I was trying out FSR4 on my RX 6800 XT, Fedora 42. Works really well and it easily beats FSR3 in visuals even on Performance. It does have a significant performance hit vs FSR3 though but it still works out to be a bit faster than a native rendering on Quality.
you used the int8 quantized leaked version right? i thought the f8 version doesn’t run on rdna2
also i wondered if the fsr4 feels like bigger input lag, can you tell?
Yes, it’s the INT8, not FP8 version.
Why would FSR had anything to do with input lag? The only reason why input lag would increase is due to FSR4 being more difficult to run on RDNA2 which would be due to lower FPS as FPS is also directly tied to input lag.
But we are talking about 120FPS vs 150FPS here when comparing Quality Presets so I doubt you could even tell. And even if you can, just lower the preset, it will still look better and get you to the same performance.
From multiple games I’ve tested so far my conclusion is that I am almost always CPU limited in most games even with 5800X3D (in CP2077, Hogwards Legacy, Kingdom Come Deliverance 2), most areas are CPU heavy due to a lot of NPCs and FPS drops in those areas enough where my GPU is bored, the only benefit of FSR in those areas is that FSR4 looks better but wont yield any performance benefits.
Input lag is caused by frame interpolation, right? Or nah?
It’s because game logic is calculated on real frames and these things lower the real frame rate even though they give you more rendered frames. If you were getting 40 real FPS, and then you go to 30 real fps, you will feel a significant amount of lag even if you are getting 60 fps in fake frames. Basically the game loop is running slower and stuff like input polling is happening slower even if you have a higher frame rate.
Framegen is worse the lower your base frame rate is.
The penalty to the speed at which the game runs is much more significant, if you normally run at 40 fps and framegen gives you 60 (30 real) then you have introduced 8 ms of latency just from that. While the same 25% performance cost going from 180 fps to 270 (135 real) adds just 2 ms.
The lower your real frame rate is the harder it will be to interpolate between frames because the changes between frames are much larger, so it will look worse. Also the lower your frame rate the longer any mishaps will remain on screen, making them more apparent.
True, Ig I was trying to teach people about why FSR often causes input lag. If you are getting 120 real frames then yeah, it probably won’t matter much, but if you are getting less then 60 real frames it’s going to be a worse experience unless you are playing menu games or something.
Yeah I just wanted to illustrate that with some numbers :)
It’s a bit counter-intuitive that frame generation is worse the lower your base frame rate is. And Nvidia in particular has no interest in making it clear that this tool is only really good for making a well-running game run even better, and is not going to give your 5070 “4090 performance” in any meaningful way.
Frame generation shouldn’t be a bottleneck on the CPU though, should it? That stuff is happening on the GPU. I know I saw a video about this stuff but I can’t remember the real reason input lag increases with frame generation/interpolation.
Most games aren’t bottlenecked by your CPU at all. It spends a lot of time waiting for the GPU to be done drawing you a picture.
“Why isn’t the game doing other stuff meanwhile?” you might ask, and part of the answer is surely, “Why do stuff faster than the player can see?”, while another part is likely a need to syncronize the simulation and the rendering so it doesn’t show you some half-finished state, and a third part might be that it would be very confusing for the player to decouple the game state from what they see on screen, like you see yourself aiming at the monster, but actually it moved in between frames so your shot will miss even if the crosshair is dead on.
I didn’t mean the game loop being bottlenecked, I said frame generation. But yeah, all that is also true, I know. 👍
I was trying to explain why the game loop would be held back by the rendering speed, even though they run on different hardware.
If you are bottlenecked by the GPU that means the game loop spends some of its time waiting for the GPU. If you then turn on frame generation, you devote parts of the GPU to doing that, which makes regular rendering slower, making the game loop spend even more time waiting. This will increase input latency.
Frame generation also needs to delay output of any real frame while it creates and inserts a generated frame. This will add some output latency as well.
In the opposite scenario, where you are bottlenecked by the CPU, enabling frame generation should in theory not impact the game loop at all. In that case it’s the GPU that’s waiting for the CPU, and it can use some of those extra resources it has to do frame generation with no impact on input latency.
it’s not. The whole point of FG was to take advantage of high refresh rate monitors as most games can’t render 500FPS even on the fastest CPU… alas, here we are with games requiring FG to get you to 60FPS on most systems looks at Borderlands 4 and Monster Hunter Wilds
Right, but FG shouldn’t be touching the CPU in any way, should it? It should be a local thing on the GPU transparent to the CPU, unless I’m misunderstanding how it works.
It’s not using CPU
Then I don’t understand how it would affect the game loop negatively. I’ll look into it though, will do some research.
Maybe it’s not the CPU but with FSR either way the real frame rate drops which is why you get input lag. The game logic/game loop is only calculated per real frame. Which means if you take a 20% drop in real frame rate you are going to get 20% more input lag.
Isn’t FSR supposed to give better performance/real fps?
If you get higher real FPS via upscaling, and a lower resolution. It can improve input latency and sim speed.
It is (if we talk about FSR as upscaler tech). But it wont help in CPU bound scenarios where the GPU already has to wait for CPU.
And in that case, frame generation will cause even more input lag I guess. I’m thinking frame generation is best for systems where the GPU is the bottle neck, I guess, input lag wise? Where it gets served frames ASAP, and can interpolate frames as soon as the latest, and second latest frames are available. Which it does anyway, but it has to wait less, then.
It’s kinda the same thing. You get input lag based on the real framerate. Since interpolation requires some extra performance the base framerate will likely be a bit lower than the framerate without interpolation which will case an increase in input lag while providing smoother image.
It seems that the input lag is more perceived, rather than actually experienced, from what I understand. Like if you go from 30 to 120 fps, you expect the input lag to decrease, but since it stays the same (or slightly worse), you perceive it to be much more severe.
The frame rate isnt going from 30 to 120 FPS. It’s actually going from 30 to like 20. The rendered frames are different then the CPU frames which handles the game loops, (physics, input, simulation, etc)
Not sure we have the same definition of frames here.
Generated frames are created using a neural network, they have nothing to do with the actual game scripts and game loop and input polling and stuff. FSR does generate frames to interpolate between real frames but things like physics and input are not being generated as well. It’s only visual. I guess maybe you have to have some basic knowledge about how a computer program and game engine works to understand this.
Basically the CPU steps through the simulation in steps. When you use frame gen, if it lowers the actual frame rate, then the CPU is making less loops per second over everything, like the physics updates, input polling(capturing key presses and mouse events), and other stuff like this.
Oh yeah, now I remember why there’s more input lag with frame interpolation turned on. Taking a shot right now and now it pops into my head.
Anyway, it’s because while the frame interpolation adds more frames per second, the “I-frames”—or real frames—you’re seeing are lagging behind one I-frame. This is because it can’t start showing you interpolated frames until it has two frames it can interpolate between.
So you won’t start seeing I-frame N-1 until I-frame N (the latest I-frame) has been generated, thus creating extra input lag.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong, I’m supposed to be asleep…
yes, that’s why FPS in this case is not a good measure of performance
Very much so. The very reason why we want more fps is to have less input lag, that’s my personal take anyway. That’s the only reason why I have a beefy computer, so the game can respond quicker (and give me feedback quicker as well).
If it drops the real frame rate more than FSR2, which it does, then yes, you will have more input lag.