I do not believe this is true at all. I think what I've seen them say is frame generation is not good for games where input lag is important, like multiplayer or racing games. And not good for games where your base framerate is low (sub 60). In terms of dlss, I don't think I've ever seen them say not to use upscaling.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Value of Hardware Unboxed benchmarking
- Thread starter Phantom88
- Start date
I do not believe this is true at all. I think what I've seen them say is frame generation is not good for games where input lag is important, like multiplayer or racing games. And not good for games where your base framerate is low (sub 60). In terms of dlss, I don't think I've ever seen them say not to use upscaling.
DegustatoR
Legend
Which isn't true at all.And not good for games where your base framerate is low (sub 60).
Which isn't true at all.
This is subjective. Their opinion is fine.
Played Alan Wake 2 with frames down to native 40 FPS. So with FG it goes up to 70FPS. Not one problem. Played absolut fine.I do not believe this is true at all. I think what I've seen them say is frame generation is not good for games where input lag is important, like multiplayer or racing games. And not good for games where your base framerate is low (sub 60). In terms of dlss, I don't think I've ever seen them say not to use upscaling.
But this channel is not only about eports games. And a lof of them supporting DLSS 2. Think about this: When we have 4K displays with 500Hz DLSS performance will be the best option to get good image quality and high frames.
DegustatoR
Legend
No, it's not "subjective", it's just plain not true.This is subjective. Their opinion is fine.
Whether FG is fine or not depends on a lot of things and base framerate is just one of them.
People are playing games at 30 fps with several times more lag than what you get with FG and ~30 base fps.
Saying that FG isn't good here is moving the goal post to make FG look bad in cases where the issue isn't in FG actually but in the low base framerate to begin with.
In other words it's not FG which is "not good" but its the <60 fps which may not be good. And just like with 30-40 fps the actual use case of FG may in fact be completely fine with such base framerates.
DegustatoR
Legend
It's fine for some people and it's fine in some games. It is also somewhat dependent on how stable the framerate is. In any case this has nothing to do with FG so, again, saying that this is a FG issue is wrong,Are we really going to start discussing whether sub-60 fps gaming is not based on personal preferences? It's fine for some people and not others. If you're okay with it, great. No one has to agree with you.
It's fine for some people and it's fine in some games. It is also somewhat dependent on how stable the framerate is. In any case this has nothing to do with FG so, again, saying that this is a FG issue is wrong,
I would just say it's fine for some people. I would never play a game at 30 fps. I won't even play games at 60 fps.
I'd have to go back and watch, but I'm pretty sure HU's opinion on frame gen is that 30->60 isn't a good experience because you have 30 fps input lag and the artifacts are more noticeable. THey also didn't like the ui issues when FG was first released. They're entitled to that opinion, just as you're entitled to yours. Neither of you are "wrong."
DegustatoR
Legend
The artifacts are equally noticeable at 60 and 180 fps with FG because they strobe for each second frame. So if there is an artifact you will notice it at any framerate, the difference could be just in how long they persist on the display. Both aren't worth talking about though since these artifacts aren't really that visible, even at 15->30 fps.I'd have to go back and watch, but I'm pretty sure HU's opinion on frame gen is that 30->60 isn't a good experience because you have 30 fps input lag and the artifacts are more noticeable.
As for lag though I disagree that playing at 30 fps is somehow better (since apparently it's not good otherwise) than playing at 30->60 with 30 fps input lag.
The artifacts are equally noticeable at 60 and 180 fps with FG because they strobe for each second frame. So if there is an artifact you will notice it at any framerate, the difference could be just in how long they persist on the display. Both aren't worth talking about though since these artifacts aren't really that visible, even at 15->30 fps.
As for lag though I disagree that playing at 30 fps is somehow better (since apparently it's not good otherwise) than playing at 30->60 with 30 fps input lag.
I would guess that the higher the input frame rate the few the artifacts because there are smaller differences between frames for it to generate from. If you're playing a 3D game and you rotate a camera quickly, you're going to have massive differences between frames at 30 fps vs the differences you'd have at 120 fps. The 120 fps is going to have an easier time generating an intermediate frame. Most of the sites are comparing frame generation with ray tracing at low frame rates, which I find annoying.
I don't think HUB would recommend 30 fps at all. They hate it. So it's not a question of 30 vs 30->60. They'd recommend lowering settings to get to 60 fps, and adding frame generation from there.
The same sort of caveats we talked about with DLSS3 also apply to FSR3. To avoid visible artifacts in generated frames you'll need a base frame rate of at least 60 fps with a final output around 100 to 120 fps. And given that frame generation does not improve latency, for that true high refresh rate experience you'll want a base framerate of 100 to 120 fps with a final output above 200 fps for the responsiveness we typically associate with the best gaming experiences. This is why we refer to frame generation as a feature which enhances the games smoothness rather than something that improves overall performance. The benefits are entirely visual in nature. If you're a game that doesn't have the gpu performance to hit those frame rate targets then frame generation, whether that's dlss or fsr, isn't going to deliver a very good experience. If you're a gamer that's only playing at 60 fps but wants to improve that to a true high refresh rate experience, frame generation isn't properly capable of that. If you're a multiplayer gamer that specifically wants to increase frame rates to access lower latencies and increase responsiveness to make you more competitive, frame generation is usless for that.
You can disagree with that opinion, but it's pretty coherent. I guess cry about people having different opinions than you if it makes you feel better, but it's super annoying when every argument boils down to "That person is not allowed to have that opinion. My opinion is the objective one." Generally we're talking about people's preferences and subjective experiences. I always aim for 120 fps as a minimum if I can, but if I can only get 90 then I'll live with it. If I can only get a stable 60 I'm probably never playing the game. Some other people will happily play 30. My opinion/preference is not more correct than theirs. They can say "30 fps is good enough" all they want, but that's not more true either.
Last edited:
Either you or HUB are mistaken here. Bumping from 30 to 60fps with frame generation doesn't mean you will have the same input lag as 30fps. Input lag will be worse in the FG scenario.I'd have to go back and watch, but I'm pretty sure HU's opinion on frame gen is that 30->60 isn't a good experience because you have 30 fps input lag and the artifacts are more noticeable.
In the native case the frame that took 33ms to render can be displayed immediately. With FG that frame cannot be shown until it's been used to generate a preceding frame which will then be displayed before the native frame can be displayed.
DegustatoR
Legend
Technically it can be but perceptually you likely won't notice the difference. But this again depends on the game and its gameplay.Input lag will be worse in the FG scenario.
As HUB has stated multiple times, you would be using reflex to begin with.FG has lower input lag because it uses Reflex. That is another reality ignored by this channel.
As HUB has stated multiple times, you would be using reflex to begin with.
Not if the comparison you're making is across vendor or across platform as these discussions often are.
e.g. HUB may be comparing the 7900XT to the 4070Ti but excluding FG from the comparison due to the "increased latency". Which would make no sense unless the equivalent AMD solution is imemented which is unfortunately far less common.
Even if you're just looking at the NV GPU in isolation, if you reject FG on the basis of increased latency then you are in effect saying the game is unplayable on othe vendor GPU's or console which often run with even higher latency.
They do mostly consider games unplayable at 30 fps for their preferences. They don't reject FG, they just don't find it particularly useful if the base framerate is already low. They do factor it in as a value add(along with superior RT and upscaling) which contributes to AMD needing to be cheaper given otherwise equivalent performance.Not if the comparison you're making is across vendor or across platform as these discussions often are.
e.g. HUB may be comparing the 7900XT to the 4070Ti but excluding FG from the comparison due to the "increased latency". Which would make no sense unless the equivalent AMD solution is imemented which is unfortunately far less common.
Even if you're just looking at the NV GPU in isolation, if you reject FG on the basis of increased latency then you are in effect saying the game is unplayable on othe vendor GPU's or console which often run with even higher latency.
Saying that FG at 60fps has the same input lag as native 30fps (+ Reflex) can lead to a false understanding about how it works though.Technically it can be but perceptually you likely won't notice the difference. But this again depends on the game and its gameplay.
And anyone who says that probably has a false understanding themselves which is another reason to correct that statement.
FG has lower input lag because it uses Reflex. That is another reality ignored by this channel.
But if the game supports reflex you can normally enable it without fg. That means you should be comparing reflex no FG vs reflex with FG.
DegustatoR
Legend
Unless the game which has added DLSS FG support didn't have Reflex previously. In which case the comparisons are different.As HUB has stated multiple times, you would be using reflex to begin with.
Sure but the difference isn't as huge as some people make it sound (unless you're running FG with vsync on a non-VRR display which would be a wrong way to use it to begin with).Saying that FG at 60fps has the same input lag as native 30fps (+ Reflex) can lead to a false understanding about how it works though.
The bigger issue is that you kinda expect lower lag from the fluidity you see but you don't get it because the frames are generated.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 112
- Views
- 12K
- Replies
- 157
- Views
- 7K
- Replies
- 34
- Views
- 4K
- Replies
- 81
- Views
- 11K
