Fixed vs Adaptive? Which is better?

[Sticky White Stuff]

I have a 240HZ Monitor, so is it better for me to use uncapped FPS and just use Adaptive Scaling for 120-240 FPS, or just lock the game to 60 or 120 FPS then use 2X on Fixed?

For example, if my FPS is 100% stable at 60 FPS, then i suppose Fixed is better.
But what about if my FPS is between 80-120, but i want a stable 120? Is it better to lock it to 60 again, and then scale it to 120 or use Adaptive 120?

Thanks.

[Gizzmoe]

Try everything and then decide for yourself what you prefer, it's a matter of personal preference after all, and system-dependant.

[M]

Id say, if you wanna manually cap your games FPS, use fixed. when you dont wanna cap your games, use adaptive and with it, dont forget to set "queue target" to "2". it helped me a lot. I use adaptive mode, so I dont have to fiddle with different ideas and different profiles.

[Sticky White Stuff]

Thanks. I'll try and fiddle with the settings. I always use Fixed for Stable Locked 30/60 or 120 FPS on 2X. But when whenever i use games that don't have FPS caps, or i can go between let's says 80 to 120, and i want 120 stable, i use Adaptive with Queue Target set to 2 and Flow Scale 100% (Since i am using 1080p), however i also lower it sometimes when Streaming heavy games so it doesn't eat my GPU/RAM up.

[stoney]

i personally think fixed feels and works the best in my opinion but i also think loseless scaling is way better than dlss fg way more u can do with it im using x5 fg max 5 max frame latency with last of us part 2 no vsync over 300 fps looks really smooth and max response time is 2 milliseconds pretty insane

[stoney]

beware tho ur gpu may vary on how much fg ur able to use without losing 60 fps max i can do is x7 with the game still being at 60 ya its a bit overkill but i really like pushing and seeing what loseless scaling really is capable of

[Attis]

I measured Call of Duty latency with AMD latency meter. And adaptive came out on top, of course with GPU load at 60-80%. Nvidia reflex didn't add anything because there was no GPU limit.

1. FPS limit within the game
2. GPU should run at MAX 80% load in case of LSFG.
3. Queue 0 value.

Latency:
https://cdn.rios.hu/dl/upc/2025-04/07/120537_taaab17o89lbxaov_lsfgg.jpg

[HabibiFresh]

I heard fixed is less of a performance hit, so if you need more performance go fixed, but for me I have dual GPU setup and my 6700XT can handle it, so I do adaptive uncapped FPS to get maximum FPS my PC can push without having to cap to a minimum for fixed mode

[Attis]

Originally posted by HabibiFresh:

I heard fixed is less of a performance hit, so if you need more performance go fixed, but for me I have dual GPU setup and my 6700XT can handle it, so I do adaptive uncapped FPS to get maximum FPS my PC can push without having to cap to a minimum for fixed mode

The worst case is when the GPU is fully utilized. That gives the worst latency. I also recommend that neither GPU go above 80% when using LSFG.

https://cdn.rios.hu/dl/upc/2025-03/19/120537_fzbe8avhnbwbnkhz_lsfg_latency.jpg

[Sticky White Stuff]

On a RX 6600 XT, the GPU will almost always hit 90-100% with or without FrameGen. The only difference i notice is when i am Streaming on Discord with Native Resolution/60 FPS.

I do have to adjust the GFX lower and the flow rate to a bit lower, or sacrifice the Streaming Resolution and Framerate. However that only goes on certain games that chug a lot of VRAM and are heavy to Stream (or rather, heavy in general).

This might sound silly, but to get Monster Hunter Wilds at a playable state (120 FPS, at High, Native FSR 3.1 no Upscaling) on my Ryzen 5600X and RX 6600 XT, i have to use FSR 3.1, then turn on FrameGen in the game options, then cap the FPS to 30 in-game, which gives me 60 FPS, THEN use Lossless Scaling to 120 FPS Adaptive (Because it can still drop to 50-55 FPS at one area in the game). which is 60 to 120.

Now that is double FrameGen, however i can't seem to notice any latency playing the game or rather, it is minimal compared to consoles, opposed to PS5/Sony OLED where the latency seems even more noticable.

There is also no artifacting, warping, blurring, ghosting or anything of the likes, which surprised me. Without that setup, the game would be unplayable. And using Low or High settings does not affect perfromance or GPU Load much or at all, i gain 3-4 frames total?

I mean, it's an unoptimized game, so this is a life saver. It's also a game where input latency doesn't really matter even for advanced gameplay and moves because nothing lags behind me when i press something.

I never used anything above 2X on Fixed, or anything below 100% Flow Scale, because of artifacts. I am almost always happy with 30 to 60, or 60 to 120, or 120 to 240. And if for some reason the game drops frames or it is variable (Less than 120), i use 120 Adaptive as a base with Queue 2.

[AxolotlBaiken]

Originally posted by Sticky White Stuff:

On a RX 6600 XT, the GPU will almost always hit 90-100% with or without FrameGen. The only difference i notice is when i am Streaming on Discord with Native Resolution/60 FPS.

I do have to adjust the GFX lower and the flow rate to a bit lower, or sacrifice the Streaming Resolution and Framerate. However that only goes on certain games that chug a lot of VRAM and are heavy to Stream (or rather, heavy in general).

This might sound silly, but to get Monster Hunter Wilds at a playable state (120 FPS, at High, Native FSR 3.1 no Upscaling) on my Ryzen 5600X and RX 6600 XT, i have to use FSR 3.1, then turn on FrameGen in the game options, then cap the FPS to 30 in-game, which gives me 60 FPS, THEN use Lossless Scaling to 120 FPS Adaptive (Because it can still drop to 50-55 FPS at one area in the game). which is 60 to 120.

Now that is double FrameGen, however i can't seem to notice any latency playing the game or rather, it is minimal compared to consoles, opposed to PS5/Sony OLED where the latency seems even more noticable.

There is also no artifacting, warping, blurring, ghosting or anything of the likes, which surprised me. Without that setup, the game would be unplayable. And using Low or High settings does not affect perfromance or GPU Load much or at all, i gain 3-4 frames total?

I mean, it's an unoptimized game, so this is a life saver. It's also a game where input latency doesn't really matter even for advanced gameplay and moves because nothing lags behind me when i press something.

I never used anything above 2X on Fixed, or anything below 100% Flow Scale, because of artifacts. I am almost always happy with 30 to 60, or 60 to 120, or 120 to 240. And if for some reason the game drops frames or it is variable (Less than 120), i use 120 Adaptive as a base with Queue 2.

I did this exact same thing to make Monster Hunter playable on my 6700xt and it's shocking how I don't feel the latency at all.

[Dr.Doctor]

I have Deep Rock Galactic on a fixed 60fps. I set it adaptive to 120. The game uses Unreal Engine 4, and has the annoying Unreal-associated occasional stutters. W/ adaptive, the little blips get smoothed over a bit so that I find that the engine hitches aren't quite as noticeable.

Your mileage may vary. I'm not a high-reflex gamer. DRG at 60fps and LS at Queue Target = 0 ends up being almost not noticeable for input lag. The extra smoothness and virtually locked 120fps w/ LS just makes the game sing.