The latest GPU from Nvidia promise more performance. Raw performance is not that much higher compared to the previous generation. The main benefit Nvidia claims is DLSS 3.0. What DLSS 3.0 does is insert a frame between 2 frames to make the gaming experience smoother. This is similar to how some TV have a "smooth" option that interpolates 2 frames and inserts the combined frame between them. On a TV show or movie this doesn't matter, the footage getting kicked back a few hundred milliseconds in time to increase smoothness of the footage is fine, it doesn't matter when the footage actually apears on your screen. However, this matters a lot for gaming. MMO and Shooter games rely heavily on response time, this extra lag is a major problem. The GPU will wait for the latest frame, and instead of showing it, it will first insert an interpolated frame made up of the latest and previous frame, and only then show the latest frame. This will result in extra lag. Since each frame has to be shown with similar intervals, you are basically adding 50% extra latency. This extra lag is a really bad idea for MMO or Shooters where response time matters.
Here is a list of games that currently support it https://www.digitaltrends.com/computing/here-are-all-of-the-games-that-will-support-nvidia-dlss-3/ A Plague Tale: Requiem Atomic Heart Black Myth: Wukong Bright Memory: Infinite Chernobylite Conqueror’s Blade Cyberpunk 2077 Dakar Rally Deliver Us Mars Destroy All Humans! 2-Reprobed Dying Light 2 Stay Human F1 22 F.I.S.T.: Forged In Shadow Torch Frostbite Engine Hitman 3 Hogwarts Legacy Icarus Jurassic World Evolution 2 Justice Loopmancer Marauders Microsoft Flight Simulator Midnight Ghost Hunt Mount & Blade II: Bannerlord Naraka: Bladepoint Nvidia Omniverse Nvidia Racer RTX Perish Portal with RTX Ripout S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2: Heart of Chornobyl Scathe Sword and Fairy 7 Synced The Lord of the Rings: Gollum The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt Throne and Liberty Tower of Fantasy Unity Unreal Engineer 4 & 5 Warhammer 40,000: Darktide
I haven't looked at this GPU technology... but if it's anything remotely like what you see on TV's with LG's TruMotion, Samsung's Auto Motion Plus, etc.. it would be something to turn off immediately. The soap opera effect is horrendously bad. Hopefully this is only a thing that gets used by games that support it and use it correctly like the list that Waring posted, and never just turned on and the GPU just tries to "make games look better" like TV's do.
Well like DLSS 1.0 it just seems this initial version kind of sucks, but if they can do a big revamp like DLSS 2.0 was vs 1.0 it could be end up being decent It is sort of like that TV stuff, but with actual game data and AI trained to do instead of the super basic stuff that TV's do, it also helps that games you typically want higher FPS in like half the genres, so if they can fix it up
I got a chuckle out of the MMORPGs requiring fast response time. Sure the game is insanely fast paced compared to years ago, but not frame by frame. Even if EQ used the glorified upscaling called DLSS, any added delay would probably be a tiny fraction of the time the server and client communicate with each other.
I find it incredibly interesting how you've concluded: No one has products in-hand to review them. Also, since the data provided/gleaned thus far would suggest the 'raw performance' of RTX 4090 support Nvidia's claim of 2x performance in Microsoft Flight Simulator. Also, your post title says "Newest GPU could add lag to EQ". You could be talking Intel Arc, Nvidia RTX, or AMD Radeon. Sorry Strawberry - your post is utter nonsense.
It's exactly like that. In the beginning some suggested Nvidia was able to predict upcoming frames, but of course they can't, Nvidia has no way of knowing if you will run left, right, jump, shoot, etc. You can not predict frames beforehand, it would introduce a visual mess if you tried it. What they're doing is just generating interpolated frames from the last and previous frame, but this introduces latency of course, since you're delaying the last frame to introduce an interpolated one. And because the interval between frames needs to remain as consistent as possible, you are introducing an extra 50% latency, which is quite a lot. I also don't think DLSS 3.0 will remain game specific like 2.0 , they can apply DLSS 3.0 to any game.
The reason this latency doesn't matter for TV that do this trick, is because shows or movies are not interactive. The viewer doesn't realize the TV is looking at the latest frames, delaying them and adding interpolated frames. Of course, even on TV this is not perfect, because as you mentioned you get the "soap opera" effect. But this isn't due to the latency, this is of course because the interpolation of frames creates a visually unpleasant effect. This is where Nvidia claims their "AI" will help them. But this of course doesn't fix the latency issues, since Nvidia has no time traveling machine.
It depends on the FPS but it is a more than "a fraction". A good round trip time (PING) to a game server is around 60 milliseconds. At 30fps you have a frame every 32 milleseconds, with DLSS 3.0 that's an extra 32 milliseconds of delay. At 60fps you have a frame every 16 milliseconds, with DLSS 3.0 that's an extra 16 milliseconds of delay. You could argue that at very high framerates this interpolation latency becomes meaningless. But of course at high framerates you don't need this DLSS 3.0 trick to begin with. There's no point in interpolating frames when you're running at 120+ fps without them. Studies show latencies of 15ms or more are noticeable. I certainly notice the difference when I play a fast-paced game on a 60ping or 100ping server. And this is a best case scenario, because it assumes that Nvidia only requires 1 frame in advance to do the interpolation. These techniques often require 2 frames to 3 frames.
I don't have the energy to correct everything that's wrong here, but your understanding of what DLSS is, how it's implemented, and the purpose it exists for is incorrect at every level.
Actually most worried about the Intel Arcs since they said they would not be doing special DirectX 9 stuff (that AMD and nVidia have had many years of implementing back then) and would be relying entirely on Microsofts DX9 -> 12 , since EQ is a DX9 game, relying on Microsoft for the emulation layer has potential to not be great
I know stuff but I won't tell you because I don't have the energy to type? If you actually know something other people don't, post it, otherwise you are just being a troll. It's pretty clear DLSS 3.0 is interpolating frames. The "purpose" for it is also pretty clear, Nvidia can claim the new GPU result in much higher FPS without actually having to render these frames. Nvidia tried to obscure any talk about latency and likely didn't expect anyone talking about to such an extent.
Digital Foundry that has access to a new Nvidia GPU now confirmed what people feared. DLSS 3.0 is interpolating frames and introducing latency into games.
If you have a TV with this technology, you know it's content agnostic, it works on all content. It simply takes 2 frames from the frame buffer and applies the interpolating algorithm. Unlike DLSS 2.0 that requires content specific data to optimize the algorithm, DLSS 3.0 can in theory be applied to any game without developer input.
This is bad news for people who likes to replay their old abandonware games, but they do have a point: No game developers that take their current games seriously, are using DX9 in this day and age. DX9 is almost 20 years old by now... Gambling on DX9 being well supported forever, is not a good strategy. I wouldn't be surprised if DBG will suddenly need to revise their roadmap drastically in the immediate future, or admit that EQ1 just doesn't run well on next-generation systems.... Time will tell how it works out in the end.
I suspect it's more your entire premise is in technical Cloud Cuckoo Land. You both exaggerate how much latency on such a small scale affects the game when in modern EQ the UI is always behind what's really going on, especially for player HP, and you seem to be talking from a perspective as if this feature is always on. Basically it's questionable EQ would even support it, rendering EQ in higher frame rates is trivial especially on a brand new card so turning it on for the game would be pointless, and even if it was turned on it's highly unlikely the latency would even matter. It's nice you are concerned to "warn" people about this, but your entire premise is so absurd expending time to refute it is mentally exhausting, no offense intended sorry. From what I read (with no personal knowledge), it's actually more time consuming to develop for DX9. The developers of the Legend of Kay remaster said they wouldn't have had the budget for the port if they supported DX9, in response to someone complaining about it
