The real fine wine

[kevman]

Least with DLSS you know what your getting. With AMD SAM you just spin the roulette wheel and see if you get an improvement or reduction in fps

 

[henson0115]

this isn't a point scoring exercise whats sam got to do with dlss?

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Yup DLSS 2.0 is very good.

Just a shame nvidia have to pay developers/publishers to use it in their games

Thankfully it seems like nvidia partner up with the main developers/publishers though, at least for games that I care about! Although I do have a sneaky suspicion that a lot of developers/publishers will "want" to use this anyway as it means they can spend even less time optimising their game for the PC.....

Time is money, dev's are not going to want to spend to much time on PC only features espcail new ish ones. So nvidia "paying" for dev time or nvidia dev time given to implemented is fine by me

 

[KiNgPiN83]

great if you specifically play these games:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_with_DLSS_support

otherwise just clickbait

Plus 23 of those don't support RTX so probably don't need to use DLSS anyway... Unless the users have terrible eye sight of course and can't see the difference.

 

[Nexus18]

And go...........

RTX turned off for this, native res. is 3440x1440 and DLSS setting used was "quality"

Actually quite surprised at a few things in these! The performance difference in DLSS quality VS native without RTX isn't quite as big as one would think..... Could just be down to the areas though.

Obviously screenshots don't show the ghosting effect that comes with DLSS in motion but again, most people probably wouldn't notice it.

 

[fs123]

Thread should be called "The real fine whining".

Face facts AMD have caught up, apart from DLSS, which is more or less irrelevant to most people I would say.

AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution is being worked on and will be the competitor to DLSS style upscaling. There is no way AMD and the console companies will ignore such a technology since they desperately need it for good RT performance.
Let the Nvidia fanboys enjoy DLSS for now since that is all they can clutch onto. Soon it will be a thing of the past if FXSR takes off.

 

[henson0115]

And go...........

RTX turned off for this, native res. is 3440x1440 and DLSS setting used was "quality"

Actually quite surprised at a few things in these! The performance difference without RTX isn't quite as big as one would think..... Could just be down to the areas though.

Obviously screenshots don't show the ghosting effect that comes with DLSS in motion but again, most people probably wouldn't notice it.

Looks like teh top one is dlss i mean the very top image the one below it is native. then the next two it looks liek you swapped them. so top is native and bottom is dlss.

 

[Nexus18]

So it is something like Radeon boost on AMD. If you stand still, you don't see any difference. If you are moving, you don't see any difference because you are moving. And you get more FPS.

Haha could say that!

Out of all the techniques I've seen, DLSS 2.0 is definitely by far the best "overall" if wanting to retain as close as possible to native res., even in motion. Anything AMD have is basically just a sharpening effect/filter, although a very good one at that! Their fidelityfx setting or whatever it is called is good though as still better than setting a different/lower resolution, I used it with cyberpunk on my vega 56 and it did a decent job although couldn't drop much less than 85% as it became a bit too blurry

 

[nvidiamd]

And go...........

RTX turned off for this, native res. is 3440x1440 and DLSS setting used was "quality"

Actually quite surprised at a few things in these! The performance difference in DLSS quality VS native without RTX isn't quite as big as one would think..... Could just be down to the areas though.

Obviously screenshots don't show the ghosting effect that comes with DLSS in motion but again, most people probably wouldn't notice it.

It's 1-2-1-2 but i admit it looks better if you stand still. Nice feature to have but can't be compared with native.

 

[nvidiamd]

Best thing will be a good upscaling with fixed framerate, like you want 150 FPS? You put that target in there and the GPU will use as much upscaling as it needs to reach that target. Even playing at 60FPS will be better than variable FPS, if we don't talk about esports.

 

[nvidiamd]

Haha could say that!

Out of all the techniques I've seen, DLSS 2.0 is definitely by far the best "overall" if wanting to retain as close as possible to native res., even in motion. Anything AMD have is basically just a sharpening effect/filter, although a very good one at that! Their fidelityfx setting or whatever it is called is good though as still better than setting a different/lower resolution, I used it with cyberpunk on my vega 56 and it did a decent job although couldn't drop much less than 85% as it became a bit too blurry

Radeon Boost is decreasing resolution while in motion and rendering at native resolution if you stand still. It works the same meaning it needs to be implemented in every game.
Now you say the performance difference isn't that big if you enable DLSS quality without RT, at least in these areas where you made the pictures. But what if part of DLSS works the same as Radeon boost? Meaning it will drop the resolution more when you are in motion and render it closer to native when you stand still and you can spot the differences?

 

[Nexus18]

Radeon Boost is decreasing resolution while in motion and rendering at native resolution if you stand still. It works the same meaning it needs to be implemented in every game.
Now you say the performance difference isn't that big if you enable DLSS quality without RT, at least in these areas where you made the pictures. But what if part of DLSS works the same as Radeon boost? Meaning it will drop the resolution more when you are in motion and render it closer to native when you stand still and you can spot the differences?

Ah you're talking about the "adaptive resolution", too many fancy names out there now! Yeah essentially drops resolution when in movement. Always hated that though, as I like crispness in movement/motion too rather than having vaseline smeared across my screen DLSS still does a better job for this area too imo. Unless playing something like CS.......

I would need to do more experiments with DLSS but if you use it, you would see that it's not resolution which is dropping in motion with dlss but rather the way the image is being artificially enhanced i.e. like there are 2-3 images on top of each other, a bit like when taking HDR photos i.e. you have multiple exposure photos being combined together to form 1 super quality photo. It's very obvious on car tail lights and foliage/bushes, something which is not present with just lowering the resolution when in motion.

Ultimately there are a lot of variables that come into play when it comes to talking about these things and what looks better or is better for certain people, the type of game, the camera view i.e. FP or 3rd person, the pace of game, what a person wants FPS wise and another big factor, what type of display people are using, VA, IPS, OLED, 60HZ, 144HZ and so on.

For example, if I use DLSS on my oled TV, it is really noticeable because of oleds instant pixel response where as on the LCD 144HZ screen, it's not as noticeable because of LCDs ghosting/higher pixel response time so LCD almost "masks/hides" the dlss ghosting issues.

 

[Raelgun]

I thought people payed good money for high end GPUs for both visual and performance, why are people so for a feature that downgrades the visual clarity? (dlss does exactly that to improve performance)

If you are fine with a degrade in visual clarity to gain performance then why do people want high end gpus in the first place, seems like most people will be happy with a lower tier card.

 

[Gerard]

I thought people payed good money for high end GPUs for both visual and performance, why are people so for a feature that downgrades the visual clarity? (dlss does exactly that to improve performance)

If you are fine with a degrade in visual clarity to gain performance then why do people want high end gpus in the first place, seems like most people will be happy with a lower tier card.

Because lower visual quality is acceptable as long as you get some reflections that most people will barely notice.

 

[Raelgun]

Because lower visual quality is acceptable as long as you get some reflections that most people will barely notice.

Hahaha true that, what irks me the most is Spiderman is the only game that did well considering its whole setting is in a city with a lot of glass, not puddles, so really you need to have a game that actually takes advantage of it everywhere you go.

Now most games aren't that and most people should be playing the game as opposed to standing still and be like, ah thats a nice looking puddle...

Most people honestly don't notice certain effects whilst a game is in motion, what they will notice is stuttering and large variance of image shifting in motion, people say they can't tell the difference between native and DLSS, well don't take a screenshot or look at screenshots, what people need to do is play said game at 4K, run the whole scene and then run the whole scene again with DLSS, you will see a difference.

Variance whilst in motion is something people do notice when it comes to degradation.

 

[Rroff]

RTX turned off for this

What is annoying - a lot of the game RT on or off aside from reflections isn't that big a deal but there are the odds spots where RT makes a massive difference - but they are like 1% of the game.

 

[Gerard]

What is annoying - a lot of the game RT on or off aside from reflections isn't that big a deal but there are the odds spots where RT makes a massive difference - but they are like 1% of the game.

That's the problem with RT for the most part, to get it to really stand out they have to go really overboard and then it just looks like it was done to pimp off the effect and probably detracts from the games overall look.

 

[Rroff]

That's the problem with RT for the most part, to get it to really stand out they have to go really overboard and then it just looks like it was done to pimp off the effect and probably detracts from the games overall look.

There is a part in the park, a spot where you pretty much have no reason to go in the game - I think there is like one minor mission vaguely nearby - where RT works pretty well with indirect lighting, etc. but 99% of players won't even go near there probably LOL. And another place in Pacifica where there are some steps into a little alley where again the difference between RT on and off, especially in motion, is huge - but it is one tiny spot.

 

[shankly1985]

And go...........

RTX turned off for this, native res. is 3440x1440 and DLSS setting used was "quality"

Actually quite surprised at a few things in these! The performance difference in DLSS quality VS native without RTX isn't quite as big as one would think..... Could just be down to the areas though.

Obviously screenshots don't show the ghosting effect that comes with DLSS in motion but again, most people probably wouldn't notice it.

I think both look really good but if I do really look and really look I needed to do I would say bottom is native and top is DLSS and the only reason I say that is from the bottom pictures. DLSS is something I really hope Microsoft and AMD can get right but if I am being honest I dont think RDNA 2 will get the feature I think it will come with next gen RDNA 3 later this year or next year.

 

[Gerard]

There is a part in the park, a spot where you pretty much have no reason to go in the game - I think there is like one minor mission vaguely nearby - where RT works pretty well with indirect lighting, etc. but 99% of players won't even go near there probably LOL. And another place in Pacifica where there are some steps into a little alley where again the difference between RT on and off, especially in motion, is huge - but it is one tiny spot.

Only game i've experienced it in that i own is BFV, DLSS (Doesn't Look So Sharp) in it is atrocious, watching enemy soldiers from afar it's like Johnny Cage shadow kick in MK with the ghosting behind them. Ironic that it was the poster child for rtx yet it never got updated to the newer version. As for the reflections, again barely noticeable, the v1 impact on rotterdam is about as noticeable as they get assuming you're not walking around a map looking at cars.