• 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.

Anybody else resenting AMD because of DLSS?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Have you made sure it is set to "quality" and also what res. is your native monitor set to?

I never lower the resolution on my monitor even if it meant awful fps purely because of how terrible it looked and that's because of how **** monitors are for scaling (no problems doing this on my TV as even 1080P looks bloody good) but DLSS 2.0 is fantastic on a **** LCD monitor.





Either way, I completely agree with wunkley, it only seems to be people who have never used DLSS or are AMD loyal that diss DLSS 2.0... If the fundamental tech. wasn't impressive, I don't think AMD and Microsoft would also be working on the exact same thing.... Plus I think every tech entity on youtube in the know rate DLSS 2.0 as being a superb feature and have gone into in depth analysis to back up these claims rather than some one liners on a random forum with no proof to show/explain why it is just "lowering resolution"....

Thankfully all the games I have/intend to play have DLSS 2.0, 150 hours in cyberpunk, just waiting on the next patch to finish my second play through :cool: Currently playing control now. Pretty hyped for dying light 2 (expecting it to be a mess on release though....)

I'm not a big fan of DLSS but anyone dismissing it as "just upscaling" has never played games which properly implement DLSS 2.0. Personally I will only accept it as a compromise if it facilitates implementing advanced RT effects.
 
Agree HDR is the game changer this time more than resolution, wonder what the game changer will be with 8K to make them easier to sell. HDR and larger screens is what sold me onto 4K as I knew going any larger than 55" on 1080p looked rubbish because not enough resolution for the size.

All comes down to viewing distance, when sitting 7+ feet from my 55" tv, 1080P is perfectly good but go to 4 feet then yeah, I want 1440P at the very least, preferably 4k but then I wo't sit that close when using HDR because of the brightness, I value my eyesight :p

Poor old Jesse and her poor eyesight.

MBmgNkD.png


Has to take a couple of steps closer so she can see the pictures clearly. :p

oZ5l8qP.png

Had someone else say the same, was it you @TNA ? Been looking out for it myself too but can't say I've noticed, however, might be down to the starting area? As when it was mentioned, I was already on to the second area and couldn't see this on my end.
 
I've seen that kind of thing in CP2077 - some distant building textures look like xbox graphics with DLSS on - generally you don't tend to notice it though.
 
Yeah overall its mostly great tech but it has some small issues, its the start of the game. Already played through Control so was just testing with RTX/DLSS. It was just really jarring, couldn't miss it. :)
 
Have you made sure it is set to "quality" and also what res. is your native monitor set to?

I never lower the resolution on my monitor even if it meant awful fps purely because of how terrible it looked and that's because of how **** monitors are for scaling (no problems doing this on my TV as even 1080P looks bloody good) but DLSS 2.0 is fantastic on a **** LCD monitor.

umm ok here we go :D.............1080p, yea I did try quality but its a huge trade off, for all people chasing the crispiness of super high res why would anyone do this. Maybe it comes into its own at 4k but just grab a 1440p monitor instead will look better surely.
 
I'm not a big fan of DLSS but anyone dismissing it as "just upscaling" has never played games which properly implement DLSS 2.0. Personally I will only accept it as a compromise if it facilitates implementing advanced RT effects.

Yup, if the performance is already a solid 70/80+ fps then I won't use DLSS either but sadly with intensive ray tracing, it is required now.

I've seen that kind of thing in CP2077 - some distant building textures look like xbox graphics with DLSS on - generally you don't tend to notice it though.

Is that not just down to how **** the LOD is with cyberpunk though? Have the same thing happen with my 3080 even with DLSS off and also on my vega 56.

Yeah overall its mostly great tech but it has some small issues, its the start of the game. Already played through Control so was just testing with RTX/DLSS. It was just really jarring, couldn't miss it. :)

I'll need to have a trip back to the start then!

My biggest and probably only complaint with DLSS is motion clarity, so obvious in cyberpunk when driving and see you a ghosting image of your tail lights. In control I hadn't noticed it until I went running past shattered glass/window....

umm ok here we go :D.............1080p, yea I did try quality but its a huge trade off, for all people chasing the crispiness of super high res why would anyone do this. Maybe it comes into its own at 4k but just grab a 1440p monitor instead will look better surely.

That might be why then.... Apparently it's not great when using 1080P. Supposedly it shines best at 4k then 1440P.
 
I already see lots of people posting "No DLSS no buy".
If folk are petty enough to not play a game just because it doesn’t have nVidia proprietary tech in it, that’s their loss I guess.

It feels like this forum lives in its own little alternate universe where DLSS, 4k and and Ray tracing don't matter. Its all about prehistoric resolutions like 1440p here :rolleyes:. Even console gamers laugh at 1440p these days.

I find the opposite. The general gamer doesn’t care about a lot of these technologies. It’s the nVidia fans on here that froth at the mouth at the thought of any game not using DLSS or Ray Tracing.
 
I literally just got a 3000 card and first thing I did was try it on Cyberpunk, its exactly the same as using a monitor at non native res. It reminded me of 2008 trying to run crysis.

You 'literally' just got a 3000 card? Literally, not metaphorically? Well done you.
 
I had a 3080 and a 6900xt, cyberpunk looked better at 2k max than 4k with dlss, and others that have tried both agee with me.
Dlss is a con
 
It needed a 'like' in front of - literally. ;)

You're missing the ultimate, starting a sentence with "So".

"So, like, I literally just...."

******* vomit.
Anyway, sorry. Crack on millennials with your terrible grammar and painful vernacular. It's all good fun and it's just a graffix forum innit.
 
I had a 3080 and a 6900xt, cyberpunk looked better at 2k max than 4k with dlss, and others that have tried both agee with me.
Dlss is a con

I've not tried Cyberpunk DLSS yet. I refuse to buy a game that's over-hyped and basically broken. Given it's general knackered status Cyberpunk's DLSS implementation is very likely equally borked. You should try some other games before you're so quick to judge on DLSS. Seriously - if it's done right it's wizardry.
 
You're missing the ultimate, starting a sentence with "So".

"So, like, I literally just...."

******* vomit.
Anyway, sorry. Crack on millennials with your terrible grammar and painful vernacular. It's all good fun and it's just a graffix forum innit.


Have to put a 'Basically' at the start for ultimate starting, making sure you're far more knowledgeable than your audience.
 
Have to put a 'Basically' at the start for ultimate starting, making sure you're far more knowledgeable than your audience.

Ultimate starting. I like that :)

You're right, it's got to be: "So, like, basically, I literally just....."
******* aaaarg! Six words wasted before you start saying anything. These end times all started with the fall of grammar. Think on kids.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom