I offiicially don't believe the performance haters

[krs31]

I have had the lucky opportunity to play this game now on multiple different hardwares.

My normal rig is a 4080 and 5800x and it runs flawlessly at 4K.

I have now been playing the game for a couple of days on much inferior hardware. I've been using a laptop with a 2070 that's now 5 years old. This mobile 2070 gpu would put it below recommended specs and probably just above minimum. Running it at 1080p, medium settings and FSR/FG, it runs a solid 60 fps, no stutters or dips, looks actually quite good, and no crashing/pop in or anything. The gameplay runs and feels perfect. No input lag or anything. I can't fault it.

People complaining have either seriously not done something right if they are above recommended specs or are literally running the game on a toaster. It's quite sad people will try and throw this game under the bus as a blind hater where it's likely your own fault it runs like crap. I have seriously lost faith in the internet after this little experiment.

[p00se2]

your believe does not change their reality

[Xrusa]

anecdotal evidence is not indicative of real life. 3070 and i9-13700k could barely scrape 60fps at minimum settings without frame gen. and it's far from a minority experiencing performance problems.

[Mr. E Skull]

Originally posted by krs31:

I have had the lucky opportunity to play this game now on multiple different hardwares.

My normal rig is a 4080 and 5800x and it runs flawlessly at 4K.

I have now been playing the game for a couple of days on much inferior hardware. I've been using a laptop with a 2070 that's now 5 years old. This mobile 2070 gpu would put it below recommended specs and probably just above minimum. Running it at 1080p, medium settings and FSR/FG, it runs a solid 60 fps, no stutters or dips, looks actually quite good, and no crashing/pop in or anything. The gameplay runs and feels perfect. No input lag or anything. I can't fault it.

People complaining have either seriously not done something right if they are above recommended specs or are literally running the game on a toaster. It's quite sad people will try and throw this game under the bus as a blind hater where it's likely your own fault it runs like crap. I have seriously lost faith in the internet after this little experiment.

Wow please tell me another fairy-tale so I can drift off to dream land.

[krs31]

Originally posted by Xrusa:

anecdotal evidence is not indicative of real life. 3070 and i9-13700k could barely scrape 60fps at minimum settings without frame gen. and it's far from a minority experiencing performance problems.

It actually makes sense people have poor performance without frame gen. But what is peoples problem with FG? I have not been able to fault it on both my desktop or this laptop. It looks and runs perfectly with it, and thanks to FSR you can use it on older hardware.

But seriously what is peoples problem with it?

[krs31]

Originally posted by Mr. E Skull:

Originally posted by krs31:

I have had the lucky opportunity to play this game now on multiple different hardwares.

My normal rig is a 4080 and 5800x and it runs flawlessly at 4K.

I have now been playing the game for a couple of days on much inferior hardware. I've been using a laptop with a 2070 that's now 5 years old. This mobile 2070 gpu would put it below recommended specs and probably just above minimum. Running it at 1080p, medium settings and FSR/FG, it runs a solid 60 fps, no stutters or dips, looks actually quite good, and no crashing/pop in or anything. The gameplay runs and feels perfect. No input lag or anything. I can't fault it.

People complaining have either seriously not done something right if they are above recommended specs or are literally running the game on a toaster. It's quite sad people will try and throw this game under the bus as a blind hater where it's likely your own fault it runs like crap. I have seriously lost faith in the internet after this little experiment.

Wow please tell me another fairy-tale so I can drift off to dream land.

Must suck being a blind hater

[DragynDance]

Originally posted by krs31:

Originally posted by Xrusa:

anecdotal evidence is not indicative of real life. 3070 and i9-13700k could barely scrape 60fps at minimum settings without frame gen. and it's far from a minority experiencing performance problems.

It actually makes sense people have poor performance without frame gen. But what is peoples problem with FG? I have not been able to fault it on both my desktop or this laptop. It looks and runs perfectly with it, and thanks to FSR you can use it on older hardware.

But seriously what is peoples problem with it?

During a generated frame, a game does not read inputs until the end of the generated frame, as they don't account for input, they are an AI attempting to generate an image of what it thinks is going to be the next frame. The more AI generated frames there are, the more and longer these input delays are, ranging from 20 MS to as high as 100 MS for excessive use of framegen. For referance, average human reaction time is 250 MS, so anything above like 10% of that is fairly noticeable.

[Mr. E Skull]

Originally posted by krs31:

Originally posted by Xrusa:

anecdotal evidence is not indicative of real life. 3070 and i9-13700k could barely scrape 60fps at minimum settings without frame gen. and it's far from a minority experiencing performance problems.

It actually makes sense people have poor performance without frame gen. But what is peoples problem with FG? I have not been able to fault it on both my desktop or this laptop. It looks and runs perfectly with it, and thanks to FSR you can use it on older hardware.

But seriously what is peoples problem with it?

Hey good luck with your cataract surgery bro but frame gen is ugly as sin and absolutely not intended for low resolutions to achieve 60FPS.

[アンジェル]

Originally posted by krs31:

I offiicially don't believe the performance haters
I have had the lucky opportunity to play this game now on multiple different hardwares.

My normal rig is a 4080 and 5800x and it runs flawlessly at 4K.

I have now been playing the game for a couple of days on much inferior hardware. I've been using a laptop with a 2070 that's now 5 years old. This mobile 2070 gpu would put it below recommended specs and probably just above minimum. Running it at 1080p, medium settings and FSR/FG, it runs a solid 60 fps, no stutters or dips, looks actually quite good, and no crashing/pop in or anything. The gameplay runs and feels perfect. No input lag or anything. I can't fault it.

People complaining have either seriously not done something right if they are above recommended specs or are literally running the game on a toaster. It's quite sad people will try and throw this game under the bus as a blind hater where it's likely your own fault it runs like crap. I have seriously lost faith in the internet after this little experiment.

I think it still took you quite a while... but yeah - I wholeheartedly agree with your observations.

[krs31]

Originally posted by DragynDance:

Originally posted by krs31:

It actually makes sense people have poor performance without frame gen. But what is peoples problem with FG? I have not been able to fault it on both my desktop or this laptop. It looks and runs perfectly with it, and thanks to FSR you can use it on older hardware.

But seriously what is peoples problem with it?

During a generated frame, a game does not read inputs until the end of the generated frame, as they don't account for input, they are an AI attempting to generate an image of what it thinks is going to be the next frame. The more AI generated frames there are, the more and longer these input delays are, ranging from 20 MS to as high as 100 MS for excessive use of framegen. For referance, average human reaction time is 250 MS, so anything above like 10% of that is fairly noticeable.

This may be true but I have been playing with FG to hit 60fps and I honestly can't tell the difference in input latency

[Khergit Horse Archer]

if only this game uses path tracing and runs 50fps without frame gen no one would dispute anything but thats not the case

heck i bet ur 5080 runs cyberprank psycho rt at 50fps without frame gen but at least it has eye candy lmao

[TwoFaceTony]

Most people are running the game fine. The vocal minority have created an echo chamber of complaints and hatred.

[Akemua]

Originally posted by krs31:

Originally posted by Xrusa:

anecdotal evidence is not indicative of real life. 3070 and i9-13700k could barely scrape 60fps at minimum settings without frame gen. and it's far from a minority experiencing performance problems.

It actually makes sense people have poor performance without frame gen. But what is peoples problem with FG? I have not been able to fault it on both my desktop or this laptop. It looks and runs perfectly with it, and thanks to FSR you can use it on older hardware.

But seriously what is peoples problem with it?

Because it's not actual frames at the end of the day. It's an ai generating fake frames to imitate what real frames would look like.

Regardless of the end user experience, this just opens up avenues for horrid consumer practices. Nvidia is already taking advantage of this with their 50 series cards, and it give publishers and devs an excuse to not optimize their games properly.

[DragynDance]

Originally posted by krs31:

Originally posted by DragynDance:

During a generated frame, a game does not read inputs until the end of the generated frame, as they don't account for input, they are an AI attempting to generate an image of what it thinks is going to be the next frame. The more AI generated frames there are, the more and longer these input delays are, ranging from 20 MS to as high as 100 MS for excessive use of framegen. For referance, average human reaction time is 250 MS, so anything above like 10% of that is fairly noticeable.

This may be true but I have been playing with FG to hit 60fps and I honestly can't tell the difference in input latency

Well, 250 MS is only average. So if you're below average, you would have a hard time noticing.

[Mr. E Skull]

Originally posted by DragynDance:

Originally posted by krs31:

This may be true but I have been playing with FG to hit 60fps and I honestly can't tell the difference in input latency

Well, 250 MS is only average. So if you're below average, you would have a hard time noticing.

Dude you just murdered this man in cold blood.

[Akira]

Originally posted by krs31:

Originally posted by DragynDance:

During a generated frame, a game does not read inputs until the end of the generated frame, as they don't account for input, they are an AI attempting to generate an image of what it thinks is going to be the next frame. The more AI generated frames there are, the more and longer these input delays are, ranging from 20 MS to as high as 100 MS for excessive use of framegen. For referance, average human reaction time is 250 MS, so anything above like 10% of that is fairly noticeable.

This may be true but I have been playing with FG to hit 60fps and I honestly can't tell the difference in input latency

frame gen looks so bad that anyone who thinks it looks even remotely decent must either be legally blind OR exist in a different timeline.

Even with the mods that slightly improve the garbage, all you've done is slightly spit shine a turd, in other words, it still looks bad.

But even worse than all of that is the input latency caused by frame gen, if you normally play online games with 200+ latency, maybe it won't bother you so much, but personally, that bothers the hell out of me.
There's a reason I still have a CRT for certain games other than the fact that I just like the look of phosphor.

Hint, it has to do with latency.