best frame gen setting

[Q]

explain like im 5 coz im too ignorant, which framegen setting is like uhh the best? quality/performance wise i just started playing without framegen so far so good but im just curious there are so many settings in this game maybe im missing out by not enabling frame gen? lol

[Grubbs008]

Depends what your rig is. If it's super good, there's no reason to enable it in the first place.

[★REM★]

Originally posted by Grubbs008:

Depends what your rig is. If it's super good, there's no reason to enable it in the first place.

Well.. it's subjective. I have a 4090 and a 7950X3D but i still use it.

@OP as i said, it's subjective. You need to try yourself and find the settings you like more and are best for your hardware. It is very different from system to system

[Craptolists]

Me personally, I have an Rtx 4080 and A 7950x3d like the person above however what Nvidia Series GPU's Are good at is Frame Gen. So I suggest using DLSS if you have an NVIDIA series graphics card and you really care about pumping the graphics to the max than I can recommend the use of frame gen although it may feel a bit off at first. the extra frames in my opinion are in fact worth it.

[Blur]

go for it if you are having stable 60+ fps, game feels much better with higher framerate.

[Ayahuasca]

I could not get the game to run for weeks ...clean install of windows and im getting 120 fps after a lil tweaking with a 2070 super with no frame gen and I see no reason to use it

The thing about frame gen is it looks worse always ....From my eyes anyway

[valium]

Originally posted by Grubbs008:

Depends what your rig is. If it's super good, there's no reason to enable it in the first place.

Things like frame gen are for people with good rigs. If you are trying to boost ♥♥♥♥♥♥ fps using frame gen, you are just going to create an even worse experience.

[Ayahuasca]

Originally posted by valium:

Originally posted by Grubbs008:

Depends what your rig is. If it's super good, there's no reason to enable it in the first place.

Things like frame gen are for people with good rigs. If you are trying to boost ♥♥♥♥♥♥ fps using frame gen, you are just going to create an even worse experience.

I have a xfx 7900Xt that with frame gen looks soo terrible I call it unplayable ....Mind you this was in 1080p. I have a 34 inch 1440 monitor on its way but still if im getting over 100 in a SP game it seems pointless

[catch22atplay]

Framegen just inserts a fake frame between real frames. So has the potential to double fps. But also increases latency although it's so much improved. As below. And note i don't see any visual differences between On or Off.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3438462585
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3438462763

On my system Framegen On with Vsync forced Off in NVapp is lower latency then Framgen Off and using Vsync On. Both set at 60fps. And ofc Framegen Off and vsync Off would be the lowest latency. Again set to 60fps for direct comparison and my monitor's refresh rate.

Valium was sort of correct. Basically latency was pretty bad when framaegen came out. We used to say if you couldn't mage at least 45ish fps don't use framegen as latency would make it unplayable. But they been improving it quite a bit and it's shockingly good now. I'd go with use it if you can do at least 30fps. Perhaps even lower then that but i've not tried it any lower. I did just try 31fps and framegen got me to 57fps and it felt real good.

[Ayahuasca]

Originally posted by catch22atplay:

Framegen just inserts a fake frame between real frames. So has the potential to double fps. But also increases latency although it's so much improved. As below. And note i don't see any visual differences between On or Off.

https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3438462585
https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=3438462763

On my system Framegen On with Vsync forced Off in NVapp is lower latency then Framgen Off and using Vsync On. Both set at 60fps. And ofc Framegen Off and vsync Off would be the lowest latency. Again set to 60fps for direct comparison and my monitor's refresh rate.

Valium was sort of correct. Basically latency was pretty bad when framaegen came out. We used to say if you couldn't mage at least 45ish fps don't use framegen as latency would make it unplayable. But they been improving it quite a bit and it's shockingly good now. I'd go with use it if you can do at least 30fps. Perhaps even lower then that but i've not tried it any lower. I did just try 31fps and framegen got me to 57fps and it felt real good.

Ya i dont see a difference in a single screenshot but moving around the world I see a difference if that makes sense

[catch22atplay]

Yes that does make sense. You can have ghosting and flickering of textures and other such issues. Flickering of bushes is pretty bad and can be lowered or for me removed by disabling Ray Traced Sun Shadows. There is still a little bit of ghosting but it keeps improving and my mind just seems to ignore it now.

[Ayahuasca]

Originally posted by catch22atplay:

Yes that does make sense. You can have ghosting and flickering of textures and other such issues. Flickering of bushes is pretty bad and can be lowered or for me removed by disabling Ray Traced Sun Shadows. There is still a little bit of ghosting but it keeps improving and my mind just seems to ignore it now.

The settings I am running now seem good game looks awesome now that it runs......lol

I imagine this new 1440P curved screen is gonna really look good

[Kuma]

First there is absolutely no point in going above the refresh rate of your monitor, so if your game already runs well enough to hit that then framegen becomes pointless.

Now, If you aren't hitting that and you want extra frames, well then it depends on how much of an enthusiast you are when it comes to paying attention to artefacting, blurriness when moving and input delay added by it. If none of that bothers you then by all means use it. Otherwise don't use it and stick to DLSS upscaling instead for a more stable experience.

[catch22atplay]

I ran a triple monitor setup using 32" monitors in lieu of a curved screen. Nvidia would put a monitor at limited color another kept it all full color or 8 bit vs 10 bit or 12 bit. It would randomly change the settings all the time. It was so frustrating every time i turned them on. Ended up giving all 3 away. Now i'm just using a 55" HD TV. Problem now is the edges are too hard to read stuff. So always looking at curved screens. Hard to justify their price and not doing the ultra wide 32x9 as some games just don't support it still. That leaves the Samsung 55" curved at 1700 bones. I got other priorities that take precedence. But ya some day and that's if they still make them.

[CeeD]

Originally posted by Ayahuasca:

Originally posted by valium:

Things like frame gen are for people with good rigs. If you are trying to boost ♥♥♥♥♥♥ fps using frame gen, you are just going to create an even worse experience.

I have a xfx 7900Xt that with frame gen looks soo terrible I call it unplayable ....Mind you this was in 1080p. I have a 34 inch 1440 monitor on its way but still if im getting over 100 in a SP game it seems pointless

When I upgraded from my 3440x1440 monitor to a 5120x1440, it made a huge difference. Totally depends on how many pixels there are. Also, AMD FSR works quite differently as I've understood it.

[A TIN OF JAR]

If you have a decent rig with good fps there is no need to use frame gen, all it does is introduce input lag, if you are getting 30 fps without frame gen then 100 with it turned on the game may look smoother it it will still feel like 30 fps.

Frame gen works best when you are getting 60+ fps.

I personally don't use it, I play at 1440p, all settings maxed, RT off with FSR 3 at quality and get 120-130 fps.