it's funny that modded fsr version in cyberpunk actually fixes ghosting and did it even before official implementation

@LyricalViking

2 ай бұрын

Passion will always be better than greed.

@TheHighborn

2 ай бұрын

@@LyricalViking but.... fsr is free

@haewymetal

2 ай бұрын

@@TheHighborn Greed in the sense that it costs AMD money to hire competent Software developers. They dont want to do that.

@yarost12

2 ай бұрын

@@KS-tz9sg FSR1 showcase title btw. Also Steam Deck flagship title. Both AMD products.

@winj3r

2 ай бұрын

@@haewymetal CP 2077 is an nvidia sponsored game. So of course they made bad implementation of an older version of FSR2.

This also served as a good example of the failings of TAA, which shows ghosting similar to FSR in some scenes like the stickers on the shop door in the Spiderman section.

@christophermullins7163

2 ай бұрын

I have never found a scenario where fsr had worse ghosting that temporal AA. Anything working temporally will have these types of effects.. even the latest dlss.

@smalldickbigdreams2386

2 ай бұрын

I have a cousin who works with a team on TAA improvement and did you know how complicated to improve such technology you are using for free? They don't get much funding and you expect them to work it to perfections?

@soulshinobi

2 ай бұрын

@@christophermullins7163 I haven't either, but TAA looks worse than DLSS, and surely DLAA, Native, MSAA, and SSAA when in motion.

@ranjitmandal1612

2 ай бұрын

😢

@PixelShade

2 ай бұрын

TAA is much worse than FSR... and AMD has eliminated ghosting completely on FSR2.2. It's just that most developers haven't implemented the measures to combat such scenarios... CDPR added a reactive mask to the car in v.1.61, but then it was magically removed in 1.62 with the release of DLSS3. fan made FSR2 Injection mods also completely remove ghosting. So it's not a matter of tech, but rather the implementation in itself.

To the people asking why this video is relevant - AMD is now ubiquitous in the gaming world. Look at how many companies are using their architectures in their PCs/handhelds/consoles. They fall into the perfect Venn Diagram of: Being a single source for both CPU and GPU hardware, having a very *mature* set of architectures (cough, Intel graphics), and actually being willing to be aggressive on price. Nvidia doesn’t care enough to compete much where AMD seems to shine, they’d rather make bank in the AI space. So, if AMD is the only real option for the majority of gaming machines outside the home built PC space, they’re the only company that needs to be convinced of anything. And a video like this is the only way to make the point. If it takes multiple reminders over the course of a couple years, so be it. Yes, Tim is beating a dead horse, but that’s AMD’s fault.

@Dragoonoar

2 ай бұрын

"actually being willing to be aggresive on price" lmao no amd and nvidia are a duopoly. and amd havent done anything to dispel that notion

@Eleganttf2

2 ай бұрын

blows my mind that you had to say this because of how rampant AMD fanboys are especially in the youtube section its like an echo chamber thanks to channels like Niktek that only had the mindset of "Nvidia = bad guy, AMD = good guy"

@kurgo_

2 ай бұрын

Thanks for stating the obvious (unironically), whenever a video like this comes out you'll find a hilariously absurd numbers of AMD fanboys (who'll never describe themselves as such, because ofc not, they're all "pc enthusiasts") saying how it doesn't matter, how AMD magically released a patch just yesterday that fixes everything, how a user on reddit found a fix that makes a 7900xt perform better than a 4090, how Tim&Steve actually don't understand what they're talking about etc. etc. ad nauseam. It's really tiresome.

@MadridistaFrieren

2 ай бұрын

​@@Eleganttf2i see you everywhere bro 😂.

@crookim

2 ай бұрын

Bruh really? Amd CPUs are better and consume less power than Intel CPUs, what are you talking about!

How about better optimize games so we dont freaking need to use upscaling methods to play in basic 1080p resolution?!

@Chrissy717

2 ай бұрын

As long as Gamers are on 10 year old graphics cards with a fraction of the power of current gen consoles. No.

@waterheart95

2 ай бұрын

@@Chrissy717 Honesty we know that not to be true. At least in the AA and AAA space, games have become a bit more unoptimized despite the slight increase in visuals. This generation feels like a low increase despite the nice power increase in the move to PS5. Most games should look a bit better and run better than the previous generation.

@geekmechanic1473

2 ай бұрын

​@@waterheart95I think it takes time for devs to learn and adapt to the new technologies especially unreal engine 5

@chadbizeau5997

2 ай бұрын

​​​@@geekmechanic1473Plus people tend to overuse the word "optimization" without actually knowing what it means. To paraphrase a classic movie: They keep using that word, I do not think it means what they think it means!

@M337ING

2 ай бұрын

Yes, but developers also didn't have to deal with the added burden of resolutions above 1080p being available just over a console generation ago. It's much more complicated when they have to increase fidelity and features while also pumping up pixels.

One interesting comparison would be between TSR and FSR. They are both temporal upscalers that don't use AI. TSR is only available on UE5 games, but there are already a few available to make a small comparison.

@GodKitty677

2 ай бұрын

UE5 will be used on console so they can pick the builtin upscaler. UE5 one looks better, it goes from 1080p to 4k by design. Every time I read about TSR people state its better than FSR but that FSR has frame generation.

@Scott99259

2 ай бұрын

@winj3r tsr looks better bro.

@winj3r

2 ай бұрын

@@Scott99259 Yes, it does. But it would be nice to see a professional comparison between the 2.

@SKHYJINX

2 ай бұрын

TSR in Robocop was the best one to use even over DLSS, dunno what went wrong with DLSS fizzling on streets, but TSR does it way way less.

@Scott99259

2 ай бұрын

@@SKHYJINX yeah tsr looks incredible in robocop.

Regarding whether DLSS is 'running a more taxing algorithm' to get better image quality, the video states it's not the case, but at the same time states that the only difference of DLSS and FSR is 'hardware acceleration vs generic shaders'. HW Acceleration is exactly that - it speeds up something that could be done in shader cores. It's very likely that the algorithm used by DLSS is more complex (thus it catches more of the corner cases that FSR misses), so it leverages HW Accel to reduce the negative performance impact. One can see something similar with XeSS's fallbacks - the best XeSS algo uses Intel XMX cores and may achieve visual results closer to DLSS (compared to FSR), but the DP4a fallback suffers from a significantly larger performance hit VS the XMX path. Speed and quality has always been inversely proportional, which is why DLSS was initially seen on launch as a kind of black magic because it got so close to native while still offering so much more performance. We now know it really isn't free - it truly had to leverage additional compute resources to make that a reality.

@olnnn

2 ай бұрын

Yeah current DLSS and FSR ultimately don't make the same tradeoffs so it's not really an apples to apples comparison. It's unlikely one could make FSR equal DLSS in image quality without either needing the same hardware acceleration that may not exist in AMD's current architecture (unless the AI cores in RDNA3 can be used) but may be applicable in the next generations, and in the next console, or a significant performance hit.

@Nintenboy01

2 ай бұрын

the power of AI Tensor cores

@CrazySerb

2 ай бұрын

Either DLSS is either very inefficient or it does not use tensor cores. Nvidia did this in the past with physX and borderlands 2 for example is not playable on FX4350 for example with physX enable because CPU is not fast enough.. Cyberpunk runs at 900p at roughly the same framerate as FSR rendering at 720p so performance cost is rather substantial. On top of it, UE4 (means, no TSR) exists and every UE4+ game has ability to surpass DLSS image quality with proper TAA and sharpening configuration. Upscaling algorithm is less relevant when you have choices for it as well, because cheaper (simple bilinear is almost free) can provide higher quality then more expensive 5-tap Catmull-Rom bicubic (not the most expensive) because it has performance advantage and therefore, higher render resolution can be used for same level of performance.

@Ivan-pr7ku

2 ай бұрын

The case for DLSS (and XeSS) could simply be the fact, that higher image quality is a result of brute forcing the AI algorithm thanks to the dedicated HW acceleration and still providing better performance. FSR simply can't afford this, being multi-platform and thus relying on the lowest common denominator -- the pixel shaders.

@deathtoinfidelsdeusvult2184

2 ай бұрын

@@CrazySerb I mean sure TAA sure has better image quality if implemented properly because it literally cost a performance hit, the opposite of what DLSS do.

I always consider upscaling from 1080p to be an odd choice. As I see it, if you're GPU isn't strong enough to game at 1080p, chances are your CPU is probably not strong enough to have notable gains from dropping to 1080p to a lower resolution. For the most part, while FSR may not be as good as DLSS, I've been happy with it from 1440p and up, and it's not the garbage fire the internet often tells me it is.

@andrexskin

2 ай бұрын

I think it kinda depends. There are a lot of people on AM4 that have a 3700x or they jumped with a 5600x and a GPU such as 2060 or 2070, it's already good for 1080p, DLSS just improves the situation and they have the headroom for that. Most of the time they should be GPU Bound in these games, so their CPU can at least push some more FPS anyway even if they would get even more with a more powerful CPU

@Kacper42PL

2 ай бұрын

The tryhards internet tech nerds love to act like their decade old knowledge is always applicable

@jamesdoranto9013

2 ай бұрын

I'm considered poor by American standards and have had 1080p monitors since 2007, 1440p since 2012. This comment is off topic but it's funny to me that people still roll with 1080p in 2024.

@pauls4522

2 ай бұрын

It's all relative. A lot of people upgrade there platform in chunks. Say mobo, ram, psu, cpu in platform upgrade, then they do not buy the cpu until 9 months to a year later. I.e. when I built my 5800x build in December 2020, I did not buy my Radeon 6800xt until September due to the gpu prices at the time. That entire time I was using a 4gb rx580. Of course fsr did not exist then, so I was stuck at 30fps in games like rust and other newerish games. If fsr existed then it would be a different story.

@ThePipojp

2 ай бұрын

Bs, lots of people still have GPUs like the 2060 with AM4 CPUs

Where available please include DLAA / FSR native so you can compare the built in TAA to NVs TAA to AMD TAA at the same input resolution. It also allows you to see how much of the IQ delta is from the TAA method used and how much is from the upscaling.

@cpt.tombstone

2 ай бұрын

I would also like to see this kind of analysis, but it might reduce the number of games that could be compared due to FSR Native not being nearly as common as DLAA, as all games from DLSS 1.9 can be very easily set to use DLAA even if the game doesn't expose the DLAA option. I'm not aware of a similar solution being available for FSR, but please correct me if I'm wrong.

@rockindude3001

2 ай бұрын

Yeah, this! It seems like crucial parameters to control were a bit put to the side.

@clem9808

2 ай бұрын

Crazy how dlss looks even better/sharper than dlaa at slightly higher resolution. Ex. 2160p dlss quality(1440p) > 1920p dlaa native.

@xxtheplague1xx280

2 ай бұрын

AMD doesn't have its own TAA, FSR (all versions) use the games built in one (I might add that allot of games have trash TAA and we just blame AMD for it). NVIDIA DLSS has had its own implementation of TAA baked into DLSS from the start along with the use of AI compute requiring a Nvidia card. DLAA came after and maybe it's similar or the same as what's in DLSS and it's a good TAA filter 👍 but AMD has no equivalent to be compared against. Edit: OK AMD does have FSR native in 3.0 but not all titles that have 3.0 also have AA native aswell so it's even less available then the very few titles that have 3.0 doesn't make for a good argument yet.

@GeneralS1mba

2 ай бұрын

​@@clem9808Imagine dldsr + dlaa.

In Cyberpunk 2077 2:59 the ghosting is in the original image, it is of course worse in the upscaling versions. I noticed similar behavior with shadows in Days Gone, no upscaling. I'm not denying the upscaled versions look worse, I'm saying that any issues in the original image will be amplified by the upscaler. It seems like an engine issue that was well hidden but made apparent by the upscaler.

@pottuvoi2

2 ай бұрын

Is it in the image without TAA? FSR and DLSS replace the games own TAA solution, so they can help with or create new problems. FSR1 and DLSS1 would have preserved the original problems.

@JohnSmith-ro8hk

2 ай бұрын

@@pottuvoi2 wrong DLSS replaces TAA as its a requirement, FSR does not. It relies on the game's taa which is why it really suffers in some games.

@pottuvoi2

2 ай бұрын

@@JohnSmith-ro8hk FSR1 relied on any ingame AA to create gradients which it used for edge creation. FSR2 and later are completely different algorithms and can be described as TAA which resolve to larger target buffer. (Like DLSS 1.8 and later or temporal inection, TAAU etc.) gpuopen.com/gdc-presentations/2022/GDC_FidelityFX_Super_Resolution_2_0.pdf

@pottuvoi2

2 ай бұрын

​@@JohnSmith-ro8hk FSR1 relied on ingame AA to create gradients which it used to find edges. FSR2 and later can be described as TAA which resolve to larger buffer. (Like DLSS 1.8 onwards, TAAU etc.) gpuopen.com/gdc-presentations/2022/GDC_FidelityFX_Super_Resolution_2_0.pdf

@glenwaldrop8166

2 ай бұрын

@@pottuvoi2 I'll check, I noticed it in Cyberpunk in this video, in Days Gone TAA is probably enabled.

Question Tim, does the amount of fps have an effect on the output quality of the fsr/dlss? For example does a game with fsr quality have a noticeable improvement in image quality of it were running at say 120fps vs at 60fps?

@AerynGaming

2 ай бұрын

It does, and that makes sense with the core of these technologies being smart re-use of information from prior rendered frames. If there are more of those frames and they're temporally closer then there is more information to work with and the information is of a higher quality (less different than the target frame). It's not as pronounced as with framegen or making massive changes to the internal resolution, but it's there. You get quite notably better quality using DLSS-Q to go from e.g. 120 to 200fps than you do going from 30 to 50.

@piotrj333

2 ай бұрын

It does matter, but not as much. Technically speaking, both technologies depend on previous frame and motion vectors. Now if frametimes are shorter, that means motion vectors diffrence is smaller and if frametime is longer, motion vectors are bigger. So they are self correcting here. In case of FSR it only matters practically only in context of ghosting. Ghosting effect on higher FPS simply is shorter as trail lenght takes more frames and over many frames it vanishes faster. In case of DLSS, it matters more, because there is actual neural network trained that guesses data based on current and previous frame. On DLSS faster presets like ultra performance you can notice it a lot - if you move and take frame out of motion well it doesn't look that good. But if you stop, DLSS gathers data about relativly static image and better recreates text and fine details. If you had infinite FPS, every frame you would treat as static. FPS count also matters a lot more in case of frame generation.

@LanceThumping

2 ай бұрын

@@piotrj333 Seems like something that could benefit more from high framerates by keeping a duration of frames instead of a single frame. If frames are quick more of them are going to be close to the current frame, if frames are slow then only the previous one will be valuable.

"For example when swinging your light sabre around, the disocclusion artifacts with FSR are more noticeable than with DLSS, although they are present for both." People base their GPU purchases off this stuff? Urgh.

@jayg339

2 ай бұрын

He's just using an example of where FSR falls short. And yes, upscaling techniques are a huge part of PC gaming now. It is definitely a consideration when purchasing a GPU.

@lvmarv1

2 ай бұрын

​@@jayg339Sure he is, but if you spent your time nit-pickicking over every little piece of the tech like this, you'd never buy anything. Neither will ever be perfect. I've played games with FSR 2 and 3 with my 7900XTX just to see what it's like, but am too busy actually playing my games to notice any of these "defects" for them to ever be an actual concern. Anyone else who was actually buying their GPUs to PLAY GAMES would notice the same thing.

@jayg339

2 ай бұрын

@@lvmarv1 I literally don't get this response. "I'm essentially too busy gaming to notice things like graphics" - then why buy a 7900xtx at all? Just buy a 7600 and call it a day because you'd be too busy "gaming" to actually notice the graphical defects.

@lvmarv1

2 ай бұрын

​@@jayg339 I notice graphics just fine. Put it this way, looking at this review, these are obscure "defects" that are often highlighted by pausing a game, slowing it right down, or zooming in unnaturally on a specific spot on-screen. When playing a game normally, a lot of these things discussed are not things that Joe Bloggs playing a game would notice or care about. Oh, and why do I have a 7900XTX? Because I can.

AI acceleration in FSR will be a blessing for lower resolutions, although it will probably require dedicated hardware like dlss or xess..

Id rather drop the game than have to rely on upscaling to get playble fps at 1080p medium.

@Osprey850

2 ай бұрын

Same. I'd just put it off until either a patch improves performance enough or I upgrade my hardware. I have plenty of games in my backlog that I put off for the same reason that I can now play at epic settings and high framerates to keep me occupied in the meantime.

@sephirothsoul999

2 ай бұрын

Completely agree with your POV. It's in a kick in the teeth when a new game come out (or even a sequel on the exact same game engine!) and the devs just _couldn't manage_ to get 1080p at a decent fps for your hardware that _was_ perfectly suitable for 1440p+ titles a year ago because of course the hardware is capable, it's just not optimised. And upscaling to 1080p? 1080p should become some sort of minimal standard to target, or the game needs to go back in the oven. IMO, it's not ready yet if (per one of the graphs in this vid), your 3060 12GB a ~£300 card) gets an average of 50fps at 1080p. 1080p60 ultra MINIMUM (I promise it can be done).

I'd love to see more games offer a 'render resolution slider', like we see in Starfield. This'll allow users to find their own balance between resolution and performance, while still being able to take advantage FSR2's upscaling features. I personally ran Starfield at 1440p + optimised settings + 75% render scale with FSR2 - and it looked great. 75% was above the standard "FSR Quality" (65% I believe), which allowed for cleaner image quality with only a minor hit to performance. At 1440p or lower, the standard resolution scale of "FSR2 Quality" might actually be too aggressive for most games.

@Your_Paramour

2 ай бұрын

For single player games it isn't really a problem (at least with nvidia) because with dlss tweaker you can set whatever internal render resolution you want, but with multiplayer games it's a big problem since dlss tweaker maybe just get you banned. RDR2 Online is a good example, the native taa is extremely blurry (especially at 1080p), but FSR is unusabably bad at 1080p quality, while dlss quality is probably marginally worse than native taa quality wise, but at least you get a small performance uplift.

@waltuhputurdaway

2 ай бұрын

FSR 2 quality is 66 percent ultra quality is definitely more than 65

@surfer8438

2 ай бұрын

Agreed. I use DLSS Tweaks to set the render resolution to 80% on 1440p. This makes the image quality almost indistinguishable from native res while giving a moderate boost to fps. Basically free performance.

@HappyHubris

2 ай бұрын

Yeah I would enjoy tweaking my upscale amount, as FSR2 tends to keel over at 1440p.

@parsashirali8957

2 ай бұрын

You mean fsr2 quality Quality is around 67% Ultra quality if that even exists is definitely above that

5:06 Did DLSS messed up the rendering of the blue sign on the right hand side or is that down to a timing difference between the frames where the engine hasn't quite finished rendering the image?

@kesselring22

2 ай бұрын

Nope. Sign is animated and its changes like this.

@Freddie1980

2 ай бұрын

@@kesselring22 thanks for clarifying thst

For me the main perk in having RTX cards for 1080p rig is an unspoken DLDSR Playing Cyberpunk with DLDSR x2,25 + DLSS Balance on high preset was a treat. Much more crispier image than native 1080p

@kamilkornobis5585

2 ай бұрын

It's a bummer that we don't get more in-depth professional analysis of DLDSR, as combined with DLSS it makes for a very effective anti-aliasing solution.

@8Paul7

2 ай бұрын

@@kamilkornobis5585yep I still game on 1080p plasma, but thanks to DLDSR and DLSS (usually using 2880x1620 with DLSS quality, so around 900p) I get absolutely pristine image quality at fantastic performance.

@Kiyuja

2 ай бұрын

my biggest issue with using that trick is that it completely messes up my second monitor...when I enable DSR/ DLDSR in NVCP it pushes all content of my second monitor almost out of screen. Might be a big win for single display users tho.

@Broformist

2 ай бұрын

@@8Paul7 1620p with DLSS quality is 1080p. You are using DLAA in that case. 1440p with DLSS Quality is 960p.

@starstreamgamer3704

2 ай бұрын

Ah, DLDSR and DLSS are the main reasons I went with Nvidia GPU last year. I was thinking about 7900 XT, but since it does not offer a straight alternative to DLDSR and FSR looked (and still looks) worse than DLSS, I chose 4070 Ti. Nvidia is selling tech this gen, not (only) compute power, like AMD.

What i would be very interested in would be a comparison/discussion of 1080p native vs 1440p DLSS/FSR. What i mean is a genuine discussion if it is better for the final gaming experience to spend more on a 1440p VRR Display and a GPU that is only able to deliver good FPS at 1440p utilizing upscaling or to get a 1080p VRR Display (which is cheaper, so you can get a better GPU) and render at 1080p native?

I always have issues with any upscaling technique since I almost always tend to notice artifacts that I find really ugly. What I often do now when I use upscaling with my RX 7900XT to get very high FPS at (upscaled) 4K resolution is to use the driver integrated RSR (Radeon Super Resolution). While image quality might still be up to debate I found that surprisingly really annoying artifacts are less common and in some titles (Dead Space) it offers clearly better results than the in game FSR. In games like Cyberpunk and Remnant 2 it is also better in my opinion. This is also partially explained by the fact that the driver option allows upscaling from 1800P to 2160P (kind of ultra quality mode). I have consistently good to very good results with this. Maybe it would be interesting to test this as well for you guys at Hardware Unboxed :).

@Sp00kyFox

2 ай бұрын

with RSR the temporal artifacts are less common or in fact completely missing because RSR is using FSR1, which is just a 2D spatial upscaler without any temporal component or even knowledge of the image content.

@Crysalis-jd1ub

2 ай бұрын

@@Sp00kyFoxNo idea, might be. I never checked it up. Still it is funny that this version within the driver can look better. For me at least it really yields often better results than the game implemented FSR.

with The Talos Principle 2 is because it was certainly removed motion blur, that in that game is what serves as denoiser for FSR, I recommend to use half motion blur and reduce sharpening to even zero, that gives the best image. That way FSR ends up being the best of the non-dlss upscalers and with Frame Generation

*for those who missed it this is on a 1080p monitor...* It SHOULD have been obvious, but I saw a lot of comments that didn't seem to realize this as I think some people didn't watch the video. UPSCALING at "DLSS Quality" on a 2560x1440 monitor is far, far different from upscaling on a 1080p monitor. And on a "4K" monitor it often goes the other way where the FPS takes a hit but much of the image barely looks better (4K using "DLSS Quality" vs 1440p using "DLSS Quality"). Although, in some situations 4K looks far better in terms of aliasing/jaggies so it depends a lot on the game. AI UPSCALING will eventually be part of the game engine in a way that it can't even be disabled because the choice of TEXTURES and how temporal data (yada yada) is implemented assumes AI upscaling will be used.

Why didn't you compare it to an unupscaled 720p image? If your gpu isn't powerful enough for rendering a native 1080p image, is it overall better to use fsr or should we stick with a 720p native rendering?

@rx58000

2 ай бұрын

I agree with you , on steam deck I found out using 960 x 540 p resolution more stable in some games than using native (1280x800)+ FSR Quality. The problem at least for me is many games don't allow that resolution

@TheZudah

2 ай бұрын

this

@user-tm9ho3bm4v

2 ай бұрын

I don't know about fsr but with intel's XeSS it does look better

@potatoes5829

2 ай бұрын

even better if you have a 1440p screen, allowing for the use of integer scaling instead of fractional scaling

@contramuffin5814

2 ай бұрын

In my situation (1440p screen), I've found that the quality goes like this: 1080p rendering > FSR1 > FSR2 > 1440p native rendering I've personally found that FSR2 gets pretty close to native 1440p rendering, and IMO you can really only see the artifacts if you really look for it. FSR1 gets you like... 70% if the way to 1440p native rendering. But I would take FSR1 over 1080p rendering any day. FSR1 just does a way better job of smoothing out the jaggies and the pixels than if you didn't use it. So yeah, if you're running a game at lower resolution than your screen, IMO always use FSR if you can

I'd say any upscaling isn't worth using at just 1080p. At low resolutions the base res is just horrendous. It starts to look decent at 1440p.

@bariscyilmaz

2 ай бұрын

DLSS Quality at 1080p on a 24 inch monitor looks good to me. I have since moved to a 27 inch 1440p monitor, and I can tell the difference more clearly between native and upscaled on this new screen. On smaller screens, the sharpness loss is not as apparent is what I'm trying to say.

@stangamer1151

2 ай бұрын

But in case of Nvidia, if you have a 1080p screen, you can enable DLDSR (1,78x), set in-game resolution to 1440p and set DLSS to "Balanced". This way you will get better image quality than native 1080p (with TAA) and still noticeably better performance. It is a win-win situation for all owners of low end Nvidia cards paired with 1080p screens.

@bariscyilmaz

2 ай бұрын

@@stangamer1151 Hmm, I should try that. Let me get back to you

@DragonOfTheMortalKombat

2 ай бұрын

Agreed, but many of us don't have a choice, using older GPUs. The option is absolutely lowest graphics settings or straight up resolution reduction. Both are worse than Upscaling imho.

@arcanethink

2 ай бұрын

nonsense dlss quality is good for 1080p

Iv'e asked this before but can I use DSR factors and DLSS together? So my 1080p monitor has an upscaled 4k image downscaled again ;)

Any plans on reviewing Lossless frame gen? Works on any game, any GPU

With upscaling becoming more and more relevant - it's easily the biggest difference between AMD and NVIDIA GPUs holistically.

@gctypo2838

2 ай бұрын

Unlike things like raytracing, upscaling has its place in all price ranges - it isn't just a "luxury" feature. A good upscaling implementation allows the user to get more graphical fidelity or performance than they otherwise would, regardless of price range. The main reason you don't see people using FSR/DLSS at 1080p is just that the results are quite poor due to having less data to predict from. That will eventually change as each implementation improves.

@matthias6933

2 ай бұрын

Yeah difference being that FSR is universally applicable

@calvin659

28 күн бұрын

@@matthias6933 The difference is FSR is not and has never been a competitor to DLSS. It cannot hold a candle to DLSS without AI. FSR competes in the special Olympics and comparing it to an actual Olympian (DLSS) is distasteful and disgusting.

@matthias6933

27 күн бұрын

​@@calvin659You seem so excited to let Jensen squeeze you out. Be a good consoomer to Senpai Huang and make sure to save for the next card soon, so you dont feel the emptiness of being arbitrarily left out out of feature sets once again.

AMD has ALREADY delivered solutions fixing sub-pixel shimmering (for powerlines, fences, etc.), smearing, and disocclusion artifacts with FSR 2.2, you just assign reactive-, composition- or transparency masks to those objects, and you can also "pixel-lock" certain sub-pixel detail.... heck CDPR added a reactive mask to the car, fixing ghosting in Cyberpunk v.1.61 completely, but then it was removed and the motion blur re-introduced for FSR in the v1.62-DLSS3 patch. Community-made injected version of FSR fixes ghosting as well (you can assign a autogenerated helper function if you don't manually add "masks" to the game, it isn't as accurate, but still helps out), so really, it's more a matter of how much effort developers put into the FSR implementation compared to DLSS, rather than it being an indicator of the technology's capability in itself. I have played around with FSR SDK, and I would argue that the biggest difference is that it lacks the last temporal smoothing passes that DLSS has (due to AMD not relying on specialized cores for accelerated matrix calculations). Otherwise the techniques function similarly. Ultimately DLSS will always yield a more stable image, but in a scenario where FSR2.2 has a feature-complete implementation, it actually gets rid of many issues that still plague the DLSS's machine learned algorithm (like ghosting and oclussion artifacts). These videos ultimately compare "implementations" rather than "technology". The reason being that these games-, and side-by-side comparison doesn't offer a like-for-like scenario. However, if the video is looking at the current state of DLSS vs FSR in games I would still argue that that's a valid goal. Especially since it spotlights the current gaming landscape and how these technologies have been utilized by developers regardless of capabilities. I just think that the wording used throughout the video is kind of misleading, as this is NOT the state of the technology itself. And the headline about AMD "needing to fix FSR" is also kind of wrong since AMD already fixed most complaints, however developers have chosen not to anything about their current implementations. What AMD could do, and something I wish they did, is to offer a temporal smoothing pass in the temporal pipeline (like DLSS has) that can be toggled on/off. That way the quality can be more on-par with DLSS at the cost of performance. But then it will be more an issue of FSR performing worse, which isn't a good marketing point of course. But I think it would cool down the "quality debate" a whole lot

@cajampa

2 ай бұрын

What is stopping the developers to add the smoothing pass themselves? Is it a known algorithm? Can it be implemented universally on shader cores even if it would be higher performance loss than through DLSS tensor implementation. Would it be similar performance if implemented on AMD RDNA3 equivalent hardware. I get you might not know this but this is what I wonder. After your explanation of what FSR is lacking and suggestion that AMD should implement the smoothing pass they are missing.

@PixelShade

2 ай бұрын

@@cajampaI mean, FSR is open source, so anyone could modify how the temporal pipeline works. However, it's A LOT of work, and require deep low-level technological skill, and architectural knowledge of how FSR2.2 is currently constructed. Most game developers don't have time for the technical investment it would require. But if they did, one would hope that the changes wouldn't be kept to their own implementation, but rather merged into a new version of FSR. I might've made it sound more trivial than it actually is in my initial post, it's really nothing you just "slap on" easily... Personally, I wouldn't have the technical expertise to do it, but I have a friend that is insanely talented that probably could. However, that friend works for Epic, so he isn't allowed to work on things outside of that, and I think that happens with a lot of talent. Companies eat them up, make them sign NDA and they can't help out elsewhere.

@N4CR5

2 ай бұрын

These lazy CCs don't want to do that, just need to push Nvidia for free samples next launch.

@riven4121

2 ай бұрын

@@N4CR5 Funny you say that when Nvidia tried to blacklist HUB not too long ago.

It's funny because I experienced FSR well before DLSS and just accepted that upscaling comes with a certain amount of ghosting and artifacts. I didn't get why so many claimed DLSS was better until I got an RTX card and realized what _good_ upscaling was. Don't get me wrong, I'm still grateful that FSR exists because it can be used on my wife and kids' GPUs giving them a longer life with newer games, but it really doesn't compare with DLSS, no matter what the AMD fanboys pretend. The fact that _no one_ uses FSR if they have access to DLSS is all the proof you need that AMD still needs to do a lot of work with FSR.

in cyberpunk i have modded xess 1.3 and i use that with fsr 3 frame gen (not afmf, lukefz mod [works as long as u have ANY upscaler enabled]) best i can do in terms of performance + quality on an amd card (for now), this setup enables me to play with rtx ultra preset on a stable 60-80 fps (6800xt gpu)

Purely academic but I'd love to see what visual quality you could get out of DLSS/FSR with performance parity to native, how high does the resolution have to be to get down to native's performance and does it look better

@nimrodery

2 ай бұрын

@@Relex_92 I'm not sure that was the question, it was about comparing visual quality between upscalers and native (TAA) at performance parity, not comparing FSR with DLSS (I think we've established DLSS has better visual quality than FSR in most if not all games).

Some of these issues with FSR can be mitigated somewhat by reducing the over sharpening that it applies by default.

@djayjp

2 ай бұрын

@@kadupse True but the apparent fizziness can be lessened by having a smoother presentation.

Does GPU/CPU load change when you turn FSR on or off? Just wondering if a better GPU and CPU will make a difference.

@andrexskin

2 ай бұрын

It surely will change, FSR (or DLSS) ON will put a bit more load on the CPU if you have the headroom to push more FPS

good video, i think you should do a video comparing dlaa to dlss quality aswell

I believe AMD stopped working on FSR2 altogether and is currently focusing on the next iteration that uses machine learning cores as mentioned last week, probably named FSR4. They gave up on what was obviously not working and moved on. Tensor cores won.

@tarakivu8861

2 ай бұрын

Slamming calculations using specially made hardware acceleration cores is obviously superior. Also means you need that hardware. And Nvidia wont allow anyone else, because they dont care about spread of technology, they only want to sell.

DLSS is genuinely important. Sony is making their own tech to compete with it. I was surprised AMD didn't figure out AI upscaling with RX 7000. They only recently announced they were even working on it.

@msnehamukherjee

2 ай бұрын

AMD has just given up in their graphics department by the looks of it. NVIDIA cards offer so many software features that are too good to ignore. Their recently released RTX HDR is a game changer.

@AdamMi1

2 ай бұрын

​@@msnehamukherjeeabsolutely! The worst thing about an HDR monitor is non HDR content. RTX HDR is absolutely massive

@varno

2 ай бұрын

​@msnehamukherjee I don't think it is that, more amd only has a certain amount of wafer allocation from TSMC, and they can sell AI accelerators based on their CDNA platform for far more than they can consumer GPUs. The main thing they need their gpus for is to maintain competitiveness in the console and laptop space.mainstream gpus do that well enough. If amd had infinite manpower and fab allocation I am sure they would go after all markets, but as it is they have to prioritise. Nvidia and AMD have about the same headcount, but for amd this must make both cpus and gpus.

@ajemison3

2 ай бұрын

I think them focusing so much on hardware agnostic fsr was to try to let older cards hold off on upgrading to 30 and 40 series GPUs sooner than they would have. With the newer consoles on the horizon its probably a feature that Microsoft and Sony demanded be included.

@GutsCrush3R

2 ай бұрын

And people are assuming AMD was talking about FSR when they said "AI upscaling" (most media just ran with it which doesn't help). But AMD actually didn't mention FSR a single time and used "gaming device" instead of "gpu". In the last DF Direct Weekly, they talked about it and they don't think it's FSR. They think AMD might just be talking about something like a PS5 pro AI upscaler. Which doesn't mean FSR with Ai isn't coming at some point, but it might take even longer.

true. I have a rx 580 and played some recent games with FSR, the artifacts are noticeable/distracting. but then, the performance added is really high and I want to avoid TAA. It is annoying that some games use TAA as lowest available option where avoiding AA should be everywhere

I am so glad that my first experience with DLSS was on 1440p. Like man 1080p already looks kinda blurry but to then add even more is just nasty. On my older 1060 using FSR wasnt even worth it, as the upfront cost was so high that using game internal resolutions scalers had better image AND framerate...rendering FSR useless in that case.

My question for you now is... Is it better to render natively at 720p or use FSR quality then, if you don't have the hardware to run at native 1080p?

@enricofermi3471

2 ай бұрын

540p integer.

@potatoes5829

2 ай бұрын

@@enricofermi3471 yes (if you have a 1080p monitor, 720p if 1440p

@ms3862

2 ай бұрын

Most console gamers use 4k tv you can't do 720p on that tv

@berkay6947

Ай бұрын

It's always better to use upscaling.

I'm actually impressed at how good DLSS is at 1080p, in a lot of scenes its actually a visual improvement and not just a framerate improvement over native

@waltuhputurdaway

2 ай бұрын

There is noticably more showing with dlss on quality in a lot of games like SOTF, where shimmering is especially noticeable

the quality of FSR is one thing I definitely noticed moving from my 2060 super to the 7800 XT. I couldn't even tell the difference between DLSS balanced and native, but anything below FSR quality just makes the game look terrible.

I know *HUB* likes to say that upscaling isn't worth using at 1080p, but on a 15" laptop screen DLSS Quality does a more than adequate job.

@Ravix0fFourHorn

2 ай бұрын

i agree, these upscalers are great for smaller screens.

I love all the movement ghosting echos using DLSS. Just finished Days Gone and DLSS looked absolutely awful coming off the back of the motorcycle. Both of these solutions are bandaids for low framerate, IMO. That's all they are. They work great if you take a screenshot. DLSS in Cyberpunk (when I played at launch haven't been back to check this now) The NUMBERS on the shipping containers in the parade float warehouse. 3 Digital numbers... every one of the containers looked like 888 with DLSS on. Turn off DLSS and you could actually see the number. This is without movement at all. What really sucked was one of the objectives was to "go to container #____" But you can't read the number on any of them.

@crookim

2 ай бұрын

I hate all this upscaling technologies, they're ruining gaming! AAA Half ass broken games will always come out with upscaling tech to cover the bad optimization of their games!

@maverichz

2 ай бұрын

Lol, i played Cyberpunk with DLSS performance and FG averaging 60fps at 4K max settings, and couldn't be more happier, everything looks gorgeous. This won't be possible w/o upscaling tech. Imagine the raw gpu power needed and the cost as well to run my setting w/o upscaling. I always LOL at ppl who despise upscaling tech. Whether u like it or not, upscaling is the true future of gaming.

@mastroitek

2 ай бұрын

I played Cyberpunk in 4k dlss balanced and it was fine, ghosting problems were a problem and just like in this video streetlights and wires were sh**, overall it was "fine", meaning that I got to play the game, the other option was to go for native rendering at 1440p low-medium or 1080p high, both looked quite bad on a 32" monitor. I then used DLSS in some other games and had a much better experience (always 4k balanced/quality), for instance dlss does a really good job in Hogwarts Legacy. Unfortunately I can't say the same for FSR, I tried to use it in Horizon ZD and it was basically unusable even at 4k quality, it did do better in games like FC6 and Hogwarts legacy and Cyberpunk, but in all cases was particularly obvious that the game was running at a lower res (mostly because of foliage and general shimmering). I'm overall fine with upscaling, but its implementation needs to be consistently good on all games for it to be a viable option, and AMD really needs to do something to fix their FSR, because rn using FSR truly is the last resort to squeeze out some extra fps

@mastroitek

2 ай бұрын

@@maverichz to be completely clear, if for you that looked "gorgeous" is because you don't see all the problems, CP has suboptimal dlss performance. for instance Hogwarts Legacy is kinda the opposite

@nimrodery

2 ай бұрын

@@maverichz Yes, in comparison to a situation that would be even worse than the current one, upscaling is pretty good. What if we also weren't overcharged for what's essentially a software solution to the problem of "not having powerful enough hardware to achieve X settings at Y cost?" Actual native output is so bad TAA is applied by default, upscalers may have hurt as much as they've helped.

Why avatar frontiers of Pandora is not in this video which has the best implementation of fsr yet 🙄

@KamiKazeD

2 ай бұрын

Who cares its just 1 game for AMD vs over a 100 games for NVIDIA

@realduox

2 ай бұрын

because Hardware unboxed only makes clickbait.

and this is why Nvidia dominates the GPU market. Sure, you can save couple bucks and gain few %fps in the traditional raster with AMD. But when you want to use RT or upscaling there is only one winner

just learned about the comma and period keys...

I play at 1080p and I highly prefer playing at native with reduced details over upscaled with more details. Maybe upscaling has its use where say you buy a 1440p gpu and play on a 4k monitor, but at 1080p I'm not convinced of its usefulness unless maybe you're playing on a 1030 and need upscaling in order to run games or something.

for the love of god please Sony gift your PSSR AI upscaler to AMD

Could you also include a comparison with the latest DLLS version? I think a lot of us viewers are using DLSS-Swapper for updating to the newest DLSS version anyways.

I'm a budget (1080p) buyer, and this feature was extremely useful for me. *Also, I'd request your thoughts on 1080p to 4k 'integer' scaling vs 'FSR/DLSS' upscaling please.* Usecase is this: I'm playing 1080p games on a 4k screen. For a better image quality, should I 'integer' scale the image (using AMD/Nvidia control panel), or should I use FSR/DLSS? I tried searching online, but surprisingly there is no coverage on this. Even though this looks like a very frequent usecase to me. Maybe most please just let their monitors handle the scaling. So your views will be much appreciated, though a video will be lovely 😊

@marcelorauber8397

2 ай бұрын

That's a good question. I'm thinking about buying a 4k monitor because I work with texts, but I also play games on the PC

I think its funny that you see a game "looks awful" when I'm an old guy who used computer games of the 80's and 90's where the pixels were visible on almost every frame!

@autumn6994

2 ай бұрын

a different types of awful, back in the day graphics were simple but since crt's were a thing things like motion clarity were arguably better nowadays with lcd's and so many badly implemented temporal aa and upscalers your screen can end up looking like a smeary ghosty dipped in vaseline mess

@vasilije94

2 ай бұрын

Well this is not 80s or 90s. I played games from 90s and all the way to here. For a game to release in 2024. the pixelated look is not acceptable. Simple as that. Jedi looking like absolute shit on native is insane. Especially from AAA studio.

@vensroofcat6415

2 ай бұрын

@@autumn6994 you could also see 50/60 Hz flickering on CRT screens all the time. And some distortions around the edges. Our brains don't appreciate visual inconsistency. We are trained to seek for typos in texts and rare gems/food in the world. We don't care as much for the average quality as for the flow of things going wrong. Be it 320*240 green (orange/gray/beige) pixels or 4K in 10bit HDR.

@ifrit35

2 ай бұрын

I'm from the same era of video games and played my fair share of 240P video games and still do. In that sense I'm not bothered by what's now considered low resolution, or in other worlds 1080P. Ugly upscaling, artifacts, shimmering, blurriness and latency don't fit well with my gaming experience though.

@ro_valle

2 ай бұрын

It's a different fidelity target Yeah Atari looked like lines moving... So what ?

When FSR 2.0 released I was ecstatic, and happy with the base quality for an initial release. However they haven’t meaningfully improved it since, even after launching frame gen, and the quality just isn’t good enough to justify using it.

@Angel7black

2 ай бұрын

They cant improve it without AI, FSR was never meant to be a true DLSS competitor, it was a boxcheck and an attempt to muddy the waters and say theyre the same. They arent

@foch3

2 ай бұрын

@@Angel7black I couldn't have said it better!

I've noticed a lot of flickering/shimmering with FSR in WH40k Darktide, but XeSS doesn't have such issues. They certainly need to fix some things about FSR.

Another great option for people with RTX cards who plays in 1080p and the game's textures/antialiasing looks like shit is to use DLDSR (Nvidia control panel>Manage 3D settings>Global settings>DSR Factors - 2.25x DL / DSR Smoothness 15%). It will create a super resolution for all fullscreen applications (otherwise you will need to change your desktop resolution before launch, some dx12 only games don't have a real fullscreen mode) and together with DLSS - Quality it'll use much more detailed frames while FPS stays the same as native 1080p. It's pretty much DLAA but with better textures, antialiasing, and no FPS drops compared to native. Don't forget to disable Antialiasing, Sharpening, Motion Blur, Depth of Field in game settings.

@NadeemAhmed-nv2br

2 ай бұрын

So like Radeon super resolution

@Nolan431

2 ай бұрын

Not sure, DLDSR uses AI cores of the GPU@@NadeemAhmed-nv2br

I think fixing can go from both ways - from and and from game developers. I hope that developers testing FSR when imementing it, so when they see artifacts they can apply workarounds. But as I see common situation for developers is applying only settings that controls FSR quality levels and that's all. And if it works bad they transfer all negative feedback to AMD. My notice not about AMD only, it's about all upscaling technologies, that need to be applied not only as an option in graphics option. This option needs testing from developer and maybe some communication between developer and GPU vendor.

@samgoff5289

2 ай бұрын

Ah yes, amd apologist, it is never their fault blame anyone else

@janbenes3165

2 ай бұрын

@@samgoff5289 Well... Why is Avatar the best example of FSR so far, when plants are generally one of the worst things for FSR to upscale?

@fabricejaouen378

2 ай бұрын

The role of developers is to report artefacts, bugs, and such, their role is not to work on getting around a tech bug/artefact. imho

@argh_666

2 ай бұрын

It's always somebody's else's fault whenever AMD/Radeon can't produce a decent product.

@lilpain1997

2 ай бұрын

​@@janbenes3165 it still suffers the usual far artifacts though? It's better but still not good imo

Papermaster confirmed that FSR AI is coming. This is both good and bad news. The good news is that it will probably catch up with DLSS 3.5 upscaling. The bad news is that I suspect that it won't be on par with DLSS 4 upscaling which is incoming with the Blackwell release on the market... basically they will always be one or even two steps behind. AMD needs to start funding (and supplying human resources) to their software team more and they need to focus theose resources on specific useful techs rather than more side projects (AFMF) which can really be done if you are dominating and you have spare time and money to throw somewhere. And this latter part is definitely Nvidia's situation not AMD's.

@gargean1671

2 ай бұрын

>The good news is that it will probably catch up with DLSS 3.5 upscaling. Good joke. Let's hope that it will catch with DLSS 2.0. That already would be a miracle.

@notenjoying666

2 ай бұрын

Mlid said there will be no significant image improvements and no performance improvements at all in next dlss version.

@danieloberhofer9035

2 ай бұрын

I wouldn't call AFMF a "side project" - it is a way to make FG as widely available as possible - something that Nvidia doesn't have. There's so much to toy around with using AFMF. One of the best off-label usecases I've come across is using it as sort of a low power mode when playing older games (not everyone exclusively plays the latest AAA titles all the time): In older or less demanding games, I turn on AFMF and I get 4K 144 FPS for below 100W on my XTX. Fans don't even spin up. Yes, that's not everyone's usecase, but still nice to have.

@Archer_Legend

2 ай бұрын

@@gargean1671 we are in 2024, I hope that it catches up to DLSS 3.5 levels of quality otherwise it will be an utter disaster

@gargean1671

2 ай бұрын

@@Archer_Legend well, it's not like that "otherwise" didn't happened to AMD time and again)

worst thing about fsr for me is poor resolution in distances cuz im born to look ahead :D it destroys all vibe of playing CP with poor details in distance

6:31 the stairs behind Miles actually look better with DLSS than native, much better antialiasing

Always the same story every few weeks. DLSS is visually better than FSR. That is now known. Nevertheless, FSR 2 and 3 are not unusable! But what the test also shows. DLSS is not fundamentally better than the native image. Because when playing normally, no one makes direct side-by-side comparisons. Or detailed comparisons in zoomed-in slow motion or on high-resolution still images. The comparison is also misleading because some titles compare older FSR versions against the latest DLSS implementations. The comparisons only fuel fanboy discussions, they're not good for anything more. In addition, there are already rumors online that FSR+AI will come in 2024. Hopefully the unspeakable, impractical discussions will finally come to an end.

@NamTran-xc2ip

2 ай бұрын

DLSS is not always better than native, but it's actually way closer to native than FSR. The old versions of DLSS and fsr because that's what officially supported in the game.

@notenjoying666

2 ай бұрын

@@NamTran-xc2ip dlss is only "better" than native if taa implementation was shit.

@NamTran-xc2ip

2 ай бұрын

@@notenjoying666 Most games have bad taa, and even if taa is decent it will always be an inferior sampling method to even fsr, especially at 1080p. You can blame the game to make excuses for amd all you want, but thats the reality.

@notenjoying666

2 ай бұрын

@@NamTran-xc2ip At 1080p fsr is a ghosting mess. Taa is way better.

How about demanding more raw fps from gpu vendors instead of getting conditioned by them to upscaling.

@thefirstone4864

2 ай бұрын

Why not both

@eliadbu

2 ай бұрын

People have been demanding that, including reviewers (at least those I watch). That doesn't mean upscaling methods don't have a place in today's gaming and should be disregarded.

@aladdin8623

2 ай бұрын

@@eliadbu All upscalers wether based on AI or not rely on temporal pixel interpolation and motion vectors from previous frames. Whenever temporal pixel techniques like temporal AA are used the picture will inevitably loose details and produce ghosting up to muddy pixels. You can fine tune upscaling but never prevent artifacts completely. Even DLSS 3 is still affected by that and even worse the AI does not always recognize objects properly and misplaces wrong patterns. Conclusion: Native frames still present the best image quality.

@eugkra33

2 ай бұрын

​@@thefirstone4864because they charge you more for the silicon that it'll cost.

@Threewlz

2 ай бұрын

@@aladdin8623 nah, DLSS (not talking about FG) is better than native in some scenarios/points, not that clean and cut as some may think

Something that this video does not adress is the fact that most TAA implementations in newer games make your game look like a blurry mess at 1080p. Even with added sharpening the image still looks like a valesine smeared mess. Introducing FSR to the mix fixes most of this since the AA used in FSR is much more sharp than native implementations. I can't recall the last AAA game with a good native 1080p TAA look.

While probably not the intended use of the video, it does also give us an interesting look at what we can expect out of the Switch 2 now that it will have access to DLSS 2 (I seriously doubt it will have DLSS3). Its also unclear how many Tensor Cores it will have as well, but generally speaking its nice to see how well DLSS compares to native while still delivering a significant boost to performance from such low starting base resolutions. Hopefully most devs take advantage of it, since poor performance, really low resolutions and no AA were way too common on the Switch 1

@ironicdivinemandatestan4262

2 ай бұрын

Switch 2 will have access to Ray Reconstruction (since even the 20-series cards have it) but not Frame Generation since it lacks the Ada Lovelace OFA, but that won't be too much of a drag since Nvidia doesn't recommend using Frame Generation below 60 fps anyways.

I get what this video is pointing out but to be honest, and maybe it's just me, but I didn't notice any issues with either technology until they were pointed out. I think that when people are just playing the game, and again maybe it's just me, I don't think these issues are really going to get in the way of the overall experience.

@MartijnterHaar

2 ай бұрын

I often felt that way too about this kind of video, but from experience I can tell that the shimmering/flickering can get really annoying really fast if you are actually playing a game. With the other stuff it is more like Tim says: you probably won't notice the specific things that are wrong, but just that something about the game doesn't look right.

@matthias6933

2 ай бұрын

yeah the problems feel extremely exaggerated and feel like momentary inferiority complex for shiny features that will be superseded by something else in the future anyway. Meanwhile Nvidia has been tightening the memory width and size in order to make these stupid features possible but somehow nobody criticizes that. The last thing I want from AMD is to build custom processors into the GPU so they can cheap out on other parts that truly count for a GPUs longevity.

How does it look like when comparing FSR vs DLSS in 1440p ? That would be really interesting for me

@thelegendaryklobb2879

2 ай бұрын

There's already a video for 1440p and 4K

@catfishxX

2 ай бұрын

@@thelegendaryklobb2879 really? Oh, thx for the information. I'm gonna search for it

My uninformed and uneducated guess is that FSR has reached its peak as an upscaling, sharpening, and temporal vector feature. Development has probably shifted to tensor cores for both mainstream and future AI products. AI upscaling will probably be a byproduct benefit to gaming compared to what they likely want to sell in the datacenter. Though my hope is that Cerebras kicks GPU makers out of the AI space entirely so we stop getting wrecked on GPU prices.

Great to hear that 1080p is still an important resolution on 2024!!!!

@JohnSmith-ro8hk

2 ай бұрын

why is this great? the industry should be moving forward and 1440p is not expensive anymore...

TAA ruined graphics for me. I know why it's used, but back then 1080p was all i needed to play, and games looked great. Now even at 4k games are a blurry mess, and i just want sharpness. Rdr2 shouldn;t even be allowed to be released with amount of vaseline on screen it generates

I have to wonder though: if you have to use any upscaling tech with 1080p final resolution, aren't you likely to have other issues by being on very underpowered hardware for the game? How relevant is this comparison, really?

@sassuki

2 ай бұрын

Exactly my thoughts.

@DeepteshLovesTECH

2 ай бұрын

Isn't the purpose of upscaling to elongate the life of underpowered hardware? Did you see the performance numbers at the end? 20-40% boost in performance for not much worse image quality with DLSS. That's like buying a new GPU, which Isn't a good option in 2024.

@sassuki

2 ай бұрын

@@DeepteshLovesTECH I see it more like a replacement tire until you get a new one in that case 😁

@VelcroSnake93

2 ай бұрын

@@DeepteshLovesTECH The question is, if they have a GPU weak enough they need upscaling at 1080p, what are the chances they have a strong enough CPU that it will actually give them a notable boost in FPS when they're dropping the resolution below 1080p with upscaling?

@DeepteshLovesTECH

2 ай бұрын

​@@VelcroSnake93 There is a high chance the CPU is good enough. Something like a 3050 will also be pretty GPU limited in new titles. Also take for example: Laptops which have powerful CPUs but weak GPUs.

If you use FSR, turn of Motion Blur and Cornfilters, and Lens effects and other Visual destroyer. It helps alot!!!

It would have been nice to see XeSS included here as well as Cyberpunk supports all 3 upscalers.

To this day I still don't use any of these technologies. Native resolution, no ray tracing. I use AA and texture filtering and that's about it. Not sure if I'm behind or these technologies just aren't used all that often.

@N4CR5

2 ай бұрын

This here. I run 4k/120 48" OLED w/ 7900xtx, I absolutely avoid this crap as it looks bad. BLURLSS/FSR etc all look bad to me. RT, meh and not worth the downgraded quality with fake frames/upscaling just to get playable FPS. So you add lighting to make it look better, then mush it out with upscaling, what a waste of time. I don't see any CC's bringing up this point because it would make Nvidia mad and they won't get any samples.

@JohnSmith-ro8hk

2 ай бұрын

You want a real eye opener? Open up an old game that your hardware can run easily and apply msaa and or supersampling in driver to upscale it. You'll be floored by the image quality even with inferior effects and textures. These newer engines are garbage, and having to use upscaling to even make them relevant makes it worse.

I don't agree with upscaling at 1080p... mid range GPU prices have dropped to around 200-300€ and they can easily handle any game at 1080p...

@roki977

2 ай бұрын

What mid range GPUs cost less than 300$?

@IncomingLegend

2 ай бұрын

@@roki977 6600 around 200€, 6600xt around 300€, 7600 around 300€, 3060 around 200€, 4060 around 300€...

I have 6950 xt and use fsr sometimes when it makes sense. Recently I have been using the driver based super resolution on AMD. Custom resolutions @ 1600-1800p on a 2160p monitor looks pretty close to native and generally better than FSR quality.(1440p) From what I see.. FSR is a high res upscaler only.

did they ever add fsr to vlc or youtube yet?

If you're using FSR/DLSS/XeSS at 1080p you really shouldn't be.

@MacTavish9619

2 ай бұрын

Finally someone with brain. I saw people playing cyberpunk 2077 in 1080p with dlss balanced and they were saying it was looking good (it was one big shimmering mess).

At these price points, they don’t have much incentive to improve it. What’s the alternative? Spend a ton more money. But if you are doing that, you aren’t in that price group any more.

As someone who still plays on a 1650, an unstable image is infinitely better than 20fps, but no change to the upscaling component from FSR 2 to 3 is ridiculous.

Can you do a video on DLDSR? I feel like it flies under the radar, but its personally one of my favorite features. Running a 1440p monitor rendering at 4K with it actually can look better than native in certain games, like Escape From Tarkov. You can also still use DLSS with it as well.

@geoffreywright9933

2 ай бұрын

DLDSR is the standout Nvidia feature for me, not this upscaling malarkey. I use it on everything I can, even demanding games in conjunction with DLSS - Only way to get that 'better than native' image with DLSS folk like to crow about

In other words: Don´t use FSR at 1080p. Drop settings to high or even medium and enjoy.

Hello everyone, i have two gpu options (used) 6800xt (375 $) and 3080ti (430 $) which one should i pick for 1440p i have 7600x CPU with a deepcool pf650 PSU should i upgrade psu or not ? Please suggest

@dssd7685

2 ай бұрын

6800 xt

@BrianBarbaGonzalez

2 ай бұрын

For DLSS and RT Performance I would take the 3080ti. It has 4GB less VRAM than the RX6800xt, but it is enough. The RX6800XT is excellent for native resolution and rasterization, but equally, its performance falls between 3080 -10% +10% ~ depending on the game. I think that PSU is insufficient, the manufacturer's minimum recommendation is 700W. But you can try. PS: I have the RX6800XT (XFX Merc), with a 1440P 165hz monitor and the FSR seems quite bad to me (Exept Avatar), the RT cannot be used, I got better upscaling with my old RTX 2080. My next GPU will be a 4070ti S/80 S.

@dssd7685

2 ай бұрын

@@BrianBarbaGonzalez well Nvidia will stop supporting 30 series GPUs they will forget about it and focus new features only for 40 series GPUs lol

@GodKitty677

2 ай бұрын

The AMD 6000 series didnt sell well. See steam hardware survey. The only card that sold any numbers was the 6700. The 3080ti is faster in both raster and RT with DLSS support. You are below minimum PSU specs for both cards. AMD's Minimum PSU Recommendation 750 W. nVidia is Required System Power (W) 750. There is zero good reason to get a 6800xt or any of the AMD rx 6000 series cards.

@AdamMi1

2 ай бұрын

Get the 3080 ti. It's just better in almost every way and the higher cost is absolutely worth it

I'd like to see a comparison for 1440p and above. Thats where they are really useful. At low resolutions, chances are your CPU will be lacking and upscalers can only marginally help. I also want a cost comparison. Nvidia has an advantage with specialized cores, but sell this at a premium, so i'd like a comparison which takes into account the card required for DLSS and an alternative from AMD which might be more powerful for general compute and can choose a better quality mode for FSR. Just because both are called 'Quality' doesnt mean they are really equal and comparable.

Забавно. В начале месяца купил 4к монитор и при проверке в киберпанке 2077 сделал сравнение изображения при нативном изображении, и при включëнном fsr-качество. Оба изображения увеличил на 1000%, и оба изображения оказались идентичными. Rx 6800 xt

A lot of people won't even notice these artifacts. They are to busy gaming... Nevertheless I totally agree: FSR needs work. A lot.

@deathtoinfidelsdeusvult2184

2 ай бұрын

Too clear, especially flickering

@BlackTone91

2 ай бұрын

Blind people don't usually play games

@deathtoinfidelsdeusvult2184

2 ай бұрын

Alot of people dont buy amd so i guess you are right.

@lilpain1997

2 ай бұрын

These artifacts are 100% easy to notice while gaming. I don't even use fsr at 1440p on my 6800xt thanks to these artifacts. Even at quality 1440p still looks noticeably worse

@user-ec8zd8zp4x

2 ай бұрын

@@lilpain1997 Yes. For us. But this is niche for nerds. We know what to look for. Most people think it is just the way it is supposed to be, don't care, find it good enough or juts don't notice it. Don't forget, most of the people also think artefact-ridden smartphone photos are of great quality...

AMD should make their three 2024 drivers functional before they consider working on their software suite...

@JohnSmith-ro8hk

2 ай бұрын

PEBKAC

@MGK195

2 ай бұрын

@@JohnSmith-ro8hkcope harder

@JohnSmith-ro8hk

2 ай бұрын

@@MGK195 lrn2pc scrub

you probably already know but in case , dying light 2 recently got an update which overhauled the lighting, and vegetation this might have caused some overhauled different if you are using older results

Yeah, playing on a AMD GPU at 1440p myself, I try to use native resolution whenever possible. The hit to image stability is just too noticeable, I'd rather turn down stuff like shadows and reflections than use FSR. More importantly, XeSS and TSR both do a much better job imo, so I occasionally use those where possible.

DLSS seems to prioritize image stability and that was always one of my biggest personal annoyances before DLSS (damn you thatched roofs in Witcher 3). Which is a big reason I've been a big fan girl. I do like a clear image but I'm far more bothered by frame to frame flicker. Esp when standing still which FSR STILL has issues with.

Me currently watching the video in data saving settings with KZread’s questionable compression: yes, DLSS/FSR bad must fix instabilities at 1080p

In some games like Ready or Not, the FSR2 implementation is so bad that even at 1440p the FSR quality option looks much worse than its DLSS counterpart. Although I’m glad they created frame gen so RTX 30 users like myself can utilise it alongside DLSS upscaling

@waltuhputurdaway

2 ай бұрын

And we rtx users are also able to easily update our DLSS dlls so if a game has really outdated DLSS then we can just download newest dll and swap

Also funny that FSR does very well in Avatar

tbh in jedi survivor most noticable for me was when running DLSS has stability issues with robot on his shoulder, it feels like Tim skips way more issues with DLSS compared to FSR, for example CP street scene, for me it feels like DLSS has less but more noticable issues compared to FSR having more less visible ones (that excludes green neon sign as DLSS probably has AI to stabilize it while FSR takes artifacts from native) is it bias or is it that he wants FSR to mature more, i have no idea

@NANOTECHYT

2 ай бұрын

Let's be honest, Jedi Survivor is a poor game visual quality wise anyway. DigitalFoundry has found animation skipping in the game. The game runs poorly on PC. It's blurry and grainy even with native 4K TAA and it's not a visually impressive game either. Both FSR and DLSS just accentuate the artifacting the game natively has, but in different ways.

So it's quite clear that upscaling version AND game specific implementation play a **huge** role in this comparison. From this it would be worthwhile to judge FSR3 against FSR2.2 and FSR2.1 to see what changed there(which I know you did). Unfortunately as long as game-devs can implement garbage 2.2 (R&C) but okay 2.1 (Dead Space) and good(ish) FSR3 (avatar) even that comparison would be flawed. Same is true for DLSS. Others in the comments have pointed out that modders have implemented better FSR into CP2077 than what was presented. So yeah, current implementations of versions of FSR look worse than current implementations of versions of DLSS. How much of this is down to devs, how much to tech? It's a catchy title that AMD has to do stuff, and yeah they DO need to do stuff, mostly poke devs to implement FSR better (which seems possible). tl;dr: The tech isn't massively worse than DLSS, to a large degree it's what is rolled out that looks sub-par. This is what AMD needs to fix. Bonus points for better upscaling tech. Cheers for this insight into the problem.

@H.S03

2 ай бұрын

Effectively scapegoating the inadequacy of FSR onto dev implementation is very counter productive toward competition in the GPU market. When your upscaler has consistently produced inferior results vs your competitor, in virtually every game where you are both implemented, since the beginning of its release, it is very obvious the onus is almost entirely on AMD. No amount of circumstance can mitigate that. Addressing the root issue and creating a better product IS what AMD needs to do to fix it, it should never be considered the “bonus”. This is by far what is most beneficial for us as consumers, criticism and accountability are the only factors that seem to drive any change in the GPU market and should never be prevented.

@rockindude3001

2 ай бұрын

​@@H.S03 No, there certainly is a visible differential in image quality produced by FSR. Painting me as if I would be denying that is disingenuous. You seem to be very certain of how "consistently" this has been shown. My criticism is that while this certainly is possible to be shown, this video shows many comparisons which *do not control* for aspects such as dev-implementation. And I did not fully blast Tim with this criticism as this would be a video that he *cannot* make. He did what he could, good on him it's a massive amount of work. BUT that also means that this important point, the implementation, is botching the point he makes. This does not take away crticism from AMD *at all*. "To a large degree it's implementation" does NOT mean that FSR is fine or AMD is off the hook. It's a compounding problem actually that only AMD can fix. They have to make sure that implementations are effectively un-botchable. NVidia does so by spending tons of money and babysitting devs through their implementations. On top of that DLSS does look better. End result: DLSS better.

love these comparing videos

I have an RX 6900 XT and generally find that FSR 2.1 or higher has been better than DLSS on my brother's RTX 3090 there's a lot of DRAM stutter and artifacting particularly in no man's sky where the game is entirely unplayable using DLSS but even on the RTX 3090 if you put FSR on in no Man's sky is pretty acceptable Edit I forgot to note that I'm on a 1440p monitor so that might be why I have a different experience

@technics1246

26 күн бұрын

I completely agree with you. I've have a RTX NVIDIA card and FSR looks better than DLSS in any game, I don't know why

I'm so glad I got over pixel ogling 20 years ago. Now I can't even tell if FSR is enabled or not, and I simply do not care. It's incredibly freeing :>

@LINAKblack123

2 ай бұрын

copium

@DavideDavini

2 ай бұрын

I know right? 😂 Jokes aside, for some people it’s really noticeable. I think that if you are an old gamer it’s easier to ignore because graphics used to be so much worse. 😂 But maybe it’s just a per person thing.

@TheMrRadish

2 ай бұрын

@@DavideDavini i remember when i got 3070 after many praises how good DLSS 2.0 looks, installed cyberpunk to check this out and my first reaction was how shit this looks.

@zackmandarino1021

2 ай бұрын

@@DavideDavini it all depends on sensitivity to things each persons going to be different fsr is 90% of dlss most of the time. personally for me i dont notice anything unless i specifically looking. the main thing i notice on both dlss and fsr when using them is the softness of the image not the shimmer on a corner at a distance or on small things its the overall softness that gets me. for me i prefer native resolution all day and dont bother turning these things on and i upgrade enough to make sure i dont have to every 4-5 years on average. im also more sensitive to latency than i am to slight shimmer at a distance while gaming. like 20ms to 40ms latency change is night and day and feels horrible.

Fuzziness Smeared Resolution is what FSR truly stands for.

@fanaticaudienc8089

2 ай бұрын

I don't like deep learning shit. But there was a very good deal on "4060". After playing reddeadredemption2 with dlss on quality, I could not tell the difference to native. But trees looked smeared with FSR quality.

@goodoldmate5548

2 ай бұрын

DLSS more like: Don't Look Still Smudged

@fanaticaudienc8089

2 ай бұрын

​@@goodoldmate5548I don't know. I jumped from 1060ti to 4060. And most games I tried looked good with dlss "quality". With FSR there always something wrong.

@NamTran-xc2ip

2 ай бұрын

​@@fanaticaudienc8089There's no card named 1060ti

@fanaticaudienc8089

2 ай бұрын

@@NamTran-xc2ip huh?

buying AMD this gen (7900XTX) was one of the worst mistakes I've made in 2023.

Both need to be better for 1080p, while there can be uplift I do find native + adjustments to always be better quality per frame

Using DLSS/FSR At 1080p Example like Doom Eternal Period

@fourtii8707

2 ай бұрын

Period? Either you don't have a NVIDIA GPU or something must be wrong with your eyes especially doom eternal with taa at native resolution period😂

@od13166

2 ай бұрын

@@fourtii8707 not really it isnt using T-AA its using SMAA T which is better then T-AA and still better then COD at native :P and way game scales gpu was great even RX6600 can do raytracing at 1080p 110fps and i swear believe you playing doom eternal with Motion blur on

@od13166

2 ай бұрын

@@fourtii8707 and also not requiring 100+gb like COD while it costed 33GB at launch

I hear you say "bad result" for such and such technology, but yet without slow motion and zoom I couldn't notice a difference most of the time.

@deathtoinfidelsdeusvult2184

2 ай бұрын

For me fsr is so ugly id rather use Xess. Too much shimmering , the only reason why you can barely notice it is because of youtube.

@Samymaniac

2 ай бұрын

KZread compression dude

@WrexBF

2 ай бұрын

You're blind.

i use frame generation on some games using FSR at 1440p and in most scenarios it works pretty well but in some games it becames so blurry that is very noticeable that i end up using 1440p native , however i am using an 6700xt , is not the best card out there but works for me so far.

Need to redo this video when FSR 3.1 comes out