.89 ms/f) 4.020 fps variability 7797 frames 69.629 seconds 111.98 fps ( 8.93 ms/f) 6.920 fps variability 7487 frames 79.279 seconds 94.44 fps (10.59 ms/f) 6.865 fps variability -steam -novid -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg 986 frames 8.786 seconds 112.23 fps ( 8.91 ms/f) 4.009 fps variability 7797 frames 70.361 seconds 110.81 fps ( 9.02 ms/f) 6.973 fps variability 7487 frames 79.949 seconds 93.65 fps (10.68 ms/f) 7.140 fps variability -steam -novid -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg -threads -preload -high -processheap 986 frames 8.755 seconds 112.62 fps ( 8.88 ms/f) 4.143 fps variability 7797 frames 70.203 seconds 111.06 fps ( 9.00 ms/f) 6.818 fps variability 7487 frames 79.476 seconds 94.20 fps (10.62 ms/f) 7.049 fps variability
2014-02-16 18:45
So you can see these commands don't give more fps :) Thanks for your time.
2014-02-16 18:51
yes, laptop is not for boosting...
2014-02-16 19:08
-steam what this and can u make fps cfg? =D
2014-02-16 19:45
i5-4570 3.2 Ghz GIGABYTE GTX 760 8GB RAM 1600 CL9 1920x1080 - all low, 4xMSAA, Trilinear Command line: -console -w 1920 -h 1080 -refresh 120 -threads 4 -novid -high -tickrate 128 +exec autoexec.cfg -mat_queue_mode 2 986 frames 1.822 seconds 541.16 fps ( 1.85 ms/f) 25.034 fps variability 7797 frames 18.097 seconds 430.84 fps ( 2.32 ms/f) 27.401 fps variability 7487 frames 29.639 seconds 252.61 fps ( 3.96 ms/f) 15.659 fps variability -mat_queue_mode -1 986 frames 1.850 seconds 533.09 fps ( 1.88 ms/f) 22.467 fps variability 7797 frames 17.867 seconds 436.39 fps ( 2.29 ms/f) 29.874 fps variability 7487 frames 29.811 seconds 251.15 fps ( 3.98 ms/f) 15.425 fps variability -without -high -threads 4 in command line -with mat_queue_mode 2 986 frames 1.833 seconds 538.04 fps ( 1.86 ms/f) 27.534 fps variability 7797 frames 18.338 seconds 425.19 fps ( 2.35 ms/f) 27.039 fps variability 7487 frames 29.594 seconds 252.99 fps ( 3.95 ms/f) 15.339 fps variability -without -high -threads 4 in command line -with mat_queue_mode -1 986 frames 1.822 seconds 541.17 fps ( 1.85 ms/f) 40.150 fps variability 7797 frames 18.140 seconds 429.83 fps ( 2.33 ms/f) 28.736 fps variability 7487 frames 30.087 seconds 248.85 fps ( 4.02 ms/f) 15.346 fps variability
2014-02-18 19:45
Time to get 760 ;] CPU overclocked? Btw. thanks for your time.
2014-02-18 19:59
After last update me and my friends have more fps in game. It's non-K version of CPU so I can't OC it. If you want more tests, please let me know. BTW. I have Windows 7 x64 if it's does it matter.
2014-02-18 21:14
Official NVIDIA 334.89 WHQL Display Driver (Released 2/18/14) A little more fps in tests. fps_test1 on 1024x768: 986 frames 1.621 seconds 608.28 fps ( 1.64 ms/f) 20.024 fps variability fps_test2 on 1024x768: 7797 frames 16.977 seconds 459.27 fps ( 2.18 ms/f) 42.198 fps variability fps_test3 on 1024x768: 7487 frames 28.514 seconds 262.57 fps ( 3.81 ms/f) 16.961 fps variability fps_test1 on 1920x1080: 986 frames 2.429 seconds 406.00 fps ( 2.46 ms/f) 105.065 fps variability fps_test2 on 1920x1080: 7797 frames 20.575 seconds 378.95 fps ( 2.64 ms/f) 42.033 fps variability fps_test3 on 1920x1080: 7487 frames 30.355 seconds 246.64 fps ( 4.05 ms/f) 15.618 fps variability Before GPU drivers update. fps_test1 on 1024x768: 986 frames 1.700 seconds 579.94 fps ( 1.72 ms/f) 15.662 fps variability fps_test2 on 1024x768: 7797 frames 17.260 seconds 451.73 fps ( 2.21 ms/f) 44.990 fps variability fps_test3 on 1024x768: 7487 frames 28.479 seconds 262.90 fps ( 3.80 ms/f) 17.995 fps variability fps_test1 on 1920x1080: 986 frames 2.927 seconds 336.81 fps ( 2.97 ms/f) 8.043 fps variability fps_test2 on 1920x1080: 7797 frames 24.016 seconds 324.66 fps ( 3.08 ms/f) 17.170 fps variability fps_test3 on 1920x1080: 7487 frames 30.640 seconds 244.35 fps ( 4.09 ms/f) 15.131 fps variability
2014-02-19 13:22
fps_test3: 1920*1080 7487 frames 52.485 seconds 142.65 fps ( 7.01 ms/f) 11.670 fps variability 1280*720 7487 frames 51.334 seconds 145.85 fps ( 6.86 ms/f) 10.307 fps variability system: fx-6300@ 4 ghz, gtx 760, 8gb ram... any tips for more fps? ^^
2014-02-19 13:58
Unpark CPU cores in Windows and test again www.coderbag.com/Programming-C/Disable-CPU-Core-Parking-Utility When no changes, change your CPU to Intel.
2014-02-19 14:11
i already tried to unpark the cores, it doesn't really help. before arms deals update i had 300-400 fps, now only 150-180 ^^ (in 5vs5)
2014-02-19 14:16
What is your status in CPU Core Parking Manager V2? Maybe you did smth wrong ;]
2014-02-19 14:20
This is crazy picky lol.
2014-02-19 14:19
Interesting thread / blogpost! Resolution: 1024x768 Launch options: -w 1024 -h 768 -refresh 144 -console -novid -noforcemaccel -noforcemparms -high -threads 4 -tickrate 128 +mat_vignette_enable 0 mat_queue_mode 2 Video settings: puu.sh/73wBP.jpg Hardware: puu.sh/73x7Z.png + 16GB Kingston HyperX 1333MHz test 1 - 986 frames 1.710 seconds 576.50 fps ( 1.73 ms/f) 21.697 fps variability test 2 - 7797 frames 15.265 seconds 510.78 fps ( 1.96 ms/f) 29.897 fps variability test 3 - 7487 frames 25.602 seconds 292.44 fps ( 3.42 ms/f) 16.481 fps variability All 3 tests were run with 1024x768. I don't know why I still have -noforcemaccel -noforcemparms in launch. I don't have any fps-problems but should I maybe expect more fps from this computer?
2014-02-20 18:34
Check my results, I think you should have more fps on that pc ;]
2014-02-22 21:19
how to i do 1920x1080? =D
2014-02-22 16:27
You need to have full hd monitor, just do 1024x768 tests ;]
2014-02-22 21:15
;/
2014-02-22 16:55
Why so sad?
2014-02-22 21:16
Laptop OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: i7-2630QM @ 2.00GHz GPU: GT 525M 1GB RAM: 8GB My game settings [Video] Resolution: 1024x768 Advanced: Low and Off Multicore Rendering: Enabled Launch options -high -novid -threads 8 -useforcedmparms -noforcemparms -noforcemaccel -noforcemspd My results fps_test1 on 1024x768 986 frames 5.396 seconds 182.72 fps ( 5.47 ms/f) 18.865 fps variability fps_test2 on 1024x768 7797 frames 46.385 seconds 168.09 fps ( 5.95 ms/f) 20.045 fps variability fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 56.110 seconds 133.44 fps ( 7.49 ms/f) 12.563 fps variability
2014-02-22 17:12
Thanks for your time.
2014-02-22 21:19
could you test if -32bit gives more fps
2014-02-22 19:44
Yes, results soon.
2014-02-22 21:16
Command is not boosting fps on my pc.
2014-02-22 21:29
someone also suggested deleting materials folder?
2014-02-22 21:37
Only when someone played on community servers with unfamiliar maps. I can't delete it because there are some files that are needed for game. I have only 62 files there. Find more suggestions I like to test them out ;]
2014-02-22 21:41
well I seen a guy with -32bpp don't know if that does anything
2014-02-22 21:56
Nope, becasue it's only for Goldsource Games.
2014-02-22 21:57
ok then I've always wanted to know what's better for fps, trilinear or bilinear. I assume its bilinear but I dont see much difference when I switch through them
2014-02-22 22:16
Bilinear - using only bilinear no matter that trilinear is needed Trilinear - using bilinear when needed, using trilinear when needed
2014-02-22 22:22
thanks dude
2014-02-22 22:38
OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition GPU: SAPPHIRE HD 5830 Xtreme 1GB GDDR5 RAM: 4GB My game settings Resolution: 1024x768 Advanced: Low and Off Multicore Rendering: Enabled Launch options: -novid -high -threads 4 +mat_vignette_enable 0 -preload -w 1024 -h 768 -console -rate 128000 -cl_cmdrate 128 -cl_updaterate 128 -tickrate 128 -refresh 120 -freq 120 Only fps_test3: 7487 frames 50.501 seconds 148.25 fps ( 6.75 ms/f) 10.305 fps variability // -high -threads -processheap +mat_vignette_enable 0 -preload 7487 frames 44.438 seconds 168.48 fps ( 5.94 ms/f) 11.911 fps variability - without any commands 7487 frames 44.362 seconds 168.77 fps ( 5.93 ms/f) 11.208 fps variability -high 7487 frames 44.333 seconds 168.88 fps ( 5.92 ms/f) 11.991 fps variability -threads 7487 frames 43.633 seconds 171.59 fps ( 5.83 ms/f) 10.989 fps variability -threads 4 7487 frames 43.968 seconds 170.28 fps ( 5.87 ms/f) 11.585 fps variability -high -threads 7487 frames 50.512 seconds 148.22 fps ( 6.75 ms/f) 10.275 fps variability -processheap 7487 frames 50.431 seconds 148.46 fps ( 6.74 ms/f) 10.169 fps variability -high -processheap 7487 frames 51.250 seconds 146.09 fps ( 6.85 ms/f) 10.664 fps variability -threads -processheap 7487 frames 51.000 seconds 146.80 fps ( 6.81 ms/f) 10.073 fps variability -high -threads -processheap 7487 frames 43.641 seconds 171.56 fps ( 5.83 ms/f) 11.415 fps variability +mat_vignette_enable 0 7487 frames 43.226 seconds 173.21 fps ( 5.77 ms/f) 11.760 fps variability +mat_vignette_enable 0 -high 7487 frames 43.590 seconds 171.76 fps ( 5.82 ms/f) 11.169 fps variability +mat_vignette_enable 0 -threads 7487 frames 43.473 seconds 172.22 fps ( 5.81 ms/f) 11.024 fps variability +mat_vignette_enable 0 -threads -high 7487 frames 43.655 seconds 171.51 fps ( 5.83 ms/f) 11.388 fps variability -preload 7487 frames 43.293 seconds 172.94 fps ( 5.78 ms/f) 11.031 fps variability -preload -high 7487 frames 44.086 seconds 169.83 fps ( 5.89 ms/f) 11.420 fps variability -preload -threads 4 7487 frames 43.658 seconds 171.49 fps ( 5.83 ms/f) 11.131 fps variability -preload +mat_vignette_enable 0 7487 frames 43.466 seconds 172.25 fps ( 5.81 ms/f) 10.915 fps variability -preload +mat_vignette_enable 0 -high 7487 frames 43.408 seconds 172.48 fps ( 5.80 ms/f) 11.100 fps variability -preload +mat_vignette_enable 0 -threads 4
2014-02-22 23:24
So it seems that you should play without commands ;] Thanks for your time.
2014-02-23 20:28
Interesting that disabling hud and postprocessing is giving me about +100 fps more. Valve should tweak their hud and unnecessary effects. cl_drawhud 1, mat_postprocess_enable 1: 986 frames 1.623 seconds 607.67 fps ( 1.65 ms/f) 18.257 fps variability cl_drawhud 0: 986 frames 1.440 seconds 684.92 fps ( 1.46 ms/f) 24.349 fps variability cl_drawhud 0, mat_postprocess_enable 0: 986 frames 1.382 seconds 713.37 fps ( 1.40 ms/f) 21.927 fps variability I bet I'll get similar % results with fps_test3 demo. Source: redd.it/1ynb0b
2014-02-23 20:25
Is it possible to disable postprocess without sv_cheats 1?
2014-02-25 07:01
Sadly no.
2014-02-25 10:36
#222
United Kingdom QNo 
Thanks for this! I'm having a strange problem though: FPS gets worse every time I test. Example: Test 1: 1280*800, all low, ... 173 FPS Test 2: changed texture detail to high... 163 FPS Test 3: same as test 1 ... 158 FPS Any idea why that could be?
2014-02-25 15:10
maybe try using a software like razer gamebooster to prevent some services from ruining the test.
2014-02-26 10:09
phenom 955 black edition 3.5GHZ amd ati hd 6870 messed around video.txt settings to -1 7487 frames 45.189 seconds 165.68 fps ( 6.04 ms/f) 11.675 fps variability with same settings to 0 (some of them) 7487 frames 45.045 seconds 166.21 fps ( 6.02 ms/f) 11.586 fps variability without launch options (I've got plenty of them lol) 7487 frames 45.467 seconds 164.67 fps ( 6.07 ms/f) 12.214 fps variability with Manage Parked CPU V2 at 100% I got 177 fps with video.txt settings to 0 (like earlier some of them) and all my previous launch options. Dunno if it is efficient because I tested only one time each with fps3 method The thing that is odd is that it is mentionned that you dont need the app launched to take benefits but I had to launch it in order to gain fps during this test. (I talk about this app coderbag.com/Programming-C/CPU-core-park.. edit to finish I didnt cleaned my CPU from a long time so it can provide differents results with same equipment
2014-02-25 23:21
Use this for permanent boost: coderbag.com/Programming-C/Disable-CPU-C..
2014-02-28 13:39
Hello, Are you sure for this permanent boost? It just rewind to Parked sometimes or when I recheck the status (even in admin mode)
2014-03-07 11:55
Yes it's working for me, on my os.
2014-03-07 13:27
Specs: Intel Core i5-3210M 8GB 1600MHz DDR3 AMD 7670 2GB Yes this is laptop, and I play on external monitor with 1024x760 all low normally. I wanted to show you how much changing resolution makes huge difference and how unparking cores don't do a thing just makes your laptop overheat during long hours of playing. Some results: 1024x768 all low and off with all launch options(i.e -high, -threads and stuff) 7487 frames 55.429 seconds 135.07 fps ( 7.40 ms/f) 12.230 fps variability 1024x760 all low and off without launch options 7487 frames 55.295 seconds 135.40 fps ( 7.39 ms/f) 12.463 fps variability 1280x960 with all low and off without launch options 7487 frames 73.536 seconds 101.81 fps ( 9.82 ms/f) 7.398 fps variability ~30% fps difference between resolution, launch commands don't do a thing as you can see. 1024x768 all low and off with unparked cores. 7487 frames 55.231 seconds 135.56 fps ( 7.38 ms/f) 12.280 fps variability With unparking cores as you can see there is no difference, there is a difference however after few hours of playing. I DO NOT RECOMMEND UNPARKING YOUR CORES IN LAPTOPS/NOTEBOOKS. That's all from me. :) EDIT: Of course all test done on test3 demo
2014-02-27 19:35
Unparking cores is for pc not for laptops and after using it I have about +70fps more so it's working for some rigs. Btw. thanks for your time.
2014-02-28 13:41
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive update for 2/27/14 (1.32.4.0) BEFORE fps_test1 on 1024x768 986 frames 1.621 seconds 608.28 fps ( 1.64 ms/f) 20.024 fps variability fps_test2 on 1024x768 7797 frames 16.977 seconds 459.27 fps ( 2.18 ms/f) 42.198 fps variability fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 28.514 seconds 262.57 fps ( 3.81 ms/f) 16.961 fps variability AFTER fps_test1 on 1024x768 986 frames 1.609 seconds 612.66 fps ( 1.63 ms/f) 22.273 fps variability fps_test2 on 1024x768 7797 frames 15.299 seconds 509.64 fps ( 1.96 ms/f) 46.294 fps variability fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 26.371 seconds 283.91 fps ( 3.52 ms/f) 18.328 fps variability Slightly more fps after this update.
2014-02-28 13:35
That park/unpark thing, is it only windows 7?
2014-02-28 13:43
Yes.
2014-02-28 13:44
BEFORE fps_test1 on 1920x1080 986 frames 2.429 seconds 406.00 fps ( 2.46 ms/f) 105.065 fps variability fps_test2 on 1920x1080 7797 frames 20.575 seconds 378.95 fps ( 2.64 ms/f) 42.033 fps variability fps_test3 on 1920x1080 7487 frames 30.355 seconds 246.64 fps ( 4.05 ms/f) 15.618 fps variability AFTER fps_test1 on 1920x1080 986 frames 2.400 seconds 410.85 fps ( 2.43 ms/f) 12.643 fps variability fps_test2 on 1920x1080 7797 frames 20.602 seconds 378.46 fps ( 2.64 ms/f) 24.476 fps variability fps_test3 on 1920x1080 7487 frames 28.166 seconds 265.82 fps ( 3.76 ms/f) 17.858 fps variability
2014-02-28 13:49
got something interesting for ya: fps_test 1 with XBOX 360 Controller: 284 fps fps_test 1 without XBOX 360 Controller: 480 fps
2014-02-28 15:01
Rofl :)
2014-03-07 13:27
found something on reddit, reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1z.. basically, when using some values of multisampling AA you can boost your fps. I have AMD CPU / GPU so I'll test it some day and report back since I got everything in low/disable (except mat queue)
2014-03-07 11:57
There is less fps with AA & AF. Tested many times.
2014-03-07 13:28
#238
 | 
Turkey ej_dlmxin 
i7 4770 gtx 660Ti 8gb DDR3 1024*768 low 1-748.5 2-579.3 3-272.1
2014-03-09 17:37
I have 150-300 (inconsistent) fps and I was wondering if I should cap my fps. I was thinking of using fps_max 150 for 120/144 hz. What do you think? Thanks!
2014-03-12 13:33
Yeah fps_max 150 is good on not stable pc, when it's stable use 300.
2014-03-30 20:28
Test 3 7487 frames 26.104 seconds 286.81 fps ( 3.49 ms/f) 23.837 fps variability 1024x768 - low settings Intel Core i5 3570 @ 4 x 3.4GHz Ivy Bridge ASUS P8B75-M 8GB DDR3 1600MHZ Kingston Hyper-X GEFORCE GTX570 1280MB
2014-03-12 13:52
Nice.
2014-03-30 20:35
Counter-Strike: Global Offensive update for 3/26/14 (3/27/14 UTC) BEFORE fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 26.371 seconds 283.91 fps ( 3.52 ms/f) 18.328 fps variability AFTER fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 25.613 seconds 292.31 fps ( 3.42 ms/f) 21.249 fps variability
2014-03-30 20:35
Official NVIDIA 337.50 Beta Performance Display Driver (4/7/14) BEFORE fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 26.371 seconds 283.91 fps ( 3.52 ms/f) 18.328 fps variability AFTER fps_test3 on 1024x768 7487 frames 25.527 seconds 293.30 fps ( 3.41 ms/f) 20.204 fps variability
2014-04-09 12:54
fps_test3 on 1024x768 4xMSA-8x i5 3570k GTX 760 7487 frames 25.527 seconds 297.30 fps
2014-04-18 05:30
7487 frames 25.270 seconds 296.28 fps ( 3.38 ms/f) 31.294 fps variability (demo3) i5-4670K default 3.4GHz GTX 560 Ti 8GB DDR3 1866MHz running on Samsung SSD 1920x1080 all very/low/off/AA 2x 7487 frames 21.309 seconds 351.35 fps ( 2.85 ms/f) 32.302 fps variability same config but 1024x768 AA: Trilinear
2014-04-28 13:37
Your variability is too high I think.
2014-08-13 19:12
can someone upload me fps_test2.dem? i changed some settings, and i know the last value of fps_test2, not fps_test3, so i want to compare them
2014-06-08 02:18
Not working because of new updates.
2014-08-13 19:08
@micronn, could you make a new demos ? Because now I get this error: WARNING: demo network protocol 15150 differs, engine version is 15401 Or maybe there is some converter like in CS 1.6 ?
2014-07-03 23:58
fps_test3 should be working fine. 1 and 2 not working because of new updates.
2014-08-13 19:10
i5 4690k not OC amd radeon r9 280X 3Go Sapphire fps_max 0 I got 300 fps and 18 variability when I tweaked my video.txt I got 340 and 22 variability I put like nearly everything to 0 "VideoConfig" { "setting.cpu_level" "0" "setting.gpu_level" "0" "setting.mat_antialias" "0" "setting.mat_aaquality" "0" "setting.mat_forceaniso" "4" "setting.mat_vsync" "0" "setting.mat_triplebuffered" "0" "setting.mat_grain_scale_override" "0" "setting.gpu_mem_level" "0" "setting.mem_level" "0" "setting.mat_queue_mode" "-1" "setting.csm_quality_level" "0" "setting.mat_software_aa_strength" "0" "setting.mat_motion_blur_enabled" "0" "setting.fullscreen" "1" "setting.defaultres" "1280" "setting.defaultresheight" "1024" "setting.aspectratiomode" "0" "setting.nowindowborder" "0" } Can someone help me to have like 10 fps variability? (it's a new formated and new computer rig so there might be default services to disable)
2014-08-12 15:26
Stop tweaking this file just do it in-game.
2014-08-13 19:11
if im puting in launch options 2 or more commands, i must do "-threads 2; -high" or -threads 2 -high? ty.
2014-09-03 19:00
Without semicolons.
2014-09-06 19:28
3570k 7950 @ 900/1250 (Catalyst 14.4 WHQL) 1680x1050 @ 3.4 GHz 7487 frames 26.748 seconds 279.91 fps ( 3.57 ms/f) 19.551 fps variability 7487 frames 26.598 seconds 281.49 fps ( 3.55 ms/f) 17.898 fps variability 7487 frames 26.486 seconds 282.68 fps ( 3.54 ms/f) 17.558 fps variability 1024x768 @ 3.4 GHz 7487 frames 25.664 seconds 291.73 fps ( 3.43 ms/f) 17.814 fps variability 7487 frames 25.939 seconds 288.64 fps ( 3.46 ms/f) 17.239 fps variability 7487 frames 25.731 seconds 290.97 fps ( 3.44 ms/f) 18.040 fps variability 1680x1050 @ 4.5 GHz 7487 frames 23.363 seconds 320.47 fps ( 3.12 ms/f) 25.094 fps variability 7487 frames 23.179 seconds 323.00 fps ( 3.10 ms/f) 22.821 fps variability 7487 frames 23.534 seconds 318.13 fps ( 3.14 ms/f) 21.626 fps variability 1024x768 @ 4.5 GHz 7487 frames 22.004 seconds 340.26 fps ( 2.94 ms/f) 21.112 fps variability 7487 frames 21.973 seconds 340.74 fps ( 2.93 ms/f) 20.237 fps variability 7487 frames 22.039 seconds 339.72 fps ( 2.94 ms/f) 20.014 fps variability Video settings: puu.sh/bo8zr/2c1edd68b2.png
2014-09-06 20:17
Tests should be done with lowest settings and 1024x768 resolution.
2014-09-16 11:17
7487 frames 23.470 seconds 319.00 fps ( 3.13 ms/f) 21.212 fps variability @ 3.4 GHz -console -novid -nod3d9ex -tickrate 128
2014-09-17 22:49
same setup win 8.1 but 4.2 ghz 1024x768 catalyt 14.8 7487 frames 24.117 seconds 310.45 fps ( 3.22 ms/f) 23.610 fps variability what win do u use ?
2014-09-28 22:49
8.1
2014-10-20 22:00
lol thanks for the late reply :D
2014-10-20 22:09
e8600+gts450@stock 7487 frames 51.684 seconds 144.86 fps ( 6.90 ms/f) 14.026 fps variability 7487 frames 52.241 seconds 143.32 fps ( 6.98 ms/f) 13.100 fps variability 7487 frames 54.629 seconds 137.05 fps ( 7.30 ms/f) 15.162 fps variability e8600@4.0Ghz+gts450@900,1800,1900(core,shader,memory) 7487 frames 46.700 seconds 160.32 fps ( 6.24 ms/f) 16.650 fps variability 7487 frames 47.588 seconds 157.33 fps ( 6.36 ms/f) 15.141 fps variability 7487 frames 49.899 seconds 150.04 fps ( 6.66 ms/f) 18.771 fps variability Im using NiP-GeT_RiGhT.cfg from his facebook 1280x960, low,medium,low,low+bilinear -novid -exec autoexec.cfg -high -threads 2 -tickrate 128 +mat_vignette_enable 0 -preload
2014-09-16 11:14
q9650+gts450@stock 7487 frames 43.196 seconds 173.33 fps ( 5.77 ms/f) 16.416 fps variability 7487 frames 42.053 seconds 178.04 fps ( 5.62 ms/f) 15.365 fps variability 7487 frames 43.578 seconds 171.81 fps ( 5.82 ms/f) 17.098 fps variability q9650@3.6Ghz+gts450@960,1920,2050(core,shader,memory) 7487 frames 38.457 seconds 194.68 fps ( 5.14 ms/f) 19.103 fps variability 7487 frames 37.704 seconds 198.58 fps ( 5.04 ms/f) 18.703 fps variability 7487 frames 38.638 seconds 193.77 fps ( 5.16 ms/f) 18.949 fps variability
2014-09-22 12:15
q9650@3,85 7487 frames 35.096 seconds 213.33 fps ( 4.69 ms/f) 20.829 fps variability 7487 frames 35.383 seconds 211.60 fps ( 4.73 ms/f) 19.399 fps variability 7487 frames 35.051 seconds 213.60 fps ( 4.68 ms/f) 20.533 fps variability
2014-09-23 10:39
fps_test3 guess i should be pretty happy xD 7487 frames 20.157 seconds 371.44 fps ( 2.69 ms/f) 31.481 fps variability
2014-09-23 13:41
That's a nice result, but tell us the specs of the system you ran the demo with, and the video settings you applied, otherwise the result is pretty pointless. Please include the OS and the driver version you used as well, if you'd be so kind. I'm personally interested to know.
2014-10-11 00:20
i7 4770k 760GTX 120 samsung ssd 8gb g.skrill 21xxmhz MSI z87 g45 mobo win7.
2014-10-12 20:28
What video settings, man?
2014-10-13 00:47
Oh, and CPU frequency, please. It's just so that your result can be confirmed.
2014-10-13 10:22
Here is my fps and parametres on my pc just for info. 7487 frames 29.642 seconds 252.58 fps ( 3.96 ms/f) 27.066 fps variability 252.58 fps in game. Parametres CPU : Intel i3 4330 Motherboard : AsRock fatal1ty killer B85 1150 RAM : 8 GB FURY 1400 MHZ Video card : Nvidia GTX 660 2 GB, 192 bit.
2014-09-23 23:53
posting for later reference
2014-09-23 23:58
G3258 3.2GHz Gigabyte GA-H81M-S1 GeForce GTX750Ti StormX Dual 2x4Gb 1600MHz CL11 1.5V Crucial Win7x64 1024x768 all LOW, multi on 7487 frames 33.659 seconds 222.43 fps ( 4.50 ms/f) 24.114 fps variability 1280x720 all LOW, multi on 7487 frames 36.129 seconds 207.23 fps ( 4.83 ms/f) 23.782 fps variability 1920x1080 all MAX, multi on 7487 frames 55.744 seconds 134.31 fps ( 7.45 ms/f) 23.293 fps variability -freq 75 -useforcedmparms -noforcemparms -noforcemspd -noforcemaccel -processheap -novid -threads 2 -high -noaafonts -nojoy -nod3d9ex -tickrate 128 +mat_queue_mode -1 +rate 128000 +cl_interp 0 +cl_interp_ratio 1 +fps_max 300 +fps_max_menu 300 +cl_showfps 4
2014-09-26 14:10
u have g3258 in stock or overclock? thats pretty awesome for a dual core chip 60bucks
2014-11-02 03:35
I have it as well. I OCd it to 4.2 Ghz + 270X and I got 250 in-game.
2015-01-05 18:35
which mobo u havE?
2015-01-06 03:10
hey can u tell me good launch option for this? CPU: intel g550 GPU: nvidia gt630 thanks alot
2015-09-24 08:51
-freq 75 -useforcedmparms -noforcemparms -noforcemspd -noforcemaccel -novid -nod3d9ex -threads 2 -high -tickrate 128 +mat_queue_mode -1 +rate 128000 +cl_interp 0 +cl_interp_ratio 1 +fps_max 129 +fps_max_menu 129 +cl_showfps 2
2015-09-24 16:42
thanks and good nvidia settings :D
2015-09-24 16:54
i mean can u tell me good nvidia settings?
2015-09-24 16:57
about nvidia: eng subs available! youtube.com/watch?v=pqOktJ8w5nE about monitors: overclock.net/t/1493866/guide-overclocki..
2015-09-24 17:07
i5-760 4GHz GTX 660 Ti OC'd 7487 frames 26.663 seconds 280.80 fps ( 3.56 ms/f) 23.803 fps variability much disappointed such wow :(
2014-09-26 17:46
frames 24.833 seconds 301.49 fps ( 3.32 ms/f) 22.352 fps variability getting it higher now. 1024x768 all low / disabled / multicore on edit: same ingame settings still that i had on #266
2014-09-26 18:18
btw, unparking cores doesn't have effect in my fps.
2014-09-26 18:41
hello, in last week im tested csgo first time, and test on basically old computer on three windows(yes i reinstaled windowses specially to test my csgo in each one) pc: intel dual core 2.33ghz E6550 nvidia geforce 8600GTS 265mb 4gb ram (no clocked, i dont know how, but want to do something with it) first i get win8.1 x64 - with standart(except vsynf off) setings what csgo makes for my pc(1600x900 16:9 middle bla bla) i get on respawn 30-40fps with 4 bots around me(at this time i dont know about this method) when i find this one, i make it till ~83-85fps in test3. record 90fps with 640xXXX second i go for XP x86 with std setting i get ~60-65fps in test3. with maked all setings for better fps i get till 85fps in test3(it was with mat_queue_mode 1 idk why) and now i make windows7 x64, with standart setings i make same ~60-65fps in test3, after make ingame video setings, i make till 83-85fps, but when i put commands in launcher "-high -threads 2 -preload -processheap +mat_vignette_enable 0 mat_queue_mode 2 tickrate 128" something make dramatically up my fps to 98-103fps!!! in win7 i find better is queuemode2. (for me) im tired from all this testing, so i dont wanna find what command exactly make my fps jump now. all test maked in 1024x768 4:3 on win8 & xp, i has very, very small difference what i can get with launch commands. (idk why) cpu now in this win7 is not tryed to unpark yet, but after few minutes will test to do that, and make some windows performance things. and what i forget, in win8&xp when i get smaller fps(83-85 in test3) i get ~4fps variability, but now in win7 when i get ~100fps in test3, i get something about ~10fps variability, why that? how much i remember(i tested many "high fps cfg") some one is given me 1-4fps boost. but now i cant find who whas it. maybe there is some commands ingame, that can be usable by client? (that can take off, bullets, fire from weapons, fog or something like that???) p.s sorry for my english. will be updated.
2014-10-02 22:11
i7-4770@3.6GHz 7950@1050/1500MHz | 50% Power Limit DDR3@1866MHz CL9-11-9-27 Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Catalyst 14.9 Lowest settings @ 1024x768 (no AA, 8xEQ MSAA and 4xEQ SSAA all have zero impact on framerate) Best out of 3 results: 7487 frames 22.441 seconds 333.63fps (3.00 ms/f) 32.517 fps variability I have no idea why the fps variability is that high.
2014-10-11 00:46
Just did a fresh install of Windows 7 and it helped gain a few frames. Same settings as above, only with the Catalyst 14.9.1 beta and Windows 7 instead of 8. Best out of 3 results: 7487 frames 21.681 seconds 345.32 fps (2.90 ms/f) 29.839 fps variability I'm still waiting for confirmation on fragdinho's result, but so far this is the highest 1024x768 result I've seen compared to the ones posted here with the fps_test3 demo.
2014-10-13 01:15
OC your cpu man, 4.2+ should be no problem Show us results
2014-10-13 01:30
It's a 4770, not 4770k, I can't overclock it because the multiplier is locked to 36. I did manage to get it to 38 with a previous BIOS version, but that's the absolute maximum it goes to.
2014-10-13 10:19
Didnt you try blck also?
2014-10-13 11:55
You can't overclock the BCLK that much, only a few Hz, and even then it's not advisable to do so.
2014-10-13 12:52
Wow, I just flashed back to the BIOS version that lets me OC the CPU to the turbo maximum no questions asked, and pushed the BCLK to 102, for a total frequency of 3875MHz (I'm using the Xeon version of the 4770, which allows a maximum multiplier of 38 instead of 39) and the difference is far greater than I expected. I also enabled HT and changed Window's appearance to best performance, not sure if that did anything though. And funny enough now there's 15-20 frames of difference between 4xEQ SSAA and no AA on this particular test. Best out of 3 results: 7487 frames 18.660 seconds 401.24 fps (2.49 ms/f) 38.493 fps variability So I guess that officially makes that one the best 1024x768 result that has been posted here for the fps_test3 demo. I'm happy. :-)
2014-10-14 01:25
Just did 3 more tests: 405, 400, 402. Just checking that it's 400fps stable, and it is. New highest result: 7487 frames 18.458 seconds 405.62 fps (2.47 ms/f) 38.219 fps variability This time I took a SS as proof: oi57.tinypic.com/259xqq9.jpg
2014-10-15 03:50
I have no idea why the fps variability is that high. Check without AA & AF, I think variability is all about your stable CPU frequency during test. Lock it and then check the result.
2014-10-13 13:09
Nah, sadly it makes no difference. My CPU frequency is stable as well.
2014-10-13 14:53
What about power saving modes, check with all?
2014-10-13 14:55
I have all the power saving stuff disabled.
2014-10-14 04:55
I thought about Windows power saving plans, best performance etc. try them all.
2014-10-14 12:29
I use Samsung's High Performance power plan.
2014-10-14 13:04
Test with others.
2014-10-14 13:05
I don't see the point?
2014-10-14 13:15
AMD FX-6300 @ multiple clocks Sapphire Radeon R9 270X Toxic (14.9 WHQL) 2x4GB Kingston XMS DDR3-1600 Win7 Ultimate 64bit Launch: -novid -console -language pirate -nojoy -noaafonts -nod3d9ex Graphics: 1440x1080 (4:3), all on low, anisotropic 16, no AA, multicore rendering on 3.5GHz - 185.0fps 16.3 fps variability 4.0GHz - 208.8fps 17.5 fps variability - +14.29% clock - +12.86% avg. fps 4.2GHz - 219.6fps 17.2 fps variability - +20% clock - +18.70% avg. fps Test were done with all energy saving options in BIOS and Turbocore disabled. I might try some testing with OC'ing memory/NB if it increases performance a bit. CPU OC was done with multiplier increase and slight Vcore decrease.
2014-10-12 20:20
CSGO responds nicely to a higher CPU NB clock, instead of 2.6GHz HT/2.0GHz NB I'm running both at 2.4GHz now, which results in 225.5fps 16.9fps variability @4.2GHz
2014-10-13 02:31
Tested with low settings and same CPU OC on 1024x768, the fps didn't really change compared to 1440x1080. 225.9fps 17.0 fps variability
2014-10-14 23:09
You should do also test with 1024x768 res and low settings.
2014-10-13 13:05
Will do so tonight.
2014-10-14 19:46
I think I may have some trouble with your guide. Here are my results : 7487 frames 25.495 seconds 293.66 fps ( 3.41 ms/f) 28.507 fps variability |||| 1920*1080 medium/high 7487 frames 25.517 seconds 293.42 fps ( 3.41 ms/f) 27.776 fps variability |||| 1920*1080 low 7487 frames 24.389 seconds 306.98 fps ( 3.26 ms/f) 27.768 fps variability |||| 1024*768 low
2014-10-13 02:16
That's just because of poor CPU usage by the Source engine, which also limits the amount of frames your GPU is capable of rendering.
2014-10-13 10:28
7487 frames 24.389 seconds 306.98 fps ( 3.26 ms/f) 27.768 fps variability |||| 1024*768 low Now you can test your fps change after new update or changes in pc (drivers etc.).
2014-10-13 13:10
7487 frames 30.911 seconds 242.21 fps ( 4.13 ms/f) 18.077 fps variability AMD FX-8150 @ 4456 MHz (oc 27%) Sapphire Radeon 7850 1435 Mhz/1035 MHz(memory/gpu) (oc 20%) 2x4Gb Corsair Vengeance LP CML8GX3M2A1866C9 @ 1932 MHz NB freq 2277Mhz HyperTransport 2070 MHz Win8.1 VideoDriver catalyst 14.9.1 Launch: -lv -novid +exec autoexec -freq 77 -processheap -high -exthreats 4 -threats 8 -forcepreload Graphics: 1440x900 (16:10), all on low only 4xAA and multicore rendering on
2014-10-13 10:53
You should do also test with 1024x768 res and low settings.
2014-10-13 13:06
7487 frames 29.246 seconds 256.00 fps ( 3.91 ms/f) 15.884 fps variability same settings but nb freq 2277Mhz to 2484Mhz with 1024x768 res and all low. Thank you for this quick benchmark very useful thing <3. btw gpu overclock by 20-30 % gives me 3-5 more fps(so its pretty useless) but overclocking PCI-Express from 100(def) to 120 gives me 10-11 fps
2014-10-14 00:02
testing launch options: -lv - nothing -processheap - nothing -high - nothing -forcepreload - nothing -threats 8 - +10 fps -exthreats 4 + -threats 8 - +13 fps tomorrow i will test RadeonPro all video options
2014-10-14 00:28
-threats? It's -threads :) and from where you got this -extreats command? I think it's not working in CS:GO.
2014-10-14 12:39
omg dat fail :D ofc -threa[BOLD]ts is BS but fps is increased lol
2014-10-14 19:32
3-5 fps in this benchmark is not that bad because it's a really demanding benchmark, in normal game it can be 13-15 fps.
2014-10-14 12:33
I'd be careful with PCIe overclocking, since the chipset uses PCIe for SATA too it may result in data getting corrupted on your HDD.
2014-10-14 19:46
CS:GO update for 10/10/2014 Official NVIDIA 344.11 WHQL Display Driver (9/18/14) fps_test3 on 1024x768 + low settings BEFORE - with old GPU GTX 560 Ti 7487 frames 25.527 seconds 293.30 fps ( 3.41 ms/f) 20.204 fps variability AFTER - with new GPU GTX 660 Ti 7487 frames 25.162 seconds 297.55 fps ( 3.36 ms/f) 21.749 fps variability
2014-10-13 13:21
Better one. AFTER - with new GPU GTX 660 Ti 7487 frames 24.862 seconds 301.14 fps ( 3.32 ms/f) 21.328 fps variability
2014-10-13 13:36
#298
 | 
United States sanders2s 
just shows how cpu heavy csgo is xD i had same fps with 550 ti as i do currently with my 660 ti. 8320 @ 4.7 ghz on water. i get 400ish in 5v5
2014-10-13 15:01
Yeah that's true and I'm always writing that. Btw. I changed GPU only because of other games.
2014-10-13 15:04
#300
 | 
United States sanders2s 
660 ti good if u wanted to stream without an fps hit. obs select nvenc codec and BAM! using the onboard h264 encoder that is used for shadowplay. kepler and maxwell both support this.
2014-10-13 15:49
With my gpu it's possible too? because I have access to ShadowPlay etc.
2014-10-14 12:40
#336
 | 
United States sanders2s 
yea if u have a kepler / maxwell gpu ( 650 ti and up. 660 at least i would do.
2014-10-15 21:08
It's not that it's CPU heavy, it's simply CPU inefficient (the Source engine, not just GO).
2014-10-13 17:14
Yes.
2014-10-14 12:29
7487 frames 22.952 seconds 326.20 fps ( 3.07 ms/f) 24.170 fps variability timedemo 3 1024x768 all low/disabled, multicore enabled i5-760 + gtx 660ti
2014-10-14 09:38
7487 frames 22.452 seconds 333.47 fps ( 3.00 ms/f) 23.546 fps variability
2014-10-14 09:43
Yeah and now wait for new updates (game or drivers) and then test it again so you can check changes in fps.
2014-10-14 12:31
Getting i7-4770k soon, lets see the fps with it xD
2014-10-19 05:42
7487 frames 19.776 seconds 378.60 fps ( 2.64 ms/f) 32.706 fps variability with 4770k (4.3ghz)
2014-10-28 01:39
so maximum what i can get from my pc is: 7487 frames 72.303 seconds 103.55 fps ( 9.66 ms/f) 10.755 fps variability (1024x768 in test3! in MM 5x5 i have ~80-180, lower in respawn with ppl around, higher when watch in sky) dual core E6550 2.33GHz nvidia geforce 8600GTS 4gb ram so maybe anyone have some idea what i can do, to get little bit more fps without any damage to my pc?! if i put in my pc where is dual core 2.3ghz little bit better video card , i will get more FPS? whats your opinion???
2014-10-14 19:21
In your case better cpu or gpu will be a waste of money, bottleneck all the way. Collect for i5-3470 and gtx 560 ti.
2014-10-14 19:26
Yeah, there will be a bottleneck both ways, CPU or GPU, so you need to upgrade both. OC'd last gen C2Q and any mid-range GPU will help a lot.
2014-10-14 21:08
u think put it in my mainboard new cpu and gpu, or simple buy new pc? idk, what is best CPU what i can put it in this mainboard... cpu-upgrade.com/mb-Gigabyte/GA-P35-S3G.h.. maybe u, or anybody else can say???
2014-10-14 22:09
if i change my CPU from E6550(daulcore) 2.33 to Q6600(quadcore) 2.40, i will not get better fps??? like sample in test3, i cannot get from it till ~150fps?
2014-10-14 23:18
Yes, but 775 is pretty obsolete. Unless you can OC that Quad pretty high I wouldn't bother if I were you. It will be much better if you switch to SB/IB/Haswell, even if you get one of the cheaper CPU's like a Pentium.
2014-10-15 00:40
Why would you recommend starting the game with the "-language english" parameter, how could it possibly affect the performance?
2014-10-14 19:44
These are only my launch options you can use what you want.
2014-10-14 23:15
Well, this is what it says right there: "Game settings for tests (use them)" Didn't make sense much at all, and that's why I posted that.
2014-10-15 00:08
I changed launch options so there is only -novid, right now it should be clear.
2014-10-16 09:13
294.73 fps i5 4690K @ 3.9 ghz MSI Z97 GAMING 3 8GB RAM 1333 MHZ SSD CRUCIAL MX100 256 GB ASUS EAH6850 DIRECTCU 1GB GDDR5
2014-10-15 01:42
after buying a new mobo + cpu, +100 fps. i had a AMD phenom II x6 1055t, i had 180 fps on this test.
2014-10-15 11:15
So it was helpful for you?
2014-10-16 09:14
I get almoust 5% better FPS, when simple overclock my CPU dualcore 2.33 to 2.8 with ONLY change bus speed from 333 to 400. (its from 104 to 110fps in test3) so Im with every day trying to get better, and better my old pc, to get playable csgo. now need to do something with my GPU, any suggestions?
2014-10-16 14:50
CS:GO update for 22/10/2014 Official NVIDIA 344.48 WHQL Display Driver (22/10/14) BEFORE 7487 frames 24.862 seconds 301.14 fps ( 3.32 ms/f) 21.328 fps variability AFTER 7487 frames 24.940 seconds 300.20 fps ( 3.33 ms/f) 20.983 fps variability So it seems no difference at all after new game and gpu drivers update.
2014-10-23 18:27
after last update my cpu use only 1 core. so max result ~210 fps(before 256). and looks like i am not alone this that problem. ppl who have amd CPUs have fps drops after last update. is valve specifically degrade performance for amd CPUs users?
2014-11-06 02:06
4770k @ 4.1GHz R9 290x 8GB DDR3 1600MHz CL9 Windows 7 64bit same fps with 1024x768 / 1920x1080 7487 frames 17.804 seconds 420.51 fps ( 2.38 ms/f) 33.750 fps variability
2014-11-09 16:21
CS:GO update for 12/11/2014 Official NVIDIA 344.65 WHQL Display Driver (10/11/14) BEFORE 7487 frames 24.940 seconds 300.20 fps ( 3.33 ms/f) 20.983 fps variability AFTER 7487 frames 24.732 seconds 302.72 fps ( 3.30 ms/f) 22.011 fps variability So it seems no difference at all after new game update and gpu drivers.
2014-11-12 12:14
#349
World p1o 
nice
2014-11-12 12:25
7487 frames 26.597 seconds 281.50 fps ( 3.55 ms/f) 21.810 fps variability NVIDIA 344.65 ASROCK H77M- 1.60bios i5 3570 stock EVGA GTX560 SUPERCLOCKED 2x2GB CORSAIR DOMINATOR 1800MHZ CL8 (1.5V in bios, 1333mhz CL9) CORSAIR TX750v2
2014-11-20 13:43
with HT -threads 8 7487 frames 23.691 seconds 316.03 fps ( 3.16 ms/f) 31.194 fps variability with HT -threads 4 7487 frames 22.367 seconds 334.73 fps ( 2.99 ms/f) 32.138 fps variability -nod3d9ex +mat_queue_mode 2 +mat_vignette_enable 0 7487 frames 22.404 seconds 334.18 fps ( 2.99 ms/f) 28.068 fps variability -nod3d9ex 7487 frames 22.560 seconds 331.88 fps ( 3.01 ms/f) 30.114 fps variability +mat_queue_mode 2 7487 frames 21.950 seconds 341.10 fps ( 2.93 ms/f) 33.224 fps variability +mat_queue_mode 2 -threads 8 7487 frames 22.569 seconds 331.74 fps ( 3.01 ms/f) 32.357 fps variability ASRock Z77 Extreme4 i7-4770k @ 4.6GHz GTX 770 OC GSkill RipJaws 2x4GB 1866 Will try more testing regarding my OC
2014-11-25 02:45
CS:GO update for 11/12/2014 Official NVIDIA 344.75 WHQL Display Driver (18/11/14) BEFORE 7487 frames 24.940 seconds 300.20 fps ( 3.33 ms/f) 20.983 fps variability AFTER 7487 frames 25.145 seconds 297.75 fps ( 3.36 ms/f) 20.150 fps variability So it seems no difference at all after new game update and gpu drivers.
2014-12-11 21:28
Launch options: -console -high -novid -mat_vignette_enable 0 -mat_queue_mode 2 7487 frames 24.273 seconds 308.45 fps ( 3.24 ms/f) 27.196 fps variability All topped (16xQ CSAA or 8xMSAA seems to make little difference if at all ) 1920x1080 7487 frames 19.681 seconds 380.41 fps ( 2.63 ms/f) 31.717 fps variability All low 1024x768 CPU bottlenecks me but I don't like going for higher clocks from neat current temps. :P ( Profile Specs )
2014-12-17 00:41
thanks can you check for my pc? i5-4670K gtx 580
2014-12-17 00:53
#359
 | 
Poland sajlent 
yyy you need to do it by yourself lol
2014-12-21 05:18
#356
 | 
Poland sajlent 
OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: AMD FX-6300 @ 4.6 GHz GPU: Gigabyte 460 SE RAM: Crucial 2x4GB 1866MHz CL9 1024x720 stretched, -threads 4 7487 frames 33.504 seconds 223.46 fps ( 4.48 ms/f) 20.424 fps variability 1280x960 stretched, -threads 4 7487 frames 34.241 seconds 218.65 fps ( 4.57 ms/f) 22.046 fps variability 1280x960 stretched, -threads 6, all low, 2xMSAA, aniso 2X 7487 frames 32.410 seconds 231.01 fps ( 4.33 ms/f) 23.278 fps variability
2014-12-21 02:04
#358
 | 
Poland sajlent 
1280x960 stretched, -threads 6, all low, 4xMSAA, aniso 4X, mat_queue_mode 2 (-1 before) 7487 frames 32.036 seconds 234.71 fps ( 4.28 ms/f) 22.522 fps variability
2014-12-21 02:15
i5-2500K @ 3,3Ghz GTX 680 Same settings as OP: 7487 frames 38.866 seconds 192.64 fps ( 5.19 ms/f) 9.769 fps variability I have a big issue with FPS, if someone can help me...
2014-12-27 21:16
#364
Russia zRo 
fan/cooling issues? temperature @cpu,gpu? nVidia drivers? ddr? windows score?
2015-01-05 17:46
#363
Russia zRo 
micronn settings: OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: Intel i5-2500 @ 3.3Ghz GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 560Ti (drivers 331.58 - old!) RAM: Hynix 2x4GB 1333MHz HDD: Seagate ST1000DM003 1Tb 7200rpm 7487 frames 30.186 seconds 248.03 fps ( 4.03 ms/f) 18.753 fps variability
2015-01-05 17:45
#365
Russia zRo 
after updating nVidia drivers to 347.09 7487 frames 28.757 seconds 260.35 fps ( 3.84 ms/f) 20.509 fps variability
2015-01-05 18:08
7487 frames 29.011 seconds 258.08 fps ( 3.87 ms/f) 22.207 fps variability OS: Windows 7 X64 CPU Intel i7-2600 @ 3.4GHz GPU: AMD Radeon HD 6800 RAM: 6GB Ram Launch options; -processheap -novid -nojoy -noforcemparms -noforcemaccel -high -tickrate 128 -threads 4 -nod3d9ex -noaafonts -nojoy +mat_queue_mode 2 Ingame Video Settings; i.gyazo.com/679acf0750948ce6be0906b5c071.. 1024x768 (Black Bars) SweetFX = fps loss too!
2015-01-06 06:18
#375
 | 
Poland sajlent 
OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: AMD FX-6300 @ 4.5 GHz GPU: ASUS GeForce GTX 660 RAM: Crucial 2x4GB 1866MHz CL9 7487 frames 29.751 seconds 251.66 fps ( 3.97 ms/f) 19.022 fps variability 1280x960 stretched, -threads 6, all low, 2xMSAA, aniso 2X
2015-02-02 19:00
OS: Windows 7 x64 CPU: i3 4160@ 3.6 GHz GPU: ASUS GeForce GTX 560Ti RAM: Crucial sport 4GB 1600MHz CL9 Resolution: 1920x1080 FPS : 228.85
2015-02-14 15:31
Gorgeous theme! As soon as I'll be home, will publish the results. In advance I say that for 3 years of wokr with the CS:GO, I found some regularity influence of various factors on the operation of the game. 1. Owners of processors i7 does not make sense to write "-threads 8" if they have 4 cores with hyperthreading (not sure about i7 with 6 cores and whether "-threads 6") 2. Principle fps in this game depends entirely on the CPU, for example 10-15 fps for 100Mhz at the quad core processors. 3. All graphics settings of CS:GO is practically have no influence on the number of fps (+15/30 FPS from highest to lowest settings) if you have normal gpu (eg GTX460 and higher, including some versions of GTX2## series, except as GTX660 - it was too much impaired). 4. If you do not have a good gpu, you should disable everything related to its load, as otherwise cpu will perform it job, namely the shadows, smoke (can not be disabled XD ), detail textures, shaders, visual effects, antialiasing. Anisotropic filtration does not affect to performance at this time. And more - If you do not work hard to carry out an experiment games without graphics processors second generation and above who have the opportunity. Also I like to measure fps per burrito/man. One person on the server - minus 10/15 fps = 10 person minus 100/150 and more... And sorry for my google's english.
2015-03-04 00:02
Ok. I've done fps_test3. And... All tests was made without VSync. 1024*768 (Very Low,No MSAA) - 7487 frames 22.682 seconds 330.09 fps ( 3.03 ms/f) 23.359 fps variability 1024*768 (Very Low,Full Shadows,No MSAA) - 7487 frames 24.679 seconds 303.38 fps ( 3.30 ms/f) 19.790 fps variability 1920*1080 (Very High,No MSAA) - 7487 frames 27.080 seconds 276.47 fps ( 3.62 ms/f) 19.344 fps variability Over test! 1920*1080 (Very High,8xMSAA) - 7487 frames 27.084 seconds 276.44 fps ( 3.62 ms/f) 20.327 fps variability (so like without MSAA) 4096*3072 Nvidia DSR (Very High,No MSAA) - 7487 frames 64.777 seconds 115.58 fps ( 8.65 ms/f) 8.517 fps variability 4096*3072 Nvidia DSR (Very High,8xMSAA) - 7487 frames 96.163 seconds 77.86 fps (12.84 ms/f) 3.876 fps variability Configuration of PC: i5-2500K (boosted for 4.3Ghz per core) DDR3-1866Mhz GTX970 chipset of motherboard - z68
2015-03-04 11:22
+1 good shit bro, ty
2015-11-28 08:08
PC: OS: Windows 7 64 bit CPU: i5 4670k @ 4.4GHz GPU: GTX 660 ti 1920x1080 shadows low texture detail high rest low and off 7487 frames 21.726 seconds 344.61 fps ( 2.90 ms/f) 27.644 fps variability
2015-03-27 22:10
Shadow on low will miss you lots and lots of enemies / game information.
2015-03-28 10:22
It's only for testing.
2015-08-14 21:51
OS: Windows 7 HP x64 CPU: AMD Phenom II x4 965 BE 3.4 GHz (Stock) GPU: Sapphire Radeon HD 6850 (Stock) RAM: Corsair Vengeance 8 GB DDR3 1333 MHz HDD: WD Black 500GB 7200 RPM 7487 frames 40.066 seconds 186.87 fps ( 5.35 ms/f) 12.846 fps variability Results after having run the benchmark once with the settings provided. I am also using the latest beta driver from AMD (15.3)
2015-03-29 00:52
Processor: i5-3350P CPU @ 3.10GHz 3.10Ghz Motherboard: MEDION - 7728 Memory: DDR3 8GB Storage: 2TB HDD Graphicscard: NVIDIA GeForce GT640 Monitor: Phillips - 227E4LH 60hz 800x600 - everything on low. 7487 frames 31.627 seconds 236.73 fps ( 4.22 ms/f) 18.900 fps variability
2015-04-08 11:36
Intel Core i7-2700K, 4433 MHz 8 GB WIndows 8.1 64 ASUS GTX 660 OC II SSD OCZ Vertex 3 1024x768 - everything on low. -threads 6 -nojoy -console -novid -freq 85 -tickrate 128 -refresh 85 7487 frames 22.050 seconds 339.55 fps ( 2.95 ms/f) 25.634 fps variability
2015-06-24 13:19
Intel Core i7-2700K, 4433 MHz 8 GB WIndows 8.1 64 ASUS GTX 660 OC II SSD OCZ Vertex 3 1024x768 - everything on low. -threads 6 -nojoy -console -novid -freq 85 -tickrate 128 -refresh 85 !!!! HPET OFF - TSC ON !!! 356 fps.
2015-07-18 10:56
#386
Spain nem 
TSC?
2015-08-05 14:23
try -threads 4
2015-08-28 21:26
...
2015-08-14 21:52
i7-930 OC 4GHz R9 280X OC Tri-X Vapor-X 10GB 1600MHz XMS3 RAM 7487 frames 23.157 seconds 323.32 fps ( 3.09 ms/f) 25.794 fps variability
2015-08-16 21:01
3570k@stock gtx560ti 8gb 2400mhz ram 7487 frames 24.790 seconds 302.02 fps ( 3.31 ms/f) 26.707 fps variability
2015-09-02 16:32
3570k@4.2Ghz gtx560ti 8gb 2400mhz ram 7487 frames 22.400 seconds 334.24 fps ( 2.99 ms/f) 26.982 fps variability
2015-09-10 10:33
3570k@4.4Ghz gtx560ti 8gb 2400mhz ram 7487 frames 21.636 seconds 346.04 fps ( 2.89 ms/f) 28.516 fps variability
2015-09-13 09:05
Intel Core i7-2700K, 4433 MHz 8 GB WIndows 10 64bit ASUS GTX 660 OC II SSD OCZ Vertex 3 1280x960 - everything on low. -threads 6 -nojoy -console -novid -freq 85 -tickrate 128 -refresh 85 , steam overlay off. steam runs as admin !!!! HPET OFF - TSC ON !!! 7487 frames 20.633 seconds 362.14 fps ( 2.77 ms/f) 27.532 fps variability
2015-10-22 17:29
net_raph 2 works too and cl_showfps 1
2015-11-28 08:13
is it normal I only get 252-254 fps with this: I5 4460 3.2GHz GTX 960 8GB RAM Launch Options: -freq 144 -novid +exec autoexec.cfg -console -tickrate 128 1024x768 Black Bars
2016-01-21 21:22
#410
 | 
Guatemala CRUZZy 
remove -tickrate 128
2016-02-11 10:57
why
2016-02-11 12:50
tickrate automatically changes itself depending of the tickrate of the server, so it isn't needed
2016-02-11 12:57
this is need for training with bots on 128 tick. When you make local server
2016-11-07 16:55
bump
2016-07-22 21:37
hello there. year ago when i get this new pc, i was tested fps with old version demo test, i was get around ~ 180fps, now after year, with same setting im getting in same old demo test ~ 140fps, what does that can say? in this last year some updates was made for csgo who drops fps fro everyone or simple with fresh windows i will get +40 fps like year ago? in the new test: some thing same 145fps! my pc: i5-6600 3.30GHz 8gb ram without video card - integrated sh*t. (ofc iv made allmoust everything what people can do with pc for most higher fps) all time was heard that CSGO has "cpu based game" little bit im agree with that, but not so much, because of story: one friends has good fps better than me, but they burned gpu card, then he get from another friend another no to good gpu like old one, and now he has only 100FPS. watched all comments dont see that anyone has i5-6600 CPU, anyone are informed how much fps you can get from this with normal GPU card?
2017-10-24 14:52
I made some testing today, since I had some severe fps drops recently (especially/mainly on new dust2) I wanted to compare old and new drivers: NVIDIA 375.xx 7487 frames 20.707 seconds 361.57 fps ( 2.77 ms/f) 28.362 fps variability 1024 very low bi 7487 frames 20.742 seconds 360.96 fps ( 2.77 ms/f) 25.090 fps variability 1024 low bi 7487 frames 20.675 seconds 362.12 fps ( 2.76 ms/f) 25.378 fps variability 1280 low tri 7487 frames 21.964 seconds 340.88 fps ( 2.93 ms/f) 24.646 fps variability WQHD --- HPET off 7487 frames 21.514 seconds 348.01 fps ( 2.87 ms/f) 28.662 fps variability WQHD 7487 frames 23.278 seconds 321.63 fps ( 3.11 ms/f) 23.569 fps variability WQHD MAX 7487 frames 20.524 seconds 364.80 fps ( 2.74 ms/f) 26.205 fps variability 1280 NVIDIA 390.xx 7487 frames 20.925 seconds 357.81 fps ( 2.79 ms/f) 27.228 fps variability 1024 very low bi 7487 frames 21.293 seconds 351.62 fps ( 2.84 ms/f) 25.594 fps variability 1280 low tri 7487 frames 22.018 seconds 340.04 fps ( 2.94 ms/f) 25.817 fps variability WQHD 7487 frames 24.599 seconds 304.36 fps ( 3.29 ms/f) 28.583 fps variability WHQD MAX my hardware: i5 4670k@4.3Ghz NVIDIA 1070 (Asus Dual OC) 8GB 1866Mhz & SSD
2018-02-12 15:01
I would love to have a similar demo for new dust2 to compare this
2018-02-12 15:06
7487 frames 22.198 seconds 337.28 fps ( 2.96 ms/f) 24.247 fps variability´ nvidia 391.35, win 10, 1280, all low, same setup. tests before were win 7, both 64bit. loss of 20-30 fps~
2018-04-15 18:05
Login or register to add your comment to the discussion.