• 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.

AMD's FSR3 possibly next month ?

Some of the comments are cringe but that's fanboyism for you.

They both want as much money off you as possible but that doesn't make them just as bad.

In a thread about AMD's open source Frame Gen for everyone regardless the gfx vendor, none of it is locked.

To then read rants from NV users that's been provided free Frame Gen by AMD and then complain that AMD ar just as bad as NV.:cry:
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Some of the comments are cringe but that's fanboyism for you.

They both want as much money off you as possible but that doesn't make them just as bad.

In a thread about AMD's open source Frame Gen for everyone regardless the gfx vendor, none of it is locked.

To then read rants from NV users that's been provided free Frame Gen by AMD and then complain that AMD ar just as bad as NV.:cry:
Click to expand...

Well what choice do amd have? Regardless of what side you sit on, you can't deny the following:

- amd solutions are not as good period even in their somewhat final form
- the adoption/implementation time for their solutions is slow
- their solutions have issues as evidenced (obviously nvidia aren't perfect but they get the issues sorted quicker, which isn't exactly surprising given it's closed source and they take ownership for it i.e. they can't rely upon the community to do their work for them)
- they are last to the market with their solutions by a consderable time period

It would be suicide for amd to try and keep their solutions closed source/locked as they simply aren't in that position to do it and this is where OSS is king as shown, they don't have to keep resources on said solutions/products to continuously improve i.e. staff can spend their time elsewhere or/and amd don't need as many staff, nvidia have no issues with their headcount)

If amd were in nvidias position, do you really think they wouldn't do the same as nvidia have?
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Some of the comments are cringe but that's fanboyism for you.

They both want as much money off you as possible but that doesn't make them just as bad.

In a thread about AMD's open source Frame Gen for everyone regardless the gfx vendor, none of it is locked.

To then read rants from NV users that's been provided free Frame Gen by AMD and then complain that AMD ar just as bad as NV.:cry:
Click to expand...

Because they are just as bad, if anyone thinks they wouldn't charge more if they had better tech to offer, they're delusional. They charge just about less to undercut nvidia and everything they do is "just about", nothing to really force them into a corner. They're not a charity organisation as some think, they're just in no position to charge more for their offerings so they charge as much as possible to still be seen as the better bang-for-buck choice.

Saying they're just as bad isn't defending nv but an objective statement and FSR being usable for anyone doesn't change squat. As above, they're not in a position to lock that tech because it's inferior to nvidia's and they stand to gain more by offering it to everyone so people can do their work for them and they also get whiteknighted for free around here by so obviously unbiased people for something they were practically forced to do:p
 
Last edited:
@Nexus18

How's NV's Frame Gen working out for your 3080 ?

@Amatsubu

It's not even remotely close, we've had decades of proprietary tech from NV.

They are not in NV's position and they don't proprietary lock features.

Maybe they would change direction and lock out other users, but speculation doesn't equate to just as bad.

Come back and say AMD is 'just as bad' when they proprietary lock AMD tech to AMD GPUs, then well agree.
 
tommybhoy said:
@Nexus18

How's NV's Frame Gen working out for your 3080 ?

@Amatsubu

It's not even remotely close, we've had decades of proprietary tech from NV.

They are not in NV's position and they don't proprietary lock features.

Maybe they would change direction and lock out other users, but speculation doesn't equate to just as bad.

Come back and say AMD is 'just as bad' when they proprietary lock AMD tech to AMD GPUs, then well agree.
Click to expand...

And what tech would AMD want to proprietary lock at this point? They aren't in nv's position because they don't offer any worthwhile tech to even lock behind their gpus and haven't for years. If they did, they'd lock it in a heartbeat, that's how corpos work. They compete in raw raster and vram instead. Call it speculation or whatever but I just call it being realistic. If "oh, we have this amazing upscaling tech, let's make it available to everyone so we don't get an upper hand over our biggest competitor" sounds more realistic to you, then fair play.

Again, FSR isn't locked behind AMD because there's nothing to gain from it at this point.
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
@Nexus18

How's NV's Frame Gen working out for your 3080 ?

@Amatsubu

It's not even remotely close, we've had decades of proprietary tech from NV.

They are not in NV's position and they don't proprietary lock features.

Maybe they would change direction and lock out other users, but speculation doesn't equate to just as bad.

Come back and say AMD is 'just as bad' when they proprietary lock AMD tech to AMD GPUs, then well agree.
Click to expand...

Dodging the question I see :cry:

It's got nothing to do with how we find said brand features to work, it's about understanding why amd go about the way they do compared to nvidia i.e. they literally have no other choice but they/their fanbase paint it as if they are doing this because they're the white knights.

Amatsubu said:
Because they are just as bad, if anyone thinks they wouldn't charge more if they had better tech to offer, they're delusional. They charge just about less to undercut nvidia and everything they do is "just about", nothing to really force them into a corner. They're not a charity organisation as some think, they're just in no position to charge more for their offerings so they charge as much as possible to still be seen as the better bang-for-buck choice.

Saying they're just as bad isn't defending nv but an objective statement and FSR being usable for anyone doesn't change squat. As above, they're not in a position to lock that tech because it's inferior to nvidia's and they stand to gain more by offering it to everyone so people can do their work for them and they also get whiteknighted for free around here by so obviously unbiased people for something they were practically forced to do:p
Click to expand...

Amatsubu said:
And what tech would AMD want to proprietary lock at this point? They aren't in nv's position because they don't offer any worthwhile tech to even lock behind their gpus and haven't for years. If they did, they'd lock it in a heartbeat, that's how corpos work. They compete in raw raster and vram instead. Call it speculation or whatever but I just call it being realistic. If "oh, we have this amazing upscaling tech, let's make it available to everyone so we don't get an upper hand over our biggest competitor" sounds more realistic to you, then fair play.

Again, FSR isn't locked behind AMD because there's nothing to gain from it at this point.
Click to expand...

Summed it up perfectly.
 
Nexus18 said:
It's got nothing to do with how we find said brand features to work, it's about understanding why amd go about the way they do compared to nvidia i.e. they literally have no other choice but they/their fanbase paint it as if they are doing this because they're the white knights.
Click to expand...
Which I'm not disagreeing with.:cry:

What I do disagree with is AMD are not as bad as Nv in the present, which categorically isn't white knighting anyone.

It's not remotely hard to comprehend the succinct difference in current business practice.
 
Found something interesting with the Witcher 3 and the frame gen mod.....

As described I run a 48" 4k OLED HDR etc screen, but I run all games at custom ultrawide resolutions as I much prefer the aspect ratio, and it's less punishing on the GPU. So I mostly play at 3840x1620 or sometimes 3440x1440 in a 1:1 mapping (for various reasons).

However with Witcher 3 and this mod, if I run at my preferred UW custom res of 3840x1620 I get truly awful ghosting on the UI elements, and along the top and bottom of my image. But, if I run at native 3840x2160, or my other custom res of 3440x1440 it's great, almost no ghosting at all and the very pronounced UI problems are gone. Very odd this one. Just shows how hit and miss this mod currently is, but it's getting there again for me as I investigate more.

Ratchet and Clank still has the same terrible UI ghosting and character ghosting regardless of what res I use, so it's not a universal issue/fix on my system.
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Yeah, about that...
Click to expand...
You already know what my take is on:

- nvidias frame gen from when I used it on the 4080 geforce now (great)
- amds official fsr 3 (**** and regardless of it's issues, not usable due to being locked to having to use fsr upscaling)
- modded fsr 3 (hit and miss but when it works, it works well)

Would it have been nice to have had nvidias frame gen on the 3080? Of course, but nvidias solution is based on the optical flow accelerator and they even said themselves they could spend time to get it working but the results would be **** due to the weaker hardware on ampere.
 
Last edited:
tommybhoy said:
Some of the comments are cringe but that's fanboyism for you.

They both want as much money off you as possible but that doesn't make them just as bad.

In a thread about AMD's open source Frame Gen for everyone regardless the gfx vendor, none of it is locked.

To then read rants from NV users that's been provided free Frame Gen by AMD and then complain that AMD ar just as bad as NV.:cry:
Click to expand...

It was the same with FreeSync.Made a lot of excuses why Vesa Adaptive Sync wouldn't work on Nvidia cards such as Pascal,etc. Then attempted to spin FreeSync would "lock out" Nvidia users despite being based on a Vesa standard. Intel even said it would work with its own IGPs.

Even when it was pointed out the cost of the monitors was so high that most Nvidia mainstream users wouldn't buy a GSync monitor,apparently they didn't care about poor gamers. Plus since FreeSync sucked nobody cared. That was even when it was pointed if the choice was between a NoSync monitor and a FreeSync one.

Then in 2019,Nvidia admitted it would work on Pascal,three years after it was launched! :cry:

Most monitors sold in the market are Vesa Adaptive/FreeSync/GSync compatible. There was zero reason Vesa Adaptive Sync couldn't have worked on Pascal earlier. Most of the gamers I know use Vesa Adaptive Sync monitors now.No "lock out" as implied years ago.

The only people negative about FreeSync were a few people on tech forums like this one and Reddit. Everyone else I knew in the realworld was quite happy the technology was democratised.
 
Last edited:
I got hold of the mod files earlier today, to try out the FSR3 mod on my RDNA3 card.

So far, I've only managed to get it working on Hogwarts. My first impression is that it works quite well, 1% lows are higher, 60 FPS at 4K with no upscaling is achievable in most scenes. The main difference is the higher average framerate.

There's a bit more delay when using a controller, but the controls of this game aren't especially responsive anyway. I have a feeling that this is gonna come down to how smooth a game already feels, some are inherently smoother to play than others.

I think it's likely that latency issues will improve significantly over time.
 
Last edited:
Amatsubu said:
Because they are just as bad, if anyone thinks they wouldn't charge more if they had better tech to offer, they're delusional. They charge just about less to undercut nvidia and everything they do is "just about", nothing to really force them into a corner. They're not a charity organisation as some think, they're just in no position to charge more for their offerings so they charge as much as possible to still be seen as the better bang-for-buck choice.

Saying they're just as bad isn't defending nv but an objective statement and FSR being usable for anyone doesn't change squat. As above, they're not in a position to lock that tech because it's inferior to nvidia's and they stand to gain more by offering it to everyone so people can do their work for them and they also get whiteknighted for free around here by so obviously unbiased people for something they were practically forced to do:p
Click to expand...

Yes but some people are just ________

These people do not question why AMD can give them technology for Nvidia GPU's that Nvidia themselves refuse to, instead of that they just fool themselves and you in to thinking they are not being treated any worse, or as more of a fool by Nvidia than they are by AMD, because no one likes feel like they are being taken for a fool.

You know what, the whole DLSS thing is a scam, its a way to get you to pay more for weaker GPU's and like it.
Oh yes AMD are following Nvidia's lead, and criticised by us for not following Nvidia's lead well enough, the story is not its a scam, its that AMD can't keep up with something that is a tool to scam you for more money and like it.... you couldn't make it up.....
 
Last edited:
I like Nvidia products, with criticisms, but I hate Nvidia as a company and admire Jenson, that's not to say i like him, i don't.
Nvidia are worse than AMD, that's not to say AMD' good, they aren't.

PS: like Intel, actually, AMD are no strangers to decades of open sourcing, at their own expense with little or no benefit to themselves, unlike Nvidia who seem to hate the very concept.
AMD didn't come up with DLSS themselves because they just don't make the same narcissistic calculations, it is a different mindset, it doesn't occur to them. They would be better in business if they had that mindset.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
the whole DLSS thing is a scam, its a way to get you to pay more for weaker GPU's and like it.
Click to expand...
I can relate to this sentiment, but I think it's the convenience of it. It's so easy to flick it on and off and see a large performance difference (with very little effort or configuration), and sometimes I think people might be kidding themselves about it's image quality on performance mode. Sure, it looks better than running at 1080p native, but it's never going to match 4K native (which I think many just decide is not worth the hit to performance, and so rarely use). The difference would be more pronounced if more people used global driver sharpening.

People have got used to 4K native being very challenging for GPUs, but in a few years, I wonder if we'll still need upscaling on high end cards at this resolution. I think it's main purpose will be playing at higher framerates, but the market for that will always be quite limited (because many are simply happy playing at 60 FPS). Without Ray Tracing, the RTX 4090 already does very well at 4K native, with 1% lows just over 60 in games like Alan Wake II.

Frame generation is something else though, I think it will influence console development, and become a standard feature in many games.
 
Last edited:
I don't think 4K native high refresh rate will even become a thing, unless you pay thousands for the GPU.

Now that its a thing, upscalling is a necessity to someone like Nvidia, because without the need for it they don't have a feature lockin.
 
Does anyone know if the LukeFZ FSR3 mod works with Cyberpunk 2077, without any crashes?

I'm redownloading my game, to see if it's version related, because on the patch version I was using, it would crash on launch when using the mod.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom