Read more.Can it rival DLSS? We find out.
Read more.Can it rival DLSS? We find out.
CAT-THE-FIFTH (22-06-2021),kalniel (22-06-2021)
I don't get why it needs to be implemented on a game-by-game basis. If all the devs are doing is tweaking the scale factor and sharpening amount then why can't I do that as an end-user instead?Originally Posted by hexus
They will need to download the code from GPU Open, do their own testing and implementation, and then release to public. Some may do it, many will not bother.
Nvidia says a smart dev can get DLSS running in under a weekend... but we still see loads of games without it.
The promise appears to be greater on the console side.
20% extra on a GTX1060 isn't to be sniffed at! If this was on my GTX1080,in Cyberpunk 2077,it would mean I would consistently get 30+ FPS at qHD at decent quality settings. ATM,I appear to hover around 30FPS,ie,sometimes in the late 20 FPS range and other times in the early 30FPS range.
The tech requires access to different stages of the rendering. So it will be easier to implement for some games and very difficult for other games. Can't just slap it on via a direct3d hook. Or this would already be in ReShade or SpecialK.
Maybe this could have saved the disastrous Cyberpunk 2077 PS4 launch
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFZAo6xItOI
They showed that FSR is better than DLSS1.0 and better than in-game upscaling with additional Adobe sharpening tools used. When comparing the highest quality modes,FSR is actually quite close to DLSS2.0 images,but the latter is better at lower resolutions.
The main advantage it seems for FSR,is that it can be used on Pascal GPUs,which still make up a lot of the Steam install base of GPUs.
If you get into the details and comparing screenshots....then it seems very "meh", just like DLSS1.0 was very "meh".
In the real world of moving games though, as long as it doesn't turn the gaming into a smeary mess (looking at you "performance" mode in most DLSS titles) you simply won't notice. Sure if you stand still and start looking at textures, you can spot this sort of tech at work...but where it matters - motion - its generally very good.
Most of the tech sites are saying that FFX is currently about as good as DLSS 1.0 and offers a good performance uplift on the newer Radeons...which is kind of what you'd expect right now. DLSS 1.0 was great for actual gaming (not staring a static images) and I expect the same with FFX 1.0
Good that AMD card owners have an option in the games that support it now, there is no criticism etc here - more that this is pretty much in line with what you'd hope for and expect...which is a good thing!
Gamersnexus review
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCzjQ4qP124
Hardware Canucks review:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JR8MsJcTBU
PCGamer:
https://www.pcgamer.com/uk/amd-fidel...ed-benchmarks/
Guru3D:
https://www.guru3d.com/articles-page...preview,1.html
LTT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ZBfG3IDTD0
If you look at the Hardware Unboxed review,its meant to be better than DLSS1.0,better than native game resolution scaling,better than using upscaling in PS and closer to DLSS2.0,with DLSS2.0 having the edge at lower resolutions. It wouldn't surprise me one bit if FSR is using some of the work MS has been doing for consoles on image upscaling.
Having said that I think you have the image quality issues backwards. DLSS,FSR,resolution scaling,etc actually look far better in static images,especially at higher resolutions such as 4K. If anything upscaling has always had far more issues with motion,due to the fast paced nature why DLSS attempts to integrate some degrees of motion vector information too. An example even in DLSS2.0,when DF pointed out that particles would show trailing effects(there is a degree of pseudorandomness to them).
In fact you can kind of see that even when video is upscaled - fast action sequences start having more image artefacts than smoother transitions.
Edit!!
Checking some more reviews. It appears FSR does have less motion issues,but also unlike DLSS can't help as much with TAA issues.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-06-2021 at 03:14 PM.
Corky34 (22-06-2021)
This is a little more open than nvidia's dlss and I believe intel may even be looking into supporting this from what I've read. While nvidia might be the 'best' pcie gpu, AMD and Intel have a huge market behind them too, especially if this can benefit their built APU performance.
While I'm sure nvidia are going to push dlss, I wouldn't be shocked if they support this too at some point so you could argue that one universal solution, even if a little weaker at the moment (screams of opencl versus cuda again), might be more appealing to developers long term.
Gamersnexus tested one of the new Zen3 APUs,with FSR.
Ironically also its going to be Nvidia users which probably benefit the most from this - if you look on Steam,many people are still stuck on Pascal and Maxwell GPUs.
Edit!!
People can test it on their GPU using the Riftbreaker demo:
https://steamcommunity.com/games/780...34608203595326
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-06-2021 at 03:25 PM.
Compatibility would be easy enough, almost all games is made for AMD GFX cards if you look over the last many years of AMD having AMD Hardware in consoles, it would be very downwind, if same developers of those games would not make it fit, also it will kick a lot of life into things.
I tried the Riftbreaker demo at qHD at the highest settings(Ryzen 7 3700X and a GTX1080). The difference between Ultra Quality FSR and native does seem reasonably small,but performance is very much more blurrier. A quick run through the starter map in both daytime and at night,I saw around a 20% to 30% uplift compared to native settings.
Edit!
TPU has tested some more games,and has image quality sliders so you can compare it directly:
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/a...nchmark/4.html
PCGH also tested it:
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/Fidel...eview-1374282/
Computerbase.de tests:
https://www.computerbase.de/2021-06/...tion-fsr-test/
It seems Pascal works reasonably OK with it.
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-06-2021 at 04:03 PM.
kalniel (22-06-2021)
This appears to be the real reason devs need to implement it rather than it being driver level - it supposedly upscales prior to the final shader pass that adds other screen effects.
For a purely spacial algo, it doesn't look too bad on ultra quality it seems. Back into the world of picking best IQ settings!
Looking at the TPU results,the GTX1080TI seems to hit the same 20% to 30% improvement going from native to ultra quality FSR. Computerbase also shows around 30% with a GTX1080 in Anno 1800.
Edit!!
The TH article on it shows the input resolutions:
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/am...ion-fsr-tested
FSR Preset Scale Factor 4K Input 1440p Input 1080p Input
Ultra Quality 1.3X 2954x1662 1970x1108 1477x831
Quality 1.5X 2560x1440 1706x960 1280x720
Balanced 1.7X 2259x1270 1506x847 1130x635
Performance 2.0X 1920x1080 1280x720 960x540
Last edited by CAT-THE-FIFTH; 22-06-2021 at 04:25 PM.
Worth a watch, at least to hear from various developers
CAT-THE-FIFTH (22-06-2021)
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)