Why can't I cap framerate when using DLSS 3?

[HungryHamster]

I'm just curious why none of the games DLSS 3.0 will let you cap your framerate. Is it something inherent in this new technology? I play MS flight simulator, Witcher 3 next-gen, Warhammer Darktide, Portal with RTX, etc. and none of them let you cap your framerate. Occasionally I will go over 138 fps and it introduces that annoying screen tearing.

[WereCat]

Why do you want to combine DLSS3 with a frame cap? That makes no sense. 

 

Just stick to DLSS2 then without frame generation of you want frame cap. 

[BetteBalterZen]

37 minutes ago, HungryHamster said:

I'm just curious why none of the games DLSS 3.0 will let you cap your framerate. Is it something inherent in this new technology? I play MS flight simulator, Witcher 3 next-gen, Warhammer Darktide, Portal with RTX, etc. and none of them let you cap your framerate. Occasionally I will go over 138 fps and it introduces that annoying screen tearing.

Framecapping won't necessarily fix tearing, but have you tried setting a global FPS limit in the Nvidia Control Panel? Then you don't have to rely on the games to have a FPS cap or a working one. 

[porina]

55 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Why do you want to combine DLSS3 with a frame cap? That makes no sense. 

Should be obvious. Because you want more fps and don't want to exceed display max refresh rate in doing so.

 

This limitation was reported at the launch of DLSS3 and I'm guessing it'll be on nvidia's list of things to improve with the tech. Hopefully it'll be in a better state when mainstream volume 40 series GPUs come out.

[WereCat]

1 minute ago, porina said:

Should be obvious. Because you want more fps and don't want to exceed display max refresh rate in doing so.

 

This limitation was reported at the launch of DLSS3 and I'm guessing it'll be on nvidia's list of things to improve with the tech. Hopefully it'll be in a better state when mainstream volume 40 series GPUs come out.

Yes but limit of 138 is so low it implies that he can easily exceed it with DLSS3 which in turn implies he can approach it without DLSS3 in some extent which makes it almost redundant.

But that's what I'm assuming, I would love if OP can say what frame rate he gets without DLSS3 and just with DLSS2 instead. 

[porina]

5 minutes ago, WereCat said:

Yes but limit of 138 is so low it implies that he can easily exceed it with DLSS3 which in turn implies he can approach it without DLSS3 in some extent which makes it almost redundant.

The world used was "occasionally" not "easily" and I do wonder what you read as it isn't what I'm seeing. We often see varying fps depending on game content so it is not hard to imagine it may cross display rate without a limit.

[WereCat]

43 minutes ago, porina said:

The world used was "occasionally" not "easily" and I do wonder what you read as it isn't what I'm seeing. We often see varying fps depending on game content so it is not hard to imagine it may cross display rate without a limit.

As I said, perhaps I'm assuming too much. And I would still like OP to provide his frame rate experience as I mentioned above without DLSS3 and with just DLSS2.

 

Considering that only cards that run DLSS3 right now are RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 my assumption was that he should be easily able to achieve around 100FPS even at 4k in most of those games he mentioned even without DLSS.

MS Flight Sim is probably a lot CPU bound so there I would understand the need for frame cap for example as the GPU alone probably cant consistently push the FPS high enough.

 

But then again I don't play with RT so maybe I'm overestimating the RT performance with those cards as well.

[HungryHamster]

13 hours ago, WereCat said:

As I said, perhaps I'm assuming too much. And I would still like OP to provide his frame rate experience as I mentioned above without DLSS3 and with just DLSS2.

 

Considering that only cards that run DLSS3 right now are RTX 4080 and RTX 4090 my assumption was that he should be easily able to achieve around 100FPS even at 4k in most of those games he mentioned even without DLSS.

MS Flight Sim is probably a lot CPU bound so there I would understand the need for frame cap for example as the GPU alone probably cant consistently push the FPS high enough.

 

But then again I don't play with RT so maybe I'm overestimating the RT performance with those cards as well.

Sorry for the late response. I might try out DLSS 2, but I'd prefer to get the highest frame rate possible and then just cap it. Occasionally I will go over my monitor refresh rate as I mentioned which is annoying, but the main reason I want to cap it is just because I prefer as stable of a frame rate as possible. From the responses of others it sounds like this just isn't something that is working with DLSS 3 right now, although I did find it helpful to cap frame rate in Nvidia control panel which helps a lot in MS flight simulator (FPS swings from like 70 to 160).

[BetteBalterZen]

1 hour ago, HungryHamster said:

... although I did find it helpful to cap frame rate in Nvidia control panel which helps a lot in MS flight simulator (FPS swings from like 70 to 160).

Glad to hear this still was helpful!

[Mark Kaine]

17 hours ago, WereCat said:

Why do you want to combine DLSS3 with a frame cap? That makes no sense. 

why not? more fps, nicer iq, *no tearing*

 

actually i doubt you cant turn on vsync or something 

16 hours ago, WereCat said:

Yes but limit of 138 is so low it implies that he can easily exceed it with DLSS3 which in turn implies he can approach it without DLSS3 in some extent which makes it almost redundant.

But that's what I'm assuming, I would love if OP can say what frame rate he gets without DLSS3 and just with DLSS2 instead. 

that depends on the game, portal runs like molasses with raytracing and no dlss3 (iirc...)

[ewitte]

It is just a limitation of how they are generating a frame between two good ones.  I've seen people force it and get major artifacts.  My guess is it is dropping that last frame before getting a chance to do AI on it to get the middle frame (also giving you a higher % of fake frames).  The technology is new it will likely improve over time.