• 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.
NZXT30 said:
It looks like apart from the usual RT shadows it also has global illumination which is a big deal. Will AMD force the dev to lock Nvidia cards out of RT like they did with Godfall though?
I already see lots of people posting "No DLSS no buy". 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.
Click to expand...
Its not about people like you and me wanting it that im talking about, im talking about game dev studios not adopting it. if there is too much money involved to bring it to a game, it aint guna happen. this is why the adoption rate is so low. nvidia have to PAY and or HELP studios implement it. usually technologies like this dy-off and as soon as nvidia find something new and shiny to focus on, it likely will.
 
TBH, it really ain't a big deal as an open source method is coming, microsoft, amd and nvidia are all working on it, granted nvidia probably are with holding some of their secret sauce to ensure dlss remains the better choice for the time being.....

The question will be which is better? the open source one or dlss 2.0?

Personally I'm just glad to have a solution here and now that does work well on the whole, it ain't perfect but it's a damn sight better than not having anything at all.
 
Last edited:
No matter how good you think dlss it's its still a lower resolution you can't magic up extra pixels when you've halved the amount of them
 
I don’t understand why people get their knickers in a twist about DLSS. You don’t HAVE to use it. It’s an option, a choice. You know that thing we used to have before 2020....
 
Nexus18 said:
Feel free to create comparisons like this showing otherwise then ;)


https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews...tranding_-_nvidia_4k_performance_trump_card/1

It's all very well saying it's no good etc. but at least post a really good in depth analysis like the above to show why....
Click to expand...

Well, Death Stranding is a tittle that has DLSS implemented best out of all games I've seen. Second one would be Control. Still, in movement, as long as there aren't big artifacts visible (which DLSS cause in Cyberpunk and many other games for example - e.g. grates of aircon, some railings, huge moire on floor textures in the office etc.), there's little difference between TAA, DLSS and CAS. Why? Biology - our eyes have really bad resolution for moving images. Only on static images we can see differences clearly. This is why AMD Boost exist, lowering resolution when one's moving mouse - they use exactly our biology to get away with that. Though, then UI and other static objects suffer, hence they need to come up with a better solution - like hopefully the coming one FFXSS.
 
Nexus18 said:
Feel free to create comparisons like this showing otherwise then ;)


https://www.overclock3d.net/reviews...tranding_-_nvidia_4k_performance_trump_card/1

It's all very well saying it's no good etc. but at least post a really good in depth analysis like the above to show why....
Click to expand...

That's a bit too scientific for AMD cheerleaders. Their MO is more like, post a single screen shot that looks blurred and walk away, stating it's crap. But deep down there is a certain sadness.:D
 
Tinek said:
Well, Death Stranding is a tittle that has DLSS implemented best out of all games I've seen. Second one would be Control. Still, in movement, as long as there aren't big artifacts visible (which DLSS cause in Cyberpunk and many other games for example - e.g. grates of aircon, some railings, huge moire on floor textures in the office etc.), there's little difference between TAA, DLSS and CAS. Why? Biology - our eyes have really bad resolution for moving images. Only on static images we can see differences clearly. This is why AMD Boost exist, lowering resolution when one's moving mouse - they use exactly our biology to get away with that. Though, then UI and other static objects suffer, hence they need to come up with a better solution - like hopefully the coming one FFXSS.
Click to expand...

But as shown in the gamers nexus video, DLSS is actually better than using some forms of AA because it doesn't introduce the problems of poor AA methods i.e. jaggies and so on. As noted in the cyberpunk video, you need to make sure you aren't using other forms of post processing effects like film grain, motion blur, chromatic aberration (which these should always be turned off anyway) etc. as these in combination with dlss can cause terrible artifacting/issues.

Yes, in movement/motion, you can see ghosting/trailing like effect, I imagine this will be improved as the tech matures further but ultimately, it's down to how the final image is presented/rendered and I fully expect the open source method from microsoft/amd/nvidia to have the same issues here.

madvr/mpc-hc for media playback has similar issues depending on what scaling algorithm you use, some have more halo'ing than others, other's have more jaggies and so on.
 
Last edited:
wunkley said:
I don’t understand why people get their knickers in a twist about DLSS. You don’t HAVE to use it. It’s an option, a choice. You know that thing we used to have before 2020....
Click to expand...

Its only supposed to be used with RT (like AMDs upcoming Super FX Resolution), to keep the frames up, as the cards are not powerful enough to run it without.
 
Not at the moment, no, given that it requires support from the developers and the games I mainly play do not benefit from it.

If it was ubiquitous then maybe.

[Edit] Thinking about it, if it was supported on every game I expect it would just be switched on by default and therefore always incorporated into benchmarks - which would make nVidia much better value than AMD (assuming similar pricing).
 
sparkymark75 said:
So with that logic, you won't be buying/playing any games that don't have DLSS?
Click to expand...

I will have to turn the settings down in games that don't support DLSS. DLSS is just a convenient way to increase the FPS with a single click. There aren't many games around that support it at the moment, but there will be in future.
 
Th0nt said:
I dunno there seems to be some that think its better visually than native..
Click to expand...

I think its laughable that the once great PC gaming master race is fighting for adaptive image quality control, the whole premise of PC gaming was a few things, options to dial in your settings for your hardware or on the high end, no compromise.

When did people start lapping up compromise? people have no right to say they are running teh game at 4K and then switch on a setting like DLSS, you are not playing at 4K no longer, that bragging right is gone.

I don't upgrade to the really high end anymore cos quite frankly most console games look better then PC games, please no one mention Cyberpunk, that game is trash.

GOW with its latest patch and Spiderman on PS5 looks way better then whats out on PC right now as an overall presentation + they are good games which control I don't find interesting at all.

All of the Ray tracing with RTX games have been so far used on underwhelming games and no true big title, what people here are peeved is that all of the good games are on consoles or likely going AMD for raytracing and they just can't deal with it.

Ratchet and Clank is an amazing game and I'm sure the new one will be too and so far from the previews it looks amazing, I can't think of one game on PC that has RTX that will be as good or actually looks as good and DLSS will just make it worse.

Are the so called PC master race only clamour for PC gaming just FPS and FPS only which DLSS delivers? is that it?

PC gaming used to be about a balanced delivery on the 2, the days where most console games will now look way better then the PC games is upon us and not to mention, be at 60 FPS which is the standard....

I will let the DLSS fan boys fight amongst themselves in this segment.
 
I've always said that console exclusives are the best, nothing on PC to match the quality of GOW, spiderman, TLOU 2 etc. Especially when you consider the price. Well unless they bring them exclusives to PC like they did with HZD, death stranding and days gone in spring......

If I'm playing something on my PC and monitor, I want as high FPS as possible without sacrificing graphical effects, DLSS allows this, especially with ray tracing.

Th0nt said:
I dunno there seems to be some that think its better visually than native..
Click to expand...

You can see why that is the case in "some" scenarios when watching comparisons from gamers nexus etc. though, it removes the usual problems seen with AA methods and can actually result in more "detail" being visible because you don't have AA ruining it.

I wish there were better AA methods:

- SMAA is good in terms of keeping the most detail but it still has flickering/aliasing/jaggies
- MSAA is a massive performance hog and doesn't get rid of all jaggies unless at stupid levels, in which case, watch the fps tank
- TAA is the best for a jaggy free appearance but it can look a bit vaseline like and there is some ghosting in motion with it, RDR 2 is probably the best I've seen as they at least added a pretty decent sharpening option to help clear the image up somewhat
- FXAA is just a vaseline filter and still doesn't get rid of all jaggies

DLSS 2.0 is very much like TAA in terms of just AA like effect, slightly blurs the image but has practically no jaggies to the image.



Still amuses me how people are so against it with literally nothing to prove all these in depth analysis of DLSS 2.0 wrong though :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom