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.
I mean if it's creating details that are not there in the native image it's failed, like it or not the native image is the native image so if image processing techniques add or remove details then they're failing to recreate the image, they're altering it.
The details are lost when using native, that's the point. Not lost at all times, but lost at zoom distances or angles at a distance where they should still be visible in reality. DLSS restores that lost detail. The data is still there just like how FG requires motion vectors to work effectively, the AI just has to use frame data to determine what the objects in frame are and then decide whether to put the detail there at that zoom or angle as it should be, since those details are there when you zoom in or elevate the camera a bit more as demonstrated by my video above.
The road is more detailed in the DLSS/FG versions not native, what you are seeing is the sun moving across the sky creating a softer surface look, there's no way to stop the movement of weather/sun in the game between screenshots, so lighting will subtly change as screenshots are taken.
You can literally zoom into any occluded part of the road showing where it meets the kerb etc for detail retention that isn't there on the native version - A more worthwhile measure of detail gain/loss than the sunlit areas of road where RTGI/Occlusion etc plays a part based on the direction of the sun etc.
It's long been clear that upscaling uses AI to reconstruct lost details, that was one of the marketing bits from Nvidia and AMD back in the early DLSS/FSR early days. It's just much more obvious now because they have advanced quite a bit to actually be good quality for the most part vs the low quality blurfest of old.
I didn't pick anything, I took 3 screenshots with each setting mentioned whilst in-game and that's as far as "picking" went.
If you really seem unconvinced, then here's a video, at these follow camera angles it's clear that the native resolution version doesn't have the definition for distant occlusion/detail on the surface so it's muted away, whereas DLSS accounts for this as the AI has analysed the scene, noted that there is meant to be detail there and so puts the texture/shadow detail there with correct occlusion:
Screenshot from the video zoomed in:
Native:
DLSS:
This is actually the first time I've watched this quirk on video and had the time to rewind and fast forward between the renders so it's pretty clear what's happening vs just taking a screenshot of any given scene in game. The detail /is/ technically there, it's just not being rendered at native properly when the camera is zoomed out. Like at an overhead angle looking directly at that distant area you'll make it out whether native or not. The purpose of AI reconstruction is to restore the details that would otherwise be there regardless of rendering method, to be realistically convincing. When you get low to the ground in real life you don't suddenly see less detail, so why should game rendering see the same issue as shown in native resolution?
I find it amusing but also in some ways insulting that no matter what actual proof is posted, someone will always be there to go "oh that was cherry picked", or come up with some other excuse to try to throw shade onto something.
Or people simply don't understand what native means, seriously people who say upscaling/frame generation is better than native have lost their marbles. If i made a copy of the Mona Lisa and shrunk my copy down to 7x5 cm it wouldn't be better than native simply because I've made a smaller copy with the same details.
Or people simply don't understand what native means, seriously people who say upscaling/frame generation is better than native have lost their marbles. If i made a copy of the Mona Lisa and shrunk my copy down to 7x5 cm it wouldn't be better than native simply because I've made a smaller copy with the same details.
If DLSS or any post process upscaling technology is using a 16k 'ground truth' it's not better than native because the native image was 16k, native is native.
So you don't think native means native?
So you don't think native means native?
No, it's a word and words have meaning.
