• 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 ?

fs123 said:
FSR3.1 frame gen is great in most of the games I tested. Which ones are bad?
Click to expand...

From ones I have played and tested:

- avatar was bad at start with the UI issue (since the ui even though transparent, it's a big box) and then they did an update that completely broke it and introduced the issue where it would only insert a new frame based of the previous one rather than interpolating one from the first and second real frame

- tlou and other sony titles also recieved updates to also encounter the same issues as was evidenced in avatar:

www.dsogaming.com

New patches for The Last of Us Part I & Robocop: Rogue City improve AMD FSR 3.0 Frame Generation

Naughty Dog and Teyon have released new patches for The Last of Us Part I and Robocop: Rogue City that improve their support for AMD FSR 3.0 Frame Generation.
www.dsogaming.com www.dsogaming.com

In general the mod version works better most of the time:

www.dsogaming.com

Believe it or not, the official implementation of AMD FSR 3.0 in The Last of Us Part 1 looks and feels worse than its mod

Naughty Dog and Iron Galaxy Studios have released Patch 1.1.3 for The Last of Us Part 1 which adds support for AMD FSR 3.0 Frame Generation.
www.dsogaming.com www.dsogaming.com


The problem is essentially lack of QC from devs end in the implementation of FSR 3+ FG but devs aren't only ones to blame, amd have made FSR to be like this along with their "substantial" documentation as their chief engineer likes to remind everyone i.e. "over the fence to you game devs, we done our part".

Dicehunter said:
3.1 is good yeah but we only have 2 or 3 games now ? Anything prior to 3.1 is kinda crap compared to the competition.

What we need is for devs to go back to games with earlier implementations of FSR and update them all to 3.1.
Click to expand...

It's not even so much a case of it being newer version solving issues as previous versions of frame gen can work just as well if implemented properly, the newer versions have simply changed some default settings to my understanding as game devs weren't tweaking FSR to work how it should (which isn't surprising since things aren't quite as good as AMD hyped/showed with their FSR 3.1 reveal....)
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
Nvidia sponsored title.
Click to expand...
SpudMaster said:
Exactly, are are really surprised that there's a poor implementation in an Nvidia tech demo
Click to expand...

Except there are plenty of amd sponsored games where they also are still using 3.0 and the quality issues with FSR are also in said amd sponsored games.

It's simply how amd have made fsr, it is up to the devs to get the very best of it (hence why every single game is so hit and miss, even in amd sponsored titles) and even then it just simply won't improve until amd start applying ai to be utilised to get it on par with DLSS.

CP 2077 relies heavily on TAA methods for the final image result so it's not surprising to see the inherent issues with fsr being more visible here.
 
Last edited:
SpudMaster said:
Exactly, are are really surprised that there's a poor implementation in an Nvidia tech demo
Click to expand...

And no one cares.....

When tech tubers learned Starfield wouldn't be getting DLSS they immediately said it was because AMD was blocking DLSS, even after Bethesda said "we delayed it because we had to get the game out in time" and added DLSS soon after people like Hardware Unboxed still claim AMD blacked it and the only reason it now has DLSS is because of pressure from them.

Double standards, quick to blame anything that disadvantages Nvidia on under handed anti consumer tactics by AMD, without any evidence, but when an Nvidia sponsored title seemingly does the same.... silence. Its been like that for decades, along with a lot of other dodgy crap, its why we are where we are, yes tech jurnoes did this and they are still doing it. Hardware Unboxed included.
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
And no one cares.....

When tech tubers learned Starfield wouldn't be getting DLSS they immediately said it was because AMD was blocking DLSS, even after Bethesda said "we delayed it because we had to get the game out in time" and added DLSS soon after people like Hardware Unboxed still claim AMD blacked it and the only reason it now has DLSS is because of pressure from them.

Double standards, quick to blame anything that disadvantages Nvidia on under handed anti consumer tactics by AMD, without any evidence but when an Nvidia sponsored title seemingly does the same.... silence. Its been like that for decades, along with a lot of other dodgy crap, its why we are where we are, yes tech jurnoes did this and they are still doing it. Hardware Unboxed included.
Click to expand...

People started blaming/questioning amd because of the evidence stacking up.... gamer nexus or/and HUB asked the question and amd refused to answer, ever since that was brought up, low and behold, amd sponsored games started to suddenly get dlss.....

docs.google.com

Sponsored games and their supported upscalers

docs.google.com docs.google.com

Funny turnaround that eh....

FSR as per their very own github page and comments by developers show FSR is easy/quick to integrate especially if dlss is already present in the game but the problem is, it is very hard to get good results from it.
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
People started blaming/questioning amd because of the evidence stacking up.... gamer nexus or/and HUB asked the question and amd refused to answer, ever since that was brought up, low and behold, amd sponsored games started to suddenly get dlss.....

docs.google.com

Sponsored games and their supported upscalers

docs.google.com docs.google.com

Funny turnaround that eh....

FSR as per their very own github page and comments by developers show FSR is easy/quick to integrate especially if dlss is already present in the game but the problem is, it is very hard to get good results from it.
Click to expand...

Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would realise AMD cannot answer that question, they are not going to throw their partners under the bus to defend themselves from unsubstantiated accusations, HUB are not stupid but ran with it anyway because their agenda is not in good faith.
 
Maybe cybverpunk just could do fsr 3.0 as 3.1 only came out in july wasnt it. So maybe cyberpunk will add fsr 3.1 but it didnt make the schedule of development in the game for it to come "now" but "later". My guess anyhow.
 
humbug said:
Anyone with a modicum of intelligence would realise AMD cannot answer that question, they are not going to throw their partners under the bus to defend themselves from unsubstantiated accusations, HUB are not stupid but ran with it anyway because their agenda is not in good faith.
Click to expand...

Yes exactly, they can't answer it because they would be in for a world of pain from nvidia, the gamer base (of which is 80+% marketshare, 60+% being RTX owners last time we saw steam stats), hence why there was silence:

sTwnU56.png


And then amd sponsored titles suddenly started to get dlss, unfortunately doesn't look like they keep it up to date anymore as there are more amd sponsored games now with both:

VNao10E.png


No need to try and guess what happened, the proof is right there in those images.
 
SkeeterUK said:
Maybe cybverpunk just could do fsr 3.0 as 3.1 only came out in july wasnt it. So maybe cyberpunk will add fsr 3.1 but it didnt make the schedule of development in the game for it to come "now" but "later". My guess anyhow.
Click to expand...

Yes this is the most likely reason, same way a lot of newly released games also still have FSR 3.0 and not 3.1. FSR uptake throughout every version in general has always been slow, especially FSR 2.0, a lot of "FSR" games are still mostly just FSR 1.0 too.
 
Nexus18 said:
Yes exactly, they can't answer it because they would be in for a world of pain from nvidia, the gamer base (of which is 80+% marketshare, 60+% being RTX owners last time we saw steam stats), hence why there was silence:

sTwnU56.png


And then amd sponsored titles suddenly started to get dlss, unfortunately doesn't look like they keep it up to date anymore as there are more amd sponsored games now with both:

VNao10E.png


No need to try and guess what happened, the proof is right there in those images.
Click to expand...

This is easy... AMD sponsored titles, Nvidia not involved with the development, Starfield on that chart got DLSS soon after launch, how many other titles on that list are out of date?
 
Last edited:
humbug said:
This is easy... AMD sponsored title, Nvidia not involved with the development, Starfield on that chart got DLSS soon after launch, how many other titles on that list are out of date?
Click to expand...

I think you have missed the point of those images/spreadsheet.... That's the whole point of this, to show how many amd sponsored titles didn't get dlss until HUB and gamernexus questioned AMD and then suddently, amd sponsored games started to get dlss added.

Also, amds chief gaming engineer has even made many comments before about not wanting developers to support dlss because of its "closed source nature" etc. he said this in the DF interview with Alex, same way he didn't want to support nvidias "open source" streamline solution.

And another one, remember that space shooter called boundary, was nvidia sponsored, had reflex, dlss and RT implemented and shown in previews, amd got involved as the new sponsor and low and behold, all of that got removed....

www.dsogaming.com

Boundary will no longer feature Ray Tracing, ditches DLSS over FSR & XeSS

Even though Surgical Scalpels showcased some really GPU-heavy RT effects for Boundary, the game will not feature any of them at launch.
www.dsogaming.com www.dsogaming.com
 
I just explained why that is, if you're not involved you don't have access to train your AI, so you do that after the game is launched, like Starfield.

AMD will have the same problem when they start AI training their upscaling tech.

I figured that out in 20 seconds. I mean... these tech jurnoes, are none of them clever enough to do that?
 
humbug said:
DLSS requires AI training, so if Nvidia are not involved with development, they don't have access, so they need to do that after the game is launched....
Click to expand...

Either you are being ignorant now or just making this up for reasons.....

Nvidia do not need to be involved to add dlss, the game doesn't need specific ai training to use dlss, the very fact, people can mod in dlss via either fsr methods or/and inject dlss and still get results just as good as the official implementation proves this.

DLSS has several presets that developers can choose from hence why dlss is 99% of the time consistently good/same results across games.
 
Here's another thought....

Sony will be AI training upscaling tech for the PS5 Pro, game developers may well give them access during development to unsure proper compatibility on launch for consoles.

This is a way in for AMD, just use Sony's training, its the same hardware.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom