The first pic showing ghosting, anyone notice how blurry the brick wall is on dlss vs the better detail on fsr2 cos probs of the sharpening, i dont get why ppl dont like sharpening it brings detail out and i much prefer that than native where cracks on walls or lettering etc isnt as sharp and harder to make out at native or dlss stuff.
Lets face it fsr 2 is good and doesnt need expensive gpus really. You will not notice anything when playing with fsr2 vs dlss latest i think. Good 1 amd.
Seems everyone has different preferences, some prefer the softer, less aliased/jaggy look over the sharper, more aliased/jaggy look. My eyesight seems to be more sensitive to the latter and its issues but it does seem the majority of people prefer the latter, reminds me of when someone posted a comparison using RIS sharpening in a cartoon like game and you had most commenting how great it looked but all I could see was jaggies/over sharpening galore especially on thin edges
Reminds me a lot of colour accuracy debate too, most people prefer saturated/vibrant colours over accurate/natural colours. There are some who choose not to use any form of AA either....
Never really been
that convinced with that claim myself-needs neural network and can
only be done through Tensor cores= marketing words convincing you that you positively do need new hardware for this feature.
Besides Nv going to that kind of expense running said neural network.
Hub were told direct from Nv they have zero plans opening up DLSS for their older gpus despite AMD showing software is capable of the same result.
Well there might still be a "chance" that FSR 2 might not perform as well as dlss in other heavier RT games e.g. cp 2077 but yes it is definitely looking very good so far. Just a shame amd are only just coming out with it now when nvidia users have been enjoying it for the last 2(?) years. I wonder how many customers amd lost because of being late to the game with another pretty must have feature? As
@TNA mentioned earlier back, how many really want to wait for many months/years when they can get something now?
This is what amd need to learn and do better at, it's all very well playing the "we are good because we go open source and do what's best for everyone" card but to me and others, it always feels like they're playing catchup and only acting because of what nvidia have done and the praise they get for said features. If AMD can keep up with their approach but beat nvidia to the punch, they would start to gain a lot more market share imo.
Who knows, maybe all of a sudden nvidia will now be able to open dlss up for older nvidia gpus.
Either way, it's a good thing all round now, more choice is better for everyone.
Marketing is nvidia strongest advantage.
They are very, very good at it, one of the best out there. AMD need some better marketing people.
They definitely are better in that area by miles but see above points with how amd are late to the market with their features. In the development world, speed and delivery is crucial to determining success, I've had projects where the product/plan was excellent but they got canned because the client wasn't getting the end results quickly enough due to slow delivery.
Of course things like FSR 2 and freesync aren't failures by any stretch but to the end consumer i.e. gamers (who don't care about brand loyalty or whatever), not having a competing feature for months, let alone years is not going to win people over imo.
