Me: "Pffft, a walking simulator, who needs such a thing"
Covid-19 "Hi!"
Me: "Wow, it's like actually being outside!"

"4K"

iO"4K"

Exactly, it's not 4k if it's not rendered at 4k natively.
From what I've seen DLSS 2.0 is similar to a sharpening filter, but most reviewers seem to be blind, I had a 24" 4k monitor and the difference was huge (in games) compared to a 1800p image let alone less but the performance was garbage with a 1070...

I didn't even think you could get 24" 4k, let alone it be worth bothering with. You learn something new everyday.

But why?

There are more fun games to play.

TheDeeGeeBut why?

There are more fun games to play.

Fun is subjective. What’s fun for me might not be fun for you and vice-versa.

Xex360Exactly, it's not 4k if it's not rendered at 4k natively.
From what I've seen DLSS 2.0 is similar to a sharpening filter, but most reviewers seem to be blind, I had a 24" 4k monitor and the difference was huge (in games) compared to a 1800p image let alone less but the performance was garbage with a 1070...

1070? I'm pretty sure DLSS doesn't even work with that.

bug1070? I'm pretty sure DLSS doesn't even work with that.

No it doesn't, because it uses an AI implementation.

ANd from the comparisons that I've seen it's not a sharpening filter, it actually ADDS DETAIL, based on the AI learning the different textures used in the game.

BoboOOZNo it doesn't, because it uses an AI implementation.

ANd from the comparisons that I've seen it's not a sharpening filter, it actually ADDS DETAIL, based on the AI learning the different textures used in the game.

That's what I have seen as well, but the OP says reviewers are full of it. And then goes on to tell us how DLSS works on a card that doesn't actually support DLSS :P I'm guessing a typo?

bugThat's what I have seen as well, but the OP says reviewers are full of it. And then goes on to tell us how DLSS works on a card that doesn't actually support DLSS :p I'm guessing a typo?

Nah he is just salty.

DLSS2.0 is really amazing. Great for performance boosting for GPUs that lacked that raw computation power. As for picture quality there are numerous testings showed DLSS 2.0 is the same or sometimes better than native resolution rendering.

The more DLSS 2.0 implementation, the better it is for end users with GPU that support it.

4K/60FPS on $300 RTX 2060? That alone is the reason to buy Ngreedia's GPU. PC implementation of RDNA2 badly needs DLSS equivalent or it will be DOA in PC gaming community. Just think of what 3080/3090 will be able to deliver with DLSS2 ON. If we presume that 3080/90 will be capable of rendering 4K/90fps natively, 8K/60fps DLSS2 or even higher fps are not out or reach. This could mean revolution for VR as crappy resolution of current headsets really holds VR back.

RedelZaVedno4K/60FPS on $300 RTX 2060? That alone is the reason to buy Ngreedia's GPU. PC implementation of RDNA2 badly needs DLSS equivalent or it will be DOA in PC gaming community. Just think of what 3080/3090 will be able to deliver with DLSS2 ON. If we presume that 3080/90 will be capable of rendering 4K/90fps natively, 8K/60fps DLSS2 or even higher fps are not out or reach. This could mean revolution for VR as crappy resolution really holds it back.

There will always be a group that buys radeon gpu whether it has dlss or not. navi gen 1 lacks a ton of features, at the same time they are priced low so folks still buy them. So no need to worry about that.

Also VR's major hurdle right now is not resolution. Valve Index is already pretty amazing. VR locomotion on the hand is if fairly lacking behind.

xkm1948There will always be a group that buys radeon gpu whether it has dlss or not. navi gen 1 lacks a ton of features, at the same time they are priced low so folks still buy them. So no need to worry about that.

Also VR's major hurdle right now is not resolution. Valve Index is already pretty amazing. VR locomotion on the hand is if fairly lacking behind.

I use VR mainly for flight sims and Elite dangerous and even with my HP Reverb (2x2160x2160p) resolution isn't quite there yet to allow you t read all the gauges. Plus higher resolution would mean headsets with large field of view become possibility. Something like 2x3840x2160p and 170 horizontal FOV would be just awesome experience and I do believe we can get there with Ampere + DLSS.

Navi is not bad arch imo, but there is no way I'd consider buying RDNA2 if it lacks similar AI upscaling option as Nvidia does.

RedelZaVednoNavi is not bad arch imo, but there is no way I'd consider buying RDNA2 if it lacks similar AI upscaling option as Nvidia does.

The big problem with DLSS 2.0 is that it works on like 3 games, for now. I don't know if training that AI to learn all the textures in a game is so time extensive, or if they simply haven't got to the good automated workflow.

But yeah, when DLSS will work on most AAA games, AMD will have to have an answer to that or be crushed.

Xex360Exactly, it's not 4k if it's not rendered at 4k natively.
From what I've seen DLSS 2.0 is similar to a sharpening filter, but most reviewers seem to be blind, I had a 24" 4k monitor and the difference was huge (in games) compared to a 1800p image let alone less but the performance was garbage with a 1070...

More lies clown. 1070 cant even do DLSS. Sharpning if it was jsut that, wouldnt give you more than 50% perf either. DLSS also acts as AA, you dotn get jaggies. It replaces TAA. Stop spreading lies.

dhkloppI didn't even think you could get 24" 4k, let alone it be worth bothering with. You learn something new everyday.

yeah they're technically 23.5" but 24" sounds better.

I think people saw entirely different screenshots than me of dlss 2. I remember one game where it shined, but that's b/c Nvidia paid the devs untold amounts of money lol. The rest were comparable to barely better than upscaling with sharpening.

It's only real usefulness is AA, since TAA is the worst thing in the world.

DLSS 2.0 is amazing tbh. Tried it in control and it was a much better option than native 1080p +2x msaa. Details are much more pronounce and FPS is better

TheGuruStudI think people saw entirely different screenshots than me of dlss 2. I remember one game where it shined, but that's b/c Nvidia paid the devs untold amounts of money lol. The rest were comparable to barely better than upscaling with sharpening.

and what would exactly the devs do with said money to make dlss 2.0 better than those that were not paid ?
tell us exactly.
cause how dlss 2.0 works in a given game is entirely up to nvidia
it's nvidia that botched dlss 1.0 not deepsilver,it's nvidia that made dlss 2.0 work very well in others.

xkm1948There will always be a group that buys radeon gpu whether it has dlss or not. navi gen 1 lacks a ton of features, at the same time they are priced low so folks still buy them. So no need to worry about that.

Also VR's major hurdle right now is not resolution. Valve Index is already pretty amazing. VR locomotion on the hand is if fairly lacking behind.

my take on dlss 2.0
seen it in wolfenstein and control

reviewers say that dlss quality looks better than native.to me it just looks different.some scenes I preferred with dlss,some without.overall image quality isn't considerably better or worse.it's just a different kettle of fish.you can see that native is native is native and recontructed is recontructed.I have no preference,I like dlss 2.0 same as native.The performance increase is insane tho.

as for the salties here they'd be happier picking a different flavor but all in all it's their choice.let them get on with their misery.

cucker tarlsonand what would exactly the devs do with said money to make dlss 2.0 better than those that were not paid ?
tell us exactly.
cause how dlss 2.0 works in a given game is entirely up to nvidia



my take on dlss 2.0
seen it in wolfenstein and control

reviewers say that dlss quality looks better than native.to me it just looks different.some scenes I preferred with dlss,some without.overall image quality isn't considerably better or worse.it's just a different kettle of fish.you can see that native is native is native and recontructed is recontructed.I have no preference,I like dlss 2.0 same as native.The performance increase is insane tho.

as for the salties here they'd be happier picking a different flavor but all in all it's their choice.let them get on with their misery.

We all know Nvidia sends an entire team of devs to optimize games.... Don't play stupid.

TheGuruStudWe all know Nvidia sends an entire team of devs to optimize games.... Don't play stupid.

wikipedia/google

DLSS 2.0

DLSS 2.0 works as follows:[13]

• the neural network is trained by Nvidia using "ideal" images of video games of ultra-high resolution on supercomputers and low resolution images of the same games. The result is stored on the video card driver. It is said the Nvidia uses DGX-1 servers to perform the training of the network.
• The Neural Network stored on the driver compares the actual low resolution image with the reference and produce a full high resolution result. The inputs used by the trained Neural Network are the low resolution aliased images rendered by the game engine, and the low resolution, motion vectors from the same images, also generated by the game engine. The motion vectors tell the network which direction objects in the scene are moving from frame to frame, in order to estimate what the next frame will look like.[14]

• en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning_super_sampling#cite_note-nvidia20-14

Mr. "Guru stud" :laugh:

it's nvidia that botched dlss 1.0 in Metro Exodus not Deep Silver,it's nvidia that made dlss 2.0 work very well in others.

The tech press should not be spreading lies. 4K is 4K, and DLSS is not. You can claim your image looks as good, that's fine, I disagree, but say "it looks as good as 4k" use actual English that has meaning instead of marketing speak.

Many modern games use rendering techniques that look blurry and don't scale with resolution anymore. Play Detroit for example, and you'll notice that much of the image doesn't improve when you switch from 1440p to 4k. Play old games and it is totally different. That is why DLSS is being pushed because it is easy to fool people who have games like Detroit, Death Stranding, Control and FF15 that are chronically blurry.

I personally prefer the visuals of last gen. Games like Mass Effect 3 and old Unreal games before the AA craze where resolution actually leads to a proper image. The fetish for realistic graphics has led to transparency techniques for hair and vegetation that is blurry and horrible imo. I'd rather play Trials of Mana at 4k 120fps and enjoy crisp visuals than play most of the recent stuff we are getting. I even prefer the visuals of Fortnite over DLSS games.

It seems the market is diverging a bit. I love Riot Games commitment to fast performance and clean rendering techniques.

SearingThe tech press should not be spreading lies. 4K is 4K, and DLSS is not. You can claim your image looks as good, that's fine, I disagree, but say "it looks as good as 4k" use actual English that has meaning instead of marketing speak.

Many modern games use rendering techniques that look blurry and don't scale with resolution anymore. Play Detroit for example, and you'll notice that much of the image doesn't improve when you switch from 1440p to 4k. Play old games and it is totally different. That is why DLSS is being pushed because it is easy to fool people who have games like Detroit, Death Stranding, Control and FF15 that are chronically blurry.

I personally prefer the visuals of last gen. Games like Mass Effect 3 and old Unreal games before the AA craze where resolution actually leads to a proper image. The fetish for realistic graphics has led to transparency techniques for hair and vegetation that is blurry and horrible imo. I'd rather play Trials of Mana at 4k 120fps and enjoy crisp visuals than play most of the recent stuff we are getting. I even prefer the visuals of Fortnite over DLSS games.

It seems the market is diverging a bit. I love Riot Games commitment to fast performance and clean rendering techniques.

this is true
dlss 2.0 looks very good,but I must admit it's something your eyes gotta adjust to.

just another nvidia gimmik. an AI upscaler lol

The main hurdle with DLSS as I see it is cost. I don’t know if Nvidia changed their stance on it in the meantime, but at launch DLSS was a feature that game developers had to pay for.