That‘s certainly something they‘re gonna want to fix. I hope DF and GN pick up on this, seems like free views and I‘d love to hear what they‘ve got to say on the matter.
Edit: Also wondering if it‘s the app or if the performance hit disappears when you disable the overlay. Only flew over the article to see what games are affected how badly so mb if that’s mentioned.
Edit 2:
HUB‘s Tim tested it and found that it‘s the overlay or rather the game filter portion of the overlay causing the performance hit. You can disable this part of the overlay in the app‘s settings, or disable the overlay altogether.
He also found that this feature wasn’t impacting performance on GeForce Experience, so it’s very likely a bug that’s gonna be fixed.
To clarify: Using game filters actively can have an impact on either, but right now even when not actively using them, they cause a performance hit just by the functionality being enabled; a bug.
The only outlier where just having the app installed hit performance was the Harry Potter game.
Here’s the quote, for people allergic to reading the update in the article.
Update: Nvidia sent us a statement: “We are aware of a reported performance issue related to Game Filters and are actively looking into it. You can turn off Game Filters from the NVIDIA App Settings > Features > Overlay > Game Filters and Photo Mode, and then relaunch your game.”
We have tested this and confirmed that disabling the Game Filters and Photo Mode does indeed work. The problem appears to stem from the filters causing a performance loss, even when they’re not being actively used. (With GeForce Experience, if you didn’t have any game filters enabled, it didn’t affect performance.) So, if you’re only after the video capture features or game optimizations offered by the Nvidia App, you can get ‘normal’ performance by disabling the filters and photo modes.
So, TomsHW (is at least claiming that they) did indeed test this, and found that its the filters and photo mode causing the performance hit.
Still a pretty stupid problem to have, considering the old filters did not cause this problem, but at least there’s a workaround.
… I’m curious if this new settings app even exists, or has been tested on linux.
I don’t think you’re understanding. The testing they did was presumably fine and the performance hit is probably unacceptable. But mentioning but not testing the scenarios of
That‘s certainly something they‘re gonna want to fix. I hope DF and GN pick up on this, seems like free views and I‘d love to hear what they‘ve got to say on the matter.
Edit: Also wondering if it‘s the app or if the performance hit disappears when you disable the overlay. Only flew over the article to see what games are affected how badly so mb if that’s mentioned.
Edit 2:
HUB‘s Tim tested it and found that it‘s the overlay or rather the game filter portion of the overlay causing the performance hit. You can disable this part of the overlay in the app‘s settings, or disable the overlay altogether.
He also found that this feature wasn’t impacting performance on GeForce Experience, so it’s very likely a bug that’s gonna be fixed.
To clarify: Using game filters actively can have an impact on either, but right now even when not actively using them, they cause a performance hit just by the functionality being enabled; a bug.
The only outlier where just having the app installed hit performance was the Harry Potter game.
Here’s the quote, for people allergic to reading the update in the article.
So, TomsHW (is at least claiming that they) did indeed test this, and found that its the filters and photo mode causing the performance hit.
Still a pretty stupid problem to have, considering the old filters did not cause this problem, but at least there’s a workaround.
… I’m curious if this new settings app even exists, or has been tested on linux.
Yeah they didn’t test that. Nor did they test having the app installed but not running. Crummy article tbh.
Not possible.
Disagree, and i don’t think it’s the point.
As an average user, why am I paying a performance hit for nvidia’s own “recommended parameters”
That’s trash and a terrible experience, and they should be called out for it.
I don’t think you’re understanding. The testing they did was presumably fine and the performance hit is probably unacceptable. But mentioning but not testing the scenarios of
Is kinda mailing it in.
I’ll give you that, yep, sure.
But that doesn’t invalidate the data they did get, it’s just not a full picture.