Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
As a 2000 series card, I am glad DLSS 3.0 is compatible, because the quality of the image is a lot better than 2.1
It doesn't make the experience objectively better than native, unfortunately. I think a lot of people will like it better than without framegen at all. However, know that its inferiority to Nvidia framegen is due to severely bad graphical issues that are pretty noticeable with the bad ghosting among other problems, and also the framerate is a lot more unsteady, making it fluctuate up and down significantly, making it less of a steady experience.
Nvidia's frame gen is technologically superior and feels tonnes closer to the quality of native frames while has more steady smoothness. Also, Nvidia's feels like it is more snappy with less latency and less input lag, which means it's a better experience for games like this where pressing certain buttons at narrow times are important for functions like parrying. This means that in FSR, you have less time to react or your action is out of sync for the gameplay.
People without access to Nvidia's framegen can still try fsr3's and judge for themselves if they wanna have it running with the game. I'd say it's worth trying but still good to know the drawbacks.