Amidst the excitement surrounding Nvidia’s announcement of the $2,000 RTX 5090 at CES 2025, confusion has swirled around one of its flagship features: DLSS 4. While Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang made waves by claiming the technology “predicts the future” rather than “interpolating the past,” technical analysis reveals a more nuanced reality behind the ambitious multi-frame generation system.
Despite promises of a 4X performance boost across 75 games at launch, DLSS 4’s underlying technology bears more similarity to its predecessor than Nvidia’s marketing suggests. Multiple sources confirm that the system still fundamentally relies on frame interpolation – the same technique powering DLSS 3, AMD’s FSR 3, and Lossless Scaling. This process involves rendering two initial frames, then algorithmically calculating and generating intermediate frames based on the differences between them.
This revelation contradicts Huang’s categorical denial of frame interpolation use during a CES Q&A session. While his metaphorical description of “predicting the future” makes for compelling marketing, it has led to widespread misunderstanding of how the technology actually functions. The truth lies in the evolutionary rather than revolutionary nature of DLSS 4’s approach to frame generation.
One common misconception surrounds the technology’s impact on latency. Critics have expressed concern that generating multiple interpolated frames would compound input lag issues. However, understanding DLSS 4’s frame interpolation foundation helps explain why these fears may be overblown. The fundamental latency introduced by the process remains largely consistent whether generating one additional frame or three, as the core mechanism still involves the same two-frame comparison and generation process.
To illustrate this concept, consider a game running at 60 frames per second, with 16.6 milliseconds between frames. While DLSS 4 can quadruple the frame rate to 240 fps, the base latency between rendered frames remains at 16.6ms. The technology isn’t reducing this core latency to 4.2ms, but rather filling the gaps between rendered frames with interpolated content to create smoother motion.
This explanation simplifies the complex reality of PC latency, which includes additional factors like monitor response time, mouse input, and DLSS processing overhead. However, it demonstrates why the number of interpolated frames doesn’t create a linear increase in input lag as some have feared.
Research into alternative frame generation techniques, such as Intel’s work on frame extrapolation, suggests potential future directions for the technology. However, the current implementation of DLSS 4 represents a refinement and expansion of existing frame interpolation techniques rather than a fundamental reimagining of the technology.
The confusion surrounding DLSS 4 highlights the challenges in communicating complex technical innovations to a broad audience. While Nvidia’s marketing approach may prioritize accessibility over technical precision, understanding the technology’s actual mechanisms is crucial for setting appropriate expectations and evaluating its real-world performance.
As the RTX 50-series approaches release, the gaming community awaits hands-on experience with DLSS 4 to validate its practical benefits. While the technology may not be revolutionizing frame generation in the way some interpretations of Nvidia’s marketing suggest, its refined approach to frame interpolation still promises significant performance improvements for compatible games.
Add Comment