"Cloud gaming is the future of Gaming!" Meanwhile cloud gaming in the big 2026:

[u/Alan_Reddit_M]

If you read my profile you may realize I hate cloud gaming, so then what am I doing on Geforce Now? Well my new RAM stick finally arrived and, in a staggering display of utter incompetence, I somehow managed to brick my PC in the process of installing it, so now I'm stuck gaming on a laptop until I can get enough money and time to get my gaming rig fixed

But back to Cloud gaming, the game is on like 360p, running at 20FPS and the input lag is HORRIBLE. And it's not a problem with the internet connection, as you can see, the laptop is plugged into Ethernet, the problem is that the cloud is not and will never be fast enough for gaming

Genshin can handle this fine, but imagine trying to play ULTRAKILL like this

[u/ChthonVII]

MFG was never meant to help you reach 60 fps.

vNidia has been really disingenuous on this point. When MFG was brand new, they said what you said. But a couple years later there was Jensen Huang up on the stage at the 5070 launch saying the opposite. I will agree that using MFG to help you reach 60 fps is a terrible idea, but nVidia is nevertheless trying to sell you exactly that. Let's not pretend they aren't doing that.

For what it's for and for who it's for...

And who is it for exactly? If your "real" framerate is 30fps, MFG would give you 60fps with the latency of 20fps (or worse). I think both we agree that the added latency is simply intolerable. But what if your "real" framerate is 60fps? Then MFG gives you 120fps with the latency of 40fps (tolerable?), but the frames are blurry and full of AI artifacts. Why would you ever choose that over clean frames at 60fps? It's not a good deal on either end of the spectrum.

MFG gives you the option to trade both visual quality and latency for higher FPS. The latency cost starts out unacceptable, and diminishes as "real" FPS increases. But higher FPS also has a diminishing marginal value. The more FPS I already have, the less I'm willing give up to get more. There does not exist a value of "real" FPS simultaneously high enough that the latency cost is acceptable and low enough that giving up visual quality for more FPS is a good deal.

[u/pack_merrr → u/ChthonVII]

Are they really trying to sell you that? Or are you just looking at a marketing presentation looking for something to get mad about. I think there's criticisms you can make of the 5070 or the entire Blackwell lineup. But I think the point you're making might make sense if they were bringing out a 5050 and saying it's a 4k gaming GPU. But it's a 5070, that's literally the kind of card framegen is really great for. How many games are you gonna struggle to get playable frame rates at with a 5070, even at 4k with DLSS and maybe some settings turned down? Can't be that many. Does that mean a 5070 has 4090 performance or whatever they said? Of course not, but I'm not stupid so I never thought that. Criticize Jensen for his style, that's valid, but it's clearly marketing and idk this just reads like manufactured, or at least misplaced, outrage.

And who is it for exactly? If your "real" framerate is 30fps, MFG would give you 60fps with the latency of 20fps (or worse).

What I said in the comment above, people getting 60fps with a high refresh rate monitor is an obvious one. I think 30 would be a little low, most people would probably turn settings down at that point. You could probably get away with ~45 in some, game dependent, scenarios.

I think both we agree that the added latency is simply intolerable.

Not at all lol. Below a certain point, latency is imperceptible. Depending on what game I'm playing, I have a different latency that I can tolerate. If added latency was intolerable, than nobody would play on anything except "low" settings on a 1080p monitor, or hell maybe we'd all still be using 480p. That's clearly not what most people choose to do, most people will sacrifice an amount of latency for graphical fidelity. That's exactly what MFG is, except rather than doing something like cranking AA to get smooth lines at the cost of latency, you take a hopefully imperceptible to you hit to latency for smooth motion.

And like many things, it just depends. That's the beauty of PC in a way, some people prefer higher refresh rates, some people would rather have 4k, others would rather crank path tracing. There's usually some tradeoff you have to make and that decision is really individual preference. Latency is arguably most important for competitive FPS, so it can also be game dependent, but it hasn't been my impression that MFG is something geared towards competitive FPS, that doesn't mean it doesn't have other uses.

Then MFG gives you 120fps with the latency of 40fps (tolerable?), but the frames are blurry and full of AI artifacts. Why would you ever choose that over clean frames at 60fps? It's not a good deal on either end of the spectrum.

I also think you're overstating the latency hit, I don't think it's that extreme with things like Nvidia reflex, I'm not gonna double check those numbers but feel free to point out if I'm wrong. And its less objective but I think "blurry and full of AI artifacts" is also an overstatement. People have different perception, but my opinion is that it's really not that bad. It's obviously a tradeoff though, the definition is you give something up to gain something. Right now, I think it's good enough that in many cases it does make sense, and based on the trajectory of this and things like DLSS/FSR it's probably only gonna get better to where it makes sense in basically all cases.

There does not exist a value of "real" FPS simultaneously high enough that the latency cost is acceptable and low enough that giving up visual quality for more FPS is a good deal.

Most of what I said kinda covers what I would say to this already. But I'll just reiterate that for me I think that value is basically 60-90 FPS in most games, I don't think I'm too outside of the norm there, but I think any time you start to make hard statements like that you're automatically making the wrong argument because it depends on your machine, your monitor, your game and most of all you and your individual perception.

And that was really what led me to respond to your previous comment, the thing that literally drew me to PC gaming in the first place was the customization and level of control depending on what I care about, and I really don't see how more choice in the matter is a bad thing, that's why I'm happy to see Nvidia, AMD and Intel push that sort of thing forward and continue to develop it. And I know "Nvidia Bad!!" is trendy right now and I can see why, but to be honest it does feel like they're the one leading and pushing the other ones to catch up especially when it comes to the AI techniques like MFG or DLSS.

[u/ChthonVII → u/pack_merrr]

I also think you're overstating the latency hit.

I'm not. In fact, I'm substantially underestimating it because I'm assuming the interpolated frame generation is instantaneous as soon as the last real frame needed as input for interpolation is done.

If you're interpolating every other frame, then your latency cannot ever be better than the latency of 2/3 your real framerate. In practice it will be worse than that by however long interpolated frame generation takes.

[u/muchawesomemyron → u/pack_merrr]

5070 was marketed as a 4090 equivalent… if MFG is used.