• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Doom Dark Ages - Is Path Tracing feasibly on RTS 5080 with 4K DLSS P MFG 3

HankSc0rpi0

HankSc0rpi0

HankSc0rpi0

Associate
Joined
18 Jan 2024
Posts
58
Location
Ireland
I ran the built in benchmarks and it performs decent enough if I have DLSS on Performance and MFG set to 3X
Is this too much of a compromise ? Considering added lag and lower internal resolution in performance mode.
Previously I was playing on 4K DLSS Quality with MFG 2X
Running RTX 5080 and LG C4 42 inch which is capped at 144hz
Thanks
 
Last edited:
Yeah but there is a little lag and performance mode is an internal resolution of 1080p, so wondering is the trade off worth it
 
Last edited:
HankSc0rpi0 said:
True enough, just gotta play and see Thought there might be a consensus on whether mfg is pants in Doom though. Thx.
Click to expand...
MFG is generally pants anyway and no substitute for raw performance. Maybe they'll improve it, but at present it's just something they've used to make the fps counter look good and sell cards. It's actual usefulness is still very limited bar a few games where you can get away with it.
 
The original Doom reboot game could run on a toaster but now it needs expensive graphics cards and fake frames.
 
Last edited:
At 4K I actually found the performance hit just too big for too little visual benefit in such a fast paced game. That’s with a 5090.
 
Last edited:
Yeah I tried 4k DLSS performance Path tracing 3X MFG and got much the same performance as 4K DLSS quality Path Tracing off 2X MFG. Can't decide which is better
 
Last edited:
Personally I only use FG when my FPS it already high, to hit close to that limit of my current monitor (4k 240Hz OLED). And I use smooth motion from drivers in world of warcraft as that engine sucks and drops to 40fps in places from 200+, that makes it seems very jarring - SM smooths the transition in such cases and helps a lot visually, where increased latency isn't very relevant.

That said, I've seen a bunch of tests online measuring latency with FG and MFG of various settings - it's not a big difference, most people likely won't even notice but only if the base FPS is already high enough (above 60 for sure). Going lower and it starts to be easier to feel but it's still very subjective, so it varies a lot between people. Some don't mind it at all and prefer smoothness increase, some feel and hate the increased latency. There are also much easier visible artefacts caused by FG at lower FPS - I tend to see them relatively easily if base is below about 70 but above that it's much harder to spot.
 
Last edited:
heatonpkmassive said:
MFG is generally pants anyway and no substitute for raw performance. Maybe they'll improve it, but at present it's just something they've used to make the fps counter look good and sell cards. It's actual usefulness is still very limited bar a few games where you can get away with it.
Click to expand...

It can smooth things out, so a highly stuttering experience can be better or if it's implemented properly, it can work even at around 30fps base fps for those that aren't extremely sensitive to latency.
 
Well I tried it and 2X MFG is ok. Not noticed latency at 4k DLSS Quality PT Off on my 5080. That's how I'm playing now.

PT On, isn't for this GPU. Base frame rate is too low with PT on. With DLSS Performance, you need 3XMFG to make it playable, and it just doesn't feel right.

Guess I need a 5090 to play that way
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom