Hello guys, im about to buy a 240hz monitor with a GPU and CPU that can support it and make me get 240 FPS consistantly with no drops.
my question is: do I need to cap my FPS to 300? like… I know that my monitor can show me 240 frames per second but people told me that 300 cap will make me get less input lag.
also, what is actually input lag?
please answer if you know, thanks 
Input lag is the amount of time it takes for your input (button press, mouse movement, click) to be registered in the game. For example, using a wireless controller will add input lag, because it has to be transmitted over wireless before the action can be carried out. Not much, but a bit.
300 is the maximum frames Overwatch can possibly display so I don’t really know what you are asking when you ask if you should “cap” it to that, but if you can run it at a stable 300FPS then do that. It’s important to cap it to the highest FPS you can get consistently, so it doesn’t mess up your aim if it jumps around a lot.
As for why higher FPS = less input lag, in simple terms, the more FPS you have - even if it’s above your monitor’s hz - means you will have a more updated image every frame, because it has more to choose from (300 per second, as opposed to 240 per second) and can choose the latest. This reduces input lag because your actions happen slightly sooner on your screen.
Ignore people who say the extra frames don’t matter, they do.
TL;DR yes leave it uncapped at 300FPS if you can keep up that framerate consistently
I’d recommend to set the framerate cap at the same value your refresh rate is.
The premise is, having your GPU produce more Frames than your monitor’s Refresh rate, doesnt provide any visual benefit whatsoever, but it does strain your GPU for no reason, which also increases power consumption.
In your case, i’d limit the Framerate @ 240 fps (if your monitor’s Refresh rate is also set @ 240 hz), while also making sure your game settings are such that allow you to maintain those 240 fps consistently.
Input lag between 240 fps VS 300 fps should be indistinguishable by the human eye.
Assuming you’re a human ofc ![:smiley:](https://d1kzxbyyijk9k6.cloudfront.net/en/overwatch/images/emoji/twitter/smiley.png?v=6" ":smiley:")
If you plan on using G-sync set fps cap to 237 otherwise 300. The difference in input delay is around 1ms so it is nothing you will notice anyway.
Capping FPS without G-sync is pointless.
You will still have very slight tearing and stutter. And your input delay will not be as good as with uncaped framrate.
This is a really bad idea.
In theory maybe this is correct but practically it is not true at all. For example I have a 60hz monitor and when my fps drops down to 80 there is a huge visual difference from teh normal 120. If you have ever played on a 60hz monitor you would be able to tell.
I capped at 120fps and noticed as soon as it went sub 100fps, very strange since my monitor is 60hz, I expected not to notice any change unless it was sub 60fps, but it wasn’t the case at all, could be to do with input lag so the game feels more precise at higher fps even when the screen doesn’t display it.
If you using gsync cap to like 235 to stay under 240hz so your gsync stays engaged with minimal input lag and no tearing, same if you use freesync on amd gpu, and if you use freesync on a nvidia gpu hope your panel is aproved, if have neither cap fps just below your minimum, if that is enough lower graphic settings, inconsistent fps can really mess with sensitivity wanna avoid that as much as possible.
I would simply stay at the highest FPS cap you can reach consistently.
G-sync, Freesync and so on is meant to fix screen tearing, but in duing so you get increased input lag.
I personally run with a 144Hz monitor and capped my fps at 160. Even though I most of the time have ~300 fps, in some extreme cases it will drop as low as 160. So in order to keep in consistent i have it capped.
I have never noticed any screen tearing, but using any sync option, no matter how optimized they are supposed to be, I do notice the input lag increase.
Input lag is the time it takes for any action you take, like a button press or mouse movement, to show up on your screen.
If you are used to playing with relatively high input lag and then switch to a setup with low input lag, the game will feel much more responsive.
Something tells me you only tried vsync and are so used to playing with tearing you dont think about it.
Capping your FPS will have a significantly higher inpact on input lag than enabling g-sync.
The problem with using G-sync is that you HAVE to cap the FPS in order for it to work and the lower the FPS the higher the input delay will be.
Here are somenumbers at 9:31
Im sure you can tell a difference betwen that 18.44 ms and 18.33 ms delay.
You forget dropped frames or hz, that means you will lose frames on your screen, which can be put up faster, if you have the excess FPS to put in on the screen. Not that it matters a lot, but that is generally, why you want quite a bit of FPS above your HZ for “safety”, but again this is basically as minute a difference in effect as 144 vs 240 hz monitors are to begin with.
I have tried Nvidia Fast sync as well.
While the input lag i noticed was much less than what V-sync gives, I could still feel it. On the other hand i have never noticed a visual difference with a sync option turned on, so in my case i don’t really see the reason. Maybe as he also shows, with higher hz & fps, tearing is simly less noticable.
If you do notice tears, i won’t discourage any1 from trying Freesync, G-sync and/or Fast Sync.
Yes, but the whole point of capping to the low end of my fluctuating fps is to keep input lag consistent, as fluctuating input lag can hurt aim more than slightly more input lag.
So the whole Idea would be to get the lowest consistent input lag you can with your system, while not noticing screen tearing.
Fair point about the consistency. Athough OP claim he has 240 FPS stable.
Capping the FPS without any sync will not get rid of tearing.
If the tearing does not bother you than good for you but its still there.
According to that video fast sync adds around 10ms.
That is something i can understand if you feel.
The 0.2ms G-sync adds when you compare with locked FPS vs locked FPS i honestly dont think anyone can feel.
I don’t believe I’ve seen stable 240 fps unless it’s capped on a computer that never drops below.
Usually computers would be running 300fps a lot of the time but can drop quite a bit in demanding scenarios, like if every1 chooses to use ult at the same time.
My own for example can sit around 300 in spawn and such, but when a teamfight starts, i get drops down to 160. Which causes rather big changes in input lag, hence why I’ve chosen to cap my fps to 160.
I didn’t claim that capping without sync would get rid of tearing or that tearing wasn’t there. I only said that to me it’s hardly noticeable (on a 144hz monitor at 160fps).
As my monitor doesn’t have G-sync I’ve not really been able to talk about how it feels using this. I can only talk from my experience with Fast sync.
If this 0.2ms is true, then i also doubt it’s noticeable.