DLSS 2.0: why aren’t more people raving about it?

[wunkley]

Having only got an Ampere card very recently, I’ve only just got around to trying out a few games with DLSS 2.0. To say I’m impressed is an understatement.

I was very sceptical when I first heard about DLSS as I simply thought that any sort of upscaling would never, ever, be as good as running native resolution. Well butter my arse, I was wrong. On quality setting it looks just as good from my own pixel peeping tests as native resolution, and from various videos around on the tubes it can even enhance some games compared to native res.

The obvious ‘free’ performance uptick you get from running it is brilliant. Why aren’t more people raving about DLSS 2.0 in here? Are there downsides I don’t know about yet?

 

[no_1_dave]

Having only got an Ampere card very recently, I’ve only just got around to trying out a few games with DLSS 2.0. To say I’m impressed is an understatement.

I was very sceptical when I first heard about DLSS as I simply thought that any sort of upscaling would never, ever, be as good as running native resolution. Well butter my arse, I was wrong. On quality setting it looks just as good from my own pixel peeping tests as native resolution, and from various videos around on the tubes it can even enhance some games compared to native res.

The obvious ‘free’ performance uptick you get from running it is brilliant. Why aren’t more people raving about DLSS 2.0 in here? Are there downsides I don’t know about yet?

It can cause blur in some scenarios and some games don't use it as well as they should but on the whole what you're saying is right, especially when used correctly.

People don't rave about it so much because there are a lot of naysayers who have never used it and whenever anybody mentions how good it can be they often chime in and act like you must be a fanboy if you like it

 

[Heisenberg]

The only downside is it's not available in more games.

 

[Radox-0]

Largely agree with points above, its not widely available yet and some settings can cause blur on some setting (performance etc)

However yes its exceptional I find and can really see a nice uplift in performance and in all the games its available I use it, even if to an extent its to offset the impact of Ray Tracing. Hope to see what AMD come out with.

 

[wunkley]

DLSS 2.0 is already fantastic, but I believe they are enhancing it further, and it might even be possible to implement it at the control panel level so it could work with ANY game (no confirmed source for that but was on a recent YouTube vid somewhere from a guy who’s normally got good info).

Thing is I did wonder if Nvidia could be shooting themselves in the foot here. If DLSS keeps getting better and can be used in more (and possibly all!) games, there will be less need to buy any higher end more expensive GPUs ever again. no?

 

[Dontrocktheboat]

DLSS 1.0 was a bit gimmicky.

DLSS 2.0 took the technology to another lvl. And actually makes a lot of sense especially in 4k and above. ( in some cases improving the visual quality over legacy resolution and textures )

=====================
I said it before:

RT + DLSS + 4K + HDR = unbeatable visual quality and performance that smashes the current crop / future crop of console games.

 

[Zeeflyboy]

I think largely because DLSS1.0 was pap and people that like to crap on Nvidia still haven’t let go of that...

It also isn’t widespread enough even now that 2.0 (or 2.1) is actually worth talking about and taking a bit more seriously. Hopefully the new UE4 plugin can help with that going forwards.

Ultimately though I’m just not convinced by proprietary standards as they rarely take off. Once we see similar techniques rolled into more open standards it’ll start to become much more common place... in the meantime though I’m definitely really looking forwards to trying out 2.1 in VR when a dev finally uses it as that is a really promising avenue for it IMO.

 

[Wrinkly]

I think largely because DLSS1.0 was pap and people that like to crap on Nvidia still haven’t let go of that...

+1

 

[JediFragger]

Tried it but not that great for me, could see the slight blurring effect that it causes so that’s a no-no. Could be the fairly high latencies involved though.

 

[Rroff]

Personally not a fan of it - and I played CP2077 with DLSS quality at both 1440p and 4K.

I'd accept it as a compromise for getting proper ray tracing but I notice the artefacts too easily - certain objects having VA motion like grainy trails, moire patterns, some things looking smudged, etc. and that it doesn't render the same scene the same each time - play peekaboo with your view of an area and it is only approximately the same each time with subtle but noticeable differences in what details are rendered - visually noisy stuff like bushes can be quite different each time - which is also noticeable to me generally during gameplay.

 

[heartburnron]

I think the idea of it is still a bit offensive to some given that the pursuit of the ultimate high end gaming experience is no compromises. I haven't tried it so I'm not qualified to comment on how good it is or isn't but I think if I had the option to turn it on with my card that I would only do so if I really needed the extra performance. Still a brilliant option if you need the frame rates though.

 

[Gerard]

Not tried it yet as none of the game i play have support for it. My only dlss game is battlefield v and that uses the original blurovision method. Ironic really that BFV was the dlss and rtx posterchild yet it was never updated to DLSS version 2.

 

[Nexus18]

It can cause blur in some scenarios and some games don't use it as well as they should but on the whole what you're saying is right, especially when used correctly.

People don't rave about it so much because there are a lot of naysayers who have never used it and whenever anybody mentions how good it can be they often chime in and act like you must be a fanboy if you like it

This.

Certainly in screenshots if you're pixel peeping, you can tell that it isn't quite as sharp/clear as native, but in motion, you would be hard pressed to notice the difference, however, you most certainly do notice the difference between 40-50fps and 60-70 fps....

 

[Zeeflyboy]

I think the idea of it is still a bit offensive to some given that the pursuit of the ultimate high end gaming experience is no compromises. I haven't tried it so I'm not qualified to comment on how good it is or isn't but I think if I had the option to turn it on with my card that I would only do so if I really needed the extra performance. Still a brilliant option if you need the frame rates though.

ultimately what matters is how the end image on the screen looks rather than how it’s arrived at though right?

Let’s just forget the realities of DLSS currently and say you have a time machine. Now you’re using DLSS10 where the results are all but indistinguishable from native to even the biggest pixel peeper, but due to the extra headroom you can run with far higher fidelity effects and settings so the end image you see on screen is superior. Is the argument that it’s not running native really relevant anymore, even for the PC master race?

We aren’t entirely there yet, but we will be at some point. The cut off won’t be black and white but largely subjective - there will already be people out there that couldn’t tell you the difference so for them that threshold has already been reached. For others it will take longer.

This isn’t specific to Nvidia’s specific DLSS either, but rather the technology at large. The potential ramifications especially for lower power mobile devices/standalone VR headsets etc is absolutely huge.

 

[heartburnron]

ultimately what matters is how the end image on the screen looks rather than how it’s arrived at though right?

Let’s just forget the realities of DLSS currently and say you have a time machine. Now you’re using DLSS10 where the results are all but indistinguishable from native to even the biggest pixel peeper, but due to the extra headroom you can run with far higher fidelity effects and settings so the end image you see on screen is superior. Is the argument that it’s not running native really relevant anymore, even for the PC master race?

We aren’t entirely there yet, but we will be at some point. The cut off won’t be black and white but largely subjective - there will already be people out there that couldn’t tell you the difference so for them that threshold has already been reached. For others it will take longer.

This isn’t specific to Nvidia’s specific DLSS either, but rather the technology at large. The potential ramifications especially for lower power mobile devices/stand alone be headsets etc is absolutely huge.

Yes I agree with everything you've said there and I think that when we arrive at that point, we'll be over it and wondered why we were ever offended by it. But we're not all there yet. I often say that bringing sound rationality into this enthusiast PC game doesn't always mix very well, bit like oil and water!

 

[jimmy321]

DLSS is not the only quality up scaling option. Running 1440p on my 4k LG 48CX tv/monitor is pretty much the same as using DLSS at 4k for more fps. Honestly you can't tell the difference.

 

[JediFragger]

DLSS is not the only quality up scaling option. Running 1440p on my 4k LG 48CX tv/monitor is pretty much the same as using DLSS at 4k for more fps. Honestly you can't tell the difference.

That's the great thing with the OLED displays, just tune the sharpen filter and you're away. Instant fps boost!

 

[Zeeflyboy]

I really can’t wait to get my hands on the new 42” LG for the cave

 

[Rroff]

DLSS is not the only quality up scaling option. Running 1440p on my 4k LG 48CX tv/monitor is pretty much the same as using DLSS at 4k for more fps. Honestly you can't tell the difference.

It probably uses a similar technique to temporal upscaling - it might look good at first glance due to the edge interpolation and if enabled features that tweak luminance to embed stereoscopic effect to add the perception of depth and more "pop" but detail will be missing and probably some latency vs DLSS.

 

[wunkley]

DLSS is not the only quality up scaling option. Running 1440p on my 4k LG 48CX tv/monitor is pretty much the same as using DLSS at 4k for more fps. Honestly you can't tell the difference.

I can guarantee it's not as good as DLSS 2.0. LG oled upscaling is good, but not that good. I have an Nvidia Shield TV tube attached to mine, and that does "AI" upscaling from 720p, 1080p and 1440p to 4k, and it is better when compared to just letting the TV do it.