@BIGDADDY, im at a point where im trying absolutly everything mate, i just want to enjoy skyrim like everyone else, i will defo try the ipresentinteval=2, but i do not really like 30fps but it depends if its as good as console then it would be ok. i guess, better than nothing, though i feel on my pc wich i payed alot of money for i should be able to play at 60, my machine isnt bad, the skipping for me i think is worse then others cuz others say it isnt game breaking when it is for me mate, im not like one of thses people who just like to moan and make a big deal out of things, if it was playable i wouldnt waste my time complaining ya know?

cpu:i5 2400 quad sandybridge
ram:8gb gskill
gpu:hd 6950 2gb
ssd

gonna give it a bash now

Just out of interest mate what settings/ini changes/graphics mods are you using?

im using alot of mods, and ini changes but ive tested, by uninstalling the game completly, doing fresh install, installing latest patch, start new game no mods fresh ini, and at 60 fps i get skip skip skip skip, noticed the most when looking down to pick up a herb. its crazy really, im sure i read you used to get it but scince the patch and making fresh ini it works proply now?

i presentinterval=2 doesnt seem to make it go at 30fps, ipresentinterval is suppose to be in the skyrim pref isnt it? dxtory shows it at 60fps

@morganb23, if I can ask without opening up an old wound lol, what has been your problems with skyrim from the beginning?

lol, its a very deep wound thats scarred me badly, basicly i cant play at 60 fps without it constantly skipping, known as the 64hz bug as explained here

http://www.gamesas.com/frameskipping-bug-video-t78605.html

it says that if you use the ifpsclamp=60 command in skyrim ini under general and my skipping problem goes away then that is what im experiencing, its a problem that people had with fallout and obvlivion and now some in skyrim, i personly think people are mistaking it with another thing, because the usualy fix of borderless window mode has no impact for me, and also with all the research ive done, no one back in the fallout and oblivion days said to use the borderless window mode to fix the 64hz bug, otherwise skyranger? think thats the mans name, wouldnt of bothered making that mod wich i assume wasnt easy at all. if something as simple as borderless window mode fixes it, wich to my knowledge just disables vsync anyway, so yeah mate its a sore subject for me, my first bethesda game on pc ruined by this skipping, and its not just a bit mate, seriouly im not the fussy type, its game breaking for sure

So in a nutshell, the 64hz bug is where even though you are monitoring your fps using fraps or DxTory and it appears you are getting 60fps you are still getting skips and stutters that are not being relfected in fraps or DxTory?

yeah pretty much mate, its god awfull, at the moment im settling for, ifpsclamp=50, and fps limiter 50, this makes sure it doesnt go over 50fps cuz it will then go into super fast speed, and my pc now must maintain 50 fps 100% of the time or it will go super slow motion, my pc does seem to be doing that, but as we both said earlier anything under 60 isnt really smooth cuz its being limited when the fps is suppose to be free not held back, but its playable at least, i think i prefer the 50fps locked, to the constant skipping, fallout new vegas and oblivion gamers were lucky to have skyranger who must of been very clever to fix it, as bethesda cant seem too, lol, figure that one out, and that was an even worse problem in them games a hell of alot of gamers had it, where as skyrim doesnt seem quite so many. i personly think its a tv issue, thats why some have and some dont, mines a cheap teknika tv.

this guy explains it best though, i really hoped bethesda could take a look at this, i know its sunday, so maybe monday ill post a thread with this link and pray they see the light, but id fully understand if they didnt, cuz at the end of the day if its only effecting a few people then for them its not worth the time and risk and effort

What is Frameskipping ( from tweakforce )


Note: There is another type of stuttering which can occur, often referred to as micro-stuttering, juddering or skipping. It usually appears as tiny skips, like missing frames in a movie. This is not the same as the normal type of stuttering mentioned above, it is not caused by loading new data, it appears to be an actual bug related to graphics synchronization in the Gamebryo engine, possibly made more noticeable by certain graphics drivers.e. To confirm the problem, use the iFPSClamp=60 setting as covered in the Advanced Tweaking section - if that removes the skipping then you are experiencing this issue. However changing iFPSClamp does not properly resolve this problem as it will then ruin your overall game speed at certain times. At the moment the only known solutions you can try are to firstly force enable VSync both in the game as well as in your graphics card's control panel - see the VSync option in the In-Game Settings section for instructions. If changing VSync doesn't work, try using a different version of your graphics driver. If that still doesn't work, there is a fix which some users claim will work as posted here. If none of these things work then you will have to wait for either a patch and/or a new graphics driver version to resolve the issue. It's an issue that's been present in the Gamebryo engine at least since Oblivion so it is not new, and so far there is no real solution.

I sent a pm to Gstaff about the problem a week or two ago, with links to some posts about the issue. He was kind enough to say he'd pass it on to the team to look into it

But like you I don't hold that Beth will fix it. They have other more important bugs to sort out first, and obviously they have to manage their time and effort from a business point of view.

I am hopeful though that if they can fix it they will

@morgan23,

- Whats your monitor max refresh rate?
- What refresh rate do you have it set to?
- can you set your monitors refresh rate to 60hz?
- Do you have v-sync on or off?
- What FPS do you typically get in outdoor/indoor environments?
- what percentage roughly do you get playing the game in a session where your FPS would be above 60fps?
- what exactly are you using to monitor your FPS while playing?
- whats the lowest FPS you get while playing Skyrim?

Lemme know these things if you can I might be able to help you.

XGLX
60HZ, i think max is 75 hz but only at a low rez, windows recomends 60hz at 1360x768
vsync on
i mainly get 60 fps but it does tend to drop in some locations, not much though, id say lowest is 50
i use dxtory, or afterburner to monitor
lowest 50 fps, but i dont tend to moniter the average, but i do monitor the lowest cuz of the ifpsclamp setting

@bigdaddy, yeah im hopefull too, they have been really great and i know if they could they would, i mean look over at rocksteady with batman arkham city on pc there support is a disgrace, i said countless times they should look over at how bethesda are doing it, and thats how it should be done, rocksteady keep you in the dark with no progress on anything

I know I thought the PC version of batman AC would be awesome, given all the pc specific features. Sadly post release support has been crap, only 2 patches since release, the last one fixed about 5 things.

I mean that the console versions are designed to run at 30 FPS or lower, few console games can operate at 60FPS due to how crap console hardware is. PC versions tend to be designed to run at 60FPS so when you run at a lower frame rate you are throwing everything out of wack like all the timing systems that are tied to the frame rate the game is meant to be running at and causing needless overhead.

Also very few games on a Xbox360 and PS3 will render at 1080P due to the consoles old hardware simply not being capable of performing well at such a high resolution (Gran Tourismo Aspec or whatever it was called, is probably the most noteworthy title to natively run at 1080p on a PS3). Both the Xbox360 and PS3 use a dedicated hardware chip that upscales 720p content to 1080i and 1080p just like what high definition TV's do for standard definition shows and what computer LCD displays do for resolutions other then there native resolution. The Wii U (Or whatever Nintendo decides to call it) will be the first major Home Console device that will be capable of rendering most games natively at 1080p without any upscaling being involved.

Now that you know the consoles aren't capable of rendering games at 1080p without significant performance problems (Unless you tone down the graphical eye candy a fair bit) and instead render them at 720p and then upscale them to 1080i/p, you can see why most multi-platform games have such terrible low resolution textures in the PC version (Companies like to do the least amount of work and decide to just re-use the console textures instead of re-optimizing the textures for high resolutions or recreating them at higher resolutions). You'll probably also find that the original textures for such games are also optimized for the consoles upscaling chip which very likely introduces its own unique problems/graphical anomalies that need to be worked around.

So true. I struggle to get 40fps with DX11 on Batman AC but with DX9 I get 60fps everywhere with a GTX 580. I get 60fps with Witcher 2 and Battlefield 3 but DX11 on Batman is horrendous, people are up in arms because DX11 should run BETTER than DX9 from what I understand.

This, and 30FPS just svcks in this day and age..

DX11 doesn't even work for me when signed into GFWL. I get literally like 1 fps. 40 odd fps when not signed in. DX9 I get 50-60 max settings 1080p.

yeah arkham city is a disgrace for people who played alot of money to play dx11, actualy want to make use of there high priced pc's, and its not often a game i really love has features that make use of my pc, only to find it broke, tbh thats faulse advertising, im not happy at all with arkham city, whats the point in playing dx9, may as well just play on my 360, thats not why i broguth batman for pc, it was for the dx11 tesselation and all that, people say it doesnt make much of a difference but to me i see a big difference, they use teselation everywhere around the city, most notibly the snow and ice, the thing with arkham city is i can get a constant 45-50 fps, i play at 1360x768, but as soon as i look at some random spot it drops to like 12-17 unplayable, but then goes rite back up, stays high most the time but the drops are just way to bad then theres the stutter,

yeah ill rephrase that, after the second patch i get pretty much 30 fps everywhere and whilst theres less 12-17 drops the overall performence is much worse, it now randomly reaches 50 fps, what a joke, any card with dx11 features should be able to run a game with dx11 as advertised, that means a hd5770 or 6770 should be able to play this game with dx11, makes me sick it really does. i know its totally of topic but ya know

DirectX 11 IS faster, however the performance benefits are largely offset by the increased features/details games/applications have access to and take advantage of. If you were to run a game built for both Direct 3D 9 and 11 and both utilized the same features but optimized for there respective version of DirectX then you should see that DirectX 11 performs better.

DX HR is the best game as far as using DX11 overall (Metro 2033 maybe an argument as well) and all the bells and whistles that come with it.

1. Xbox360 can play movies in 1080p and play games only 1080i - PS3 can do both in 1080p http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MakQpMSKP7I&feature=my_favorites&list=FLDgMavvhjqgKQCSSZLLCanA
2. Like post author i never found that answer in a whole internet no matter how hard i tried "WHY XBOX360 30FPS LOOKS SO MUCH BETTER than PC?" This question can be answered only by hardware developers and can't be found in forums ,believe me ! most people who trying to be smart and answer this question never had a Console and never saw how really smooth 30fps are on console . They can tell you what they read "somewhere" but the real answer will be unanswered because they don't know !
3. if your system can run the game which you are playing between 60-50fps at 1080 or 720p resolution Then ALWAYS,ALWAYS ! Set your monitors(desktop) resolution before entering the game to 1080p or 720p and set 50Hz NOT 60hz ! if in game your settings are set to 1080 or 720p at 60Hz than you have to change it to 50Hz(if game don't have Hz option than it will use your desktop Hz settings) the thing is you always will have smooth gameplay if your Hz and resolution will match each other outside the game and inside the game settings . For example Skyrim :
Test1 -set your monitor to 1080p or 720p and choose 60Hz in drivers then limit the game with FPS limiter to 50FPS you will see how bad and not smooth game is when you turning camera with your controller
Test2- set you monitor to 1080p or 720p and choose 50Hz in drivers then limit the game with FPS limiter to 50FPS(just to avoid skyrims frame skipping bug) you will see the difference how game is smooth when it matches in game and outside the game both resolution and Hz
I'm always using this 50Hz method if i can run the game between 60-50fps to avoid frame jumps to 60fps and frame drops to 50fps .The 50Hz will limit your frames to 50 and it's more than enough . if you can't keep up with 60 or 50fps and want to limit the game to 30fps then chose 60hz . 50Hz will be smoother only when you limiting to 25fps(which is unplayable)

I just have one word... WOW. After just watching the youtube link I really feel disappointed and betrayed by Microsoft. When I first got my 360 many years ago now I was only new to the HD era, and when I first began playing on HDTVs it was an immediate improvement in visual clarity. I didn't stop to think about if the image was true 1080p because I didn't know better back then. I wasn't aware of all the technical specifications that you should be paying attention to. Now presently, I'm quite aware of resolutions and refresh rates, FPS and so on, and just lately when I've been comparing the 360's 'so called' 1080p games to playing games on my PC at 1080p, I can definitely see a difference in clarity, which got me thinking maybe the 360 wasn't sending out a true 1080p image. This guy in the link nails it. Solid proof that Microsoft has been lying to you since day one. Yes it can produce a 1080p image, but only upscaled from a lower resolution source, either 720p or 1080i. Feel so betrayed.... A very good find, kudos to laimis911.

It is different, but not for reasons people would expect. TV's (the world of consoles) are different from monitors (the world of computers). TV's usually employ an advanced form of motion blur which is for the most part for more advanced than what graphics cards + gameing software can acjieve. the card itself could do it well but it still has to obey the rules of the gaming code and thus software is used to blur between refreshes on screen if required. TV's on the otherhand employ this technique purely through hardware only, and as we all know hardware is far superior to software.

A TV can handle this blurring, which makes refresh rates on screen look smoother, very well upto 120fps. At 60fps they do it much better. At 30fps and OMGOBBLYGOOK! It is the TV filling in gaps between frame refresh on TV's that makes it look smoother, the TV essentially overlays the frame before over the previous frame. Otherwise known as a form of Interlacing, however this is not true Interlacing as we know it because the two frames on screen at the same are 100% overlayed, not 1 pixel to the side of each other.

And this is why consoles can look smoother on TV, but realistically, get a semi-decent rig and play that at 30fps and you would never need the blurring of frame overlays... it would just look magnificent anyway. We are well on the way to having cards and gaming engines so efficient that we will no longer need to "fill in the gaps" between screen refreshes. One day we may all see proper 60fps, not what we have today where even on the greatest gaming rig and greatest monitor where realistically the best you will achieve is actually around 50fps despite FRAPS saying 200fps. Technology is catching up with marketting, finally.

Thats true for monitors (see my above post about what we really see from games on the screen regarding Frames) but not so for HDTV's, if the PC is connected to a 60FPS HDTV then the cards refresh rate should be set to that as well. It is important for me here to stress that if a HDTV claims to be above 60Hz refresh (even if claiming to be natively above 60Hz) then don't believe that. There is no HDTV on the market that is native above 60Hz, anything beyond that is TV-engine trickery. The correct thing to do with this is the turn on Gaming Mode if there is the option, gaming mode you will notice resets the TV to 60Hz even if the manufacturer claims upto 800Hz Hyper Engine. The TV is still a 60Hz TV set no matter what numbers they advertise. Always go Native, and that means locking your game to the HDTV/Monitors refresh rate but play it safe with 60fps on monitors even though they can go higher than HDTVs natively. Nobody needs more than 60fps (or 60Hz locked) considering real life is only 100Hz... that is the amount of images the best human brains can decode every second. Locking the game at 120fps is a waste of 20% efficiency that the card and the rest of the PC could be using elsewhere. The human brain runs at 100Hz, above that... pointless in games.

Ah my bad, the PS3 has no hardware upscaler, only the Xbox360 does. Anyways as I said most games will not be played at 1080p or 1080i, instead they will be upscaled from 720p (or lower) either by a dedicated hardware upscaler or a software upscaler to 1080i/1080p (Note I said games, not videos as video uses very few resources compared to interactive game environments.). I never said the consoles don't support 1080i or 1080p (I believe only the PS3 can run games at full HD?), I said that the majority of games are not rendered at those resolutions which is indeed true, very few games on the consoles will be natively rendered at such resolutions.

The crap hardware in the consoles is also why games originally developed for them, are often ported to PC with terrible textures because the consoles video cards have very limited video memory and companies are too lazy to remake/optimize the textures for PC.

With regards to the 120hz, 240hz, 480hz etc. (100hz, 200hz, 400hz, etc. for PAL regions) that TV's advertise, those are special interpolation modes where the TV interpolates/calculates and creates additional video frames based on source frames and insert them between source frames.

1, 1a, 2, 2a, 3, 3a, 4, 4a, 5, 5a, 6, 6a etc. is an example of a 120hz TV running with it's 120hz function enabled. every 2nd frame (Frames with an a) is generated/predicted/calculated by the TV and inserted between the source frames to create a smoother transition between source frames (A god send for the PAL N64). Essentially the TV predicts what the next video frame will be and creates what it thinks it will look like, it then inserts it between source frames, this process is very prone to errors which result in graphical artifacts.

Most TV's will let you choose what kind of situations the interpolation system will interact with, such as only working with slow panning camera scenes, moderate paced action or fast paced action. with the moderate and faced paced settings being more prone to introducing artifacts.

Interpolation for TV's was introduced to eliminate the visible judder/stutter you get with TV broadcasts (Is also beneficial to games that run at low FPS).

In my opinion, everything under 55fps is garbage on PC.

Im using a 27 full hd screen.
i need high fps, else [censored] gets horrible

60fps is fine. As is 55fps. And 24fps provide it's doesn't deviate above and below, meaning it is locked at that rate.