People who are usually against frame generation are the same people who haven't experienced it, nor have the hardware for it. I was sort-of in the same boat, I was at least skeptical but once I got my 4090 and tried it in MSFS, I realized it's a game changer. Visually, almost perfect but the performance increase is absolutely massive and it even provides a bigger breathing room for your CPU, thus an even bigger potential performance overhead and better 1% lows. Obviously you have some caveats in terms of the game, input lag etc. but that's less of an issue for flight sims.

Only reason why I'm hesitant about AMD's version is that they usually just provide a technically worse version of everything they do. Functional but worse. That doesn't really get my juices flowing. But preliminary testing sounds promising and if that means I'll be able to have it in X-Plane, have that running as smooth as MSFS? I'd be over the moon.

1 hour ago, NovemberUniform said:

I have no need to double the frames when already at 50fps

no wonder since you run at low resolutions of 1680x1050px. @ 4K there nearly 5 ! times as many pixels that need to be calculated each frame. plus frame generation can provide head room for additional add ons like traffic, complex avionics, better clouds etc. which quickly brings your 50 fps down to its knees. frame generation is a godsend for high resolution and complex scenarios. otherwise I would gladly still be using my old RTX 1080 and have saved $ 4.000

Edited August 26, 20232 yr by turbomax

47 minutes ago, Sethos said:

if that means I'll be able to have it in X-Plane, have that running as smooth as MSFS?

I already have sufficient 70-80 fps @ 4K in x-plane 12 due to its inherent lower avionics, scenery and cloud quality. frame generation won't change that. just no comparison to MSFS.

Edited August 26, 20232 yr by turbomax

if the artifacts are no worse than what VR users are currently seeing, and it only adds minimal latency, this is awesome imho

8 hours ago, turbomax said:

no wonder since you run at low resolutions of 1680x1050px. @ 4K there nearly 5 ! times as many pixels that need to be calculated each frame. plus frame generation can provide head room for additional add ons like traffic, complex avionics, better clouds etc. which quickly brings your 50 fps down to its knees. frame generation is a godsend for high resolution and complex scenarios. otherwise I would gladly still be using my old RTX 1080 and have saved $ 4.000

I'm not sure you got my point.

Due to my weak GPU I'm struggling at many big airports, even with my lower res monitor. I can't even think about buying inibuilds KJFK, KLAX or EGLL. With track IR, everything lower than 30 fps gets uncomfortable (for me, personally). If this new technology would boost me from 20fps to 40fps, that would be huge.

But I've read that with lower frames as a base, the effect may not be as noticeable as with higher frames as a base.

I guess time will tell. 

9 hours ago, NovemberUniform said:

This definitely sounds interesting! I've read that the effect brings better results when already at higher frames. I have no need to double the frames when already at 50fps. I want to double the frames when I'm at 20fps. That would be huge. 

I’m not sure what you mean by “better results” at higher FPS. Any further insights or links?

My experience is that the results are a doubling of FPS no matter what your base FPS is. The reason this is a game changer in MSFS is because the raw FPS can literally fluctuate between 30 and 90 on my high end system, depending on where I’m at and a dozen other factors. With FG this means my FPS is consistently over 60 rather than dropping into ugly territory. 

Is FG of any benefit in my shooter games?… no… since they run at 80+ FPS anyway. It does really help pick FPS off the floor in a game like Cyberpunk if you use raytracing. So it’s realky game dependent I think. But it is a god-send for MSFS. 
 

 

Double post
 

 

Edited August 26, 20232 yr by Virtual-Chris

9 hours ago, NovemberUniform said:

This definitely sounds interesting! I've read that the effect brings better results when already at higher frames. I have no need to double the frames when already at 50fps. I want to double the frames when I'm at 20fps. That would be huge. 

You would definitely increase fps if you only had a 3000 card and could therefore run DLSS 2. I have a 3070. DLSS 2 compared to TAA isn't double fps but it is about a whopping 40% fps increase on my setup to use DLSS instead of TAA.

Point is, AMD's new feature will probably work even better, just like they tell me that DLSS 3 does indeed work even better than DLSS 2.

13 minutes ago, Virtual-Chris said:

I’m not sure what you mean by “better results” at higher FPS. Any further insights or links?

I got it from here:

https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2023-amd-reveals-long-awaited-fsr-3-tech-and-frame-gen-for-every-dx11dx12-game

Quote: It also means that the technology is compatible with the current generation consoles - but just remember that a high frame-rate is required for best results. AMD recommends a 60fps base frame-rate for best results with FSR 3.

More fps might be a critical need for some people soon. Almost everyone complains the SU beta reduces fps. I believe those who say it doesn't have very top end hardware. For me it's night and day, the beta is much worse fps and stutters. I think the release SU will be similar, but I hope not.

52 minutes ago, NovemberUniform said:

I got it from here:

https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2023-amd-reveals-long-awaited-fsr-3-tech-and-frame-gen-for-every-dx11dx12-game

Quote: It also means that the technology is compatible with the current generation consoles - but just remember that a high frame-rate is required for best results. AMD recommends a 60fps base frame-rate for best results with FSR 3.

I see. Thanks.  The issue is that if you're in a high motion, low FPS situation, there's more changing between frames, making a generated frame more challenging to create accurately.  The thing is, with MSFS, unless you're flying an F16, you're generally in a low motion situation compared to say a first-person shooter,  so generating a frame isn't going to be as problematic at low FPS.

Edited August 26, 20232 yr by Virtual-Chris

probably best to test drive a RTX 4xxx and see for yourself if it is what you want. AMD announced FSR3 already back in November 2022, again at CES to launch "shortly". now again at Gamescom in August 2023. "„will be available soon“.I wouldn't hold my breath.

https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/dlss-3-0-frame-generation-at-low-fps/587244/13

 

1 hour ago, NovemberUniform said:

I'm not sure you got my point

agree, I didn't. 😊

you would definitely benefit enormously from a GPU upgrade, with or without frame generation.

2 minutes ago, turbomax said:

agree, I didn't. 😊

you would definitely benefit enormously from a GPU upgrade, with or without frame generation.

Sure thing. I'm saving up already for a better card. Not long ago I bought mfg crosswind rudder pedals, they weren't cheep either. It's all adding up, lol.

For the time being I stay away from sceneries I know require a lot of VRAM. Just now I'm doing a flight in the Fenix from KBOS (flytampa) to KIAH (fsdt), both pretty large payware airports, but I can run them without any problems. Fps don't go below 40, so it's possible. I enjoy my sim as it is, already. Still, this FSR3 feature looks interesting. 

On 8/25/2023 at 10:59 PM, Virtual-Chris said:

TVs have been doing frame generation for years for 24FPS content to 120Hz.

That's not the same, a movie is recorded at a specific frame rate using the real world (nothing rendered).  GPUs generate the frames and they vary considerably pending complexity of what needs to be render.  For slow motion the frame generation is less of an issue, for faster motion it gets inaccurate.  I hate it when marketing toss around AI ... it's such a buzz word and hardly accurate in most use case.  The AI created frame is just some simple mathematics based on compares it's not true "learning" by any stretch of the imagination.  

Frame generation is a good idea for lower budget GPUs to help them try to keep up, but for higher end GPUs I would NOT use frame generation, give up accuracy for an FPS number that doesn't matter to anyone.