Before and after applying Windows optimizations, you need reliable benchmarks to measure the difference. Here's how to get consistent, meaningful numbers.
The problem with casual benchmarking
Running a game, looking at FPS counter for a minute, and declaring "it's better" is unreliable. Natural variation between sessions (server load, Windows background activity, different in-game scenarios) creates noise that hides real differences.
Reliable benchmark methodology
1. Same scenario every time: record a fixed route in the game, play it back. Many games have built-in benchmarks — use them. CS2 has timedemo, most racing games have a benchmark track.
2. Multiple runs: run the same benchmark 3 times, discard outliers, average the rest.
3. Wait for thermal stability: run the benchmark once as a warmup, then measure. Cold CPU/GPU benchmarks lower than sustained performance.
4. Close everything: same set of applications running each time. No browser, no Discord, no background apps.
Tools
FrameView (NVIDIA, free): logs frame times, GPU/CPU utilization, render latency to CSV. Best for detailed analysis.
CapFrameX (free, open source): captures frame times, generates statistics, supports comparison between captures.
HWiNFO64: hardware monitoring for temperature and clock speed during benchmark.
What to measure
- Average FPS (1% low is more important)
- 1% low FPS
- 0.1% low FPS
- GPU utilization (tells you if GPU or CPU limited)
- Frame time graph (shows consistency)
Comparing before/after
Use the same benchmark, same settings, same time of day. Log results. A 5% FPS change is meaningful. Perceived smoothness from reduced 1% lows is also meaningful even if average FPS is similar.
IzanagiOP improves 1% lows and frame consistency more than average FPS. Measure accordingly. https://terweb.lt/
Top comments (0)