The reason gamers want higher framerates is mostly for lower latency, faster reaction times, and a bigger advantage in online play. DLSS 3 'fakes' it's higher frame rates. As a result you might have 120 fps, but it's going to feel like 60hz. Personally, that inconsistency would drive me crazy. I'd rather use DLSS 2 performance than DLSS 3 quality.
? This is mostly wrong? > The reason gamers want higher framerates is mostly for lower latency, "Gamers" are absolutely not a monolithic group, but in general, they mostly want higher frame rates because higher frame rates does a better job of feeling and looking fluid. > faster reaction times, 60 fps is 16 ms per frame. The end to end latency for a decent video game setup will be ~50 ms, and it's pretty well decoupl…
I don't know what my current systems total latency is, but I use a mouse with custom internals and an LG OLED screen for the lowest input lag. The difference between 60 and 120 Hz is huge even with my at least low-ish input lag system.
This isn't meant as a criticism, as I stated I have no clue how DLSS feels and I quite enjoy playing games on my PS5 too (with LG OLD and VRR), but the 100ms just sounded off to me.
Actually, before posting I just had a quick look at Nvidias article. Their example of worst system latency was 77ms and the best is 12ms.
100 and I'd throw it out the window.