Associate
Agree with this. Whilst I like the idea of DLSS/FSR I won't be using either anytime soon. Native only, would drop settings long before using scaling.
-
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.
Fidelity Super Resolution in 2021
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Agree with this. Whilst I like the idea of DLSS/FSR I won't be using either anytime soon. Native only, would drop settings long before using scaling.
Thanks for the feedback.
Much more useful that a theoretical debate of which tool "might" be best.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,401
Looks like I don't need FSR though in Anno, all I had to do was full native 1440p maxed out and drop the AA to 2x to bring the FPS up to 60-70.
Looks much better than Quality FSR did, sharper image and better colours.
So its a better idea to go down to 2x AA before trying FSR or DLSS.
Looks much better than Quality FSR did, sharper image and better colours.
So its a better idea to go down to 2x AA before trying FSR or DLSS.
Completely false, I was just very disappointed that FSR does not include temporal accumulation or any advanced DL techniques, so technologically it is not very interesting. In fact I have been veyr positive about the FSR results, just I am realistic about the weaknesses.
1) Open source is basically irrelevant to any gamer. DX is not open source. Windows is not open source. The games you play are not open source. AMD Windows driver is propriety, their hardware is proprietary. No one cares if a particular piece of software is open or closed, it makes no difference.
2). This is basically false with DLSS2 since the library directly integrates with existing TAA solutions and is available in most game engines. FSR might be even easier still, but the effort to get DLSS implemented is no longer a hurdle so this is irreverent.
3) Wider cross platform support is great, o one has denied that
4) Because FSR doesn't replace TAA, to remove temporal artifacts then FSR has to rely on the underlying TAA, if that TAA produced ghosting whuch many implementations do, then FSR will only magnify that levle of ghosting. FSR does absolutely nothing to remove ghosting, it just isn't a source of ghosting itself. DLSS2 actively attempts to mitigate ghosting apaprent form TAA
Mindless waffle. So reviewers shouldn't look at image quality? Image quality of FSR is the single most important factor, because if it doesn;t provide anything more than existing up-scaling techniques then it has much less value. Luckily FSR provides good edge definition, so it will garner some interest, But none of th pints you raised above matter in the slightest if FSR is not providing quality.
More junk. FSR is supported in the XBox dev kit, but so what? How many games will support FSR We already see console developers rejecting FSR, because as everyone keep saying, temporal accumulation provides superior results
https://videocardz.com/newz/metro-exodus-will-not-support-amd-fidelityfx-super-resolution-fsr
When you consider the PS5 has dedicated hardware support for checkerboarding which will also provide better quality for textures, and that all major game engines are supporting TAA-upscaling, the choice of FSR has some battles to overcome.
Your last statement makes no sense at all, FSR has not been compared to DLSS because AMD forbid any reviewer of comparing FSR to DLSS unless the game supports both, but of course AMD never worked with any developer to add FSR to a game with DLSS support.
The time will come when FSR will be directly compared to DLSS, and I think the results will be quite revealing.
If FSR is not added to UE it is because Epic has a deal with Nvidia, not because they have a "better" solution. That's BS, it is up to each game dev to decide which are the better solutions, i can make a deal with AMD and refuse to add DLSS because i already have a better solution.
Don't tell me a game dev will be so dumb that he will use FSR but refuse to use the "better solution" UE5 is already offering, if it is better. Or DLSS for that matter. It's all about money, the engines should integrate all the features from all major hardware vendors, especially if they are open sourced.
AMD worked directly with Epic to create TSR in UE5. It has absolutely nothing to do with NVidia. TSR is basically AMD's ultimate version of FSR - using temporal accumulation to reconstruct an image with more information than a single low-resolution frame.
Great boost in frame rate can't wait for it to be implanted in more games / https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AXrsxjN4Zw8:p:o
Similar to DLSS in that it doesn't scale past a certain point at lowere 1080p resolutions. 4K is where it really makes a difference. My hope is that it starts being used in VR.
That is a lie and yo probably know it by now. In fact it is written just there that it was bad info and that ME dev were talking about something else. This does not mean that ME will support FSR but the link you posted is not a proof for this.
And also some may not support it in the future because they have deals with Nvidia, like Godfall devs have with AMD. Do you expect them to tell you that they won't add FSR because they have received money from Nvidia for DLSS exclusivity? Of course they will find other explanations.
And what do you think it will happen? The 6800xt owner that gets 20 FPS now and will get 40 or 60 with FSR will be angry? Or the 1060 owner who will see his FPS going through the roof will be angry on FSR? They will all run to buy Ampere because DLSS is worth every penny?
AMD did the job optimising for the Sony console. Sony has a very big influence on Epic but AMD were never Epic's favorites. Nvidia are their big favorites on PC and if they don't add FSR, this is the only reason.
That does not mean anything anyway, any game developer can add FSR himself even if he is using UE engine.
On 1080p you will be most of the time CPU limited with FSR or DLSS since they are scaling from 720p and even less. Even on 1440p you are CPU limited many times.
If we stop feeding the Nvidia shills/trolls they will go away. It is the same MO over and over.
His premise was as follows and it has already proven utterly false and wrong.
"The problem AMD has being second to market and trying pretend that FSR is comparable to DLSS, is that reviewers will make that comparison and FSR will fall well short".
Move on and put him on ignore so we can have a constructive thread please.
- Come to an AMD thread and make a statment of fact that AMD suck which has zero proof or any evidence
- When the claim is debunked, move the goalposts
- Repeat
His premise was as follows and it has already proven utterly false and wrong.
"The problem AMD has being second to market and trying pretend that FSR is comparable to DLSS, is that reviewers will make that comparison and FSR will fall well short".
Move on and put him on ignore so we can have a constructive thread please.
Last edited:
Well said.
Associate
This all day long. Clear as day.
Last edited:
AMD effectively killed DLSS with FSR.
Naturally if you bought the marketing from Jensen now you have to lash out.
Its called cognitive dissonance and part of the donner-kruger effect.
We have FSR on xbox, soon Ps5.
All the console games ports will have FSR then for PC.
Once AMD improve FSR 2.0, 3.0 etc.. which is likely to happen faster than what DLSS can do nvidia has no other choice than to support AMD´s solution
again....
Now these guys that hate will have never-ending nightmares about impotence
Associate
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2020
- Posts
- 2,401
Well even at 2xAA, Anno 1800 still tanks to 35 FPS while moving around the pre built campaign city.
The problem there is its not a graphics limitation but CPU bound.
The problem there is its not a graphics limitation but CPU bound.
See I don't think they have killed off DLSS because DLSS really is a very good tech and has its place. DLSS will keep doing what it always has, get introduced into a trickle of games that Nvidia more often than not will sponsor. What will happen is the majority of games and users will use FSR and just be more than happy.
Let's be very clear here, both DLSS and FSR LOWER image sharpness form a slight to a large degree depending upon the setting. What we as gamers have to do is decide if the lower sharpness is worth the extra eye candy we can enable. Slightly blurrier overall vs some very nice RT reflections for example. It is great that we have this ability now with both DLSS and for a significantly higher userbase, FSR.
Like veryone else, If I can get decent FPS in my games I always use native, if not I can add DLSS and FSR as applicable to balance the RT eye candy.
Let's be very clear here, both DLSS and FSR LOWER image sharpness form a slight to a large degree depending upon the setting. What we as gamers have to do is decide if the lower sharpness is worth the extra eye candy we can enable. Slightly blurrier overall vs some very nice RT reflections for example. It is great that we have this ability now with both DLSS and for a significantly higher userbase, FSR.
Like veryone else, If I can get decent FPS in my games I always use native, if not I can add DLSS and FSR as applicable to balance the RT eye candy.
Associate
- Joined
- 29 Jun 2016
- Posts
- 529
DL is pretty new to be honest, particularly in terms of being applied successfully. It is a completely new way of approaching programming.
*shrug* it was the tangent you took. You said that AI doesn't really exist, and in a general intelligence sense that is correct. But by the current definition of AI, ML and DL are a subset, and so AI is absolutely real, not marketing BS, not fake news. It's absolutely here and here to stay. It will 100% change how the world works, particularly how we deal with complex and computationally expensive problems.
Here's a fantastic example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Bw5f4vYL98
The guy presenting/narrating is an absolute guru.
Last edited:
Yes no one killed DLSS and it will remain as a premium feature for Nvidia cards owners. And in time, as more people will buy new cards ( most from Nvidia if the trends will remain as they are now ), then Nvidia will have no problem to add DLSS in any new game, even without paying since it will have a very large userbase.
Even if it was getting killed, DLSS did his job, helped Nvidia to sell a lot of cards so that is still good investment.
As far as I can tell D.P. is correct on AMD and Unreal Engine 5, AMD is much more heavily involved than in the past and Epic's new temporal upscaling method (TSR) has so far only been mentioned in reference to AMD (Nvidia wants DLSS after all). It also is very similarly named to FSR with only one letter being different.That is a lie and yo probably know it by now. In fact it is written just there that it was bad info and that ME dev were talking about something else. This does not mean that ME will support FSR but the link you posted is not a proof for this.
And also some may not support it in the future because they have deals with Nvidia, like Godfall devs have with AMD. Do you expect them to tell you that they won't add FSR because they have received money from Nvidia for DLSS exclusivity? Of course they will find other explanations.
And what do you think it will happen? The 6800xt owner that gets 20 FPS now and will get 40 or 60 with FSR will be angry? Or the 1060 owner who will see his FPS going through the roof will be angry on FSR? They will all run to buy Ampere because DLSS is worth every penny?
AMD did the job optimising for the Sony console. Sony has a very big influence on Epic but AMD were never Epic's favorites. Nvidia are their big favorites on PC and if they don't add FSR, this is the only reason.
That does not mean anything anyway, any game developer can add FSR himself even if he is using UE engine.
On 1080p you will be most of the time CPU limited with FSR or DLSS since they are scaling from 720p and even less. Even on 1440p you are CPU limited many times.
It's a two-pronged approach from AMD, TSR (which they worked on with Epic) in UE5 games and FSR in everything else.
He is calling out the lie D.P is repeatedly making without proof that FSR is being rejected by console developers. It is not relevant that FSR may never make it into UE5 because there are other game engines both on console and on PC. So there is a fundamental difference between saying FSR may never make it into UE5 and concluding that console makers are rejecting FSR.
If a person makes a false assertion and is corrected multiple times, then you must conclude they are either thick, delusional, or lying. You decide which it is.
Last edited: