Alfatawi Mendel
Posts: 277 +467
Is that it? I'm struggling to see a difference here. There would be zero difference whilst actually PLAYING the game. The new Hairworks....
yeah DLSS should be a bonus, not a selling point.Interesting article. Thanks. Having experienced playing games with DLSS3 and frame gen, I think the technology has promise, there are games where it actually works and even works quite well... certainly with games where the frame rate is already approaching 60 it does make sense.
My initial impression of the article was that your criticism was harsh, however as I read on it dawned on me that your approach is justified, and very welcome. At impressive as it is, it is essential that this technology is picked apart in every detail, in order to discourage Nvidia from marketing this is pure performance - and pricing it in.
It's not that these expensive GPUs are not delivering expected performance based on their specs; It's the bullcrap that Nvidia is using DLSS3 to pad the numbers of what these GPUs can do to make them look better than they really are.
We've all seen those graphs Nvidia has pushed out, claiming upwards of 3x the performance of a 3090Ti (but in tiny writing at the bottom of the graphs it tells you that the Ada cards are using DLSS 3 and the Ampere aren't using anything other than basic rasterization performance). Marketing gimmicks at their best.
DLSS 3 is a waste, if you ask me, but I'm certain there are hardcore Nvidia fans that will defend it with their lives. Much like how people are like RT!!!! OMG! RT! Nvidia does it so well over AMD. The problem is, I don't know who to feel worse for: AMD for being behind what Nvidia can do when it comes to RT performance or for Nvidia for having dedicated cores for RT and they still stuck at it.
I'll look out for those next time I play, because I'm not seeing them now. You should check too, but I get the feeling you can't first hand. I'm glad I asked.So the edges are less jagged great but everything else is blurry and introduces artifacts and clipping. Thanks for asking
You won't believe me anyways.I'll look out for those next time I play, because I'm not seeing them now. You should check too, but I get the feeling you can't first hand. I'm glad I asked.
I'll just use my own eyes, something Tim and I have in common. But a point in time review with Tim's limited game selections and older DLSS versions won't provide either of us much value in march 2023 and beyond.You won't believe me anyways.
Maybe you'll believe Tim
https://www.techspot.com/article/2583-amd-fsr-vs-dlss/
Or maybe not.
So the edges are less jagged great but everything else is blurry and introduces artifacts and clipping. Thanks for asking
Developers are adopting it becuase they can be lazy and not optimize the their games.
The reality is that as games become more complex, graphically speaking, you're going to need more high-performance hardware. Cost aside, the current crop of hardware can only deliver so much performance. Developers are pushing the envelope when it comes to visuals and not all of them optimize their games.No, it is not acceptable for such an expensive GPU to need these tricks to deliver the expected performance.
I may have missed it, but I didn't see what resolution they were running in this testing. At 1440, you're right, at 4K those fps numbers come down quite a bit. I figure 120-150 fps is sufficient for gaming. Whether you need 4K is a personal decision, I suppose. I still game at 1080 simply because I have 2 1080P monitors that I haven't upgraded yet.If you buy a new GPU there should be no reason to use upscaling...
Train of thought.... 4070ti-6950xt-4080-7900xt-4090-7900xtx all can run 1440p games well above 120 frames...
Nah I have plenty of experience.Sounds to me that you have little to no experience with DLSS2
Certainly has all the hallmarks;Sounds to me that you have little to no experience with DLSS2
If you think DLSS is blurry, then you have no proper experience with it, thats for sure. Can easily be fixed by replacing dll if implementation is bad.Nah I have plenty of experience.
Don't know why you're so butt hurt about it. You probably would get upset if I told you I can hear the difference between different audio formats.Certainly has all the hallmarks;
References reviews as source of knowledge - check
Regurgitate the negative aspects shown in reviews - check
Day 1 talking points used when downplaying it - check
Evident disposition toward hating Nvidia - check
I wonder, say Tim reviewed DLSS, but did so based on watching someone else's content or reading other reviews, would his review carry any merit? unlikely, Yet some seem so confused when their opinion is promptly dismissed and ignored by the people that own the hardware required to use it.
I'm not at all, assumption on your part.Don't know why you're so butt hurt about it.
Strawman bad, but at least in that example we can assume you are directly the one experiencing it.You probably would get upset if I told you I can hear the difference between different audio formats.
Good for them I spose, just as good for the majority of owners who leave it on and desire it over native. I'd rather hear their experienced thoughts on DLSS than yours, but somehow it always seems to be the people that down own RTX cards that throw it the most shade, so this somewhat serves as a public facing rebuttal to that.Plenty of people have turned on dlss and then turned it off because they don't like the up converted image quality. If you like it then good for you.
Not sure why you're discounting my first hand experience with it but whatevs.I'm not at all, assumption on your part.
Strawman bad, but at least in that example we can assume you are directly the one experiencing it.
Good for them I spose, just as good for the majority of owners who leave it on and desire it over native. I'd rather hear their experienced thoughts on DLSS than yours, but somehow it always seems to be the people that down own RTX cards that throw it the most shade, so this somewhat serves as a public facing rebuttal to that.
I'm not at all, assumption on your part.
Strawman bad, but at least in that example we can assume you are directly the one experiencing it.
Good for them I spose, just as good for the majority of owners who leave it on and desire it over native. I'd rather hear their experienced thoughts on DLSS than yours, but somehow it always seems to be the people that down own RTX cards that throw it the most shade, so this somewhat serves as a public facing rebuttal to that.
Everyone? well everyone except..Everyone knows that playing native is SUPERIOR to using DLSS...!
DSO Gamingthe final results are as good as or in some circumstances better than the native 4K image.
Venturebeat, Geoff GrubbAs we can clearly see, the DLSS image looks sharper with less aliasing. You can clearly notice these image improvements in the screenshots that have the Helicarrier. The distant objects look more refined with fewer jaggies in the DLSS screenshots. Native 4K comes in second place]
Digital Foundry, Alex BattagliaBut DLSS, meanwhile, actually has even more detail than the native 4K.
Techpowerup!, maxus24Nvidia's DLSS - which delivers image quality better than native resolution rendering.
Then there's HUB's own poll from almost 2 years ago which polled 80,000 people, 12,000 people can't tell the difference and 15,200 people say it improves the visual quality. 9,600 said it reduced visual quality and 44,800 hadn't even tried it. So of the people that had at the time had tried it, 72% said it looked as good or better. Almost 2 years ago.DLSS, on the other hand, does a great job reconstructing small objects; it even results in more detail and better image quality than the native
Everyone? well everyone except..
Hardware Unboxed, Tim
DSO Gaming
Venturebeat, Geoff Grubb
Digital Foundry, Alex Battaglia
Techpowerup!, maxus24
Then there's HUB's own poll from almost 2 years ago which polled 80,000 people, 12,000 people can't tell the difference and 15,200 people say it improves the visual quality. 9,600 said it reduced visual quality and 44,800 hadn't even tried it. So of the people that had at the time had tried it, 72% said it looked as good or better. Almost 2 years ago.
All of those quotes and results were from over 18 months ago now too, where several versions in the meantime have significantly improved various aspects again, most notably 2.5.1 which of course can be dropped into virtually any supported game.
So forgive me but when you drop a blanket statement like "everyone knows native is superior", I don't know what on earth you're talking about, I just end up back at - somehow it always seems to be the people that down own RTX cards that throw it the most shade.
lol indeed, conclusively disproved your statement, and you immediately wonder why you weren't polled (it was public, anyone can vote) and it has nothing to do with 4k. All the rest is shifted narrative and goalposts so I'm off, if you can't even admit when you're incorrect, and launch into parallel arguments and there's even strawman in there, I have zero interest in having a discussion about it, as I'm going to wager you'd do the same thing again anyway.LOL^