Why Do People Hate DLSS 3 Frame Generation?

cyberpunk look without fg better and performe better on my system lol xD

you cant see input latency with video recorded inside the game, you need camera with the same frequency as the monitor or better

It really depends on how bad you need performance. If it jumps you from 20 to 50 FPS, absolutely its worth it. But i'm not sure jumping you from 70FPS to 140FPS is worth the very obvious artifacting and blurring. At some point you reach the limit of what your eyes and optic nerve can process, after 80-100 FPS almost all humans stop noticing even a subtle difference. You've been watching TV at sub-30fps all your life. But im sure it will get better as they patch it.

Frame Generation in Cyberpunk 2077 looks like crap when you really stop and look at things like distant vehicles. But I think the reason why most people hate it is because it's another crutch for developers to forego optimizing their games.

Most of them are RADEON users just cannot accept the fact that NVIDIA newer cards are keep on getting better and better.

The main reason to increase FPS - to get lower input latency. People who have at least slightest idea how video games work hate frame generation because it's a scam - it doesn't actually increase FPS, it doesn't make latency any lower, which real FPS increase would do. FPS is not a number of some pictures sent from GPU to display in one minute, FPS is a number of game engine updates, which consists of 3 phases (simply told) - update of game world (core logic, objects, input from player and etc.), CPU render and GPU render. FG doesn't increase this FPS, it only emulates the last phase, producing just an interpolated image, which is not connected to any game logic at all, it is NOT A GAME FRAME. But nvidia claims that FG increases exactly FPS - it's a lie, and it's a disgusting, terrible lie, because it gives game devs excuse to make horriblly optimized games. I'm shocked such thing even exists, and i'm even more shocked that SO many people are seriously defending it. This world is so messed up...

if I understand this correctly u get 90-100 fps with FG on but the latency feels like fucking 30-40fps? then what is the point of FG?

So, Frame Genertion increase input latency? It's not recommend in online FPS games like csll of duty?

Frame generation is amazing. The problem was never frame generation. The problem is that manufacturers are gonna realise "hey, we can just make worse cards, but use frame generation to make the performance better than its predecessor", and now you're buying a 300$ product for 1500$

...turn off mouse acceleration in Windows Mouse Settings. You might be surprised at how many people don't know that this adds latency.

Wtf are you talking about? Nobody hates it.

The tech itself is not the problem. It's quite good. The problem is how devs and Nvidia use it.

People should really think for a second and realize that both DLSS and upscaling technology is the future lol.
We literally cannot make more powerful GPU's without:

A) significantly increasing size of the GPU

B) Letting the AI do the work.

Keep in mind that AI technologies,including this one will be better with time.

Lol there was always naysayers telling how new things are shit etc. If we listened to them,we wouldn't have vertex nor pixel shaders,AA or anything of that sort lol.

increased the lag too much

Ez. The people that "hate it" don't have it. Simple.

for me its so bad i can play at 60fps rather then frame generation

if you didn't see a side by side, you would never know the difference. My opinion is, players play games at such a fast pace that they never really take the time to see the higher quality of graphic images.

To be honest is an incredible technology but the only thing I fear is when devs become lazy and not optimizing their games properly Making DLSS required instead of an option.

I dont like frame generation because it greatly increases input lag and also makes motion kinda laggy.

has anyone had visual bugs when using frame generation? like it gives my ui a "ghosting" effect where parts of even in game textures have difficulty keeping up

BCS is a piece of crap, end of the video. G.Bye

Noone hates it. I Love it with all my Heart.

I turn it on here, and it looks great. I have an 4060 and it boosts performance by twice.

I think it’s interesting tech but don’t like using it. Even using it at higher fps the latency is noticeable. I don’t even play competitive twitch shooters I just like low latency. Frame Gen with Reflex is ok-ish but Reflex without frame gen is ideal for me.

Rather have low latency than motion clarity at least if I can get a solid 60fps.

number 1 haters is allways AMD employe fans that say frame generation is shit

Why do people hate it?

Gee, perhaps because it's being used as a crutch to avoid properly optimizing a game to run on as many different hardware configurations as possible?

I've said it before, and I'll say it again. If you as a developer can't be fucking bothered to ensure that your game runs at native resolutions, and frame rates up to 144FPS, you have no business being in the game industry, full stop.

it is really good stuff that people need to try before being negative. The 5ms for high refresh rate is fine with me,

the problem here is that Nvidia sells it as "the eternal solution" they didn't improve in rasterization power and put this thing and said "our GPUs runs better than before" that is not true, is the same, and almost all devs are getting behind the door where they say "this game runs well with DLSS 3" and with just only rasterization is just a terrible experience, makes everything worse, it really shouldn't exist!

Too much latency with fg.

Most people hating because as someone said that it locked behind 40xx series and also because it’s not the "raw performance" from card , i have a 1070 quite a long time and never been able to try DLSS at all, now I’m looking to upgrade to 4060

There are two big problems I have with upscaling and frame generation. One is that they use these software technologies as the main selling point of their GPUs to try and justify cutting corners on the actual hardware of the GPU. The second reason is that developers use them as a crutch to not optimise their games properly. It's getting absolutely pathetic now. Upscaling and FG are overrated. I have always preferred native rendering and have been more into the actual hardware specs of a GPU instead of its features such as DLSS, FSR and FG.

when your faking frames why not 2000fps

avg gamer be thtupid ...is the answer

Why did VHS win over Betamax? Rental stores.

I honestly believe that competing standards are GOOD for the industry and even better for innovation. Look how far we've come in three years. I don't agree with the cost of entry involved with Nvidia cards, but that should improve with future generations (as lower end cards increase in power). With that said, history proves that the BEST solutions don't always win the market. Developers are ultimately the deciding factor, as they want the best presentation possible for the largest number of buyers. Why do you think Nvidia invests in projects such as Portal RTX, Quake RTX, Cyberpunk Next-Gen, and others?

FSR may not be better (yet), but has a leg up as it appeals to a broader audience.

People don't Hate FSR or DLSS. People hate Graphics Card companies using it to show performance gains, from the last generation to the next, instead of showing performance gains Native to Native. And when game companies use DLSS as a reason not to optimize their game.

Because Nvidia is making it their overpriced selling point instead of the card.

it def helps with visual smoothness, but for me, i cant stand it in cyberpunk, it feels terribly laggy.

DLSS is legitimate quantum leap forward in technology of the last decade.

Because they cant afford it. Those same people are praising the AMD version that comes in FSR3. Some people are too stupid to realize that the technology is insane and should hate nVidia for the price, but not the technology itself. Nvidia is single handledly moving forward computer graphics in the last years with DLSS, ray tracing and now frame generation. They should be hated for the greedy pricing, not for the technologies that they release and cry about "raw performance". 50 years ago there were 300+ horsepower cars that would get destroyed by a 150HP modern car on the track. Its not all "raw performance".

because its software locked for rtx 30 and 20 cards , thats why we hate it. fk nvidia they can shove their cudas and 8gb vram up their ass

Its crappy software rendering, Am i the only old fart in tge world who remembers aoftware rendering for video games in 1999? Thats what DLSS AND FSR IS!!!! Its the Equivalent to 1990s software rendeing in video games.... it was trash back then and its trash now...

Oh what? Its good because now an AI is doing it? Its still shitty software rendering.... it will always be inferior to RAW hardware rendering, Its why we abandoned the option later on in the 2000s in favor of open gl and direct x rendering

NVidia could activate it easily for older GPUs but they just want to milk everything

Too bad it adds so much input lag, feels almost as bad as cloud gaming

Funny they use DLSS + RT on, then compaire DLSS + FG + RT... Thus making it look better with 3x the performance with half that from DLSS, and the next half from FG.

It's +50-100%

Yeah because it's excuse to sell underpowered and/or overpriced GPUs, because they provide 70% higher "fps", when infact real compute power is very lacking.