Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,753
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Just like we had when G-Sync was ringfenced. When you buy into that ecosystem, sometimes people overlook that.
-
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
- Thread starter shankly1985
- Start date
Just like we had when G-Sync was ringfenced. When you buy into that ecosystem, sometimes people overlook that.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 1,235
Not following this. It isn't sponsored as there is no logo, but it is sponsored as it uses their tech? Paying to put technology into a product is exactly sponsorship, locking out another brand doesn't happen as far as I'm aware as all games work on all graphics cards? A lot of games don't offer a home theater sound mix, it doesn't mean that Realtek paid them to lock Sonos out of the ecosystem. The sound still works on both.
@LtMatt also pointed out that it WAS sponsored by AMD, and he works/worked for them.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 1,235
I am in the nVidia/Gsync ecosystem, and absolutely no complaints to be clear, works very well. But that's not to say that other solutions DON'T work, it's just when buying my products they were the best/only ones available to me at the time.
I may well switch next time, I might not it'll just depend on availability, need and price when making a purchase. If everything was equal, and I was looking at an AMD or nVidia card of otherwise identical perfomance and features, DLSS is unlikely to be worth a lot more to me than FSR 2.0, dependent on how prevalent it is in games at that point in time (obviously the tech will have moved on, but I hope my point makes sense).
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,675
- Location
- The KOP
FSR 2.0 interview - not watched it all yet but the comments section seems to like the question Alex has asked.
https://youtu.be/8ve5dDQ6TQE
https://youtu.be/8ve5dDQ6TQE
Yup it was a decent interview to be fair.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,753
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Well its much easier now that AMD have laid their cards on the table. This means you can choose your path. We can see their/open roadmap for the technology and it thankfully is getting traction. There was a good year or so where nvidia were just tanking on so I can understand why they comfortably got the audience with the Ampere gen.
What I meant is if you bought a G-Sync display many years ago, people continued to buy GPU's until very recently where the branding still suffers from the mindshare influence. As long as the display is 'compatible' for any sync it doesn't matter which GPU you go with. I think I was lucky my freesync 4k monitor worked with Gsync but there were a few about where you got locked in (dependant on year and brand ofc).
- Joined
- 25 Nov 2011
- Posts
- 20,675
- Location
- The KOP
Yeah just finished watching it. Very good interview its nice to know FSR 2.0 will continue to improve.
Correct me if I'm wrong but at the time it was not possible for nvidia gpus to utilise adaptive sync which is one of the main reasons nvidia had to implement a gsync module? Is this correct @Rroff ? Not to mention nvidia having this for about 1-2 years before amd caught up with utilising adaptive sync i.e. freesync, not all gamers want to wait that kind of time period to get features such as that especially if they need to wait another year or so in order to get to close/match the same standard as said feature.
I've got both a freesync premium and gsync ultimate displays and can't say I notice a huge difference between the techs. Certainly nothing worthwhile to get "locked" into in this day and age.
As matt once said before when it comes to a few things, it's most likely above his paygrade and not part of his helpdesk/support/pr role at amd so I imagine he isn't going to have any oversight to those areas of the business.
EDIT:
It could also have been a "timed" based sponsorship as deathloop didn't have dlss at the start, it was added in later on. Much like how sony or microsoft will pay to have exclusive access to a game for only their platform for the first year or so:
www.reddit.com
All in all, it's not a clear cut being 100% solely sponsored by amd, imo, arkane studio implemented each brands tech. of their own accord or/and received some kind of "compensation" (be that financial support or/and on hand support from amd/nvidia) to implement both parties respective technology, ultimately the only people who know with 100% certainty are those that are involved in those deals.
I've got both a freesync premium and gsync ultimate displays and can't say I notice a huge difference between the techs. Certainly nothing worthwhile to get "locked" into in this day and age.
Long story is, a product can have multiple "sponsorships" if needs be but there is also sponsorships where within the contract/deal of said sponsorship, they cannot use competing brands technologies, again I've seen this in my workplace and it's very common throughout other industries too, for obvious reasons though, details will not be disclosed.
As matt once said before when it comes to a few things, it's most likely above his paygrade and not part of his helpdesk/support/pr role at amd so I imagine he isn't going to have any oversight to those areas of the business.
EDIT:
It could also have been a "timed" based sponsorship as deathloop didn't have dlss at the start, it was added in later on. Much like how sony or microsoft will pay to have exclusive access to a game for only their platform for the first year or so:
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
All in all, it's not a clear cut being 100% solely sponsored by amd, imo, arkane studio implemented each brands tech. of their own accord or/and received some kind of "compensation" (be that financial support or/and on hand support from amd/nvidia) to implement both parties respective technology, ultimately the only people who know with 100% certainty are those that are involved in those deals.
Last edited:
More reddit communities picking up on the interview including amds stance on streamline:
www.reddit.com
www.reddit.com
Someone raised a good point, there's nothing stopping nvidia from integrating FSR 2 into streamline, would be funny if they do this
But unlikely nvidia will do this let alone adopt someone else's unofficial integration of it for these reasons:
@Bill Turnip Curious on your thoughts on amds stance about streamline? And if you agree with what people are saying regarding the contradictory stance from Nick/AMD?
BTW, that page of amds with supposed "sponsorships" is actually just games which "contain" amds tech e.g.
Apparently monster Hunter World: Iceborne is sponsored by nvidia, as in upon startup of the game, you will see nvidias logo, however, it is featured on amds site as it also contains amd features.
Quite a good site too showing all the titles with dlss and/or FSR:
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Reddit - Dive into anything
www.reddit.com
Someone raised a good point, there's nothing stopping nvidia from integrating FSR 2 into streamline, would be funny if they do this
But unlikely nvidia will do this let alone adopt someone else's unofficial integration of it for these reasons:
@Bill Turnip Curious on your thoughts on amds stance about streamline? And if you agree with what people are saying regarding the contradictory stance from Nick/AMD?
BTW, that page of amds with supposed "sponsorships" is actually just games which "contain" amds tech e.g.
Apparently monster Hunter World: Iceborne is sponsored by nvidia, as in upon startup of the game, you will see nvidias logo, however, it is featured on amds site as it also contains amd features.
Quite a good site too showing all the titles with dlss and/or FSR:
When G-Sync came out on 99% of displays it was impossible to change refresh rate on the fly without a momentary black screen while the display "re-trained".
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 1,235
I'll have to read a little more about it to know my thoughts - being honest, I don't know enough about it yet. I come here with little knowledge about this sort of thing, but looking to ask questions and learn.
As I understand it, streamline is a system whereby it makes it easier to bring upscaling tech into games. On that basic level, as FSR is open source, I can't see a reason that they couldn't. However, if they wish to push proprietary tech, it could also be in their interest to do so provided that nvidia tech is empirically and considerably better. This is the crux, and could be helpful for developers, but also as a marketing tool (nvidia will only be doing this to benefit themselves, after all).
If FSR was considerably less effective than dlss, they would WANT to put it in. If FSR was considerably better, they would NOT want to put it in. Nvidia aren't saving gamers here either. There doesn't seem to be loads of difference between fsr 2.0 and dlss at the moment (anecdotally, I haven't tried them both yet) so there is no point in nvidia including it.
If FSR is easy to implement, it won't need to be part of streamline as it can be added by developers for comparatively little time and effort. Unless streamline locks this option out, again I wouldn't know.
Essentially, streamline is just a catalyst/api plugin to allow developers to add all upscaling techs in one swoop rather than having to implement each one separately. Intel are onboard with it, iirc, their solution is also open source.
Just to clear up, streamline itself is open source.
There is plenty of reason to still give nvidia gamers the choice of using dlss imo:
1. still being added to more games than fsr 2 "currently" - obviously this will change going forward but hasn't got that traction just yet
2. better IQ than FSR 2, the mod injection is considerably better than the official implementation imo, no disocclusion issues as well as less fizzle issues and better temporal stability as well as having better performance in RT scenarios than the official way, however, the mod way does have some severe ghosting (I would take this over the other issues though) and other issues if motion blur is enabled.
One thing which I picked up on was that with FSR 2 being open source and the documentation provided as well as the issues Alex raised to Nick is that amd are leaving it up to the game developers to really work on the implementation in order to get the best from it, this could explain why we haven't seen as good of results in other games other than deathloop so far. Obviously with time and further reiterations of FSR 2 and when developers get to grips with it, this will improve though.
I meant more specifically what you made of the contradicting statement from Nick/AMD stance on how they always want to do what's best for gamers and developers but yet won't get onboard with what is really the best way forward if we ignore all the nvidia vs amd controversies. Obviously we know why nvidia want everyone onboard with streamline and why amd don't want to be apart of it but at the same time if looking at it from the same viewpoint as amds take on their "solutions" i.e. "we do what's best for gamers and what's best for developers", these are the 2 questions which would have been good to ask AMD/Nick (again ignoring the usual amd vs nvidia working practices):
Specifically what are the disadvantages to game developers and gamers with streamline solution?
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Jun 2021
- Posts
- 473
- Location
- Yorkshire
Is it? The best way forward, that is? Wouldn't it be better if DirectX or Vulkan supported scaling technologies directly? After all, the developers are going to have to work with one or other of those anyway? Or is that not viable for some reason? Or is it more that Streamline is here now and developers would have to wait for either of DX or Vulkan?
A cynic might say it's so that Nvidia can then dictate the way that these technologies develop and can be used.
I only looked briefly at the GitHub page you linked and the NVIDIA Developer Streamline page linked from there, but I couldn't see anything about governance? Have NV indicated they'll hand over management of the API to an independant body? If not, what's to stop them blocking any attempt to extend the plugin interfaces beyond what their own technologies support? So AMD and Intel would always have to work within Nvidia's way of thinking about these technologies.
If it's not an attempt to restrict their competitors options on Nvidia's part, then it just looks like a #927 to me.
As of right now, it's the best way forward for both gamers and developers imo. Can you think of any disadvantages to gamers or developers with this solution? (Addressed the meme reference at end of my post)
Obviously a solution within dx and Vulcan is ultimate end game but how far away is that? I do recall of Microsoft working on something but not sure what happened to it? Not to mention what happens if their solutions are considerably worse than fsr 2 and dlss? People won't want to use them, same way many won't use fsr 1 or didn't use dlss 1 due to it's quality so in some ways, it could be a stepback. Closest thing we have to that as of right now would be TSR in UE4 but it is pretty awful going by current implementations not to mention in hardly anything compared to fsr and dlss.
To my understanding, streamline doesn't dictate how fsr or Intel's one is used, it's simply a framework to be able to add all 3 in one go, Nvidia would have no input on fsr or Intel's code/development and how developers interact with it. If Nvidia dictated what could happen, I don't think intel would have got onboard with the idea not to mention as pointed out, if Nvidia could/would sabotage the implementations, they would face some lawsuits no doubt. Also, streamline is open source so there is no way Nvidia could cover up if they were to tamper with it and ultimately if there was foul play, obviously any developers and amd/intel would pull out of supporting it, not exactly a good image for Nvidia if that is their intentions.
That meme is true but we're only talking about 3 providers here....
Last edited:
That's just looking at the past to understand the future
. Isn't Nvidia known for screwing over business partners and people are wondering why AMD isn't excited to jump in bed with them.But hey FSR is open source, if Nvidia really cared about giving gamers choice they could implement it into streamline themselves
Or they could modify FSR to run on tensor cores, add some Nvidia special source and bin DLSS rather than make another new standard. So there is just you know, one standard.
An interesting comment I saw is that streamline is just Nvidia trying to solve DLSSs biggest weakness and that is, its closed source nature.
Lawsuits xx years after the damage is done, is pointless. See Intel VS AMD.
Like Nvidia hasn't already **** on their own image in the past. People will soon forget about it or defend it. Remember the Geforce partner program.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 20,753
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
But hey FSR is open source, if Nvidia really cared about giving gamers choice they could implement it into streamline themselves
Or they could modify FSR to run on tensor cores, add some Nvidia special source and bin DLSS rather than make another new standard. So there is just you know, one standard.
An interesting comment I saw is that streamline is just Nvidia trying to solve DLSSs biggest weakness and that is, its closed source nature.
Very rarely do people apply the neutral gamer filter. Once they own said brand they seem to go out of their way to justify the proprietary feature sets. Seeing as we seem to be some woke environmentalist culture too (gotta hate them miners stealing all cards), what about nvidia's huge data centres crunching so we can apply DLSS? The contradiction of some is unbelievable. As you point out, do you really need DLSS and such as brute force pipeline or resources when other companies are achieving similar without huge farms computing resources?
That's just looking at the past to understand the future
But hey FSR is open source, if Nvidia really cared about giving gamers choice they could implement it into streamline themselves
Or they could modify FSR to run on tensor cores, add some Nvidia special source and bin DLSS rather than make another new standard. So there is just you know, one standard.
An interesting comment I saw is that streamline is just Nvidia trying to solve DLSSs biggest weakness and that is, its closed source nature.
Lawsuits xx years after the damage is done, is pointless. See Intel VS AMD.
Like Nvidia hasn't already **** on their own image in the past. People will soon forget about it or defend it. Remember the Geforce partner program.
People are making it out like nvidia is going to dictate how and what intel and amd can do with their own solutions when from my understanding of streamline, they will have no say whatsoever, again, it is just a framework to allow seamless integration of all 3 in one go as opposed to the current method developers are having to face of implementing them all (well less so intels one....).
Guessing you're skimming posts again?
That has already been raised by someone else but for reasons, it's not the wisest decision for nvidia:
IMO, that is the last reason nvidia want streamline to be successful, dlss is already integrated into several game engines to allow quick and easy implementation in games (as attested to by developers), from nvidias POV, the most applicable reason is to ensure dlss stays around for much longer as eventually there will be an "industry" standard, most likely in DX or/and vulkan itself.
All in all, I find it hilarious this:
"nvidia are bad because they don't do any open source solutions"
*nvidia make an open source solution to aid all gamers and developers*
Insert new reason to hate on nvidia. I swear if nvidia made dlss open source and able to run on all hardware, people would still find some reason to hate on them.
No one has been able to provide a good/solid answer to this yet.
If only FSR 2 was here 2-3 years ago and in the same quantity and quality of games.....
Lol, when NV tried to command and absorb partner brand names the likes of Strix, Aorus etc under the NV umbrella or the more recent HUB blacklisting, those went well.
Associate
- Joined
- 1 Oct 2020
- Posts
- 1,235
Locking developers into the streamline system? Whilst it may help developers crank out games by plonking those systems in, it would then stifle progress looking into alternatives, whuch may end up being more effective?
I like my games to be varied and imaginative. We're already walking towards "Franchises" with about 20 different call of duty, Assassin's Creed, Fifa type things where each year a texture is updated and little thought put in. If even less thoguht is put in, I see it as a good thing for developers, but not necessarily gamers. My understanding of streamline can help developers, but this can mean that better solutions for particular games are no longer sought.
Just a thought.
That's a good point. But if alternatives did come down the line, they could also be onboarded to streamline? As someone said further up, it would just become like the anti-aliasing option we have where a few games could offer: msaa, smaa, fxaa, TAA etc. Essentially giving gamers the choice to use what they want/prefer and to get the best from their hardware.
Ultimately I think this will be us in terms of upscaling tech. until something is included in dx + vulcan as the market is somewhat saturated with upscalers as is right now and I can't see many alternatives arriving anytime soon: of the top of my head, UE 4/5 = TSR, intel = XESS, AMD = RSR (can be forced through driver side), FSR 1 + 2, nvidia = DLSS + NIS (can be forced through driver side)