Tech Focus: VRR Is Not A Magic Bullet - Why G-Sync/FreeSync Can't 'Fix' Performance

[@CaptainLyoner]

18:51 "Judder Survivor" is good lmao

[@evanschwab3261]

came here to say this. glad you noticed too lol

[@georgesaaiman]

I am busy with it at the moment and it plays smooth as silk on my 4090 which is actually much better than the previous games that stutters a lot.

[@Saif0412]

​@@georgesaaiman Great, so we need a RTX 4090 to fix Jedi Survivor? 😂

[@kraM1t]

@@georgesaaiman No it doesn't. Alex already said it isn't fixed on the fastest CPU GPU combo in the world, it's an engine issue, you just have low standards

[@KirillChufarov]

Missed it. LOL)

[@arcticridge]

anyone else see ghost John at 11:49?

[@parkernisbett]

that's a feature of VRR

[@arcticridge]

@@parkernisbett every time the fps falls below the variable refresh rate, John appears Chris Hansen style and asks the GPU, John: "What are you doing?" GPU: "Making a mistake" John: "Making a mistake!"

[@Chasm9]

@@arcticridge and asks the frame pacing to have a seat right over there

[@CYB3R2K]

Punished John

[@TransformationalGaming]

Yeah Alex is notorious for his edits... Me too though.

[@Onikann42]

Unfortunately, the video contains a few inaccuracies or things that are expressed in a misleading way. Alex says that there is no frame holding with VRR. This is not quite true. With sample & hold displays and active VRR, a frame / image is kept active after the scanout until a new frame is supplied by the source. With a 120Hz display, this means that the scan-out always takes ~8.3ms even with VRR active. The screen is put into a hold state after the scan-out phase. For example, if a source delivers a constant 60fps, the scan-out still takes 8.3ms, after which the screen waits 8.3ms for the next frame, then displays the next delivered frame in 8.3ms, then waits another 8.3ms, etc. Technically speaking, with VRR the display still operates at 120Hz and there is no change to the scan-out duration (~8.3ms). However, monitors cannot keep an image active indefinitely without a further scan-out, even modern screens like OLED monitors/TVs can't do that. That's why Alex's description of LFC is not quite right either. The lower VRR limit is defined by the maximum holding time of the monitor. For LG's 120Hz OLED TVs, for example, this is 25ms (40Hz). This means that a new scan-out must take place after 25ms at the latest. And this is where LFC comes into play. If the GPU cannot deliver a newly rendered image after 25ms, it simply delivers the previously delivered image again. Hopefully it is clear from the above description that the scan-out for this repeated frame still only takes 8.3ms after which the GPU may deliver a next frame. In other words the GPU may send a new frame after 25+8.3 = 33.3ms for a 120Hz display. This means that the representation in the video at 13:15 is not quite correct. With LFC the GPU does not necessarily display 2 consecutive frames with a duration of 22.2ms if a game is currently being rendered at 45fps. In this scenario the GPU may send another frame after 30.5ms (22.2+8.3) and not 44.4ms (22.2+22.2) in case the next rendered image is available at an earlier time. I deliberately said “necessarily” here because current LFC implementations are more than just simple multiple representations of already rendered fames. Instead, the GPU manufacturers try to keep the frame times as stable as possible in their drivers when LFC is active. I.e. they sometimes deliberately delay the delivery of a new frame in order to cushion excessive frame time fluctuations.

[@sklynexd]

I'm not reading all that lol, digital foundry is right.

[@missfortune9269]

You're the bigger man here.

[@syeddanishanwer]

Good analysis. You should create your own channel. I would def. subscribe.

[@Onikann42]

@@sklynexd Digital Foundry is great because they are technically excellent and can admit when something is not fully explained correctly. They always try to present and check facts. Otherwise I wouldn't even have bothered to write my comment!

[@Shantara11]

Too bad DF never engage with the audience outside of their paywalled community, so they’ll never acknowledge the existence of this comment

[@alanamarko]

totally agree with getting rid of the "FPS graphs" altogether and instead focusing on smoothness and consistency, which is WAY more important than number going bigger.

[@therealsunnyk]

Something which DF does which no other publication does unfortunately is have the horizontal axis for frame time be *time*. So, most publications will show a bad frame as a single dot point. In the 500ms example given, DF would correctly show the graph as a "square" shape, but most publications show a "line" shape. Also, with one bad frame, what's the 1% low? 0.1% low? In the 500ms example, even if it was the only bad frame in 5 seconds of footage, the 1% low per _time_ would be 0FPS (or 500ms). However, the 1% low per _frame_ would be 30FPS (or 33ms). Most publications unfortunately show the latter. Unsure if DF does it right. In short, frame times are extremely error prone to display, and until all the major publications show it correctly, I wouldn't trust them to use it over FPS.

[@therealsunnyk]

@@fgdvdszedsa FPS is just 1/[frame time], so you can show a frame time graph as "FPS".

[@mik0186]

100% agree. A locked 30 with consistent frames feels perfectly fine than a locked 30 with inconsistent frames.

[@Optim121]

A locked 60 or 120 is even better ​@@mik0186

[@richardheumann1887]

This question will stick its head up every now and then... And it won't get any traction because people are used to FPS as a metric. And habits die hard. I am not against frame time as a metric to be clear. I don't see that it will happen.

[@cube2fox]

Small correction: Hz doubling with VRR+LFC does not increase persistence blur on sample-and-hold screens like LCD or OLED. This is because showing one frame for, say, 20 ms does not look different than showing a doubled frame for 10+10 ms. In the latter case the screen just overwrites one frame with another that looks exactly the same, which will not be visible at all. So persistence blur stays the same with LFC. LFC frame doubling can be noticeable on pulsed displays like CRTs (or strobed LCD backlights or OLED with black frame insertion) though, since having one pulse per 20 ms looks different from having two pulses in 10+10 ms. The former could look somewhat flickery, the latter would lead to an double image effect in persistence blur cases.

[@darkl3ad3r]

It does because it has to do with how your eyes track a moving object. 1:1 frames to refresh cycles looks far better even on a sample and hold display. This is why real G-Sync module based monitors are far superior to Freesync junk panels, because they can single cycle sync down to much lower refresh rates without requiring LFC, and without flickering.

[@Oshadorin]

​@@darkl3ad3r Watching a 24 fps movie on a 144Hz screen looks much better than at 24Hz though. Don't know if it's the same thing

[@Reallynotnick]

@@OshadorinAssuming no motion interpolation is happening or weird other settings kicking in, the one difference you’d see is the initial scan out from top to bottom would happen much quicker and then the image wouldn’t change for the next 4 refresh’s. While if it was truly scanning out at 24Hz the screen would constantly be refreshing from top to bottom. So it may create a different sort of rolling shutter effect or sort of jello like effect if switching between panning left and right rapidly.

[@kpsowns]

This is exactly the issue that Nvidia showed off at CES and they said they were working on GSync Pulsar that prevents these increased motion blur issues so that both VRR(and LFC) and BFI can work all together without any downsides. This is most relevant to competitive FPS gamers that want the best motion clarity and are the gamers likely using motion blur reduction features like BFI in the first place. What it means for the average gamer is that most likely Nvidia will try to put this tech as some custom chips in partner only monitors, or make it a driver level feature for RTX cards only. So we will either have to buy these GSync Pulsar branded monitors at a premium or we will have to wait for AMD(or possibly VESA) to make a more accessible, more open standard for the same tech.

[@Rachit0904]

A theoretically-perfect sample-and-hold display wouldn’t have any issues with LFC. In practise, doubled frames can have inverse ghosting.

[@tsorakin]

Alex is doing the lords work here. I've been hoping for discussions such as this for years now. The Rtings video opened the door for VRR flicker from OLED technology, and this video further emphasizes how inconsistent frametimes has been the culprit the entire time. I now have hope that more effective solutions will surface with the recent spread of awareness on these issues.

[@elgoblinospark2949]

Judder Survivor.

[@Mattened]

le 56%

[@AnimeUniverseDE]

VRR is best used with an arbitrary framerate cap, as you are no longer bound to V-Sync and fractions of your monitors' refresh rate

[@JoPsyph]

This is where custom resolution utility comes in for me, I can set my monitor to any refresh rate I want while using the large Vertical total calculator to give me reduced input lag with vsync on for those lower refresh rates

[@AnimeUniverseDE]

@@JoPsyph if your display supports those custom refresh rates and it doesn't cause any frame skipping then that's also a good solution, yea

[@6ch6ris6]

thats what i do. 144hz monitor, games are capped to 120fps with a pc that is capable of rendering more than that (in those games). super smooth experience :)

[@JoPsyph]

@@AnimeUniverseDE yeah my monitor is a freesync monitor so it supports those large verticals but it's unfortunately hooked up to my laptop so freesync isn't supported r.i.p.

[@kosmosyche]

Yes, I found this to be a very good strategy for keeping the framerate as consistent and movement as smooth as possible. For example, if I know that a game averages at a 100fps on my system with spikes up to 120fps and lows into 80s, I'd rather cap it at around 84-85 fps for 99% smoothness, rather than run it uncapped but with noticeable inconsistency in smoothness.

[@Wallguy]

FPS graphs are as important to me as frame time variance. I will always want both covered. One without the other is only part of the story and insufficient. So I am happy that DF has taken it upon themselves to raise the profile of FTV in the minds of the average viewer. Good work Alex. :)

[@mduckernz]

They could just use a double Y axis, with milliseconds on the left and FPS on the right. FPS is essentially a derivative of a moving average of frametime, with a window of 1 second.

[@TheNerd]

Judder Ring - Shadow of the Stutter

[@George-um2vc]

Upcoming Star Wars DLC is called Judder Survivor - The Judder Strikes Back

[@Krypterium]

lol

[@TheRealBOBlibob]

Judder of the Erdtree

[@tvguy316]

Hi Alex, thank you for the video as always. Just a note regarding the various display limitations when engaging VRR. The Sony X90J (used as an example here) and all Sony FALD TV using their XR processor have been updated to be able to use local dimming with VRR engaged. As per Rtings, with very minimal IQ degradation, but a ~4ms input lag increase at 60hz. To my knowledge this is the only brand that offers that, otherwise you have to go OLED

[@shodancat1000]

OLED ftw.

[@HassanMohamoud-lg2xw]

Thanks for the info :)

[@purebaldness]

I have an LG C3 and I can't get enough of the brutal ABL and OLED flicker 👌 ​@@shodancat1000

[@jonothonlaycock5456]

Samsung qn90c and d use can use FALD and vrr/freesync premium pro/gsync at the same time.

[@kpsowns]

Fascinating! It seems they have beat Nvidia to release this tech to consumers! Nvidia Gsync Pulsar tech that is still unreleased is apparently for solving the same issues with running VRR and BFI at the same time.

[@AVerySillySausage]

VRR on the PC side has gotten people to underestimate the value of a stable framerate. I try to never let my GPU run at 100%, I like using conservative frame caps that I can hit nearly 100% of the time so I never notice anymore performance changes. Consistent frame pacing just feels smoother and it's much better for immersion.

[@rodrigofreitas3288]

Same. Capping provides a sense of predictable linear motion that our eyes get used to, adapting to this motion pattern/timing. I often cap at 30, 60, 120 just to make sure some not very optimized game's physics run properly as well.

[@djayjp]

Report 1% and 0.1% low frametimes 👍

[@redclaw72666]

Pay them lol

[@CtguhokhCredibley]

whatsinmy AI fixes this (AI Video Analysis). VRR isn’t a performance fix.

[@superjoy1337]

As an arcadehead, VRR has been truly a godsend. So many games run in weird nonstandard refresh rates and it's been wonderful no longer dealing with that issue in Mame. Same with RetroArch and any PAL 50hz game

[@rubenel7993]

Absolutely. Some Sega arcade machines ran at 57 fps, VRR smooths that out. VRR is also a godsend for 30fps retro games and It improves input delay.

[@boshi9]

Even consoles such as NES and SNES run at a non-standard refresh rate of 60.09 hz.

[@AaronPaden]

dosbox-staging supports vrr as well. A lot of DOS games run at 70hz

[@lukilladog]

Custom resolutions with custom refresh rates have been around for a while.

[@ymi_yugy3133]

The tech focus videos are my favorite by DF, thank you for making them. One aspect I didn’t quite understand is how low frame rate compensation works and how the GPU adjusts display refresh rate. Since frame times depend on the application the GPU doesn’t know the frame time ahead of time. So when a GPU sends a frame to the display it can’t “set” the frame rate since it doesn’t know when the next frame will come. So all the display can do is to display that frame until the next one comes. If that falls within the VRR range everything is fine, but what when it falls below it. Let’s say the frame is 24 ms long, but the lower bound of vrr is 22.2 ms (upper bound 8.3ms). Ideally it would display the frame twice each time for 12ms. But since it doesn’t know how long the frame time will be I assume it will display it for 22ms and then again for 8.3ms. Am I understanding LFC correctly or is there something else going on?

[@xkannibale8768]

LFC doesn't actually kick in right away. If you're in a game and getting below your min VRR range, then you alt + tab out and back in. You'll see flickering for a few seconds, and if you use your monitors "show refresh rate" hud, it'll show the monitor go from the min to max refresh rate, hundreds of times per second until LFC kicks back on. So it takes the driver a few seconds after a game takes focus to actually be aware of LFC. For me my monitors VRR range is 48-164, and once LFC kicks in then anytime I'm below 60 fps it'll just use LFC.' It doesn't even get near the bottom range.

[@hadiabdul9266]

The RTings VRR Flicker test on OLED is not unrealistic at all. I've gotten even worse flicker playing Skyrim. its really bad. as it stands i leave it disabled all the time

[@OniMirage]

Some of it has to do with the instant on off of oled pixels. led has the same issue but only if the rate is close to the max refresh rate since lower rates will start to blend which oled doesnt do.

[@XJoukov]

THIS. have disabled g-sync permanently on mine too because of the flickers

[@residentCJ]

You can eliminate the Flickering completely if you Limit the VRR Range with the "CustomResolutionUtility" I set my VRR Range to 90-165hz. Added FPS Limiter @100fps. And voilà, no more Flickering on my AW3423dwf.

[@jon....]

Games that consistently stutter are the only ones I’ve noticed have flicker. Elden Ring for example is genuinely unplayable with VRR on because of how noticeable the flicker is, whereas I can play literally any other game (even a game with large variations in FPS like GTA IV) and not notice any flicker if there is any to begin with. I think it’s bad frame times that cause it, so it would make sense that Skyrim would be problematic especially if you’re using mods.

[@Varmint260]

Yup, I didn't realize it was a downside when I got my first OLED screen and was wondering what the heck was going on in certain games! Now I know what it is, I adjust settings or shut off VRR as necessary.

[@SpontaneousWeasel]

Thanks largely in part to this channel, I've become increasingly aware of these issues and how to best 'curb' them using vrr and frame capping as a tool. I'm not sure how others feel but the fps graphs feel like a comfort to watch on the df comparison videos - I think I'd miss them! But without doubt consistent frame times are ALWAYS better than a wildly variable one. I love how series x can just use LFC and VRR on any game.

[@Scrawlerism]

"judder survivor" is my favorite Freudian slip of the month, at least.

[@uncleren]

I noticed that G-Sync smoothed out many high fps games that had consistent micro stutter that I could not solve in any other way. For this reason alone I always have it on.

[@slizzy418]

Not to mention it gives you smooth looking games even if the game itself doesn’t have micro Stuttering

[@thornstrikesback]

I am the same. I keep G-Sync on all the time, even when playing Battlefield and APEX. I just can't stand screen tearing and will take the slight lag/delay over screen tearing any day of the week. But I am mostly a single player person anyway so G-Sync definitely for the Win.

[@tarfaerhing7555]

Is a monitor with a gsync module worth it over a gsync compatible monitor? I remember there were some advantages of that specific module, but how are the things now?

[@slizzy418]

@@tarfaerhing7555 yes as an owner of both it matters.. i had a VA monitor with g sync compatible and needless to say it gave me horrible flickering but only with unoptimized games, other than that is good if you’re on a budget.. Now with my current monitor that has an IPS panel with a G sync Module it DOESNT FLICKER even with the worst of games.. always silky smooth And the type of the panel also matters.. IPS and TN seem immune to this phenomenon while OLEDs and VAs are the worst and this is backed by several people on the internet and also by RTINGS

[@paulusapfel]

​@@tarfaerhing7555Can't speak for everyone but myself, I have a gsync monitor and a gsync compatible one. After some initial problems to correctly adjust the gsync compatible one everything works fine now. But in my subjective feeling I think it's not as perfectly smoothed at lower frame rates (under 60 FPS) as with the dedicated gsync monitor (both with 48Hz - 144/165 Hz VRR range) and in very rare cases there is a little flickering which never occures on the gsync one. But overall the difference is negligible.

[@tomvandongen8075]

I'm officially charmed by the way Alex pronounces "obfuscates"

[@ScottWozniak]

I believe English isn't his first language.

[@Raigeki-SC]

@@ScottWozniak Alex is german

[@fffrrraannkk]

@@ScottWozniak Really? If that's true I never would have guessed that. Because of how well he speaks English I just assumed it was his first language.

[@kendokaaa]

@@Raigeki-SC John also lives in Germany but he's American, Alex too AFAIK

[@Diablokiller999]

@@kendokaaa As a german I can hear his idiom...or he has trained himself so well in german that he has overwritten his native english tongue with german quirks - highly doubt it ;)

[@bloodykilla8521]

You guys thought you're gonna play Fluke's Atom Bomb in the background and I wouldn't notice? Great taste in music I've gotta admit👍

[@8K240hz]

digital foundry continues to make the nerdiest possible videos of all time and i love it

[@plume...]

5:13 this is exactly the sort of scenario (not exactly, but a similar situation) that I notice when a game has obvious performance problems, and when I have a peek around the Steam forums etc. people say "Nope, no problems here, runs SmOoTh As BuTtEr". Some people simply don't see it, or only play with mouse and keyboard (the mouse being the camera controls). When you have a uniform camera turn speed with a controller the stutter is SO noticeable. It drives me nuts!!

[@Wip3ou7]

VRR is not meant to "fix framerates" (in fact, by definition, it UNFIXES it) its simply meant to be the best way to display video with irregular frame times AND IS.

[@boshi9]

Not only that, his understanding of how it works on a technical level isn't correct.

[@boshi9]

It's also a good way to display video with regular frame times that don't happen to match the native refresh rate of the display (or an even fraction) without having to inject a duplicate frames every now and then or adjust the speed of playback.

[@Lead_Foot]

The worst part of VRR is the huge brightness overshoot and flickering you get on OLEDs and FALD LCDs when there's big frametime spikes. Alan Wake 2 with VRR enabled on an OLED looks worse than the Rtings demo.

[@astreakaito5625]

Happens on ips and va LCDs too. Some people claimed that Gsync monitors with actual Gsync modules used to be able to prevent brightness flickering with the help of the gsync hardware.

[@Chasm9]

I only get VRR flicker in menus where the frame rate and frame time is an afterthought apparently.. like in RDR2. Otherwise I never get any VRR flicker. (LG C2, AW3225QF)

[@MrChadLedford]

This. It was horrible.

[@residentCJ]

You can eliminate the Flickering completely if you Limit the VRR Range with the "CustomResolutionUtility" I set my VRR Range to 90-165hz. Added FPS Limiter @100fps. And voilà, no more Flickering on my AW3423dwf.

[@residentCJ]

You can eliminate the Flickering completely if you Limit the VRR Range with the "CustomResolutionUtility" I set my VRR Range to 90-165hz. Added FPS Limiter @100fps. And voilà, no more Flickering on my AW3423dwf.

[@CozMyN]

for years I tried to make GTA V not stutter, I hate stutter... until I got my first 144 G-Sync monitor, same PC components, totally different experience, and no more stuttering :D

[@Starless85]

I hope you guys do more videos like this. I have a basic grasp on a lot of this stuff, but a real breakdown like this for those of us less tech savvy is awesome

[@gurratell7326]

Higher refresh rates is the way to go, even running without VRR. Say that you have a 1000hz monitor but playing at around 60fps, this will mean that the GPU never have to wait more than 1ms to send away the new frame no matter how the render time of that frame. You can even run with vsync on without any noticeable added delay.

[@cube2fox]

The best thing would be to use reprojection (e.g. Meta's asynchronous space warp) to artificially extrapolate the frame rate. In contrast to DLSS/FSR frame gen, this lowers latency and is computationally inexpensive. It works well and is used for VR, but it would also work well for PC FPS games where camera movement is directly controlled by the mouse.

[@Cheynanigans__]

No sir. 60fps on a 1000hz monitor would show judder. If the fps are not divisible by the monitor hz, then some frames will need to be displayed longer than others, which manifests as a judder. VRR's purpose is to remedy this and remove the hz/fps divisible requirement.

[@gurratell7326]

@@Cheynanigans__ Except that it would be a 1ms judder compared to a 16ms one on a 60hz monitor, so yeah it's there but I doubt that it's noticeable. I mean many people say that they don't notice a difference between 240hz and 360hz, so 4ms and 3ms, so you think anyone would notice 1ms? (Of course I can't say for 100% sure though since there's not really any data on this).

[@macklin4839]

i really really appreciate these videos that just break down some aspect or Technical Thing™about video game performance. loved the one y'all did on anti-aliasing.

[@yuro1337]

Alex has just dropped 24 minute video 👀 gotta get some popcorn

[@leonfrancis3418]

Thanks to VRR, I've experienced almost no perceptible frame issues in games I play this generation. Even games people have complained have said issues. Investing in a good TV to go alongside my current gen console was the best decision. I wondered why this channel didn't speak more about this tech, I guess I know why when it feels this way. The hearted comment is really informative.

[@MorningstarJinn]

Thanks for bringing correct info to light, i find it very frustrating so many people think things like VRR work a certain way when it clearly does not.

[@directive-4]

Great and informative video Alex! Well done. PS: Cool to see John making a very brief cameo appearance between 11:49 and 11:50 :)

[@Pawnband]

18:50 Judder Survivor LOL

[@TheUltimateBlooper]

I wouldn't wan the FPS graphs to disappear. What I am happy with is what DF do - framerate + frametimes, so that I know what level of performance I can expect from a game/hardware and then whether that is smooth or not and HOW smooth.

[@TheIndulgers]

Another issue not talked here especially on consoles. At a frame cap of 60, the latency is relatively low. Once the game dips into its vrr window under 60fps, the latency skyrockets - not only due to longer frame times, but the gpu no longer has extra utilization headroom. No more gpu busy time to lessen latency.

[@stephenenzor9385]

It does not necessarily skyrocket -- if the VRR display is only 60 hz then when reaching the 60 FPS cap you would get traditional V-Sync level input lag. When the framerate drops into the VRR range you'd see that V-Sync level lag removed, but you might see CPU prerender lag as you're no longer reaching the game's built in fps limit. Some games may not even have an engine level FPS cap in place and would just be using V-Sync alone so it's going to be game by game.

[@subjectivereviews]

Alex doing tech focus stuff is just the best. wish DF does more of these than console comparisons.its stuff such as this that's really helpful

[@MotaboT]

The flickering is not an unrealistic test I think. I can consistently reproduce a flickering effect when playing fighting games (60 fps hard limit due to the genre) on a 144hz with freesync enabled. The effect starts to appear and increase in intensity the longer the game session is. To solve it I've just disabled freesync on all fighting games.

[@tablettablete186]

Interesting, I could also reproduce it in a fighting game (brawhalla)

[@DigitalFoundry]

Hmmm, that is curious -Alex

[@Demmortal]

Same for From games like elden ring with cap on 60fps

[@konga382]

Rtings is mistaken when they say that VRR flicker is only caused by inconsistent frame rates. That can cause it, but I've also seen it plenty of times with a completely locked and stable frame rate. The one thing I've noticed that helps reduce it when you have a stable frame rate is lowering your display's refresh rate as closely to the game's frame rate as you can without going under. Sticking to 60hz for 60fps games, or if you're locking to 90 on a game with one of the new 240hz OLEDs, drop down to 120hz. Having less of a deviation between max refresh rate and in-game frame rate seems to help.

[@Demmortal]

​ @konga382 cause if u game locking it at 60 for example it still varies internally and can activate LFC so its jumping from 55-60 to 110-120

[@parrydigm]

The explainer on frame persistence is S-tier - really appreciate the easy to follow primer. Thanks!

[@wolfreon]

VRR flicker is nasty in OLED. I thought my unit was bad but I figured this is not happening outside games. That's how I discovered VRR flicker in OLED is normal.

[@andrewmorris3479]

It depends on the OLED. My PG32UCDM is barely noticeable only in menus.

[@wolfreon]

@@andrewmorris3479 try darker scenes, it does have the same cons in rtings.

[@lennyjoeduh]

Cap your fps! If you smooth your frame times you won't get flicker with gsync

[@mechanicalmonk2020]

​@@lennyjoeduh and then you get hit by Alan Wake that can fluctuate between 30 and 90fps on excellent hardware

[@messiahmozgus]

​​@@lennyjoeduhabsolutely zero effect on games like Helldivers 2. Doesn't matter how low I cap it. Doesn't matter either what tool or the game's native frame limiter. My LG monitor is a strobe light with gsync on. I just can't believe none of the reviews mentioned this huge issue.

[@kunalnn017]

Am glad this tech focused videos are done..thanks DF 😊👍..please do more such videos on topics like DP 2.1 vs HDMI 2.1 or adaptive sync or panel replay.. would be fun to understand better

[@paul1979uk2000]

VRR was never about fixing performance, it just gives you more room to play with when it comes to performance, but much of that depends on your display range and the game and it's settings. On the PC being you can play games however you want, VRR can work really well on most games when setup right, but on consoles, there are far more limitations in place, especially on PS5. Either way, VRR can't fix games that have performance issues like judder, transversal stutter and issues like that, what it can do is give you a bigger range on where your frame rate can dip before you notice any judder, to put it another way, say you've got a game playing at 60fps and the frame rate dips under 60fps, if your VRR range is 40fps, the game will look quite smooth as long as it doesn't dip under 40fps, so it's better than how it would be if you have normal vsync and have to have a locked 60fps, because any dips under it, even if it's only by 1fps, you will notice it. Personally, I find having a range from 45fps to 85fps is a good range that works well for me, whiles on a smaller display like the Steam Deck, you can get away with more at 40fps, but all this will depend on the individual person as we all have different sensitivity levels on what we find acceptable when it comes to frame rates. They also recommend that you have your frame rate around 1-3fps away from your min and max range of your VRR display so it doesn't overshoot and creates tearing, from what I've found, just 1fps at the low and high end is enough to solve that problem but that might vary from game to game or display. For me, I find VRR works really well on AMD hardware with Radeon Chill, if set like how I play at 45-85fps, when not much is going on, the frame rate drops a lot whiles staying smooth, when the action heats up, the frame rate ramps up, the advantage of this is that is uses less energy, temps are lower and from a visual point of view, it looks the same, and that range can be set to whatever your display and gpu can handle, this works really well for me being that my VRR range is 40-120fps, meaning there's no chance of it getting close to that to cause any tearing issues, and so far, I've not seen any issues with tearing in any game with it.

[@HerZeL3iDza]

You should cap even lower than 1-2 FPS. This is especially true the higher the FPS. On a 165hz monitor for example I wouldn't use higher than 160FPS but to stay safe I use 157FPS (This actually is what Reflex ends up at if you use VRR + Vsync). If you use a realtime monitor (not average) of your FPS you will see how wild a framerate "cap" actually is!

[@paul1979uk2000]

@@HerZeL3iDza Normally they say anywhere from 1 to 3fps, I normally set it at 3fps as you're not going to notice the difference anyway and it makes sure that the game can never go out of my display range and so far, it works great on every game I've tried. That might be different for other users on different games and displays, but it works great for me.

[@itsprod.472]

Can’t believe how adaptive sync of any type changed how a game felt and look when we all used to play on 60fps with Vysnc on lol back in the late 2010s -2012.

[@TalentedTacoTrex]

Screen tearing is the absolute bane of my existence. I don't care about the input lag as long as the image is stable. I had friends who would never turn it on and I genuinely didn't understand how they can play a game while the entire image is tearing the whole time

[@viking9442]

They think they playing co-op splitscreen 😂

[@Terepin64]

And that's why Vsync is needed even with VRR.

[@LordRaydenTube]

I think it’s hilarious that some people pay 2000$+ on a pc and then play games with tearing.

[@viking9442]

@@LordRaydenTube and at 1080p

[@KillahMate]

@@Terepin64 If you use a reliable framerate cap method with VRR then Vsync should almost never be needed. Some games unfortunately have bad builtin framerate caps, but Nvidia drivers provide a very good framerate cap system that can be used with any game.

[@alister_cat]

Alex going with the Apollo Justice hair today!

[@Rubik43]

6:27 Can someone explain to me how 24fps movies are handled on a 60fps TV?

[@mduckernz]

Good TVs will actually adjust their refresh rate to 24Hz, or some multiple thereof. Bad TVs will not, and will consequently look awful, as 24 simply cannot cleanly divide with 60. A common implementation is to set the refresh to 48, and then (optionally) interpolate the 24 up to 48. What do you want to know in particular? There’s a lot to cover and it varies quite a bit based on the underlying display technology, afaik

[@rodrigofreitas3288]

In that scenario the TV would do the "3:2 pulldown" method in order to show the content at the cost of judder. Since 24 frames doesn't fit evenly in 60 refreshes this method makes every odd frame be repeated, playing twice, while every even frame is tripled to fit the TV's 60Hz. So it would be like this: Frame 1 = 2 Refreshes, Frame 2 = 3 Refreshes, Frame 3 = 2 Refreshes, Frame 4 = 3 Refreshes and so on.

[@middle_pickup]

I think a follow up video is needed or a blog post at least to help people understand how to set up their games on their systems for best frame timing. I could definitely learn more about this myself since I'm getting into esports titles more and more.

[@Last1SiN]

Meanwhile on Nintendo Switch: VRR got available by the best Switch OC solution.

[@trixniisama]

Elaborate?

[@-41337]

very grateful for DF setting the standard for how consumers can be informed and presented information to help them understand the quality of games and hardware. if it weren't for guys like you we'd be more in the dark.

[@Tomiply]

24:14 Get rid of the fps graph altogether? I don't know about that. It's nice to have.

[@MrSmitheroons]

I agree subjective description of smoothness (and of how nice the experience is in general) is important, as well as frametime consistency as a family of objective metrics to reality check those descriptions and tether back to something measurable. Some games will have, say, glowing small particle effects. These can make low framerate very obvious, and it depends on the person whether they find it distracting, or their mind has accepted "hey this is a simulation of smooth motion not real smooth motion, it's fine" at which point it will genuinely stop bothering a large proportion of people once they accept this. Meanwhile, if the view consists mostly of misty or far-off areas, with low contrast and slow motion across the screen due to being far away/how parallax works, any lack of smoothness of motion, for example when the camera isn't panning much, will be low. Low framerate can be tolerable in such cases, and I imagine frametime variance can be easier to simply not notice as well. Also, atmospheric "along for the ride" passages, where information is passively presented to the viewer, vs interactive twitch-shooter moments, the gamer may demand more or less fidelity of motion to perform the skill tasks of the game. Failing to perform well in the requirements of in game tasks due to lack of smoothness can be frustrating. It can prevent progress in single-player modes, or cause lost matches/worse outcomes in multiplayer modes. Though distracting motion errors can break immersion for cinematic/laid back passages as well. So, it depends on what's on the screen, what's important about what's being presented, and how much smoothness can aide or hinder skill of the player. In other words, it matters on the art style, the gameplay, and the individual leanings of the player, their aesthetic preferences, and their gameplay needs. Let alone differences in how different display hardware responds to the various demands of showing the game content at whatever framerates/brightnesses/refresh Hz, etc. So, bringing the subjective side in becomes important, it's not all metrics. But we should make sure we don't become like the audiophiles where the science is poor at explaining what matters. We should keep some objective metrics close by to reference and comment on along with the subjective, since we want our results to be repeatable and understand why things are happening.

[@JoelRosP]

Smoothness > Resolution > FPS We all remember when 30 FPS felt smooth but then we needed 60 FPS and now we run at 120, 144 or higher and yet something is wrong on the naked eye. I agree that developers need to put more effort on stabilizing frame times so we see a more fluid motion. I notice the difference between 60 and 120 Hz, but even at 120 Hz I see those "microstops" and I'll pay any money to be able to run even at 40 FPS but with a fluid motion than having 360 FPS with inconsistent frames.

[@Mihaylovich]

Eyesight uber alles. VRR smoothness in 48 hertz will destroy your vision and get you feeling tired, inducing myopia in the long run.

[@lpnp9477]

I'm happy to play at 480p for 60fps or more. Please don't speak for everyone.

[@FOREST10PL]

Yes, you see the framerate dropping from 120 Hz to 115 Hz. Sure

[@JoelRosP]

@@FOREST10PL I play in a 144 Hz display, I can't assure you that once you're accostumed you can notice frame drops. You can even see the frequency of some office lights at work that my coworkers can't just because my eyes have accostumed to 144 Hz. But more importantly, it's not the frame drops, even if i'm running the game at perfect 144 Hz it can feel not smooth due to frame times, this video explains this.

[@JoelRosP]

@@lpnp9477 aigt boy forgot there are some Internet Explorer users here

[@Doo-l5x]

Your explanation is so clear. 3:31

[@frozenmist8873]

It's a shame Alex didn't delve deeper into the Global Nvidia setting of "Fast" for Vertical Sync. "Fast - GPU renders unconstrained similar to VSYNC Off, but does not tear since frames in excess of the refresh rate of the monitor are dropped. Delivers latency that is very close to VSYNC off with no tearing.". I'd love to see a DF style breakdown of these different GPU Control Panel Global Settings for VSync to see how they really perform and work. Thanks for the video!

[@dmer-zy3rb]

so how is that better than uncapped windowed mode?

[@rodrigofreitas3288]

Hey, if you're still interested in how this technology works, Alex has actually made a video years ago about V-sync in which he covers all the other variants including Fast-sync. He has even mentioned that in this video. 7:02

[@dpmjmun]

i put the video on, but i didn't really payed attention to it, i just wanted some bg noise in the last half-hour of my shift at work, thanks DF

[@veraalves6874]

Yessss finally the video was made. I remember this idea being suggested a long time a go. Great work, Alex!

[@OverHaze]

There is another issue with OLED VRR that people don't seem to talk about. With VRR on gamma is raised as frame-rate goes down. Say you have a 240hz oled monitor and you are playing something like Starfield at 120fps you are going to start seeing posterisation, the lower the frame-rate the worst it gets until the black level starts to visibly raise. At very low framerates like watching a movie at 24fps with VVR on the black level raises so badly you are looking at TN levels of contrast.

[@Alovon]

Why no mention of alternative Sync features like NVIDIA Fast Sync (AMD's Enhanced Sync being the counterpart). These methods act like Vsync off when under your monitor refresh (which is fine as you have VRR), but allow you to run beyond your monitor refresh without any tearing/jutter (and maintain the input latency of the native framerate better)

[@Relex_92]

Wrong it adds judder just like classic Vsync does. There is absolutely no way getting a VRR like experience above your monitors refreshrate. Every VRR Monitor AT or ABOVE max refreshrate behaves exactly like a non vrr display. So you have to enable Vsync to prevent tearing and/or enable a FPS cap to completely avoid framerates hitting the max refreshrate. (its best do enable both, the G-Sync 101 article on blurbusters explains why)

[@iurigrang]

It's a different type of jutter, but it's still jutter. Let's say we're running a game at around 70 fps on a 60hz VRR screen. This means some frames will be displayed in sequence, and some frames will be dropped to avoid tearing. When a frame is dropped, there will be double the time passed in game inbetween the displayed frames when compared to when consecutive frames are shown. This means you will see a perfectly frame timed 60 fps experience, but in which all movement happens at an irregular pace. This does a similar thing as enabling v-sync on a non VRR screen bellow the refresh rate, as input latency isn't (much of) a trade off, but you'll have traded screen tearing for full screen jutter.

[@c-baazxxx1721]

Danke! Sehr aufklärend. Wie immer DF at its' best. :0)

[@AcousticBlu3]

Alex looking like a final boss of low fps with that haircut

[@nicl4388]

Thanks Alex! I've been looking forward to this deep dive. I would also like to see a deep dive into using VRR with frame generation and also when you decide to enable a frame cap and what you cap it at when you do and why.

[@Spike_33]

Tech focus👍

[@Jim-hm9ch]

VRR is amazing. I play on a samsung 75" 4k tv with 120 hz vrr and i love it. I always use v sync too. It keeps things steady all the time. If my pc goes from 120 fps to 90 fps, i can hardly tell because there was no delay in each frame, they always get there when ready.

[@CaveyMoth]

I wonder if AI frame generation could be used not just to double frames, but to smooth out frame rates/times, as well.

[@mduckernz]

This is essentially a better implementation of LFC, yes

[@jaytay420]

That makes no sense.. frame time is the time the gpu needs to render a frame obviously, and frame generation generates frames based on those that are actually rendered

[@martinramirez9647]

Amazing video, clarifies a lot of doubts i had.

[@AmaroqStarwind]

VRR works well if your framerate falls below if your framerate falls below your monitor’s maximum refresh rate, while FastSync works well if your framerate exceeds your monitor’s maximum refresh rate. And a good real-time motion blur implementation effectively acts like antialiasing for framerate. Finally, there’s the issue of frame pacing: if you have good frame pacing in your render pipeline. If you were to combine all four of these, you’d have a fantastically smooth experience.

[@Relex_92]

Fast sync introduces judder if framerate is not an exact multiple of the monitors refreshrate. It behaves just like classic Vsync but without the FPS limit.

[@timmyp6297]

VRR works best with reflex, since it has anti lag tech that includes capping fps so it stays in vrr range. If you dont have reflex, cap below so it DOESNT hit vsync and VRR remains active. You dont combine anything you only want one.

[@rodrigofreitas3288]

No, you don't want to use FastSync with VRR, makes no sense. FastSync doesn't provide smooth motion if it's not running at a multiple of the monitor's maximum refresh rate. If you already have VRR use it instead, since both tech are meant to fix tearing and not to be used simultaneously.

[@timmyp6297]

@@rodrigofreitas3288 Its pcmr spillage. The comment and upvotes. You would think a tech channel, or other (rapidly diminishing amount of) educated enthusiasts would correct... but nope. Let the misinformation reign!

[@SebastianBugiu]

Amazing deep dive. I was aware that VRR wasn't a perfect solution but didn't know all the details. Either way VRR is the way to go compared to VSync or *shudders* screen tearing.

[@PoppyPitts-vm3jx]

I can binge these videos for hours!

[@AlphaladZXA]

Begone bot!

[@TheGrimMumble]

really love the in-depth look into tech like this. keep 'em coming Alex, this was great!

[@jhonrock2386]

VRR did that on my PS5 + Fallout 4. It turned an unplayable game into a fairly pleasant game to play. The difference between 30fps@non-VRR and 40fps@VRR was like night and day.

[@joefawley9264]

@@jhonrock2386 fallout 4 is never pleasant to play haha. But I get your point!!

[@deathtrooper2048]

That's not VRR, that's 120hz display since 40hz is only compatible with 120hz and not 60hz.

[@audiokrak9598]

All VRR does it makes the screen match the refresh rate of the game to stop screen tearing, maybe watch the video before commenting

[@jhonrock2386]

@@audiokrak9598 I dont give a f*ck about the details, what matters to me is the results, and the 40fps@120hz mode on fallout 4 worked well enough to make it worth to use. So, VRR rlz!

[@isaacaderogba1199]

Huh, thought the PS5 needed a window of at least 48fps before VRR kicked in

[@workthrowaway8430]

Bro I hear that tetris CD-I soundtrack. Just wanted to shout it out because that ost is a banger.

[@Wolverine3196]

Next do Tech Focus: Upscaling Is Not A Magic Bullet - Why TAA et al Can't 'Fix' Performance

[@cube2fox]

TAA doesn't do upscaling so this doesn't make sense :D

[@kendog0013]

@@cube2fox Temporal upscaling is most certainly a thing... look at UE... most people just dont call Temporal upscaling 'TUS' - TAA still isnt inherently wrong as upscaling IS a 'form' of anti-aliasing

[@mjc0961]

Well that's the thing: upscaling doesn't fix performance. Dropping the resolution is why you get a performance boost. Upscaling is just the method used to take the lower resolution image and make it fill the higher resolution screen. You can do it in old games without any of this DLSS or XeSS or FSR crap, just let your monitor stretch it. All those technologies are doing is trying fill in the missing resolution in such a way that it looks better than it would if your monitor just stretched it. Sometimes they call it "image reconstruction." But to my eye, I just call all those technologies garbage, they all introduce new artifacts and I'd just prefer to let the monitor do the stretching. Or display the image at the lower resolution and let the rest of the screen be blank. Or turn off other unimpressive graphical effects like raytracing and run at native resolution with high framerate.

[@mathimatisk]

Don't think I didn't notice music from Tetris CD-I in the background!

[@infinitysynthesis]

Id rather have it than not though. It's game changing for some games.

[@TheVillainOfTheYear]

New metrics: average frame time DELTAS, and number of frametime deviations >10% per second (deviations from the average frame times from the previous second). These numbers would show us how stable a game is and if any deltas are noticeable. For example, if 100 fps, but frame times are 9.5-10.5 ms, thas a delta of 1ms. Separately, if only a few or none out of those hundred frames gave deltas that are noticeable (say, 10% difference for example), it's "smooth."

[@thepunisherxxx6804]

Its really shocking how little priority performance gets. Fun should always come first of course with games, but performance/feel/responsiveness is right below fun in terms of importance for a game. UE5 is so bloated, so much abstraction, games so big. I LOVE DLSS but I knew it would become a crutch and we would see it essentially be required for games to get acceptable FPS (120+ FPS is bare minimum for PC game in 2024). Sometimes its just pure laziness or a rushed delivery date where they made no LOD models like with Cities Skylines 2 where it was rendering high res teeth of every resident walking around when your camera is literally in the sky. I'll say the engine COD uses now seems really good with performance. It can handle 100+ players on massive maps, it has lots of dynamic culling and other systems in place to manage performance without lots of manual tweaking. I also LOVE the options search feature, I just need to call that out - Searchable options needs to be a thing for ALL apps. Its a godsend, esp with how complicated options are getting now. It makes business sense too. You want your game to run on as many machines as possible, as good as possible.

[@iurigrang]

I don't really understand this "in 2024" mentality. Frame rates haven't, as far as I'm aware, ever improved with time. As time passes, hardware gets stronger, but games also get more complex, and at a similar pace. That's why the most common target framerate on consoles have looked more like a coin toss than having improved (60 on SNES, often bellow 30 on ps1, 60 on ps2, often bellow 30 on ps3, around 30 on ps4, and now 60 on ps5). Why is there an expectation that target framerates increase with time?

[@thepunisherxxx6804]

@@iurigrang What you're saying just isn't true. N64 and PS1 started at 24/30 FPS. PC games targeted 30 FPS, then 60, things slowly started to creep up as hardware improved and refresh rates in monitors advanced. Console lingered on 30 fps and eventually standardized mostly on 60 because its easier to get away with lower FPS/latency on a controller and farther from the display. Mouse you notice those nuances in response times and performance way more. We also see FPS options now in console games, that wasn't a thing 5 years ago, and some games now have 120 FPS even on consoles, so there is a trend, if not up and down for some games like you mentioned. With DLSS that was encouraged even more to push FPS higher. Most don't use DLSS to get 60 FPS in ray traced games, they use it to get 120+ FPS in most games with moderate settings. As a PC gamer, you always want to try and match your monitors max refresh rate for the most fluent, responsive experience possible. This has always been a key pursuit for gaming enthusiasts, increase resolution while maintaining high FPS. There are certainly diminishing returns, but high FPS does make a difference. Professionals all use 240hz + for the best advantage possible. When you're playing for money on the line the things that matter most stand out, and we see that with the desire for higher FPS. So yeah, the ideal world goal should be every game running at 240 FPS with no dips or frame pacing issues. Ideal, not realistic for most games, but for some they are doing that already.

[@Huschke85]

As long as people can easily compare average FPS, nothing will change. We need to come up with our own easily comparable metric, such as an "average frame-to-frame millisecond change factor", but with a catchier name and a nice abbreviation!

[@alpcan151]

Digital Foundry could you please review lossless scaling 4x frame gen mode and added gsync option (which was not supported before) in lossless scaling.

[@JustSheen]

Building my pc, I was excited to finally see what VRR was all about only to get those awful micro dips in brightness on my oled screen and never turned it on again.

[@jinx20001]

wait... did people actually think VRR can fix bad performance? wow. low framerate will always be low framerate.

[@DaRkRaGiNgBeAsT]

Framerate can be 30fps I don't care as long as the frametimes are smooth. If framtimes are all over the place even with high refresh rate it's unplayable imo

[@KillahMate]

As Alex says, if frametimes are mostly consistent then VRR can make them look good and smooth regardless of what those frametimes are - they just need to be consistent. It's a _huge_ improvement over fixed refresh displays, which only look smooth if the frametimes match the refresh rate. But as Alex also says it's still the game's duty to render consistently, VRR can't fix stutter.

[@BryanBortz]

It’s an engineered title for KZbin.

[@astreakaito5625]

Love these videos, glad to see another tech focus! Ah VRR, I have a mostly negative opinion about it since I prefer using BFI and I'm perfectly fine not using it at all, but it's still good to have when your fps is close to target and you want the lowest latency.

[@jeffbeasley8235]

this felt way too unnatural like "alex is reading from a teleprompter" for the entire video, to me

[@LordRaydenTube]

I love the fps / frametime comparison. Frametime describes the raw performance output AND the fluidity. Fps only the first. Why are we holding on to it?

[@Fellipe2k5]

In 2020 it was the magic bullet for DF, when the PS5 didn't have the feature. Now that it has, it has become something trivial

[@ShadyPlatinum777]

Glad someone else remembers

[@amirranjbar1995]

I am sold on the suggestion of getting rid of fps graphs and focusing on frame-times instead.

[@MrHorst38]

This "local dimming gets turned off in VRR mode" is not relevant anymore for FALDs, almost all tvs got updates that enable local dimming in VRR and unless your tv is from 2020 you should be fine. So maybe stop mentioning that constantly.

[@Marenjii]

It's only 2024, assuming what you said is true, and taking into account that many people hold onto their TVs for 7-10 years, then there's a lot of people out there with a TV that still turns off local dimming when VRR is enabled. It's going to be a while for that tidbit of information to no longer be relevant.

[@MrHorst38]

​@@MarenjiiI assume that people holding on to their tv for 7-10 years are not very tech savvy, don't watch digital foundry and have no idea what local dimming is.

[@Marenjii]

​​@@MrHorst38I'm not sure that's a fair assumption. While most people aren't tech savvy, and even those that are may not be watching these videos, tech savvy doesn't mean someone is more likely to upgrade their TVs more often than someone that isn't. I bought a new TV in 22, I'm not upgrading till 29 at the earliest because these are expensive devices.

[@KillahMate]

@@MrHorst38 You assume wrong. People can be tech savvy and not have loose change lying around to buy a new computer screen every 12 months.

[@MrHorst38]

@@KillahMate I'm not talking about 12 months though, no idea why you pulled this number out of nowhere. I think keeping a tv for 4 to 5 years is reasonable. He said 7-10 years. This means that you would have a dim 40 to 50 inch 720p/FHD 60hz TV set in 2024. No VRR, no HDR, no 120hz, no 4K, no modern features, probably subpar brightness. Hard to understand how you can be tech-savvy and have such a small and ancient tv set around that lacks basically everything.

[@jericoba]

I'm not very technically savvy, at least not at the level of DF and many people watching here, but even I can understand that a feature like VRR is not going to fix a broken game. We should never completely rely on features like these. Hopefully developers can get their (bleep!) together and release a game that works, regardless of platform. Thank you for the video!

[@XWXS2]

The only thing that performance can fix is performance. Developers nowadays are just lazy and Greedy

[@joskamps4711]

loving the deep dives you take during tech focus!

[@joefawley9264]

This generation hasn't impressed me at all.

[@AeonMW2]

you didn't mention minor VRR tearing at the lower part of the screen even when inside VRR window AND V-sync OFF. That's why you should always have vsync on even in VRR window

[@prich0382]

V-Sync increases latency, so no

[@soulshinobi]

These videos are the most valuable ones from DF, right to the core of what we're here for.

[@djayjp]

Miss these graphics tech videos!

[@rickysargulesh1053]

Really helpful video. Learned a lot. thanks Alex

[@sniperganso]

very good video. I would love to see a video about the quality of frame limiters in a separate video. More specifically, how specialk normal vs vrr optimized modes affect the frametimes. Also, on the topic of fixing games, SpecialK can fix several games that have bad frame pacing or bad fullscreen modes by converting them to independent flip

[@Poptartsicles]

FPS graphs still have their place, because knowing whether something is a smooth 30fps or a smooth 120fps stil matters, even if both games have stable frame time differences of sub 10% variation per frame. But the importance of ftc (frame time consistency) graphs definitely need more attention.

[@TheDarksideFNothing]

To me, VRR allows me to run a game right around the average FPS my GPU is capable of instead of having to cap it well below to prevent frame drops and vsync judder. Its almost like a blanket 20% performance boost compared to not having VRR in that regard. Hugely impactful to my gaming experience.

[@kaizerdeath12]

I'm still all in for FPS counters in me games, but if there could be a vast normalization for frame-time tools that come right with the game itself, in the way we see video settings say "this is your performance buget and how much each setting is affecting it", I would be very into it as a diagnostic and learning tool

[@VectorAero]

As an LG OLED TV owner I've given up on VRR. The dark area flickering issue is so hard to tune out via fps caps. And the Black Stabilizer feature does not make a huge difference.