DLSS is far better than FSR and DLSS is featured in most new AAA games these days, including BF2042, biggest PC release in years. Nvidia is years ahead and have a superior tech. FSR needs to be remade ground up to even come close to DLSS 2.x because it's nothing but a spacial upscaler with sharpening on top, hence the blur.
FSR can easily be implemented yeah, but that implementation is mostly trash unless it's perfected on a game per game basis. In many games injected FSR will lower visual quality and performance compared to NOT using it at all; Pointless... This has been tested several times. Google it. FSR is mostly a blurry mess like DLSS 1.0 was and there's tons of proof. In every single FSR vs DLSS 2.x comparison; DLSS wins. Sad but true.
Most games with FSR till now are crappy games (as in low metacritic scores), meanwhile DLSS is features in top AAA titles, pretty much every time. Nvidia pays developers for proper implementation and testing, because they can afford it. AMD can't, that is why they went the open source route. Open source does not make an inferior tech better. Adoption will be faster but end-result will be wonky AF. Which is what you see. Alot of crappy FSR implementations, blurry mess in most if not all. In games that have both FSR and DLSS 2.x - No one with a RTX card will be using FSR that is for sure.
And? FSR was never meant to be as good as DLSS but much easier to adopt and open. DLSS too will lower visual quality and I rather take simple upscaler instead AI trying to tell me what I should see. Also FSR do not require any specialized hardware that creates more expensive and hotter chips.
Few AAA titles have DLSS = most have them? Nvidia pays for developers because no-one would use DLSS otherwise. AMD however gains support quickly without paying. It's just, when Nvidia stops paying, no-one uses DLSS anymore.
You call me fanboy, yet you are the biggest AMD fanboy I have seen for a long time
Everyone that don't agree with your AMD fanboyism are Intel and Nvidia fanboys I guess?
I use all the brands and have most AMD chips in my house, so calm your tits.
Because I asked sources for your claims but they are still missing, I call you fanboy.
Yes Nvidia gets priority, because using TSMCs best nodes is about HOW MUCH YOU CAN PAY and thats is why Apple owns their best nodes, at all times. AMD gets the sloppy seconds, and AMD don't want it anyway, because their pricing would be ruined. Why do you think AMD refreshes Zen 3 on 6nm (as in optimized 7nm) instead of going directly to 5nm? BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD IT YET. 5nm AMD chips will come late 2022 at best and they will compete against Raptor Lake not Alder Lake.
Nvidia and Intel has far deeper pockets than AMD and this is why they can easily secure the same or even better nodes than AMD at TSMC.
It's not only how much you can pay but also how much you pay. That means, ordering a lot. Apple owns best nodes because they pay well AND make huge orders. Nvidia is little customer vs AMD so even AMD is paying less, TSMC still prefer AMD because total revenue from AMD is much bigger.
Why? Because:
1. Zen3 is made for 7nm and 6nm design rules are very close, so it takes very little effort to make 6nm Zen3.
2. AMD does not really need 5nm yet, Intel is so far behind.
3. Zen4 will use 5nm so why make old architecture for 5nm while you can make new one for it?
Rocket lake might have chance against Zen3 but not Zen3 with V-Cache, even less for Zen4.
Again, Intel and Nvidia are so small customers that TSMC gladly takes easy money from them but as seen with Apple, vip treatment is for those who pay AND order much.
Nvidia went with Samsung 8nm
because they could deliver why do you think Ampere sold way better than RDNA2? Going with Samsung was a smart move, meanwhile AMD struggles to deliver GPU's.
Nvidia is eating up marketshare for a reason. If Samsung is so bad, why does Nvidia win anyway? 3080 Ti beats 6900XT overall. 3080 beats 6800XT overall
3070 beats 6700XT overall. And this is without DLSS enabled too. We can all cherry pick benchmarks but overall performance is what matters and Nvidia is ahead + has option for DLSS + has better Ray Tracing (by far).
Nvidia made decision years ago, not like yesterday. Where is source for "Ampere selled way better"? Steam survey is not source, since you can use multiple accounts on same machine and since Steam Survey does not reflect on sales data at all.
Beats? Nvidia cards are little faster but consume much more power. Guess what? Bigger chip and more power consumption always allow more speed on graphic cards. Nvidia being barely faster or not faster at all on much higher power consumption is not beating overall, it's losing badly.
Nvidia eated up GPU market share whopping 0.06% last quarter. That's pretty much, yeah
For reason, Nvidia gains so little.
I don't give any credit for image quality sacrificers and current cards are way too slow for RT.
Dude you have no knowledge about this
AMD supplies chips to Microsoft and Sony. They make these chips at TSMC 7nm just like all their other chips. Console APUs take up alot of production capacity and this is why AMD can't deliver many GPU's because they are downplayed to supply CPUs and APUs instead.
AMD had no permission to use any other foundry than GlobalFoundries until 2019. Those console chip contracts were made much before that. Likewise XBox one APU was made on TSMC, AMD was not allowed to use TSMC that time. That proves you're wrong once again. Source for those claims: WSA.
Again, there is no still no single proof for claim AMD "cannot deliver many GPU's. No, discrete GPU market share is no proof since it counts even low end GPU's. That's why Intel has biggest GPU market share, around 3 times bigger than Nvidia.
Stop making things up and educate yourself please. This is common knowledge.
Yeah people will care for Ampere cards for the next many years. Because demand is high and supply is low, every GPU sells which is why Nvidia puts out RTX 2060 12GB soon too, made at TSMC 12nm.
Nvidia going for max output to supply and will eat up marketshare. Nvidia is closing in on 86% dGPU marketshare as we speak and Intel dGPUs will targets AMDs prime segment.
How about reading even basics of WSA before making yourself look like *****?
You did say Nvidia had no problems supplying Ampere and next tell they are using obsolete tech to put out obsolete cards? Because they have problems with Ampere, right?
Oh, Intel GPU's are not targetting GTX 2060 level?
AMD needs to wake up or they will be at less than 10% dGPU marketshare in 1-2 years. You will see. Unless AMD cards don't deliver better performance for alot less than Nvidia, 99% will go the Nvidia route. AMD is the small player, always will be. And this is why most PC games are optimized and tweaked for Nvidia cards. Overall performance is simply more solid on a Nvidia card because most developers optimize (and use) Nvidia cards, just like 86% of the PC player base. LOGIC 101.
That's not problem for AMD. See, every time AMD releases better APU's, their discrete cards share will get lower. Basically AMD low end cards have been replaced long time ago with APU's. Faster APU's = less DISCRETE market share. So yes, lower discrete market share is basically what AMD WANTS. Because AMD gets almost all income from APU but video card revenues are split between AMD and card manufacturer.
Just looking at console GPU market share, AMD owns high end market at 100%. Since many AAA games are console ports, figure out rest. But yeah, most console users do not play games