By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
HoloDust said:
Chrkeller said:

If I were going to be super picky, only issue I have ever seen with DLSS 1440p to 4k was last of us part 1.  Metal railing in the distance shimmered a bit.  But that is a very poor port and being super picky.  I mean who cares if a railing 300 ft away has a slight shimmer when DLSS took me from 60-80 fps to 110-120 fps?

No issues with any other game.  In fact, quite often, I run 1440p DLSS to 4k even if my rig can do native.  It keeps temps way down and the rig runs super quiet.  

I have to be honest, as PC gamer of some 30 years at this point, I cared for fps in 80+ range only in FPS games - that is where I actually need them.
For everything else, especially if I'm using gamepad, I'm fine with 60, and I won't make much fuss even if I'm forced to play at 30 on consoles (though it does bother me somewhat visually).
But keeping the rig quieter - yeah, that's often my reason for using DLSS as well, while limiting fps to 60.

I completely agree that the benefit of high fps depends on the genre.  FPS for sure, but I also really like it for something like Horizon and God of War, any game that pans the camera a lot looking for secrets.  RPGs it is completely unnecessary for sure.  I am running Tales of Arise at 120 fps, but if it were capped at 60 fps...  yeah perfectly fine.  

I deal with/accept for 30 fps on Nintendo games, just because I love their games and don't want to miss out.  But 30 fps bothers me.  Just too rough on the eyes.  

Hopefully I am not disappointed, but I can really see Nintendo targeting 60 fps in most first party titles on the S2.  It should have plenty of power to hit that target.  



rtx 4090, 32 gb ram, i7-13700k

Switch 2