The real problem is when developers launch games that REQUIRES it to run properly even on high end computers. Other than that, it's a nice feature to have.

I love how this channel is not just reviews, but quality education on GPUs and games / settings. I have learned so much here.

As someone who plays the witcher on a 4k 144hz monitor, I’m definitely thankful this feature exists. I was very skeptical at first cause yknow “fake frames” but after getting a 4090 and experiencing it first hand, it’s pretty nuts

Great objective breakdown. I like how Daniel’s “math teacher” side shines through (IMO). As someone who works in finance, I like my data to be objective, measurable/quantifiable, and without bias (or with full transparency of existing bias). Great work!! Thank you, sir. And thank you for educating our youth and us.

Yeah I can see that frame generation will be better at higher fps because each frame persists on the screen for a shorter amount of time so the image quality degradation shouldn't be as noticeable. It will be interesting to see how they continue to improve it as well and this really does feel like a game changer.

Your channel has become one of my favorite tech channels. Keep up the great work!

Super useful breakdown of Frame Generation across multiple use cases. Probably won't be able to take advantage of it myself until the next generation of GPUs, but this sounds great for the types of computationally difficult games I tend to play (single player and often more CPU limited)

My take on this is it will get better. Much like the leap from dlss 1 to 2, frame generation 2.0 will probably be awesome

DLSS 3 is amazing. it's supposed to be used with single player games. Not competitive. So the extra latency doesn't matter. It also helps with alleviating cpu bottlenecks, so in games like spider-man that are very cpu heavy, you can get extra smoothness from the image by turning on one setting and having an image that's extremely similar to the original, but with extra smoothness

This was an outstanding breakdown of the tech and pros/cons. Thanks for your work on this.

Opinion prior to video: It's worth it on singleplayer games that dont require quick reactions as the latency is there. Kinda similar to how V sync used to suck for that reason. BUT you gain massive frames making it feel smother. Making it very useful for most singleplayer stuff. (will post an update after the video to see if my opinion has changed) Updated opinion: Completetly forgot about nvidia reflex, which could potentially offset the delay. Seems like implementation might the biggest factor. I imagine it could be really really good for getting smoothness if you're hitting fps in the 40-60 range where you really notice the drops. Being able ot maintain 60+ could be huge. So in a sense it feels very much like how DLSS 2.0 is, where you use it for that extra hump of performance over a threshold.

Really clear and useful explanation. I think I'll aim at having it off as much as possible, but will definitely try it in a few games to experience by myself how they feel. Thanks for the time and effort you put into it.

Having actually used Frame Generation in a few games, I will say it's an absolute game changer.

I'm really hoping that fsr3, or some future version of dlss frame gen integrates time warp reprojection that has been used in VR for years now. Technology like that actually increases the responsiveness of games, and are pretty light on hardware afaik. It could really improve game feel for keyboard and mouse users.

Wow, great analysis of DLSS! Thanks for the insight, getting my 4080 today, looking forward to testing this out.

Bro, I love your videos, so detailed yet simple to understand, thanks man !

Tried out Portal RTX on my 4080 at 4K, it was an amazing experience especially on controller. Absolutely no discernable difference to DLSS2 other than a smoother experience! Time to try out portal RTX on my laptop 3050 lmao UPDATE MY LAPTOP MELTED AT 10FPS

Doesn't feel like a gimmick to me. I've been playing Witcher 3 Next Gen at 4K max raytracing. It's so choppy that it's unplayable without frame generation, but with DLSS Quality and Frame Generation, it feels very smooth and I almost never notice the AI generated frames, and I don't notice any input latency.

Good video, Daniel. I got my 4090 a couple of days ago but I have barely been able to use it. The problem with DLSS is that it is an "I win more card". That is, it works best, when you don't need it. You have to be over 60 fps already, and in games that aren't fast paced like Spider-man, which is precisely where you want and need the extra fluidity, well, perceived fluidity. Also, I'm not sure I'd rather have 87 real fps with 290W or 120 fake fps with 400W of power, as you showed in A Plague Tale Requiem.

Loads of useful information. Thanks for a wonderful video!

It is a killer feature when is well implemented. In Portal RTX is really perfect, I can’t see any artifacts in this game.

I know how this whole enthusiasm can make you feel good. Almost like reading specs + enthusiastic comments about some cool product you would like to purchase but then you learn what those not so positive have to say and look at return rate statistic which give you cold shower feeling. Some say 1000R screens are immersive while ignoring 200 ping, some have it otherwise like me. This whole "feature set" makes me a little bit concerned if it wont make devs lazier by instead of proper (alert buzz word) optimizing just slapping those features and call it a day.

Thanks for the video, it's given me more information about dlss 3 frame generation. The issue I have is I am lock 4k@60fps on a 4k 60Hz monitor in the games I play. 1:06 contradicts his conclusion about latency. Native 4k 12ms, DLSS Quality 11.6ms and DLSS frame generation 8.2ms.

Beautifully explained, thank you Always a pleasure

After having used frame gen in requiem I can say it’s definitely nice to have and I don’t see any artifacts at all. I play at native 4K with a 4080 and get around 60fps without frame gen and with it on I get about 80-100 fps. It’s definitely nice to have and let’s me use native 4K + DLAA rather then upscale.

if your original FPS was around 40 or lower and you enable Frame Generation then the latency would suck but the game would look smoother the input delay would just get worst now if you have 60 or more FPS before you enable frame Generation then the latency impact can be tolerable depending on the game.

What I would love to see is a comparison of this Nvidia Game Motion Interpolation and that same concept on a Samsung TV. If you could manage to do a side by side comparison of those two, it would really show how much frame interpolation can benefit from having the power of a GPU as opposed to the power of a dedicated but weak image processing chip in a TV.

Almost 100K subs man!!

I would argue that fps has not always been a direct representation of input lag, anyway. Depending on how they were programmed, some games can feel much floatier and less responsive at 60 fps than others at 30 fps.

Interesting to know how Witcher 3 even tanks on 4090 when you turn on RayTracing because it's CPU limited. I have a 3080 Ti and also noticed that no matter what settings I change (e.g. crank up DLSS 2.0, or turn down graphics options) it doesn't make a huge difference when RT is on; makes me want a 4000 series card to do frame generation!

Absolute insane feature. DLSS and frame generation just work and are fantastic!

That was an awesome video , thank you. I just bought an 4090 , coming from an 6900 xt and you gave me all the information i needed.

For my DLSS3 working very well with Witcher 3 for example and possibly this will be a good choice for most of RPG games, problem is how to enabled it.... I was looking for ages until finally somebody wrote to enable Hardware Acceleration in Windows otherwise this option do not appear in graphic options (game), at least I do experienced this problem. Now I can finally play with DLSS3.

The latency induced by DLSS frame generation is probably similar to that you'd experience with Vsync, as they work in similar ways. Yes, it's true that Vsync increases input lag, but not many people, except hardcore FPS players would turn off Vsync and put up with screen tearing.

It is fantastic and keeps improving! I was not really that sure on it but yeah after a bunch of testing it's a great feature.

Great video, thanks for the discussion.

Its a killer feature, that's proprietary and hidden behind a massive pay wall. Please don't continuously promote it until it comes to more reasonably priced cards

My biggest issue with this is when it’s technically possible to run frame generation on a 2000-3000s card but they make it a software limitation to be able to use it. That makes the benchmarks skewed in my opinion

Your take on this is exactly what I think about this feature. I love FG. Personally I can't see any difference in gameplay and I'm not going to slow my gameplay down just to see a difference in the visuals. It's not ideal for competitive shooters but I love it for my single player games.

One thing that I notice is that in addition to increasing latency, consumption increases by about 60 watts. On the other hand, if the callisto protocol with a 4090 makes you wish you had dlss 3, it only speaks of how poorly optimized the game is, which is left for those with medium or low-end video cards

It's a killer feature for the problems that NVidia created, Raytracing. And currently there are only high end 40 series cards with this technology. This feature seems a lot more beneficial to the midrange where you'd actually be taking gameplay from unplayable to playable. When they show the DLSS 3 frame rates versus previous gens it's pure marketing gimmick to justify the price increases.

This is why I like Daniel... He's a No Bullshit kind of dude. I've watched reviewers playing with Nvidia 4000's and AMD 7900's and I can't see, feel, or tell a difference between any of them. As we all know You Tube over compresses the hell out of video and audio so your You Tube experience is gonna be half assed at best. To me these type of 'Benchmark' streamers are a bit elitist in my opinion, kinda like 'Look what I can afford and you can't' type streams. I like the way Daniel brings everything back to reality and real world results.

Fascinating and hugely informative , you got a subscribe and a like

Great point to have explained it can help with CPU limitation! Thanks!

It doesn't really matter as long as it is software locked to the 4000 series. It is nice to see it works on the 2000 series with mods now, but for real relevance, Nvidia has to offer it on all RTX cards officially. Otherwise my money is on FSR 3.0

I've used it on the 4090 and, to me, the tech is a nice addition for sure. Like you said in your video, very few people have seen it live, so saying it's a gimmick without testing it for yourself in your favorite games is not really fair. That being said, you have to take it from Nvidia's perspective. To me, it's clear that Nvidia implemented DLSS 1.0+ at the same time as RT to reduce the FPS penalty and it's pretty much the same with the new 4000 class of GPU's. RT taxes the CPU and cards like the 4090 can't be fully used to it's full potential because of it. Add the brut performance of the card at 1440p and it's CPU bound in most games ! For the most part, DLSS 3 is useful for RT titles which are CPU bound. I really doubt we'll see DLSS 3 in non-RT games.

New subscriber here! Fantastic video. Best in class. Thank you 🙂👌

Similar to DLSS is the frame generation already built into most TV’s. I use it in conjunction with BFI on my OLED, and the resulting motion clarity with 60fps locked is equivalent to that of 240fps. It’s a killer feature yet mostly overlooked by gamers and tech KZfaqrs.

Haven't seen enough videos on frame generation I think u did a great job and was very informative about the pros and cons and overall experience, I think overclocking the cpu to its boost clock from base clock would help the bottleneck this time around there heavier just an idea, great job again I stumbled apon ur videos from intel xess and enjoyed ur content ever since.

On a 27in monitor (1440p X 1.78) the visuals in SpiderMan are fine for me with DLSS3 (and im pretty sensitive to visual aesthetics), on a massive 4K monitor that might be different. On my side it just allowed me to crank all the RT and gfx on max and truly enjoy the game without a hiccup. For the Witcher 3 it's literally unplayable without FG if ppl want all the bells and whistles, but the game is still a bit stuttery and I'll hold off till they do more patches. I can't wait to try CP2077 with DLSS3 and for Nvidia to generally improve the tech even further. Fantastic video imo on DLSS3 and I totally agree.

@Daniel Owen: It would be nice to see how it will help on the future mid-range cards!? I can't find any analysis on that on YT... What's happening if you pull the handbrake? If you downclock the card targeting for example 30-40 fps? Your content is of top-notch quality -> .

informative as always, thank you

It is good, used it in a bunch of games. Feels like real FPS and I don't notice any input lag, probably because it's in singleplayer games mostly so it doesn't matter at all even if there's something. Some games like Portal RTX and Witcher 3 pretty much unplayable without it so I'd say it is a very good feature. When people compare 7900XTX and 4090 they love to just leave out DLSS3 for some dumb reason as if it doesn't exist.

I have rtx 4080 and I can honestly say almost not feel any issue with image quality and game responsiveness while DLSS 3 enabled. Also feels much smoother with high refresh rate monitor g sync enabled. I belive Nvidia will improve frame generation technology near future...

DLSS3 itself seems to work pretty well. But for my use case specifically, on an ultrawide in Witcher 3 I get flickering during cutscenes on the sides because they shrink the cutscenes to 16:9. It's so damn distracting I had to disable it.

You’re absolutely right. Thanks for the video!

I'm far more interested in if this will help boost lower end GPUs performance than top their GPUs because that's the only area I see this having value. 90fps to 130fps isn't as noticeable as 30 fps to 60+fps.

After trying it. It is quite awesome. Would I like to have that amount of real frames? yes....but since GPUs cannot possibly do that, FG is a great thing to have and it does make a big difference. Latency wise, as long as you're at 60 real fps or more, I don't feel the latency.

It has to be experienced in person because we all generally differ in how we feel latency. For example, with framerate, I am one of those that doesn't notice real difference past 75hz on a monitor. So while i do have a 144Hz monitor, it's wasted on someone like me, and I tend to prefer gaming on my 75hz ultrawide. But I do think that it would be more noticeable when say the native performance is putting out 30ish frames and DLSS is pushing out say 50-60, because it will still feel like 30fps input wise. The midrange cards is where DLSS3 is really going to be tested. Not so much these halo high end cards.

Playing Witcher 3 on max settings with RT in 1440p and the Frame Generation is amazing. Basically pushing my true 60-80 fps to silky smooth 120+ fps. Now when I get into Novigrad, my true fps drops to something like 40+ fps (hard CPU bottleneck), you can notice some issues. But I will still take generated 60 fps over true 30 fps any day.

My opinion towards this frame generation thing is, they are definitely some early stage of unfinished technology, it is like how you buy into the ray tracing technology back in RTX2000 series, you are buying into the ray tracing technology just to find out you need to turn off ray tracing option in the game because it tanks your FPS so much. Similarly for this frame generation thing, you will feel so left out in about 2+ years time when the technology improve so much more rapidly. Don't have the mindset of "I'm going to YOLO overpay right now, to have that 16 or 24GB of VRAM, and whatever DLSS3 tech, L2 cache, ray tracing cores, tensor cores just to futureproof", you can't futureproof your GPU purchase, things get so rapidly outdated nowadays, especially with Intel joining the triopoly, competition will heat up and take things to the next level. Unless, you play those games that are not dependent on these graphics technology, then you can sit on your GPU for many years.

This is exactly why I bought a 4080. I'll be able to play everything maxed out for years to come because of this feature alone.

great analysis and video

Great video! Myself i've been looking to upgrade since 2020. Waiting and waiting.. Thinking of pulling the trigger, would the 4090 be the better buy compared to the 4080? I've saved plenty to go for the big bucks but it still feels insane to spend 2k euros on a GPU alone where my last system was 1900 in total..

i like it, as a 4090 owner im surprised to say when its been available its been useful. Very difficult to spot any issues when playing... literally game changing in some cases like portal RTX. But im sure there will be those that do not have a 40 series card that will tell us how much of a trash gimmick it is because digital foundry froze the frames for them so that's it that's all they needed to see lol.

Frame Generation is literally a "game changer".

great video! i appreciate the objective take that isnt tainted by feelings towards nvidia themselves (positive or negative) or the 4090 as a product or anything like that. your thought align pretty much exactly with my own (disclaimer, i say "dlss 3" when i am talking specifically about frame generation. sorry for any confusion, its a habit) so far only 2 games i play have dlss 3: spiderman remastered and cyberpunk. cyberpunk at max settings with dlss 3 is absolutely incredible and is an unmatched gaming experience. spiderman does have a huge amount of motion which is a struggle for dlss 3 in terms of visual artifacts, but i also think the increased motion smoothness is really appreciated for how much more fluid and satisfying your swings feel. overall i 100% will be using dlss 3 in the future for games similar to cyberpunk. i think that is where dlss 3 will excel: games where i really want to run at max settings, but i also wish i would be able to get more than 60 fps. if i just bought a 4090, i dont wanna turn off raytracing, but i also dont wanna be playing a 60 fps. dlss 3 lets you have your cake and eat it too, because the drawbacks of dlss 3 are much less noticeable in that style of game. this might be weird, but i almost think it should be treated more like a graphics setting, rather than a performance setting like dlss 2. it decreases performance but makes the game look better, like any other graphics setting. like you said, dlss 3 goes against the idea that "framerate" and "responsiveness/performance" are the same thing. by increasing dlss 3, you make the game look better (smoother) but you are losing performance. in the type of game where you would want to crank the graphics settings, you would crank dlss 3. in the type of game where you would lower the graphics settings, you would turn off dlss 3. for the question of whether its a game changer, i think it will age similarly to raytracing. raytracing has matured a lot and looks really great, but it hasnt "changed the game" of lighting and reflections. normal lighting is still plenty good and definitely the norm, but raytracing has evolved past being just a gimmick into being a very solid feature. similarly, i foresee nvidia decreasing the latency and visual artifacting slightly over the coming years, but more than that i foresee game developers simply learning how to implement it better, and i think it will really come into its own at that point. not as a magic spell that doubles framerate in all games, but a very useful tool for situations where the improvement to motion smoothness is appreciated, and the small hit to latency and visuals are not bothersome. i am really excited to see where this goes, because motion smoothness/fps are very important to me

Hi Daniel, I noticed some screen tearing. Is this caused by the recording software, not having gsync enabled, or is it being caused by using DLSS3?

What matters is that tearing that happens with DLSS3 over the sync framerate. That's a deal breaker. Also the the latency reported in the nVidia overlay in the video is nonsense. On the left side you have reflex off, while ideally you would have reflex on on both sides. Keep reflex on in the driver. Compare the best case for both sides, not the worst case for the left side and the best case for the right side. You also want reflex on without DLSS if you happen to have low framerate. You know, to feel 30FPS more responsive.

I've tried frame generation with my 4090 extremely underclocked to simulate what it would be like on lower hardware and it still looks way better than just having low framerate. If every game had it I would pretty much always use it. The net gain is almost always more than what you lose in latency, it really does a good job at fooling you that more is there, like 80% compared to a real extra frame

Great video 👍

damn love your channel;D can imagine you being a sick math teacher!

I think "frame interpolation" would describe the tech better, but I believe that monicker was already taken.

Glad you're talking about DLSS because it's been absent from all the reviews Nvidia 4000 / AMD 7900... Just making more obvious that there is zero reason to consider the AMD GPUs over the 4080/4090.

Back when I first used it in Darktide, I thought it was black magic. But now I can't unsee the visual errors after knowing what to look for. It's definitely good enough for single player or PvE.

I think it's great. I don't notice any difference but the more smooth gameplay locked at my refresh rate (144hz). I'm sure in competitive games it may be noticeable but it's literally happening in milliseconds which is nearly imperceivable even if you tried. They also have Nvidia Reflex with most games with these DLSS settings which combats any input latency. I think it's a non issue UNTIL it's being relied on to make games run at a basic level.

I used frame generation for my entire play through of plague tale requiem on a 4090, never noticed any difference from regular gameplay. In fact there were a few times when I saw an artifact or graphical glitch thinking it was frame generation only to turn it off and see it was a glitch in the game. I used vsync as well and had frames locked to 141 max on a 144hz monitor, frame generation worked perfect with it and response time was steady at around 21-26ms vs regular 7-9ms which was unnoticeable in a third person game on controller. I should note that there was issues with using vsync when I first received the 4090 as the game would appear to extremely stutter if it and frame generation was turned on, however this disappeared in a driver update.

In Portal RTX with FG on, if you enable mouse acceleration in the options and increase mouse sensitivity, that latency feel pretty much disappears even if you are trying to feel for it.

It should theoretically be a benefit at graphics settings, where your card can't provide player framerates normally, but do when you turn DLSS 3 on. So on the lower end it should be clutch.

That was a great explanation of dlss (if correct). It's been a while, but I watched videos explaining dlss when it came out and dlss 2 when it came out and never remembered how it worked. I know it's a good technology and I'm sure I would use it but I'm a latency stickler so I have AMD

The big problem with this tech is how much a niche it is. If it's really only useful on slow paced single player games, and you need to be already at 60+ fps before it, then is it really that important? High fps on that sort of game does not matter much, so the only difference is the fluidity, which is something very subjective.

Yeah nvidia love mass marketing pseudo bar graphs to trick you to think that DLSS 3 while good can be misleading in certain titles. Happy Xmas Dan

I'm using it with an i5 13600K on a RTX 4070 Ti in MSFS2020. It's awesome. Smooth flowing frames on Ultra with double FPS in the range 60 to 120 depending on the scenery and the aircraft. Most of the time 90 FPS.

Hi guys could someone compare and contrast DLSS frame generation vs that "smooth" extra fps feature that many TV's have built-in?

I have 4090. I use frame gen in Darktides. It's revolutionary! It's bigger than upscaling and ray tracing combined. In fact, with it, it allows you to use ray tracing even more easily. I want it in as many games as possible, provided it's enabled correctly. I'm pissed off that CDPR has it in Witcher 3 but not in Cyberpunk 2077, when it's already working in reviewers versions.

it is good, sadly most people hating on it are probably on AMD bandwagon which I can relate as I was heavily biased and wanted amd to win all the time. Now I'm 3070 user and love what dlss has to offer. no plans on getting 4000s series since I just got this one. but definitely getting 5K series and I believe frame generation will improve even more

It's very nice to have when gaming at 4k. I think the higher the frame rate the better it seems to work and latency is not as noticeable. I did have some kinda strange stuff happening when playing Cyberpunk with it enabled, only very very minor.It does make Cyberpunk very playable at 4k with ultra rt and ultra settings, quality DLSS. I dont really play that many competitive games, so yeah, for me it works well.

Is there really a benefit of higher fps if there is no decrease in latency? I.e is there any added smoothness when there is an increase in latency especially on low to medium specced machines?

Funnily enough, I recently finished Spiderman where I played with DLSS 3 from start to finish (20 hours for the campaign) and during actual gameplay as well as cutscenes I could honestly not notice anything wrong with the image quality on my 42" LC C2 OLED TV which I am using as a monitor. The main reason I used frame generation were the CPU bottlenecks, because even with an overclocked i9-12900K and fast manually tuned memory I was still getting drops to ~90 FPS or so, which is a very noticeable drop from 120. DLSS 3 solved this and gives me stable 116 FPS (limiter to keep G-sync enabled) even when swinging through the city at street level where all of the cars / NPCs have to be rendered. Even more significant impact can be observed with Witcher 3 - a combination of DLSS 2 and 3 allows me to run pretty much 4K @ 120 FPS with maxed out settings. Just disabling DLSS 3 would drop me below 60 FPS in certain parts of Novigrad which is completely unplayable for me (I am a snob who needs 100+ FPS always). NV overlay says the latency is about the same and I cannot tell any meaningful difference (mouse and keyboard). The RTX 4090 costs an arm and a leg (2300 Euro for my Asus TUF here in Europe), but damn, playing all games at 4K HDR OLED and 120 FPS is really a completely different experience than what I had with my previous RTX 3080 and Asus PG279Q LCD.

This technology is amazing. What people don’t realize is that it only adds things and doesn’t remove anything. As long as it looks good while in “motion” it shouldn’t matter if the game generated it or the ai did. It looks incredible :D and I love it! It’s a whole different experience

What type of CPU, Memory and Drive are you using? Just curious. If you have a 13900K(s), 7950x, 7800x3d, 5800x3d, or even a 7950x3d, I wouldn't think it would be bottlenecking at the CPU.

Wow. 50 watts higher power draw when turning it on. Didn’t expect that.

I think this is great for demanding single player games like cyberpunk and plague tale where the highest responsiveness isn't that critical.

Killer feature in witcher 3, portal, and Warhammer Darktide. Was nice quality of life in Requiem.

Best thing for future Videos, add a timer, that is slowed down too, 50% yeah sounds nice, but you when you see 1 seconds visualized its much better.

What i am interested is how well dlss 3 will work on nvidia lower models, 4070 and below.

The fact that you need a $1600+ GPU to enjoy a remaster of a 2015 game is the real joke here.

Fantastic review. You went through everything that many bigger reviewers didn’t bother to look at it. Even though I’m on team red right now, I am interested in seeing how frame generation will help in the future.

you dont buy the 4000 series for the extra raw power over the 3000 series, you buy it for the softwre update called frame generation. this means that the weakest 40 series cards like the 4050 and 4060 will be indredible deals since they have access ti FG just like the expensive ones, but are the ones actually really needing/benefiting from it while maintining a low MSRP. Maybe this is the reason why nvidia has still not released them. They want to clear midrange 30 series stock as much as possible before releasing the low end 40 series cards.

I use DLSS 3 in the Witcher 3 and Spider-Man. Not noticeable since I use controller for both those games. Haven’t noticed any image distortion. In all honestly I think DLSS 2 distorts images worse since it can give it a grainy effect on the outline of textures. That is completely eliminated with DLSS 3.