really getting fed up with the posts stating RTX/DLSS does not work this gen

[gpuerrilla]

Yeah fair enough, but it has taken majority if not by the time it is done it will have taken the whole of the 2000 series product life cycle to have got to this point. As I suspected from the start, the 2000 series is beta testing Nvidia's stuff where you pay for the privilege of doing so. I thank everyone who has done this and look forward to the 3000 series

theres a guy on here touting thats why AMD gpu's are gash because of same logic with drivers..

 

[zola25]

^ That's a fair comment @TNA, for whatever reason the huge amount of games that promised DLSS support and to a lesser degree RTX have yet to materialise.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Yeah fair enough, but it has taken majority if not by the time it is done it will have taken the whole of the 2000 series product life cycle to have got to this point. As I suspected from the start, the 2000 series is beta testing Nvidia's stuff where you pay for the privilege of doing so. I thank everyone who has done this and look forward to the 3000 series

No problem, looking forward to the 3s too

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

DLSS in 2020: "Absolutely Stunning Results, This could be The Game Changer, AMD needs to respond in a big way. We can easily recommend DLSS 2.0 as it's just a free performance button"

https://www.techspot.com/amp/article/1992-nvidia-dlss-2020/

So it only took 8 months after the game to be released for it to actually work properly!!

BTW,Techspot and Hardware Unboxed are the same people,and they pointed out another problem - even if DLSS has improved a number of earlier games with DLSS have not had any improvements(this from a video a few weeks ago),and that the main problem is games need to be doing it properly close to launch....months later most of the playerbase would have moved on.

 

[TNA]

theres a guy on here touting thats why AMD gpu's are gash because of same logic with drivers..

^ That's a fair comment @TNA, for whatever reason the huge amount of games that promised DLSS support and to a lesser degree RTX have yet to materialise.

No problem, looking forward to the 3s too

 

[Grim5]

BTW,Techspot and Hardware Unboxed are the same people,and they pointed out another problem - even if DLSS has improved a number of earlier games with DLSS have not had any improvements(this from a video a few weeks ago),and that the main problem is games need to be doing it properly close to launch....months later most of the playerbase would have moved on.

It hasn't taken 8 months to add DLSS into wolfenstein, they could have done it earlier. They delayed it because they were building DLSS 2.0 and once it was finished they went ahead and released it in game.

DLSS 2.0 fixes basically all the complaints from last year. Blurry graphics? Nope looks like native OR better. Only runs at certain resolutins? Nope now runs on everything for every RTX GPU.

As pointed out, DLSS 1.0 and 1.5 required a lot of manual input from the developer and if they want to upgrade to DLSS 2.0 they need to go back into their game code and remove all traces of DLSS 1.0 and 1.5.

Once thats done Nvidia can add DLSS 2.0 via a driver update.

I don't see it happening, DLSS is 2.0 is going to be forward facing - Nvidia said DLSS 2.0 profiles will be released in game ready drivers, which kind of implies for new games on release day rather than going back and revisiting older titles. Developers in any case won't go back on their old games now to rework DLSS.

It actually makese sense that DLSS 1.0 and 1.5 was pushed upon RTX2000 owners to beta test. This was Nvidia's plan all along - they knew adding raster performance would be hard since their dies are getting ridiculously big. And they figured it would take time, but they could make an AI system that would give generational performance boosts without negatively affecting the graphics. It took longer than expected but they did it and now with DLSS 2.0 ready to roll RTX3000 is ready for prime time.

theres a guy on here touting thats why AMD gpu's are gash because of same logic with drivers..

AMD has always had driver issues, but yeah why not it would make sense that Navi is just a beta test for AMD's driver team. Thanks to 5700/xt owners for beta testing those trashy drivers

 

[gpuerrilla]

AMD has already had driver issues, but yeah why not it would make sense that Navi is just a beta test for AMD's driver team. Thanks to 5700/xt owners for beta testing those trashy drivers

In context, this person was slating Radeon cards as they detested the gall that drivers should mature like 'fine wine' and would not be buying them as they wanted the performance out of the box on day 1. Of course it makes the audience chortle because there goes nvidia with their pants down beta testing the RTX cards which this person was slinging the mud from - lol.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It hasn't taken 8 months to add DLSS into wolfenstein, they could have done it earlier. They delayed it because they were building DLSS 2.0 and once it was finished they went ahead and released it in game.

DLSS 2.0 fixes basically all the complaints from last year. Blurry graphics? Nope looks like native OR better. Only runs at certain resolutins? Nope now runs on everything for every RTX GPU.

As pointed out, DLSS 1.0 and 1.5 required a lot of manual input from the developer and if they want to upgrade to DLSS 2.0 they need to go back into their game code and remove all traces of DLSS 1.0 and 1.5.

Once thats done Nvidia can add DLSS 2.0 via a driver update.

I don't see it happening, DLSS is 2.0 is going to be forward facing - Nvidia said DLSS 2.0 profiles will be released in game ready drivers, which kind of implies for new games on release day rather than going back and revisiting older titles. Developers in any case won't go back on their old games now to rework DLSS.

It actually makese sense that DLSS 1.0 and 1.5 was pushed upon RTX2000 owners to beta test. This was Nvidia's plan all along - they knew adding raster performance would be hard since their dies are getting ridiculously big. And they figured it would take time, but they could make an AI system that would give generational performance boosts without negatively affecting the graphics. It took longer than expected but they did it and now with DLSS 2.0 ready to roll RTX3000 is ready for prime time.



AMD has always had driver issues, but yeah why not it would make sense that Navi is just a beta test for AMD's driver team. Thanks to 5700/xt owners for beta testing those trashy drivers

You missed this video which Hardware Unboxed/Techspot did last week which is what the article is based on:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScAQ5Of1LfE

Control was launched 8 months ago,and Wolfenstein:Young Blood in July 2019 - that is the two games they tested.

Also the article says the following:

Clearly, a year and a half after DLSS launched, even Nvidia would admit this hasn’t gone to plan. This is almost an identical situation to Nvidia’s RTX ray tracing. The feature has been heavily advertised as a 'must have' for PC gamers, but the first few games to support the tech didn’t impress, and it's taken nearly a year to get half-decent game implementations that as of today can be counted on one hand.

DLSS overpromised at launch over a year ago...

Just like with ray tracing, it’s nice to eventually get DLSS support in games, but doing so weeks or months after the games' launch is almost worthless. We can’t imagine too many people going back to play Youngblood months after release specifically for DLSS, even less so having received mediocre reviews.

We have no doubt that DLSS will become a fantastic inclusion in games beyond today, but we've got to say that looking back Nvidia went too far on promising what they were unable to deliver. It was common to see promotion slides like the above, showing off the magical free performance DLSS would provide.

The huge slate of DLSS games is almost laughable in 2020 with most of these never getting DLSS. Those are some major releases that Nvidia advertised would support DLSS but never came to fruition. We asked them about this and their response was that initial DLSS implementations were “more difficult than we expected, and the quality was not where we wanted it to be” so they decided to focus on improving DLSS instead of adding it to more games.

Moreover,DLSS needs machine learning to improve itself,and they looked at a few games,and didn't have any change in quality since soon after launch. That is the thing with machine learning,the more you train an ANN,the better the result will be,so that means companies have to be invested to push Nvidia to do this before the game launches,and continue running iterations after that.

So,it doesn't invalidate what I said,ie,the DLSS algorithms pretty much needs to be done and dusted by the game launch,or soon after...if it takes months its not going to matter as most sales of games are in the first month or so.

This is what even Hardware Unboxed/Techspot even pointed out.

Also with the huge number of releases each year,it makes me wonder how many games Nvidia can be running weeks and months before release to make sure everything is OK, within the launch window for a game. It makes me think its mostly going to be big AAA titles sponsored by Nvidia which will have this at launch.

This is the big disadvantage of machine learning assisted techniques such as DLSS,it requires time to do things,whereas normal upscaling might have less optimised algorithms(worse image quality) but can be applied to all games from day one,and old games too.

 

[gpuerrilla]

Control was launched 8 months ago,and Wolfenstein:Young Blood in July 2019 - that is the two games they tested.

Clearly, a year and a half after DLSS launched, even Nvidia would admit this hasn’t gone to plan. This is almost an identical situation to Nvidia’s RTX ray tracing. The feature has been heavily advertised as a 'must have' for PC gamers, but the first few games to support the tech didn’t impress, and it's taken nearly a year to get half-decent game implementations that as of today can be counted on one hand.

DLSS overpromised at launch over a year ago...

I mentioned it before and will again, if it wasnt nvidia pulling the tricks people would be haranguing like mad men about what a flop it was. In theory they are nice features but as unique selling points it was clearly a gen too early to champion it and not a must have.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I mentioned it before and will again, if it wasnt nvidia pulling the tricks people would be haranguing like mad men about what a flop it was. In theory they are nice features but as unique selling points it was clearly a gen too early to champion it and not a must have.

Well we have seen all these exclusive features AMD and Nvidia have promised,the reality isn't almost as great as you think it is and that is at least from my observations from the last 20 years. As usual when any new technology is released it makes more sense to wait for the 2nd generation or even 3rd generation before jumping onboard.

 

[Poneros]

Promises have ZERO value when failure to hold your word has no consequence attached to it.

People should feel free to shill DLSS all day & all night once every DLSS game has something on par with what's in YB & it's out at release or within a week. Additionally, DLSS in games with HDR is WORTHLESS because it's borked, and HDR is worth more than both RT & DLSS put together. Until they fix all that it remains a weak effort.

PS: Don't expect older DLSS titles to get 2.0. Metro Exodus devs did AMA today and basically said 'no way, too much rework needed'.

 

[Grim5]

Hardware Unboxed just did the latest Q&A video where one viewer asked how they would benchmark DLSS for new product releases.

And what they said is, they'd like to see another 1 or 2 games running DLSS 2.0 just to see that there is no image quality loss - but once that is confirmed they will use DLSS by default - as in any game that has DLSS 2.0 they will run DLSS ON when testing against AMD.

So unless AMD comes up with its own version there may very well be upcoming games where mid range Nvidia card is beating high end AMD card because of DLSS and that's how reviewers will report it by always running with DLSS ON when reporting frames per second

 

[Rroff]

Hardware Unboxed just did the latest Q&A video where one viewer asked how they would benchmark DLSS for new product releases.

And what they said is, they'd like to see another 1 or 2 games running DLSS 2.0 just to see that there is no image quality loss - but once that is confirmed they will use DLSS by default - as in any game that has DLSS 2.0 they will run DLSS ON when testing against AMD.

So unless AMD comes up with its own version there may very well be upcoming games where mid range Nvidia card is beating high end AMD card because of DLSS and that's how reviewers will report it by always running with DLSS ON when reporting frames per second

Be an interesting situation but if DLSS ever truly provided a 1:1 reproduction of the same resolution then including performance results without it would purely be an academic exercise.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Hardware Unboxed just did the latest Q&A video where one viewer asked how they would benchmark DLSS for new product releases.

And what they said is, they'd like to see another 1 or 2 games running DLSS 2.0 just to see that there is no image quality loss - but once that is confirmed they will use DLSS by default - as in any game that has DLSS 2.0 they will run DLSS ON when testing against AMD.

So unless AMD comes up with its own version there may very well be upcoming games where mid range Nvidia card is beating high end AMD card because of DLSS and that's how reviewers will report it by always running with DLSS ON when reporting frames per second

https://youtu.be/m9072fKeka0?t=1432

They said they would extensively test each game BEFORE each review for image quality,and then test the game with and without DLSS. Also they said even DLSS 2.0 does reduce image quality like VRS does,but if it was only "slight" it would be good enough in most cases,hence why they would test it anyway as another data point.

They never said they would stop testing without DLSS, and they said if it was ever forced on at a driver level,they would do even more extensive image quality tests,as they are worried companies might cheat and reduce image quality.The same goes for VRS,and that is something which is being supported on the console GPUs too.

 

[TNA]

Blurry graphics? Nope looks like native OR better.

Lol. Unlikely. How the hell is it going to make it better than native?

Would love to see that magic

 

[Mauller]

Lol. Unlikely. How the hell is it going to make it better than native?

Would love to see that magic

It only looks better at times when the TAA being used is poor to begin with.

I would like to see DLSS 2X 2.0 available ad an AA option running at native.

In situations with no screen blurring post processing effects, DLSS cannot compete with native.

 

[Grim5]

Lol. Unlikely. How the hell is it going to make it better than native?

Would love to see that magic

makes it sharper than native

 

[TNA]

makes it sharper than native

So sharper means overall better?

I have been going on about 4K being much sharper and better since 2014 and many here were like nah. They come out with stuff like I had a 4K and 1440p side by side and could not tell the difference. Only the past year or so have people changed their tune slowly

It only looks better at times when the TAA being used is poor to begin with.

I would like to see DLSS 2X 2.0 available ad an AA option running at native.

In situations with no screen blurring post processing effects, DLSS cannot compete with native.

I avoid using any form of aa at 4K whenever I can. Though some games need it still. I guess for those using DLSS would be beneficial.

 

[Grim5]

So sharper means overall better?

They come out with stuff like I had a 4K and 1440p side by side and could not tell the difference.

those people need glasses

 

[willhub]

So sharper means overall better?

I have been going on about 4K being much sharper and better since 2014 and many here were like nah. They come out with stuff like I had a 4K and 1440p side by side and could not tell the difference. Only the past year or so have people changed their tune slowly



I avoid using any form of aa at 4K whenever I can. Though some games need it still. I guess for those using DLSS would be beneficial.

I find GTA V I can get away with no AA at 4K.

Weirdly, think it was Kingdom Come, I think it was with AA on rather than off the performance was ever so slightly higher, not sure it happens on other games.