The RT Related Games, Benchmarks, Software, Etc Thread.

[mrk]

All this is trivial, Starfield will have RT no doubt (although no confirmation yet?), even with just FSR, the performance will be better on Nvidia cards as a result, so no matter what, AMD still come out under and it just ends up dragging everyone else down to the lowest common level which is the IQ of FSR in the process like we saw with Callisto Protocol and others.

 

[chris85oc]

All this is trivial, Starfield will have RT no doubt (although no confirmation yet?), even with just FSR, the performance will be better on Nvidia cards as a result, so no matter what, AMD still come out under and it just ends up dragging everyone else down to the lowest common level which is the IQ of FSR in the process like we saw with Callisto Protocol and others.

Yep it’s funny how people complained about consoles dragging down pcs but a pc vendor dragging the other down is totally fine cause hypocrisy!

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

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.

I agree AMD has gotten greedy with prices - the stupid we are not a budget brand nonsense. If anything it's their CPU side where they went the worst and split features on AM5 so the motherboards are poor value. Or jacking up Zen3 pricing. Can also agree that one of the biggest selling points for RDNA3 over RDNA2 was apparently FSR3,due to the additional hardware support and its missing in action. As is the missing RX7700XT/RX7800XT. So AMD do need to up their game.


But in this scenario it is Nvidia's fault IMHO. They locked down DLSS to only some of their cards. Yet Steam shows vast quantities of their own cards including the GRX1600 series which are still made and top the Steam charts cannot support DLSS. The GTX1650 is the top card in Steam.A lot of the Nvidia install base ironically have FSR or XeSS as their best upscaling option.

Intel and AMD can make their own upscalers work on Nvidia cards. Epic makes TSR work fine. It's irrelevant if DLSS is better. Just like GSync was better,but essentially AMD successfully marketed VESA adaptive sync as like something they invented, ie, FreeSync.So what happened is FreeSync won despite GSync initially having the numbers in terms of supported monitors and Nvidia having more cards.Many on here were adamant GSync would win longterm because it was better because of dedicated hardware and low AMD marketshare.

Nvidia restricting DLSS means most multi platform games will have to use FSR or XeSS in them as they support consoles. TSR is integrated into Unreal Engine and many games use Unreal Engine,so they might not need anything else.They will also support the massive install base of integrated graphics, the newest of which are GTX1060 level. They will support phones - Samsung is transitioning over to RDNA2.If Nvidia made a proper fallback layer for DLSS then FSR/XeSS wouldn't get out of the starting blocks. DLSS would be on consoles too. I seriously don't get their strategy. Eventually TSR, FSR and XeSS will also get better too.

What's even worse about this internet controversy,Starfield is a Bethesda Games Studio game,so probably it will support DLSS via mods. Or they will do a Cyberpunk 2077 and release DLSS later on. But then if that happens,moan that it does not have PC melting RT effects. People should be more worried if the engine is again limited by one or two threads, which any person who plays Bethesda Games Studio games knows is the biggest technical concern,especially things such as Papyrus scripting limitations. Not RT and not upscaling.

 

[Calin Banc]

For 120 mil steam users, from the top of my head, from 2060 onward, there are 40mil+ users with DLSS capable cards based on steam reports of cards in use. Of course, the lower the card, the more will benefit from DLSS. Especially since performance mode is much better than FSR equivalent.

With that said, it will be funny to NOT have the latest FSR version into Starfield (V2.2 or whatever is/will be).

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

For 120 mil steam users, from the top of my head, from 2060 onward, there are 40mil+ users with DLSS capable cards based on steam reports of cards in use. Of course, the lower the card, the more will benefit from DLSS. Especially since performance mode is much better than FSR equivalent.

With that said, it will be funny to NOT have the latest FSR version into Starfield (V2.2 or whatever is/will be).

Well IIRC,the latest XBox consoles and the PS5 have sold over 50 million units since late 2020. That also means 80 million people on Steam can't run DLSS. FSR,XeSS and TSR work on the majority of those cards and those consoles. Now think when Cyberpunk 2077 was launched there were far less people with RTX cards,meaning probably nearly 100 million people who could have used FSR(obviously not all could run Cyberpunk 2077!). There was zero controversy - makes me wonder whether this is another quiet marketing push?

The obvious answer is for Nvidia to work on integrating a fallback layer for DLSS,which would technically increase DLSS numbers by a few times. Considering AMD is taking its time with FSR3,they could easily knock the winds out of FSR3 by doing it. Very easy open goal attempt for Nvidia!

Also don't have any expectations for lack of technical issues with Bethesda Games Studio!

 

[TNA]

I agree AMD has gotten greedy with prices - the stupid we are not a budget brand nonsense. If anything it's their CPU side where they went the worst and split features on AM5 so the motherboards are poor value. Or jacking up Zen3 pricing. Can also agree that one of the biggest selling points for RDNA3 over RDNA2 was apparently FSR3,due to the additional hardware support and its missing in action. As is the missing RX7700XT/RX7800XT. So AMD do need to up their game.


But in this scenario it is Nvidia's fault IMHO. They locked down DLSS to only some of their cards. Yet Steam shows vast quantities of their own cards including the GRX1600 series which are still made and top the Steam charts cannot support DLSS. The GTX1650 is the top card in Steam.A lot of the Nvidia install base ironically have FSR or XeSS as their best upscaling option.

Intel and AMD can make their own upscalers work on Nvidia cards. Epic makes TSR work fine. It's irrelevant if DLSS is better. Just like GSync was better,but essentially AMD successfully marketed VESA adaptive sync as like something they invented, ie, FreeSync.So what happened is FreeSync won despite GSync initially having the numbers in terms of supported monitors and Nvidia having more cards.Many on here were adamant GSync would win longterm because it was better because of dedicated hardware and low AMD marketshare.

Nvidia restricting DLSS means most multi platform games will have to use FSR or XeSS in them as they support consoles. TSR is integrated into Unreal Engine and many games use Unreal Engine,so they might not need anything else.They will also support the massive install base of integrated graphics, the newest of which are GTX1060 level. They will support phones - Samsung is transitioning over to RDNA2.If Nvidia made a proper fallback layer for DLSS then FSR/XeSS wouldn't get out of the starting blocks. DLSS would be on consoles too. I seriously don't get their strategy. Eventually TSR, FSR and XeSS will also get better too.

What's even worse about this internet controversy,Starfield is a Bethesda Games Studio game,so probably it will support DLSS via mods. Or they will do a Cyberpunk 2077 and release DLSS later on. But then if that happens,moan that it does not have PC melting RT effects. People should be more worried if the engine is again limited by one or two threads, which any person who plays Bethesda Games Studio games knows is the biggest technical concern,especially things such as Papyrus scripting limitations. Not RT and not upscaling.

Can't see Nvidia doing that as DLSS comes with all their cards now and has done for a while. It was different with monitor's as you had to buy a monitor and pay extra for it to be gsync.

@Nexus18 did you not say Nvidia offered amd for the to come up with a single open standard but AMD declined? You had links for this as I recall.

Anyway. In this instance point is AMD do not want DLSS in games they are sponsoring. That much seems clear. Many people naturally will get annoyed at that, no surprise there as majority of people out there have Nvidia GPU's.

My main annoyance with AMD on this issue is, if you are going to sponsor a game and take my ability to use DLSS away from me, please make sure the FSR you provide is just as good. This way people won't be missing out on anything and will walk away think oh look, AMD can do a great job with FSR, who needs DLSS which is only locked to Nvidia cards?

But what do AMD do? They release a version of FSR which is no way near as good like they did in RE4 Remake. That to me is AMD's fault and AMD come out looking like that bad guys. My opinion anyway.

 

[Raelgun]

Can't see Nvidia doing that as DLSS comes with all their cards now and has done for a while. It was different with monitor's as you had to buy a monitor and pay extra for it to be gsync.

@Nexus18 did you not say Nvidia offered amd for the to come up with a single open standard but AMD declined? You had links for this as I recall.

Anyway. In this instance point is AMD do not want DLSS in games they are sponsoring. That much seems clear. Many people naturally will get annoyed at that, no surprise there as majority of people out there have Nvidia GPU's.

My main annoyance with AMD on this issue is, if you are going to sponsor a game and take my ability to use DLSS away from me, please make sure the FSR you provide is just as good. This way people won't be missing out on anything and will walk away think oh look, AMD can do a great job with FSR, who needs DLSS which is only locked to Nvidia cards?

But what do AMD do? They release a version of FSR which is no way near as good like they did in RE4 Remake. That to me is AMD's fault and AMD come out looking like that bad guys. My opinion anyway.

How about we get a game that doesn't come with any upscalars and focus on optimisation and image quality.

We need less people to be satisfied with mediocre image quality when it comes to PC gaming, it's the one thing it had over consoles.

Crysis 3 cranked up still looks better then a lot of modern games also on PC.

 

[TNA]

How about we get a game that doesn't come with any upscalars and focus on optimisation and image quality.

We need less people to be satisfied with mediocre image quality when it comes to PC gaming, it's the one thing it had over consoles.

Crysis 3 cranked up still looks better then a lot of modern games also on PC.

That is a completely seperate issue. And to that my answer is, why not both?

 

[Raelgun]

That is a completely seperate issue. And to that my answer is, why not both?

Why get used to bad image quality, give people a bad option, that will take it, so more options isn't actually better in some cases.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Can't see Nvidia doing that as DLSS comes with all their cards now and has done for a while. It was different with monitor's as you had to buy a monitor and pay extra for it to be gsync.

@Nexus18 did you not say Nvidia offered amd for the to come up with a single open standard but AMD declined? You had links for this as I recall.

Anyway. In this instance point is AMD do not want DLSS in games they are sponsoring. That much seems clear. Many people naturally will get annoyed at that, no surprise there as majority of people out there have Nvidia GPU's.

My main annoyance with AMD on this issue is, if you are going to sponsor a game and take my ability to use DLSS away from me, please make sure the FSR you provide is just as good. This way people won't be missing out on anything and will walk away think oh look, AMD can do a great job with FSR, who needs DLSS which is only locked to Nvidia cards?

But what do AMD do? They release a version of FSR which is no way near as good like they did in RE4 Remake. That to me is AMD's fault and AMD come out looking like that bad guys. My opinion anyway.

OK,lets try this angle. AMD decides to launch FSR3 for Starfield - it only is locked to RDNA3 cards. It ends up being OK by some miracle. Will most people on the internet ditch their Nvidia cards for an RDNA3 one? Or will they moan they want DLSS in the game,and AMD is "forcing" them to upgrade. Then I expect AMD will be called out for not making it run fully on RDNA2 also. But with Cyberpunk 2077,locking out 2/3 of Steam(probably more) was fine and making DLSS3 articially locked out of RTX2000/RTX3000 cards is fine.

You know the answer already.

Again nothing stopping Nvidia make DLSS like XeSS and FSR,ie,having a fallback layer for older Nvidia cards,AMD/Intel cards and consoles. Popular Nvidia cards such as the GTX1060,GTX1650 and GTX1660 are forced to use FSR,XeSS or TSR.

This is the same moaning against Hogwarts Legacy because of JK Rowling and AMD trying to on purpose screw Nvidia(because of VRAM) according to Reddit. It made no difference to sales AFAIK.

Moreover,is this what PC gaming has gone down to? Upscaling wars? PCMR was laughing at console users gushing over Checkerboard rendering.No wonder with the overpriced junk we seem to be getting the last few years,its almost like PCMR is clutching its pearls. PC gamers really are gluttons for punishment.

How about we get a game that doesn't come with any upscalars and focus on optimisation and image quality.

We need less people to be satisfied with mediocre image quality when it comes to PC gaming, it's the one thing it had over consoles.

Crysis 3 cranked up still looks better then a lot of modern games also on PC.

Because it justifies not including enough VRAM on dGPUs or selling an RTX4050 as an RTX4060/RTX4060TI. Instead of asking the obvious questions,about these weak dGPUs using console level moves,whilst paying premium prices and then mock consoles.Also DLSS/FSR are used as a way to prop up poorly optimised games.

These greedy companies want to sell overdone effects,on subpar,overpriced hardware. But don't worry if we keep repeating our latest upscaling is better than reality,using BoJo logic enough will believe it.Upscaling 10 years ago,aka,resolution scaling was used by people on low end hardware.

Then people wonder why we have trash like the RTX4060/RTX4060TI/RX7600. Or overpriced motherboards which are more worried about appearance and RGB. Or cases which look nice and have useless airflow.

 

[Calin Banc]

Well IIRC,the latest XBox consoles and the PS5 have sold over 50 million units since late 2020. That also means 80 million people on Steam can't run DLSS. FSR,XeSS and TSR work on the majority of those cards and those consoles. Now think when Cyberpunk 2077 was launched there were far less people with RTX cards,meaning probably nearly 100 million people who could have used FSR(obviously not all could run Cyberpunk 2077!). There was zero controversy - makes me wonder whether this is another quiet marketing push?

The obvious answer is for Nvidia to work on integrating a fallback layer for DLSS,which would technically increase DLSS numbers by a few times. Considering AMD is taking its time with FSR3,they could easily knock the winds out of FSR3 by doing it. Very easy open goal attempt for Nvidia!

Also don't have any expectations for lack of technical issues with Bethesda Games Studio!

There shouldn't be one or the other, all upscaling tech should be in by default. Whatever it was bad in the past, shouldn't be a justification for future awful actions.

I don't think DLSS can offer the same quality without hw present on chip, but I could be wrong. I suspect is the same thing with RT - dedicated hardware required, without it, AMD can't catch up with Nvidia. Having worse IQ and 2 versions of DLSS, probably makes no sense for Nvidia.
As for DLSS 3 not being supported on Ampere and Turing... don't know. That "optical flow" thingy is unknown to me to judge what's what. )

PS: that's also 40mil users that could have a better experience with minimal work.

 

[Calin Banc]

Why get used to bad image quality, give people a bad option, that will take it, so more options isn't actually better in some cases.

Why get used to bad image quality, give consoles players native 4k experience, just drop visuals, sorry, optimize, until that's doable.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

There shouldn't be one or the other, all upscaling tech should be in by default. Whatever it was bad in the past, shouldn't be a justification for future awful actions.

I don't think DLSS can offer the same quality without hw present on chip, but I could be wrong. I suspect is the same thing with RT - dedicated hardware required, without it, AMD can't catch up with Nvidia. Having worse IQ and 2 versions of DLSS, probably makes no sense for Nvidia.
As for DLSS 3 not being supported on Ampere and Turing... don't know. That "optical flow" thingy is unknown to me to judge what's what. )

PS: that's also 40mil users that could have a better experience with minimal work.

XeSS and TSR are temporal upscalers too,and didn't need specific hardware.TSR was pretty much the equal of DLSS1,and that was many years ago. Even having a quick look now,and it seems pretty solid and only slightly worse than DLSS2!The UE5 version is probably further improved - it wouldn't surprise me if a number of UE5 games just use TSR and not DLSS/FSR as it would require no action on the developers part.

For all the comments about FSR being rubbish,I can't fathom why DLSS has no fallback layer. Also all it needs to do is be better than FSR or XeSS fallback layers.So you have 80 million people on Steam,50+ million console users,etc who can't use DLSS now served with a solution.

Also surely ask why Nvidia with their billions can't outsponsor AMD in this game?If they can't be bothered,then DLSS will be added in by modders or even Bethesda Games Studio later on. Just like with Cyberpunk 2077 having no FSR for over a year. People are acting like DLSS will never be in the game - it will be.

I wasn't moaning when I played Cyberpunk 2077 on my card,which didn't support DLSS or even RT. I finished most of the game that way.

Either which way,I don't think this controversy will actually affect sales of the game. If the game has decent gameplay,world building,characters and isn't too buggy it will sell. If it doesn't it will be another Fallout 76 and no amount of technology will save it!

Personally it shows how many of us are bored of new releases,so upscaling is now a talking point!

Why get used to bad image quality, give consoles players native 4k experience as just drop visuals, sorry, optimize, until that's doable.

Well PCMR is gushing over upscaling,like console users were gushing over Checkerboard rendering. The reason we "need" upscaling is because of trash hardware releases. Consoles need it because they are built to a cost.

So PCMR is no different than console users in that way. Yet as I showed looking at Steam,huge numbers of PCMR don't have better than console hardware. That includes RTX3060 owners,who are the most represented metric.

The reality is that the RTX4070TI would have been the 8800GT/8800GTS of this generation. Smallish die,etc but it seems Nvidia and AMD would rather keep prices high for their own benefit,and upscale their own margins.

Anyway,we seem to be going round in circles so it is what it is.

 

[Dicehunter]

How about we get a game that doesn't come with any upscalars and focus on optimisation and image quality.

We need less people to be satisfied with mediocre image quality when it comes to PC gaming, it's the one thing it had over consoles.

Crysis 3 cranked up still looks better then a lot of modern games also on PC.

Why get used to bad image quality, give people a bad option, that will take it, so more options isn't actually better in some cases.

This is actually 1 of the things many seem to forget about DLSS and I'm glad you brought up Crysis 3 as it's the perfect example of DLSS being useful for more than perfofmance gain.

In Crysis 3 Remastered max settings, 4K, Top most AA option, Pixel crawling is still an issue on various surfaces... but you enable DLSS Quality and aside from the performance gain this pixel crawling goes away completely.

 

[Nexus18]

@Nexus18 did you not say Nvidia offered amd for the to come up with a single open standard but AMD declined? You had links for this as I recall.

Yup nvidia have an open source solution called streamline that implements their solutions all in one go i.e. reflex, dlss and FG, intel were onboard with it but not amd due to very iffy reasoning by their chief engineer (in DF interview with Alex) even though it would have benefitted just not consumers (being able to use what works best for their hardware) but also developers (do all 3 in one go as opposed to separately) and also would have benefitted amd since uptake would be larger and quicker for them.

Streamline

developer.nvidia.com

GitHub - NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline: Streamline Integration Framework

Streamline Integration Framework. Contribute to NVIDIAGameWorks/Streamline development by creating an account on GitHub.

github.com

 

[Raelgun]

This is actually 1 of the things many seem to forget about DLSS and I'm glad you brought up Crysis 3 as it's the perfect example of DLSS being useful for more than perfofmance gain.

In Crysis 3 Remastered max settings, 4K, Top most AA option, Pixel crawling is still an issue on various surfaces... but you enable DLSS Quality and aside from the performance gain this pixel crawling goes away completely.

Truth be told, I'm not referring to the remastered version

 

[Raelgun]

Why get used to bad image quality, give consoles players native 4k experience, just drop visuals, sorry, optimize, until that's doable.

See if you spend 1500 on a 4090 and you get visuals that only match consoles, you think you can defend that?

Spending that to use dlss to make the image look even worse is even more dumb.

 

[Calin Banc]

See if you spend 1500 on a 4090 and you get visuals that only match consoles, you think you can defend that?

Spending that to use dlss to make the image look even worse is even more dumb.

That's up to anyone's will. is called a choice, something that console players don't have.

Again, you want native PC? Good, have native consoles. Hold everyone to the same standard.

 

[Calin Banc]

XeSS and TSR are temporal upscalers too,and didn't need specific hardware.TSR was pretty much the equal of DLSS1,and that was many years ago. Even having a quick look now,and it seems pretty solid and only slightly worse than DLSS2!The UE5 version is probably further improved - it wouldn't surprise me if a number of UE5 games just use TSR and not DLSS/FSR as it would require no action on the developers part.

For all the comments about FSR being rubbish,I can't fathom why DLSS has no fallback layer. Also all it needs to do is be better than FSR or XeSS fallback layers.So you have 80 million people on Steam,50+ million console users,etc who can't use DLSS now served with a solution.

Also surely ask why Nvidia with their billions can't outsponsor AMD in this game?If they can't be bothered,then DLSS will be added in by modders or even Bethesda Games Studio later on. Just like with Cyberpunk 2077 having no FSR for over a year. People are acting like DLSS will never be in the game - it will be.

I wasn't moaning when I played Cyberpunk 2077 on my card,which didn't support DLSS or even RT. I finished most of the game that way.

Either which way,I don't think this controversy will actually affect sales of the game. If the game has decent gameplay,world building,characters and isn't too buggy it will sell. If it doesn't it will be another Fallout 76 and no amount of technology will save it!

Personally it shows how many of us are bored of new releases,so upscaling is now a talking point!



Well PCMR is gushing over upscaling,like console users were gushing over Checkerboard rendering. The reason we "need" upscaling is because of trash hardware releases. Consoles need it because they are built to a cost.

So PCMR is no different than console users in that way. Yet as I showed looking at Steam,huge numbers of PCMR don't have better than console hardware. That includes RTX3060 owners,who are the most represented metric.

The reality is that the RTX4070TI would have been the 8800GT/8800GTS of this generation. Smallish die,etc but it seems Nvidia and AMD would rather keep prices high for their own benefit,and upscale their own margins.

Anyway,we seem to be going round in circles so it is what it is.

DLSS is super easy (plugin) in UE5 , so I guess is a higher chance for FSR to be left outside. But, whatever the name will be, if is just as fast and good as DLSS, ESPECIALLY in balanced, performance and ultra performance modes, I'm fine with it.

Those 80 mil will have to upgrade or use FSR. What would be the point of using a FSR like DLSS in terms of IQ when you already have FSR?

I don't care about who's sponsoring who. I don't blame AMD or Nvidia. I blame Bethesda, is their game after all, their choice.

Old console upscaling was crap. DLSS usually isn't. Using DLSS gives better image quality than lower settings.

Yes, we want better hardware. That has nothing to do with upscalers. People were saying 4090 is good, but still needs upscalers in some situation. All of the sudden is not good anymore? Or is it that no matter how much you optimize your game, you'll still need those upscalers to have a better image quality at the end? Because, surprise surprise, a GPU can't render yet a perfect image.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

DLSS is super easy (plugin) in UE5 , so I guess is a higher chance for FSR to be left outside. But, whatever the name will be, if is just as fast and good as DLSS, I'm fine with it.

Those 80 will have to upgrade or use FSR. What would be the point of using a Fast like DLSS in terms of IQ when you already have FSR?

I don't care about who's sponsoring who. I don't blame AMD or Nvidia. I blame Bethesda, is their game after all, their choice.

Old console upscaling was crap. DLSS usually isn't. Using DLSS gives better image quality than lower settings.

Yes, we want better hardware. That has nothing to do with upscalers. People were saying 4090 is good, but still needs upscalers in some situation. All of the sudden is not good anymore? Or is it that no matter how much you optimize your game, you'll still need those upscalers to have a better image quality at the end?

Its everything to do with upscalers. Just look at their marketing - a lot of cards "peformance" boost is advertised on upscaling and frame generation. Even AMD is doing it.

It's all about selling cheaper hardware for more money. Have you noticed how DLSS3 is locked to newer hardware(unless you really think an RTX3090TI has less Tensor core output than an RTX4060?) and probably the same with FSR3? Sell cards with the minimum level of performance improvements,then fill out performance with upscaling,etc.

So ironically PC and console are closer in marketing now. Consoles have to use economy hardware to hit their price-points,so need to use upscaling,etc to do so. Now PC is doing the same as Nvidia/AMD want to increase margins.

Fallout 4 released in what, 2015? Were AMD even in the game at that point? Why would you not prioritise the brand that dominates the market?

If Nvidia does its fine due to XYZ reasons. Considering there are over 50 million consoles,and apparently only 1/3 of the 120 million Steam systems use RTX cards,maybe Bethesda Game Studios is just putting in the upscaler which works with as much hardware as possible?Maybe its a console orientated title then.

But this is madness really - so people are saying that AMD and Intel have no right to sponsor titles and push their tech. Why doesn't Nvidia make its own tech work on AMD and Intel then?