Man of Honour
You're an eye racist!!!
Last edited:
-
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.
The RT Related Games, Benchmarks, Software, Etc Thread.
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
- Status
They are rose tinted also.
Blocking DLSS may not be a bad thing though as it shows consumers just how bad the actual hardware is this generation.
I'm hoping it brings back the option of real AA in all honesty.
Also gives the new wave of pcmr a reason to go back to the options screen in detail.
Man of Honour
I trust DF, but if you had watched the video you'd see that they do offer a balanced view, but that the omission of other more superior upscalers is highly annoying since AMD's FSR2 isn't as good, so it's basically dragging the visual potential down to the lowest level, which is FSR2, since all cards can run FSR at the same quality, but just that FSR itself isn't as high quality as DLSS/XeSS in most situations, especially for motion vectors and motion in general.
I don't really like upscalars at all so I don't really care which is better in this argument.
Just provide more comprehensive options in the settings for us to work with including proper AA.
But in my statement, I don't trust the eyes of people when it comes to image if they have to wear glasses.
Man of Honour
But why? Seems like a really silly judgement to make lol.
Go on then, please explain.
Caporegime
You were talking sense up until this point.
If you want to analyse something, do you trust the opinion of where image clarity is concerned where someone eyes are compromised.
There are jobs in the world that will say no to those even color blind, so why should I trust the eyes of some one that's technically blind to an extent and requires a tool to make up for it, can you truly trust that their vision is up to scratch.
You wouldn't trust a blind guide would you.
Which bit
Man of Honour
I largely trust what they say because I can then fire up a game they are talking about and see exactly what they talk about for myself, that's why. Whether 1440p or 4k doesn't really matter, any quirks they talk about with a game I am playing, I am able to see the same pros/cons - So yeah, I do trust what they say as they talk about the same things many of us observe so it's nice to see verification by a large platform seeing those same things, whether good or bad.
Caporegime
I am not sure why it is upto AMD to put in competitors tech now - how many times has Nvidia put in stuff like Hairworks,PhysX,etc which wouldn't work on AMD cards. Standard reply on here,is Nvidia spends the money and effort on sponsorship,so that is AMD's problem. Why don't they go and sponsor games and put their own stuff in. Nvidia shouldn't do AMD's job,etc.
AMD does that,and does not even block its own stuff working on competitors products and suddenly outrage.
Is AMD blocking FSR on Nvidia cards? Nope. Did they make TressFX,etc only work on AMD cards? Nope. So in the end however good or bad it is,it works just as well(or not) on AMD,Nvidia and Intel cards.
Cyberpunk 2077 took over a year to incorporate FSR into the game,so anyone who didn't have an Nvidia RTX2000 or RTX3000 series dGPU had to use the worse quality in-built resolution scaler. That means everyone with an AMD card,any Turing based GTX1600 series dGPU,Pascal dGPU,etc didn't have any choice. This is what I had to use on my own card.
Yet,all I heard it was an Nvidia sponsored the game,AMD should have too,so that is their problem.
Why didn't Nvidia then sponsor Starfield to get its tech into it,like it did with Fallout 4?
It literally performs 10% to 20% better on Nvidia dGPUs - I run one of the few remaining benchmarks threads on the internet for that game. It has other Nvidia exclusive technologies,which won't work on AMD or Intel cards(one of them is weapon debris).
Why doesn't Nvidia make a fallback layer like XeSS,which can run on competitor dGPUs?
This is getting to almost Apple level now. It seems more like Nvidia sponsorship got spurned,or they couldn't be bothered,and they want 100% of the advantages of sponsorship whilst AMD and Microsoft have to pay for it. So go and create some social media outrage.
They have billions of USD and more money and GPU engineers than AMD,maybe they should pay Microsoft a few million,send some engineers over and then put in DLSS.
AMD does that,and does not even block its own stuff working on competitors products and suddenly outrage.
Is AMD blocking FSR on Nvidia cards? Nope. Did they make TressFX,etc only work on AMD cards? Nope. So in the end however good or bad it is,it works just as well(or not) on AMD,Nvidia and Intel cards.
Cyberpunk 2077 took over a year to incorporate FSR into the game,so anyone who didn't have an Nvidia RTX2000 or RTX3000 series dGPU had to use the worse quality in-built resolution scaler. That means everyone with an AMD card,any Turing based GTX1600 series dGPU,Pascal dGPU,etc didn't have any choice. This is what I had to use on my own card.
Yet,all I heard it was an Nvidia sponsored the game,AMD should have too,so that is their problem.
Why didn't Nvidia then sponsor Starfield to get its tech into it,like it did with Fallout 4?
It literally performs 10% to 20% better on Nvidia dGPUs - I run one of the few remaining benchmarks threads on the internet for that game. It has other Nvidia exclusive technologies,which won't work on AMD or Intel cards(one of them is weapon debris).
Why doesn't Nvidia make a fallback layer like XeSS,which can run on competitor dGPUs?
This is getting to almost Apple level now. It seems more like Nvidia sponsorship got spurned,or they couldn't be bothered,and they want 100% of the advantages of sponsorship whilst AMD and Microsoft have to pay for it. So go and create some social media outrage.
They have billions of USD and more money and GPU engineers than AMD,maybe they should pay Microsoft a few million,send some engineers over and then put in DLSS.
Last edited:
Some settings have obvious effects, but they seem to struggle to tell apart dlss stuff vs native where when I fire it up my self I notice the degradation fast and feel like they lied.
Bad eye sight is where you can't tell a difference or what's wrong when there actually is, it's how optician find indications you don't have good eye sight.
When I pointed out the bad parts in a user screen shot for cyber punk, they said it was nice but it looked awful especially when I pointed it out.
Man of Honour
XeSS wasn't a thing when Cyberpunk came out, and FSR wasn't in a fit state to call "good" then either, whereas DLSS was. So it's probably a good thing it took a year for other scalers to be added else everyone not on those Nvidia cards would be moaning about how crap FSR is, which is exactly what happened on other games.
Last edited:
Soldato
I recall DLSS1 was pretty pants. Thing is when the 80+% mindshare gets affected you are bound to get some complaining - although CAT's points sum it up pretty well.
Caporegime
I said FSR not XeSS at launch and I talked about fallback layers with XeSS. You had DLSS exclusivity for 12 months(IIRC),and FSR was better than the standard image scaler in the game. In late 2020 and well into 2021,most gamers couldn't get an RTX3000 series card because of miners! Most people using raytracing in the game were RTX2000 owners.
But some of the most popular Turing cards were the GTX1600 series which don't support DLSS,let alone the huge number of Pascal users too(and all the AMD users). They had access to no modern upscalers. I was one of them. So DLSS in Cyberpunk 2077 was not actually useable by a large number of people who bought the game at launch and probably well into 2021.
This wouldn't be even an issue,if DLSS is the only new generation upscaler with no fallback layer,for older Nvidia hardware let alone competitors hardware.
FSR has it. XeSS has it. But more importantly,Epic Games has TSR which is a temporal upscaler which works on both AMD and Nvidia hardware. So its quite clear Nvidia has made DLSS on purpose not work on whole swathes of its own hardware let alone competitors and consoles. Nvidia has zero excuse for this - they have much larger teams than AMD or Intel dedicated to graphics. They also have extremely close relations with Epic games for years - so why didn't they license TSR as a fallback layer?
That way everyone will use DLSS like everyone uses CUDA,and everyone on PC and consoles will be happy.
Last edited:
Soldato
Nvidia camp will bitch and moan about lack of dlss until it gets added to Starfield and AMD lose any competitive advantage. If they negotiated deals then so be it. The sense of self entitlement is strong.
It seems we all want AMD to be competitive, but only to get us a better deal from Nvidia.
It seems we all want AMD to be competitive, but only to get us a better deal from Nvidia.
AMD's fault imo. They have let themselves fall so far behind and they have been given open goals to claw back market share they somehow managed to score own goals.
It seems to me their current trajectory is leading to even smaller mind/market share.
They should be spending the money on hiring teams to help improve FSR. They should be coming out swinging and offer competitive prices from day one like they used to.
They have lost so much respect from people like me with the way they operate. As soon as they see a bit of success they hike prices to silly levels. I used to prefer them and dislike Jensen and his tactics. But now I just don't care anymore and buy whatever I fancy leave all that crap out if it.
How about being competitive by having more/better features instead of handicapping your competition? Imagine sports being all like but man that guy runs too fast for us, just give him some extra weights or make him run without shoes. That makes sense.
It’s not Nvidias fault AMD has nothing better to offer. Or Nvidia users’ fault.
- Status