Hey there - I think everybody already knows that using AI frame gen (FG) has potential artefact and latency trade-offs, which isn’t the point of the thread but summarising that quickly to get it out of the way:
Phew!
Now, the purpose of the thread. I’m uncertain: what’s the best way of trying to ensure that your MFG rate is sitting underneath your monitor’s refresh rate? Or is this not ‘a thing’?
For example, if I had a 240hz monitor, I’d be curious to experience games at 230fps with MFG on. If my starting FPS with DLSS already on is, say, 90fps, then this seems a little annoying… either I can go to 170-180fps with FG x2 which leaves a lot of headroom or I’d overshoot the monitor cap with x3.
In which case, I’d want my starting DLSS FPS to be around 80. Obviously, I won’t be able to sort this via Nvidia control panel… or would I?
I can’t figure out if the solution is as simple as setting a 236ish fps cap in NVCP, enabling g-sync (plus V-sync always on in NVCP but disabled in game, in the usual recommended way) and letting the MFG figure it out.
A related point: I’ve heard people mentioning Nvidia reflex, how does this tie in with these issues?
All input / insight appreciated. Thanks
- FG works best when the starting fps (with FG off) is above 100fps. Most reviewers suggest FPS should be at least 60-80 before turning FG on to avoid it being a horrid experience.
- FG isn’t a solution to solving the various issues associated low (sub-60) FPS. If starting FPS without FG is low, it’ll still feel sluggish with FG turned on (possibly even slightly more sluggish).
- FG may introduce artefacts in games that are very fast or that resolve a lot of very fine detail. Multi frame gen (MFG) at x3 / x4 may introduce more artefacts than basic FG x2. It’ll be down to personal preference / sensitivity as to whether the increase in FPS is worth these artefacts. If you find yourself ‘deliberately looking for issues’ you will probably find them, but that’s a bit different than ‘noticing them when playing games’.
- FG uses DLSS, so your starting point for raw frames ought to factor than in. There will also be a minor additional FPS hit so x2 FG will be a little lower then your ‘non FG but DLSS on’ frame-rate.
- FG isn’t a solution to solving the various issues associated low (sub-60) FPS. If starting FPS without FG is low, it’ll still feel sluggish with FG turned on (possibly even slightly more sluggish).
- FG may introduce artefacts in games that are very fast or that resolve a lot of very fine detail. Multi frame gen (MFG) at x3 / x4 may introduce more artefacts than basic FG x2. It’ll be down to personal preference / sensitivity as to whether the increase in FPS is worth these artefacts. If you find yourself ‘deliberately looking for issues’ you will probably find them, but that’s a bit different than ‘noticing them when playing games’.
- FG uses DLSS, so your starting point for raw frames ought to factor than in. There will also be a minor additional FPS hit so x2 FG will be a little lower then your ‘non FG but DLSS on’ frame-rate.
Phew!
Now, the purpose of the thread. I’m uncertain: what’s the best way of trying to ensure that your MFG rate is sitting underneath your monitor’s refresh rate? Or is this not ‘a thing’?
For example, if I had a 240hz monitor, I’d be curious to experience games at 230fps with MFG on. If my starting FPS with DLSS already on is, say, 90fps, then this seems a little annoying… either I can go to 170-180fps with FG x2 which leaves a lot of headroom or I’d overshoot the monitor cap with x3.
In which case, I’d want my starting DLSS FPS to be around 80. Obviously, I won’t be able to sort this via Nvidia control panel… or would I?
I can’t figure out if the solution is as simple as setting a 236ish fps cap in NVCP, enabling g-sync (plus V-sync always on in NVCP but disabled in game, in the usual recommended way) and letting the MFG figure it out.
A related point: I’ve heard people mentioning Nvidia reflex, how does this tie in with these issues?
All input / insight appreciated. Thanks
Last edited:
