Soldato
But not all games support dlss..just under 300 I think support dlss2.
-
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.
It looks like the 'real' /affordable RDNA3 + next gen NV desktop launch won't launch until September. Thoughts?
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Nov 2017
- Posts
- 1,923
ASRock Radeon RX 7800 XT graphics card with 16GB VRAM spotted at EEC - VideoCardz.com
ASRock Radeon RX 7800 XT spotted at EEC Yet unreleased Radeon RX 7800 XT graphics card appears on Eurasian Economic Commission regulatory office. ASRock is preparing its first RX 7800 GPU, most likely based on the latest Navi 32 GPU. The card called Radeon RX 7800 XT Phantom Gaming is to...
videocardz.com
I'm sorry but unless the native AA implementation is total crap native > upscaling.
Again, I'm on 1080p, the worst resolution to use any kind of upscaling tool so I'm not the target for those tools.
If any brand wants my money, I'd rather have HDR emulation than upscaling. If DLSS works for you more power to you but I want the full fat supersampling, not the emulation.
Soldato
I think you just don't understand what im saying....
Try to read it slowly this time. If you target a specific framerate, using DLSS to get there will undoubtedly give you better image quality. You said you play at 1080p. Good, rendering at 1440p natively and then using DLSS on top will get you better image quality than native 1080p. Simple as that
And rendering at 1440p natively then downscaling gives even better quality, simple as that.
I'm not targeting a framerate, I'm defining what's acceptable from it and work from there. I mostly play older games so even my RX590 can handle 1440p downscaled in many cases.
Soldato
BUT LOWER FRAMERATE!!!???!?!
So to match that framerate you can render at 4k and use DLSS Q which will be better than native 1440p...
Last edited:
Man, if I can't get the 1% low at 30@1080p/1440p on a 3+ years old game it's time to get a new card rather than upscale.
Can we just agree to disagree? I played Doom 2 @15fps in the 1990s, it's very likely that I am much more tolerant than you to low framerates and we're looking at different things in the way we enjoy games.
Soldato
This has absolutely nothing to do with how tolerant you are to low framerates. No matter what framerate you want to play at DLSS will get you that framerate with better image quality.
Look Bencher, no upscaling tech will ever be as good as supersampling so please stop preaching the DLSS gospel at me.
I play old games on an old PC and very little in my current wishlist is going to give me performance issues so I'll likely start playing games where upscaling techs matter in 2025 or later.
Soldato
Im not preaching anything, just stating facts. 1440p + DLSS Q looks better than native 1080p with comparable performance. 4k DLDSR + DLSS Q looks better than supersampled native 1440p with comparable performance. DLSS just gives you better image quality when you are trying to match framerates. Apparently you don't like that fact, but what do you want me to do about it, pretend it's not true?
Last edited:
Soldato
I mean it's very straightforward, 1440 + DLSS Q looks much better than native 1080p while it offers very very similar framerates. That much cannot be argued with. Therefore supersampling native will not help you, cause you can supersample while using DLSS Q as well. Whoever argues the above is doing it on bad faith.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,158
Set it to maximum and if it's any lower it'll be a nice surprise
For 50xx, probably not till second half of 2024 at earliest.
Question is if we will get a "super" range this time though......
That's basically DLAA though.
Caporegime
What @Bencher is saying is right.
If you have a 1440P screen but not the muscle to run it DLSS can render the image at 1080P with near 1080P performance and up-scale it to 1440P to fit your screen resolution and you get near 1440P image quality.
If you have a 1440P screen but not the muscle to run it DLSS can render the image at 1080P with near 1080P performance and up-scale it to 1440P to fit your screen resolution and you get near 1440P image quality.
Soldato
Not really, DLDSR is much better than DLAA cause it uses higher quality LODs, since you are basically running the game at higher resolution. That's why I've said multiple times that native is "dead", in the sense that there is no reason to run any game in native resolution anymore. If it's framerate you are after enabling DLSS is basically a no brainer, if it's image quality you are after you go the supersample + DLSS way. No point in native anymore
DLAA isn't anywhere as good as DLDSR + DLSS, DLAA is just purely AA, basically dlss without the upscaling. This is native vs DLDSR & dlss:
And one from mrk:
System Shock - Imgsli
imgsli.com
Last edited:
Soldato
Holy crap, the difference in TLOU is huge.
I can see why the distortion might look better in some ways but I can also see several spots of oversharpening. If those are noticeable on my 1080p monitor I shudder to think on higher res...
That said, we're way off topic here so I suggest to bring this somewhere else.