Thursday, February 29th 2024

Microsoft DirectSR Super Resolution API Brings Together DLSS, FSR and XeSS

by
T0@st
 Discuss (26 Comments)
Microsoft has just announced that their new DirectSR Super Resolution API for DirectX will provide a unified interface for developers to implement super resolution in their games. This means that game studios no longer have to choose between DLSS, FSR, XeSS, or spend additional resources to implement, bug-test and support multiple upscalers. For gamers this is huge news, too, because they will be able to run upscaling in all DirectSR games—no matter the hardware they own. While AMD FSR and Intel XeSS run on all GPUs from all vendors, NVIDIA DLSS is exclusive to Team Green's hardware. With their post, Microsoft also confirms that DirectSR will not replace FSR/DLSS/XeSS with a new upscaler by Microsoft, rather that it builds on existing technologies that are already available, unifying access to them.

While we have to wait until March 21 for more details to be revealed at GDC 2024, Microsoft's Joshua Tucker stated in a blog post: "We're thrilled to announce DirectSR, our new API designed in partnership with GPU hardware vendors to enable seamless integration of Super Resolution (SR) into the next generation of games. Super Resolution is a cutting-edge technique that increases the resolution and visual quality in games. DirectSR is the missing link developers have been waiting for when approaching SR integration, providing a smoother, more efficient experience that scales across hardware. This API enables multi-vendor SR through a common set of inputs and outputs, allowing a single code path to activate a variety of solutions including NVIDIA DLSS Super Resolution, AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution, and Intel XeSS. DirectSR will be available soon in the Agility SDK as a public preview, which will enable developers to test it out and provide feedback. Don't miss our DirectX State of the Union at GDC to catch a sneak peek at how DirectSR can be used with your games!"
Source: Microsoft Dev Blogs

Related News

Add your own comment

26 Comments on Microsoft DirectSR Super Resolution API Brings Together DLSS, FSR and XeSS

#1
Onasi
I am still not fully clear on what this even is supposed to be. Sounds more like a simplified way for the devs to implement already existing upscalers and less like a new hardware-agnostic standardized SR to kill off the proprietary ones that many hoped for.
Posted on Reply
#2
Pooch
This API enables multi-vendor SR through a common set of inputs and outputs, allowing a single code path to activate a variety of solutions including NVIDIA DLSS Super Resolution, AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution, and Intel XeSS. Yea sounds like its just some development path enhancement to allow for easier integration. So idk why they are acting like this is some big thing? Microsoft isnt developing its own SR, its just allowing you to use existing ones more easily.
Posted on Reply
#3
wNotyarD
OnasiI am still not fully clear on what this even is supposed to be. Sounds more like a simplified way for the devs to implement already existing upscalers and less like a new hardware-agnostic standardized SR to kill off the proprietary ones that many hoped for.
If it at least ends with the "this game is sponsored by X brand to use their upscaler and not use the ones from Y and Z brands" talks, it'll make the market a little better.
If it also serves as a universal extension that calls DLSS, FSR or XeSS, and the devs only need then to call DirectSR, it may make things better as well.
Posted on Reply
#4
Onasi
Yeah, best we can hope for is this ending like the RTX to DXR thing where the MS featureset just cannibalized and then made agnostic a previously proprietary feature.
Posted on Reply
#5
Vya Domus
OnasiI am still not fully clear on what this even is supposed to be.
It's basically the equivalent of Nvidia's Streamline, an API to make all these upscalers easier to implement and just like Streamline I don't really see it's point.
OnasiYeah, best we can hope for is this ending like the RTX to DXR thing where the MS featureset just cannibalized and then made agnostic a previously proprietary feature.
There never was "RTX", that was just Nvidia's marketing making it sound as though it's Nvidia's own API which people still believe it is the case to this day.

It was always DXR, which was also always hardware agnostic (everyone still has to write their own back end to it), if you go back to the very first RT game, Battlefield 5, in the video settings it's even called explicitly "DXR" not "RTX".
Posted on Reply
#6
Onasi
@Vya Domus
Yeah, thanks for clarification. So would it be safe to say that RTX is just a backend for DXR that’s NV specific? Blender peeps I talk about often mention it as an OptiX accelerated RT solution for NV and compare it to ProRender Vulkan.
Posted on Reply
#7
qlum
Vya DomusIt's basically the equivalent of Nvidia's Streamline, an API to make all these upscalers easier to implement and just like Streamline I don't really see it's point.


There never was "RTX", that was just Nvidia's marketing making it sound as though it's Nvidia's own API which people still believe it is the case to this day.

It was always DXR, which was also always hardware agnostic (everyone still has to write their own back end to it), if you go back to the very first RT game, Battlefield 5, in the video settings it's even called explicitly "DXR" not "RTX".
Unlike streamline its not by one of the hardware vendors, which should be more neutral and less prone to biasses.

I will add with ray tracing implementations are still somewhat scewed towards Nvidia at times, and there may have existed a propriatary api at the earliest stages but it is not relevant.

In general I would agree there are only dxr and vulkan rt that are relevant.
Posted on Reply
#8
Noyand
Vya DomusIt's basically the equivalent of Nvidia's Streamline, an API to make all these upscalers easier to implement and just like Streamline I don't really see it's point.
I vaguely heard something about an AMD exec not caring much about streamline because FSR was supposed to be the end game solution for everyone anyway. Even if streamline is open source, I've heard that Intel was the only vendor who was onboard, (AMD potential spot being "Hardware Vendor #3").


It's however been confirmed that AMD is working with Microsoft for DirectSR. So we might actually see a feature parity in games, rather than the perpetual : "need to wait for x.x patch to get that specific vendor solution". It feels like we stray further away from the "one API to rule them all" dream each day, with trillion dollars companies giving their solutions a lot of momentum.
Posted on Reply
#9
HisDivineOrder
Makes you wonder how they deal with someone trying to use this when they have a card like the 1080 Ti where it's Nvidia but it doesn't have DLSS. Do they default to FSR or XeSS? Or none?
Posted on Reply
#10
redzo
Definitely a step into the right direction: gamedev implements directsr: leave everything else up to the graphic card vendors. Frame generation should follow the same path.
At least on windows, all users benefit no matter which graphic card brand they own. No more dlss supported but fsr not, or the other way around.
Posted on Reply
#11
Vya Domus
OnasiYeah, thanks for clarification. So would it be safe to say that RTX is just a backend for DXR that’s NV specific? Blender peeps I talk about often mention it as an OptiX accelerated RT solution for NV and compare it to ProRender Vulkan.
RTX is just an umbrella term Nvidia has for everything related to ray tracing, OptiX is an API dedicated to ray tracing, basically CUDA, that's unrelated to DirectX and it's actually way older than any of this post 2018 RT stuff.
Posted on Reply
#12
wolf
Better Than Native
So it's not their own upscaler as was rumoured (hey look another MLID turd, from what I gather, because I sure as hell won't watch him), it's basically "Streamline by Microsoft", which is also not a bad thing at all, just give us all the option to use what works best on our hardware.

Hopefully this puts a rocket up AMD to keep improving FSR, perhaps leveraging hardware in never revisions, because just working broadly isn't going to be enough, never was imo but more so with this announcement.

This announcement is sure to dissapoint some that we're expecting one upscaler to rule them all, and those wishing the expeditious demise of DLSS.
Posted on Reply
#13
katzi
wolfSo it's not their own upscaler as was rumoured (hey look another MLID turd, from what I gather, because I sure as hell won't watch him), it's basically "Streamline by Microsoft", which is also not a bad thing at all, just give us all the option to use what works best on our hardware.

Hopefully this puts a rocket up AMD to keep improving FSR, perhaps leveraging hardware in never revisions, because just working broadly isn't going to be enough, never was imo but more so with this announcement.

This announcement is sure to dissapoint some that we're expecting one upscaler to rule them all, and those wishing the expeditious demise of DLSS.
Their video upscaler in Edge on Beta/Dev - is (dare I say) Much better than nvidias
Posted on Reply
#14
Minus Infinity
Wouldn't it just be better for DirectX 12 to have new DirectSR and DirectAI features builtin so there is no need for proprietary third party solutions even if some are open source. The game developers then can implement the upscaling as they like and it will work on any hardware supporting the latest DirectX. Take the need away from the gpu makers to implement SR.
Posted on Reply
#15
wolf
Better Than Native
katziTheir video upscaler in Edge on Beta/Dev - is (dare I say) Much better than nvidias
I haven't used it, but I'm fine with that, all anyone needs to do to rise to the top is actually be the better solution.

For now I have no issues with this DirectSR approach that allows all major upscalers to be included every time, and keep the competition alive, pushing them all to strive to be better and better, we will all reap the rewards of that competition and innovation. I am however not okay with settling for a demonstrably inferior solution based purely on wider compatibility when these easy layers exist to give everyone what they want. Now if someone, anyone, can come up with a solution that works on everything and also is undisputedly the best, power to them, I will applaud that and be totally happy with it being the single solution to rule them all.
Posted on Reply
#16
Craptacular
So, basically Microsoft is saving the hardware agnostic upscaler for DirectX 13.....
Posted on Reply
#17
Camm
Good to see, we get an agnostic API that also works for Xbox, unlike Streamline that only worked on PC (which was why AMD never adopted it, Streamline was a trojan horse to fuck AMD pushing FSR as being platform agnostic).

Downside, Linux is going to have yet another bit of Microsoft tech to work past and this has no benefit for other console platforms.
Posted on Reply
#18
Veseleil
Yes, bring them all together and take them where the Sun doesn't shine.
Posted on Reply
#20
Vayra86
And yet another crystal ball truth coming into fruition.

Well done. Get it done. Upscale should not be a USP, but a Universal selling point :) Big bonus points here for the PC platform in the end.

BTW, don't think too technical about this 'feature'. Its a marketing feature. Now you can't reasonably avoid making a DX12 game without having this label attached to your game as well. This is a push on all creators that's a lot harder to deny than 'we implement FSR, or DLSS'. Because for end users, they will soon go 'DirectSR or you suck, why don't you have this, its part of the api'.
Posted on Reply
#21
Chrispy_
The real question is "what vendor-specific features aren't used by DirectSR?"

Nvidia made a lot of fuss about how DLSS needed AI and it turns out that was blatant lies. The closest Nvidia got to using AI with DLSS was training their driver profiles using some machine learning, but DLSS itself, running on Geforce cards is AFAIK completely AI-free in every possible interpretation of the phrase.

XeSS, DLSS, and FSR all do look different to each other. Will that still be the case under DirectSR?
Posted on Reply
#22
trsttte
Chrispy_The real question is "what vendor-specific features aren't used by DirectSR?"

Nvidia made a lot of fuss about how DLSS needed AI and it turns out that was blatant lies. The closest Nvidia got to using AI with DLSS was training their driver profiles using some machine learning, but DLSS itself, running on Geforce cards is AFAIK completely AI-free in every possible interpretation of the phrase.

XeSS, DLSS, and FSR all do look different to each other. Will that still be the case under DirectSR?
The AI spiel was basically proprietary instructions instead of something standard like DP4a like Intel did (in part).

We're risking going from 3 to 4 competing standards but imo the best thing DirectSR could do would be to really kill the other 3 with standard instructions that would be supported by any gpu (the original promise of FSR). It would end the anti competitive fuckery of nvidia/amd/intel bribing studios for premium support of their own solution.

It would be a problem for linux, but that will always be the case when talking about directx features
Posted on Reply
#23
Super XP
Someone on Wccftech mentioned that Microsoft is working closely with AMD because MS is interested in FSR. Note that XeSS is also open source. Would be interested if both AMD & Intel would put away their prides and work together for a unified open source solution to combat Nvidia's DLSS.
Anyhow DirectSR looks to benefit PC Gamers, I'm all for it.
Chrispy_XeSS, DLSS, and FSR all do look different to each other. Will that still be the case under DirectSR?
Its interested how all 3 companies use different methods for a similar result(s).
The best options is Open Source, that's where Intel's XeSS and AMD's FSR stand out above DLSS that requires specific Nvidia hardware to work.
Posted on Reply
#24
Camm
Super XPNote that XeSS is also open source
Should be noted XeSS is NOT open source, there is no source code availability.
Posted on Reply
#25
trsttte
Super XPNote that XeSS is also open source
Not open source, simply not locked down and compatible with any GPU supporting DP4a instructions. It's also worth mentioning Intel is (or claims to be) using differently trained and designed models depending on if you're using the standard DP4a or proprietary XMX implementation.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 21st, 2024 09:01 EST change timezone

Latest GPU Drivers

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts