• 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

humbug said:
AMD say it isn't.
Click to expand...

Maybe watch/listen to what Nick says again:

DF: Getting back to the idea of an interoperability here with DLSS to a certain degree: Nvidia detailed Streamline in April of this year and they released some code on GitHub. The idea was essentially [that] super resolution tech is now here on PC, all the vendors have [developed] their own solution, Intel included. The initiative was basically to create a common API platform, a plug-in interface for developers to use to just make it so that if you have an Intel GPU, you can run Intel XeSS, if you have a Nvidia GPU, well then the developer has an easier way to put in DLSS. And same for AMD's FSR 2.0, hopefully. I was just curious whether AMD wants to support such an initiative in the future?

Nicolas Thibieroz: I'm going to be direct with you here. We don't plan to support Streamline at this time. Right now, obviously, while we believe that focusing on open source technologies is the best approach for gamers and game developers, inherently, we don't believe that Streamline provides any significant benefits... beyond what is currently available - and essentially the underlying Nvidia technologies like DLSS that plug into it, well they're still closed and proprietary. So you're talking about having an open source framework that plugs into a closed technology, right? So if I were to contrast this with FSR 2.0, obviously it's fully open source, easy to implement and supported on multiple platforms, including consoles, which I think is actually key to that particular topic. So there is no need for developers to learn and implement a new framework for something that they can already do easily today.
Click to expand...

He acknowledges that whilst streamline is open source, it is pushing closed source propriety tech i.e. dlss

And as per the official github repo of the streamline code:

github.com

GitHub - NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline: Streamline Integration Framework

Streamline Integration Framework. Contribute to NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com github.com

Streamline is an open-sourced cross-IHV solution that simplifies integration of the latest NVIDIA and other independent hardware vendors’ super resolution technologies into applications and games. This framework allows developers to easily implement one single integration and enable multiple super-resolution technologies and other graphics effects supported by the hardware vendor.
Click to expand...
 
Nexus18 said:
Maybe watch/listen to what Nick says again:



And as per the official github repo of the streamline code:

github.com

GitHub - NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline: Streamline Integration Framework

Streamline Integration Framework. Contribute to NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline development by creating an account on GitHub.
github.com github.com
Click to expand...


well they're still closed and proprietary. So you're talking about having an open source framework that plugs into a closed technology, right
Click to expand...

That's the concern.
 
humbug said:
That's the concern.
Click to expand...

See the bit before where you cut of to see what he is referring to here.....

and essentially the underlying Nvidia technologies like DLSS that plug into it, well they're still closed and proprietary. So you're talking about having an open source framework that plugs into a closed technology, right?
Click to expand...

They don't want to be supporting nvidias closed source solution i.e. dlss which inherently if amd partner up with this idea of streamline, they are in effect supporting/giving approval for that idea of closed source tech to be pushed, it's obvious why amd don't want to go down this path (they want dlss dead sooner than later and just maybe they really are firm believers in not wanting to ever support closed source tech in any form.....), same way it's obvious why nvidia want people on board with streamline (so that dlss stays relevant for a longer period of time).

This is the bit which a lot of people are picking up on as being contradicting from Nicks/AMDs part:

Right now, obviously, while we believe that focusing on open source technologies is the best approach for gamers and game developers, inherently, we don't believe that Streamline provides any significant benefits... beyond what is currently available
Click to expand...

Of course they are going to say they don't believe it offers any benefits, why would they praise anything from their direct competitor? Also, I have to laugh at the "beyond what is currently available", technically there is nothing available which achieves what streamline would, at least nothing public/we know about.....
 
Nexus18 said:
See the bit before where you cut of to see what he is referring to here.....



They don't want to be supporting nvidias closed source solution i.e. dlss which inherently if amd partner up with this idea of streamline, they are in effect supporting/giving approval for that idea of closed source tech to be pushed, it's obvious why amd don't want to go down this path (they want dlss dead sooner than later and just maybe they really are firm believers in not wanting to ever support closed source tech in any form.....), same way it's obvious why nvidia want people on board with streamline (so that dlss stays relevant for a longer period of time).

This is the bit which a lot of people are picking up on as being contradicting from Nicks/AMDs part:



Of course they are going to say they don't believe it offers any benefits, why would they praise anything from their direct competitor? Also, I have to laugh at the "beyond what is currently available", technically there is nothing available which achieves what streamline would, at least nothing public/we know about.....
Click to expand...

You're impossible to talk to.
 
Last edited:
Nexus18 said:
Don't entirely agree with this bit though:
Streamline isn't going to make a significant difference to developer's workflow
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Fair enough, I was only taking what the AMD rep said at face value.

Nexus18 said:
Given a developer could integrate all 3 in one go, that saves time and effort on their part
Click to expand...
Absolutely, I can't disagree with that. But I can't see how the "integrate all 3 in one go" can hold true without it being a constraint on innovation. It's a problem inherent to all standard APIs I guess, but for an abstract API to support all the features of the underlying technologies, those technologies have to work in a similar enough manner that the API doesn't then become a mess of exceptions.

I don't have the expertise to assess how Streamline actually integrates the plugins (I'm a strictly amateur, occasional, programmer), but to bring back one of your previous comments:
Nexus18 said:
however, given that DLSS also needs some form of tuning on a per game basis to get the best from it as well, I imagine developers would be able to tweak the likes of FSR, dLSS, xess even if the implementation of them is done via streamline, essentially all streamline does is allow the integration but the tuning of each upscaler tech. within said game would still be down to the game developers, not nvidia, not amd, not intel.
Click to expand...
and extrapolate a little I can perhaps envisage where AMD are coming from. If the Streamline framework's benefits are mainly in the "initialisation" and developers still need to write extra code depending on which plugins they've selected, then the workflow bonus is not quite as stark as "integrate all 3 in one go". Throw in

Nexus18 said:
Working primarily with automation and pipelines for our software solutions these days has got me thinking if some game studios might perhaps already have come up with their own ways of being able to automatically implement these upscalers too but alas I don't work in the game industry so can't comment but I'm sure it would be possible....
Click to expand...

and

we don't believe that Streamline provides any significant benefits... beyond what is currently available
Click to expand...
is perhaps not such a stretch? Especially given how similar AMD have already made the implementation of FSR to DLSS.

Sure AMD's PRs are probably overegging it, but then probably so too are Nvidia's marketing people when they talk about "easily implement one single integration".
 
humbug said:
You're impossible to talk to.
Click to expand...
Why? Because I highlight your mistakes? :cry:

You made the claim stating that amd referenced to streamline as not being open source i.e.

Should Nvidia make the whole thing open source? To alleviate AMD's concerns that its still black box software controlled by Nvidia.
Click to expand...

What are you referring to here? Streamline? It already is open source....
Click to expand...

AMD say it isn't.
Click to expand...

Then you quote a snippet from Nick without including what he is referring to in order to try and insinuate that streamline is potentially closed source? i.e. the bit in bold underlined was removed:

and essentially the underlying Nvidia technologies like DLSS that plug into it, well they're still closed and proprietary. So you're talking about having an open source framework that plugs into a closed technology, right
Click to expand...

Not see the error of your ways here?

gpuerrilla said:
Welcome to six months ago bug!! :cry:
Click to expand...

Oh look at that, another post which doesn't actually address anything to do with the topic being discussed :o

VersionMonkey said:
Fair enough, I was only taking what the AMD rep said at face value.


Absolutely, I can't disagree with that. But I can't see how the "integrate all 3 in one go" can hold true without it being a constraint on innovation. It's a problem inherent to all standard APIs I guess, but for an abstract API to support all the features of the underlying technologies, those technologies have to work in a similar enough manner that the API doesn't then become a mess of exceptions.

I don't have the expertise to assess how Streamline actually integrates the plugins (I'm a strictly amateur, occasional, programmer), but to bring back one of your previous comments:

and extrapolate a little I can perhaps envisage where AMD are coming from. If the Streamline framework's benefits are mainly in the "initialisation" and developers still need to write extra code depending on which plugins they've selected, then the workflow bonus is not quite as stark as "integrate all 3 in one go". Throw in



and


is perhaps not such a stretch? Especially given how similar AMD have already made the implementation of FSR to DLSS.

Sure AMD's PRs are probably overegging it, but then probably so too are Nvidia's marketing people when they talk about "easily implement one single integration".
Click to expand...

Yup that's the bit I would want some more info on as well as what kind of control would game developers have once all 3 are integrated using streamline. As mentioned, I personally think they would still be able to customise and make the same changes as if the upscalers had been independently integrated, as mentioned, even dlss needs to be fine tuned on a per game basis so if game developers could still adjust dlss, they would definitely be able to do the same for amd and intels unless of course nvidia did block that but then obviously amd would not get onboard with it and I imagine intel wouldn't want onboard with it either.

Agree though, that is the only way (and very possible given what automation and pipelines achieve) that comment could hold true from Nick, this is where Alex should have questioned/pushed for more clarity/info on what exactly he meant by that as to our knowledge there is nothing out there that does what streamline intends to do.

Want to know what I find kind of ironic is that people don't like/want FSR anywhere near nvidia/dlss yet when it comes to modders forcing FSR 2 into games utilising dlss dll files, it's a massive win and no one is complaining about dlss/nvidia then :cry: :D :p ;)
 
Nexus18 said:
In terms of stickers? Not wrong there, at least I can't think of anything, however, it is stated on product pages when there is support for both:

www.overclockers.co.uk

LG 27" 27GP850P-B 2560x1440 NANO IPS 165Hz 1ms FreeSync/G-Sync Compatible Widescreen Gaming Monitor

Order LG 27" 27GP850P-B 2560x1440 NANO IPS 165Hz 1ms FreeSync/G-Sync Compatible Widescreen Gaming Monitor now online and benefit from fast delivery.
www.overclockers.co.uk www.overclockers.co.uk

www.lg.com

27” UltraGear™ Nano IPS 1ms Gaming Monitor with NVIDIA® G-SYNC® Compatible - 27GP850-B | LG UK

Discover LG 27GP850-B. Click for pictures, reviews, and tech specs for the LG 27” UltraGear™ Nano IPS 1ms Gaming Monitor with NVIDIA® G-SYNC® Compatible.
www.lg.com www.lg.com

Ah yes, I'm team green when I have owned more amd hardware than nvidia and intel combined and chances are if AMD match/beat nvidia for RT perf. I'll most likely end up back with them :cry: @TNA Sound familiar? :D



No I'm not, you stated exactly that "amd came up with an open source solution to "defeat" nvidia gsync" when they did not.... all they did was enable a feature from their side to utilise the built in monitors vesa standard, which was pretty damn awful because of it lacking certain aspects and again, it was not possible to get this working until the next re-iteration of adaptive sync arrived i.e. the gsync module didn't have these shortcomings. Also, fun fact, adaptive sync will work on a lot of monitors/nvidia gpus even if not classified as "gsync compatible", the "gsync compatible" badge means that it meets certain requirements in order to provide a bug free "certified" experience based on nvidias own testing. There are plenty of articles showing the quality and issues that affected freesync/adaptive sync v1 displays compared to gsync.



Eh? Where have I have snipped posts? You even stated you are skimming posts and in another post, state you don't read the whole thread/posts :cry: Also, that's highly hypocritical coming from you and others given the amount of times my posts have been snipped/cut to back up the narrative :cry:

How's it irrelevant? If nvidia don't modify FSR/XESS (again this will show in git history, as a developer, we have a popular saying "git is our single source of truth"), how can they intentionally sabotage their tech?

Disadvantage? And I acknowledged that:



But as I have stated numerous times now, I want to know from a gamers and developers POV, not from amd, nvidia or intels or our eyes.... given amd have stated they do what's best for gamers and developers..... @Bill Turnip didn't have any problems understanding the question so not sure why you are? Purposely being argumentative again?



Only the same old inner knitting cult :cry: Must be patting each other on the back in a private Dc server or somewhere :cry: Shame with the combined resources no one is still capable of providing valuable discussion, maybe as a collective you guys can also go over and take on all the people stating these very same points on various sub reddits too :D
Click to expand...

Yep. Same here. I have had more AMD than anything. But because currently I have Nvidia some assume I am an Nvidia fan boy. Little do they know I am no fan of Jensen and his lubbing tactics. I just went Nvidia as it suited me better on this occasion and was MUCH cheaper than what AMD had on offer.

I have no issues buying AMD, never have.
 
TNA said:
Yep. Same here. I have had more AMD than anything. But because currently I have Nvidia some assume I am an Nvidia fan boy. Little do they know I am no fan of Jensen and his lubbing tactics. I just went Nvidia as it suited me better on this occasion and was MUCH cheaper than what AMD had on offer.

I have no issues buying AMD, never have.
Click to expand...
Using both AMD/Nv you didn't develop the need for an overnight superiority complex after years playing the underdog on AMD.:p
 
tommybhoy said:
There you go, if NV are really that concerned, open source the whole lot of their upscaling and hand it over to GitHub like AMD did.
Click to expand...

IMO the thing that Nvidia are worried about is the PC gaming community bypassing developers and making their own FSR2 patches and releasing them in to the wild.

Nvidia have no control over that, its quite obviously why AMD did it, now Nvidia want AMD to agree to hand over that control to them, AMD would be incredibly stupid to do so.

However, if Nvidia put the whole thing on GitHub everyone wins.

So come on Nvidia, do the right thing for once.
 
tommybhoy said:
There you go, if NV are really that concerned, open source the whole lot of their upscaling and hand it over to GitHub like AMD did.
Click to expand...
Bill Turnip said:
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.
Click to expand...
You might start seeing DLSS in more AMD Sponsored titles other than just Deathloop, if they were to do that and make it open source on Git hub. Since AMD have never liked games using DLLs that the developers do not have source code access to. This is no secret and nothing has changed with the GameWorks banner which DLSS falls under.

Some folk don't really understand what they are talking about when it comes 'sponsorship' and how things actually work with regard to these agreements. There's more nuance to 'sponsorship' than a logo on an intro screen and is a perfect example of why I do not recommend listening to someone on the outside proclaiming to know whether a game is sponsored or not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom