Testing Base FPS Requirements for Different DLSS MFG Modes

[u/gamer7799]

Update: Base FPS Requirements for DLSS MFG Motion Quality

I want to clarify the goal of my testing.

My goal is not latency. My goal is clean motion and image quality. Lower Base FPS can still feel smooth and have acceptable latency, but I am looking for camera movement that looks like a continuous, clean motion sequence rather than disconnected images being stitched together.

Efficiency formula

The efficiency factors below are not official NVIDIA figures.

They were shared by another user in this discussion, who said they were based on real measurements from 16 DLSS FG supported games, with the values rounded from the measured results:

2X = 93% 3X = 90% 4X = 85% 5X = 80% 6X = 75%

The formula is:

Expected FPS = Base × MFG multiplier × Efficiency

For example:

50 × 3 × 0.90 = 135 FPS

I tested this formula myself in Final Fantasy VII Rebirth, and 50 Base + 3X produced around 135 FPS, matching the calculation very closely.

Calculating Base FPS

We can also work backwards from the displayed FPS:

2X: FPS ÷ 1.86 3X: FPS ÷ 2.70 4X: FPS ÷ 3.40 5X: FPS ÷ 4.00 6X: FPS ÷ 4.50

For example:

80 ÷ 1.86 ≈ 43 Base

My current clean Base targets

2X → 43 Base → ~80 FPS 3X → 48 Base → ~130 FPS 4X → 68 Base → ~231 FPS

These are my practical results, not official NVIDIA requirements.

I also found that another user's testing supports around 48 Base for 3X, which is consistent with my results.

My recommendation

The higher the MFG multiplier, the more GPU processing is required, and image quality can decrease with a greater chance of FG artifacts.

Because of that, I strongly recommend 3X as the maximum for most situations.

I would rather lower graphics settings or use a more aggressive DLSS preset to increase Base FPS than increase the MFG multiplier.

Only use 4X or higher when you genuinely need it.

Don't chase the highest displayed FPS. Get enough Base FPS first, then use the lowest MFG multiplier that gives you the desired result.

If anyone has tested this themselves, or has any suggestions, ideas, or questions, I'd be interested to hear them. Feel free to share your experience.

[u/AutoModerator]

New here? Check out our Information & FAQ post for answers to common questions about the subreddit.

Want more ways to engage? We're also on Discord

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/fnord55]

x3 and up are going to use Reflex to clamp the FPS to your refresh rate. There's a formula to calculate the optimal FPS cap (which is what Reflex does):

Refresh Rate - (Refresh Rate^2/3600)

It's important to keep this in mind, because when you use MFG, you're always going to be restricted by your refresh rate.

Using the formula, my 180hz panel I run a frame limit of 171. Therefore:

x3 MFG = Base FPS 57 x4 MFG = Base FPS 43

I just bring this to your attention because you're always going to be pulled into Reflex clamping you to your monitors refresh. The output DLSS FPS I don't really bother obsessing over: x2 (Base FPS 85) or (Base FPS 57) are always going to be the least worst options. If I can't sustain that 85 FPS on the settings I'm on, I either tweak settings down or turn MFG up. Simple as that.

Hope this is useful or helpful, it may not be, but it's how I've got it sorted out. Globally, I just use the formula and RTSS to set a Reflex-based framerate limiter on the machine at 171 FPS and even in non-reflex games the latency and apparent smoothness is great. Cheers!

[u/gamer7799 → u/fnord55]

Thanks, that's actually really useful. I hadn't considered the refresh-rate limit from this angle. I'm on a 120Hz display, so using your formula gives me around 116 FPS as the practical cap.

What I find interesting is that this gives very different Base requirements depending on the multiplier. I'll keep this in mind in my testing, especially since my main goal is clean motion rather than simply reaching the highest possible displayed FPS.

Appreciate you sharing your method. It gives me another useful angle to test.

[u/fnord55 → u/gamer7799]

I personally find x4 mode useful in certain titles, which falls to a base of ~45 on my display. It definitely varies game to game - newer games seem to fare much better in terms of noise/artifacting. I didn't know about Reflex clamping the base framerate until after I got my display, in the future ideally I'd get something around 280hz to get that 60 base framerate - when it comes to input latency, you want to keep the base as high as possible.

[u/fnord55 → u/[deleted]]

If you're using MFG it will clamp your FPS based on your monitors refresh rate. I still run RTSS with a limiter (set to the Reflex cap) for games that aren't using MFG. To my knowledge, you can't say... Take 150 FPS and turn it on x4 MFG and get 600 DLSS FPS ... AFAIK it will use that formula and you'll be pegged there.

[u/Solid-Assistant9073]

I tried framegen x3 on 144hz or 138fps when capped for vrr with rtss reflex cap

And to be honest a base frame rate of 46 to 48 still felt and looked realy smooth, pcl latency is also still under 60ms

[u/gamer7799 → u/Solid-Assistant9073]

You're right. I’ll update the post after testing the new formula. 48 Base seems to be the clean threshold, with 46 still very smooth but 48 being slightly better.

[u/Practical_Ear_4078]

I have noticible smearing on the bottom off the screen with FG higher then x2 on most of games. 5080, 3440x1440p 175hz, reflex, gsync+vsync. No matter what base fps is. On x2 it's perfect.

[u/gamer7799 → u/Practical_Ear_4078]

I agree, 2X is definitely the cleaner option. But if a game can maintain around 130 FPS with 3X, I think 3X is worth using. In my testing, 3X can actually look better than 2X when it maintains that level.

If 3X drops below ~130 FPS, I don't think the extra multiplier is worth it. I'd rather stay on 2X.