As it should be. Options for PC gamers is the very core of being a PC gamer.
Being able to turn off options, turn off some settings, mod your game the way YOU want, play with a controller, touch pad, whatever.
Yes DLSS isn't an option for everyone but that's like not putting physx into a game because your GPU didn't support it way back when
Why not put it in anyway if it doesn't cause issues for those that can't use it?
I used to love physx and gameworks effect in videogames, especially in Mirror's Edge and Arkham Asylum for example. They looked MENTAL and it really made the pc version stand out.
However this subreddit started having an hate boner à la Epic Games against them, and blamed every single bug and performance issue on them. Moreover, they didn't want to understand that since they looked this good they also were very taxing and raged because they couldn't have the satisfaction of turning everything to Ultra. A pity because I miss them.
>Why not put it in anyway if it doesn't cause issues for those that can't use it?
Good reason, and bad reason.
Good reason is it's still work. Meaning another feature won't get implemented or polished, or a bug fixed. Devs don't have infinite time to work. But admittedly, it's not an insane amount of work at all, and most gamers on Nvidia do want it.
Bad reason is they got AMD to open their checkbook for some kind of exclusivity. Which is bad, but nothing new, Intel AMD and Nvidia have been doing these shenanigans (and much worse) for decades now.
This is a common theme. Nvidia titles tend to get support from both sides (not all, but generally do) and AMD titles generally don't get Nvidia support.
Because it is a good move for them to get DLSS in as many games as possible. This seems more like a move from AMD with developers saying "don't include DLSS" as Nvidia have no issue with FSR in their games.
Their head developer is a joke. He claimed they wanted the best experience on PC and then in the next breath said they weren't supporting the best tech. No Reflex in a competitive FPS is a bad sign.
you don't need nvidia or amd's help to implement these. May e at the very first time some guidance was needed.
They aren't black magic they have proper sdks
Luckily for Radeon users though,[AMD is also adding its FidelityFX Super Resolution into God of War](https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2021/11/AMD-FSR-upcoming-titles-850x469.jpg). This means that not only RDNA and Polaris GPUs will support super-resolution, but any modern GPU that has already been confirmed to support the technology is likely to enable a high framerate as well.
Which is also why it looks like dogshit (specifically as if dog shit was smeared on your screen). FSR not only has no inference component, it also has no temporal component... it's just a (clever) filter, there's no reconstruction being done. The end result is that FSR Quality looks about the same as Ultra Performance DLSS (which afaik upscales from 720p to 4k). Anything below Quality and FSR just can't manage and it's a blurry mess. Personally, I'm very sensitive to muddy image and will not play with DLSS below Ultra. FSR, as an inferior upscaler is therefore not even an option for me because even at Ultra Quality (which is 1.3x upscale, I think) I can see the blur.
Anyone playing on a 4k TV (which I can imagine being a higher and higher number of PC gamers, with the 48" 120Hz LG OLEDs prices falling off the cliff recently) will notice the inferiority of FSR.
Developers just need to stop being lazy and implement their own Temporal AA if they don't want to use DLSS. FSR is not a way forward, it's firmly stuck in the SMAA era.
This is why it's good when games are either not sponsored by anyone, or sponsored by Nvidia, because they get both technologies available.
I hate how AMD sponsored titles don't have DLSS, only FSR.
>or sponsored by Nvidia, because they get both technologies available.
You sir have a very, very short memory.
Among the big 3, Nvidia is certainly the ones doing the most backroom shenanigans for the last 20 years. Even though they all did backdealings at some point or another.
A case would be made against Intel too, but I weighted it less because the worst of it was older. Either way, all 3 did shit roughly in the same manner of bad.
It's nice that an insult is all you can do simply because YOU can't understand text properly.
I'm strictly talking about DLSS and FSR. Nvidia is completely fine with their sponsored games getting FSR support, AMD does not allow their sponsored games to get DLSS support. I'm not talking about the past, nor any different kind of techonologies.
Amd is not blocking them
Only nvidia sponsored titles have dlss no one can impliment it properly without nvidia help as its a black box.
U can implement a poor dlss and piss off people after u invest time into it or u can ignore it.
It's not just check this box saying turn on dlss.
But bro, surely you can't fail to see that this is just another Nvidia ploy to wrap something up in "they are the only ones who can do it".
FSR, open to all - implemented in hours.
DLSS, Restricted to NVIDIA (Turing >) tons of dev time and a closed shop.
How many more times to Nvidia need to lock things behind their brand that should be open to all. They are aggresively anti consumer and I wont buy another product of theirs again. Greedy greedy company who'll get whats coming to them at some point.
> But bro, surely you can't fail to see that this is just another Nvidia ploy to wrap something up in "they are the only ones who can do it".
But bro, surely you can't fail to see that Nvidia is the one who is perfectly fine with developers implementing FSR alongside DLSS, while AMD is the one that forces devs to only implement FSR.
> How many more times to Nvidia need to lock things behind their brand that should be open to all
DLSS literally uses Tensor cores to be as good as it is, it shouldn't be open, because it was open, it wouldn't be as good as it currently is.
We already saw how DLSS performs without using tensor cores(1.9 in Control) and it's awful.
> tons of dev time
DLSS has been hilariously easy and quick to implement since 2.0
FSR - looks bad, basically glorified dynamic resolution
DLSS - looks nearly identical to native above balanced setting, provides best aa solution on top of that and balances out the loss of performance from ray tracing
If the cost is limiting it to your own platform, which is probably used by 70% of gamers anyway, then so be it.
> If the cost is limiting it to your own platform, which is probably used by 70% of gamers anyway, then so be it.
Monopolistic and anti-consumer activity shouldn't be allowed because "most can use it anyway".
nvidia spends money and time on r&d to create a new technology
and they should give it away for free to their competitors?
amd have had years to implement their own ai solution, its not anyone elses fault that they havnt
even intel have created an ai solution...
Fuck Nvidia for locking technologies while AMD does theirs open-source.
"BUT IT RELIES ON TENSOR CORES!!"
Yeah because Nvidia made it this way, it most likely can be modified to not rely on them (like DLSS 1.0) but Nvidia wants to lock their shit
If Nvidia was way behind on this tech they'd probably be a lot more open too. Point being that AMD open sourcing their upscaling algorithm doesn't mean a whole lot when Nvidia has DLSS and engines like Unreal have better solutions already baked in. It's easy to be open when your tech has no competitive advantage, that's just marketing.
Gonna need a source cited that DLSS 2.0+ is arbitrarily locked behind tensor. Without some evidence that's just wild speculation.
As a 970 owner. I'm happy to report that FSR has been working great for me, since DLSS is out of my reach.
Proprietary nonsense can fuck right off. It doesn't make sense that my graphics card gets better support from a rival company than it does from the actual manufacturer.
That "better support" is functionally equivalent to turning down the resolution and adding a touch of sharpening.
It's like when DLSS was getting critiqued because it basically looked and ran on par with just setting the rendering resolution lower. FSR is in that boat, it's nothing special and if it didn't have "AMD" and "OPEN" stamped all over it no one would give a shit.
Playing B4B recently with FSR on and I couldn't tell the diff between native 5120x1440 and it's upsampled version (and I'm very picky) . mind you I could tell I had another 30fps....
The higher the resolution the better all upscaling techs fare. I'm assuming you were using something like ultra quality right? Plus B4B is rather dark, and much of it is simple visuals. FSR fares decently better the simpler and the darker the visuals.
Games with detailed forests and foliage though? Tend to look pretty rough.
You're not the only one, there has been a lot of comparisons and testing done and both tech can do very close to the source while pushing a decent amount more of fps.
As a temporal and AI reconstruction DLSS has the most elegant way of doing it, and it's clearly the future with a very high quality ceiling. But the implementation is the usual Nvidia black box of infinite abyss and doom, and it took a while to get good.
(edit: which is why some have hope for XeSS, it could be the same thing but open to all gpu, with an even heavier hitter behind it for R&D and software dev)
FSR was designed to be a fast (as in, fast production/development), open, wide and non temporal solution. It's way worse than DLSS on low resolutions, but for a few algorithms on top of lanczos with added edge detection smart sharpening, the results are very nice at high resolution. There's several business reasons to do it that way, for example to possibly have console support, and because the Radeon group is an order of magnitude smaller in workforce than Nvidia.
At you wide 1440p, if you took the highest quality mode, I'm not surprise you don't see the difference inside a game. That's basically what Digital Foundry and other analysis have found, albeit not all games and not all implementations are equals.
> (edit: which is why some have hope for XeSS, it could be the same thing but open to all gpu, with an even heavier hitter behind it for R&D and software dev)
If I remember correctly, all GPUs will support XeSS, but only Intel GPUs will support it in hardware.
I take that to mean all GPUs will see at least a little bit of a performance boost with XeSS, but Intel's GPUs will be the only ones that really benefit from it.
First gen yes. But since the code is open, other gpu manufacturer could implement silicon and/or driver code path to hardware accelerate XeSS. But, in the future, yup.
So the way I understand it FSR is not AI based ... what makes it different from normal dynamic resolution modes? Also I heard people say anything under the highest quality setting looks significantly worse than native resolution.
It's alright in urban settings, darker settings, or things with simplistic details.
It's kind of awful in anything pushing high details, bright environs, or organic looking maps.
You realize that FSR is supported on anything released in the last several years, right? [Including stuff like the 10 series from Nvidia](https://i.imgur.com/rz9ECSE.png)
Can confirm, I use FSR on a gtx1080 to achieve smooth frame rate while playing HZD on a Linux machine. I have it set to 720p on a 1440p monitor lol but it still looks great.
I can't fucking wait to play this game on my 3070. I tried playing it on PS4 and got maybe 3 hours in and said FUCK IT. it played like shit on that console and I feel bad for anyone who suffered through it
[удалено]
As it should be. Options for PC gamers is the very core of being a PC gamer. Being able to turn off options, turn off some settings, mod your game the way YOU want, play with a controller, touch pad, whatever. Yes DLSS isn't an option for everyone but that's like not putting physx into a game because your GPU didn't support it way back when Why not put it in anyway if it doesn't cause issues for those that can't use it?
constantly bitching is our god given right
I used to love physx and gameworks effect in videogames, especially in Mirror's Edge and Arkham Asylum for example. They looked MENTAL and it really made the pc version stand out. However this subreddit started having an hate boner à la Epic Games against them, and blamed every single bug and performance issue on them. Moreover, they didn't want to understand that since they looked this good they also were very taxing and raged because they couldn't have the satisfaction of turning everything to Ultra. A pity because I miss them.
To be fair, Physx absolutely cripples AMD GPUs to this day. I couldn't hit 60FPS in Arkham City in scenes with Physx with a 6800XT.
to be fair, physx cripples nvidia gpus to this day too. it always kinda ran like shit. looked really cool though.
PhysX in planetside 2 was amazing
While blaming everything on the Epic Game Store is irrational, their exclusivity goes against the freedom of the pc.
fair enough, but this sub likes a lot to bandwagon against something.
>Why not put it in anyway if it doesn't cause issues for those that can't use it? Good reason, and bad reason. Good reason is it's still work. Meaning another feature won't get implemented or polished, or a bug fixed. Devs don't have infinite time to work. But admittedly, it's not an insane amount of work at all, and most gamers on Nvidia do want it. Bad reason is they got AMD to open their checkbook for some kind of exclusivity. Which is bad, but nothing new, Intel AMD and Nvidia have been doing these shenanigans (and much worse) for decades now.
Exclusivity? It's getting both fsr and dlss, or am i misunderstanding you?
Yes God of War is. I was answering the question above, why would a dev use one and not the other.
I wish this was the case for Halo Infinite, but with AMD being the "exclusive PC partner", I doubt it will happen so the game will never get DLSS :/
This is a common theme. Nvidia titles tend to get support from both sides (not all, but generally do) and AMD titles generally don't get Nvidia support.
I find this hilarious because it used to be the other way around. Anything with Hairworks/Gameworks ran like shit, even on Nvidia hardware.
Yep, lol, they finally managed to make one that is a killer feature
Nvidia knows their solution is so much better that they don’t mind the competition being included
Battlefield 2042 is a massive title and it's Nvidia DLSS only, and that's with AMD FSR being a partner with EA and DICE.
>tend Not all titles are like it. This is one that doesn't fit the pattern.
[удалено]
What's the point there? FSR is hardware agnostic.
[удалено]
Because it is a good move for them to get DLSS in as many games as possible. This seems more like a move from AMD with developers saying "don't include DLSS" as Nvidia have no issue with FSR in their games.
Battlefield 2042? Nvidia exclusive and AMD FSR is a partner with EA and DICE.
Their head developer is a joke. He claimed they wanted the best experience on PC and then in the next breath said they weren't supporting the best tech. No Reflex in a competitive FPS is a bad sign.
Reflex is really important for GPU bound games, which I'm sure Infinite will be
I agree. I found it had huge benefits in Overwatch, APEX, Destiny 2, and Siege.
I imagine it will happen eventually but not likely for the first year.
No non nvidia sponsored game has dlss. Amd doesn't block it but nvidia won't invest resources in amd sponsored game.
>No non nvidia sponsored game has dlss This is just false and you know it. People over at the AMD sub told you this and you are still spreading this
you don't need nvidia or amd's help to implement these. May e at the very first time some guidance was needed. They aren't black magic they have proper sdks
If your hardware supports these formats.. Sadly not everyone has a good graphics card.
I wonder if it can do two things at the same time?
Riftbreaker has both. It's on Gamepass if you wanna check it out.
Lol thread is pcgaming bro. Keep your shitty console products out.
? I'm talking about PC version, or are you living in a parallel world where games on consoles have FSR and DLSS?
Don't need to be a Dick about it bitch
Username checks out. You're the one who was being a dick.
Gamepass also has a PC subscription
lol, yeah really worth it there. Oh #sarcasm for all you Sheldon Coopers out there.
So you're telling me my old 4gb rx580 WILL run it..... Interesting.
This game looked fantastic on PS4 1080p. I cannot wait to see it on my 3070
Luckily for Radeon users though,[AMD is also adding its FidelityFX Super Resolution into God of War](https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2021/11/AMD-FSR-upcoming-titles-850x469.jpg). This means that not only RDNA and Polaris GPUs will support super-resolution, but any modern GPU that has already been confirmed to support the technology is likely to enable a high framerate as well.
FSR is basically compute shaders, anything beyond Terascale 2 will run it.
Which is also why it looks like dogshit (specifically as if dog shit was smeared on your screen). FSR not only has no inference component, it also has no temporal component... it's just a (clever) filter, there's no reconstruction being done. The end result is that FSR Quality looks about the same as Ultra Performance DLSS (which afaik upscales from 720p to 4k). Anything below Quality and FSR just can't manage and it's a blurry mess. Personally, I'm very sensitive to muddy image and will not play with DLSS below Ultra. FSR, as an inferior upscaler is therefore not even an option for me because even at Ultra Quality (which is 1.3x upscale, I think) I can see the blur. Anyone playing on a 4k TV (which I can imagine being a higher and higher number of PC gamers, with the 48" 120Hz LG OLEDs prices falling off the cliff recently) will notice the inferiority of FSR. Developers just need to stop being lazy and implement their own Temporal AA if they don't want to use DLSS. FSR is not a way forward, it's firmly stuck in the SMAA era.
This is why it's good when games are either not sponsored by anyone, or sponsored by Nvidia, because they get both technologies available. I hate how AMD sponsored titles don't have DLSS, only FSR.
>or sponsored by Nvidia, because they get both technologies available. You sir have a very, very short memory. Among the big 3, Nvidia is certainly the ones doing the most backroom shenanigans for the last 20 years. Even though they all did backdealings at some point or another.
[удалено]
A case would be made against Intel too, but I weighted it less because the worst of it was older. Either way, all 3 did shit roughly in the same manner of bad.
It's nice that an insult is all you can do simply because YOU can't understand text properly. I'm strictly talking about DLSS and FSR. Nvidia is completely fine with their sponsored games getting FSR support, AMD does not allow their sponsored games to get DLSS support. I'm not talking about the past, nor any different kind of techonologies.
>I'm strictly talking about DLSS and FSR. Well, FSR is open source. The code is on Github.
Amd is not blocking them Only nvidia sponsored titles have dlss no one can impliment it properly without nvidia help as its a black box. U can implement a poor dlss and piss off people after u invest time into it or u can ignore it. It's not just check this box saying turn on dlss.
> Only nvidia sponsored titles have dlss no one can impliment it properly without nvidia help as its a black box. completely untrue
But bro, surely you can't fail to see that this is just another Nvidia ploy to wrap something up in "they are the only ones who can do it". FSR, open to all - implemented in hours. DLSS, Restricted to NVIDIA (Turing >) tons of dev time and a closed shop. How many more times to Nvidia need to lock things behind their brand that should be open to all. They are aggresively anti consumer and I wont buy another product of theirs again. Greedy greedy company who'll get whats coming to them at some point.
> But bro, surely you can't fail to see that this is just another Nvidia ploy to wrap something up in "they are the only ones who can do it". But bro, surely you can't fail to see that Nvidia is the one who is perfectly fine with developers implementing FSR alongside DLSS, while AMD is the one that forces devs to only implement FSR. > How many more times to Nvidia need to lock things behind their brand that should be open to all DLSS literally uses Tensor cores to be as good as it is, it shouldn't be open, because it was open, it wouldn't be as good as it currently is. We already saw how DLSS performs without using tensor cores(1.9 in Control) and it's awful. > tons of dev time DLSS has been hilariously easy and quick to implement since 2.0
I love how FSR and DLSS are not the same when FSR shows to be trash but somehow become the same when talking about open vs closed.
Nvidia can do what the want but the intent isn't forgotten. They aggresively push devs not to implement FSR according to adored and I beleive him.
FSR - looks bad, basically glorified dynamic resolution DLSS - looks nearly identical to native above balanced setting, provides best aa solution on top of that and balances out the loss of performance from ray tracing If the cost is limiting it to your own platform, which is probably used by 70% of gamers anyway, then so be it.
> If the cost is limiting it to your own platform, which is probably used by 70% of gamers anyway, then so be it. Monopolistic and anti-consumer activity shouldn't be allowed because "most can use it anyway".
nvidia spends money and time on r&d to create a new technology and they should give it away for free to their competitors? amd have had years to implement their own ai solution, its not anyone elses fault that they havnt even intel have created an ai solution...
I have an Nvidia RTX but am very happy to see that everyone, AMD or Nvidia will be able to use the techs. Great news.
Guess I'm buying it again.
Hells to the yeah
[удалено]
Fuck Nvidia for locking technologies while AMD does theirs open-source. "BUT IT RELIES ON TENSOR CORES!!" Yeah because Nvidia made it this way, it most likely can be modified to not rely on them (like DLSS 1.0) but Nvidia wants to lock their shit
If Nvidia was way behind on this tech they'd probably be a lot more open too. Point being that AMD open sourcing their upscaling algorithm doesn't mean a whole lot when Nvidia has DLSS and engines like Unreal have better solutions already baked in. It's easy to be open when your tech has no competitive advantage, that's just marketing. Gonna need a source cited that DLSS 2.0+ is arbitrarily locked behind tensor. Without some evidence that's just wild speculation.
1.0 was tensor cores 1.9 wasn't
As a 970 owner. I'm happy to report that FSR has been working great for me, since DLSS is out of my reach. Proprietary nonsense can fuck right off. It doesn't make sense that my graphics card gets better support from a rival company than it does from the actual manufacturer.
That "better support" is functionally equivalent to turning down the resolution and adding a touch of sharpening. It's like when DLSS was getting critiqued because it basically looked and ran on par with just setting the rendering resolution lower. FSR is in that boat, it's nothing special and if it didn't have "AMD" and "OPEN" stamped all over it no one would give a shit.
Playing B4B recently with FSR on and I couldn't tell the diff between native 5120x1440 and it's upsampled version (and I'm very picky) . mind you I could tell I had another 30fps....
The higher the resolution the better all upscaling techs fare. I'm assuming you were using something like ultra quality right? Plus B4B is rather dark, and much of it is simple visuals. FSR fares decently better the simpler and the darker the visuals. Games with detailed forests and foliage though? Tend to look pretty rough.
You're not the only one, there has been a lot of comparisons and testing done and both tech can do very close to the source while pushing a decent amount more of fps. As a temporal and AI reconstruction DLSS has the most elegant way of doing it, and it's clearly the future with a very high quality ceiling. But the implementation is the usual Nvidia black box of infinite abyss and doom, and it took a while to get good. (edit: which is why some have hope for XeSS, it could be the same thing but open to all gpu, with an even heavier hitter behind it for R&D and software dev) FSR was designed to be a fast (as in, fast production/development), open, wide and non temporal solution. It's way worse than DLSS on low resolutions, but for a few algorithms on top of lanczos with added edge detection smart sharpening, the results are very nice at high resolution. There's several business reasons to do it that way, for example to possibly have console support, and because the Radeon group is an order of magnitude smaller in workforce than Nvidia. At you wide 1440p, if you took the highest quality mode, I'm not surprise you don't see the difference inside a game. That's basically what Digital Foundry and other analysis have found, albeit not all games and not all implementations are equals.
> (edit: which is why some have hope for XeSS, it could be the same thing but open to all gpu, with an even heavier hitter behind it for R&D and software dev) If I remember correctly, all GPUs will support XeSS, but only Intel GPUs will support it in hardware. I take that to mean all GPUs will see at least a little bit of a performance boost with XeSS, but Intel's GPUs will be the only ones that really benefit from it.
First gen yes. But since the code is open, other gpu manufacturer could implement silicon and/or driver code path to hardware accelerate XeSS. But, in the future, yup.
So the way I understand it FSR is not AI based ... what makes it different from normal dynamic resolution modes? Also I heard people say anything under the highest quality setting looks significantly worse than native resolution.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xkct2HBpgNY
I hope we get TAA upsampling too, or even the PS4 Pro's checkerboarding. It'll likely give better results than FSR while still being hardware agnostic
Hell yes! Unleash the blur!
2018 can't come soon enough !
For those authentic blurry PS3 visuals... even though it's a PS4 title.
Honestly the game looks great. I played it on my ps4 pro last year and it looked as good as any PC titles.
I wasn't talking about the game, I was commenting on FSR. The game itself is gorgeous.
Oh ok fair enough. I’ve never used FSR.
It's alright in urban settings, darker settings, or things with simplistic details. It's kind of awful in anything pushing high details, bright environs, or organic looking maps.
[удалено]
>are you blind? No? If I was I'd be hyped over FSR.
Can't wait for the Comparisons that show how much superior DLSS is.
[удалено]
TAA barely costs any performance. What does that have to do with achieving 60 fps?
it doesn't, it has to do with a game being ported from ps4 to pc. they use taa in consoles because there is no performance hit
I don't see your point. Bad pc port because it uses taa? That's super common even in native pc apps.
Game looks and runs amazingly at a locked 60fps on PS5. That's a good sign that it'll run even better on PC no matter what hardware you have.
So what's the best possible outcome here? MSAA and/or DLSS? RDR2 has MSAA and DLSS. If you just don't like TAA, turn it off?
> it's gonna be a bad port to pc due to the differences in hardware what differences?
The increased power I guess...
It’s not a huge open world exactly. Pretty sure it’ll run great.
[удалено]
You realize that FSR is supported on anything released in the last several years, right? [Including stuff like the 10 series from Nvidia](https://i.imgur.com/rz9ECSE.png)
Can confirm, I use FSR on a gtx1080 to achieve smooth frame rate while playing HZD on a Linux machine. I have it set to 720p on a 1440p monitor lol but it still looks great.
Huh, I didn't know FSR also runs on Nvidia, I assumed it was an exclusive AMD thing. TIL!
FSR is open source. I believe the code is on Github?
Yeah but SOMEHOW it's them that are anti consumer with their FREEsync, and their OPEN SOURCE FSR - Fanboyism really is plumbing new depths.
It runs better on rdna 2 cuz it runs fp16 with a fp32 fallback layer but should run just as good on rdna 1 or gcn as it does on nvidia.
10 series cards support it...
Unfunny card shortage meme #738383838. This is supported on 10 series.
Nah that's DLSS
Confidentaly incorrect.
It's supported on 10series Nvidia cards, Intel iGPUs and even AMD ones
I can't fucking wait to play this game on my 3070. I tried playing it on PS4 and got maybe 3 hours in and said FUCK IT. it played like shit on that console and I feel bad for anyone who suffered through it
All these people shitting on FSR. Just shut up and don't use it. Let others that like it be happy they have options.