Post your computer specs!~

[chesebert]

Frame generation is pretty amazing. Starfield was at a janky 60-70fps with 5900X (I have fast ram). With FG on, I am averaging 120-130fps and it feels super smooth and responsive. Also, the new ray reconstruction with DLSS and FG is kind of nuts as well. I was running at 120fps+ in CP2077 with everything maxed out and path tracing - the game looks way better than most of the 3D animated films.

 

[KcMsterpce]

Thanks for the monitor tip. I'll have to do some more research. I was mainly thinking of future proofing by going 4K, and I thought it would be a better fit for PS5. The choices are a little underwhelming at 27". Seems not many have full bandwidth HDMI 2.1. The ones that do are pricey. I may wait this one out a bit and hold out for something next year.

Well, if you can find something decent at 4k 27" it won't be all bad. Aslo, since you're using a PS5 with it, that kind of changes my view on relevance for resolution.
Additionally, 4k screens have very good pixel density, which helps graphics look much sharper, and text easier to see. There are definitely benefits to 4k, even at smaller sized monitors.
Then again, waiting a year might be a good idea. This year has some real bangers released, and those may become cheaper next year, AND there will be a few more neat monitor releases.
But yeah, ensure that your HDMI input for the monitor can support 4k/60Hz, at least. For the PS5.

 

[BrokeAudiophileMan]

Frame generation is pretty amazing. Starfield was at a janky 60-70fps with 5900X (I have fast ram). With FG on, I am averaging 120-130fps and it feels super smooth and responsive. Also, the new ray reconstruction with DLSS and FG is kind of nuts as well. I was running at 120fps+ in CP2077 with everything maxed out and path tracing - the game looks way better than most of the 3D animated films.

How are you doing frame generation in starfield?

 

[chesebert]

How are you doing frame generation in starfield?

Mod - the free one https://www.nexusmods.com/starfield/mods/761

 

[Radio81]

Well, if you can find something decent at 4k 27" it won't be all bad. Aslo, since you're using a PS5 with it, that kind of changes my view on relevance for resolution.
Additionally, 4k screens have very good pixel density, which helps graphics look much sharper, and text easier to see. There are definitely benefits to 4k, even at smaller sized monitors.
Then again, waiting a year might be a good idea. This year has some real bangers released, and those may become cheaper next year, AND there will be a few more neat monitor releases.
But yeah, ensure that your HDMI input for the monitor can support 4k/60Hz, at least. For the PS5.

Thanks for the advice. I came across a good deal on a 28" 4k 144Hz and couldn't pass it up. Acer Predator, model XB283K. Acer has them certified refurb at a great price right now on their ebay store, and I was able to stack 25% off on top of that. Cost wasn't much more than another 1440p monitor, so I jumped. I think it will be cool, just praying I get a good panel.

I have that and another monitor arm coming, and an under-desk mount for the PS5. Should be a clean setup.

 

[SilverEars]

Frame generation is pretty amazing. Starfield was at a janky 60-70fps with 5900X (I have fast ram). With FG on, I am averaging 120-130fps and it feels super smooth and responsive. Also, the new ray reconstruction with DLSS and FG is kind of nuts as well. I was running at 120fps+ in CP2077 with everything maxed out and path tracing - the game looks way better than most of the 3D animated films.

What vid card is that on? I wouldn't say 6-70fps is janky. I don't get double with frame gen.

 

[chesebert]

What vid card is that on? I wouldn't say 6-70fps is janky. I don't get double with frame gen.

4090FE

 

[SilverEars]

4090FE

I got a 4070ti, and I don't get double gain from frame gen, but about a quarter to third gain. Still, I don't like frame gen because it looks unstable. There's points in time I see massive delays to get the frame gen started or there are glitches.

 

[chesebert]

I got a 4070ti, and I don't get double gain from frame gen, but about a quarter to third gain. Still, I don't like frame gen because it looks unstable. There's points in time I see massive delays to get the frame gen started or there are glitches.

I see. I don't see any artifact in regular gameplay. The only ghosting I see in Starfield is when ship travels from planet to planet. In any case, I expect the actual FG implementation by the developer will solve that one issue for me.

 

[m-i-c-k-e-y]

Tried Raid-0 (two 1TB pcie 4.0 m.2 SSD) on my System this week.
System: Lenovo P360 Ultra i7-12900, 128Gb, RTX2000 12Gb, 2x1TB Samsung PM9A1 (Raid-0), 2x2TB Kingston Fury Renegade 4.0 (Raid-0)

This happens when you have extra RAM and a good cache program (PrimoCache)

Results...

C: Drive Pcie 4.0 2x1TB Samsung PM9A1 (Raid-0)

Drive D: Pcie 3.0 2x2TB Kingston Fury Renegade 4.0 (Raid-0)

 

[KcMsterpce]

Tried Raid-0 (two 1TB pcie 4.0 m.2 SSD) on my System this week.
System: Lenovo P360 Ultra i7-12900, 128Gb, RTX2000 12Gb, 2x1TB Samsung PM9A1 (Raid-0), 2x2TB Kingston Fury Renegade 4.0 (Raid-0)

This happens when you have extra RAM and a good cache program (PrimoCache)

Results...

C: Drive Pcie 4.0 2x1TB Samsung PM9A1 (Raid-0)



Drive D: Pcie 3.0 2x2TB Kingston Fury Renegade 4.0 (Raid-0)

Firstly, do you see an actual improvement in performance in real-world application?
I used to be a RAID 0 fiend, but I found that after NVMe came out, I literally saw zero difference from a 3500MB/s M.2 compared to a 6500MB/s and so on.

Furthermore, using RAID 0 actually increases latency of the drive, meaning that there may be drawbacks in performance that - again - you may not notice in the real world. Especially in random seek time, and in certain file size transfers.

 

[m-i-c-k-e-y]

Loading apps were snappier (especially the larger ones Photshop, CorelDraw etc..), file transfer were faster.. .
Big improvement was on file management however. Indexing my 100K music files in Roon and JRiver was a breeze. So as transfers to my NAS and back.

Having said those...SO..at the end valid? I think in real world applications, (like you) you can do with out.
Will 1-2 second in app loading or 3-4 second transfer time difference bothers you. It depends. Me can live without it.

It was on the database indexing I was happy. Before it took me half a day in JRiver. Now about an hour and a half. But how many times does your app builds its database?

 

[BrokeAudiophileMan]

Firstly, do you see an actual improvement in performance in real-world application?
I used to be a RAID 0 fiend, but I found that after NVMe came out, I literally saw zero difference from a 3500MB/s M.2 compared to a 6500MB/s and so on.

Furthermore, using RAID 0 actually increases latency of the drive, meaning that there may be drawbacks in performance that - again - you may not notice in the real world. Especially in random seek time, and in certain file size transfers.

OK... what? I'm blown away. How are you getting such high read and write speeds out of PCIE 4.0 drives? Even in raid-0 you should top out at MAX 15,000MB/s it shouldn't be any higher than that and yet you're blowing that number out of the water. I can understand the benefits of huge amounts of RAM and good caching but still-- how are you getting these numbers?

 

[SilverEars]

Firstly, do you see an actual improvement in performance in real-world application?
I used to be a RAID 0 fiend, but I found that after NVMe came out, I literally saw zero difference from a 3500MB/s M.2 compared to a 6500MB/s and so on.

Furthermore, using RAID 0 actually increases latency of the drive, meaning that there may be drawbacks in performance that - again - you may not notice in the real world. Especially in random seek time, and in certain file size transfers.

In my experience I see no practical read improvements with one of the top Gen 4 drives, WD Black 850X, what so ever in gaming. The only improvement is when I transfer large files to it and out of it, and even SSD to SSD transfer, I get 2GB/s at best. I would just go with a Gen 3 if I were to do it all over again since I only game (and do some productivity) with a PC.

Also, I notice when I load of a game I haven't loaded up in a awhile, the NVME takes a bit of time to initialize, I don't know why.

What I really want is very fast small file transfers. That's when it's in the practical territory.

 

[chesebert]

OK... what? I'm blown away. How are you getting such high read and write speeds out of PCIE 4.0 drives? Even in raid-0 you should top out at MAX 15,000MB/s it shouldn't be any higher than that and yet you're blowing that number out of the water. I can understand the benefits of huge amounts of RAM and good caching but still-- how are you getting these numbers?

PrimoCache