• 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.

Poll: How do you game? Upscaling or native? (updated poll choices - 24/12, revote!)

How do you game?

  • Total voters
    237
Aegis said:
Supersampling (which is what DLDSR is doing) is always going to look better, but since I typically run my 4090 at 60% power, it's just a waste of resources for me.

'Better' is also highly subjective - MSAA in Forza Horizon 5 doesn't completely eliminate jaggies in the image but it is noticeably more 'native' looking than DLSS in FH5 (which is visibly softer).

Overall though, I think the quality of DLSS is excellent and I do miss it when it's not available.
Click to expand...

Has a 4090 and runs it at 60% power.... what? :p

Thing with DLSS as well is sometimes the stock/default option is worse and not as good as native but this is why I like DLSS as you can switch out the files for the newer/better ones as well as changing the preset to what works and looks best, which can be the difference between it looking worse than native or better than native.


RDR 2 first dlss implementation was pretty poor in terms of the edges i.e. shimmering but switching the dlss file to 2.5.1 or above fixed this issue which resulted in it looking better than native in my experience.

It obviously all comes down to what people value for IQ too i.e.

- less shimmering, aliasing, jaggies and better temporal stability and to be the best here, this can sometimes result in a softer looking image and sometimes, ghosting
- 100% clarity and sharpness with zero ghosting and to be the best here, this can result in jaggies, shimmering and aliasing

I'm very sensitive to shimmering, jaggies and overall temporal stability, seeing shimmering etc. ruins the immersion for me so this is why SMAA, MSAA and so on is a complete no go and most games TAA is bad especially at resolutions less than 4k thus dlss is the best out of all options for my needs.
 
3080 1440p native , if not DLSS quality, and depends on game min for single player I'd want at least 60fps as high as I can go with settings
The Last of Us maybe its better now, depending on area at times wasnt smooth maxed 1440p, maxed with DLSS quality the shimmering annoyed me so instead went with native high preset and being honest I couldnt tell the difference between ultra and high graphically
 
Last edited:
Depends on the game. I play @1080 with my 3060Ti and some games are fine using dlss quality IMO.

I've played Hitman and Darktide with dlss through choice. Darktide IMO is kinda required because the game 'crawls' with their AA on whereas dlss doesn't have that issue.

I've enabled DLSS with Starfield and Remnant 2 because the games, IMO, ran poorly without it that it needed the performance boost to make the game enjoyable - yes they're both CPU limited in places too.

I've tried DLSS in Vermintide 2 and No Mans Sky and it caused issues in both so disabled it. As did DLAA - actually I seem to recall DLAA was worse in NMS.

I've tried FSR in Hitman (more as a test vs dlss) and looked at how far I could drop the settings in both to see how both DLSS and FSR performed. FSR was worse, and dropped off faster. I was actually impressed with DLSS lowest setting in hitman - no I wouldn't play it as I DLSS availble but it was interesting to see. Not sure I'd choose to play with FSR or not as I noted that DLSS was better so didn't really give it a go.

I've tried FSR (V1 i think) in Anno 1800, and I don't remember any issues TBH, but I didn't leave it enabled and I'm not sure why.

At the end of the day - I play with what i think looks better, generally 1920x1080 with dlss quality I don't notice as i don't side by side compare and spot the differences, I take the image as I see it and decide if it looks alright. Then I go back to enjoying the game.
 
I think anyone in there right mind would like Native with good AA and high fps. Sometimes fps ain't high enough so upscaling it is or drop settings. Sometimes the AA solution is not up to scratch and upscaling does it better. If you had all three where they needed to be then i doubt anyone is turning on Dlss.

It's all situational to the game your playing but Native is what most people would prefer imo.
 
Last edited:
I prefer native, however if performance is not great, then DLSS Quality if its available, dependent on game, is employed. It can still cause some bad artifacting though in some titles or glitching, so it's definitely a 'when performance doesn't quite feel right' AND 'when DLSS doesn't cause annoying issues' option.

I am definitely a prefer to play without upscaling kinda guy though where possible.
 
Last edited:
TheRealDeal said:
I think anyone in there right mind would like Native with good AA and high fps. Sometimes fps ain't high enough so upscaling it is or drop settings. Sometimes the AA solution is not up to scratch and upscaling does it better. If you had all three where they needed to be then i doubt anyone is turning on Dlss.

It's all situational to the game your playing but Native is what most people would prefer imo.
Click to expand...

Exactly which is why I said this is aimed at what you are mostly using for your day to day gaming, not what your preference is. It would be the equivalent to creating a thread asking what your preferred fps is, obviously everyone is going to want as high of a fps as possible (well except console gamers who prefer 30 fps........ :p) but reality is, most are probably gaming at 60-80 fps range or even less, especially if not using upscaling at high res.
 
GPU: 3070
Resolution: 1440p 240Hz

I haven't used DLSS or FSR much, though I do test them out for performance/visual comparisons on occasion. I generally prefer to stick with native.
 
Nexus18 said:
Has a 4090 and runs it at 60% power.... what? :p
Click to expand...
It's hooked up to a 4k LG OLED - if I get 90+ fps at max settings in most of my games (which I do), why burn extra kW if I don't need to? (the 4090 is wildly efficient) - the only game I have to bump up the power on is Cyberpunk.
 
7800xt 1440p

Native if possible, most of the games i play don't support upscaling or don't need it for good framerates.
 
GPU : Vega 56
Resolution : 1080p

Normally, native with the more demanding graphics settings being tweaked to get the game looking as shiny as possible without huge fps drops.

With Cyberpunk, I found that FSR allowed my ancient PC to hold 50 fps at tweaked Medium settings and still look good.

Obviously, nowhere how shiny a high-end current PC with £1,000 of GPU would make the game look.
 
RTX 3090 with 4k @120hz.

depends on the game, I play varying types, some easy to hit 120 FPS, others such as Cyberpunk or Starfield, fortunately most the demanding's ones have some form of upscaling. In those cases will flick on DLSS, go for quality is usually enough to get decent FPS numbers. For me in those games, do not need a consistent 120 FPS, but 60 or so + is fine so will dial in to try and hit that as a baseline.
 
6900XT (as in sig)
1440P res.
Native as long as my FPS isn't struggling, otherwise I'll use FSR. Only exception to this is CP2077 where I use XeSS. :)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom