AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution in Ultra Quality shows visible quality loss

@Whiplashwang this would be great after reviews say its crap.
As of today, you're just making a fool of yourself.

 

Nvidia always had the upper hand on marketing, they already won with DLSS no matter how long it will live, they sold more cards to gamers because of it. At least it is more practical than the crippling "god rays", they are still laughing about that.

 

@Silva

It's a joke dude. Lighten up. There were plenty of memes for DLSS 1.0 in 2019 as well. Also, don't be hurt, third place is still good.

 

Can someone clarify for me please - will this be a "optimised per game/engine basis" like DLSS is, or will it be a driver toggle and usable globally?

If it's something that could be used globally, then that would be the killer feature - per game/per engine basis is just a recipe for planned obsolescence or even a fade into obscurity.

 

@Truder I think it needs to be implemented on a game basis, as DLSS is. That said, apparently is arguably easier to implement over DLSS, so we will see more games implementing it.

 

Deep Learning = nVidia PR gobbledygook... As usual, AMD will be far more honest and straightforward about what they market and produce--it's why I stick with them. The ability to look beyond mere marketing slogans separates the men from the boys--those who fall for marketing descriptions are usually "the boys", imo. Here AMD is just getting started with something of its own and people are throwing off on it before they even use it--based on projected clips demonstrated on stage very briefly... AMD must really be getting into nVidia's nickers to see stuff like this coming out!

 

Anything can be run on anything. One could run Bitcoin mining operation on a piece of wood.



"Can be run" tells you nothing about whether it should be run or whether it would be practical in any way.

 

Nvidia actually spent serious time making DLSS integration seamless, in Unreal Engine you just have to drag and drop the DLSS nvidia plugin in your project plugin folder, start the editor and click a checkbox to get DLSS up and running. DLSS has turned its initial public opinion 180° since DLSS 2.0, the tech is appreciated by the PC gamers as far as i know.

 

I'm a big fan of these sorts of reconstruction techniques, but even DLSS 1.9 just wasn't good enough imo and I definitely get why it was meme'd on hard when it came out lol. I found many of the issues very distracting (like the strobing that would happen if a fan blade went past a fence) or the way hair blurred and shimmered in motion for Control. It just didn't look right to me unless I wasn't moving the camera.

2.1 in Metro Exodus Enhanced is kind of blowing my mind though -- I honestly had a hard time differentiating between DLSS 2.1 Quality (output 1440p) and native + TAA which is a first because even in Cyberpunk 2077 with DLSS 2.0 in Quality I could still notice the difference pretty apparently. In Metro the only real issue I could spot was sometimes textures/surfaces that weren't even that far from the camera wouldn't draw quite right til I moved closer or zoomed in on them at which point they'd eventually resolve themselves, but all in all very impressive what's been achieved I think.

 

Agreed, making it so accessible in UE like that is a brilliant move I think.

 

I recall a few working on games on reddit complaining they weren't really told how DLSS works. Sighting:

From there it was referred to as a blackbox solution. Little did I know at the time how important "some areas" is. As in some areas that are cpu bound won't provide any performance improvements. Frame rate drops in some areas of a given map should indicate a cpu bound scenerio.

Now from what I know so far, I still await more information, developers will have a bit more understanding of how they can implement FSR and will be able to amend to it to fit their engines. Which should bring better visual fidelity. Now that still needs to be seen. And, I am interested in seeing this in games other then God's Fall and Borderlands 3 (rumored). But if true FSR seems to be a bit more flexible. Something I've heard requested by them.

Another interesting note is if Radeon owners can use both Radeon Boost and FSR. As it stands now at 50% I cannot tell the difference moving around (although I do turn motion blur/blur in general off in games). But I do notice a performance increase. Granted it takes some getting use to as it works only in motion. When you stand still it's back to normal.

If Radeon Users can use both Radeon Boost and FSR at the same time would bring a massive performance boost. I can see this advantage in APUs, mobile and lower end cards and integrated gpus. Making 1080p gaming a moot endeavor. But, that remains to be seen if you can or not.

 

Oh god yes I totally agree, Nvidia's marketing is on another level compared to AMD's. And even if DLSS does die away and FSR or another tech becomes the standard a lot of people will still use DLSS as the name. It's the same reason why a lot of people now call ray tracing in games RTX, its not RTX that is the name of the GPU's, the tech is just ray tracing. But marketing and naming matters, who remembers "AMD Gaming Evolved"???, pretty much no one, but who remembers "Nvidia the way its meant to be played"??.. A LOT of people.

Yea I totally agree here, the plugin thing has only recently just happened and I think this is Nvidia trying to make adoption of the tech easier but I also think this is Nvidia getting scared of not just FSR but other upscaling tech (like the new TAA one found within UE5). They could of made a plugin ages ago if they really wanted to, but now things are getting scary and their monopoly could be in jeopardy they go full steam ahead.

As much as the tech is cool with it's A.I stuff, I am sorry but I REALLY don't want it to succeed. I want it too fail and go away, closed tech like this just hurts the industry as a whole, open source is the proper way forward and the way the PC platform should be. An open standard is better, and then we can get down to judging the companies involved on how good the actual hardware is, Intel included. I am so glad they are jumping into the High end GPU market, I just hope they stick to an more open sourced approach the same as AMD has.

 

Given DLSS improves performance by allowing a decrease in rendering resolution, of course it won't help at all in CPU bound scenarios. The more GPU bound you are the more it can help.

 

I asked AMD guys if they can provide us with PNG screenshot of Godfall with FSR comparison and got no reply, nothing.
This reminds me of situation when Navi 21 cards were presented, RT was mentioned but no results were provided, only that it's present in silicon.
So I think it will be as DLSS 1.0 with improvements coming once RDNA3 will be out, maybe...

 

With the entire industry watching your next move, presenting new technology is tricky enough without you breathing down their neck

 

IMO, FSR results are going to be game specific. And, as a personal preference will decide if I will use Ultra, Quality, Balance or Performance. Along with Radeon Boost if possible. I do not have any expectation that it will be "better the native".

And, I don't honestly see AMD suggesting it is. Another thing is that it's going to be impossible to do IQ comparisons unless the same game offers both. A fair comparison is to see if FSR is better or not at the resolution it's targeting.

The biggest benefit is the fact that it's being made available to a wider audience of PC gamers.

 

FSR visual quality comparisons in enabled games compared to Native resolution is the only thing that is needed. Similar to the review process that was applied once DLSS was enabled in games.
You don't even need similar games because comparisons should always be made against the "ground truth".

 

FSR is going to be the standard for Nvidia and AMD and Intel. Amazing how AMD gets crap with these things

 

You don't know what you are talking about. You compare the image being targeted to that resolution. We already know what native is. And we already know that Performance will be worst then Native, for example.

Therefore, the question will be if lowering the resolution to match whatever FSR is targeting is better, worst or the same. You do not compare 4K to Performance and expect to see IQ better then 4K. That's just naive. As no one said nor implied that the IQ settings in FSR is better then native. Perhaps you should lower your expectations a bit.

 

Just wait till June 22 and expect to be enlightened!