FSR 3, when can the community expect it!

[ics93]

They could just make a statement saying either: 'we're working on it' or 'we gave up'.
It would surely make people angry no matter which one would be the statement, but, everyone gets angry at everything nowadays. Some people are angry right now because they don't make the statement. If they made the game free, gave everyone who got it a 4090 and paid 50 bucks, some people would find a reason to complain. I know I'd appreciate the transparency. I'd get pretty pissed because I kinda bought the game expecting it to have Frame Generation for my GPU, but I'd surely appreciate the transparency.

 

[cp2x77gamer]

why are you all so obsessed with fsr3? it won't upgrade your gpu to 4090. and it physically unable to increase your fps from 15 to playable 30 or 60.

 

[Farbros9]

why are you all so obsessed with fsr3? it won't upgrade your gpu to 4090. and it physically unable to increase your fps from 15 to playable 30 or 60.

Because it can increase it from 60 to 100? Or from 40 to 60? Every fps when <60 matters.

 

[ics93]

Because it can increase it from 60 to 100? Or from 40 to 60? Every fps when <60 matters.

I read somewhere that it won't be much effective when it's below 60 already, but I don't know. Everyone says a lot of stuff online and 99% of the time they don't have a clue of what they are saying. For me, if the final result is the sensation +10fps, the game will feel incredible, since my fps is in between 40 and 50.
To the other dude that i'm too lazy to quote: I'm not obsessed, but AMD announced it for this specific game. I waited 4 years to have money to buy the game and have a barely decent pc to run it. I live in a country where an entry level graphics card costs two months of wage of a regular citizen. My computer is worth around 8k of our money, and even though thats like 1.5k dollars, for us that's like half a year of minimum wage. The vast majority of people here would have to work half an year to have a PC like mine, but without eating or paying bills. It wasn't easy to buy it and, yet, it's considered an entry level PC that some would build for their children in other places. A 3070 here is between 3.5k and 5k. So the prices don't scale like in the USA or Europe either. That all said, gaming is important to me and I'm more obsessed with Night City than FSR3. First time I saw Night City, I got very interested in this game. With all honesty, I like the writing, I like the voice acting, I like the lore, but I don't like the story and, usually, story is 70% of the game for me, yet, I feel 100% satisfied just because of graphics and visuals. Walking though the night with the neon reflecting on the ground is one of the best sensations I ever had in gaming. I want that feeling to the max. So, yeah, I think I have the right to be frustrated if something that would give me the chance to enjoy my favorite hobby to its max potential gets scrapped out. I also think it's natural that, from time to time, I get a bit anxious to see it implemented. And with all honesty, I think implementing it must be very hard, I'm not on the devs shoes to say: 'oh, but it's X months already!" For me it's like: take your time, dude. It'll be worth the wait. But I would appreciate a lot the transparency if they stated if there are real intentions to implement it or not. If they implement it by Q1 2025, I'll be happy as long as they implement it. That's why FSR 3 is important to me.

 

[Farbros9]

I read somewhere that it won't be much effective when it's below 60 already, but I don't know. Everyone says a lot of stuff online and 99% of the time they don't have a clue of what they are saying. For me, if the final result is the sensation +10fps, the game will feel incredible, since my fps is in between 40 and 50.
To the other dude that i'm too lazy to quote: I'm not obsessed, but AMD announced it for this specific game. I waited 4 years to have money to buy the game and have a barely decent pc to run it. I live in a country where an entry level graphics card costs two months of wage of a regular citizen. My computer is worth around 8k of our money, and even though thats like 1.5k dollars, for us that's like half a year of minimum wage. The vast majority of people here would have to work half an year to have a PC like mine, but without eating or paying bills. It wasn't easy to buy it and, yet, it's considered an entry level PC that some would build for their children in other places. A 3070 here is between 3.5k and 5k. So the prices don't scale like in the USA or Europe either. That all said, gaming is important to me and I'm more obsessed with Night City than FSR3. First time I saw Night City, I got very interested in this game. With all honesty, I like the writing, I like the voice acting, I like the lore, but I don't like the story and, usually, story is 70% of the game for me, yet, I feel 100% satisfied just because of graphics and visuals. Walking though the night with the neon reflecting on the ground is one of the best sensations I ever had in gaming. I want that feeling to the max. So, yeah, I think I have the right to be frustrated if something that would give me the chance to enjoy my favorite hobby to its max potential gets scrapped out. I also think it's natural that, from time to time, I get a bit anxious to see it implemented. And with all honesty, I think implementing it must be very hard, I'm not on the devs shoes to say: 'oh, but it's X months already!" For me it's like: take your time, dude. It'll be worth the wait. But I would appreciate a lot the transparency if they stated if there are real intentions to implement it or not. If they implement it by Q1 2025, I'll be happy as long as they implement it. That's why FSR 3 is important to me.

What do you mean it won't be much effective? It is the same as with upscale. You can upscale from any resolution. The quality of upscale from 540p to 1080p would not be the same as with 1080p to 4k. The more real fps you have, the better would be the AI fps, but it can generate as many as you want, as long as you are ready for all those artifacts. I think by 40 you might already have problems with quality.

 

[ics93]

What do you mean it won't be much effective? It is the same as with upscale. You can upscale from any resolution. The quality of upscale from 540p to 1080p would not be the same as with 1080p to 4k. The more real fps you have, the better would be the AI fps, but it can generate as many as you want, as long as you are ready for all those artifacts. I think by 40 you might already have problems with quality.

I read someone saying that if you have less than 60, it won't be of much use. I don't remember where. I said it's not a trustful information, I just threw it there cause that made me contain my expectations. If you read carefully, I said: "[...]but I don't know. Everyone says a lot of stuff online and 99% of the time they don't have a clue of what they are saying."
My fps fluctuates between 40 and 50. Most of the time it's 45. It's something I'd have to test to see if it's viable. But it gives me hopes of playing at psycho. Based on what you said about artifacts, it would depend greatly on the kind and frequency of artifacts. If it's one here and there in exchange for superb performance, well, I won't complain a bit.

 

[LeKill3rFou]

Just checked a video on Starfield, nothing really "scientific" and it could be totally different on Cyberpunk, but FSR3 FG boost FPS for sure but without surprise, also add many little weird visual issues.

 

[ics93]

Just checked a video on Starfield, nothing really "scientific" and it could be totally different on Cyberpunk, but FSR3 FG boost FPS for sure but without surprise, also add many little weird visual issues.

If the visual oddities end up like that in most games and CP2077, it'll be awesome. Seems very solid really. I wonder with lower fps how bad it would be.

 

[GrimReaper801]

Just checked a video on Starfield, nothing really "scientific" and it could be totally different on Cyberpunk, but FSR3 FG boost FPS for sure but without surprise, also add many little weird visual issues.

And that's the thing a lot of people don't get. A lot of people seem to think of FSR3 as some kind of holy grail that will make their game run smoooooothly and just increase their FPS. The reality is very different.

First, as your video shows, it introduces a lot of video artifacts. Secondly, it introduces higher levels of input latency.

That's for someone with decent hardware that runs games smoothly from the get-go. Frame generation is aimed at people who are already hitting 60+ FPS and want a smoother looking experience but if you aren't hitting 60FPS, the experience will not be nearly as smooth. The further away you are from reaching 60 FPS, the worse those issues get.

The game will look smoother but it'll feel worse.

I read someone saying that if you have less than 60, it won't be of much use. I don't remember where. I said it's not a trustful information, I just threw it there cause that made me contain my expectations. If you read carefully, I said: "[...]but I don't know. Everyone says a lot of stuff online and 99% of the time they don't have a clue of what they are saying."
My fps fluctuates between 40 and 50. Most of the time it's 45. It's something I'd have to test to see if it's viable. But it gives me hopes of playing at psycho. Based on what you said about artifacts, it would depend greatly on the kind and frequency of artifacts. If it's one here and there in exchange for superb performance, well, I won't complain a bit.

It is not meant to be a tool to just be suddenly able to crank those graphical settings to the max. I'm hitting a constant 80+ FPS at psycho RTX. That's with path tracing turned off. If I turn on path tracing, I drop to 40ish. FSR3 isn't meant for me to be able to turn path tracing on and still get my 80 FPS smooth experience.

If the best you are getting is an average of 45, FSR3 is definitely not aimed at you. I'm not trying to be a dick here, it's straight from AMD:

minimum of ~60 FPS before frame generation

This is not meant for you to just magically increase your graphical settings and not feel it. Depending on how sensitive you are to input lag, anything under a minimum of 50FPS pre-frame generation will feel terrible and get exponentially worse the farther away you are from the target 60 FPS pre-FG.

 

[ics93]

And that's the thing a lot of people don't get. A lot of people seem to think of FSR3 as some kind of holy grail that will make their game run smoooooothly and just increase their FPS. The reality is very different.

First, as your video shows, it introduces a lot of video artifacts. Secondly, it introduces higher levels of input latency.

That's for someone with decent hardware that runs games smoothly from the get-go. Frame generation is aimed at people who are already hitting 60+ FPS and want a smoother looking experience but if you aren't hitting 60FPS, the experience will not be nearly as smooth. The further away you are from reaching 60 FPS, the worse those issues get.

The game will look smoother but it'll feel worse.



It is not meant to be a tool to just be suddenly able to crank those graphical settings to the max. I'm hitting a constant 80+ FPS at psycho RTX. That's with path tracing turned off. If I turn on path tracing, I drop to 40ish. FSR3 isn't meant for me to be able to turn path tracing on and still get my 80 FPS smooth experience.

If the best you are getting is an average of 45, FSR3 is definitely not aimed at you. I'm not trying to be a dick here, it's straight from AMD:



This is not meant for you to just magically increase your graphical settings and not feel it. Depending on how sensitive you are to input lag, anything under a minimum of 50FPS pre-frame generation will feel terrible and get exponentially worse the farther away you are from the target 60 FPS pre-FG.

About the artifacts, I didn't mind the ones in the video at all. They seemed very subtle and while moving I doubt I'd even notice them. Also it's an NVidia card. I'll check out how it worked on an AMD card later. Supposedly, it should be even smoother.
About your explanation, that was a good one. I'm lay, I don't have any idea of how it works. So thank you.
But I didn't test it with my own eyes and rig on the specific game I want. Maybe it'll work ok and improve enough for me. Maybe it'll be bad. Maybe for 99% of people my results would be bad, but for me I'd find it great. The game doesn't run badly at 45 fps and, with ray tracing on ultra, it runs near 60. Since FSR3 was announced, I just want to be able to try it. If it works poorly, well, whatever, but if the final pay off is good enough, it'll be a win for me. It would be nice to have the possibility to test it. I bought the game because of frame generation and if it doesn't do what I want it to do, whatever, I'll be the only one to blame and it was my money. Neither CDPR or AMD promised me anything but the implementation itself. Honestly, with my card, I wasn't expecting to be able to use ray tracing at all. The fact that game is really playable at ultra was a neat surprise and I won't abandon the game if they give up on FSR3. Another personal point I consider is the fact that I will also change my cpu soon for a better one and maybe my FPS will get closer to 50 on psycho, then it enters the range you said. New drivers can come and improve latency and the frame generation itself. If that technology isn't implemented on the game, we'd only lose. And there are the ones playing with high refresh rate monitors and getting 60 fps. They're as important as any other player and it would be extremely beneficial for them. And, just to point out again, I'm not saying they won't implement it. I'm just saying that people are eager for it and since it was anounced by AMD, transparency on both sides would be an extremely nice attitude (not an obligation, but a nice attitude). I'm not saying CDPR is bad because they didn't say what's going on yet. But, as a consumer, they'd gain a lot of points just for giving us the feedback.

 

[Farbros9]

I read someone saying that if you have less than 60, it won't be of much use. I don't remember where. I said it's not a trustful information, I just threw it there cause that made me contain my expectations. If you read carefully, I said: "[...]but I don't know. Everyone says a lot of stuff online and 99% of the time they don't have a clue of what they are saying."
My fps fluctuates between 40 and 50. Most of the time it's 45. It's something I'd have to test to see if it's viable. But it gives me hopes of playing at psycho. Based on what you said about artifacts, it would depend greatly on the kind and frequency of artifacts. If it's one here and there in exchange for superb performance, well, I won't complain a bit.

What he meant by that is that the quality of the generated frames would be horrible, not that it would be impossible. Just like upscale from 540p or less.

 

[ics93]

What he meant by that is that the quality of the generated frames would be horrible, not that it would be impossible. Just like upscale from 540p or less.

Maybe, I couldn't possibly know what a random person meant with a vague commentary online. But in any case, it doesn't matter. It'll be what it'll be.

 

[tavellone]

In the time it took from the announcement of FSR3 to now, I bought a 4060 so I no longer personally care about FSR3 not being in the game, but the fact that it is still not in the game and there's literally no comment about it at all is absurd, especially since people are actually using FRS3 in the game currently with a mod.

 

[GrimReaper801]

About the artifacts, I didn't mind the ones in the video at all. They seemed very subtle and while moving I doubt I'd even notice them. Also it's an NVidia card. I'll check out how it worked on an AMD card later. Supposedly, it should be even smoother.
About your explanation, that was a good one. I'm lay, I don't have any idea of how it works. So thank you.
But I didn't test it with my own eyes and rig on the specific game I want. Maybe it'll work ok and improve enough for me. Maybe it'll be bad. Maybe for 99% of people my results would be bad, but for me I'd find it great. The game doesn't run badly at 45 fps and, with ray tracing on ultra, it runs near 60. Since FSR3 was announced, I just want to be able to try it. If it works poorly, well, whatever, but if the final pay off is good enough, it'll be a win for me. It would be nice to have the possibility to test it. I bought the game because of frame generation and if it doesn't do what I want it to do, whatever, I'll be the only one to blame and it was my money. Neither CDPR or AMD promised me anything but the implementation itself. Honestly, with my card, I wasn't expecting to be able to use ray tracing at all. The fact that game is really playable at ultra was a neat surprise and I won't abandon the game if they give up on FSR3. Another personal point I consider is the fact that I will also change my cpu soon for a better one and maybe my FPS will get closer to 50 on psycho, then it enters the range you said. New drivers can come and improve latency and the frame generation itself. If that technology isn't implemented on the game, we'd only lose. And there are the ones playing with high refresh rate monitors and getting 60 fps. They're as important as any other player and it would be extremely beneficial for them. And, just to point out again, I'm not saying they won't implement it. I'm just saying that people are eager for it and since it was anounced by AMD, transparency on both sides would be an extremely nice attitude (not an obligation, but a nice attitude). I'm not saying CDPR is bad because they didn't say what's going on yet. But, as a consumer, they'd gain a lot of points just for giving us the feedback.

You are correct, what might be fine for you would be unacceptable performance for many. Your FPS for example, I can't stand going below ~60FPS it just annoys me. Others can't stand going under 100FPS and other are fine with 30 FPS. This is a very subjective thing indeed and as long as someone is fine with the performance they get, nobody else should care.

The goal of my post, like I said, is not to be a dick or to shit on anyone's parade. It's to try to make people realize they need to temper their expectations of what FSR3 and it's accompanying frame generation model are. Many people, not just here, seem to think it's a miracle solution to their low FPS or that it will allow them to suddenly go from 60 FPS at the lowest graphical settings to 60 FPS at the highest graphical setting without a hitch and it just won't. It isn't even meant to do that.

I hope FSR3 does make it into the game for those who are looking forward to it, I really do. I won't use it since I don't need it at all but even though I don't personally care for it, it was announced by AMD and I understand why people want to see it happen. CDPR won't say a word about it until it's ready to release or they fully decide to not integrate it though. It's been their way of doing things for quite a few years now.

 

[ics93]

You are correct, what might be fine for you would be unacceptable performance for many. Your FPS for example, I can't stand going below ~60FPS it just annoys me. Others can't stand going under 100FPS and other are fine with 30 FPS. This is a very subjective thing indeed and as long as someone is fine with the performance they get, nobody else should care.

The goal of my post, like I said, is not to be a dick or to shit on anyone's parade. It's to try to make people realize they need to temper their expectations of what FSR3 and it's accompanying frame generation model are. Many people, not just here, seem to think it's a miracle solution to their low FPS or that it will allow them to suddenly go from 60 FPS at the lowest graphical settings to 60 FPS at the highest graphical setting without a hitch and it just won't. It isn't even meant to do that.

I hope FSR3 does make it into the game for those who are looking forward to it, I really do. I won't use it since I don't need it at all but even though I don't personally care for it, it was announced by AMD and I understand why people want to see it happen. CDPR won't say a word about it until it's ready to release or they fully decide to not integrate it though. It's been their way of doing things for quite a few years now.

Yeah, low expectations are usually good for mental health hahahaha

 

[cp2x77gamer]

Because it can increase it from 60 to 100? Or from 40 to 60? Every fps when <60 matters.

fsr3 works with images. it means that fsr3 needs the next frame to generate previous(es). so, fsr3 has to wait gpu to render next frame (with 15 or 60 fps) and only then it can at first generate and then display those generated images. it works best with another dumb modern passion to "upgrade" films to 60-120-1000000 fps. but in games you get less responsive controls compared to the same real fps. look at where a frame is rendering and displaying. nvidia's "magic" works different, even if it's a horseshit too.

there is slightly different way to generate some "magic" with fsr3. but it is bad too. just set the graphic details according to the amount of money you've spent on your gaming device. it works (mostly).

 

[jblibrat]

Seems like a longshot, but CDPR could be waiting for RDNA 4 to launch this year (if it does). Even though FSR 3 is meant to be platform agnostic, RDNA 4 will probably introduce dedicated RT hardware that would help FSR 3. An even more longshot is that RDNA 4 brings us an updated version of FSR 3 or maybe FSR 4. I'm just throwing shit out there but FSR 3 integration into games seems to be at a snail's pace.

 

[ics93]

You are correct, what might be fine for you would be unacceptable performance for many. Your FPS for example, I can't stand going below ~60FPS it just annoys me. Others can't stand going under 100FPS and other are fine with 30 FPS. This is a very subjective thing indeed and as long as someone is fine with the performance they get, nobody else should care.

The goal of my post, like I said, is not to be a dick or to shit on anyone's parade. It's to try to make people realize they need to temper their expectations of what FSR3 and it's accompanying frame generation model are. Many people, not just here, seem to think it's a miracle solution to their low FPS or that it will allow them to suddenly go from 60 FPS at the lowest graphical settings to 60 FPS at the highest graphical setting without a hitch and it just won't. It isn't even meant to do that.

I hope FSR3 does make it into the game for those who are looking forward to it, I really do. I won't use it since I don't need it at all but even though I don't personally care for it, it was announced by AMD and I understand why people want to see it happen. CDPR won't say a word about it until it's ready to release or they fully decide to not integrate it though. It's been their way of doing things for quite a few years now.

You inspired me to test something. I changed my monitor refresh rate to 50hz and I really think the game feels smoother with my FPS now. Since (when on ultra) it's already between 45 and 55 fps, changing the refresh rate seemed to make it better. And I think I might get used to the feel of 50fps if it's there in all games I play. Makes sense or am I feeling a placebo?

EDIT: I also installed the new driver from AMD and used AFMF. It's not exactly like FSR 3, it's a generic version of frame generation, and I think it got smoother on Psycho and even more on Ultra. I think FSR 3 might truly be promising. Just a reminder that those are all stuff based on my experience and it has no scientific value or valid data to show that what I say really makes sense. I could be feeling a placebo effect, for example.

 

[GrimReaper801]

You inspired me to test something. I changed my monitor refresh rate to 50hz and I really think the game feels smoother with my FPS now. Since (when on ultra) it's already between 45 and 55 fps, changing the refresh rate seemed to make it better. And I think I might get used to the feel of 50fps if it's there in all games I play. Makes sense or am I feeling a placebo?

EDIT: I also installed the new driver from AMD and used AFMF. It's not exactly like FSR 3, it's a generic version of frame generation, and I think it got smoother on Psycho and even more on Ultra. I think FSR 3 might truly be promising. Just a reminder that those are all stuff based on my experience and it has no scientific value or valid data to show that what I say really makes sense. I could be feeling a placebo effect, for example.

I can't speak to AFMF, I'm team green, but limiting your refresh rate isn't a placebo effect.

You would be better off setting an FPS limit within the game itself since you could still enjoy higher frames outside of the game but the end result is the same. The lack of fluctuation is what makes it feel better. At 100FPS, suddenly losing 5 frames isn't something you'll notice. At 50 FPS, +/- 5 is noticeable. The stability makes the whole thing feel better and since you cap it below what your PC is able to do, it's easier for your PC to maintain it.

 

[radosuaf_]

For Radeon cards there's Radeon Chill that does the job - you set the min and max FPS and you're done.