Star Wars Jedi Survivor performing suspiciously excellent (200+ FPS) ?

evo4ever86

evo4ever86

evo4ever86

Associate
Joined
6 Feb 2016
Posts
234
Location
Liverpool
Hello all.

I recently upgraded my gaming PC to the specs in my sig below. I've been playing some games maxed out to put it to the test. There's one game I love playing and that's Jedi Survivor. When I got my new PC up and running I decided put it through it's paces and I must admit I'm very impressed. Now to the point.. I've maxed out (Epic) Jedi Survivor to the gills (DLSS 3 @ Quality, Frame Gen on, Ray tracing on, etc etc) @ 2560x1440p and I'm getting on average 200 FPS does that seem suspiciously high? I mean I'm not complaining but I just want to make sure it's running correctly. Input greatly appreciated.
 
Last edited:
I turned Frame Gen and DLSS off and my FPS came down to around 120 but I didn't notice any difference in image quality. Do you think I should turn them back on? I'm thinking I probably should.
 
Shaolin Chicken said:
Did you notice any difference in latency with Frame Gen on?
Click to expand...

No I didn't to be brutally honest. Thinking about it I don't see any point in using DLSS and Frame Gen when I'm already getting a good natively rendered FPS, I guess those features are for more taxing games, what do you think?
 
Last edited:
evo4ever86 said:
No I didn't to be brutally honest. Thinking about it I don't see any point in using DLSS and Frame Gen when I'm already getting a good natively rendered FPS, I guess those features are for more taxing games, what do you think?
Click to expand...

I use FG and DLSS when I can, even though in the majority (for now) of games I play don't require them to achieve my monitor limited 100fps, purely because it lowers the power requirement, and hence my GPU requires less cooling, and my system runs quiet and consumes less electricity.
 
evo4ever86 said:
No I didn't to be brutally honest. Thinking about it I don't see any point in using DLSS and Frame Gen when I'm already getting a good natively rendered FPS, I guess those features are for more taxing games, what do you think?
Click to expand...

Yup if you have decent FPS with native res, no dlss/fsr scaling no frame gen then no benefit of using them

Although dlss/fsr has anti aliasing IE I think xess aa native is better than fsr aa native in stalker 2
 
evo4ever86 said:
I turned Frame Gen and DLSS off and my FPS came down to around 120 but I didn't notice any difference in image quality.
Click to expand...

120fps seems about right

1746528064461.png

evo4ever86 said:
Do you think I should turn them back on?
Click to expand...
No
 
Frame gen and DLSS are not meant to be used unless required. Meaning, if you have a decent FPS close to, or at your monitors limit, you'll be detrementially impacting your experience. Frame gen is a latency hog and DLSS is a cheap fix for poor performance.

Ideally, you should try get your games to a happy FPS (60+) via graphical setting adjustment, at that point, if you want more frames, then use DLSS, if it's still shy, your final option is frame gen.

And no, DLSS isn't a AA solution, it's a bi-product thrown in to enhance the visuals following the upscaling. DLAA is king for AA, with MSAA being #2 and TAA/FXAA being avoided at all costs.
 
Last edited:
agnes said:
Frame gen and DLSS are not meant to be used unless required. Meaning, if you have a decent FPS close to, or at your monitors limit, you'll be detrementially impacting your experience. Frame gen is a latency hog and DLSS is a cheap fix for poor performance.

Ideally, you should try get your games to a happy FPS (60+) via graphical setting adjustment, at that point, if you want more frames, then use DLSS, if it's still shy, your final option is frame gen.

And no, DLSS isn't a AA solution, it's a bi-product thrown in to enhance the visuals following the upscaling. DLAA is king for AA, with MSAA being #2 and TAA/FXAA being avoided at all costs.
Click to expand...

Yeah the AA settings and DLSS settings are separate features in the visual settings in Jedi Survivor.
 
Armageus said:
120fps seems about right

1746528064461.png


No
Click to expand...

It's a little disappointing to see a 4090 outperform my 5080. 120FPS is at stock GPU and CPU speeds btw. I'm going to put the GPU core clock back up to 3250mhz (+350) and the vram back up to 17000mhz (+2000) in Afterburner to see if I can beat the 4090 lol, I'll report back and let you know.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom