Doc
This may be so:
As stated in another thread, even you if you have a high-end machine is advisable to set it to 25 (instead 30)
,
but the purists will tell you that the fps limit ideally should be an integer of the refresh rate, ie 15 (too low), 20, 30 and 60. That way there are less calculations going on between the cpu and gpu.
I use an nVidia card and now with nVidia Inspector, I set AA/AF to application controlled but set up the fps limit to 30, and under vertical sync set that to adaptive and choose half the refresh rate (Triple Buffer = on). That now provides a seamless experience that doesn't exceed 30 fps and stops those ridiculous FRAPS figures like 2560.
There is some texture loading lag (micro stutter - more like macro stutter in some instances) with TS2012 particularly wiith some routes and scenarios and running TS2012 off a dedicated SSD can have some positive results. I still see fps drops under certain conditions but they have gone in a flash when installed on an SSD, no hesitation or jerkiness.
IMHO you can't equate FPS to what the human eye can discern, its like comparing apples to pears. There is no evidence that the human eye cannot distiguish between 15 fps and 60 fps, we've even got 300Hz TV's for a clearer sharper picture. A PC monitor is not a movie projector or an old TV where you needed 24 fps to avoid jerkiness etc.
Bring out the Battys
Regards
PeterH