-
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 in 2021
- Thread starter Grim5
- Start date
Not sure if trolling... The 1060 demo was pretty blurry due to a bad capture.
Now this shot from the 6800XT actually looks great...
Well that looks bloody great, if its as good in motion I cannot see a reason not to at least apply ultra quality. Should mean my 6800 lasts a few years.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,857
Yup, means we will all get a good amount of time out of our cards if Ultra is pretty decent
Soldato
Yeah ultra quality is probably what I would run and then if still required more frames drop some setting from ultra before going to the next tier.
This is all assuming the setting below ultra quality get more noticeable in image quality drop off.
This is all assuming the setting below ultra quality get more noticeable in image quality drop off.
Even with DLSS most people use Quality mode since anything less and it is fairly blurry. FSR Ultra quality mode should make a big difference even if you can get 20% more performance.
Thing is, the comparison isn't vs native, it's vs alternatives, and in the case of something like Godfall since it's on UE4, that would be TAAU which is a simple toggle (see examples here (FSR looks closer to what simple TAA upscale looks like): https://docs.unrealengine.com/4.26/en-US/RenderingAndGraphics/ScreenPercentage/). In the future as projects move to UE5 the comparison will be even more unfavourable because of how good TSR is (see here: https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/nozuvo/testing_unreal_engine_5_temporal_super_resolution/).
So if it's not even as good as that then what's the point? If it were a driver toggle that would be more understandable (and useful), but since it requires per-game integration anyway then meh.
Caporegime
The screenshot says native 4K vs Ultra Quality? https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/posts/34837742
The only reason amd didn't use a driver toggle was adoption - if it's limited to amd driver then even if it's open source Intel and Nvidia won't touch it. AMD has lots of examples for this in its other open source software that no one but amd uses.
By implementing it into the game, it makes the feature work with any modern graphics card or console, at the expense of having to implement in games one by one
so pick ya poison, instant implementation but no one but AMD uses it or try to get everyone to use it with slow implementation
As for what's the point, simple, not all games are built on UE5, most games don't have simple built in resolution sliders that is easy for gamer to use. Gamers would like a one button click for more fps, that's what FSR can offer. Don't expect miracles from FSR and you won't be disappointed- yesterday hardware unboxed asked AMD if FSR produces higher framerate at a given internal resolution compared to native, their answer was you'll have to test it yourself - I.e they either don't even know how well FSR works or doesn't or they're hiding that it's no better than just using a resolution slider, main benefit = one click, no thinking and testing needed
Last edited:
Caporegime
Not sure if trolling... The 1060 demo was pretty blurry due to a bad capture.
Now this shot from the 6800XT actually looks great...
Thats a higher setting too, as the 1060s only on Quality.
So why would you need another upscaling method in UE5 games if it's that good? Just use TSR and that's it. The quality is good enough and no other method will give you more FPS.
That was a terrible question of course they produce lower FPS, even DLSS has up to native FPS performance and that is because they are using extra hardware for upscaling. There is no way to get more FPS.
I think that is the problem. The quality mode on FSR seems poor form the material AMD released.
This is likely because FSR is only using a spatial up-sampling algorithm without temporal sampling. This provides a strict upper bound to the information available to reconstruct, so quality is going to be closer to DLSS version 1.
At least you don't get ghosting.
Soldato
Also, Saphire AMD cards already have access to FSR and have for several months now, it's called Trixx Boost
Yeah because amd would give access to the features before anyone else wouldn't they
Keep on the damage control path.
From what info AMD has provided, there is no temporal component in FSR , at least currently. SO TSR and DLSS will be in a separate league
I doubt that is the case at all. It is is liekly that FSR is or will require some internal render state information or control of the render pipeline to improve quality.
Why on earth would AMD care if their competitors can use FSR.
Soldato
Is it just me or is history repeating itself here?
I am getting Freesync vs Gsync vibe.
I remember Gsync being the better choice because it had £100 expensive hardware.
Well look how that ship sailed.
If Amd can pull off FSR to look just like native or there about because I am sure like DLSS it won't be perfect then does it really matter what approach each graphic manufacturer choose?
So long all users get this upsampling feature I couldn't care less about DLSS gives a slight better image if you zoom in 10x you can spot a leaf detail.
Soldato
On the ultra quality comparison?