Nvidia DLSS 4.5 arrives with a new transformer model promising better image quality, but not without performance trade-offs. We test DLSS 4.5 vs DLSS 4 to see where this latest upscaler genuinely improves.
Nvidia DLSS 4.5 vs DLSS 4: Good But Not Flawless
- Thread starter Scorpus
- Start date
I pretty much never play games at native anymore.
I use DLSS, DLAA or DLDSR in most games on my main rig (RTX 4090)
Tried DLSS 4.5 (on different presets, plus M) but was not that impressed over DLSS 4 (K) which is close to perfection to begin with IMO but I am sure DLSS 4.5 will improve over time just like all other DLSS versions has improved.
I am happy to see that AMD finally delivered good upscaling with RDNA 4 tho.
FSR 4 is the first version of FSR that I want to use. I picked up a Radeon 9070 as a result, for my HTPC. I would have picked a 5070 for sure if AMD did not release FSR 4 with RDNA 4. Good upscaling is crucial for longevity (sadly for RDNA 1, 2 and 3 owners)
FSR 3.1 is worse than even DLSS 2 from 2020 IMO
FSR 2/3.x simply has too much issues like artifacts, shimmering, blur etc. Especially when moving, so you can't just compare FSR vs DLSS in still shots. FSR 2/3 can look decent and very close to DLSS 2/3 in screenshots but when you move, DLSS is just so much better.
DLSS 4 pretty much removed TAA blur and FSR 4 is good as well.
Most people that hate upscaling, only tried FSR 1, 2 and 3.x - These are all bad. FSR 1 is completely useless, just like DLSS 1.
DLSS 2/3 and especially 4.x + FSR 4 are very good, but since you need hardware support, many have never tried them for real which is why people on dated hardware continue to hate upscaling
AMD GPU owners used to hate upscaling, and most still do. Radeon 9000 / RDNA 4 owners don't, why do you think? Because FSR 4 is now worth using. Just like DLSS have been worth using for many years.
Now AMD just needs to improve the FSR 4 support, as Nvidia supports DLSS in like 1000+ games at this point and DLSS 4 can be forced in most/all of these + DLSS mods on top of all this. FSR Redstone is all about this; FSR 4 in more games and with RNDA 3 and older, falling back to FSR 3.1. One dll file, for both FSR 4 and 3.1 = Much easier for developers = Leading to higher FSR 4 support while still retaining FSR 3.1 support.
You can always force DLAA in DLSS games, so people won't have to complain about DLSS ever. DLAA will make regular native look bad, every single time. Just like FSR Native will.
I use DLSS, DLAA or DLDSR in most games on my main rig (RTX 4090)
Tried DLSS 4.5 (on different presets, plus M) but was not that impressed over DLSS 4 (K) which is close to perfection to begin with IMO but I am sure DLSS 4.5 will improve over time just like all other DLSS versions has improved.
I am happy to see that AMD finally delivered good upscaling with RDNA 4 tho.
FSR 4 is the first version of FSR that I want to use. I picked up a Radeon 9070 as a result, for my HTPC. I would have picked a 5070 for sure if AMD did not release FSR 4 with RDNA 4. Good upscaling is crucial for longevity (sadly for RDNA 1, 2 and 3 owners)
FSR 3.1 is worse than even DLSS 2 from 2020 IMO
FSR 2/3.x simply has too much issues like artifacts, shimmering, blur etc. Especially when moving, so you can't just compare FSR vs DLSS in still shots. FSR 2/3 can look decent and very close to DLSS 2/3 in screenshots but when you move, DLSS is just so much better.
DLSS 4 pretty much removed TAA blur and FSR 4 is good as well.
Most people that hate upscaling, only tried FSR 1, 2 and 3.x - These are all bad. FSR 1 is completely useless, just like DLSS 1.
DLSS 2/3 and especially 4.x + FSR 4 are very good, but since you need hardware support, many have never tried them for real which is why people on dated hardware continue to hate upscaling
AMD GPU owners used to hate upscaling, and most still do. Radeon 9000 / RDNA 4 owners don't, why do you think? Because FSR 4 is now worth using. Just like DLSS have been worth using for many years.
Now AMD just needs to improve the FSR 4 support, as Nvidia supports DLSS in like 1000+ games at this point and DLSS 4 can be forced in most/all of these + DLSS mods on top of all this. FSR Redstone is all about this; FSR 4 in more games and with RNDA 3 and older, falling back to FSR 3.1. One dll file, for both FSR 4 and 3.1 = Much easier for developers = Leading to higher FSR 4 support while still retaining FSR 3.1 support.
You can always force DLAA in DLSS games, so people won't have to complain about DLSS ever. DLAA will make regular native look bad, every single time. Just like FSR Native will.
Last edited:
godrilla
Posts: 2,359 +1,794
Great article. I am using the preset M at 4k dlaa in an older title named Vermintide 2 and the the game looks and runs amazing. It's a shame that the 5000 series upper high end is harder to come by especially at MSRP. Also no word on when ray reconstruction for dlss 4.5 is coming to the public.
I wonder if them rtx 6000 pros selling close to msrp scale better using the new dlss 4.5 via fp8 lol for work and play
.
I wonder if them rtx 6000 pros selling close to msrp scale better using the new dlss 4.5 via fp8 lol for work and play
.In a nutshell:
Only people using 4K/UHD or higher should probably bother with the new preset m and not all will think it looks better than preset k. Some will probably think it looks oversharpened.
Most users, meaning 1080p and 1440p gamers especially, should just stay at preset k which is optimized for DLSS quality and balanced preset.
The ultra performance preset, should pretty much never be used. It is mainly for "8K" maybe 6K as well, since 6K monitors is starting to pop up but this preset will look too bad in most cases on 1440p/4K monitors, since this is only 33.3% of the native res.
Only people using 4K/UHD or higher should probably bother with the new preset m and not all will think it looks better than preset k. Some will probably think it looks oversharpened.
Most users, meaning 1080p and 1440p gamers especially, should just stay at preset k which is optimized for DLSS quality and balanced preset.
The ultra performance preset, should pretty much never be used. It is mainly for "8K" maybe 6K as well, since 6K monitors is starting to pop up but this preset will look too bad in most cases on 1440p/4K monitors, since this is only 33.3% of the native res.
Last edited:
Thatsdisgusting
Posts: 536 +619
What about preset L?
Mostly for 8K, meaning irellevant for most
L is optimized for ultra performance preset
Thatsdisgusting
Posts: 536 +619
The problem is, L is the only one close to K in terms of ghosting, surpassing the latter quality wise.
M has an awfull ghosting and shimmering that I saw in cp77 and different ue5 slops.
HU can update their test suite for cyberpunk and see what I mean - 1st person vehicle cockpit, and watch that speedometer numbers go
, another one is stand 90° in front of cop vehicle with side LEDsAt what resolution? I would just stay with K thenThe problem is, L is the only one close to K in terms of ghosting, surpassing the latter quality wise.
M has an awfull ghosting and shimmering that I saw in cp77 and different ue5 slops.
HU can update their test suite for cyberpunk and see what I mean - 1st person vehicle cockpit, and watch that speedometer numbers go
K is still the overall best preset for most but it can be subjective, depends on what people prefer
"Awful ghosting" should not be present in any of the presets, sounds like other issue or game incomp.
Last edited:
Megalomaniac
Posts: 1,196 +1,251
It's shocking how far DLSS has come since inception - I never play native now when I can avoid it, due to DLSS Q just looking better than native + AA.
Sometimes I marvel that something like DLSS Balanced + Frame Gen looks as impressive as it does given the baseline input, and I'm really glad I traded in my 7xxx AMD card that was stuck on FSR3.
Sometimes I marvel that something like DLSS Balanced + Frame Gen looks as impressive as it does given the baseline input, and I'm really glad I traded in my 7xxx AMD card that was stuck on FSR3.
It's important to remember that "better than native" is short for "better than native with TAA".
DLSS is great and keeps getting better, but if you aren't playing on a game engine that uses TAA or equivalent this doesn't matter. About a third of my recent purchases don't use (or need) this because of the game type or art style.
So if you don't have a GPU that can take advantage of the latest upscaling tech, take heart still a lot of games out there to enjoy in their full glory.
DLSS is great and keeps getting better, but if you aren't playing on a game engine that uses TAA or equivalent this doesn't matter. About a third of my recent purchases don't use (or need) this because of the game type or art style.
So if you don't have a GPU that can take advantage of the latest upscaling tech, take heart still a lot of games out there to enjoy in their full glory.
Thatsdisgusting
Posts: 536 +619
I'm glad that reviewers really nitpick these upscaling methods because it does push developers at Nvidia or AMD to keep improving these models. On the other hand, it does seem like we are getting to the point where you have to really zoom in or be sitting very close to see the issues with DLSS4+ and FSR4+. One thing I am particularly annoyed by though is ghosting. So, I'm very glad to hear that it has been substantially reduced by the latest model. From my own playtime (Currently playing FFXVI, not sure why just getting to it) and having the new model drop toward the middle of the game for me has allowed me to really see the difference and ghosting is definitely the most noticeable improvement I'm seeing, though I have noted an overall better image quality as well.
Disagree. I find that DLSS-Q looks better than SMAA or FXAA as well. To say nothing of using DLAA in lighter titles.
And native without AA is often jaggy.
Do you have an example of titles that look better with native rendering?
amghwk
Posts: 1,891 +1,899
I don't know. Everything looks the same to me. Especially when moving fast, I don't have time to stop and look at every minute detail. I thought we're trying to play games here, not look at art gallery? What's the use of graphics, if gameplay is ...meh?
Yet another post from you boasting about your system while contributing nothing to the convo
Megalomaniac
Posts: 1,196 +1,251
Yet another post from you boasting about your system while contributing nothing to the convo
Considering what the prices of this stuff are now, yeah...
Native without AA looks too bad, even when using 4K/UHD.
4K DLSS looks better.
4K DLAA looks best.
People that complain about DLSS/DLAA is pretty much always people that can't use it. They are in denial. No AA solution comes close to DLAA but FSR Native is better than any regular AA solution too.
Especially TAA is crap, with TAA blur all over.
DLSS 4 / FSR 4 support, and you are golden these days. Everyone who can't use these, will complain about upscaling becuase they have only seen FSR 3.1 or older which is bad, to the point I would never use it.
FSR 1, 2 and 3.x is crap overall. DLSS 1 is crap as well. DLSS became good in 2020 when version 2 came out and has been worth using for many people since. DLAA works in all DLSS 2+ games and will always provide the best visuals.
1440p DLAA looks far better than 4K NoAA
1440p DLAA looks better than 4K DLSS too
Last edited:
Similar threads
