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

[TNA]

Easy the native 1080p whoever says otherwise doesn't know what they looking for basically a console gamer am sorry. Its night and day!

LoadsaMoney thinks the dlss image looks better. Lol

Saved both images on my pc and had a look. The dlss ones look like they have fxaa on.

Maybe this game looks better in action. But the images used here look absolutely rubbish. Bit like grim5's posts as of late

 

[Grim5]

But her butt definitely looks good in the second one.
It's smudgy like fxaa on the first.

Saved both images on my pc and had a look. The dlss ones look like they have fxaa on.

Prefer the native 1080p. The 720p with dlss looks like apex legends did when i had to use lower res to increase frames.
Lots of artifacts in the dlss 50% version vs the 4k.

Easy the native 1080p whoever says otherwise doesn't know what they looking for basically a console gamer am sorry. Its night and day!

I agree, the main character looks better in the native image.
In the DLSS image, her hair looks smoother, less defined, as does the textures on her jacket and jeans.

Well you've all been tricked. Everyone said they preferred the "native 1080p" image... well I switched the images around - the image you all said you prefer is in fact DLSS @ 1080p, rendering up from native 720p. And the image you all said looked worse is the Native 1080p image.

So now that we've cut through the brand BIAS, we know that DLSS rendering from 720p to output 1080p pixels in fact is visually superior to Native 1080p

And yes the images were also switched in the 1440p example and once again you guys choose what you thought is native, but in fact is DLSS rendering up from 50% of 1440p

 

[shankly1985]

Ignore - I was wrong

 

[Grim5]

I don't believe you, prove I am wrong! They is no chance DLSS can make the image better than native res.
Why not show a full screenshot instead of cut down?

Not needed.

Here is the Source file so you can see I'm not lying about switching the images

https://imgsli.com/MTM3NDg

 

[shankly1985]

Man you fanboys are hilarious

https://imgsli.com/MTM3NDg

I was just about to edit my post and say I was wrong! I did not look at anything DLSS 2.0 until now and I am surprised how much better it really is in control.

And just to be clear here I wasn't posting before based on my preferring AMD over Nvidia I was simply posting what I thought was the best image and I was still correct! The DLSS was indeed better.

So I stand corrected.

 

[imginy]

Well you've all been tricked. Everyone said they preferred the "native 1080p" image... well I switched the images around - the image you all said you prefer is in fact DLSS @ 1080p, rendering up from native 720p. And the image you all said looked worse is the Native 1080p image.

So now that we've cut through the brand BIAS, we know that DLSS rendering from 720p to output 1080p pixels in fact is visually superior to Native 1080p

And yes the images were also switched in the 1440p example and once again you guys choose what you thought is native, but in fact is DLSS rendering up from 50% of 1440p

Yes we have all been tricked by using fxaa to make native look worse.

If dlss is good let it stand on it's own, there is no need to try and trick people into liking it by using fxaa on one and not the other and doing stupid stuff like lying about what picture is what.

I certainly don't have any sort of agenda here to make dlss seem worse than it is. The game looks terrible and running at stupid resolutions most people gave up years ago.

 

[Grim5]

Using FXAA to make the native look worse to prove a point.

That's just what the game looks like, what else can we say. I've seen heaps of people use TAA games to show off AMD RIS - whats the difference, if the game was developed for TAA (and most multiplatform games now are to deal with console performance issues around anti aliasing) then why complain, beats me... You know a lot of games also use film grain which DLSS happens to just about remove, so does RIS probably.

 

[Phixsator]

I was just about to edit my post and say I was wrong! I did not look at anything DLSS 2.0 until now and I am surprised how much better it really is in control.

And just to be clear here I wasn't posting before based on my preferring AMD over Nvidia I was simply posting what I thought was the best image and I was still correct! The DLSS was indeed better.

So I stand corrected.

What I simply do not understand is how DLSS is able to get what looks like more detail out of less. Look at the shadows on the "Native Res" picture. They look way more crude compared to the much softer rendering of "DLSS 2.0".

I personally have nothing against DLSS 2.0 if it can deliver better performance while keeping visuals crisp. I think that's a great value add for nvidia gpu owners. I just take issue with the methodology used to compare the solution to native res. TAA is such a smear/blur fest and I personally cannot stand that AA method. That said DLSS 2.0 seems like a very good improvement over the original implementation of DLSS. So kudos to nvidia for doing that I suppose.

 

[Stanners]

Final warning, if people can not post in a grown up manner, access will be removed.

 

[shankly1985]

What I simply do not understand is how DLSS is able to get what looks like more detail out of less. Look at the shadows on the "Native Res" picture. They look way more crude compared to the much softer rendering of "DLSS 2.0".

I personally have nothing against DLSS 2.0 if it can deliver better performance while keeping visuals crisp. I think that's a great value add for nvidia gpu owners. I just take issue with the methodology used to compare the solution to native res. TAA is such a smear/blur fest and I personally cannot stand that AA method. That said DLSS 2.0 seems like a very good improvement over the original implementation of DLSS. So kudos to nvidia for doing that I suppose.

DLSS is also acting like a sharpening tool its definitely making the image more sharp to make more detail stand out.

I would like to see this tested in more detail with what it's actually doing.

Take Radeon Image Sharpening you can also get extra detail from texture just like Grims images above.

I would like to test RIS more at lower resolution like native 1440p vs 75% 1440p with RIS enabled and compared it to DLSS

As also pointed out FXAA or TAA will be making the native look even more bad vs DLSS better AA
This again is were RIS shines in games running TAA
Squad is a game that benefits massively with RIS.

 

[TNA]

Damn, my post got deleted for quoting panos

In the end using FXAA to make the native resolution look all blurred and then when we point it out that exact thing he says “hah got you” makes no sense. But somehow he missed this. Lol. I game at 4K and in most the games I play I use no AA.

As I have maintained from before, I want DLSS 2.0 to be awesome as I will be getting a RTX 3070 when it comes out so it will be a great feature to have. But the way Grim5 went about trying to make a point did not prove anything. Well it did prove one thing about him

 

[Grim5]

DLSS is also acting like a sharpening tool its definitely making the image more sharp to make more detail stand out.

I would like to see this tested in more detail with what it's actually doing.

Take Radeon Image Sharpening you can also get extra detail from texture just like Grims images above.

I would like to test RIS more at lower resolution like native 1440p vs 75% 1440p with RIS enabled and compared it to DLSS

As also pointed out FXAA or TAA will be making the native look even more bad vs DLSS better AA
This again is were RIS shines in games running TAA
Squad is a game that benefits massively with RIS.

agreed. Some people think it's not worth doing comparisons for games that use TAA but I don't see why not, let's just enjoy how much better our games look when we're not forced to use TAA that was intended for consoles

I'd like to see that comparison too, let's do dlss on its 50% 1440p option vs RIS on native 1080p - should be a good comparisons of quality and performance as both are using 1080p render for its base then working its magic let's see who's magic is best

 

[TonTom]

Some of you people take graphic cards far to seriously.

 

[Phixsator]

Some of you people take graphic cards far to seriously.

We are on lockdown mate, what else are we going to do ?

 

[shankly1985]

Some of you people take graphic cards far to seriously.

I wouldn't say seriously tbh it's a hobby and like any hobby they will be disagreements.

Any hobby in the world will have some form of disagreement.

 

[LoadsaMoney]

I was just about to edit my post and say I was wrong! I did not look at anything DLSS 2.0 until now and I am surprised how much better it really is in control.

And just to be clear here I wasn't posting before based on my preferring AMD over Nvidia I was simply posting what I thought was the best image and I was still correct! The DLSS was indeed better.

So I stand corrected.

A 24fps boost as well, nice

 

[Panos]

Damn, my post got deleted for quoting panos

In the end using FXAA to make the native resolution look all blurred and then when we point it out that exact thing he says “hah got you” makes no sense. But somehow he missed this. Lol. I game at 4K and in most the games I play I use no AA.

As I have maintained from before, I want DLSS 2.0 to be awesome as I will be getting a RTX 3070 when it comes out so it will be a great feature to have. But the way Grim5 went about trying to make a point did not prove anything. Well it did prove one thing about him

I game at 2560x1440 and on games that use AA that actually blurs the image (MSAA, FXAA, TAA) without option for SSAA, using custom profiles and running the games from wattman. The significant majority of times no perf is lost, while the actual game looks much much better. Also games using optimised tessellation for Nvidia only, I even get performance boost by the AMD optimised tessellation override when overriding the AA also on the profile.

Though on games that support internal rendering engine override, I set it to 4K and no AA (eg ESO) and look fantastic especially now with RIS on.

But my plan is to replace the monitor with 4K OLED 120hz VRR TV and the new 48" from LG looks ideal to improve the pixel density from the bit 55-65" monstrosities.

 

[TNA]

I game at 2560x1440 and on games that use AA that actually blurs the image (MSAA, FXAA, TAA) without option for SSAA, using custom profiles and running the games from wattman. The significant majority of times no perf is lost, while the actual game looks much much better. Also games using optimised tessellation for Nvidia only, I even get performance boost by the AMD optimised tessellation override when overriding the AA also on the profile.

Though on games that support internal rendering engine override, I set it to 4K and no AA (eg ESO) and look fantastic especially now with RIS on.

But my plan is to replace the monitor with 4K OLED 120hz VRR TV and the new 48" from LG looks ideal to improve the pixel density from the bit 55-65" monstrosities.

That will be a huge upgrade. Had my LG 55" B9 since black friday. Yet to lug my huge and heavy case down to the living room to hook it up to do some testing as I have plenty games to get on with on my PS4 Pro which I got around the same time.

My plan is to wait until at least black friday before I upgrade my monitor to that. But it might be the black friday after that so I give you guys all the time to beta test for me and let me know if you get any burn in over 12 months

 

[Panos]

That will be a huge upgrade. Had my LG 55" B9 since black friday. Yet to lug my huge and heavy case down to the living room to hook it up to do some testing as I have plenty games to get on with on my PS4 Pro which I got around the same time.

My plan is to wait until at least black friday before I upgrade my monitor to that. But it might be the black friday after that so I give you guys all the time to beta test for me and let me know if you get any burn in over 12 months

Yeah I am not buying before Autumn time, when PS5 would be close to release also.

 

[melmac]

Well you've all been tricked. Everyone said they preferred the "native 1080p" image... well I switched the images around - the image you all said you prefer is in fact DLSS @ 1080p, rendering up from native 720p. And the image you all said looked worse is the Native 1080p image.

So now that we've cut through the brand BIAS, we know that DLSS rendering from 720p to output 1080p pixels in fact is visually superior to Native 1080p

And yes the images were also switched in the 1440p example and once again you guys choose what you thought is native, but in fact is DLSS rendering up from 50% of 1440p

You see, We did learn things from 4K8K!!

Well played