I found this method pretty interesting and logical. 

Have any of you tried it already? 

Many people in the comments are reporting a very smooth experience after implementing it.

https://youtu.be/651r5ZtJOuE

 

Limiting fps to a fraction of the monitor frequency (and applying FG, if possible) always was the way to achieve smooth frame times. The new setting in the config file might make this easier. I am going to try. 

Tried this briefly this morning before work.  Dont see any reduction in vram use during a quick test sitting in Fenix at gate of LEBB.

Frame limited doesnt appear to kick in during the initial sim load, my 3080ti is 'screaming' due to the high fps. Before this test I was using RTSS to limit frames but had to set it as the total inc frame gen eg 60

Currently testing this "FrameLimiter 30" modification in my C:\Users\<User Name>\AppData\Local\Packages\Microsoft.Limitless_8wekyb3d8bbwe\LocalCache

RTX 5070ti, FrameGen x2 (max fps 60 and vsync ON in Nvidia App), DLSS.

First flights seems to show that it reduce the FG artefact (massive flickers and stutters) maybe by limiting load on GPU ? https://forums.flightsimulator.com/t/extreme-flickering-and-stuttering-with-frame-generation/678009

Edited April 18, 20251 yr by vbazillio

I have max fps set to 60 in NCP using the frame gen mod with super DLSS quality and monitor FPS using the nvidia experience overlay.  FPS show 60 or just a little below

When I turn down max fps to 30 in the NCP I get 30 FPS or just below and a choppy msfs.

TrackIR is smooth with the former but horribly jerkey with the latter, so I have to stick with 60 in the NCP.

I have noticed that with the latest driver I am automatically using NVIDIA profile K even though I have not set it manually.

I'm not on the SU2 beta though I have used DLSS swapper to update to the latest Nvidia and AMD dlls 

Edited April 18, 20251 yr by cianpars

5 hours ago, vbazillio said:

First flights seems to show that it reduce the FG artefact (massive flickers and stutters) maybe by limiting load on GPU

If there is truly a significant redux in FG artifact that would be music to my ears, but doubtful it's related to limiting load on the GPU because that is already what I do, limited load to 30 or so native FPS and that had no impact on the artifact problem.  I stopped using FG of any kind because of this and the 2nd screen judder.  That being said if indeed this lock method truly improved artifact I would be better with coping with the judder issue.

Yes, Frame generation quality is much much better. No artefacting. I belevie it is because sim is producing stable limited frames on gpu, exactly half from target with FG. gpu is not utilized as much, running cooler also.

Ofcourse that is if you limit to something rational that your system can handle. I limit it to 45, and with FG I get 90 smooothh fps on Gsync 360Hz monitor. no stuttering, lower power consumption and better quality. I havent been so excited since FSX days.... 🙂

 

 

The only scenario that will show a reduction in artifact is if you are moving from a driver based or external framegen to an in game framegen with motion vectors, which is now available in  beta SU2 for AMD cards and possibly older Nvidia GPUs that could not previously take advantage if the 40 series in game framegen.

For me personally the suggestion to lock the frames to improve frame pacing and conserve gpu and cpu cycles is not new information. What is new is altering the user config file to do the lock and whether there is any additional benefit to doing this vs using the tried and true external solutions (RTSS, Radeon Chill, or whatever the Nvidia driver based counterpart is to do the lock.

The person in the video is asserting that locking the frames in the game gives a VRAM benefit. I am not seeing this vs my preferred method (Radeon Chill)

Edited April 18, 20251 yr by Maxis

6 minutes ago, Maxis said:

The only scenario that will show a reduction in artifact is if you are moving from a driver based or external framegen to an in game framegen with motion vectors, which is now available in  beta SU2 for AMD cards and possibly older Nvidia GPUs that could not previously take advantage if the 40 series in game framegen.

For me personally the suggestion to lock the frames to improve frame pacing and conserve gpu and cpu cycles is not new information. What is new is altering the user config file to do the lock and whether there is any additional benefit to doing this vs using the tried and true external solutions (RTSS, Radeon Chill, or whatever the Nvidia driver based counterpart is to do the lock.

The person in the video is asserting that locking the frames in the game gives a VRAM benefit. I am not seeing this vs my preferred method (Radeon Chill)

Person in the video is known for his invalid statemants. But he was close this time 🙂

It is not the same. External solutions will limit frames at the end of pipeline. This is limiting renering of "real frames" by the simulator. VRAM will be the same, the sceen is still the same all the textures and objects are the same, so..... ignore the vram part.

 

15 minutes ago, Dankovic said:

Person in the video is known for his invalid statemants. But he was close this time 🙂

It is not the same. External solutions will limit frames at the end of pipeline. This is limiting renering of "real frames" by the simulator. VRAM will be the same, the sceen is still the same all the textures and objects are the same, so..... ignore the vram part.

 

Fair .. at least you understand the process and thus my skepticism. I appreciate that. But as someone who also likes to see the "graphs" i would have to do some measurements to see if there are any actual measurable benefits or if its just placebo.

My hardware configuration is not typical so cannot be fully relied on when i run my own tests (AMD CPU+GPU) so i don't speak up much and do my own thing but i usually test out my options before deciding on what to use.

Will run a few tests over the weekend to fully validate the assertions in his video.

Edited April 18, 20251 yr by Maxis

It would be nice if there was a way to smooth out things with FG.  I get triple digits but sometimes there is stuttering.

Are they saying to also set a dynamic fps target along with enabling FG in sim?

24 minutes ago, Dankovic said:

Yes, Frame generation quality is much much better. No artefacting. I belevie it is because sim is producing stable limited frames on gpu, exactly half from target with FG. gpu is not utilized as much, running cooler also.

Sounds promising.  I launched 2024 after the edit to Frame Limit to 30, but when I then enabled Nvidia DLSS Frame Gen in 2024 settings the rate does not double.  Why might that be?

11 minutes ago, Maxis said:

Fair .. at least you understand the process and thus my skepticism. I appreciate that. But as someone who also likes to see the "graphs" i would have to do some measurements to see if there are any benefits or if its just placebo.

My hardware configuration is not typical so cannot be fully relied on when i run my own tests (AMD CPU+GPU) so i don't speak up much and do my own thing but i usually test out my options before deciding on what to use.

Will run a few tests over the weekend to fully validate the assertions in his video.

I am running a similar set up 9800x3d and 9070xt  I tried to limit frames and then frame gen using the Radeon Experience app but it didn’t do anything  sticking with FSR3 and in a frame gen  

 

 

 

 

 

Just now, MarkW said:

I am running a similar set up 9800x3d and 9070xt  I tried to limit frames and then frame gen using the Radeon Experience app but it didn’t do anything  sticking with FSR3 and in game frame gen  

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited April 18, 20251 yr by MarkW