• 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.

Upscaling & Fake frames?

Cyber-Mav said:
Give it time, the number of fake frames will exceed the number of real frames.
Click to expand...

It does look like things are headed that way, imagine if they even force these things to be on by default and block them from being turned off.
Like you can only game with these fake frames.
 
My personal opinion:

I'm not a fan of DLSS but I will accept it as a compromise if it means playable FPS with a proper ray tracing implementation (most games with "ray tracing" don't have a proper implementation and are relying on DLSS/upscaling as a crutch to make up for poor optimisation).

Frame generation I'm even less of a fan of, unless the baseline framerate is very high as above I notice the impact on how the game "feels" as well as seeing some visual artefacts like objects juddering and odd texturing, etc. it can work quite nicely though if you've got a fairly decent baseline framerate and want to maintain a slightly higher stable framerate i.e. 80-120FPS and want to maintain 120+ or 144 on a 144Hz display, etc. but where you want that kind of technology the most is when you are struggling to get playable baseline framerate but there at least for me the technology falls down with introducing as many different negatives as it takes away with a net result that if anything is actually worse.
 
Thanks, this is all exceedingly educational. There seems to be more acceptance of DLSS for upscaling, than Frame gen, and if I understand correctly that's because the latter impacts input lag, and causes ghosting, etc...

This article seems cautiously positive about improvements coming with this gen:
www.eurogamer.net

Hands-on with DLSS 4 on Nvidia's new GeForce RTX 5080

Digital Foundry has the first look at Nvidia's new DLSS 4, as tested on Cyberpunk 2077 RT Overdrive running on a GeForce RTX 5080.
www.eurogamer.net www.eurogamer.net
 
muon said:

Most of the improvements in DLSS 4 are actually backwards compatible.

The big one is the switch from Convolutional Neural Networks to Transformer Models, second on the table above.
Click to expand...


I just realized something else. In Nvidia's benches, the 4090 was tested with DLSS3, then later on after we get more info we found out that DLSS4 is coming to RTX4000 and that DLSS4 and RR is now 40% more efficient and can improve performance by double digit percentages.

This means that when the new driver hits on 30 January, the RTX4090 and other older RTX cards are all going to get faster and then the gap between the 4090 and 5090 will get even smaller because Nvidia benched the 4090 at CES with DLSS3 and the 4090 will get faster with DLSS4 later this month.

I bet you though, that Nvidia will not release the new driver for reviewers, so that the new additional performance on the 4090 is not included in the reviews, that would be a typical Nvidia trick
 
Last edited:
It doesn't say 4090 was limited to DLSS3. It's only the MFG4X that is enabled extra for RTX5000.

Screenshot-2025-01-07-225418.png
 
Last edited:
As a primarily single player gamer, I'm a fan of both DLSS and Frame Gen. However I avoid Frame Gen in fast paced games (Black Myth Wukong for example). It looks like this MFG somehow removes a lot of the lag though? We'll see, but if that's the case I'll use it more often.
 
brostradamus said:
i would say framegen isnt the right approach
because it conflicts with the concept of realtime interactive media
rest is ok
Click to expand...
This is a good point.

It's like we're circling back to Dragon's Lair:

For those that are too young to have experienced it, this game was basically an interactive cartoon. You had to make input choices at specific moments, and the cartoon would continue in one of a few possible directions and then play the section of the cartoon that corresponded with your last input.

It was effectively "generating" frames, and a LOT more than 4, in 1983.

IIRC, it was generating a few full seconds' worth of frames in response to each input choice.
 
DanF said:
the time between the real frames doesn't change much between the 2, 3 and 4 frame gen versions. There's just more frames between them now, so it shouldn't feel much different as in lumpy or inacurate
Click to expand...

Yeah true but will still need 60+ base fps and therefore a 240Hz screen to really make use of it :p
 
Twinz said:
This is a good point.

It's like we're circling back to Dragon's Lair:

For those that are too young to have experienced it, this game was basically an interactive cartoon. You had to make input choices at specific moments, and the cartoon would continue in one of a few possible directions and then play the section of the cartoon that corresponded with your last input.

It was effectively "generating" frames, and a LOT more than 4, in 1983.

IIRC, it was generating a few full seconds' worth of frames in response to each input choice.
Click to expand...
I remember playing Dungeon Lair as a little kid at our local arcade and being impressed by its "graphics". I also recall after about 5 minutes of playing my and friends and being dazzled we decided the gameplay was garbage and went back to playing 1943 Midway.
 
Last edited:
Thinking about this a bit more and I’m curious; do the people that oppose DLSS / frame gen avoid playing performance demanding games entirely or just play exclusively with lower FPS?

Taking Wukong maxed and native, you only get 20ish fps with a 4090 which is unplayable for most. Even if the 5090 doubled this raw performance grunt and got you to 40ish fps, it would still be pretty terrible.

At which point, BMW would currently be considered by people that demand both ‘outstanding graphics’ and ‘raw performance only’ as an unplayable game…? Or do you use DLSS begrudgingly?
 
DLSS upscaling is great
its an actual increase in fps, preserving the look (mostly), imporving the feel

DLLS frame gen is questionable at best
a 40fps game will still feel like a 40fps game even with 3 generated frames taking it to 160fps. Oh, and from my limited experience if it hits CPU bottleneck, might even feel worse!
I think fake fps should be shown in brackets after real number. I'm targeting 100-120 fps in games not because I like the number, but because at that level the input feels smooth and reactive.
 
Last edited:
I will just be using DLSS upscaling and not fake frames and calling it a day with a 5080.

Seems only to be "needed" if you are playing at 4k native with path tracing in cyberpunk, a game which I have been done with years ago.

Even at 4k PT/Ultra with DLSS performance and no frame gen the 4090 is hitting 60fps - so the 5080/5090 should hit a bit higher. Not to mention turning down those settings that have near zero visual impact but a 20% framerate hit.
 
Nitefly said:
Thinking about this a bit more and I’m curious; do the people that oppose DLSS / frame gen avoid playing performance demanding games entirely or just play exclusively with lower FPS?

Taking Wukong maxed and native, you only get 20ish fps with a 4090 which is unplayable for most. Even if the 5090 doubled this raw performance grunt and got you to 40ish fps, it would still be pretty terrible.

At which point, BMW would currently be considered by people that demand both ‘outstanding graphics’ and ‘raw performance only’ as an unplayable game…? Or do you use DLSS begrudgingly?
Click to expand...
A lot will depend on the latency MFG imposes. I don't mind using frame gen to round off and keep a game at a constant frame rate, but I have to admit it does feel a bit "off" having to pay £2000+ for basically what amounts to a software upgrade. Also makes me concerned that game devs might become even lazier on optimisation and just fall back on DLSS 4 / MFG.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom