Comparing Nvidia DLSS vs AMD FSR in the same games: Round 1

[Avro Arrow]

The premise of the test stops NVIDIA from winning outright because "improve performance without a significant loss to visual quality" is NOT the only objective of the technology. The second objective of the tech is to display resolutions that the device is not capable of directly rendering. AMD's tech is not going to be able to achieve this the way it's doing things.

Wow, you signed up specifically to shill for nVidia. I never realised that nVidia was so desperate.

 

[Avro Arrow]

Look at the level of lying and mockery this company has risen to:

Wow, he shaved! He doesn't look like "Young Man Logan" anymore!

 

[m3tavision]

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.

 

[Shadowboxer]

DLSS is a lot better than FSR as it’s in more games and can also reconstruct image detail that isn’t there. FSR does not, it just improves the lower res image quality. This is a key distinction, with DLSS you are getting the resolution you select but that is generated from a lower res with extra details added in. But most importantly FSR isn’t in any game I regularly play but DLSS is.

Maybe in a couple of years FSR will be better as more developers implement it. But you would also assume DLSS will be too. AMDs tech suffers due to arriving 3 years after Nvidia tech, it’s not that difficult. Maybe if the tech press put more pressure on AMD they would develop techs faster. Like right now it’s ok if Radeon is piss poor at ray tracing, the tech press will cover for you and not test with ray tracing. I still haven’t seen Steve do one of his highly unprofessional videos calling out AMDs marketing bs that the 6000 series can ray trace. Or that AMD ever planned to have any availability at all. Odd really as there were 4 hate videos about DLSS when AMD couldn’t give you anything at all.

 

[m3tavision]

DLSS is a lot better than FSR as it’s in more games and can also reconstruct image detail that isn’t there. FSR does not, it just improves the lower res image quality. This is a key distinction, with DLSS you are getting the resolution you select but that is generated from a lower res with extra details added in. But most importantly FSR isn’t in any game I regularly play but DLSS is.

Maybe in a couple of years FSR will be better as more developers implement it. But you would also assume DLSS will be too. AMDs tech suffers due to arriving 3 years after Nvidia tech, it’s not that difficult. Maybe if the tech press put more pressure on AMD they would develop techs faster. Like right now it’s ok if Radeon is piss poor at ray tracing, the tech press will cover for you and not test with ray tracing. I still haven’t seen Steve do one of his highly unprofessional videos calling out AMDs marketing bs that the 6000 series can ray trace. Or that AMD ever planned to have any availability at all. Odd really as there were 4 hate videos about DLSS when AMD couldn’t give you anything at all.

DLSS is proprietary and ONLY works on 5% of Gaming hardware... requires months of development and nVidia has to pay a game Developer to use it. That is why Game Industry doesn't care about DLSS, because they know the entire Gaming Industry will be using directML instead, in the future.

FSR is free and works on 300 million devices.... and takes days to implement.


Shadow boxer is another paper scientologist who doesn't understand that Game Developers do NOT care what is better, only what is easier and more prevalent. (again, see VHS vs Betamax)

FSR is what the Game Consoles use, it is the "industry standard".