• 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.

Fidelity Super Resolution 2.0

RavenXXX2 said:
Click to expand...
AMD looks ever so "slightly" better (would agree with the splitting hairs comment, funny how people can notice that without zooms but yet the same people can't notice RT or dlss differences :cry:) but it still looks beyond awful compared to dlss :o

OZj1F7U.png


But remember, it's free....
 
Last edited:
  • Haha
Reactions: TNA
Lets back up a bit and see the forest instead of the bark of the tree.

God Of War uses DX11. No one disputes that. And, it's a perfectly capable API to use although a bit dated when compared to the flexibility of Vulkan and DX12. However, there is a bit of information that wasn't shared in the FSR 2.0 vs DLSS video comparison that I believe is very important. FSR 2.0 wasn't/is not compatible with DX11 API. And it came directly from Alex himself in a prior video/podcast they did about a week or so before the fsr 2.0 vs dlss comparison.

@52:28 to around 53:30
Per Alex: GOW came out of nowhere with fsr 2.0 update...They accidentally released the UI string for it at one point...(earlier then it should have).
But it's a little bit strange that it's actually listed. Because FSR 2.0 actually doesn't support DX11. Ah, which is curious. They said they [AMD] only work with developers on a per game bases. They wouldn't release DX11 code for FSR 2.0. So this is a custom job. Ah, by the team their at...I forget the team name of the studio. Rocket Studio...No, no it's the porting house. I don't something like squirrel...
Click to expand...
The name of the studio who ported GoW to PC is called JetPack Interactive.

So, the question is if these issues are found using AMD's competitor's hardware it's apparent that Jetpack Interactive is at fault for their custom, jerry rigged version of FSR 2.0. It's certainly clear that they got no support from AMD.

Furthermore, it's said that most of those odd ghosting, smudging IQ issues are removed once the game is modded to remove DoF and TAA. For example, take a look at the images below:


Original




TAA/Sharpening/DOF OFF

Personally, with this bit of information we are looking at the issue created by the developer who ported the game. And, it's appears there is room for improvement. Lets hope they update their custom FSR 2.0 and see if things improve. I've tested it myself and didn't find most, if not all, the issues presented by DF. However, most of those issues they spotted were found with in 1-3 frames or less. Something, I don't see while playing. You have to slow down the game play to 10-15% normal speed to even see if they exist. IMO, even if DF found that issue with their 3090 it's a non issue at normal speeds because it's nearly impossible to see the majority of it while playing at normal speed. I certainly cannot find the information I quoted above in the FSR 2.0 vs DLSS review.

I wonder if he will tweet about this version of FSR 2.0 being a "custom job"? Since I never found that bit of info in the IQ review. To be fair this is a jerry-rigged version of FSR 2.0 used in DX11 without any DX11 code from AMD. I guess for a reason. ;)
 
Last edited:
Good find. I wonder why that important information was missing from the comparison? The mind boggles. :D

Supports:
  • DirectX® 12.
  • Vulkan®.
  • Unreal Engine 4.26/4.27 and Unreal Engine 5 as a plugin from the Unreal Marketplace.
gpuopen.com

AMD FidelityFX™ Super Resolution 2 (FSR 2) - AMD GPUOpen

Learn even more about our new open-source temporal upscaling solution FSR 2, and get the source code and documentation!
gpuopen.com gpuopen.com
 
LtMatt said:
Good find. I wonder why that important information was missing from the comparison? The mind boggles. :D

Supports:
  • DirectX® 12.
  • Vulkan®.
  • Unreal Engine 4.26/4.27 and Unreal Engine 5 as a plugin from the Unreal Marketplace.
gpuopen.com

AMD FidelityFX™ Super Resolution 2 (FSR 2) - AMD GPUOpen

Learn even more about our new open-source temporal upscaling solution FSR 2, and get the source code and documentation!
gpuopen.com gpuopen.com
Click to expand...

Although I wanted to mention it earlier a lot of DF/Alex findings about those IQ flaws are within 1-3 frames. Which can be very hard to see in normal speed. IE: playing the game. There are others that happen within 2-3 frames. And if you repeat it several times you might get a glimpse of it. But nothing more.

It seems, to me, that these blemishes were told to Alex by someone closely involved with the implimentation of this jerry-rigged version of FSR 2.0 in GoW. More so then him finding it on his own IMO (although not nearly impossible). Because they are too specific and require you to slow down the speed around 10-25 percent of normal speed to see it.

But there is another problem. I didn't see most of those issues on my AMD gpu. It's inconclusive to state that it's just a nvidia driver/hw problem. I really don't know but I wasn't able to find a few of those issues Alex found using his 3090. I posted my videos here back in post #373.

Now it's not to say there is no problems found with FSR 2.0 at all. It's just that I didn't find them in the frequency he did and I also slowed the animation down.

What we need to ask ourselves is why is he omitting this bit of information from the review and his tweets since the IQ review? When he said it about a week before releasing that IQ reivew.
 
Last edited:
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands: FSR 2.0 Review is up on Techpowerup
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/tiny-tina-s-wonderlands-fsr-2-0/

The review starts positive like mentioning that FSR 2.0 improves the quality of vegetation and grass in particular vs native image across all resolutions but image stability of thin objects has issues.
Performance uplift at 4K resolution is great but there is a noticeable texture quality reduction, and 1440p/1080p suffers from a weird performance hit that could be due to the developers implementing the FSR 2.0 render path itself incorrectly.
 
While I'm unsure if CDPR will add in FSR2 to Cyberpunk, Would be nice if they did, A modder has put FSR2 into it thanks to AMD releasing the source code with very promising results that uses the existing DLSS options menu, Disable motion blur or you get weird black lines.

www.nexusmods.com

FidelityFx Super Resolution 2.2 - FPS boost mod

Boost your FPS in Cyberpunk by replacing DLSS with FSR 2.2 which works on all GPUs.
www.nexusmods.com www.nexusmods.com
 
Last edited:
EastCoastHandle said:
Lets back up a bit and see the forest instead of the bark of the tree.

God Of War uses DX11. No one disputes that. And, it's a perfectly capable API to use although a bit dated when compared to the flexibility of Vulkan and DX12. However, there is a bit of information that wasn't shared in the FSR 2.0 vs DLSS video comparison that I believe is very important. FSR 2.0 wasn't/is not compatible with DX11 API. And it came directly from Alex himself in a prior video/podcast they did about a week or so before the fsr 2.0 vs dlss comparison.

@52:28 to around 53:30

The name of the studio who ported GoW to PC is called JetPack Interactive.

So, the question is if these issues are found using AMD's competitor's hardware it's apparent that Jetpack Interactive is at fault for their custom, jerry rigged version of FSR 2.0. It's certainly clear that they got no support from AMD.

Furthermore, it's said that most of those odd ghosting, smudging IQ issues are removed once the game is modded to remove DoF and TAA. For example, take a look at the images below:


Original




TAA/Sharpening/DOF OFF

Personally, with this bit of information we are looking at the issue created by the developer who ported the game. And, it's appears there is room for improvement. Lets hope they update their custom FSR 2.0 and see if things improve. I've tested it myself and didn't find most, if not all, the issues presented by DF. However, most of those issues they spotted were found with in 1-3 frames or less. Something, I don't see while playing. You have to slow down the game play to 10-15% normal speed to even see if they exist. IMO, even if DF found that issue with their 3090 it's a non issue at normal speeds because it's nearly impossible to see the majority of it while playing at normal speed. I certainly cannot find the information I quoted above in the FSR 2.0 vs DLSS review.

I wonder if he will tweet about this version of FSR 2.0 being a "custom job"? Since I never found that bit of info in the IQ review. To be fair this is a jerry-rigged version of FSR 2.0 used in DX11 without any DX11 code from AMD. I guess for a reason. ;)
Click to expand...

Ah so FSR 2 doesn't support dx 11 officially then. Have amd got any plans to add "official" support for it? Although I wouldn't say it was entirely down to dx 11 as the ghosting issues also plague farming simulator, which is dx 12.

Sadly that is the way amd want their tech to be used i.e. once they have done their bit, they want to take a step back and let the industry do as they please hence why their previous technologies like tressfx, audio feature that was in thief (cant remember what it was called) etc. never got used widely.

On the TAA bit, that should be disabled as soon as FSR 2 or dlss is detected, at least that is how it works with dlss in games i.e. once enabled, AA option gets disabled and greyed out. DOF I find usually causes problems with upscaling tech too, was a similar issue in guardians of the galaxy where if DOF and dlss was on, you would get the weird artefacts. It's why I keep telling people you shouldn't be adding sharpening either as it will increase any artefacts in the base image.

NinjaCool said:
Tiny Tina's Wonderlands: FSR 2.0 Review is up on Techpowerup
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/tiny-tina-s-wonderlands-fsr-2-0/

The review starts positive like mentioning that FSR 2.0 improves the quality of vegetation and grass in particular vs native image across all resolutions but image stability of thin objects has issues.
Performance uplift at 4K resolution is great but there is a noticeable texture quality reduction, and 1440p/1080p suffers from a weird performance hit that could be due to the developers implementing the FSR 2.0 render path itself incorrectly.
Click to expand...

Wonder if amd can sort out the temporal stability issues as that is the biggest con of it compared to dlss for my needs. Was hoping FSR 2 would solve the issues with sniper elite 5 awful shimmering/aliasing but sadly, it will be even worse so guess it will go on the backburner until they can sort it out.

Grim5 said:
Unfortunately it's a pretty bad implementation and it's better to just leave the game on native
Click to expand...

I'm just hoping it is down to amd needing to fine tune it from their end rather than it being down to the tech itself.
 
Dicehunter said:
While I'm unsure if CDPR will add in FSR2 to Cyberpunk, Would be nice if they did, A modder has put FSR2 into it thanks to AMD releasing the source code with very promising results that uses the existing DLSS options menu, Disable motion blur or you get weird black lines.

www.nexusmods.com

FidelityFx Super Resolution 2.2 - FPS boost mod

Boost your FPS in Cyberpunk by replacing DLSS with FSR 2.2 which works on all GPUs.
www.nexusmods.com www.nexusmods.com
Click to expand...
That's quite amazing that people have managed that in such a short time frame.

So based on this I guess all games that support dlss can be modded to support FSR 2.0
 
shankly1985 said:
That's quite amazing that people have managed that in such a short time frame.

So based on this I guess all games that support dlss can be modded to support FSR 2.0
Click to expand...

I forgot the correct technical terms but apparently DLSS2 and FSR2 share the same ground work so any DLSS2 game can have FSR2 added to it pretty quickly.

gpuerrilla said:
Isnt that what Dicehunter linked on #432 @fs123 ?
Click to expand...

Yep it is but it's no biggie :)
 
Nexus18 said:
Ah so FSR 2 doesn't support dx 11 officially then. Have amd got any plans to add "official" support for it? Although I wouldn't say it was entirely down to dx 11 as the ghosting issues also plague farming simulator, which is dx 12.

Sadly that is the way amd want their tech to be used i.e. once they have done their bit, they want to take a step back and let the industry do as they please hence why their previous technologies like tressfx, audio feature that was in thief (cant remember what it was called) etc. never got used widely.

On the TAA bit, that should be disabled as soon as FSR 2 or dlss is detected, at least that is how it works with dlss in games i.e. once enabled, AA option gets disabled and greyed out. DOF I find usually causes problems with upscaling tech too, was a similar issue in guardians of the galaxy where if DOF and dlss was on, you would get the weird artefacts. It's why I keep telling people you shouldn't be adding sharpening either as it will increase any artefacts in the base image.
Click to expand...

The most important question: Why didn't Alex at DF disclosed that AMD did not release DX11 code for FSR 2.0 in GoW? Making FSR 2.0 in GoW a jerry-rigged, "custom" implementation. If we are to view him as unbias? This comes off as some sort of agenda otherwise. As we know now the DF review is about how well Jetpack Interactive implemented without AMD's help. Although I cannot prove it I do believe that the developer disclosed those flaws to Alex.

The DF review of FSR 2.0 vs DLSS made it look like AMD was at fault when it was Jetpack Interactive who is the culprit for a poor implementation of it for a DX11 title.

It's clear that the game needs a slider/toggle to reduce/remove TAA and DoF. As well as a toggle to remove any additional sharpening and vignette used to compensate for enabling TAA/DoF. This should come from the developer. As we know copeious amounts of DoF and TAA is used as a cheat to hide any odd artifacts they couldn't resolve in code.
 
EastCoastHandle said:
The most important question: Why didn't Alex at DF disclosed that AMD did not release DX11 code for FSR 2.0 in GoW? Making FSR 2.0 in GoW a jerry-rigged, "custom" implementation. If we are to view him as unbias? This comes off as some sort of agenda otherwise. As we know now the DF review is about how well Jetpack Interactive implemented without AMD's help. Although I cannot prove it I do believe that the developer disclosed those flaws to Alex.

The DF review of FSR 2.0 vs DLSS made it look like AMD was at fault when it was Jetpack Interactive who is the culprit for a poor implementation of it for a DX11 title.

It's clear that the game needs a slider/toggle to reduce/remove TAA and DoF. As well as a toggle to remove any additional sharpening and vignette used to compensate for enabling TAA/DoF. This should come from the developer. As we know copeious amounts of DoF and TAA is used as a cheat to hide any odd artifacts they couldn't resolve in code.
Click to expand...
Quite the accusation that...

Perhaps Alex had already been working on the video before he became aware of it? Just because the video was uploaded after their podcast doesn't necessarily mean that the GOW video wasn't in the works before that.

But yes, there should be a follow up to it. Maybe tag him on twitter to get an answer?

You can see people have tagged him already saying they don't see it and he has responded i.e.

Poneros said:
Click to expand...

And the response to that was:


Either way regardless of it being a poor implementation of fsr 2 for whatever reason, it doesn't invalidate the results shown in his video (and other peoples videos). Especially when as mentioned, other FSR 2 titles show the exact same issues as are found in GOW, the disocclusion and the ghosting issues (just not as bad), regardless of the game being dx 11 or dx 12. Maybe there are external factors that affect how well it works in games i.e. as you mentioned TAA or/and DOF but this isn't always going to be the cause of issues as we have seen with deathloop where there are still issues with FSR 2 temporal stability and disocclusion for example.

What I would be asking is do AMD need to be involved with every game and work with the game developers to get good results from FSR 2 and fine tune it on a per game basis? Given that deathloop has had the best implementation so far and pretty much every other title has been very lacklustre.... Why is this?

Dicehunter said:
I forgot the correct technical terms but apparently DLSS2 and FSR2 share the same ground work so any DLSS2 game can have FSR2 added to it pretty quickly.



Yep it is but it's no biggie :)
Click to expand...

According to amds articles etc., that is pretty much the case i.e. games with dlss take <3 days to implement, although I imagine there is other optimisations to be done.

Good sub reddit here where people are posting their experiences:

Reddit - Dive into anything

www.reddit.com www.reddit.com

Some comments from the modder:

Please note that the modder specifies he does not have enough access to engine variables to make it look nice. He says this is a ghetto hack at best and a proof of concept, not something you should use for anything other than "cuz it's interesting."
Click to expand...

But seems positive reports overall on a variety of hardware, main issue just seems to be disocclusion and ghosting:

gfycat.com

Fsr 2.0 GIF | Gfycat

Watch and share Fsr 2.0 GIFs on Gfycat
gfycat.com gfycat.com

gfycat.com

Dlss GIF | Gfycat

Watch and share Dlss GIFs on Gfycat
gfycat.com gfycat.com

Good to see this though as it means we won't have to wait on AMD to get FSR 2 in more games now :p :D I wonder if modders could do the same with FSR 2 games and add dlss in since amd won't allow dlss in sponsored titles :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom