Comment: _"Radeon BOOST is NOT meant to reduce system latency! That is what Anti-Lag is for!"_ *FYI:* It was AMD who positioned Radeon Boost as *"Ultimate Latency Reduction Technology"* - more powerful than Radeon Anti-Lag according to their own slides. I thought the snip from the press conference I included 4:42 made that clear, guess it didn't - however this should: twitter.com/BattleNonSense/status/1373021156345847813
This guy definitely deserves more subs ! He is the hero we all needed when it comes to gaming ! The video quality, data processing and nice readable graphs are on the level of Tech Jesus himself !
@@hialgo1808 No. Nvidia ultra low latency exists because of Radeon Anti-Lag. Nvidia Reflex is beyond either of those, and the precedent is that not hitting max GPU utilization has a significant impact on response times. Not sure if Chris was the first to discover this, but he was likely the one who did the most research to impact Nvidia's implementation of Reflex.
@@Voidward I believe that console devs have known it for a long time. I read some docs about game development of a very popular fighting game from 2010 where they talk about keeping 60 fps but always having 2-4% "overhead", never quite got why overhead is so important before I watched Chris videos. I think that both knowledge from console sport/fighting games and Chris publicity helped create the perfect storm and paved the way for Reflex. Really glad that it did.
@@ndesuuu that doesn't seem like a lag reduction thing, 60fps was max back then. Seems they just wanted to target a frame rate and wanted headroom for potential frame drops so the 60fps remains stable, unless they specifically mentioned latency.
I was always convinced that limiting the framerate to get below 100% GPU utilisation is more advantageous than a few extra frames, but had no way to prove it. Thank you for this comprehensive analysis!
I would like to have a look at system latency and what could effect latency in games. Things like spatial sound virtual 7.1 or higher bit audio, full screen optimization, GPU scaling and image sharpening on older Nvidia cards. There are also some people saying that discord voice chat or any background desktop application can increase latency especially on low thread count CPUs (4 threads). Also something like G-sync VS No sync VS scanline sync that comes with RTSS in term of latency on caped stable FPS count. I personally found all these fake info around the web and even if there was any latency difference it would be like no difference, but I want it to be proved. There is also an MSI tool that change system scheduling for certain stuff like setting higher priority for the graphic driver and I am not sure if it really does anything. This could be an interesting topic for u in the upcoming video. I would love to see that. Thank you very much for all precious info we got from u.
I been watching since very early on before I even built my pc. First monitor I bought was Gsync and religiously been following since. Thank You for the Tests!
Great video as always Can we by any chance get a short summary video of what are the most Important settings you need to make to let a game run optimally? Basically summarizing all of your videos on this topic and allowing us to reference a video that contains everything one might need without it containing that much background information :)
This is a *very* subjective topic- not just to personal goal/preference on the matter, but also the massive difference in how/why you would go about it for any particular game given the massive differences in some engines, etc.
Disable vsync, lower settings in-game for max framerate, but don't let you GPU hit that framerate. Limit it to a stable framerate below that which you are unlikely to hit in complex scenes.
Fascinating stuff, and it's completely changed my approach to configuring my frame-rate limits (which I've typically done to reduce system power consumption for games that do not require high frame-rates).
Hey Chris, as always, your content is awesome. Quick question then : We know that we have input latency increase in a G-Sync enable scenario with framerate at the top-notch of the monitor (for example, when your framerate touches 165Hz on a 165Hz monitor with G-Sync enable, you increase momentarily your input lag then). What's the setting to use then? NULL OFF / G-SYNC ON / V-SYNC ON / In game or RTSS FPS limiter ON at 158Hz to prevent G-SYNC ceiling and REFLEX ON in game? I hope my question is not too hard to understand :D ! Cya
Thanks Chris for the explanation of the functionality at the beginning of the video. I thought it was a marketing gimmick but it's some actual usable technology. 👍🏾
Interesting as always. Great to see amd and nvidia taking this seriously (thanks to you no doubt!) For me using a frame rate limiter and having rock solid frame times is the most practical and transferable solution for all games. What I would like is a setting for target frame rate with solid frame times in game that adjusts resolution and settings dynamically to achieve this. Until then I am happy to find the settings that give me the most stable performance.
You still plan on making a video comparing keyboards and input lag? :) I would love to see more Corsair comparisons like you did a bit of in the last video! :)
@Falcon_ haha you again, being stupid. Lmao your pseudo intelligence is hilarious. What you’re trying to say doesn’t even make sense. The travel distance of a key is not “subjective” anyway?????
@Falcon_ Yeah but how in the hell is that "subjective", it's a fact and it doesn't even affect the test.. It's not like it's hard to understand the actuation point of different keyboard switches. Please learn the definition of subjective if you want to carry on using it, it seems you think word definitions are "subjective" too lmfao
@@BattleNonSense Would you be interested in analyzing Quake Champions netcode? I know it is not a mega popular game, but it has a passionate community :)
@@marcoferrari4285 I actually like to look of Overwatch when I use the image sharpening at 20% with Freesync. Especially when I have all graphic settings to low except for the render scale, which I set to 100% because anything lower just looks too ugly for me. I'm using 5700XT and AW2521HFL. But overall, I'm starting to regret buying AMD GPU now because of all the features like DLSS, RTX and now Reflex that I'm missing out on. I don't regret buying the Ryzen 3600 though and I still think the CPU was well worth the money.
2 Questions: Would setting max power to 95% help NOT getting gpu bound? Would adaptive power management help in any case where you do not want to be gpu bound?
I am curious about the frametime consistency when comparing with (RTSS) using the nvidia reflex , can you tell me an avg and how much standard deviation does it have comparing to RTSS? (Let's say you cap the framerate at 90% load on GPU as the maximum limit using RTSS) Is the frametime all over the place with Reflex? Why I ask this: You said the in-game framelimiter has bad frametimes (Inconsistent) so I am trying to get the best of the best in terms of options (G-sync/Free Sync) + No GPU Bound (let's say best of both worlds, no tearing (SYNC OPTIONS) + Smooth (Frametime Consistency) + Lowest latency possible while having the first 2 (Not the fastest) Also if you can test the new feature of RTSS (Scanline SYNC) You have a great mind and I thank you for dedicating your time to do this for us and I hope you will continue to do so.
hey dude, would be awesome to see an updated look at Escape from Tarkov. they've supposedly done a lot of server modernization in the past year and the community can't decide whether it's better or worse. could use some cold hard data from the man himself
Love the content as always Chris. I've used Afterburner as a framelimiter for some time, any thoughts on using it or an external equivalent outside of the game? Thanks
Great content as always :) Just one question: throughout the video you've always talked about a "good" in-game frame limiter. Would you say the limiter in CSGO through console (fps_max x) is good? Or can you achieve even lower latency with an external limiter like rtss?
I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. There are two separate measurements for "good" fps limiters: 1) Good framepacing (how smooth image looks) 2) Good responsiveness (doesn't introduce additional input lag) Both RTSS and Nvidia's limiter v3 offer smooth framepacing (which is GOOD), however since they are external limiters, they introduce additional input lag (which is BAD). In-game limiters usually have worse framepacing (which is BAD), however they usually don't add any additional input lag (which is GOOD). You see where this is getting? Anyway to answer your question, using fps_max to minimize latency is good enough, and using RTSS would actually increase the latency.
In terms of system latency Ubisoft games have horrible ingame FPS limiters (R6S is just one example - requires cfg edit to enable) Overwatch, Source, Unreal, Frostbite Engine have good ingame FPS limiters based on my system latency tests. External FPS limiters also perform worse than in-engine limiters (in terms of system latency) as just like NULL or Anti-Lag they try to pace the game from the outside.
Very good video. Conclusion: Avoid using such low latency features (unless your gpu load is at fixed 99%), stick to in-game fps limiters (capped to slightly lower framerate that reduces gpu load).
When you are talking about smoothness, there is thing to remember. While higher framerate may reduce latency, when you are already at your monitors refresh rate going higher framerate can make it less smooth. Having framerate very uneven with your refresh rate causes it to not be smooth. For example, having 150fps on 144hz monitor is smoother than 180fps. And for more noticeable example, having 150fps on 120hz feels like stuttering to me. That is, with no sync, im not sure how it works above your refresh rate on freesync or g-sync monitors, i only know in those smoothest is to limit fps little below your refresh rate. So, if i had game that supports reflex and nvidia gpu, i would enable reflex but limit fps anyway (I assume there is no downside to enabling it). But i dont play any game that supports it and i have amd gpu currently. I dont believe that improvement of radeon anti-lag is that low at least in every case. In Quake champions i keep my fps limited to 150, and its clear to me that i get lower input lag with radeon anti-lag. On my laptop i limit it to 118 fps (for freesync 120hz) and it doesnt keep fps up there always, on it i feel huge difference. Could it be that somehow it affects input lag in Quake Champions differently than in games you test?
There's a free Quake-like game on Epic, called Diabotical, that has optional multi-threaded input where an input thread runs at ~500hz, as well as giving you control over buffering (1 to 5 frames) settings, and a pretty good in-game FPS limiter. If you have time to test whether multi-threaded input is actually a boon there, and what combination of settings is "best", I would love to see what results you get.
WTF is Radeon Boost doing? You buy a high refresh rate monitor to get a responsive and as clear as possible gaming experience during fast movement and Radeon Boost doesn't really benefit the responsiveness, but completely ruins clarity. Who thought this was a good idea? Even ignoring any stability issues, I can't see a single reason why anyone would use this.
You sir are brilliant!!!! I love it. Liked & Subscribed! I need you to help me decide if I should get the Zowie BenQ XL2456k dyac+ 240hz or Alienware AW2521H Ulmb 360hz! No explanation needed! 😕
The way that AMD is playing catchup here is interesting in implementation but embarrassing in practice. You get your visuals set to mud in a way AMD thinks you won't notice to not even get the same benefits as Nvidia's Reflex does at full resolution. No matter how much people dump on Nvidia and their business practices, software advances like this, DLSS, RTX, integer scaling, Gsync, hardware acceleration in productivity apps, etc, are what will keep me loyal to this brand. They are a significant value add to me.
@Falcon_ Their version is RTX is also very underwhelming. They're trying to put out pretty much whatever they can to claim they have feature parity, but thus stuff clearly doesn't have the R&D behind it.
Apex Legends has some issues with it's Lag compensation, try turning it off(cl_lagcompensation 0) and go into the fiering range. you can easily hit consecutive wingman shots while draging the aim over. with Lag compensation on(cl_lagcompensation 1) tracking is the only way of hitting consecutiv shots. in game with the lag compensation off(cl_lagcompensator 0) you will get a ton of no-regs. But the lag compensation favours tracking aim over dragging/flicking. if you flick and rest your aim over the target you will hit, but if the mouse is dragged over target it will count as a miss
What's the current consensus for limiting FPS in games with no engine limiter? still RTSS? And has the opinion on GSYNC changed at all? Is latency better or worse with it enabled?
Hmmm... so if I want to use an in-game frame rate limiter in order to both prevent gpu bound, as well as enable input delay consistency and frame consistency, is there any point to be using nvidia reflex since limiting FPS at a consistently sustainable value simulates a cpu bound case? At least Boost surely gives benefit, right? Or does it..? Hmm. I'm guessing not. I suppose that's why you mentioned multiple times that reflex seems to be like a very nice variable frame rate limiter, because it produces similar results to limiting frames at a consistent/reliable number, without having the frames actually limited. Am I on the right track here?
Thank you so much , love your channel ❤️ as a conclusion, for me an AMD user i should enable anti-lag and 'try and error' to find a frame rate that my pc can maintain consistently in each game .. am i right?
Love your videos, im a new at PC gaming, can you make a video showing the best NVIDIA control panel options for gaming ? Its so many options and kinda confusing.
Honestly, you don't need to touch anything in the NVCPL. Except for when you own a G-Sync monitor there are 2 options that you want to look at 1. G-Sync is enabled 2. always choose highest available refresh rate.
@@BattleNonSense Thx for the reply ! I see a lot of these "guides" for better performance after some tweaks on the NVCPL. I put the 'Power Management mode' in Prefer Maximum Performance and 'Texture Filtering - Quality' at High Performance. Does this settings actually change anything ? How about 'Threaded Optimization' , 'Shader Cache' ? Does Low Latency Mode works and NVIDIA Reflex is on ?
But where comparison latency between 1600 dpi mouse and 800 dpi? :P is there any difference at 1k hz? or difference is only visible like u show to us on 8khz? because looks like 3200 dpi or 1600 is much faster than 400 dpi if it comes to latency. Like it!
I’ve been using NULL with Reflex and my latency feels amazing. Also use a timer resolution but the one i own also is a standby list cleaner which i still don’t know is all the way safe. But on controller you feel the latency even more when it jumps than you do on kbm, atleast i do. I also cap my frames on all GPU heavy games because I don’t have a Gsync monitor (i have one on the way now)
I know this sounds odd but could you look into this for me, War Thunder has both support for DLSS 2.0 and Nvidia Reflex but no site (including Nvidia's) show "no support" for Reflex and any article as of Feb 2021 and newer do not show DLSS support for WT either. just find this highly odd considering WT is a fairly large game as its a direct competitor to WoT and WoWs and also are the same company behind "enlisted" which supports Reflex.
@@BattleNonSense Depends, Chill with 120fps during movement should have lower input lag than an in-engine limit with 60fps Further, not all in-engine limiter are created equal. To illustrate: Your GPU is capable of ca. 70fps in standard resolution. Chill limits to 60fps without movement and reduces the GPU utilization thus reduces input lag. When you move the cursor with Boost your GPU is capable of 150fps but again with ca. 100% utilization. Chill can also limit your fps to 120fps during movement and can so guarantee you never reach 100% GPU utilization.
That AMD tech is interesting, but it creates an inconsistency in response, which seems like the exact opposite of what you would want, even if its more responsive at times.
@@WalrusFPGA Static scene does not need high fps, only high fps we need is in the motion and when we control this motion. I need higher FPS when i moving around and higher sharpness when i just looking
One thing that is very interesting to consider is how much latency remains after subtracting frame draw time and the result of the SOL test (which covers scanout time, hardware latency, polling rate, ect) to see how much latency is caused by imperfection of the games input handling (careful not to confuse framecap delay with gpu draw time)
There is actually another very interesting aspect that games which provide the Reflex Flash Indicator allow you to measure. And that is how much extra delay is caused by the game's animation system as well as (in some games) intentional trigger delay.
Great video, as always. I am just wondering if there is a difference when you use in-game limiter or the one in nVidia settings. I have i7 6700k and GTX 1060, while playing Apex Legends in 1080p I get around 144fps on low settings, where cpu load is 50%, and gpu load is 99%. I use the limiter from nvidia settings, set at 140 fps, but the game still feels a bit laggy, maybe it's because of 20 tick servers, I don't know. What do you guys think?
the nvidia FPS limiter in the NVCPL as well as AMD's CHILL perform worse than the in-engine frame rate limiter because just like NULL and Anti-Lag they try to pace the game from the outside. Apex Legends is based on the source engine which has a good in-game FPS limiter, but Respawn does not offer an FPS cap option in the settings, and the fps_max parameter in the launch options does not work for me.
You know what would solve all this without needing game implementation? If Nvidia and AMD made a driver-based GPU utilization limiter INSTEAD of a driver-based framerate limiter.
Honestly I wonder if the reason they went with driver-based framerate limiter is because I'm not quite sure it's even possible to limit utilization of the hardware via software (excluding downthrottling/lowering power limits, which would not solve the problem, as that would just slow down the processing speeds, but keep it at 100% utilization). I really don't have any idea though when it comes to this, just speaking outta my ass haha.
@@Synky Unfortunately, there's no demand or people knowledgeable enough (both customers and Nvidia/AMD) to be able to push for a GPU usage limiter as a feature. If it's absolutely impossible to implement through software (which I kind of doubt), I could see it as a fairly inexpensive hardware addition. But the first step is actually getting people to care about the issue.
Sorry if this was covered already, but do I need to use the Overwatch frame rate limiter when I'm using Reflex+Boost or is that redundant? One or the other? Thanks!
Why was Nvidia reflex better with the setting set to "On" compared to "On + boost" as shown in the graphs for latency??? I thought boost would yield lower latency???
Hi man. great in-depth testing! I got a question. I play Apex legends and I quite dont understand the difference between reflex ON vs reflex+BOOST. And looking at your data, it seems having reflex ON is better than reflex+BOOST (tho just barely a difference). using gtx1660 in a 1440p resolution at 144hz.
With G-Sync if I enable Reflex in Overwatch, the game auto-caps FPS to 138 (on my 144 hz monitor). Is this the Nvidia driver level limiter kicking in like it does for ULLM automatically or is it the Overwatch FPS limiter kicking in? It’s “probably” the driver level limiter I would think given its behaving just like it does for the ULLM mode+Gsync. In your prior videos you demonstrated that the in engine limiter has less latency and we know RTSS and the Driver limiter have basically the same latency. Would this mean for users who are reaching the Max refresh of their Gsync panel and hitting that automatic FPS cap that they’ll actually get worse latency with reflex ON since they’ll be running into the driver limiter? They could instead do Reduce Buffering ON + a manual cap at 140 for example, but we only know how capped + FPS limit compared to Reflex uncapped currently. It would be useful to see how Reflex + Nvidia driver level limiter / the auto FPS cap behavior on Gsync panels compares when you’re actually reaching that target. Currently there’s no way to disable this auto capping behavior so if you use another limiter you have to cap beneath the auto limiter by say 3 or 4 frames which wastes overhead. Thanks,
Warzone recently added a dynamic resolution feature with a target FPS setting. could you test latency with this mode on for nvidia, (but especially for) amd? Right now, in warzone, amd has no option to reduce latency than to limit fps ingame, but the problem is that in this game fps are all over the place so fps would have to be limited at a very low limit compared to avg / max fps.
In most cases of fps being all over the case it's a CPU/RAM bottleneck that doesn't cause frame queuing like GPU bottlenecking does. Just limit your FPS to a point where your GPU consistently stays under 100%.
You didn't mention that boost also does variable rate shading. It's more than just simply adjusting render scale now. Also Apex Legends works fine for me on a 165hz 1440p monitor with a 5700xt so strange it didn't work for you. Did you DDU? Take this as constructive criticism cause I really do appreciate your work on this and your findings. Keep it up.
A really nice thing about radeon boost: It also works with vega igpus. So basically any amd laptop. This gives me in overwatch about 100fps on my amd apu laptop and 70fps in gta online both on fullhd. This is really awsome, because you can game on laptops, which are not really meant for gaming.
@@buttflies7597 im playing on my lenovo slim 7 with an Ryzen 4800u on full hd with medium settings. But also lower end ryzen cpus can achieve that, because the gpus are realtively similar.
You can just reduce the render scale or the game resolution instead. That way you will get a stable frame rate and frame times while with Boost FPS and Frame Times (as well as system latency) are all over the place.
Thanks a lot, awesome video!! What basically is not clear for me yet is the following: While having Nvidia Reflex Enabled, should the Low Latency Mode (LLM) in the Control Panel (NCP) be off as shown in the benchmarks? Would LLM on or ultra negatively affect the input lag? Or is it just not relevant anymore as soon as Reflex is on and only becomes affective when the game doesn't support Reflex?
So how's the fps limiter in Call of Duty Cold War? It seems to fluctuate all over the place for me rather than holding a constant fps, does it also have bad input lag?
If you set the FPS limiter to 60, and your system can maintain those 60FPS at all times then RLL will not do anything. If you set the FPS limiter to 400, and your system can not do more than 90FPS then RLL will prevent your system from getting GPU bound.
I don't know if I'm just blind or what, but wouldn't AMD's Boost feature work optimally with an in-game framerate limiter? Like say you had a computer that was capable of 144 fps 1440p with an average of 130 because of high-intensity gameplay, wouldn't the optimal thing to do be limit the frames and then put on boost to smooth out dips from movement?
Radeon Boost is not able to "smooth out FPS drops" that you get during intense situations, like when i.e. something blows up right next to you. Radeon Boost *only* reduces the resolution of the game *while you move your mouse* . How much it can increase the frame rate then depends on many factors (how fast you move your mouse, what is going on in the game, how far you allow it to drop the resolution, ...). If you would combine Radeon Boost with an FPS cap as you suggested then you will only handicap Radeon Boost while moving your mouse which is the only time when it actually gets active. It will also reduce the small gain you get from it even further.
@@BattleNonSense I'm aware it's only when moving. If the system in this case can load all assets and textures with no difficulty while still, but once movement is introduced in tandem with said assets lets say it causes an fps drop. Would not boost be effective at mitigating that loss due to movement? Also, it seems pretty uhh not like intended operation for AMD to have your fps fly wildly high while moving your mouse, which changes frame time and all that jazz. Seems a little counter-intuitive. While limiting fps would limit the amount of input lag Boost is able to help you with, it really does seem like (to me at least) that using the Boost feature as you described and tested could really be nothing more than torture, especially when looking at the deviation in timings for your Boost tests. Flying to 120 fps while shooting with inconsistent frametimings to "reduce input latency" is only technically correct because the frametimings/rate are not consistent enough to really get value out of that reduced input latency, no? If it's not consistent enough to use then is there *really* reduced system latency. I would be very interested in seeing a test with capped fps and Boost, because the way it's laid out in your video makes it look like there is absolutely zero way anyone should be using it at all. It makes everything too inconsistent to get the value out of the reduced input latency. My thinking is that the capped fps will allow (once again in a game where everything can run 144 while stationary, but only 130 in high-intensity fights where you're moving your mouse around a lot, like Apex where there's 2 ults, smoke and nades everywhere and you gotta run around like a chicken with your head cut off {maybe should've added that in my first post}.) would it not smooth out the experience? All in all, thanks for taking your time to respond, and I hope AMD does something akin to Nvidia, because a feature that only offers reduced latency *when you're moving* seems like a lot of variables to worry about to the point that you'd almost be better off finding a way to lower engine resolution to a level that's attainable consistently by the system. Consistency > reduced input latency if that latency causes inconsistency, get a clue AMD. Also, you as a person are actually awesome, this is the third time I've gotten a response from you on a different account, keep doing you man:) EDIT: "Torture" is an overstatement, but in terms of highly-competetive FPS I don't think it would be.
Comment: _"Radeon BOOST is NOT meant to reduce system latency! That is what Anti-Lag is for!"_
*FYI:* It was AMD who positioned Radeon Boost as *"Ultimate Latency Reduction Technology"* - more powerful than Radeon Anti-Lag according to their own slides.
I thought the snip from the press conference I included 4:42 made that clear, guess it didn't - however this should: twitter.com/BattleNonSense/status/1373021156345847813
Where did you manage to buy an LDAT? I've been looking to buy one
This guy definitely deserves more subs ! He is the hero we all needed when it comes to gaming ! The video quality, data processing and nice readable graphs are on the level of Tech Jesus himself !
"himself"... heh
Exactly, it's what I say since when I "found him" on TH-cam
He’s beyond tech Jesus because he’s rational, and not sensationalistic. Doesn’t try to editorialize his content to fan the flames of fanboyism
this is youtube.
clowns and clickbait rule here.
I feel like Nvidia Reflex exists because of your testing, and you'll never get official credit for it. So I'll just thank you personally.
@Falcon_ nice theory you have come up with there. FoRtNiTe KiDs DuMB. 🤡 look in a mirror
I feel like Nvidia Reflex exists because of Anti-Lag, personally...
@@hialgo1808 No. Nvidia ultra low latency exists because of Radeon Anti-Lag. Nvidia Reflex is beyond either of those, and the precedent is that not hitting max GPU utilization has a significant impact on response times.
Not sure if Chris was the first to discover this, but he was likely the one who did the most research to impact Nvidia's implementation of Reflex.
@@Voidward I believe that console devs have known it for a long time. I read some docs about game development of a very popular fighting game from 2010 where they talk about keeping 60 fps but always having 2-4% "overhead", never quite got why overhead is so important before I watched Chris videos. I think that both knowledge from console sport/fighting games and Chris publicity helped create the perfect storm and paved the way for Reflex. Really glad that it did.
@@ndesuuu that doesn't seem like a lag reduction thing, 60fps was max back then. Seems they just wanted to target a frame rate and wanted headroom for potential frame drops so the 60fps remains stable, unless they specifically mentioned latency.
I was always convinced that limiting the framerate to get below 100% GPU utilisation is more advantageous than a few extra frames, but had no way to prove it. Thank you for this comprehensive analysis!
Nvidia GeForce Twitter just shared your video. Nice.
I would like to have a look at system latency and what could effect latency in games. Things like spatial sound virtual 7.1 or higher bit audio, full screen optimization, GPU scaling and image sharpening on older Nvidia cards.
There are also some people saying that discord voice chat or any background desktop application can increase latency especially on low thread count CPUs (4 threads).
Also something like G-sync VS No sync VS scanline sync that comes with RTSS in term of latency on caped stable FPS count. I personally found all these fake info around the web and even if there was any latency difference it would be like no difference, but I want it to be proved. There is also an MSI tool that change system scheduling for certain stuff like setting higher priority for the graphic driver and I am not sure if it really does anything.
This could be an interesting topic for u in the upcoming video. I would love to see that. Thank you very much for all precious info we got from u.
Underrated channel - you should make a video on testing CRT monitors vs modern flat-panel monitors. That would be very interesting
wth? who uses those?
@@FcoEnriquePerez CRT monitors have 0ms latency
@@Fals3Agent Yeah, so? lol
@@Fals3Agent If i could find good CRTs for gaming I would use them to this day.
@@FcoEnriquePerez Real men use CRT
I been watching since very early on before I even built my pc. First monitor I bought was Gsync and religiously been following since. Thank You for the Tests!
We can't thank you enough for your hard work.
Great video as always
Can we by any chance get a short summary video of what are the most Important settings you need to make to let a game run optimally? Basically summarizing all of your videos on this topic and allowing us to reference a video that contains everything one might need without it containing that much background information :)
This is a *very* subjective topic- not just to personal goal/preference on the matter, but also the massive difference in how/why you would go about it for any particular game given the massive differences in some engines, etc.
Disable vsync, lower settings in-game for max framerate, but don't let you GPU hit that framerate. Limit it to a stable framerate below that which you are unlikely to hit in complex scenes.
@@Voidward what about llm?
Fascinating stuff, and it's completely changed my approach to configuring my frame-rate limits (which I've typically done to reduce system power consumption for games that do not require high frame-rates).
Hey Chris, as always, your content is awesome. Quick question then : We know that we have input latency increase in a G-Sync enable scenario with framerate at the top-notch of the monitor (for example, when your framerate touches 165Hz on a 165Hz monitor with G-Sync enable, you increase momentarily your input lag then). What's the setting to use then? NULL OFF / G-SYNC ON / V-SYNC ON / In game or RTSS FPS limiter ON at 158Hz to prevent G-SYNC ceiling and REFLEX ON in game? I hope my question is not too hard to understand :D ! Cya
Incredibly in-depth as always. Great job and thanks for this useful video!
As always, thanks for the real testing with all this hard work!
Keep it up and thanks for the video!
You are the hero we need!
Your analysis is so organized and clear...Thanks!!!
Thanks Chris for the explanation of the functionality at the beginning of the video. I thought it was a marketing gimmick but it's some actual usable technology. 👍🏾
I'm with you up to the point where you start wishing more games add proprietary features instead of just improving their rendering pipeline.
Interesting as always. Great to see amd and nvidia taking this seriously (thanks to you no doubt!) For me using a frame rate limiter and having rock solid frame times is the most practical and transferable solution for all games. What I would like is a setting for target frame rate with solid frame times in game that adjusts resolution and settings dynamically to achieve this. Until then I am happy to find the settings that give me the most stable performance.
You still plan on making a video comparing keyboards and input lag? :) I would love to see more Corsair comparisons like you did a bit of in the last video! :)
@Falcon_ No, it was fine! Go watch his last video! :-)
Yup, something is in the works. Will be just a few more weeks until I get all the hardware. :)
@@BattleNonSense Ohhh great to hear! Can´t wait! :)
@Falcon_ haha you again, being stupid. Lmao your pseudo intelligence is hilarious. What you’re trying to say doesn’t even make sense. The travel distance of a key is not “subjective” anyway?????
@Falcon_ Yeah but how in the hell is that "subjective", it's a fact and it doesn't even affect the test.. It's not like it's hard to understand the actuation point of different keyboard switches. Please learn the definition of subjective if you want to carry on using it, it seems you think word definitions are "subjective" too lmfao
the hero we need but dont deserve, love your work, thank you so much!
You are doing god's work. Thank you so much.
Thanks for covering this topic. It was interesting to listen to!
Remember when battle)non)sense used to do netcode videos for games ?
Eventually I will do that again, right now system latency interests me more.
@@BattleNonSense Would you be interested in analyzing Quake Champions netcode? I know it is not a mega popular game, but it has a passionate community :)
Amazing breakdown, so comprehensive
So for AMD Users keep using AntiLag, cap frames in game where your card is more stable and for the moment avoid Radeon Boost.
Thanks for the video!
and also make shure to disable the image sharpening because it's complete garbage
what if a game is capped at 60 fps should I still keep AntiLag on?
@@marcoferrari4285 I actually like to look of Overwatch when I use the image sharpening at 20% with Freesync. Especially when I have all graphic settings to low except for the render scale, which I set to 100% because anything lower just looks too ugly for me. I'm using 5700XT and AW2521HFL. But overall, I'm starting to regret buying AMD GPU now because of all the features like DLSS, RTX and now Reflex that I'm missing out on. I don't regret buying the Ryzen 3600 though and I still think the CPU was well worth the money.
@@heinstar6206 Same gpu and cpu. In overwatch works flawless but in other games doesn’t work very well like Warzone.
2 Questions: Would setting max power to 95% help NOT getting gpu bound?
Would adaptive power management help in any case where you do not want to be gpu bound?
i hope you can try compare other competitive games too like DoTA 2 for example
Hey, could you test Escape From Tarkov netcode again? They said they have changed netcode a lot, but seems the same.
thx you deserve more subscriber
I am curious about the frametime consistency when comparing with (RTSS) using the nvidia reflex , can you tell me an avg and how much standard deviation does it have comparing to RTSS? (Let's say you cap the framerate at 90% load on GPU as the maximum limit using RTSS) Is the frametime all over the place with Reflex?
Why I ask this: You said the in-game framelimiter has bad frametimes (Inconsistent) so I am trying to get the best of the best in terms of options (G-sync/Free Sync) + No GPU Bound (let's say best of both worlds, no tearing (SYNC OPTIONS) + Smooth (Frametime Consistency) + Lowest latency possible while having the first 2 (Not the fastest)
Also if you can test the new feature of RTSS (Scanline SYNC)
You have a great mind and I thank you for dedicating your time to do this for us and I hope you will continue to do so.
Superb video as always, you are on another planet, so much work, quite spectacular.
Thanks for uploading.
I will re-watch this in 2023 when the hardware is available.
This tech works with GPU's that are more than 3 years old.
2023 lol send me a message in 2032
My GPU is 6 year old :(
Can't even buy any 4+gb GPU in the current market
At least I can still use the old Boost in DX9 games.
how is your "available hardware in 2023" thingy goin lil bro???
@@user-pdogiP78V you've been living under a rock or smth, LIL BRO?
hey dude, would be awesome to see an updated look at Escape from Tarkov. they've supposedly done a lot of server modernization in the past year and the community can't decide whether it's better or worse. could use some cold hard data from the man himself
very late reply but seconded, I love this game and felt like it has improved quite a bit.
Broooo you are the must youtuber care about the knowledge at this area thank's u 4 real u make a hard work . Hope see more and more from you
Love the content as always Chris. I've used Afterburner as a framelimiter for some time, any thoughts on using it or an external equivalent outside of the game? Thanks
Great content as always :)
Just one question: throughout the video you've always talked about a "good" in-game frame limiter. Would you say the limiter in CSGO through console (fps_max x) is good? Or can you achieve even lower latency with an external limiter like rtss?
I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding here. There are two separate measurements for "good" fps limiters:
1) Good framepacing (how smooth image looks)
2) Good responsiveness (doesn't introduce additional input lag)
Both RTSS and Nvidia's limiter v3 offer smooth framepacing (which is GOOD), however since they are external limiters, they introduce additional input lag (which is BAD).
In-game limiters usually have worse framepacing (which is BAD), however they usually don't add any additional input lag (which is GOOD). You see where this is getting?
Anyway to answer your question, using fps_max to minimize latency is good enough, and using RTSS would actually increase the latency.
In terms of system latency Ubisoft games have horrible ingame FPS limiters (R6S is just one example - requires cfg edit to enable)
Overwatch, Source, Unreal, Frostbite Engine have good ingame FPS limiters based on my system latency tests.
External FPS limiters also perform worse than in-engine limiters (in terms of system latency) as just like NULL or Anti-Lag they try to pace the game from the outside.
@@BattleNonSense does this mean r6 limiter is not good or I can edit the cfg file and use it ?
@@BattleNonSense so if i have to cap fps in R6S, should i use rtss instead of ingame limiter? TIA
Fantastic video as always, liked
Very good video.
Conclusion: Avoid using such low latency features (unless your gpu load is at fixed 99%), stick to in-game fps limiters (capped to slightly lower framerate that reduces gpu load).
This includes nvidia reflex? Im cpu bound what is better fps cap or nvidia reflex?
Thank you for all of your hard work making this useful in depth video for us!
When you are talking about smoothness, there is thing to remember. While higher framerate may reduce latency, when you are already at your monitors refresh rate going higher framerate can make it less smooth. Having framerate very uneven with your refresh rate causes it to not be smooth. For example, having 150fps on 144hz monitor is smoother than 180fps. And for more noticeable example, having 150fps on 120hz feels like stuttering to me. That is, with no sync, im not sure how it works above your refresh rate on freesync or g-sync monitors, i only know in those smoothest is to limit fps little below your refresh rate.
So, if i had game that supports reflex and nvidia gpu, i would enable reflex but limit fps anyway (I assume there is no downside to enabling it). But i dont play any game that supports it and i have amd gpu currently.
I dont believe that improvement of radeon anti-lag is that low at least in every case. In Quake champions i keep my fps limited to 150, and its clear to me that i get lower input lag with radeon anti-lag. On my laptop i limit it to 118 fps (for freesync 120hz) and it doesnt keep fps up there always, on it i feel huge difference. Could it be that somehow it affects input lag in Quake Champions differently than in games you test?
Well done!
Come on AMD, time to step-up! Anti-lag 2, based on Nvidia Reflex technology!
I like how scientific you are!
There's a free Quake-like game on Epic, called Diabotical, that has optional multi-threaded input where an input thread runs at ~500hz, as well as giving you control over buffering (1 to 5 frames) settings, and a pretty good in-game FPS limiter. If you have time to test whether multi-threaded input is actually a boon there, and what combination of settings is "best", I would love to see what results you get.
WTF is Radeon Boost doing? You buy a high refresh rate monitor to get a responsive and as clear as possible gaming experience during fast movement and Radeon Boost doesn't really benefit the responsiveness, but completely ruins clarity. Who thought this was a good idea? Even ignoring any stability issues, I can't see a single reason why anyone would use this.
Radeon Boost is looking awful, you can see the difference even with YT compression and everything. The menu test, holy shit.
Yeah, not sure what they were thinking...
@@bad-sackingen5892 It might have been inspired by dynamic resolution in consoles
I'm so frustrated with my Radeon card the worst drivers, Always, the worst technology and always so so far behind of what the industry is providing...
Treasure trove of info do keep making these man
you could make a video showcasing the input lag effect of the parsec latency in a local network with and without wifi, it would be pretty interesting
Awesome work. Your patreon link is broken btw.
Huh. Nvidia Reflex has always felt off to me but I also used a 300 fps limit in warzone. Maybe setting to unlimited will feel better.
Reflex Low Latency will not engage at all when you cap your FPS and you reach that FPS cap value.
You sir are brilliant!!!! I love it. Liked & Subscribed! I need you to help me decide if I should get the Zowie BenQ XL2456k dyac+ 240hz or Alienware AW2521H Ulmb 360hz! No explanation needed! 😕
The way that AMD is playing catchup here is interesting in implementation but embarrassing in practice. You get your visuals set to mud in a way AMD thinks you won't notice to not even get the same benefits as Nvidia's Reflex does at full resolution. No matter how much people dump on Nvidia and their business practices, software advances like this, DLSS, RTX, integer scaling, Gsync, hardware acceleration in productivity apps, etc, are what will keep me loyal to this brand. They are a significant value add to me.
@Falcon_ Their version is RTX is also very underwhelming. They're trying to put out pretty much whatever they can to claim they have feature parity, but thus stuff clearly doesn't have the R&D behind it.
AMD did catch up to nvidia in terms of raw processing power.
Now they must step up their game in the software department to compete with DLSS and RLL.
@@BattleNonSense I specifically meant software. Check your email, I want a non-Patreon donation option.
Apex Legends has some issues with it's Lag compensation, try turning it off(cl_lagcompensation 0) and go into the fiering range. you can easily hit consecutive wingman shots while draging the aim over. with Lag compensation on(cl_lagcompensation 1) tracking is the only way of hitting consecutiv shots. in game with the lag compensation off(cl_lagcompensator 0) you will get a ton of no-regs.
But the lag compensation favours tracking aim over dragging/flicking. if you flick and rest your aim over the target you will hit, but if the mouse is dragged over target it will count as a miss
Which file within the game should I use: cl_lagcompensation 1? Where do I find? Could you inform? Thanks!
Did you disable fullscreen optimizations for any of these? Awesome video btw.
What's the current consensus for limiting FPS in games with no engine limiter? still RTSS? And has the opinion on GSYNC changed at all? Is latency better or worse with it enabled?
Hmmm... so if I want to use an in-game frame rate limiter in order to both prevent gpu bound, as well as enable input delay consistency and frame consistency, is there any point to be using nvidia reflex since limiting FPS at a consistently sustainable value simulates a cpu bound case? At least Boost surely gives benefit, right? Or does it..? Hmm. I'm guessing not. I suppose that's why you mentioned multiple times that reflex seems to be like a very nice variable frame rate limiter, because it produces similar results to limiting frames at a consistent/reliable number, without having the frames actually limited.
Am I on the right track here?
Good video, you covered everything I think.
man you're the best
no marketing BS
just facts
Good Video as always
Thank you so much , love your channel ❤️
as a conclusion, for me an AMD user i should enable anti-lag and 'try and error' to find a frame rate that my pc can maintain consistently in each game .. am i right?
Love your videos, im a new at PC gaming, can you make a video showing the best NVIDIA control panel options for gaming ? Its so many options and kinda confusing.
Honestly, you don't need to touch anything in the NVCPL.
Except for when you own a G-Sync monitor there are 2 options that you want to look at
1. G-Sync is enabled
2. always choose highest available refresh rate.
@@BattleNonSense Thx for the reply ! I see a lot of these "guides" for better performance after some tweaks on the NVCPL. I put the 'Power Management mode' in Prefer Maximum Performance and 'Texture Filtering - Quality' at High Performance. Does this settings actually change anything ? How about 'Threaded Optimization' , 'Shader Cache' ? Does Low Latency Mode works and NVIDIA Reflex is on ?
But where comparison latency between 1600 dpi mouse and 800 dpi? :P is there any difference at 1k hz? or difference is only visible like u show to us on 8khz? because looks like 3200 dpi or 1600 is much faster than 400 dpi if it comes to latency. Like it!
I’ve been using NULL with Reflex and my latency feels amazing. Also use a timer resolution but the one i own also is a standby list cleaner which i still don’t know is all the way safe. But on controller you feel the latency even more when it jumps than you do on kbm, atleast i do. I also cap my frames on all GPU heavy games because I don’t have a Gsync monitor (i have one on the way now)
@Falcon_ should hpet be disabled before using any kind of timer resolution tool?
I know this sounds odd but could you look into this for me, War Thunder has both support for DLSS 2.0 and Nvidia Reflex but no site (including Nvidia's) show "no support" for Reflex and any article as of Feb 2021 and newer do not show DLSS support for WT either. just find this highly odd considering WT is a fairly large game as its a direct competitor to WoT and WoWs and also are the same company behind "enlisted" which supports Reflex.
Oh thanks for the info, this might help with something I am working on.
good work!
Boost should be used with chill. Higher frames during movement without being GPU limited.
That makes no sense because you handicap Boost with Chill.
And chill performs much worse than an in-game FPS limiter just like nvidia's FPS limiter.
@@BattleNonSense Depends, Chill with 120fps during movement should have lower input lag than an in-engine limit with 60fps
Further, not all in-engine limiter are created equal.
To illustrate:
Your GPU is capable of ca. 70fps in standard resolution.
Chill limits to 60fps without movement and reduces the GPU utilization thus reduces input lag.
When you move the cursor with Boost your GPU is capable of 150fps but again with ca. 100% utilization.
Chill can also limit your fps to 120fps during movement and can so guarantee you never reach 100% GPU utilization.
And all my friends still call me crazy when i tell them to use in game fps cap smh at least i try. 😂
Share this vid.
@Battle(non)sense any chance you can do a motion delay test for a good few of the top mice? GPW, Finalmouse, Endgame gear, ZOWIE
blud really went and compared 2 completely different things that have absolutely nothing to do with each other 💀💀💀💀💀
Great video!
But what is best? 1. Ingame fps limiter on 241fps.
2.Ore activate reflex and disable ingame fps limiter. Games then run in 400 fps.
That AMD tech is interesting, but it creates an inconsistency in response, which seems like the exact opposite of what you would want, even if its more responsive at times.
Look like its need to be polished and will be perfect
@@iraklimgeladze5223 i dont think there is anything "perfect" about variable resolution and inconsistencies that it introduces.
@@WalrusFPGA Static scene does not need high fps, only high fps we need is in the motion and when we control this motion. I need higher FPS when i moving around and higher sharpness when i just looking
@@iraklimgeladze5223 sounds like this is something you dont want then, as it decreases your resolution when you move around..
@@WalrusFPGA lol, when you move around its harder to see. It's how humans eyes see.
Would be awesome to see an updated look at Escape from Tarkov.
Turn off game mode in Windows helps with tarky
One thing that is very interesting to consider is how much latency remains after subtracting frame draw time and the result of the SOL test (which covers scanout time, hardware latency, polling rate, ect) to see how much latency is caused by imperfection of the games input handling (careful not to confuse framecap delay with gpu draw time)
There is actually another very interesting aspect that games which provide the Reflex Flash Indicator allow you to measure.
And that is how much extra delay is caused by the game's animation system as well as (in some games) intentional trigger delay.
You aren't going to post a video about how I flew a jet into the palm tree right before you were about to unlock the black dice camo?
Great video, as always. I am just wondering if there is a difference when you use in-game limiter or the one in nVidia settings. I have i7 6700k and GTX 1060, while playing Apex Legends in 1080p I get around 144fps on low settings, where cpu load is 50%, and gpu load is 99%. I use the limiter from nvidia settings, set at 140 fps, but the game still feels a bit laggy, maybe it's because of 20 tick servers, I don't know. What do you guys think?
the nvidia FPS limiter in the NVCPL as well as AMD's CHILL perform worse than the in-engine frame rate limiter because just like NULL and Anti-Lag they try to pace the game from the outside.
Apex Legends is based on the source engine which has a good in-game FPS limiter, but Respawn does not offer an FPS cap option in the settings, and the fps_max parameter in the launch options does not work for me.
@@BattleNonSense Thank you, I just set the parameter in Origin and it locks at 135 fps, as intended. (used +fps_max 135). Keep up the great work!
Hi! thx for this video. Do you know if super rendering increase input lag?
You know what would solve all this without needing game implementation?
If Nvidia and AMD made a driver-based GPU utilization limiter INSTEAD of a driver-based framerate limiter.
Honestly I wonder if the reason they went with driver-based framerate limiter is because I'm not quite sure it's even possible to limit utilization of the hardware via software (excluding downthrottling/lowering power limits, which would not solve the problem, as that would just slow down the processing speeds, but keep it at 100% utilization). I really don't have any idea though when it comes to this, just speaking outta my ass haha.
@@Synky Unfortunately, there's no demand or people knowledgeable enough (both customers and Nvidia/AMD) to be able to push for a GPU usage limiter as a feature.
If it's absolutely impossible to implement through software (which I kind of doubt), I could see it as a fairly inexpensive hardware addition. But the first step is actually getting people to care about the issue.
Would Radeon Chill achieve that?
Thanks for what you do!
Sorry if this was covered already, but do I need to use the Overwatch frame rate limiter when I'm using Reflex+Boost or is that redundant? One or the other? Thanks!
nvidia tech support says reflex doesn't work on every monitor.?
Thanks for the awesome explanation! I just have 1 question, does it matter if NULL is set to ON while reflex is also on in a game?
Reflex Low Latency overrides NULL.
So when RLL is enabled ingame NULL is disabled by the driver for that game.
Unbelievable! Radeon features need more work!
AMD did catch up to nvidia in terms of raw processing power.
Now they must step up their game in the software department to compete with DLSS and RLL.
Why was Nvidia reflex better with the setting set to "On" compared to "On + boost" as shown in the graphs for latency??? I thought boost would yield lower latency???
What kind of performance differences would you see in a higher end overwatch config? 9700K/3080?
depends on ingame GFX settings and resolution.
Where did you manage to buy an LDAT? I've been looking to buy one
Hi man. great in-depth testing! I got a question. I play Apex legends and I quite dont understand the difference between reflex ON vs reflex+BOOST. And looking at your data, it seems having reflex ON is better than reflex+BOOST (tho just barely a difference).
using gtx1660 in a 1440p resolution at 144hz.
Starkes Video wie immer! :)
Can you check what happens if we cap the fps with RTSS to 59 and have reflex enabled, what's the behaviour of latency then?
With G-Sync if I enable Reflex in Overwatch, the game auto-caps FPS to 138 (on my 144 hz monitor). Is this the Nvidia driver level limiter kicking in like it does for ULLM automatically or is it the Overwatch FPS limiter kicking in? It’s “probably” the driver level limiter I would think given its behaving just like it does for the ULLM mode+Gsync.
In your prior videos you demonstrated that the in engine limiter has less latency and we know RTSS and the Driver limiter have basically the same latency.
Would this mean for users who are reaching the Max refresh of their Gsync panel and hitting that automatic FPS cap that they’ll actually get worse latency with reflex ON since they’ll be running into the driver limiter? They could instead do Reduce Buffering ON + a manual cap at 140 for example, but we only know how capped + FPS limit compared to Reflex uncapped currently.
It would be useful to see how Reflex + Nvidia driver level limiter / the auto FPS cap behavior on Gsync panels compares when you’re actually reaching that target.
Currently there’s no way to disable this auto capping behavior so if you use another limiter you have to cap beneath the auto limiter by say 3 or 4 frames which wastes overhead. Thanks,
Warzone recently added a dynamic resolution feature with a target FPS setting. could you test latency with this mode on for nvidia, (but especially for) amd? Right now, in warzone, amd has no option to reduce latency than to limit fps ingame, but the problem is that in this game fps are all over the place so fps would have to be limited at a very low limit compared to avg / max fps.
In most cases of fps being all over the case it's a CPU/RAM bottleneck that doesn't cause frame queuing like GPU bottlenecking does. Just limit your FPS to a point where your GPU consistently stays under 100%.
You didn't mention that boost also does variable rate shading. It's more than just simply adjusting render scale now. Also Apex Legends works fine for me on a 165hz 1440p monitor with a 5700xt so strange it didn't work for you. Did you DDU? Take this as constructive criticism cause I really do appreciate your work on this and your findings. Keep it up.
A really nice thing about radeon boost: It also works with vega igpus. So basically any amd laptop. This gives me in overwatch about 100fps on my amd apu laptop and 70fps in gta online both on fullhd. This is really awsome, because you can game on laptops, which are not really meant for gaming.
Woah your getting high framerate from an iGPU?! Thats amazing! What CPU and resolution are you playing?
@@buttflies7597 im playing on my lenovo slim 7 with an Ryzen 4800u on full hd with medium settings. But also lower end ryzen cpus can achieve that, because the gpus are realtively similar.
You can just reduce the render scale or the game resolution instead.
That way you will get a stable frame rate and frame times while with Boost FPS and Frame Times (as well as system latency) are all over the place.
@@BattleNonSense Nah, it then looks shitty. With radeon boost it still looks good and you dont have any stutters when moving...
I'm sorry I know almost nothing about all this, but why are we sharing fps in the 60-70fps range? on a 360hz monitor
Thanks a lot, awesome video!! What basically is not clear for me yet is the following: While having Nvidia Reflex Enabled, should the Low Latency Mode (LLM) in the Control Panel (NCP) be off as shown in the benchmarks? Would LLM on or ultra negatively affect the input lag? Or is it just not relevant anymore as soon as Reflex is on and only becomes affective when the game doesn't support Reflex?
Reflex overrides control panel options to avoid conflicts.
So how's the fps limiter in Call of Duty Cold War? It seems to fluctuate all over the place for me rather than holding a constant fps, does it also have bad input lag?
You were on 99% gpu usage with Reflex on, if you enable Reflex AND limit to 60 fps, would that even further reduce input lag?
If you set the FPS limiter to 60, and your system can maintain those 60FPS at all times then RLL will not do anything.
If you set the FPS limiter to 400, and your system can not do more than 90FPS then RLL will prevent your system from getting GPU bound.
@Battle(non)sense What about the latency of Nvidia reflex with a gpu load of < 90% ?
great job Battle(non)sense
I don't know if I'm just blind or what, but wouldn't AMD's Boost feature work optimally with an in-game framerate limiter?
Like say you had a computer that was capable of 144 fps 1440p with an average of 130 because of high-intensity gameplay, wouldn't the optimal thing to do be limit the frames and then put on boost to smooth out dips from movement?
Radeon Boost is not able to "smooth out FPS drops" that you get during intense situations, like when i.e. something blows up right next to you.
Radeon Boost *only* reduces the resolution of the game *while you move your mouse* .
How much it can increase the frame rate then depends on many factors (how fast you move your mouse, what is going on in the game, how far you allow it to drop the resolution, ...).
If you would combine Radeon Boost with an FPS cap as you suggested then you will only handicap Radeon Boost while moving your mouse which is the only time when it actually gets active.
It will also reduce the small gain you get from it even further.
@@BattleNonSense I'm aware it's only when moving.
If the system in this case can load all assets and textures with no difficulty while still, but once movement is introduced in tandem with said assets lets say it causes an fps drop.
Would not boost be effective at mitigating that loss due to movement?
Also, it seems pretty uhh not like intended operation for AMD to have your fps fly wildly high while moving your mouse, which changes frame time and all that jazz. Seems a little counter-intuitive.
While limiting fps would limit the amount of input lag Boost is able to help you with, it really does seem like (to me at least) that using the Boost feature as you described and tested could really be nothing more than torture, especially when looking at the deviation in timings for your Boost tests.
Flying to 120 fps while shooting with inconsistent frametimings to "reduce input latency" is only technically correct because the frametimings/rate are not consistent enough to really get value out of that reduced input latency, no? If it's not consistent enough to use then is there *really* reduced system latency.
I would be very interested in seeing a test with capped fps and Boost, because the way it's laid out in your video makes it look like there is absolutely zero way anyone should be using it at all. It makes everything too inconsistent to get the value out of the reduced input latency. My thinking is that the capped fps will allow (once again in a game where everything can run 144 while stationary, but only 130 in high-intensity fights where you're moving your mouse around a lot, like Apex where there's 2 ults, smoke and nades everywhere and you gotta run around like a chicken with your head cut off {maybe should've added that in my first post}.) would it not smooth out the experience?
All in all, thanks for taking your time to respond, and I hope AMD does something akin to Nvidia, because a feature that only offers reduced latency *when you're moving* seems like a lot of variables to worry about to the point that you'd almost be better off finding a way to lower engine resolution to a level that's attainable consistently by the system.
Consistency > reduced input latency if that latency causes inconsistency, get a clue AMD.
Also, you as a person are actually awesome, this is the third time I've gotten a response from you on a different account, keep doing you man:)
EDIT: "Torture" is an overstatement, but in terms of highly-competetive FPS I don't think it would be.
So... Reflex is to a frame rate limiter what Adaptive Sync is to a fixed refresh rate?
kind of :D