Fidelity Super Resolution in 2021

[G J]

It would be better for gamers if nvidia and amd just built better GPUs that didn't rely on upscaling to work

Agreed, The cynical side of me will guess that FSR/DLSS will become baseline as some game devs use it as a way to be lazy and cut time/costs etc and some people will lap this up.

Pretty certain that was nvidia marketing machine when they convinced pc gamers that upscaling is cool now.

I'm suprised the whole PC master race types jumped on board with this given how elitist/purist they get with graphics but I guess some of it comes down to AMD/Nvidia having something the other does not and fanboys going at it.

 

[Harlequin]

 

[ICDP]

The first year of RT and DLSS was a complete joke, hardly any support and DLSS 1.0 was roundly laughed at as atrocious. To be fair most decent tech sites did get at Nvidia for the fact that the new RTX cards were being sold at a premium for tech that wasn't even viable. It took Nvidia well over a year to get DLSS to a point it was usable instead of laughable. The fact that AMD are well better than DLSS 1.0 ever was and didn't oversell it as some amazing Next Gen deep learning and it doesn't require special hardware should be applauded.

Those who mitpick at what AMD have delivered are just showing themselves to be blinkered and baised.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I'm suprised the whole PC master race types jumped on board with this given how elitist/purist they get with graphics but I guess some of it comes down to AMD/Nvidia having something the other does not and fanboys going at it.

Many also mocked consoles for using upscaling,etc. Seems like we are all one happy PC Console Gaming Master Race now!

 

[ICDP]

The irony is the only reason DLSS exists is because Nvidia needed to make their new Ray Tracing Tech viable. The only reason FSR exists is because AMD were getting being reminded by the tech press they didn't have an answer to a tech, that in a perfect world should have no reason to exist.

 

[chris85oc]

You’re free to disable raytracing. Just like you’re free to play on low details. And disable DLSS/FSR.

You are also free to keep playing the same graphically dated games just in higher native res cause that’s what really matters yes? Look at them halflife 2 graphics in 16k res and 32xAA. That pristine IQ

For the rest of us who want better graphics we have a choice, just like you do. What makes you think you should have a say in taking our choice away? Right…

 

[Harlequin]

You`re free to play at 1080p upscaled to 4k, just because you feel the marketting means you *need* to turn on all the bells and whistles in fortnite. Native is where its at. No compromises , in 2021 games

 

[Nexus18]

You’re free to disable raytracing. Just like you’re free to play on low details. And disable DLSS/FSR.

You are also free to keep playing the same graphically dated games just in higher native res cause that’s what really matters yes? Look at them halflife 2 graphics in 16k res and 32xAA. That pristine IQ

For the rest of us who want better graphics we have a choice, just like you do. What makes you think you should have a say in taking our choice away? Right…

This guy gets it.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The irony of wanting better graphical fidelity,only to have to use upscaling/image reconstruction at the same time to reduce other aspects of image quality(resolution,and ghosting/trailing issues) on brand new GPUs, which shouldn't need it in the first place.

PCMR hasn't realised monitor panel resolutions and PPI haven't moved forward that much relative to other markets. 4K has been out for a very long time. 1440p has been out for yonks.

Despite this relatively fixed target,we are still having to fiddle about with image quality downgrades on £1000 GPUs. It tells me that RT is still not quite ready for the primetime and we need another generation for things to start becoming more viable.

Things such as upscaling/image reconstruction really make more sense for people with weaker or older GPUs who need to extend its lifespan. So in my case FSR at least lets me sort of keep an old GPU for a bit longer.

However,its not a victory when you need it in £500+ GPUs(let alone £400 ones) because they are too weak.They are too weak to run sufficient level RT effects,and too weak to run intensive AA methods within a year of launch. This is why things such as TAA(made mostly for consoles) and TAA alternatives like DLSS/TAAU/TSR came out,which all seek to reduce internal rendering loads,or apply AA in a cheap way.

Ever since Pascal we have had stagnation - people forget the Ampere/RDNA2 improvements are on top of a stagnant Pascal/RDNA1 series which barely moved things forward in mainstream markets.

It means these very same GPUs are going to have to be replaced relatively soon if you want to run said effects. Many here change their GPUs out within a year or two,so don't see this but the problem is longer term.

PCMR were mocking the consoles such as the PS4 PRO,etc for needing upscaling/image reconstruction so they could do the same,but because AMD/Nvidia pushed more marketing its all fine!

This is why I am 50/50 on whether I should bother getting a new GPU from this AMD/Nvidia generation and wait for the RX7000/RTX4000 series GPUs. Nvidia might do RT better than AMD(that is a fact),and RX6000 RT performance is more variable, but ATM same time the Nvidia GPUs do not have not enough VRAM(IMHO) for someone who wants to keep their GPU a few years,or is into game modding. My main concern is if GPUs are struggling now with RT effects,its not going to look so great in 2 years time from launch,and most people I know keep their GPUs for a few years.

 

[g67575]

Not really true. DLSS is a huge benefit for graphics cards like the RTX 3070 (RTX 3060 TI too), which I wouldn't describe as low end, since it has similar performance to the RTX 2080 TI, but with less VRAM.

At 4K, aliasing and jagged edges are still a significant problem. DLSS can help to get rid of these, even on performance mode (but noticeably more in quality mode). I run WD: Legions at 4K DLSS performance mode, with an RTX 3070 because it looks better than running at a lower resolution. It's a super demanding game and I still have to turn down settings, my 10700KF is only just about good enough to handle the game in many scenes (I had to turn down the 'Geometry' setting to reduce the load on the CPU, as in some scenes it was falling below 60 FPS.

Anyway, I can see the value in technologies things like FSR. It basically allows you to run games at 4K, when most graphics cards still really struggle in new games, running 4K natively. It looks like it won't ever be as good as DLSS, because it doesn't make use to machine learning to improve the quality of images. But the highest quality option at 4K is still an improvement on native 1440p resolution.

 

[g67575]

You`re free to play at 1080p upscaled to 4k, just because you feel the marketting means you *need* to turn on all the bells and whistles in fortnite. Native is where its at. No compromises , in 2021 games

Lol, why you choose to play at 1920x 1080 on a 1440p / 4K monitor (assuming it's relatively large)? The main benefit of upscaling is that it allows higher output resolution, which reduces aliasing / jagged edges.

I suppose it's a choice between cranking up the native resolution (to increase image quality) as high as it will go at playable framerates, vs less jagged edges / smoother looking images when upscaling to higher resolutions. I think DLSS Quality does a pretty good job of smoothing the graphics, while retaining important details.

It's true that in some older games (for example, Planetside 2), cranking up the native resolution (via DSR, to beyond 4K resolution) is still the best way to improve image quality and reduce jagged edges...

 

[zx128k]

FSR is the DLSS 1 from metro Exodus without the AI network. Thus DLSS 1 > FSR by design. They are both Sparal upscaling. DLSS 1 runs the AI network and then sharpens but FSR just sharpens. So what created the better quality for DLSS 2? The breakthrough in image quality I should say, is replacing the Sparal upsacalar with a temporal one. This ment that motion vectors from the game were needed. FSR will be blurred and less detailed than DLSS 2.2 and native. Its always going to have a less detailed image compared to native.

Unreal Engine 5 also uses a temporal upscaling, the goal is the same as DLSS 2.2. Upscale from 1080p to 4k and keep the quality close or better than native. The good thing about Unreal Engine 5 is their temporal upscaling works on all GPU's and consoles.

Anyone that tells you FSR > DLSS 1 does not understand how they both work because objectively this cannot be true. Also anyone that states FSR is the same as native is ignorant because it can objectively never happen. FSR will always reduce quality compared to native. Always.

FSR will increase performance but wont match the scaling and quality of DLSS 2.2. DLSS 2.2 is so far ahead at this point, reviews should ignore native benchmarks in games supporting DLSS 2.2. With DLSS blurring happens because many games have incorrect LOD settings. They use the settings for the lower internal resolution. If you tweak correctly you get what DLSS promises.

FSR can still give a good image for the simple fact that Ultra quality uses an internal image resolution of 1662p and quality uses 1440p. Upsaling from that resolution to 4k will give a decent image but never a native quality image. It will always be blurred and lose detail. This is the reason for the DLSS AI network.

Now in games with RT only (Metro Exodus enhanced edition) 1440p is about the limit of a 6800xt card. Thus with FSR upscaling could be quality at best or far below. This is a problem for FSR and its poorer scaling compared to DLSS. The more the internal resolution drops, the less subjective the blurring and shimmering becomes.

With the RTX 2060, I can run Cyberpunk 2077 with all the RT effects on and still hit 4k with DLSS 2.2. The image quality was not bad and the game was very playable. Felt like 60fps really did (not 60 fps just very constant fps). If I turn DLSS 2.2 off. Image quality increases a bit (hard to tell as it powerpoint) but the fps go well onder 10fps. So DLSS 2.2 does deliver 1080p render resolution -> 4K output resolution. With great image quality and insane performance increases. FSR cannot match this mix of quality and performance. Its down to the way FSR was designed. What no one is talking about as well is how poor FSR is to DLSS and why at this late stage AMD should be releasing something with better quality. AMD have patanted a method like FSR with an AI network like DLSS 1. A hybrid approach. AMD are using a method NVidia abandoned because of image quality problems.

The elephant in the room is how far behind AMD are and how much the media are avoiding covering this problem. You even here things like, Why should FSR be compared to DLSS 2.2? Becuase that is were everyone but AMD have reached. It like stating we need to ignore the fact others are better in quality and performance to make things fair for AMD. Then stating AMD performance is on power with others. The whole media more or less tried to destory DLSS. How bad its quality is compared to native. Now that FSR exisits the goal post moves. Well the point is not native and the massive performance increase is worth the quality drop. FSR is << DLSS 1 by design. FSR image quality is decent and even videos stating it matches native.

As a customer avoid AMD cards, they are slower (RT performance is really bad and is the method AMD use. The reason is hardware related. Yet you had all the AMD fine Wine arguments.) and have poorer image quality(FSR). FSR is just the fastest way to do upscaling on AMD cards, image quality is a far away secondary concern.

DLSS 2.2 is about both maintaining quality and increasing peformance. Make your choice.

 

[kjaerligkatt]

It would be better for gamers if nvidia and amd just built better GPUs that didn't rely on upscaling to work

Pretty certain that was nvidia marketing machine when they convinced pc gamers that upscaling is cool now.

Is this a serious comment? I'm sure that if one of them they could conjure up a GPU that performed an order of magnitude better, at the same cost, that they would do it. Added to that, games developers also want to appeal / sell to as wide an audience as possible, not only those with state-of-the-art GPUs. This leads to techniques being developed that allow compromises to be chosen, and the game run as widely as possible.

 

[RBImGuy]

Game developers wanted FSR, not dlss.
So AMD made FSR and killed of dlss.
Its why many games too many to count will just have FSR and dlss will die slowly like Gsync did

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Is this a serious comment? I'm sure that if one of them they could conjure up a GPU that performed an order of magnitude better, at the same cost, that they would do it. Added to that, games developers also want to appeal / sell to as wide an audience as possible, not only those with state-of-the-art GPUs. This leads to techniques being developed that allow compromises to be chosen, and the game run as widely as possible.

The artificial market segmentation from AMD and Nvidia is getting worse. The laptop RTX3060 has more shaders than a desktop RTX3060 for example! Look at the improvements from a RTX2060 to an RTX3060? Look at Turing? AMD having Polaris for years. Even AMD and Nvidia appear to price between their competing SKUs,not directly so to avoid direct competition.

Most buyers go roughly by price,and GPUs have been going up much faster in price than most other parts. You can see this by the gross/net margins which are at record levels. On this forum,since its full of enthusiasts they don't care,as a few £100 here and there makes no difference to them.

The issue is AMD/Nvidia are trying to upsell people to more and more expensive GPUs. This is the reason why we still have a GTX1060 at the top of the Steam Hardware Survey list. Pascal GPUs have between 1.5X to 2X the share of all the RT capable GPUs on that list.Mainstream and entry level markets have stagnated and gone up in price,so many don't see the worth in upgrading often now, or people in many parts of the world have been priced out.

This is why developers are doing all this,and why many of these popular games look cartoony.They can see the market for what it is.

You had the same with smartphones,until all the Chinese companies flooded the market with capable smartphones. Then all of a sudden Samsung,etc made much better mainstream smartphones.

What we need is a competitive third player - because 20 years ago,when we had many players things moved forward much quicker IMHO.

 

[zx128k]

Game developers wanted FSR, not dlss.
So AMD made FSR and killed of dlss.
Its why many games too many to count will just have FSR and dlss will die slowly like Gsync did

Thats why Unreal Engine 5 developed a temporal up scalar of their own which will run on console and any gpu. Also supports DLSS. Why AMD filed a patant for a hydrid upscaling tech using an AI network.

 

[Joxeon]

The artificial market segmentation from AMD and Nvidia is getting worse. The laptop RTX3060 has more shaders than a desktop RTX3060 for example! Look at the improvements from a RTX2060 to an RTX3060? Look at Turing? AMD having Polaris for years. Most buyers go roughly by price,and GPUs have been going up much faster in price than most other parts. On this forum,since its full of enthusiasts they don't care,as a few £100 here and there makes no difference to them.

The issue is AMD/Nvidia are trying to upsell people to more and more expensive GPUs. This is the reason why we still have a GTX1060 at the top of the Steam Hardware Survey list. Pascal GPUs have between 1.5X to 2X the share of all the RT capable GPUs on that list.Mainstream and entry level markets have stagnated and gone up in price,so many don't see the worth in upgrading, or people in many parts of the world have been priced out.This is why developers are doing all this,and why many of these popular games look cartoony.

You had the same with smartphones,until all the Chinese companies flooded the market with capable smartphones. Then all of a sudden Samsung,etc made much better mainstream smartphones.What we need is a competitive third player - because 20 years ago,when we had many players things moved forward much quicker.

performance has hardly moved in terms of price points for 3 years now, 3060 is about as fast as a 2070 and costs the same, a 3060ti is slightly faster than a 2080 for the same money and a 3070 is slightly slower than a 2080ti and comes with 3gb less VRAM while coming in 100 quid cheaper. 3090 is about 40% faster than a 2080ti but is over 100% more expensive etc.

 

[nvidiamd]

Meanwhile the fine wine is real and soon the Big Navi will not need upscaling anyway.
https://twitter.com/3DCenter_org/status/1408771777962995718

 

[LtMatt]

Meanwhile the fine wine is real and soon the Big Navi will not need upscaling anyway.
https://twitter.com/3DCenter_org/status/1408771777962995718

That’s interesting good find.

 

[Nexus18]

Amd always gets some good fine wine about 7/8+ months after release, hopefully they'll be able to squeeze out more perf. for ray tracing too.

Interesting summary:

In the sum of all things, this shows a different performance picture than at the launch of the first RDNA2 accelerator, AMD has since been able to catch up a lot compared to nVidia's ampere accelerators. However, you must be warned against using the term "fine wine" for this purpose: It describes gains after a longer period of time, often only reached at the end of the life cycle of the respective hardware. This point in time is far from approaching for the RDNA2 accelerators , the performance gains that can possibly be achieved through "fine wine" can only be expected in some time. The currently visible performance gains will primarily be based on updated test systems and the effect of rBAR / SAM. On the subject of "fine wine"Ampere architecture have a say, because its double FP32 power could potentially become more powerful in the future than is currently the case.