When using DLSS Frame Generation, would limiting the game to 60 real frames per second and letting frame generation produce around 120 FPS leave useful GPU headroom? My monitor runs at 144Hz, and I care more about stable frame pacing and a smooth experience than the highest possible FPS number. Would a lower cap reduce latency or improve stability, or should I let the game maintain the highest stable base FPS it can?
4 Answers
Frame Generation makes the image look smoother, but your input latency is still largely tied to the underlying, non-generated FPS. A 60 FPS base with generated frames may look like 120 FPS, but it can still feel like 60 FPS in terms of responsiveness. If your system can hold a higher stable native frame rate, that is generally preferable.
Using Nvidia Reflex is usually the best option when the game supports it. Reflex manages the frame queue and can automatically keep the frame rate below the display limit, helping with latency and avoiding unnecessary rendering. If the game does not support Reflex, you can use an in-game or driver-level frame cap instead, though the behavior may not be quite as well optimized.
For a 144Hz display, you could aim for a cap near 140 FPS with Frame Generation enabled, assuming your system can maintain it. G-Sync or another variable refresh feature can help keep things smooth. If your CPU or GPU cannot sustain that, a lower cap such as 72 base FPS for roughly 144 generated FPS can be a reasonable power-saving compromise.
Capping the frame rate can save power and reduce heat, especially if you are not playing competitively. For competitive games, higher real FPS usually means lower latency, so a conservative cap close to the monitor's limit is often better than locking the base rate to 60. The best setting depends on whether smoothness, efficiency, or responsiveness matters most to you.
My Core i5-10400F is struggling in this case, so I may need to use a lower cap rather than trying to reach the monitor's full refresh rate.