Comment on ELI5: How does Frame Generation even work?
Kolanaki@pawb.social 1 day agoThis kinda also explains to me why my experience with games that offer FG have been mostly bad. The only game where FG actually made the game smoother, visually, was STALKER 2. Without FG, I get like 40fps even with FSR. With FG, it looks and almost feels like natural 60fps in other games but the input lag kinda ruins all the visual gains. Every other game, tho, where I get close to but not exactly 60fps, if I turn FG on the FPS counter says 60fps but the game is visually not fluid (even if the input lag isn’t at all noticeable; like standing still and watching trees blow in the wind or NPCs walking around looks even lower than the 40-50fps I was getting without FG on) and it often starts to stutter every few seconds/minutes which varies on the game.
ericwdhs@discuss.online 1 day ago
Yeah, there’s a fair bit of criticism about the tech being better for the higher-end cards that shouldn’t need it in the first place. Another way this shows up is in VRAM amounts.
To ELI5, how effective FG is at improving the base frame rate scales with available VRAM. (Think 60 improved to 80 versus 60 improved to 120.) Some modern games hit 12GB regularly now even in 1080p and before any fancy tech. (There’s a separate discussion on game optimization in there.) Since lower-end cards really skimp on provided VRAM (every tier should really be at least 4GB higher), there’s not much space there for FG to work with in the first place.