Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,865
Have to agree. Whilst this news is of great gain to gamers on both sides it's sure going to shake the bush and all those fanboi's are gonna drop out with their negativity
-
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
While forum warriors (on the web in general) will argue how this one pixel over here looks better with DLSS if you zoom 5000% in and don't play the game, the reality of it is that for 99.99% of people the visuals are pretty much indistinguishable during normal gameplay & with the open-source nature of the tech and that it doesn't required dedicated silicon to make use of it, it's definitely making DLSS seem superfluous now particularly as the most important part is console-compatibility. I don't think DLSS will really disappear, because it's already plugged into most major engines so it's just gonna carry over & afterall it still has an advantage, just a smaller one now. Though I'd say the already high availability of DLSS in existing titles is an even bigger advantage, particularly some would-be classics like RDR 2 etc, unless AMD really hustles to gain some ground on those fronts (which seems unlikely as they're almost entirely forward-focused when dropping new tech). Plus I'd not bet against Nvidia working on revitalising it (in whatever new way) for the next-launch so that it maintains its status as a "must-have" feature.
Amusingly I think this is actually worse for XeSS as the compatibility for that is more restrictive & they got beaten to the punch even though they've been showcasing it since way before FSR 2.0 got talked about, and from everything they're saying the actual cross-compatible version will come later (2023?) and so will when they open source it. Congrats to Intel for succeeding to fail yet again.
Given that DLSS and XeSS both use AI training, while FSR x depends on people, I really can't see how these would ever become superfluous e.g. DLSS 3 is rumoured to give a large boost to RT. I believe this is why Nvidia have been working on Streamline https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline which should allow the consumer to choose the best option.
Anyone else remember the forum warriors calling the end for DLSS when FSR 1 appeared?
I just want to see more of FSR 2, let's see more comparisons. I am somewhat perplexed at techpowerup's claim that the dlss killer has arrived after testing one game, but they made the same claim when FSR 1 was released so who knows what goes on over there - and I'm not the only one who thinks so https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/unjdvo/tpu_amd_fsr_20_quality_performance_review_the/
Soldato
Im sure we`ll get more paused / zoomed in screenshots of jaggies on a 1 pixel width wire to prove the point of how bad it is - all linking Digitial Shilleries as proof.
Soldato
I don't understand the pokey comments, I mean if you have an nvidia card your invested in that ecosystem, so what does it matter if FSR is worse etc. Most folk seem to stick to their one brand on here anyway!
As mentioned above its a great technology offering free performance on the table. When playing games at speed you wont notice, other than have better fps. What happened to all the "if only AMD competed with.." posts of yesteryear? This is driving on the software which is a good thing for everyone!
As mentioned above its a great technology offering free performance on the table. When playing games at speed you wont notice, other than have better fps. What happened to all the "if only AMD competed with.." posts of yesteryear? This is driving on the software which is a good thing for everyone!
Defo looking good although I'll await more footage in various games and in depth analysis from likes of digital foundry 
Wonder if there are any ghosting issues, if the same people who give dlss **** for that will also give fsr **** too 
I wouldn't say dlss is a bad thing for anyone either tbh, it's just the way ecosystem works and Nvidia aren't stopping fsr and other solutions from being implemented into their sponsored games meanwhile amd sponsored games don't have dlss....
Not sure why people still say dlss killer too, the same was said when fsr 1 released... Had dlss not got integrated into game engines, this probably would have been true.
Hopefully it gets added to rdr 2 and CP 2077.
Wonder if there are any ghosting issues, if the same people who give dlss **** for that will also give fsr **** too
I wouldn't say dlss is a bad thing for anyone either tbh, it's just the way ecosystem works and Nvidia aren't stopping fsr and other solutions from being implemented into their sponsored games meanwhile amd sponsored games don't have dlss....
Not sure why people still say dlss killer too, the same was said when fsr 1 released... Had dlss not got integrated into game engines, this probably would have been true.
Hopefully it gets added to rdr 2 and CP 2077.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,865
I think it's more to do with the fact that it's completely open and open-source too rather than its performance.
I know, I am just referring to the uptake/adoption in games for both upscaling techs. To me a DLSS killer will be when dlss is no longer getting added to games in the same capacity.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 29,865
Few years down the line and everything will have FSR, with DLSS in a select few Nvidia sponsored titles as always. I imagine one day they'll both fall under the same umbrella.
Thing is, dlss is in loads of non nvidia sponsored games too. Given it is a simple plugin that is literally click and enable now for most commonly used game engines, there is no reason for developers to not add it. From the looks of it, it seems FSR 2 requires more work/time at the moment unless dlss is already added then fsr can piggy back of it.
It's very hard to say how things will go with both fsr and dlss, nvidia are wanting to make it a unified approach where all upscaling tech. can be added in at the same time, intel seem to be onboard but amd appear to be MIA @Wrinkly has the article/screenshot for that showing the approach. Ultimately I think TSR will be the go to standard eventually.
Any idea what exactly FSR 2 is based on? Is it TAAU or TSR? Or this entirely amds own work?
Caporegime
@Nexus18 DLSS is in Deathloop which is an AMD Sponsored game.
It won't be a DLSS killer unless Jensen gives up on DLSS and tells everyone that the AI/tensor cores thing was a marketing trick, DLSS and FSR are similar and there is no reason for any dev to add the same feature twice.
If anything FSR 2.0 will be a good indicator for which dev is taking money from AMD / Nvidia . If a game gets FSR but no DLSS then the developer of that game had a deal with AMD and if it's getting DLSS but no FSR then the dev had a deal with Nvidia. These games should cost less since they are used to promote hardware products.
If anything FSR 2.0 will be a good indicator for which dev is taking money from AMD / Nvidia . If a game gets FSR but no DLSS then the developer of that game had a deal with AMD and if it's getting DLSS but no FSR then the dev had a deal with Nvidia. These games should cost less since they are used to promote hardware products.
Soldato
Much like the carry on with the g-sync era before it gets pushed into an agnostic thing.
I don't think deathloop is sponsored by either. There are no logos nor mention of it being amd sponsored.
Caporegime
I know it is AMD sponsored. https://www.amd.com/en/gaming/deathloop
You can choose not to believe me course, that's up to you. But just wanted to provide a counter to this
It really depends on if adding dlss is extra work vs FSR 2.0 without knowing the tech side I would expect its the same amount of development time.
But if its not then you will see dlss fall off over time just like other technology locked to nvidia in the past.
You also have to remember it's paying customers that is the main focus if you can get FSR 2.0 boosting that spec of hardware to a bigger base on just focus on dlss and lose a massive player base.
It's all time and money.
Even if dlss offers slight better pixel peeping the cost to reward still isn't worth it.
But if its not then you will see dlss fall off over time just like other technology locked to nvidia in the past.
You also have to remember it's paying customers that is the main focus if you can get FSR 2.0 boosting that spec of hardware to a bigger base on just focus on dlss and lose a massive player base.
It's all time and money.
Even if dlss offers slight better pixel peeping the cost to reward still isn't worth it.
Jury is still out on that bit...It won't be a DLSS killer unless Jensen gives up on DLSS and tells everyone that the AI/tensor cores thing was a marketing trick, DLSS and FSR are similar and there is no reason for any dev to add the same feature twice.
If anything FSR 2.0 will be a good indicator for which dev is taking money from AMD / Nvidia . If a game gets FSR but no DLSS then the developer of that game had a deal with AMD and if it's getting DLSS but no FSR then the dev had a deal with Nvidia. These games should cost less since they are used to promote hardware products.
In heavy RT workloads, dlss looks to do better in terms of perf. than fsr 1. Haven't seen enough on FSR 2 yet though.
Also, as per amds own diagram:
We have videos and developers own testaments showing how easy it is to enable/add DLSS, it is literally a plugin you just download and enable if the engine supports it. FSR 2 will be the same in theory.
Surely you would have it on the start up screen when launching the game like every other amd/nvidia sponsored game? Nvidia also have games listed on their site and youtube channel even if not "sponsored".
Caporegime
Not quite, one difference is game developers don't have access to the source code for DLSS. Maybe that's why you don't see it in many sponsored games.
FSR 2.0 will be available on GPU open and developers will have full access to the source code.
No, not always the case. Forza Horizon 4 was AMD sponsored and had no AMD logo on the intro screens. A logo on an intro screen is not a guarantee that title X is/is not sponsored.
If it is a plugin for the game engine there is no need for access to the source code though. That is the whole point of having plugins, to make the developers life easier. I wish in my job, I didn't have to faff with code and scouring stackoverflow for answers or searching through pages of poorly written documentationNot quite, one difference is game developers don't have access to the source code for DLSS. Maybe that's why you don't see it in many sponsored games.
FSR 2.0 will be available on GPU open and developers will have full access to the source code.
No, not always the case. Forza Horizon 4 was AMD sponsored and had no AMD logo on the intro screens. A logo on an intro screen is not a deal breaker in these kind of things.
Generally the hardest and biggest blocker for dlss and same will be for FSR 2 is if the game doesn't already have motion vectors and TAA added, I believe TPU also addressed that point.
Hmmm bit weird that as kind of goes against the whole "sponsorship" angle.... I remember at launch people thought deathloop was nvidia sponsored due to the nvidia features in settings menu.
