Depends on the game. If it’s not really demanding on reaction time, and the game is locked framerate I’m fine with 30, like Okami. However if the game is not locked FPS and I still can’t hit 60 FPS at least on my 1440p monitor I’d probably just play something else (because I know I could have better experience is I could run it).

However for shooter and reaction heavy games I always aim to max out my 144 Hz monitor, even 60 FPS can feel sluggish for me

I only recently experienced the luxury of higher frame rates.

I’ll put up with 30. I usually don’t notice it after a while, especially if it’s steady.

60 is preferred, and I always aim for performance if I can.

40-45.

There are a lot of games at 30 I’ve played through just fine, but for FPS games that extra 10-15 is about my minimum unless it’s on console with aim assist. I grew up playing Saints Row 2 at single-digit framerates, but I just can’t do that anymore.

25FPS and 480 pixels vertically is enough for me to get sucked in and forget the world around me.
Which is nice cause that way I can play open world RPGs like Kingdom Come on an old laptop.

I play a ton of simulation and strategy games (and some that I would hazard to classify as virtual railfanning/model railroading, like Railroads Online and Transport Fever 2) so I crank up the prettiness, download as much custom content as will load and enjoy the scenery at 20-40 FPS

25 and above with drops is fine for me. I grew up with an ati card on low end machine so if the stupid game runs im happy. Don’t understand the stupid " 4k 250hz perfect black oled or its shit for stupid people" attitude. As long as my 1080p doesn’t ghost its fine. T. Made art for many games some of you have played.

For me, it highly depends. Turn-based strategy games, I can easily play at a much lower framerate (30 is fine tbh though I always appreciate more). FPS-style games? 60 is a bare minimum, but 100+ is what I would consider to be enjoyable.

I try to get 60 FPS, 30 is fine and i could live with 20

10 if the alternative is lag spikes

Anything realtime needs to be at least 60 fps, the closer to my monitor 144Hz the better. Something like a city builder or turn based strategy or non-time-critical relaxed co-op stuff is fine to be 30+.

I’d never want to play any shooter at lower than 60, no RTS, no racing game and so on.

Around maybe 40 or so I start to notice it. 50 and higher I’m content. My monitor only supports 60 Hz. Around 20 or less I’m annoyed. It’s tolerable for turn based games though. Not enjoyable, just tolerable.

My target is 60, but depending on the game I find framerates down to 20 technically playable (if it’s stable), but I need a bit of time to get used to it.

For framerates above 60, however, I can’t really feel any difference so I usually set a cap at 60 to reduce heat and because the on board sound card is poorly isolated and picks up noise from the gpu.

Highly depends on the type of game. For First person shooters, 120+ fps is a must. I skipped the more recent CoDs because I couldn’t get them to run at that target consistently enough on my PC without turning them into blurry DLSS smear.

Racing games, where motion is typically always going in one direction with only smooth direction changes, a lower framerate is fine (like 60 to 80), although the added smoothness from high framerate is obviously still nice.

Slower paced or turn based games I’m fine with going as low as 40 FPS, as long as it’s consistent without drops and frame pacing issues.

30 is acceptable for most games but stuff where the gameplay is mainly the movement itself (platformer, racing, first person shooter) needs to hit 60. I could go lower than 30 for the visuals on a lot of games but that’s the threshold where the interface starts feeling unresponsive and that really gets to me.

For the longest time I thought 30fps is good, but now I always want 60 fps - 50 is my minimum. Id rather drop some shadows, clouds, lighting.

60 FPS, I can’t stand an unstable framerate, I prefer to lower quality/effects if I can’t get constant 60 FPS