The FSR Thread (Announcements & Discussion)

bill dennison said:
:lol:

i think i can hear the grinding of the jacket's teeth from here
Click to expand...

demo said:
Great news, at least we can compare it to DLSS if both are supported.
Click to expand...

If nVidia really wanted to... They can open DLSS up to work without the tensor cores... They choose not to.

Look no further than Control. The DLSS in that game launched with shader based DLSS and was later patched to DLSS 2.0 and switched to using the tensor cores.
 
I was under the impression moving to tensor cores gave IQ and performance advantages under 2.0+, so I wouldn't consider that a negative.
 
It would still give a performance boost. The image quality would be the same, it just may not be as performant
 
IQ advantages in the sense it can run more complex AI algorithms for better reconstruction - sure, at better performance.
 
Was expecting more, but it has terrible image quality from what they showed. It's just basic upacaling, hell those. On console side will be most. Disappointed they were hoping for a dlss to boost those performances.

However what they have now is already as good if not better.

At least 3D Cache on zen3+ looks good.

Hopefully AMD works on this more and put some actual money into a dlss competitor.
 
Nascar24 said:
Stop it Billy, you dont like DLSS 2, how in the world would you like this?:confused:
Click to expand...

i don't and have said i think it is not good for 4k IQ AMD or NV

but i just love that AMD's works on more NV and older hardware ( Pascal maybe more ) than NVidia's own DLSS does :lol: :p
plus the game consoles


AMD will catch up to NV quickly in IQ and then NV's dlss will be dead because it only works on RTX cards
 
Last edited:
That’s a classic Bill opinion thinking AMD will equal NV’s DLSS “quickly” .. I don’t see that happening, at least for a while.
 
Pretty harsh article form wccftech but I think he makes a few mistakes:

https://wccftech.com/no-amds-fsr-fi...-alternative-and-here-is-why-you-should-care/

FSR does not use any machine learning or inference and while it is an amazing tool to have in the absence of a DL system - it is not comparable in any way to an AI-powered image upscaling system. The former will always have a quality cost associated with it while the latter can actually get to a point where it would be impossible to see differences between native and AI-upscaled images. With the non-DL implementation AMD has rolled out with FSR, you are looking at quality that is worse than DLSS 1.0 on the highest preset. Performance presets should impact quality even more.
Click to expand...

id read that DLSS up to version 1.9 was also a spatial upscaler. They gave up on it and moved on to ai/dl in 2.0. It doesnt mean it cant work well it may simply need a lot more work before we can say its a good quality. Also with game engines like UE5 putting in their own upscaling tech I suspect we may be using that more often than those provided by the gpu vendors as time goes on.

He also used the 1060 demo which used medium setting to draw a comparison. It was enabled for the 1060 but not optimized.

AMD's Scott Herkelman has stated that they have no intention of optimizing FSR for NVIDIA GPUs and that NVIDIA should do that work. While it would have been a completely reasonable expectation in normal circumstances, the fact that AMD expounded on NVIDIA support, absorbed a ton of good press on this and is now basically back tracking makes it seem like a bait and switch situation. This also implies that FSR for NVIDIA users will be optimized only for Godfall unless NVIDIA wants to adopt the technology (which, in my opinion, they absolutely should for non-RTX cards).
Click to expand...



Hardly fair when nvidia doesnt provide any upscaler for gtx cards. I dont see how we can expect amd to help write nvidia drivers. Its probably not even legal.
 
Nunz said:
That’s a classic Bill opinion thinking AMD will equal NV’s DLSS “quickly” .. I don’t see that happening, at least for a while.
Click to expand...

i give it a year two tops till it is close enough to keep the same standard that works on the new game consoles and PC both AMD and NV for the game devs not to want to spend the extra time and money to program a different code just for NV RTX

oh i'm sure NV will pour cash on a game dev here and there but it won't last


then RDNA 3 chiplets in a year & RDNA 4 in 2.5 to 3 years may well make it not needed much it the about same time frame
 
It's going to be needed once true ps5/xsx games appear and not crossgen stuff.

There's always going to be something to destroy our fps. :bleh:
 
Here's a full resolution image of "quality mode" on a 1060.

Unfortunately, this doesn't look too promising. The right side of the screen where quality is enabled is noticeably blurrier especially in terms of texture detail, like by the columns. Was DLSS 1.0 this bad? Can't remember, but it was rightfully slammed for its blurriness especially in BF5.

Don't know what "ultra quality" looks like yet, we'll find out soon enough. But it does look like AMD has go through their "DLSS 1.0" moment before they get their "DLSS 2.0" act together eventually down the road.

3-100890493-orig.jpg
 
bill dennison said:
i give it a year two tops till it is close enough to keep the same standard that works on the new game consoles and PC both AMD and NV for the game devs not to want to spend the extra time and money to program a different code just for NV RTX

oh i'm sure NV will pour cash on a game dev here and there but it won't last


then RDNA 3 chiplets in a year & RDNA 4 in 2.5 to 3 years may well make it not needed much it the about same time frame
Click to expand...

Oh Bill.. you would want something that matches console quality rather than exceeds it. :(
 
Exposed said:
Here's a full resolution image of "quality mode" on a 1060.

Unfortunately, this doesn't look too promising. The right side of the screen where quality is enabled is noticeably blurrier especially in terms of texture detail, like by the columns. Was DLSS 1.0 this bad? Can't remember, but it was rightfully slammed for its blurriness especially in BF5.

Don't know what "ultra quality" looks like yet, we'll find out soon enough. But it does look like AMD has go through their "DLSS 1.0" moment before they get their "DLSS 2.0" act together eventually down the road.

3-100890493-orig.jpg
Click to expand...
Are you sure it isn't the left side that has quality enabled? :lol: Seriously, I admit my eyes are older and tired, but the portion of the image on the left looks better to me. Detail on the walkway stones...actually ....everything.

To make a point, not start an argument, I would say new consoles easily beat that in games I've seen.
 
Last edited:
yeah where I see the image distortion on the floor of the right the vegetation on the left looks like garbage. Hopefully folks will get access to be able to
give reactions in motion soon.
 
Last edited:
I bet that blurriness would be nicely cleaned up with Radeon Image Sharpening. nVidia has a similar driver side feature doesn't it?
 
Nunz said:
Oh Bill.. you would want something that matches console quality rather than exceeds it. :(
Click to expand...

i want it off and the power to do RT on both AMD & NV at 4k without and kind of DLSS

but i think AMD will make sure the PC looks better than the new consoles as they will have more power to do so

.....

as for this you can't tell by still pictures on the net

you need to see it live, DLSS 2.0 looks great in still pictures but drops some in motion
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top