I selling 20 years pc hardware and I love hardware. I sell amd cpu more than intel in this year because has better performance watage than intel and good for gaming.I am disappointed because FSR is not realy change any thing. I love to see amd is better than nvidia so nvidia force to sell their GPUs lower price than right now
FSR is a good thing and free and simple to use for developer but can't help in lower res than 1440p . this option hasn't image quality like dlss. u can search in youtube and see playing game with FSR render game in 720p didn't really better than native 720p. FSR with ultra quality in 4k res rendering game in 1660p ( 1660x2950=4.900.000 ~ 5 mil pixel).if u play in 28~32 inch 4k monitor realy can u recognize deference between 2160p and 1660p from 30cm distance of monitor or in image verses video can u see lots of deference? when u want find out best cpu bench mark u play 1080p or 4k to cpu show u has bottleneck or not?
if FSR is good why every body use in ultra quality in 1080p tell we see FSR is lower res than native and dint good as native. so what is deference between native rendering and same res rendered with FSR? what is benefit if image quality didn't change in lower than 1440p?
Why are you rambling on about stuff that doesn't matter..? DLSS has nothing to do with YOU. This is about what the Game Developers want..!
And for more gamers and more developers, FSR is a pure win. YOU keep rambling on about a technical aspect, without realizing that what a Dev chooses to use, has no bearing on what is best. They want what is faster & easier to implement.
FSR just works and works on 200 million more devices than nVidia's solution. GTX 1080ti owners are thanking AMD for FSR, because they will benefit the most from it. They can now upgrade from their 10 year old 1080p monitors, into a higher res and us FSR.
directML is coming and dlss will end up like betamax.