Tuesday, February 6th 2024

Mod Unlocks FSR 3 Fluid Motion Frames on Older NVIDIA GeForce RTX 20/30 Series Cards

NVIDIA's latest RTX 40 series graphics cards feature impressive new technologies like DLSS 3 that can significantly enhance performance and image quality in games. However, owners of older 20 and 30 series NVIDIA GeForce RTX cards cannot officially benefit from these cutting-edge advances. DLSS 3's Frame Generation feature, in particular, requires dedicated hardware only found in NVIDIA's brand new Ada Lovelace architecture. But the ingenious modding community has stepped in with a creative workaround solution where NVIDIA has refused to enable frame generation functionality on older generation hardware. A new third-party modification can unofficially activate both upscaling (FSR, DLAA, DLSS or XeSS) and AMD Fluid Motion Frames on older NVIDIA cards equipped with Tensor Cores. Replacing two key DLL files and a small edit to the Windows registry enables the "DLSS 3" option to be activated in games running on older hardware.

In testing conducted by Digital Foundry, this modification delivered up to a 75% FPS boost - on par with the performance uplift official DLSS 3 provides on RTX 40 series cards. Games like Cyberpunk 2077, Spider-Man: Miles Morales, and A Plague Tale: Requiem were used to benchmark performance. However, there can be minor visual flaws, including incorrect UI interpolation or random frame time fluctuations. Ironically, while the FSR 3 tech itself originates from AMD, the mod currently only works on NVIDIA cards. So, while not officially supported, the resourcefulness of the modding community has remarkably managed to bring cutting-edge frame generation to more NVIDIA owners - until AMD RDNA 3 cards can utilize it as well. This shows the incredible potential of community-driven software modification and innovation.
Source: via HardwareLuxx
Add your own comment

27 Comments on Mod Unlocks FSR 3 Fluid Motion Frames on Older NVIDIA GeForce RTX 20/30 Series Cards

#26
AnotherReader
ZendouI would say that a possible reason for AMD not being in that position is that they have never had the market share to try. If they were the dominate platform and could, they probably would.

As for the Intel subject that is just the cherry picking of information. The A770 is not and has not been the card of best value by Intel, that would be the A750. Which has most of the A770 performance with a reduced cost. As seen in this chart in the review of the A580 for performance per dollar (which is an actual important metric) it appears the A750 is in a 24% lead at 1080P, 16% at 1440P, and 23% at 4K when compared to the 7600. The drivers are still being much improved, in fact from this article on TPU dated 01/24/24 certain DX11 games got a +268% performance increase, I would say there is still more headroom for gains.

I can understand when cost is a concern, however you seem to be focusing on efficiency and die size which really does not affect most people in any meaningful way.
You have a point about AMD never being in a position to abuse their position. I'll note that Nvidia, at least, has been unscrupulous even when they were nowhere near as dominant as today.

I'm only discussing the technical merits of the A770. For that purpose, lower performance products like the A750 are irrelevant. I agree that drivers have improved a lot, but the examples I linked to included games where Intel does well, e.g. CyberPunk. Knowing how well the A770 does, we can make a reasonable estimate of Battlemage performance. Getting to the 4070 would require a 60% performance increase over the A770 which is greater than the difference between the 3090 TI and the 4090 in TechPowerUp's reviews. One saving grace for Intel is their good ray tracing performance so if they managed to match a 4070 in rasterization, they would probably match it in ray tracing too which would be a pretty good position to be in.

None of this has any bearing on this topic so let's leave it to PMs if you want to discuss it further.
Posted on Reply
#27
Gica
JAB CreationsRemember when AMD's stock price was $2 and Intel was giving away billions of dollars to OEMs to not use AMD products? I sure remember when Zen 1 launched and motherboard manufacturers only released motherboards because of obligations and on those motherboards wasn't sufficient storage required for compatibility because no one believed AMD would still be in business let alone support the same CPU socket for almost a decade. Maybe consider the glass house you're standing in before blindly throwing bricks.
Speculation at the door of the block. Don't forget that both companies are from the USA, where the penalties are in the order of billions.
AMD shares were low because they offered nothing. Neither Intel nor nVidia launched Bulldozer or Vega.
However, you didn't understand. AMD, Intel, nVidia, Apple ... American companies. Pure capitalism. All of them, when they have no competition, take seven skins from the buyer because the shareholder is their God. In the first year after the launch of the superb Zen 3, AMD released only 4 processors on the market, none under $300, nothing non-X. Intel remained frozen in 4 cores while AMD was playing for amateurs, Apple doubles the price just for an apple painted on products and nVidia offers exactly as much as it needs and not as much as it can.
You should still be glad that there is fierce competition. At least here, the products of the two companies, be it processors or video cards, are now sold at a lower price than at launch. It's no small thing when inflation is Batman.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Dec 21st, 2024 22:20 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts