Really? It only uses global illumination. For the most part it just results in darker interiors. You can almost get the same effect just by turning down the gamma adjustment. At least Battlefield has proper reflections.
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
Nvidia DLSS 5 months on-a win or fail?
- Thread starter easyrider
- Start date
I've not yet seen anything that has used ray tracing in a useful way with Turing GPUs - Battlefield 4 and The Division have artistically better use of GI even though its fake and TD does reflections well enough you'd have to stop and study to notice the difference.
Ray tracing, even hybrid implementations, using Turing hardware can do so much better.
Ray tracing, even hybrid implementations, using Turing hardware can do so much better.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,070
In fairness, the anti-20 series crowd are as bad
. There's so much misinformation here and if some bothered to read up more they'd see they're wrong.A few oddities I noticed that made me chuckle this morning.
1. FFIV is just a benchmark.
2. DLSS HAS to be used with RT.
I've given up myself as I'm sure some folks are bots , proven by ignoring evidence contrary to their own thoughts
. You get a slight pause followed by repeated same narrative.I just sit back and enjoying gaming with a 20'er card, waiting for further improvements and next gen too
Last edited:
In fairness, the anti-20 series crowd are as bad
A few oddities I noticed that made me chuckle this morning.
1. FFIV is just a benchmark.
2. DLSS HAS to be used with RT.
I've given up myself as I'm sure some folks are bots , proven by ignoring evidence contrary to their own thoughts
this forum never changes. The same anti-Nvidia crow will continue to post the same nonsense time and time again, no matter how absurd or obviously false. you point it out with facts and they still just keep repeating the same fake BS.
Which is all ridiculous because as with any large company Nvidia has heaps of flaws and Turing is definitely not a great release. There are loads of legitimize complaints you can make so when these anti-nvidia fans just make up garbage arguments it just weakens their position and make them look like pathetic trolls.
As an example, Given the thread topic it is plainly obvious DLSS has massive issues under some situation producing dreadful image softness which is completely inexcusable, while Turing costs significantly more. From that point alone we can conclusively state that DLSS is currently a failure. Why then the need to make up all kinds of ridiculous claims, lies and blatant nonsense? Why is it not possible to have an intelligent discussion about the current state of DLSS, the science and technology behind DLSS, and the potential for Nvidia to improve upon the current results?
From my perspective I think DLSS is a fascinating technology, with a huge amount of potential, and very solid theoretical background. It is poorly executed by Nvidia currently, but I am more interested in where the technology can take us.
It is a basic fact that Deep-learning based up-scaling provably can provide better results than tradition re-sampling and more advanced algorithmic solutions like temporal checkerboards.
A 4K image has massive amount of pixels but the total information content is far smaller diue to statistical distributions of the pixels. One can see this when compression an image (lossless or lossy). E.g, a high quality jpeg compression of a photo still looks photo realistic without perceptible image problems while being 10-15X smaller in size than RAW. That same concept on information entropy can be used in reverse to generate a high resolution image form lower resolution samples and a model that has learned most of the statistical pixel patterns.
The state of the art in DL super resolution absolutely does not have problems with quality. It will be interesting to see what Nvidia can do in the next months
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,200
Yeah, the issue is that traditional rasterisation method have become SO good over time 'faking it' as such that it's just going to be extra difficult for an average RT implementation to tell much of a difference. Like anything, I expect it'll take some time to improve (and ultimately, will it actually be worth the hit).
It's going to take years before RT does it better without a massive performance hit, by that time we'll probably be at £5000 top end gaming GPUs.
I can't see DLSS taking off either in its current form, nVidia will likely release a new version of it. SDDLSS (Super Duper Deep Learning Super Sampling).
I can't see DLSS taking off either in its current form, nVidia will likely release a new version of it. SDDLSS (Super Duper Deep Learning Super Sampling).
By that time, we will probably all be on consoles
By that time, we will probably all be on consoles
It's a trap!
Nvidia want this because they're heavily invested in the console industry, supplying the cores and gpu's and apu's and bbq's and everything that goes into them!
Oh wait...
Being Cereal for a minute, at least with consoles, you generally just plug and play and no faffing about. I will be watching the PS5 launch with interest.
Well I still have my PS4, use it occasionally for a couple of JRPG's I have.
However, when the next generation of consoles are released and if GPU prices haven't dropped back to some kind of normality (unlikely) then yeh, might pick one up again.
Certainly won't ever be paying a grand plus for a GPU.
Nvidia and AMD can both go and do one as far as I'm concerned.
At 30 fps with mandatory motion blur.
I hear that and yuck! Hopefully 60 fps with the next and 4k would be swellAt 30 fps with mandatory motion blur.
At 30 fps with mandatory motion blur.
It's weird tho, if my PC hangs around 40 or so FPS it feels almost unplayable nowadays - Yet when playing on a console at 30 it felt/feels ok ? :s
Like DLSS + RTX then?At 30 fps with mandatory motion blur.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,200
Thing is it is perfectly possible to use that amount of hardware to replicate Quake 2's static light mapper with a real time, higher resolution, variant with things like volumetric lighting and caustics and get viable performance and I think if people saw that they'd start to appreciate the potential better - unfortunately I've not done any serious 3D graphics programming since DX7 so between getting upto speed on that and doing an actual implementation it would probably take me around 2 years to accomplish :s
It’s cinematic! It just works!Too much blur
So you're trying to tell me there's a Bird that registered on this forum to spew anti Nvidia propoganda?
Think you might want to get your water supply checked as clearly it's getting mixed with some type of hallucinogen.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 31,200
Think you might want to get your water supply checked as clearly it's getting mixed with some type of hallucinogen.
It's how Greg rolls
