Film runs at 24 frames per second because that is close to the absolute minimum that the human eye can detect "flutter" as the frames go by. Most people can live with 18. Needless to say, if you have 40 or more, it's silky smooth... Anything more than that and even those who are pros have a hard time detecting it. I know this for a fact as I used to (and still sometimes do) work with Imax making 3D Stereoscopic films... Imax 3D films run at 24 FPS per eye for a total of 48FPS.

 

If your rig can run FSX at anything higher than 18, consider yourself in the pink....

 

That said, the way that most people detect it (in FSX) is by seeing their FPS change based upon where they are and what they are doing...

you do realise that the human eye cant tell the difference on fps at anything above 30~. and your monitor cant display anything above its refresh rate with is probably set at 60. So the best thing to do is use the external fps limiter or even better if you have an nvidia card...use nvidia inspector to restrict the frame rate...makes for butter flying and no stutters for me

 

Not this old chestnut again.

 

The 24FPS 'human eye limit' is only applicable to motion film.

 

Without realistic motion blurring, video games and computer animations do not look as fluid as film, even with a higher frame rate. When a fast moving object is present on two consecutive frames, a gap between the images on the two frames contributes to a noticeable separation of the object and its after image in the eye. Motion blurring mitigates this effect, since it tends to reduce the image gap when the two frames are strung together The effect of motion blurring is essentially superimposing multiple images of the fast-moving object on a single frame. Motion blurring makes the motion more fluid to the human eye, even as the image of the object becomes blurry on each individual frame.

 

Games do not have natural motion blur between frames unlike film.

 

It has been shown that 24 FPS in a movie = an need of around 60FPS in a video game.

18 is about where I start seeing problems.

Not this old chestnut again.

 

The 24FPS 'human eye limit' is only applicable to motion film.

 

Without realistic motion blurring, video games and computer animations do not look as fluid as film, even with a higher frame rate. When a fast moving object is present on two consecutive frames, a gap between the images on the two frames contributes to a noticeable separation of the object and its after image in the eye. Motion blurring mitigates this effect, since it tends to reduce the image gap when the two frames are strung together The effect of motion blurring is essentially superimposing multiple images of the fast-moving object on a single frame. Motion blurring makes the motion more fluid to the human eye, even as the image of the object becomes blurry on each individual frame.

 

Games do not have natural motion blur between frames unlike film.

 

It has been shown that 24 FPS in a movie = an need of around 60FPS in a video game.

 

Thank You

 

Drives me crazy that after so many years and a billion forum post some people still by into this nonsense. Playing a video game at home using a monitor is not the same as sitting in a dark cinema watching a motion picture with human eyes or any other eyes.

 

Rant over

 

As for FSX anything under 30fps and I'm concerned, above and I'm happy with my human eyes. :LMAO:

Anything below 10-12 fps. Most of the time I just turn "fraps" off and feel much better.

10-15 is OK for me, and my FPS hardly ever drop below that.

I lock at 30 and don't like anything less. I agree though that smoothness is the key, not the number.

 

I only fly GA planes in FSX so those are usually easier on FPS. (I stick to FS9 for my heavy iron, detailed airports and traffic).