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

[Nexus18]

If no different, why change? What does ownership matter?

One of those things with stats, spin them how you like. Only half of nvidia users use upscaling, no amd users use it. So 75% of users aren't upscaling.

The changes on the surface seem to be to dilute the native vote and improve the look of the dlss bar.

Because it's interesting to see where the votes are coming from?

How's it's diluting the stats? The outcome is still the same or are you suggesting that people can't do basic maths and/or don't like seeing dlss with a bigger bar than last time?

It would be interesting to see if the native Nvidia owners are mostly made up of non rtx owners though but CBA redoing the poll, I know at least 3 of the votes are rtx owners though.

At the end of the day, it doesn't bother me what people use, I use dlss as it simply is better than native as evidenced by several sources and my very own testing (which no one has been able to debunk with anything to show otherwise other than cherry picked scenes or/and using old/worse versions of dlss) as shown in my videos when it comes to temporal stability and adding more detail (especially combined with dldsr). If people want to use native for whatever reason, that's their choice, I just find it hilarious when people keep saying native is better yet there is nothing to back this up unless the above in brackets is done.

Of course if I was playing older games more often, I wouldn't have any choice but to use native (well I would use dldsr since old games will be easy to run) but alas I don't.

 

[Bill Turnip]

Ah, let's not fight on Christmas! I'm happy using DLSS, just don't see that it is an improvement over native IQ in actual gameplay in my experience, but it's not much if any downgrade either at quality level. But DLSS quality is not the point of this thread, it's only a poll with moving goalposts... Sorry, answers

 

[Grim5]

The most surprising thing to me is that no one uses FSR according to the poll

AMD may as well shut it down

 

[Yulaw]

Because it's interesting to see where the votes are coming from?

How's it's diluting the stats? The outcome is still the same or are you suggesting that people can't do basic maths and/or don't like seeing dlss with a bigger bar than last time?

It would be interesting to see if the native Nvidia owners are mostly made up of non rtx owners though but CBA redoing the poll, I know at least 3 of the votes are rtx owners though.

At the end of the day, it doesn't bother me what people use, I use dlss as it simply is better than native as evidenced by several sources and my very own testing (which no one has been able to debunk with anything to show otherwise other than cherry picked scenes or/and using old/worse versions of dlss) as shown in my videos when it comes to temporal stability and adding more detail (especially combined with dldsr). If people want to use native for whatever reason, that's their choice, I just find it hilarious when people keep saying native is better yet there is nothing to back this up unless the above in brackets is done.

Of course if I was playing older games more often, I wouldn't have any choice but to use native (well I would use dldsr since old games will be easy to run) but alas I don't.

Native is better.

 

[Nexus18]

Ah, let's not fight on Christmas! I'm happy using DLSS, just don't see that it is an improvement over native IQ in actual gameplay in my experience, but it's not much if any downgrade either at quality level. But DLSS quality is not the point of this thread, it's only a poll with moving goalposts... Sorry, answers

In what way don't you see it being better than native from your experience? General curiosity.

I suppose I'm more picky than most when it comes to temporal stability especially gaming on a non matte finished qd-oled 175hz display where shimmering and so on is much more noticeable.

The most surprising thing to me is that no one uses FSR according to the poll

AMD may as well shut it down

Yeah this just confirms what I've been saying for ages, it's all very well making things free and oss for the masses but it's a bit pointless when no one wants to use it. I think fsr will improve at some point but as shown, dlss at lesser Res and lower presets is miles ahead now so they really need to focus on it and not expect the Devs to do the work for them as they aren't going to spend the time on it without amds time

 

[Bill Turnip]

In what way don't you see it being better than native from your experience? General curiosity

No IQ improvement in gameplay, when playing a game. I'm also not noticing much in the way of deterioration, just not an improvement.

 

[Nexus18]

No IQ improvement in gameplay, when playing a game. I'm also noticing much in the way of deterioration, just not an improvement.

Do you not see an improvement in motion fluidity/smoothness with the higher FPS when using dlss? (Can't recall if you have a high refresh rate display or not)

 

[matt1]

I always try to use native but only have a 3060 Ti at the moment so for 1440p do have to sometimes use DLSS

Same card for me but play 1080p (native) and try and hit 200+ fps on my 360Hz monitor

 

[JediFragger]

The most surprising thing to me is that no one uses FSR according to the poll

AMD may as well shut it down

Tbf their is one vote for it atm, name.....Mr Magoo

 

[Bill Turnip]

Do you not see an improvement in motion fluidity/smoothness with the higher FPS when using dlss? (Can't recall if you have a high refresh rate display or not)

Yes, frame rate is higher like I said, but the actual picture quality hasn't improved, if that makes sense. Similar libel (edit - meant to say still!) images, but more of them. On an AW3823 so 144hz and g-sync ultimate, but I don't notice an improvement beyond frame rate.

 

[tommybhoy]

When Polls Go Bad.

It's 50-50 Nv users-reason being, not many users voted are running DLSS on 30/80's, they're on lower 20/30 series gpus@1080p and DLSS looks horrible, my lad always ran his 3070 and 4070@240Hz@native 1080p.

DLSS@1440p, I ran my 3080 and wasn't impressed because it simply can't compete with a far superior native output.

(Iirc opethdisciple stated DLSS CP was poor on his 4080 too@1440p)

My lad's 4070 is now running 49" CRG9 Dual-QHD 120Hz Odyssey and using DLSS because he needs the boost it brings and happy to take the IQ compromise, although he won't touch DLSS3 with a bargepole-his words-FG is**** because he's a twitch gamer and says the lag is a no go for his playing styles.

@4K DLSS is needed when you have a 3080/4070* because they're not the best@4K so they need all the help they can get and justifies their current gpu.

4K 408/90 DLSS is when you go all in and get the full on experience so I get why they rate it so much, it's the only way to experience everything.

4K FSR is doable game by game because even though it's no where near as good as DLSS, it isn't remotely as bad as some cheerleaders make it out to be, it can be used, but again native is better.

I don't have any issue with DLSS/FSR, if it works for you great, they are both useful if you need the fps boost no matter the gpu you are running.



Whenever this discussion comes up, I don't insist native is better, I always say I prefer native-which always resulted on multiple posts(usually from the same user) of vids for example when they think HUB/Daniel Owen say ''DLSS is better than native' because that's what they wanted to hear...

When's the next poll update btw?

 

[Dicehunter]

I think it depends on the game and the engine it's running, Some games will still have pixel crawling or stair stepping no matter if you play at 4K+ with AA enabled, Crysis 3 is a good example, Run it at 4K with AA and it still has pixel crawling but enable DLSS Quality and it goes away completely with the image quality looking the exact same in 99.99% of the game as native.

I quite like Bryan Catanzaro of Nvidia's take on running something at native resolution that it is a highly inefficient use of resources

 

[tommybhoy]

I think it depends on the game and the engine it's running, Some games will still have pixel crawling or stair stepping no matter if you play at 4K+ with AA enabled, Crysis 3 is a good example, Run it at 4K with AA and it still has pixel crawling but enable DLSS Quality and it goes away completely with the image quality looking the exact same in 99.99% of the game as native.

I don't disagree with that, it can provide better AA in some cases, but, that doesn't negate the loss of IQ with added ghosting, blur, artifacts amongst other things in the rest of the scene.

Waiting for the next DLSS2 version so we can hear all about the improvements in reduced ghosting etc like we have since it launched.

Edit

There's no denying upscaling is here and it's only going to get better and better, how long it takes to surpass native, idk, but when it does get there, I'll be running Nv again-if I'm not already.

 

[Grim5]

When the conclusion doesn't match the data my bruski

 

[TNA]

@tommybhoy Do you not use DLDSR with DLSS? That is how you get the visible boost in image quality vs native. On 3440x1440 anyway. For me it gets boosted to 5160x2160 and using Quality DLSS you are back down to rendered being 3440x1440 anyway. But it ends up looking so much better.

Give it a try with an open mind dude. Though you already being on 4K you may not see as much of a boost in image quality that I see. There should be some though. Even looks better than native doing the above using DLSS at Performance. Try it on a few games

 

[Nexus18]

I think it depends on the game and the engine it's running, Some games will still have pixel crawling or stair stepping no matter if you play at 4K+ with AA enabled, Crysis 3 is a good example, Run it at 4K with AA and it still has pixel crawling but enable DLSS Quality and it goes away completely with the image quality looking the exact same in 99.99% of the game as native.

I quite like Bryan Catanzaro of Nvidia's take on running something at native resolution that it is a highly inefficient use of resources

Which is what I have been saying for ages

Most games have awful shimmering, aliasing and jaggies which to me is extremely immersion breaking and then as a result, most games use TAA to solve this but alas it is poorly implemented. I get the hate for TAA, there's no doubt in motion it doesn't provide a perfectly clear image compared to likes of MSAA, SMAA essentially non TAA based methods but the problem is as evidenced without TAA AA, the games can just downright look broken. I much rather take a softer image with TAA over distracting things like buildings and grass field looking like they have an ant problem. Pick your poision.

When the conclusion doesn't match the data my bruski

Doesn't fit the narrative so will be ignored as per usual

HUBs testing was so flawed here too as the issues they picked out with the games would have been fixed had they updated the dlss version to 2.5.1 or above but alas it's apparently such a hardship to switch out one file

One thing which few don't get either is that post processing effects can negatively impact upscaling output as also evidenced e.g. motion blur, CA, bloom, lens flare, DOF (also impacts frame gen quality too). HUB IIRC had DOF etc. running as for the guardians of the galaxy (seperate video) comparison and it also affected spiderman too, they mentioned issues with DLSS and outer edges, this was because DOF was running (which is down to dlss or dof being rendered at the wrong time in the pipeline according to Alex). Personally I and I think most pc gamers disable such effects.....

At the end of the day, it's a case of the usual again, cherry pick or/and use old data. Could go and post every single review where PCGH, computerbase, tPU, DF, Daniel own, gamer nexus, oc3d have (and it wouldn't be hard as 90% of the time these days, they all come to the same conclusion, dlss is usually better "overall" than native) but it would just be ignored/claimed otherwise with nothing to back up to debunk these sources evidence except for "trust me bro" e.g. look at how easy this is:

 

[Nexus18]

Yes, frame rate is higher like I said, but the actual picture quality hasn't improved, if that makes sense. Similar libel (edit - meant to say still!) images, but more of them. On an AW3823 so 144hz and g-sync ultimate, but I don't notice an improvement beyond frame rate.

Would be good if someone could create a test like this where one side used dlss and the other was native:

TestUFO: Framerates-versus

Animation on Blur Busters UFO Motion Tests for testing displays and monitors.

www.testufo.com

Obviously we have side by side comparisons on youtube but youtube compression and then being capped to 60 fps doesn't show the improvement in motion clarity, smoothness and so on.

I'm presuming that most people who vote native are also not using TAA and instead some other form of aa in order to avoid all these "issues" with dlss as generally the issues in dlss will also be there and most likely even worse with TAA, if not, well....

EDIT:

PS.

4K FSR is doable game by game because even though it's no where near as good as DLSS, it isn't remotely as bad as some cheerleaders make it out to be, it can be used, but again native is better.

Poll shows otherwise

 

[Nexus18]

BTW, this is a great video explaining the negatives and positives with TAA and why there are such poor implementations, which is why I mentioned this:

I'm presuming that most people who vote native are also not using TAA and instead some other form of aa in order to avoid all these "issues" with dlss as generally the issues in dlss will also be there and most likely even worse with TAA, if not, well....

 

[decto]

Can't vote... I prefer native but I will use DLSS Quality if the frame rate lags a little. I think a better question would be prefer native / prefer upscale

 

[eeii]

For me it all Depends on the game. I used FSR 2 quality with ray tracing and it was perfectly fine in cyberpunk. You just have to try it for yourself.