-
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
Oh damn, I see I fell for the trap? My apology! Will stop it now, then, to not repeat what was already said.
As a heads up here is a basic rundown of the various arguments that these guys repeat over and over. Things we constantly see without any proof, or that have been debunked countless times by most of the tech press. The fact these have been debunked over and over shows the position of dishonesty these people are debating from.
Things that have been so far debunked and we will most likely not see brought up again. Even dishonest debaters are not idiots all the time.
FSR won't be in consoles
FSR will be worse than DLSS 1.0.
FSR is not easier to implement than DLSS from a blank slate.
All we have left are
FSR is no better than upscaling
FSR sucks because it doesn't use "deep learning"
FSR should be compared to DLSS 2.2 and nothing else. This ignores that DLSS 1.0 - 2.0 still a thing and exists in games
And from the other perspective we get the following
DLSS is dead - A ridiculous notion
DLSS adds input lag
FSR is as almost good as DLSS - This is only true if we consider higher resolutions. At 1080p DLSS is superior by a fair margin.
Things that have been so far debunked and we will most likely not see brought up again. Even dishonest debaters are not idiots all the time.
FSR won't be in consoles
FSR will be worse than DLSS 1.0.
FSR is not easier to implement than DLSS from a blank slate.
All we have left are
FSR is no better than upscaling
FSR sucks because it doesn't use "deep learning"
FSR should be compared to DLSS 2.2 and nothing else. This ignores that DLSS 1.0 - 2.0 still a thing and exists in games
And from the other perspective we get the following
DLSS is dead - A ridiculous notion
DLSS adds input lag
FSR is as almost good as DLSS - This is only true if we consider higher resolutions. At 1080p DLSS is superior by a fair margin.
Last edited:
Slightly off topic this.....
Whilst that is true to an extent, it is well regarded now that ampere is substantially better for ray tracing regardless of whether a game has been optimised more for nvidia or not.
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Rayt...cials/ART-Mark-Raytracing-Benchmarks-1371125/
Godfall and resident evil village are pretty good examples of this as it runs better than nvidia/ampere by a decent margin without RT but as soon as the ray tracing effects (of which are limited) are turned on, then nvidia/ampere take the lead by a decent margin (hard to say this for 100% for godfall though as no direct side by side comparisons where RT is turned on) and amd then encounter some pretty bad fps drops in godfall with RT too (could just be down to poor optimisation though)
Whilst metro is obviously nvidia sponsored, it has been 4a who have said that amd can do much better if the ray tracing is optimised for amd/rdna 2 and their game shows this, amd do rather well (when hairworks is turned off) but still fall very short from amperes ray tracing abilities.
And whilst they aren't popular.... digital foundrys video xbx vs pc for metro enhanced shows the RT sacrifices that have to be made for consoles pretty well:
That upcoming avatar game will be interesting as from what I read, it is basically going to be a ray traced only game like metro and they will have a software approach for older gpus which don't have ray tracing. Plus it's a different engine/developer (massive/snowdrop) to show case how they will do RT. Sadly not out till 2022 though by which time most of us we'll be on the next gen gpus anyway!
Right, I see. There's always one person on each forum/comments that I see with identical arguments. Ergo, it all must be coming from the same source - either a marketing script (I wouldn't put black marketing past NVIDIA) or just one silly subreddit/youtube channel that spreads it and sends its "religious zealots" all over the net with a mission.
The former we can fight and win, the latter - almost impossible, it's like arguing with flatearthers, there's just no point.Oh damn, I see I fell for the trap? My apology! Will stop it now, then, to not repeat what was already said.
Ha, this genuinely made me alugh out load.Oh no, please keep up the great work. When you get tired one of the rest of us will jump in to give you a break
As I said in my post, yes Ampere is faster. But if you use RT sensibly in a way that current hardware can handle it and you do optimise for both platforms, you won't see HUGE performance differences. It's mostly in the space of 20% for NVIDIA in top models and even less if you compare 6800 with 3070 (usually around 10%). Which is hardly game-breaking and for a first try from AMD's side of things, very well done. Especially that they didn't even waste silicon to create completely separate units for denoising and RT but integrated them all into the shaders - hence AMD cards can be cheaper (as production cost is lower) and also use considerably less power. Something for something, really.
However, the linked benchmark works ridiculously bad on current GPUs (irrelevant of brand), just showing that we are far away from actual full RT in games and sadly many sponsored games are just a showcase of reflections instead of actual good art and using RT properly to improve things instead of tanking performance in a show-off. Gladly, that is slowly changing for the better. We don't need all surfaces to be reflective, we want games to look more real or just artistically better. Personally, I love the idea of a good GI (like we could see in Minecraft mods for few years now or new Metro) much more than reflections, which in real life you don't even notice most of the time. Hence new Metro looks really nice, a good progress! I am looking forward to new titles, where hopefully artists will have more to say than marketing and sponsorship of specific effects.
I've tried Nvidia's sharpen and Sharpen+ and have seen performance reduced by about 10%-15% which is unacceptable compared to AMD's RIS which only loses about 1%. I know most Nvidia trolls stay silent on this and try to bury this bit of info though.
Last edited:
FSR itself also has a performance hit, though - comparing to standard bilinear scaler (that itself should be a proof enough that it is NOT a bilinear scaler, especially that CAS/RIS has minimal performance hit). But with 1440p and higher (4k+ especially) it's a worth tradeoff. And you're right, hence I didn't use NVIDIA sharpening on 2070S, it had way too hight performance hit for what it offered. Instead in-game CAS worked much faster.
But that is the point though, when you say "use RT sensibly", you mean basically cut down effects such as seen in godfall, tomb raider, re village because rdna 2 and turing gpus + consoles can't handle the extra load the same way as ampere, ideally, developers should be pushing the effects/scaling whether hardware can handle it or not. Part of the beauty that has been lost with pc now is when you used to get a new gpu and being able to go back and replay a game you enjoyed but with the settings whacked up even more/maxed.... As long as players have the option to turn rt effects off or reduce them, this is a better way as opposed to not having the option in the first place.
People also keep bringing up about how nvidia wasted silicon and how nvidia users are paying extra for that but the reality is as of right now, nvidia are on par for rasterization (pretty much matched depending on the game), however, are comfortably ahead for anything ray tracing (and as shown, even from both microsofts and sonys game show case etc., ray tracing is not going anywhere, it's here to stay) and as for pricing, well, yes at MSRP, amd win if you "can" get a card at msrp and obviously depends on what the end user values more, be that more vram/better power efficiency or more feature rich on the whole/ray tracing.
Of course you are right, reflections in something like borderlands would be pointless but ray traced reflections can really add to a games art style/graphics such as cp 2077 (driving around during rain in a neon lit futuristic blade runner like city is something to behold), likewise for watch dogs legion and spiderman swinging around in new york.
Definitely global illumination is probably the best ray traced effect by far and metro shows this extremely well.
Not tried nvidias method myself as personally not a fan of sharpening (and I prefer a reshade preset over both amd and nvidias sharpening) but I've read that if you do this via the geforce filter/overlay, performance hit is ridiculous, however, through the nvidia control panel under manage 3d settings, there is little to no performance hit according to the nvidia subreddit. Might be worth checking out.
Sure, if they want to produce a benchmark or tech-demo - go ahead. If they want to produce actual games that people play AND use said effects (I've seen many statistics from various devs showing that most people turn RTX off to get higher FPS) then they need to use them sensibly, cut down to the hardware's capabilities etc. Because current hardware CAN NOT handle that yet. Use new tech, sure, but adjust it to current hardware. These days almost nobody will play such games (or remember about them) in 5-10 years on hardware that will let it run fully with high FPS. It makes no financial sense for devs to do that unless they simply want to use it as a test case or... someone pays them to do that. But then it's a paid tech-demo and not a game.
Those times are gone - there's so many games being released now it's hard to keep up even with current ones. There's simply no time and will for most of current gamers to think about older games, unless they were really good and not just had some fancy effects that new games have even better ones already. There's simply no point and hence devs do not want to waste money on such things - everything that takes time in development cost a lot of money.
If I play old games, I play them just because they were so good and there's nothing new like that anymore - not because my hardware can run them now when in the past it had trouble. And I've not seen recently even one game I want to play in the future because it has a bit lower FPS now.
MSRP is the only price we can compare, because you can't buy ANY card in MSRP for almost a year now, hence no other comparison can be done. And sure, you can get faster RT on NVIDIA but it's still not fast enough in most cases and it cost quite a bit more (even by MSRP). Someone has to pay for the R&D that NVIDIA did for enterprise and then shoehorned it into gaming cards, as a nice excuse to recoup some of that money from gamers too. It took them a long time to even persuade game devs to start using any of that and quite a while before it produced any worthwhile effects - just now we are getting games that are actually not just silly tech-demos sponsored by NVIDIA.
In CP2077 - they have both GI and reflections. As it's a city and has lots of windows, it makes sense. However, there's almost no interaction by player with these objects. Same with water puddles in Watchdogs (they're just flat surface with no interaction with cars driving over them etc.). I rather have fake reflections in such places (they really were good enough in most games I remember) and physics than fancier reflections but 0 physics nor interactions with it. And it requires really fast hardware as is anyway, costing lots of FPS for little gain (ot even loss - physics etc.).
It's a good thing to read what Unreal Engine devs said about why they opted for their own lighting tech instead of using DXR (RTX) - in short words because the latter is very inflexible and actually not that useful for devs who want creative freedom, proper physics implemented, destructible environment etc. And it's not fast enough either - UE software solution is faster than hardware DXR (on both vendors), though they can use that hardware to accelerate their solution even more. And that is what I call a proper creative thinking and improvement instead of empty "it just works" which is apparently not as great as NVIDIA wanted us to think.
For sure! It also uses much less resources than reflections, apparently (which are the most computationally expensive). Sure, some reflections here and there are good, but I am just fine (as mentioned above) with faked ones which we had good enough already in many games up till now, with SOME limitations that usually were hard to even notice - as long as such objects can be interracted with. GI can't be faked well, though - not in any dynamic way, with physics and proper interaction. RT is the only good solution for that, though there's many different methods that are much smarter than brute force method pushed forth by NVIDIA (as UE engine devs proven in practice).
As far as I recall, you might be right - I've read the latter is apparently a copy of AMDs code (1:1), hence almost no performance hit. But at least NVIDIA is smart and if they find a very good open-source solution (irrelevant of who came up with it), they implement it. As it should be.
As far as I recall, you might be right - I've read the latter is apparently a copy of AMDs code (1:1), hence almost no performance hit. But at least NVIDIA is smart and if they find a very good open-source solution (irrelevant of who came up with it), they implement it. As it should be.
I thought you had to at least credit the original developer if you use and release software based on the open source code. That is a requirement afaik yet Nvidia hasn't done that.
I don't know the exact licensing and we'll likely never know if they didn't just go and actually bought it from AMD quietly, or maybe even they did credit them somewhere inside the code that's not visible in the panel. vOv
Depends on how you look at it really, ampere owners along with dlss/fsr has the ability to enjoy intensive ray tracing now (obviously some people hate dlss/fsr as they see it as a crutch but thankfully for them, they have the choice to turn it off and reduce graphical effects) and have for the last 8/9 months now.
Suppose it depends on the game and user, the one I remember the best for going back to enjoy with new hardware was crysis and more recently rdr 2 and gta 5 with redux/tons of mods and I'll probably fire up rdr 2 again when dlss lands so I can enjoy it with settings whacked up a bit further and without the TAA ghosting/vaseline effect.
Except you can buy 30xx FE cards at msrp pretty often as shown by the 30xx series thread on here, I signed up to dc alerts and got a 3080 FE @ msrp within 3 weeks, if I could have got the 6800xt at msrp at the time, I probably would have tbh as do prefer amd on the whole, however, having used ray tracing and nvidia sponsoring the games I care about, kind of glad I went nvidia this time round, sure it was a bit more than than the 6800xt msrp price but for me, the extra price for better ray tracing and having dlss for the past 8/9 months was worth it and already paid of (and we still have far more to come such as crysis 2 and 3 rtx, witcher 3 rtx [game bored me to tears but interested in giving it a go for the tech showcase], dying light 2, bf 2042, the ascent etc. etc.)
The ascent should be an interesting title as it seems it is a nvidia sponsored title but at the same time, microsoft look to have been involved in it heavily:
Horses for courses I suppose, personally I find the reflections disappearing just because of a slight camera angle change extremely immersion breaking, which is even more obvious after having seen ray traced reflections.
No doubt UE 5 will be better but as it is right now, rtx ray tracing is still better for developers workflow too as shown by 4a recorded video comparison, the amount of time and effort they have to put into rasterization method was crazy and still nowhere as good as the ray tracing implementation, not to mention, it ran better.
Not sure where that is coming from as the path tracer in Quake 2 RTX has no problem handling dynamic environments/physics, the only downside with it so far is dealing with the visual noise from the relatively low ray count and update frequency - some dark areas especially can totally breakdown if you aren't careful but that is solvable with the hardware for a higher ray budget.
Some of the earlier attempts were a bit limited i.e. Battlefield but that was due to it being a bit new to everyone and additionally MS later added a more flexible approach to DXR.
I see you are one of those who don't actually read my posts and just substitute what you think I must be saying then berate me for something you've made up in your head.
Last edited:
Well I gotta give it to 4A, Metro Exodus EE with maxed out stuff is one hell of a looker game. I'm simply mesmerized by the graphics. Not going to lie...
And DLSS works crazy fine on this title, it makes the distances such a marvel to look at and there are no ghostings I can notice yet
its just crazy how it rebuilds thin details in the distance...
dunno about fancy reflections but i'm all in for rt lighting
And DLSS works crazy fine on this title, it makes the distances such a marvel to look at and there are no ghostings I can notice yet
its just crazy how it rebuilds thin details in the distance...
dunno about fancy reflections but i'm all in for rt lighting
As I said, there might be few single games like that. Majority do not fall into this category though.
We do not yet know performance or amount of RT in the coming games, so I won't comment before they arrive. However, in regards to FE cards - that source mainly dried out. There's been a bunch of nice drops of 3080FE, then 3070s too. Lower models and now 3070Tis are nowhere to be seen, 3080s also dried out as 3080Tis replaced them for NVIDIA. You can pretty much see in their behaviour that they want to push top models more than cheaper ones for as long as they can - much better money for them, this way.
AMD sadly doesn't sell at all to UK from their online shop - because of brexit shenanigans and all kinds of issues and cost associated with shipping from EU (their main hub is in Ireland). Nothing really to do with AMD as such, as on their website you still can now and then buy their cards for MSRP in EU, just not in UK - as my buddies from EU all got their GPUs from AMD's website, for MSRP. I got mine from OCUK (thanks Gibbo!), through this forums.
I haven't seen ascent before, looks fancy - thanks!
I'll keep an eye on it for sure. And it being on consoles indeed suggest that we might see proper RT, possibly DLSS too and maybe FSR as well? Could be first game with direct comparison between both vendors' tech.In regard to reflections - I've seen well done "fake" reflections which did not exhibit screen-space immersion-breaking issues. Screen-space reflections are easy to do but it's not the only way/method to do it. Then again, CP 2077 has RT and yet player's character is NOT reflecting in most places at all. That is very immersion breaking for me as well.
EU5 doesn't use rasterization to fake RT - they use software but still very real RT for GI, reflections etc. They just done it in much more smart and faster way than NVIDIA's brute-force way, with more flexibility. Some call it "fake" but if it gives pretty much identical results... I don't see why one would complain.
Though, as I said, it can utilise both AMD and NVIDIA hardware to speed up their method too. Still, it's a new engine and it'll take a while for devs to fully learn how to use it properly.
Last edited:
This is a question to games' devs and not me. That said, Quake 2 is a very special case, as it's not DXR and games use very different approach.
Well I gotta give it to 4A, Metro Exodus EE with maxed out stuff is one hell of a looker game. I'm simply mesmerized by the graphics. Not going to lie...
And DLSS works crazy fine on this title, it makes the distances such a marvel to look at and there are no ghostings I can notice yet
its just crazy how it rebuilds thin details in the distance...
dunno about fancy reflections but i'm all in for rt lighting
Game indeed looks awesome but... maybe it's the filter, some post-process or maybe DLSS, I can't tell for sure - but your screens are very soft looking. I wouldn't call it blurry, just very soft looking. Nothing is really sharp, not even close-by textures. This is where people seem to have issues with DLSS, it looks fine but makes everything look much softer. Same issues people had with TAA in the past and FXAA before that, etc. I reckon applying extra sharpening would fix it here. It's still not a bad look and from a bit further away (like playing on a big TV few m away) it would look 100% fine, but sitting up close to a big monitor, it's very visible.