Not everybody plays FPS (as in First Person Shooter) and need to squeeze every ms of latency.

For those, some "free FPS (as in Frame Per Second)" is a good thing.

edit: clarified the two FPS

What does this mean? That Arc series is not being discontinued after all?

There's nothing I want less than multi-frame generation. I guess some people want to feel like they're getting their money's worth from their 240 Hz monitors.

Overall, I'm pretty happy with my Intel Arc B580, if framegen helps me squeeze out a little bit more life out of that card before it becomes more or less obsolete, then I'll gladly take it.

Though, to be honest, with the amounts of UE5 slop out there, I'll probably need to give an unreasonable amount of my money to Nvidia or AMD sooner or later (since many games don't exactly let you turn off Lumen and Nanite).

It's just unfortunate that Intel themselves won't provide the much needed market competition in the form of a B770.

I can't believe that some people are enjoying MFG, however small that group is. me personally? I hate that cognitive dissonance of "it looks like 120 FPS yet input lag is more like 40-60 FPS". plus, FG itself has performance tax, which in my case means input lag tax.

it's input lag that defines experience, not frame time. I am comfortable with 30 FPS (sometimes less frames even fits the style of the game, e.g. Dishonored 2, Clair Obscur) as long as the game responds instantaneously.

Does Intel even try to compete with Nvidia? Or are they content with the bottom end?

The Steam Deck case is the clearest test. Boss fight in Elden Ring: your inputs are still 45hz, eyes see 90.

For readable patterns it's probably fine; for reaction-window timing you're being misled.