I am curious as to the differences between the two. This is about online gaming support in general and not a particular game.

Can any one enlighten me as to the pros and cons of the two types in terms of support?

For example: (Is one better for fps while another is better for open world? Do they render texture heavy games like ark evolved better or worse? Which is better for fighters?)

  • 2
    I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it is about server configuration, not gaming.
    – Frank
    Commented Nov 6, 2016 at 21:26
  • 1
    @Frank I am not asking about how to configure a server. I am asking about how the differences provide a different experience to the player and the developer. If this context is unclear to you then please give a me a recommendation that I can use to edit it properly.
    – Callat
    Commented Nov 8, 2016 at 19:28
  • 1
    Well said, Kaz. I'm not voting to close this question, but will if nothing changes.
    – user143228
    Commented Nov 13, 2016 at 8:50
  • I have edited my question and included examples to tie my question more to gaming. If the tone of my question is still inappropriate please leave a comment and I will edit accordingly.
    – Callat
    Commented Nov 13, 2016 at 9:30

2 Answers 2


In general, the "tick rate" refers to how many times per second essential game tasks are run - this is a "game tick". Examples of tasks which might run on the game tick include calculating the movement of players, recalculating lighting and processing AI behavior. Many different games have different tick rates by default - Minecraft, for example, tries to run at a fixed tick rate of 20 ticks per second, while Source engine games can vary wildly. A higher tick speed doesn't necessarily mean that the server costs more (although it can, depending on the how resource-intensive the game is).

Since the tick speed affects how frequently different tasks can be run, a lower tick rate may make the game feel less smooth while often ensuring that the game doesn't slow down when processor-intensive tasks are run and seem to "lag", while a higher tick rate can make a game feel smoother while taking the risk that a processor-heavy task might slow down the game tick and create the feeling of lagginess.

(As a side note, graphics and networking aren't usually affected by the tick rate - generally only game logic is.)

  • 1
    So in summation I suppose that the 60-tick refreshes at 60 times per second and 120-tick does 120 per-second. Would you say that an FPS is better on a 120-tick and a platformer/open-world better on a 60?
    – Callat
    Commented Nov 8, 2016 at 19:34
  • @KazRodgers It depends on how much work is being done in each tick before the game can move on to the next tick - for example, what physics calculations need to be done? Do any stats need updating? Commented Mar 18, 2017 at 16:17

Yes a 60 tick is "better" than 20 or 30. BUT - that matters if the game in question actually depends on real-time responsiveness - like most First Person Shooters (FPS).

Many FPS server hosts run at a default 30 tick. It is "possible" to get a 60 or even 100 but there is usually a premium involved. Sometimes, you can't get a pre-configured 60/100 tick server BUT you might have the option to get a virtual server with that same hosting company, and then "do it yourself" once they setup the OS.

With the right game, a 60 tick is a major jump from 30. The magical combination of the human eye and brain will SMOOTH OUT the experience very well once you hit 60. A further increase to 100 or more might be "noticeable" but is far less significant.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .