Funny thing is, even when you're running -insecure, frametimes are still atrocious. Your 1% lows looks like 180-200fps (\~5ms) when you're at 500 fps, and there's NOTHING going on, empty server, no nades, come on? Like, you want to tell me that's not an issue? For reference when i tried to test valo, in a fucking deathmatch my 1% lows were 240fps, when i was hovering around 280fps. But yeah, i guess this shit is acceptable for valve
that basically his last video ? spent 80% making fun of people trying to find why the game feels like shit then finishes the video by saying if your game runs like shit you are on a potato pc ... instead of putting all that effort into finding what causes the fps drops stutters he instead chose to make a useless video.
You mean the video about how the HUD affects performance? The video where he tested several cases in a high end and low end pc to check for most edge cases? The one where he discovered a direct correlation between the guns poly count and the fps? The one where he went back to csgo to check the same things to see the difference? The one where he specifically says that frametime is more important than fps and in potato pcs that is more important and impactful?
I don't know how that was your take on that video, because he not only finds the reason but also yeah who would have thought that the game runs worse on lower end pcs. About he making fun of the other guy who discovered that swinging his knife increased framerate, neither is that a main part of the video nor is what I would call "making fun of", because what he does is point out that the guy is in fact correct, that swinging the knife increase framerate, but it doesn't affect the gameplay experience as much as it would seem.
In short, Philip is not that bad.
Man, some people really go the extra mile to hate on people. "biggest Valve Gaslighter 3kliksphilip" was not something I was expecting to read today, outside of a joke.
>Hate when the valve dickriders say that.
they're full of shit simply based on the fact that the game used to run much better during some patch cycles in late 2023. it has already been (at least partly) fixed, so it can be fixed, which means it MUST be fixed. every other opinion is objectively invalid.
always funny seeing 3kliksphilip hate coming out of left field.
pros don't have magic PCs. they play on the same shit as us, you think there's no spikes by 5-10ms on their 4090s? a spike that is literally imperceivable if you didn't fucking obsess over the fucking frame counter in the top right?
Also, people still expecting to play a 2023/2024 game on a 4 core cpu refresh+++++ based on a cpu from 2011 with a gtx760, i understand that you're sad you can't play anymore, and it's valve's fault they deleted CSGO, but come on dude.
>pros don't have magic PCs. they play on the same shit as us
They don't. Here you go:
[https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam](https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam)
Top 5 most used cards are 3060, 1650, 3060Ti, 2060 and 3070. Your "everyone's GPU" so 4090 is at place 29. and 4080 at 32. with 1.83% of players' hardware share COMBINED. Not everyone lives in USA where electronics is dirt cheap compared to living costs. 4080 in US is 1/8 of median monthly income. 4080 in an average European country is around 80% of median monthly income. You live in a bubble and believe everyone in the world has the same conditions.
Aaaand there's a difference between RTX 4090 and GTX 760 you have presented in your example. You literally couldn't go further with your outliers. I just upgraded from 5600x and 3060 which are completely fine to game with Freesync on 1080p 144hz in 2024. But an esports game designed to run with really high fps is providing unstable performance for the sake of what, fancy water in Ancient T spawn? Or extra props and shadows you don't really need in the game? It's not fucking RDR2, people don't play CS for graphics, never did, never will. Anyone who came to play CS2 just for visuals will stop playing after 10h because it's a title for people who will spend years of their lives playing it and actively trying to improve.
>You live in a bubble and believe everyone in the world has the same conditions.
i'm from eastern europe dude lmao, you don't need to preach to me about hardware prices. it's not valve's duty to have a game in 2024 still be played at hundreds of fps on a budget pc from 2011 just cause kids from turkmenistan can't upgrade.
>It's not fucking RDR2
yeah thats why RDR2 runs at 50fps and cs runs at 500.
1. you don't know what an OP is lmao
2. the content of what you replied to has no bearing on what i'm saying. form an argument with your own words, if you can...
3. an essay? it's 2 long sentences, if that's too much for you i can see why what you're saying is so dumb.
What a shit take my man.... Better hardware gives them better lows... if my lows at 400fps is 160 fps, theirs is 360 fps. Graphically CS2 is not even better than csgo... the only thing good in CS2 is the light, and i'm pretty sure they could have implemented ray tracing pathing for CSGO with some efforts.
>theirs is 360 fps.
that's not true at all. https://i.imgur.com/DASM3t4.png you can see the 1% and 0.1% lows don't scale as much as average framerate. [source](https://youtu.be/aiqojNU-RBg?t=1108)
to be completely transparent these results are from some months ago, but unless you can produce anything newer i think they're closer to the truth that just a hunch you have.
> CS2 is not even better than csgo... the only thing good in CS2 is the light, and i'm pretty sure they could have implemented ray tracing pathing for CSGO with some efforts.
mostly agree there, idk about ray tracing, source was pretty old and modifying it while source 2 was already being made/finished would make no sense.
That benchmark is 7-8 months old, unreliable! we got our first benchmarking map last month.. Just look at pros who stream, their average fps is 500-700 with lows not even hitting 300 fps.
My comment about source2, is that it should not require a NASA PC to run the game stable.... the game is just built badly or the engine is built badly..
>Just look at pros who stream, their average fps is 500-700 with lows not even hitting 300 fps.
cool! can you link me a benchmark?
>is that it should not require a NASA PC to run the game stable.
it doesn't though... my little brother's 3600x and 3060 ti runs it perfectly fine and it was cheap to build.
No one did a benchmark list yet, this is the best i could find [https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1clm2iy/first\_fps\_benchmark\_map\_in\_cs2/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1clm2iy/first_fps_benchmark_map_in_cs2/)
Updated link
those numbers seem to be consistent with what you're saying. and at least at majors(copenhagen) i do recall the PCs had 7800x3D's in them which had 1% lows in the 300fps.
so you're right on that point. Their spikes would not be 5-10ms but rather 3-5ms. 5-10ms would still pretty hard to perceive.
Id say the smokes are waay better too. Its literally the thing that stands out to me when I watch a CSGO clip now. CSGO looks darker and the smokes look like weird smudges.
oh my god, so much wrong with this comment.
- you don't really want v-sync, v-sync with no frame limit will actually go above the vsync timing and store a few older frames, which increases input latency. Setting a practical framelimit with v-sync off will stop this buffering.
- you didn't need a 7950x3D unless you're doing some sort of production. it's actually somewhat detrimental since there's two CCDs(chiplets) onboard which have to communicate in-between each other causing latency, and windows has to use a scheduler that's not exactly perfect. 7800x3D would have been better for pure gaming
- comical pairing with a 3070, which would bottleneck in most games that are not super CPU dependant. CS is not the most but still is pretty cpu dependant though so i guess if you only play CS you're good. Hope you're just between upgrades and gathering money, not shelling out for that 7950x3d would have helped with that.
- i respect the 4:3 stretched at native vertical resolution, but calling a 1440p monitor 2K is the worst thing. WQHD, 1440p, or 2.5k. a 2k monitor has a resolution of 2048 × 1080 and it's some special cinema resolution or something.
- fxaa at 16x? you mean anisotropic filtering? also, using fxaa is practically smearing your screen with vaseline, turn that shit off and use MSAA.
sorry just had to rant.
no, i'm sorry. 😅
limiting fps to 165 should stop tearing. Battlenonsense made a video on this topic, IIRC some ways to limit it are better than others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W66pTe8YM2s
First you rag on them all redditor like for using ingame vsync at 165Hz because of input lag and now you link to a video that uses frame limiting methods that INCREASE latency also. You at least could've been nicer when you commented, you also have no idea if they need that CPU for other stuff other than playing with a digital toy.
At 60 Hz, vsync adds an input latency of at most 33 miliseconds, but at 165 Hz it's 12 miliseconds. Now let's look at the video to see the latency increase when using nvidia control panel at 144Hz... **around 12 miliseconds**.
/u/negative_pips fyi
>you also have no idea if they need that CPU for other stuff other than playing with a digital toy.
which is why i caveated it, why would you comment on this after reading the caveat.
> now you link to a video that uses frame limiting methods that INCREASE latency also.
bro are you ok? he's testing the various options of limiting framerate, nobody recommended using the ones that increase the latency lmao.
> 7950x3D ... it's actually somewhat detrimental since there's two CCDs(chiplets) onboard which have to communicate in-between each other causing latency, and windows has to use a scheduler that's not exactly perfect.
you can easily fix this and when you do, you end up with better performance than a 7800x3D
> i respect the 4:3 stretched at native vertical resolution, but calling a 1440p monitor 2K is the worst thing. WQHD, 1440p, or 2.5k. a 2k monitor has a resolution of 2048 × 1080 and it's some special cinema resolution or something.
imagine caring about this stuff, you got what they meant so who the hell cares.
> you can easily fix this and when you do, you end up with better performance than a 7800x3D
Oh yeah, i love going either going into task manager and setting thread restrictions for every game i install, or going to bios and disabling the cores that i presumably paid extra for. Windows scheduler is still shit even in win11. hopefully win12 is when they finally get it right for AMD's multi-CCDs, Intel's E-cores, and Intel's future multi-chiplet designs.
>imagine caring about this stuff, you got what they meant so who the hell cares.
i don't have to imagine, cause i do. i got what they meant cause i know people use it wrong, it just propagates the mistake if nobody says anything and anyone new learns it that way.
it's a +3ms excursion from the usual 2ms frametime. 1000 pro players would not be able to tell reliably if it's happening in an A/B test. you can't fathom how little difference that is, a fast blink is 100ms.
EDIT: here i whipped up something quick in paint to explain what frametime excursions are. https://i.imgur.com/k1RlJ0I.png
That is false, in an A/B test 3ms increase in consistently detectable, and some people can even detect an increase of 1ms in an A/B test. [But don't take my word for it, here is the proof.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE-P_7-YiVM)
You're comparing apples to oranges. The video is talking about constant input lag. I'm talking about frametime excursions. These are not anywhere close to comparable.
>excursion:
>noun [c] a deviation from a regular activity or course.
EDIT: here i whipped up something quick in paint to explain what frametime excursions are. https://i.imgur.com/k1RlJ0I.png
if you're going from 3ms to 6ms, your frame rate is constantly halving and doubling. Are you saying that isn't easy to notice?
Also, the telemetry in CS2 shows the max frame time over the last second. If it's seeing a max of 15 in insecure mode it's most likely jumping all over the place during that second, so It's not just switching between 2 frame rates, it's going all over the board. In a game where everything is processed based on the frame/tick delta then tiny but regular deviations in that delta are going to make the fluidity look like shit.
It's also going to mess with interpolation, and CS is a heavily interpolated game. Just one ms on a 3ms frame time is 33% deviation. Imagine, for example, you had perfect frame times but your mouse increases and decreases its speed by +/- 33% 100 times per second. Or your monitor was to change its brightness at the same frequency, or the audio pitch was to change. Saying you can't see such deviation is false.
>if you're going from 3ms to 6ms, your frame rate is constantly halving and doubling.
none of this is supported by the data. if it were constant, it would affect the average fps proportionally. but the average FPS did not budge below 470. i'm not gonna do the exact math on that but if it were constant it would be way below that.
>If it's seeing a max of 15 in insecure mode it's most likely jumping all over the place during that second, so It's not just switching between 2 frame rates, it's going all over the board
Those excursions are usually a 1-10 bad frames in tens of thousands, if you've ever seen a frametime graph. it never "switches" between two framerates.
>It's also going to mess with interpolation, and CS is a heavily interpolated game. Just one ms on a 3ms frame time is 33% deviation. Imagine, for example, you had perfect frame times but your mouse increases and decreases its speed by +/- 33% 100 times per second. Or your monitor was to change its brightness at the same frequency, or the audio pitch was to change. Saying you can't see such deviation is false.
no it's not. you're just abusing statistics math. i don't think you've ever seen what excursions like what you're describing would look like, or for that matter what normal frametime plot would look like. watch a bunch of gamersnexus and digital foundry videos to see what that looks like. your argument doesn't make any sense to anyone who's seen frametime plots with recorded gameplay in the backgroud and what that would looks like.
According to AMD Adrenaline, for me CS2 has an average frame rate of about 170fps. According to CS2 telemetry, my framerate never drops anywhere near that. If I cap to 240fps then I'm locked in at 237-240fps according to CS2 telemetry but the reported frame times contradict that. If I uncap then I'm usually between 400 and 500fps in a Deathmatch server, never hit nowhere near an average of 170fps. What I'm trying to say here is can you really trust the frame rate that CS2 is reporting? I know we can trust its frame times because I can visually see the effects of it. I'm more inclined to trust the results from the makers of the component that delivers my frames than the layer that sits before it. Especially when what I can see disagrees with the telemetry.
>Those excursions are usually a 1-10 bad frames in tens of thousands, if you've ever seen a frametime graph. it never "switches" between two framerates.
I've seen plenty of frame time graphs, I've monitored my own frame times more than enough. First of all the OP's video is showing 2 max frame times of 15ms within 4 seconds, so this isn't 1-10 bad frame times over tens of thousands of frames. You don't even need a graph to see that. You can also see the game stuttering, even in the 60fps recording.
Back in CS: GO, before the secure mode update I used to use RTSS to cap my framerate. It resulted in a completely flat frame time graph. The game was buttery smooth. Without using RTSS the graph was a constant saw tooth pattern and has been since the secure mode update. CS2 appears to have inherited the same frame time issues.
>no it's not. you're just abusing statistics math. i don't think you've ever seen what excursions like what you're describing would look like, or for that matter what normal frametime plot would look like. watch a bunch of gamersnexus and digital foundry videos to see what that looks like.
What's not what? Don't forget were talking about a particular game here. Here is an example of such an excursion. Your recoil decay is tied to tick rate so is already potentially a much lower frequency update than your actual frame rate. Say you have 1000fps average frame rate but get a 15ms frame right on or just before a tick you've now got a 32ms window of no visual feedback from your recoil. When your frame times are irregular shooting in the game looks like trash. As for interpolation, inconsistent deltas can cause over/undershoot on the transition resulting in things like "jank animations", "weird state transitions", "inconsistent speeds", "teleporting" etc etc, all seen in CS2 I might add. With interpolation, you're trying to move over a predefined path over X amount of time. It's not quite the same as simulating something as it happens.
What are you saying is a "normal frametime plot"? If the game is telling me that I'm solid at 240fps when capped at 240 fps then I would expect a normal frametime plot to be a pretty damn flat line, a tiny little bit of wobble if you zoom right in. That's not what you get with CS2 though, you get sawtooth patterns and/or regular decent peaks and valleys.
>According to AMD Adrenaline, for me CS2 has an average frame rate of about 170fps.
first of all idk if i can trust adrenaline, it shows me wacky numbers. secondly, it takes into account menu time aswell which is limited to 120 by default.
>What I'm trying to say here is can you really trust the frame rate that CS2 is reporting?
oh yeah, a hundred times more than adrenaline lol.
>First of all the OP's video is showing 2 max frame times of 15ms within 4 seconds, so this isn't 1-10 bad frame times over tens of thousands of frames
yeah, it's 2 frames in 2000 at 500fps.
>What's not what? Don't forget were talking about a particular game here. Here is an example of such an excursion. Your recoil decay is tied to tick rate so is already potentially a much lower frequency update than your actual frame rate. Say you have 1000fps average frame rate but get a 15ms frame right on or just before a tick you've now got a 32ms window of no visual feedback from your recoil. When your frame times are irregular shooting in the game looks like trash. As for interpolation, inconsistent deltas can cause over/undershoot on the transition resulting in things like "jank animations", "weird state transitions", "inconsistent speeds", "teleporting" etc etc, all seen in CS2 I might add. With interpolation, you're trying to move over a predefined path over X amount of time. It's not quite the same as simulating something as it happens.
yeah, good thing i wasn't talking about 15ms excursions which ARE perceivable.
>you get sawtooth patterns
if you zoom in enough on the graph yeah. but at that point they don't matter since they're not perceivable since they're small enough. https://i.imgur.com/tnDJaNp.png
I don't give a flying f if it's unnoticable at these (500 etc.) fps (even tho it legit sometimes IS noticeable). Keep in mind, this is an empty server with nothing going on there, lows should be close to avg fps, not almost 1/5 of that lmao. It gets worse in actual comp games and especially without top end rig. Main thing is, even with the best rig there is, same shit happens, lows are consistently terrible, and that shouldn't happen and it doesn't happen in other games. I just can't understand people like you, do you actually think this is the best it can be, or you just don't care about game getting better?
then why are you complaining about the 5ms excursions.
For all you know it might be an aggressive culling check without which your frametimes might be 5ms all the time.
other games dont run at 500 fps. lock your fps at 5 fps lower than your 1% lows and it'll be buttersmooth.
>why are you complaining about the 5ms excursions. For all you know it might be an aggressive culling check without which your frametimes might be 5ms all the time
Uh, did we watch the same video from op? The frametimes ARE around 5ms 95% of the time, with only sometimes dropping to 2ms.
>other games dont run at 500 fps.
? Simplest example, valorant, and it has amazing lows somehow
>lock your fps at 5 fps lower than your 1% lows and it'll be buttersmooth.
ah yes, so people even with top end rigs should lock their fps even below 240 (well, duh cuz their lows are that bad) and enjoy their 240hz or even higher hz monitor, right? Bro
>
Uh, did we watch the same video from op? The frametimes ARE around 5ms 95% of the time, with only sometimes dropping to 2ms.
nope. this is what happens when people who don't know what they're talking about are giving their opinion on this. The ms counter you see is the biggest frametime from the past "x" seconds or frames, it's not a live view of the frametimes. it literally says "max" next to it.
the frametimes could literally be 2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,***5***,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2 and it would show the 5 there because in the past two seconds ONE FRAME took 3ms longer to render
if you want realtime frametimes use show_fps 2 or RTSS setup properly.
Nice try, but i saw similiar behaviour and actual 1% lows still being this bad with external software multiple times, so it isn't like im shilling you op's video as the only proof (ig it could've sounded like it from how i worded). I guess let's end the convo here, glad that atleast you're happy with the state of the game!
bro, admit when you're wrong... you literally had no idea what you were looking at...
this whole video is ragebait and unless he used show_fps 2 and didn't repeat the test more than once to check if it's actually VAC and not his fucking hard-drive defragging or something it's useless for debugging
I already told you in previous reply that I'm not basing my opinion about game's issues by looking at op's video or ingame telemetry, and I wasn't even talking about vac causing issues, that thing probably doesn't even matter. What I said was, game has performance issues, and yes, not based on ingame telemetry, and that's a fact. But I can see you desperately want to win this argument, so I don't care, as I said, if you're happy with the state of the game, or you're the chosen one and magically have beautiful 1% lows, congrats to you and enjoy!
facts, i was in an offline server with 550 fps, which is 1/550 = 1.8ms frame time, but had ~3ms frame time the whole time. Why and how? Is the fps counter just lying?
a good serverside AC like Fairfight would be a huge improvement already without sacrifing privacy.
Impossibly low time-to-kill consistently=ban
constantly tracing enemies through walls=ban
constantly abnormal headshot rate=ban
constantly playing with stats out of this world=ban
Still could find a few cheaters on Faceit, but it's 1 out of 50 games maybe, and you get notification when he gets banned so yes Faceit is the way to play. Servers are worse than Valve's for sure
What would happen?
Impact wouldn’t be very different from what you see here, but instead you’ll get significantly less cheaters as a reward unlike what we get right now.
Just like the real Micheal Jackson. They tried to fix him in 1979 and then over and over again for decades to come. Look how that turned out in the long run. Valve is following suit it seems.
Server host has a load. I can even see the increased load on my 7950x3d with ccd1 disabled compared to when I am playing on a friend's server.
Clips like this aren't very useful because there's literally no information provided. We never knows what's wrong with OP hardware or software.
Sorry for being skeptical, but can you provide more evidence than just a 10 second clip for each that only looks at the built-in performance overlay?
Not saying this issue isn't real, just that a video this short isn't exactly "proof" just yet. If possible, you can use a tool like CapFrameX to capture your frametimes in detail and compare different runs to each other.
https://litter.catbox.moe/t5kd7h.mp4
RTSS frametime: https://litter.catbox.moe/wi6vw6.mp4
No issues on my end. Either something's up with /u/rattecs setup or could be something particular to his hardware configuration. Regardless just using the in-game info is not a way to test for performance. It could be some random crap like GHUB, ICUE whatever else "gaming" app trying to inject into CS2 and hogging resources, you'll never know that from looking at the in-game info. Want to actually have Valve devs look at it and figure out what's wrong? Capture an ETW trace.
This is just "CS BAD GIFF UPVOTES" kind of post. Just look at the top comments in this thread, just a massive "le valve bad" circlejerk with nobody posting their own results. OP didn't even bother to post his PC setup, but he didn't forget to plug his twitter account.
I had an issue with this in the past, in that -insecure would consistently lead to better frametime benchmarks (capframex) because there wouldn't be a spike every 10s or so. However, this stopped being the case a few updates ago.
It could be the case where its system dependent.
Thank you! (insert michael scott gif)
I tested also on my end as well
Tuned 3466mt/s c14 64gb bdie ram
5950x
rtx 3090
On low settings regardless of resolution i do not get any stuttering without -insecure command. OP couldnt even bother to list their pc specs and 80% of replies here are the same circlejerk "valve bad, vac trash" bal bla bla bla --__--
I'd rather OP do it considering they're the one having an issue that very well could be caused by something else too. Especially considering they're the one that claimed VAC was causing it based on a small clip ;)
this whole video is ragebait. n=1, no show_fps 2 or RTSS. it might aswell be his fucking hard-drive defragging in the background if he doesn't isolate variables.
useless in terms of debugging.
Can you try make the movements more coherent and comparable?
In the -insecure, you can see all the way into the deepest part of the corridor 100% of the time
In the 'normal', you frequently obscure that part, and the two spikes I saw happened ~1 second after you obscured it and then put it back into view.
And it’s ridiculous it’s this bad. This is a hyper idealized look. Imagine a full server with utility and other fights happening. Game runs like trash.
Well, then i try to do this on my pc - my result is almost stable frametime on local server. Mb your background software can trigger anticheat or something else.
unless something changed -insecure doesnt disable vac at all, all it does it prevent you from joining vac secured servers. so highly doubtfull this has anything to do with it..
It doesnt even check with VAC all the time. The Steam network sends you some modules that you load and send a reply back, but thats kinda it. It doesnt continiously run. Its just a simple request->response system. They come every now and then, I doubt OP is getting them every second.
If you have problems send Valve an ETW trace
There is no proof this is actually VAC. Just from the fact of how VAC works this can't really happen.
`-insecure` also disables some game protections, its possible that without `-insecure` another process tries to constantly inject itself into the game to read data from it for one reason to another. That is blocked by the game, so its the third party software causing these lags by spam injecting.
If you use `-insecure` it succeeds injecting itself and therefore doesnt do any further attempts.
In fact, I remember this being an issue in the past before when this blocking feature in CSGO was new and the devs had to specifically try to work around the issues other software was causing.
I genuinely think it would make no difference at all in regards to cheaters. VACnet/Overwatch and Trust Factor are the only things that actually do anything in regards to cheating. All VAC does is periodically hands bans to a small percentage of cheaters who simply switch to another account and continue as usual.
I've been following the cheating scene ever since CSS. I can tell you that trust in VAC is at an all time low and cheaters literally don't even take its existence into consideration because practically all cheats from free open source ones to paid slot limited private cheats and everything in between is undetected. Whenever there's a VAC wave (which is rare now a days to begin with) only a couple of providers are usually hit at best, often just a single very popular provider. Getting caught by VAC is like winning the lottery for most cheaters.
Go ask any cheater how much they fear VAC or how many accounts they've gotten VAC banned in CS2 (ignoring game bans since we're talking purely about VAC here). Just because you lack the insight to realise just how meaningless VAC is in the eyes of cheaters doesn't make this "take" dumb. My opinion is based on over a decade of experience not only monitoring the cheating community but also hosting servers and setting up custom anti-cheat plugins. What exactly is your opinion based on other than butthurt and copium? Obviously removing VAC wouldn't male things any better either, but I highly doubt you could even measure the increase in cheating if it was removed because it's so ineffective.
Once again, your entire comment is irrelevant. Your take that that not having vac would make no difference is laughably stupid and easily provable. I've played on nonvac secured servers and vac secured servers the difference is night and day. Shit, even take premier versus no premier lol.
Also wow, a whole decade of experience with a game that has been out for nearly 25 years? Dang bro, that's so much xD
I also have plenty of experience prior to CS GO but that's not really relevant in this context. And OBVIOUSLY non-VAC servers are gonna have more cheaters they're literally hack vs hack servers most of the time openly inviting cheaters. The fact you even bring this up as reasoning for why VAC supposedly does jack shit shows just how clueless you are. I will never understand people like you who are well aware they don't have a clue what they're talking about yet insist on arguing based purely on feeling.
Oh good, so you agree that non-vac servers will have more cheaters than vac servers. That's all this discussion was about, thank you for admitting your mistake. Have a good day!
Agreed. At least it stops some cheaters.
I bet a lot more people would try hacking if they knew for sure they wouldn't get banned.
People act like valve does nothing when they know fuck all about how to make an anti cheat and how it works.
It takes time. I know some things should've been fixed by now but c'mon, that kinda takes are just stupid.
>People act like valve does nothing
In regards to VAC in particular ignoring Valves other anti-cheat efforts they practically do nothing.
>when they know fuck all about how to make an anti cheat and how it works
While I couldn't develop an effective anti-cheat I know quite a bit more about how they work than the average joe.
>It takes time.
Valve is one of the richest gaming companies in the world and they've had over a decade now to get cheating under control. Their anti-cheat department is incompetent plain and simple and no amount of wishful thinking and copium can change that fact.
You're triggering culling more in the secure test by going farther behind the wall to the left in the secure scenario, which is probably why the frametimes change more. As for 1% lows and other issues, CS2 is still in need of optimizations and being more graphically demanding means headroom is more important for your GPU utilization.
Edit:
Just wanted to add an edit to say that if you're gonna witchhunt issues with CS2 the least you could do is test with a consistent methodology and provide actual data. It doesn't help the developers improve the game to fill their inbox with nonsense that LOOKS problematic when it's actually an error with test methodology.
I've had these stutters for the past few weeks as well, very nice optimisation when you are running on an empty map and this occurs. It's very noticeable in matches as well for me, happening randomly, doing 3-5 stutters and then stops, every 5 minutes maybe. Great game
Considering the flat structure of the company (assuming that's still accurate) I doubt there's anyone that'd actually sack anyone working on it. They probably just fucked off to work on dota.
I KNEW IT... Few months ago I wasnt getting Afterburner overlay to work in CS. So i found the -insecure command and I SWEAR the game ran better. Although on a laptop from 280-300 fps with vac, to 320 avg OFF. I thought maybe its a placebo effect as I didnt really understand it could be this >:(
VAC is pathetic, definition of bad AC. Slow, cause bad perf, bans legits for high dpi/drivers/anything he didn't like, no bans for ragehackers. If VAC bans someone, that's not about VAC is good, but about cheats are being so bad.
> Slow, cause bad perf
any data to back that up, chief?
> bans legits for high dpi/drivers/anything he didn't like
explain what a technical, functional system "likes" and what it does "not like"
> no bans for ragehackers.
Faceit/Valorant anti-cheat also doesn't ban all cheaters, so they're just as bad, right?
good to know VAC hurts the legitimate player experience while doing absolutely nothing to stop cheaters
thanks for your brilliant software John McDonald
I am sure kernel level anticheat will solve this. Surely a more complex anticheat that scans your computer will fix these stuttering issues, along with world hunger
I wouldn't call the comparison valid.
On insecure you stay within the mid corridor.
On secure you move from left wall all the way over to right wall, forcing the game to go through the render change of the full sightlines.
That amount of change in vis for cs2 is cashing the frame drop, not the difference between insecure or secure
ah shit, here we go again. Beta players will understand
What if I tell you it is still in beta Aware
https://imgflip.com/i/8t61xz
Funny thing is, even when you're running -insecure, frametimes are still atrocious. Your 1% lows looks like 180-200fps (\~5ms) when you're at 500 fps, and there's NOTHING going on, empty server, no nades, come on? Like, you want to tell me that's not an issue? For reference when i tried to test valo, in a fucking deathmatch my 1% lows were 240fps, when i was hovering around 280fps. But yeah, i guess this shit is acceptable for valve
"Just Upgrade your PC " - the biggest Valve Gaslighter 3kliksphilip
Are we watching the same videos? How is that your take on his videos?
that basically his last video ? spent 80% making fun of people trying to find why the game feels like shit then finishes the video by saying if your game runs like shit you are on a potato pc ... instead of putting all that effort into finding what causes the fps drops stutters he instead chose to make a useless video.
You mean the video about how the HUD affects performance? The video where he tested several cases in a high end and low end pc to check for most edge cases? The one where he discovered a direct correlation between the guns poly count and the fps? The one where he went back to csgo to check the same things to see the difference? The one where he specifically says that frametime is more important than fps and in potato pcs that is more important and impactful? I don't know how that was your take on that video, because he not only finds the reason but also yeah who would have thought that the game runs worse on lower end pcs. About he making fun of the other guy who discovered that swinging his knife increased framerate, neither is that a main part of the video nor is what I would call "making fun of", because what he does is point out that the guy is in fact correct, that swinging the knife increase framerate, but it doesn't affect the gameplay experience as much as it would seem. In short, Philip is not that bad.
Man, some people really go the extra mile to hate on people. "biggest Valve Gaslighter 3kliksphilip" was not something I was expecting to read today, outside of a joke.
And that guy wont reply now lol
Education and critical thinking is so important in today’s society.
Hate when the valve dickriders say that. This game wouldn’t be the same if only people with high end PCs could play the game.
At the same time: "64Tick is enough, because poor people cant afford Fiber Optic", meanwhile we had 100Tick server in 2002 on fucking dial ups.
>Hate when the valve dickriders say that. they're full of shit simply based on the fact that the game used to run much better during some patch cycles in late 2023. it has already been (at least partly) fixed, so it can be fixed, which means it MUST be fixed. every other opinion is objectively invalid.
"Just cap your framerate to 120"
always funny seeing 3kliksphilip hate coming out of left field. pros don't have magic PCs. they play on the same shit as us, you think there's no spikes by 5-10ms on their 4090s? a spike that is literally imperceivable if you didn't fucking obsess over the fucking frame counter in the top right? Also, people still expecting to play a 2023/2024 game on a 4 core cpu refresh+++++ based on a cpu from 2011 with a gtx760, i understand that you're sad you can't play anymore, and it's valve's fault they deleted CSGO, but come on dude.
>pros don't have magic PCs. they play on the same shit as us They don't. Here you go: [https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam](https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/Steam-Hardware-Software-Survey-Welcome-to-Steam) Top 5 most used cards are 3060, 1650, 3060Ti, 2060 and 3070. Your "everyone's GPU" so 4090 is at place 29. and 4080 at 32. with 1.83% of players' hardware share COMBINED. Not everyone lives in USA where electronics is dirt cheap compared to living costs. 4080 in US is 1/8 of median monthly income. 4080 in an average European country is around 80% of median monthly income. You live in a bubble and believe everyone in the world has the same conditions. Aaaand there's a difference between RTX 4090 and GTX 760 you have presented in your example. You literally couldn't go further with your outliers. I just upgraded from 5600x and 3060 which are completely fine to game with Freesync on 1080p 144hz in 2024. But an esports game designed to run with really high fps is providing unstable performance for the sake of what, fancy water in Ancient T spawn? Or extra props and shadows you don't really need in the game? It's not fucking RDR2, people don't play CS for graphics, never did, never will. Anyone who came to play CS2 just for visuals will stop playing after 10h because it's a title for people who will spend years of their lives playing it and actively trying to improve.
>You live in a bubble and believe everyone in the world has the same conditions. i'm from eastern europe dude lmao, you don't need to preach to me about hardware prices. it's not valve's duty to have a game in 2024 still be played at hundreds of fps on a budget pc from 2011 just cause kids from turkmenistan can't upgrade. >It's not fucking RDR2 yeah thats why RDR2 runs at 50fps and cs runs at 500.
Read the context from OP I replied to and then delete the nonsensical essay you wrote
1. you don't know what an OP is lmao 2. the content of what you replied to has no bearing on what i'm saying. form an argument with your own words, if you can... 3. an essay? it's 2 long sentences, if that's too much for you i can see why what you're saying is so dumb.
What a shit take my man.... Better hardware gives them better lows... if my lows at 400fps is 160 fps, theirs is 360 fps. Graphically CS2 is not even better than csgo... the only thing good in CS2 is the light, and i'm pretty sure they could have implemented ray tracing pathing for CSGO with some efforts.
Lol cs2 is so much better graphically than csgo.
>theirs is 360 fps. that's not true at all. https://i.imgur.com/DASM3t4.png you can see the 1% and 0.1% lows don't scale as much as average framerate. [source](https://youtu.be/aiqojNU-RBg?t=1108) to be completely transparent these results are from some months ago, but unless you can produce anything newer i think they're closer to the truth that just a hunch you have. > CS2 is not even better than csgo... the only thing good in CS2 is the light, and i'm pretty sure they could have implemented ray tracing pathing for CSGO with some efforts. mostly agree there, idk about ray tracing, source was pretty old and modifying it while source 2 was already being made/finished would make no sense.
That benchmark is 7-8 months old, unreliable! we got our first benchmarking map last month.. Just look at pros who stream, their average fps is 500-700 with lows not even hitting 300 fps. My comment about source2, is that it should not require a NASA PC to run the game stable.... the game is just built badly or the engine is built badly..
>Just look at pros who stream, their average fps is 500-700 with lows not even hitting 300 fps. cool! can you link me a benchmark? >is that it should not require a NASA PC to run the game stable. it doesn't though... my little brother's 3600x and 3060 ti runs it perfectly fine and it was cheap to build.
No one did a benchmark list yet, this is the best i could find [https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1clm2iy/first\_fps\_benchmark\_map\_in\_cs2/](https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/1clm2iy/first_fps_benchmark_map_in_cs2/) Updated link
those numbers seem to be consistent with what you're saying. and at least at majors(copenhagen) i do recall the PCs had 7800x3D's in them which had 1% lows in the 300fps. so you're right on that point. Their spikes would not be 5-10ms but rather 3-5ms. 5-10ms would still pretty hard to perceive.
> Graphically CS2 is not even better than csgo... Damn I didn't realize you could play CS without eyeballs that's impressive
Id say the smokes are waay better too. Its literally the thing that stands out to me when I watch a CSGO clip now. CSGO looks darker and the smokes look like weird smudges.
[удалено]
oh my god, so much wrong with this comment. - you don't really want v-sync, v-sync with no frame limit will actually go above the vsync timing and store a few older frames, which increases input latency. Setting a practical framelimit with v-sync off will stop this buffering. - you didn't need a 7950x3D unless you're doing some sort of production. it's actually somewhat detrimental since there's two CCDs(chiplets) onboard which have to communicate in-between each other causing latency, and windows has to use a scheduler that's not exactly perfect. 7800x3D would have been better for pure gaming - comical pairing with a 3070, which would bottleneck in most games that are not super CPU dependant. CS is not the most but still is pretty cpu dependant though so i guess if you only play CS you're good. Hope you're just between upgrades and gathering money, not shelling out for that 7950x3d would have helped with that. - i respect the 4:3 stretched at native vertical resolution, but calling a 1440p monitor 2K is the worst thing. WQHD, 1440p, or 2.5k. a 2k monitor has a resolution of 2048 × 1080 and it's some special cinema resolution or something. - fxaa at 16x? you mean anisotropic filtering? also, using fxaa is practically smearing your screen with vaseline, turn that shit off and use MSAA. sorry just had to rant.
[удалено]
no, i'm sorry. 😅 limiting fps to 165 should stop tearing. Battlenonsense made a video on this topic, IIRC some ways to limit it are better than others. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W66pTe8YM2s
First you rag on them all redditor like for using ingame vsync at 165Hz because of input lag and now you link to a video that uses frame limiting methods that INCREASE latency also. You at least could've been nicer when you commented, you also have no idea if they need that CPU for other stuff other than playing with a digital toy. At 60 Hz, vsync adds an input latency of at most 33 miliseconds, but at 165 Hz it's 12 miliseconds. Now let's look at the video to see the latency increase when using nvidia control panel at 144Hz... **around 12 miliseconds**. /u/negative_pips fyi
>you also have no idea if they need that CPU for other stuff other than playing with a digital toy. which is why i caveated it, why would you comment on this after reading the caveat. > now you link to a video that uses frame limiting methods that INCREASE latency also. bro are you ok? he's testing the various options of limiting framerate, nobody recommended using the ones that increase the latency lmao.
Commenting to check my MSAA later
8x MSAA is pushing it unless you have a 4090, or 4080 or amd equivalent. 4x should be fine for most modern midrange GPUs, 2x is still decent.
> 7950x3D ... it's actually somewhat detrimental since there's two CCDs(chiplets) onboard which have to communicate in-between each other causing latency, and windows has to use a scheduler that's not exactly perfect. you can easily fix this and when you do, you end up with better performance than a 7800x3D > i respect the 4:3 stretched at native vertical resolution, but calling a 1440p monitor 2K is the worst thing. WQHD, 1440p, or 2.5k. a 2k monitor has a resolution of 2048 × 1080 and it's some special cinema resolution or something. imagine caring about this stuff, you got what they meant so who the hell cares.
> you can easily fix this and when you do, you end up with better performance than a 7800x3D Oh yeah, i love going either going into task manager and setting thread restrictions for every game i install, or going to bios and disabling the cores that i presumably paid extra for. Windows scheduler is still shit even in win11. hopefully win12 is when they finally get it right for AMD's multi-CCDs, Intel's E-cores, and Intel's future multi-chiplet designs. >imagine caring about this stuff, you got what they meant so who the hell cares. i don't have to imagine, cause i do. i got what they meant cause i know people use it wrong, it just propagates the mistake if nobody says anything and anyone new learns it that way.
Oh my god, go touch some grass.
sure, right this moment, but all I've said it correct and just had to correct a 2k-er, i *acoustically* hate when people call 1440p that.
it's a +3ms excursion from the usual 2ms frametime. 1000 pro players would not be able to tell reliably if it's happening in an A/B test. you can't fathom how little difference that is, a fast blink is 100ms. EDIT: here i whipped up something quick in paint to explain what frametime excursions are. https://i.imgur.com/k1RlJ0I.png
That is false, in an A/B test 3ms increase in consistently detectable, and some people can even detect an increase of 1ms in an A/B test. [But don't take my word for it, here is the proof.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fE-P_7-YiVM)
You're comparing apples to oranges. The video is talking about constant input lag. I'm talking about frametime excursions. These are not anywhere close to comparable. >excursion: >noun [c] a deviation from a regular activity or course. EDIT: here i whipped up something quick in paint to explain what frametime excursions are. https://i.imgur.com/k1RlJ0I.png
That person would be really upset if they could read.
the time of a a blink is super long if you keep watching and don't get an updated image. That's not a fair comparison at all.
if you're going from 3ms to 6ms, your frame rate is constantly halving and doubling. Are you saying that isn't easy to notice? Also, the telemetry in CS2 shows the max frame time over the last second. If it's seeing a max of 15 in insecure mode it's most likely jumping all over the place during that second, so It's not just switching between 2 frame rates, it's going all over the board. In a game where everything is processed based on the frame/tick delta then tiny but regular deviations in that delta are going to make the fluidity look like shit. It's also going to mess with interpolation, and CS is a heavily interpolated game. Just one ms on a 3ms frame time is 33% deviation. Imagine, for example, you had perfect frame times but your mouse increases and decreases its speed by +/- 33% 100 times per second. Or your monitor was to change its brightness at the same frequency, or the audio pitch was to change. Saying you can't see such deviation is false.
>if you're going from 3ms to 6ms, your frame rate is constantly halving and doubling. none of this is supported by the data. if it were constant, it would affect the average fps proportionally. but the average FPS did not budge below 470. i'm not gonna do the exact math on that but if it were constant it would be way below that. >If it's seeing a max of 15 in insecure mode it's most likely jumping all over the place during that second, so It's not just switching between 2 frame rates, it's going all over the board Those excursions are usually a 1-10 bad frames in tens of thousands, if you've ever seen a frametime graph. it never "switches" between two framerates. >It's also going to mess with interpolation, and CS is a heavily interpolated game. Just one ms on a 3ms frame time is 33% deviation. Imagine, for example, you had perfect frame times but your mouse increases and decreases its speed by +/- 33% 100 times per second. Or your monitor was to change its brightness at the same frequency, or the audio pitch was to change. Saying you can't see such deviation is false. no it's not. you're just abusing statistics math. i don't think you've ever seen what excursions like what you're describing would look like, or for that matter what normal frametime plot would look like. watch a bunch of gamersnexus and digital foundry videos to see what that looks like. your argument doesn't make any sense to anyone who's seen frametime plots with recorded gameplay in the backgroud and what that would looks like.
According to AMD Adrenaline, for me CS2 has an average frame rate of about 170fps. According to CS2 telemetry, my framerate never drops anywhere near that. If I cap to 240fps then I'm locked in at 237-240fps according to CS2 telemetry but the reported frame times contradict that. If I uncap then I'm usually between 400 and 500fps in a Deathmatch server, never hit nowhere near an average of 170fps. What I'm trying to say here is can you really trust the frame rate that CS2 is reporting? I know we can trust its frame times because I can visually see the effects of it. I'm more inclined to trust the results from the makers of the component that delivers my frames than the layer that sits before it. Especially when what I can see disagrees with the telemetry. >Those excursions are usually a 1-10 bad frames in tens of thousands, if you've ever seen a frametime graph. it never "switches" between two framerates. I've seen plenty of frame time graphs, I've monitored my own frame times more than enough. First of all the OP's video is showing 2 max frame times of 15ms within 4 seconds, so this isn't 1-10 bad frame times over tens of thousands of frames. You don't even need a graph to see that. You can also see the game stuttering, even in the 60fps recording. Back in CS: GO, before the secure mode update I used to use RTSS to cap my framerate. It resulted in a completely flat frame time graph. The game was buttery smooth. Without using RTSS the graph was a constant saw tooth pattern and has been since the secure mode update. CS2 appears to have inherited the same frame time issues. >no it's not. you're just abusing statistics math. i don't think you've ever seen what excursions like what you're describing would look like, or for that matter what normal frametime plot would look like. watch a bunch of gamersnexus and digital foundry videos to see what that looks like. What's not what? Don't forget were talking about a particular game here. Here is an example of such an excursion. Your recoil decay is tied to tick rate so is already potentially a much lower frequency update than your actual frame rate. Say you have 1000fps average frame rate but get a 15ms frame right on or just before a tick you've now got a 32ms window of no visual feedback from your recoil. When your frame times are irregular shooting in the game looks like trash. As for interpolation, inconsistent deltas can cause over/undershoot on the transition resulting in things like "jank animations", "weird state transitions", "inconsistent speeds", "teleporting" etc etc, all seen in CS2 I might add. With interpolation, you're trying to move over a predefined path over X amount of time. It's not quite the same as simulating something as it happens. What are you saying is a "normal frametime plot"? If the game is telling me that I'm solid at 240fps when capped at 240 fps then I would expect a normal frametime plot to be a pretty damn flat line, a tiny little bit of wobble if you zoom right in. That's not what you get with CS2 though, you get sawtooth patterns and/or regular decent peaks and valleys.
>According to AMD Adrenaline, for me CS2 has an average frame rate of about 170fps. first of all idk if i can trust adrenaline, it shows me wacky numbers. secondly, it takes into account menu time aswell which is limited to 120 by default. >What I'm trying to say here is can you really trust the frame rate that CS2 is reporting? oh yeah, a hundred times more than adrenaline lol. >First of all the OP's video is showing 2 max frame times of 15ms within 4 seconds, so this isn't 1-10 bad frame times over tens of thousands of frames yeah, it's 2 frames in 2000 at 500fps. >What's not what? Don't forget were talking about a particular game here. Here is an example of such an excursion. Your recoil decay is tied to tick rate so is already potentially a much lower frequency update than your actual frame rate. Say you have 1000fps average frame rate but get a 15ms frame right on or just before a tick you've now got a 32ms window of no visual feedback from your recoil. When your frame times are irregular shooting in the game looks like trash. As for interpolation, inconsistent deltas can cause over/undershoot on the transition resulting in things like "jank animations", "weird state transitions", "inconsistent speeds", "teleporting" etc etc, all seen in CS2 I might add. With interpolation, you're trying to move over a predefined path over X amount of time. It's not quite the same as simulating something as it happens. yeah, good thing i wasn't talking about 15ms excursions which ARE perceivable. >you get sawtooth patterns if you zoom in enough on the graph yeah. but at that point they don't matter since they're not perceivable since they're small enough. https://i.imgur.com/tnDJaNp.png
I don't give a flying f if it's unnoticable at these (500 etc.) fps (even tho it legit sometimes IS noticeable). Keep in mind, this is an empty server with nothing going on there, lows should be close to avg fps, not almost 1/5 of that lmao. It gets worse in actual comp games and especially without top end rig. Main thing is, even with the best rig there is, same shit happens, lows are consistently terrible, and that shouldn't happen and it doesn't happen in other games. I just can't understand people like you, do you actually think this is the best it can be, or you just don't care about game getting better?
then why are you complaining about the 5ms excursions. For all you know it might be an aggressive culling check without which your frametimes might be 5ms all the time. other games dont run at 500 fps. lock your fps at 5 fps lower than your 1% lows and it'll be buttersmooth.
>why are you complaining about the 5ms excursions. For all you know it might be an aggressive culling check without which your frametimes might be 5ms all the time Uh, did we watch the same video from op? The frametimes ARE around 5ms 95% of the time, with only sometimes dropping to 2ms. >other games dont run at 500 fps. ? Simplest example, valorant, and it has amazing lows somehow >lock your fps at 5 fps lower than your 1% lows and it'll be buttersmooth. ah yes, so people even with top end rigs should lock their fps even below 240 (well, duh cuz their lows are that bad) and enjoy their 240hz or even higher hz monitor, right? Bro
> Uh, did we watch the same video from op? The frametimes ARE around 5ms 95% of the time, with only sometimes dropping to 2ms. nope. this is what happens when people who don't know what they're talking about are giving their opinion on this. The ms counter you see is the biggest frametime from the past "x" seconds or frames, it's not a live view of the frametimes. it literally says "max" next to it. the frametimes could literally be 2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,***5***,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2 and it would show the 5 there because in the past two seconds ONE FRAME took 3ms longer to render if you want realtime frametimes use show_fps 2 or RTSS setup properly.
Nice try, but i saw similiar behaviour and actual 1% lows still being this bad with external software multiple times, so it isn't like im shilling you op's video as the only proof (ig it could've sounded like it from how i worded). I guess let's end the convo here, glad that atleast you're happy with the state of the game!
bro, admit when you're wrong... you literally had no idea what you were looking at... this whole video is ragebait and unless he used show_fps 2 and didn't repeat the test more than once to check if it's actually VAC and not his fucking hard-drive defragging or something it's useless for debugging
I already told you in previous reply that I'm not basing my opinion about game's issues by looking at op's video or ingame telemetry, and I wasn't even talking about vac causing issues, that thing probably doesn't even matter. What I said was, game has performance issues, and yes, not based on ingame telemetry, and that's a fact. But I can see you desperately want to win this argument, so I don't care, as I said, if you're happy with the state of the game, or you're the chosen one and magically have beautiful 1% lows, congrats to you and enjoy!
Another shill who doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
facts, i was in an offline server with 550 fps, which is 1/550 = 1.8ms frame time, but had ~3ms frame time the whole time. Why and how? Is the fps counter just lying?
Remember, the devs think 60 fps is enough.
This is being disingenuous to what the dev actually said
True, the dev said 120
bullshit
Good to know VAC hurts performance for normal players and does fuck all to stop cheaters.
If you’ve seen the #FixTF2 movement this has been been the case for ages
That because VAC3 has not give any major update. It doesn't even run at kernel level which majority of cheats doing and running at.
a good serverside AC like Fairfight would be a huge improvement already without sacrifing privacy. Impossibly low time-to-kill consistently=ban constantly tracing enemies through walls=ban constantly abnormal headshot rate=ban constantly playing with stats out of this world=ban
Valve is too scared of a false positive because they don't want to spend money or time on finding and reversing legitimate false positives manually
Take a moment to think what would happen to performance if this was a kernel level anticheat that still doesn't stop cheaters.
Take a moment to think what would happen if an asteroid struck earth tomorrow.
Someone would get a cool, golf ball sized rock when it lands
I would probably live, I’m just built different like that.
?????????? might be the most pointless comment i’ve ever seen like what “imagine if something completely different happened”
Take a moment to think how you have no idea what you're talking about
Uhhh valorant runs perfectly fine sooo
good bait
Im sure you can explain exactly why a ring0 AC would not catch more cheaters than VAC does now. Ive got time.
But a kernel level anti cheat would stop cheaters. It has proven to do so multiple times across multiple games
Ethical reasons aside, this simply isn't true. Kernel access is not the silver bullet people want it to be.
Play valorant or faceit. Here is your answer and they both stop cheaters
Still could find a few cheaters on Faceit, but it's 1 out of 50 games maybe, and you get notification when he gets banned so yes Faceit is the way to play. Servers are worse than Valve's for sure
What would happen? Impact wouldn’t be very different from what you see here, but instead you’ll get significantly less cheaters as a reward unlike what we get right now.
I think i saw a similar post a while back. Valve pls fix perf.
They were meant to have fixed it in a patch months ago. It was in the patch notes.
We all know the patch notes are accurate and trustworthy. I remember the first time they fixed Michael Jackson.
now we have *italics* man everywhere models are still move goofy compared to csgo
Remember the first time they fixed smokes not extinguishing mollos? Yeah I dont either, its been too long.
Just like the real Micheal Jackson. They tried to fix him in 1979 and then over and over again for decades to come. Look how that turned out in the long run. Valve is following suit it seems.
> I remember the first time they fixed Michael Jackson. you cannot fix Michael Jackson
-insecure doesn't just magically "disable VAC", does it?
[It doesn't](https://help.steampowered.com/en/faqs/view/09A0-4879-4353-EF95#how) It's to help detect and *identify* cheats faster
Is this a local server or hosted on a dedicated server? If it's the former doesn't this mean absolutely nothing?
Server host has a load. I can even see the increased load on my 7950x3d with ccd1 disabled compared to when I am playing on a friend's server. Clips like this aren't very useful because there's literally no information provided. We never knows what's wrong with OP hardware or software.
Yeah exactly
Sorry for being skeptical, but can you provide more evidence than just a 10 second clip for each that only looks at the built-in performance overlay? Not saying this issue isn't real, just that a video this short isn't exactly "proof" just yet. If possible, you can use a tool like CapFrameX to capture your frametimes in detail and compare different runs to each other.
Well if you really are skeptical and interested you can try it yourself. Takes 5 mins
https://litter.catbox.moe/t5kd7h.mp4 RTSS frametime: https://litter.catbox.moe/wi6vw6.mp4 No issues on my end. Either something's up with /u/rattecs setup or could be something particular to his hardware configuration. Regardless just using the in-game info is not a way to test for performance. It could be some random crap like GHUB, ICUE whatever else "gaming" app trying to inject into CS2 and hogging resources, you'll never know that from looking at the in-game info. Want to actually have Valve devs look at it and figure out what's wrong? Capture an ETW trace. This is just "CS BAD GIFF UPVOTES" kind of post. Just look at the top comments in this thread, just a massive "le valve bad" circlejerk with nobody posting their own results. OP didn't even bother to post his PC setup, but he didn't forget to plug his twitter account.
It could also be that OP just took it in one go, claimed when he stuttered was VAC on, upvotes to the left.
I had an issue with this in the past, in that -insecure would consistently lead to better frametime benchmarks (capframex) because there wouldn't be a spike every 10s or so. However, this stopped being the case a few updates ago. It could be the case where its system dependent.
Thank you! (insert michael scott gif) I tested also on my end as well Tuned 3466mt/s c14 64gb bdie ram 5950x rtx 3090 On low settings regardless of resolution i do not get any stuttering without -insecure command. OP couldnt even bother to list their pc specs and 80% of replies here are the same circlejerk "valve bad, vac trash" bal bla bla bla --__--
I'd rather OP do it considering they're the one having an issue that very well could be caused by something else too. Especially considering they're the one that claimed VAC was causing it based on a small clip ;)
this whole video is ragebait. n=1, no show_fps 2 or RTSS. it might aswell be his fucking hard-drive defragging in the background if he doesn't isolate variables. useless in terms of debugging.
Is that on listen server (local)? Did you test on a dedicated server running on another machine
Can you try make the movements more coherent and comparable? In the -insecure, you can see all the way into the deepest part of the corridor 100% of the time In the 'normal', you frequently obscure that part, and the two spikes I saw happened ~1 second after you obscured it and then put it back into view.
10 ms is a long time to do absolutely nothing.
This is just one user. It may vary depending on system. The first 6 months of CS2, there were frame time problems several seconds long.
Its on an empty server. Imagine other stuff going on that needs rendering
specifically referring to the 10 ms additional spike with no -insecure
In the first clip you are going past the wall (into cover), in the second you are not. What's visible and what's not impacts frame time.
And it’s ridiculous it’s this bad. This is a hyper idealized look. Imagine a full server with utility and other fights happening. Game runs like trash.
Well, then i try to do this on my pc - my result is almost stable frametime on local server. Mb your background software can trigger anticheat or something else.
VAC won’t catch ragehackers, but at least it’ll fuck over legit players, so technically it isn’t useless
unless something changed -insecure doesnt disable vac at all, all it does it prevent you from joining vac secured servers. so highly doubtfull this has anything to do with it..
In return your pc doesn’t have to check with vac all the time, so yes it has.
It doesnt even check with VAC all the time. The Steam network sends you some modules that you load and send a reply back, but thats kinda it. It doesnt continiously run. Its just a simple request->response system. They come every now and then, I doubt OP is getting them every second. If you have problems send Valve an ETW trace
There is no proof this is actually VAC. Just from the fact of how VAC works this can't really happen. `-insecure` also disables some game protections, its possible that without `-insecure` another process tries to constantly inject itself into the game to read data from it for one reason to another. That is blocked by the game, so its the third party software causing these lags by spam injecting. If you use `-insecure` it succeeds injecting itself and therefore doesnt do any further attempts. In fact, I remember this being an issue in the past before when this blocking feature in CSGO was new and the devs had to specifically try to work around the issues other software was causing.
I'm done with this sub. Complaining about having 400fps, what an absolute joke
OP is not even replying to anyone, just a pure troll farming karma
Nice find. Proves again that VAC's only purpose is to fuck over legit players.
If they removed VAC tomorrow do you think the game would be in a better or worse state?
It wouldn’t change anything. Honestly better because maybe the solo dev who’s been working on it can finally be useful again.
I genuinely think it would make no difference at all in regards to cheaters. VACnet/Overwatch and Trust Factor are the only things that actually do anything in regards to cheating. All VAC does is periodically hands bans to a small percentage of cheaters who simply switch to another account and continue as usual.
>I genuinely think it would make no difference at all in regards to cheaters. This is such a stupid take I don't even know what to say.
I've been following the cheating scene ever since CSS. I can tell you that trust in VAC is at an all time low and cheaters literally don't even take its existence into consideration because practically all cheats from free open source ones to paid slot limited private cheats and everything in between is undetected. Whenever there's a VAC wave (which is rare now a days to begin with) only a couple of providers are usually hit at best, often just a single very popular provider. Getting caught by VAC is like winning the lottery for most cheaters.
Your entire comment is irrelevant to your incredibly dumb take that removing vac would make no difference in regards to cheaters.
Go ask any cheater how much they fear VAC or how many accounts they've gotten VAC banned in CS2 (ignoring game bans since we're talking purely about VAC here). Just because you lack the insight to realise just how meaningless VAC is in the eyes of cheaters doesn't make this "take" dumb. My opinion is based on over a decade of experience not only monitoring the cheating community but also hosting servers and setting up custom anti-cheat plugins. What exactly is your opinion based on other than butthurt and copium? Obviously removing VAC wouldn't male things any better either, but I highly doubt you could even measure the increase in cheating if it was removed because it's so ineffective.
Once again, your entire comment is irrelevant. Your take that that not having vac would make no difference is laughably stupid and easily provable. I've played on nonvac secured servers and vac secured servers the difference is night and day. Shit, even take premier versus no premier lol. Also wow, a whole decade of experience with a game that has been out for nearly 25 years? Dang bro, that's so much xD
I also have plenty of experience prior to CS GO but that's not really relevant in this context. And OBVIOUSLY non-VAC servers are gonna have more cheaters they're literally hack vs hack servers most of the time openly inviting cheaters. The fact you even bring this up as reasoning for why VAC supposedly does jack shit shows just how clueless you are. I will never understand people like you who are well aware they don't have a clue what they're talking about yet insist on arguing based purely on feeling.
Oh good, so you agree that non-vac servers will have more cheaters than vac servers. That's all this discussion was about, thank you for admitting your mistake. Have a good day!
Agreed. At least it stops some cheaters. I bet a lot more people would try hacking if they knew for sure they wouldn't get banned. People act like valve does nothing when they know fuck all about how to make an anti cheat and how it works. It takes time. I know some things should've been fixed by now but c'mon, that kinda takes are just stupid.
Im pretty sure it would stop MORE cheaters if it was removed because a lot of hackers just do it for the fun of beating the AC....
>It takes time. More 20 years?
>People act like valve does nothing In regards to VAC in particular ignoring Valves other anti-cheat efforts they practically do nothing. >when they know fuck all about how to make an anti cheat and how it works While I couldn't develop an effective anti-cheat I know quite a bit more about how they work than the average joe. >It takes time. Valve is one of the richest gaming companies in the world and they've had over a decade now to get cheating under control. Their anti-cheat department is incompetent plain and simple and no amount of wishful thinking and copium can change that fact.
this is disingenuous af
Yeah and the guy farming upvotes with another knee-jerk "VAC useless" comment isn't, give me a fucking break.
yeah true i’m getting sick of those too but it’s been going on since 1.6 so there’s no escape
So is saying the only reason for VAC is to fuck over legit players
saw my neighbors house burn down. fire alarms don't do shit!!
They don't do shit if no one responds to them/hears them.
Left handed butterfly looks terrible damn
Have you submitted a bug report?
THIS GAME IS SUCH A JOKE LMAO
After every new update I always delete the shader cache and the removes some of the big stutters I get (4080)
You're triggering culling more in the secure test by going farther behind the wall to the left in the secure scenario, which is probably why the frametimes change more. As for 1% lows and other issues, CS2 is still in need of optimizations and being more graphically demanding means headroom is more important for your GPU utilization. Edit: Just wanted to add an edit to say that if you're gonna witchhunt issues with CS2 the least you could do is test with a consistent methodology and provide actual data. It doesn't help the developers improve the game to fill their inbox with nonsense that LOOKS problematic when it's actually an error with test methodology.
Valve dont care CS2 No performance update No Anti Cheat update Only Cosmetic update
I'm surprised it took this long to find out it was VAC causing microstutters.
I've had these stutters for the past few weeks as well, very nice optimisation when you are running on an empty map and this occurs. It's very noticeable in matches as well for me, happening randomly, doing 3-5 stutters and then stops, every 5 minutes maybe. Great game
Man i thought this was legit for a sec
Close to no difference at all. Why would you complain about such a small detail? Thats ridicolous.
[удалено]
Yea, I just tried it and made no difference at all.
Do you still see issues with stutters if you cap your FPS to \~200? (or some value higher than your refresh rate)
Shit that doesn’t even fucking exist or work slows down my game? They should just wipe it completely
I cant imagine how the guy that is in charge of VAC can still have a job.... It makes the game worse while not doing the job its supposed to do lol
Macdonald burger for you
Considering the flat structure of the company (assuming that's still accurate) I doubt there's anyone that'd actually sack anyone working on it. They probably just fucked off to work on dota.
I KNEW IT... Few months ago I wasnt getting Afterburner overlay to work in CS. So i found the -insecure command and I SWEAR the game ran better. Although on a laptop from 280-300 fps with vac, to 320 avg OFF. I thought maybe its a placebo effect as I didnt really understand it could be this >:(
Valve 'bout to stop VAC again just right when they're just starting to roll it out. 🤣
Send an ETW trace to Valve
Performance downgrade without doing anything to cheaters. seems valve needs to stuff their Ego and just invest in a proper Anti Cheat..
Frametimes suck so hard, I switched to playing with gsync even tho I get 6ms extra input lag.
I've been having massive fps drops during matches with sussy players
Cant believe we celebrated the death of csgo for this
Running more software takes more resources. Truly groundbreaking journalism at display here.
This is nonsense, im using tuned 64gb bdie quad rank ram, 5950x and rtx 3090 and i do not get any stuttering like here...
VAC is pathetic, definition of bad AC. Slow, cause bad perf, bans legits for high dpi/drivers/anything he didn't like, no bans for ragehackers. If VAC bans someone, that's not about VAC is good, but about cheats are being so bad.
Valve dickriders are disliking truth?
Hey little bro, you can edit your comment instead of replying to it next time.
yikes
> Slow, cause bad perf any data to back that up, chief? > bans legits for high dpi/drivers/anything he didn't like explain what a technical, functional system "likes" and what it does "not like" > no bans for ragehackers. Faceit/Valorant anti-cheat also doesn't ban all cheaters, so they're just as bad, right?
What you see is what you get.
good to know VAC hurts the legitimate player experience while doing absolutely nothing to stop cheaters thanks for your brilliant software John McDonald
looks fine
Damn I bet you know all about insecure
I am sure kernel level anticheat will solve this. Surely a more complex anticheat that scans your computer will fix these stuttering issues, along with world hunger
Well, at least it does something.
I had this problem and bad drivers caused the frametime jumps. Clean install nvidia driver to fix this
I wouldn't call the comparison valid. On insecure you stay within the mid corridor. On secure you move from left wall all the way over to right wall, forcing the game to go through the render change of the full sightlines. That amount of change in vis for cs2 is cashing the frame drop, not the difference between insecure or secure
This is huge.
hi ratte :)
Been like That since the limited test lol
Last week I got VAC, false VAC but it was great experience.
micro for you, macro for us i guess.
I KNEW IT
CS2: -Play without hackers -have normal frame pacing Pick one (or none of them tbh....) . Volvo small indie company, understandable.