john_I doubt AMD can give enough money to CDPR to convince them to optimize for AMD in the same way they optimize for Nvidia.

There is literally RYZEN logo on the CP2077 startup screen...

radosuafThere is literally RYZEN logo on the CP2077 startup screen...

Yeah, Ryzen is a nice graphics card.

john_I agree with what you say, I will just comment on this part.
If an AMD user and an Nvidia user buys the game, they will both pay the same amount of money. If the game developer can't or wouldn't optimize for a certain hardware, then they should be selling the game to those using that hardware at a lower price. Else they are becoming part of the problem that drives the market to a monopoly.

In my opinion, games should not be optimised for this or that. They should be as hardware-agnostic as possible. I bet we all thought this would be the case with most, if not all of them with DirectX 12 Ultimate, but hardware makers (especially Nvidia) just can't stop pushing their own agenda, and people buy into it, unfortunately.

AusWolfIn my opinion, games should not be optimised for this or that. They should be as hardware-agnostic as possible. I bet we all thought this would be the case with most, if not all of them with DirectX 12 Ultimate, but hardware makers (especially Nvidia) just can't stop pushing their own agenda, and people buy into it, unfortunately.

They might had less bugs that way. There are games that where a huge mess, because the developers where trying to implement specific features in them.

Yet another case where modded in FSR3 works better than native one. HDR is still broken with FSR3 they implemented, while it works normally with modded one. At least Freesync seems to be working, but frame pacing seems to be off as I get slowdowns with camera movement. Didn't happen on modded FSR. Well I don't have 24.8.1 drivers that they recommend because they break Wukong so maybe it will get fixed with driver update but doubt it.

AusWolfThey should be as hardware-agnostic as possible.

"As possible" is the key. Usually it's not readily possible. Different architectures from different vendors using vastly varying methods prove a real PITA. That's why some games run better on NV, some — on AMD, with RT being generally an AMD's weakspot no matter the generation and game.

However, AMD really don't do enough. FSR from today is worse than DLSS from 3 years ago. AMD FG from today is worse than NV FG from the launch. XeSS is much younger, Intel are much newer to this market, however XeSS looks better than FSR already. Despite all those issues Intel are forced to reckon with lately. AMD are too late for a wake up call. They need a nuke.

Not AMD FSR 3.1

john_Would you please stop calling the others fanboys. It doesn't help how you look. You don't become more objective in others' eyes.

It's a mental disorder. He posts same link to this YTB video everywhere. Don't feed the troll, just ignore him.

Beginner Macro Device"As possible" is the key. Usually it's not readily possible. Different architectures from different vendors using vastly varying methods prove a real PITA. That's why some games run better on NV, some — on AMD, with RT being generally an AMD's weakspot no matter the generation and game.

However, AMD really don't do enough. FSR from today is worse than DLSS from 3 years ago. AMD FG from today is worse than NV FG from the launch. XeSS is much younger, Intel are much newer to this market, however XeSS looks better than FSR already. Despite all those issues Intel are forced to reckon with lately. AMD are too late for a wake up call. They need a nuke.

I thought I read an article somewhere that with all 3 vendors using some kind of AI core in their current architectures, Microsoft was working on a hardware-detection based global upscaler. It can't come soon enough and put an end to this mess. Although personally, I'd rather just forget that upscaling even exists, and turn down some graphical features instead of using it.

I wont quote anybody and just post it as a general comment.

Stop making excuses on behalf of AMD. They are no longer that struggling company that is on brink of bankruptcy, trying to survive against two giants. Nowadays they are healthy and profitable business and must do a better job. Their fans (i used to be one as well, until they spent billions on share buybacks instead of improving the company and its technologies) should demand and expect better job from them.

When will they abandon the low cost, low efforts approach of just releasing something as open source and leaving it to the developers to implement it well, which almost never happens. Instead of using Nvidia/Intel approach of utilizing the Nvidia's Streamline SDK and continuously refine the upscaling algorithms and models and updating the binaries. When are they going to release a machine learning enhanced version of FSR? FSR continue to shimmer and ghosts and have all kinds of other image quality shortcomings.

AMD wants to win back market share. That wont happen If they continue with the low cost, low efforts approach. Nvidia's market share gains have shown that people are willing to spend more for extra features and good experience. Like i said in another post, competing solely on raster/price is no longer enough.

Look at the state in which Zen5 was released. The infamous "Finewine" technology, i.e. beta drivers.

AMD MUST DO A BETTER JOB! Especially on the software side.

AusWolfExcept that AMD's shit is open-source, so no collaboration is needed. This is entirely on the game devs as far as I see it.

Bingo, and that's exactly why it ain't working out.

I'm saying this strategy does not work for AMD, and in the end, AMD is the company wasting time and energy on this, with a certain purpose. Its purpose is obviously to sell GPUs.
So that's all on AMD. As is their marketing overall. They suck hard at it.

lasCyberpunk 2077 after v2.0 is a pure masterpiece and no matter how hard of an AMD fanboy you are, you should probably give it a shot. One of the biggest turnarounds ever in PC gaming.

What's so radically different to you, after 2.0 then? In my experience... the city's still lifeless and empty (okay, assets move around in it, but interaction zero), traffic is still prone to randomly crashing if you turn around, and let's not get started about police behaviour, that's probably even more hilarious... The missions are the same as before... the crafting and economy systems of the game are still broken AF, the new talent trees are a good addition though. That's really the only radical change I could say has truly made the game (somewhat) better. But even now, there's not really any semblance of balance, between talent trees or weapon types; or relative to the enemies you meet. I also can't truly say the combat's improved in the way it works or flows; you can still do mostly whatever and succeed...

Alongside that, numerous bugs still happen, and sure, a lot can be written off as 'oh its fun in the sandbox' but I wouldn't directly say it oozes quality and polish. And masterpiece... eh, just no. There's barely a game and there's a bunch of story missions in a city. That's about as far as Cyberpunk managed to go. It should have been so much more. And I tried, I really, really tried to find the game here, the thing that keeps you going back, but apart from the pretty pictures (in some places... Night City still also has a lot of deserted, unfinished alleys and whole districts even, and no, that's not for its immersive qualities) I don't find it, even after trying all sorts of builds and playstyles. A lot of features and skills for example, (cyberhacks especially, but lots of (smart-) guns too) just simply don't work well, either situationally or at all. Nothing changed here between 1.21 and 2.0.

john_CP2077 is more or less an Nvidia Demo all those years. I doubt AMD can give enough money to CDPR to convince them to optimize for AMD in the same way they optimize for Nvidia.


But I do agree in this part. It's just that, in my opinion, AMD can't have much of a saying in CP2077 because it is Nvidia's game.

Oh yeah, sure, an Nvidia game that also appears on every console where it uses AMD technology. Come on dude. What bags of money, they're bloody releasing the vast majority of sales on AMD hardware.

The fact Nvidia has pushed RT doesn't mean AMD can't push its upscale proper. Its IN THE GAME. As in, devs DID implement the technology. Of COURSE AMD is next in line to tell them they need to do it properly! And if they don't, AMD should have sent an engineer that way to do it for them - something Nvidia is keen to do, by the way, and has been doing, for decades. Its not just bags of money here, its dedicated investment of time and workforce. Its way too easy to keep saying 'devs fault' in this space. Collaboration doesn't work that way, as evident.

AusWolfI'd rather just forget that upscaling even exists, and turn down some graphical features instead of using it.

I'm quite the opposite. Upscaling is a useful tool that should never be avoided. Making games unplayable without it is foul but making games without it altogether is a bigger foul.

My GPU is dated and could've been top tier maybe seven years ago but now it's just a last gen mid-tier unit that's barely suitable for next-gen 1080p. However, with upscaling, it's possible to have it playable at 4K, also having more image quality than at native 1080p. At a conservative performance cost (approx. 85 FPS at 1080p native VS 65 FPS at 4K with XeSS Performance), too.

Image quality damage from upscaling has become almost negligible and it's far less damage than when lowering the "basic" settings. I see no reason to prefer lower settings over upscaling, unless upscaling isn't present or is poorly implemented.

john_CP2077 is more or less an Nvidia Demo all those years. I doubt AMD can give enough money to CDPR to convince them to optimize for AMD in the same way they optimize for Nvidia.


But I do agree in this part. It's just that, in my opinion, AMD can't have much of a saying in CP2077 because it is Nvidia's game.

Oh yeah, sure, an Nvidia game that also appears on every console where it uses AMD technology. Come on dude. What bags of money, they're bloody releasing the vast majority of sales on AMD hardware.

john_A few months delay of implementing DLSS in Starfield.
Tech press, users, fans, trolls the whole universe revolts against bad AMD.

When you reduce the entire fisaco into those two cherry picked sentences it sure sounds horrible for poor AMD :(

AusWolfI don't think I'll ever understand why frame generation is a thing. It's useless at high FPS, and unusable at low FPS.

Honestly I've been really enjoying LSFG for the cases where it can make the biggest difference, and those situations so far are mostly fixed framerate content, be it game or video. 24/30/60 fps hard capped content imo it works a treat given the fps is locked anyway you mostly just gain the motion fluidity with less perceived drawback. I can also appreciate it costs money and that might be a nope for people, but it is only 7 bucks. It has it's place, I'd rather have it in the toolset and not want to use it, than want to use it and not have it, and it's hardware agnostic.

AusWolfno collaboration is needed.

It might help though

Just tested 2.13 patch. Both FSR3 and FG works on 6800XT with Win10. That's being said, I wasnt really impressed.

FSR3 mostly gets rid off ghosting behind the cars compared to FSR2 but it's not perfect. It still has excessive shimmering on vegetation while standing still. It looks good otherwise but I'd rather use XeSS 1.3 as it does better job on both of those scenarios.

FSR FG was initially really bad. Motion fluidity was horrible. But after playing with resolutions and video options it fixed itself. My best guess is Vsync was stuck as on after patching and turned off again by playing with video settings. 6800XT, FSR Balanced 1440p, RT Ultra plays mostly 100+FPS with FG on. But honestly, I really dont see or feel any difference after AFMF2. And I have to use FSR3 for FSR FG. Cant use Xess 1.3 with it unlike with AFMF2. I guess I'll stay on AFMF2+XeSS 1.3.

Fun fact, you use AFMF2 over FSR FG and they both work. :laugh:

adilazimdegilxFun fact, you use AFMF2 over FSR FG and they both work.

94 percent frames are fake brrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttt!

Both XeSS and FSR are a horrid mess at 1440p if you do Balanced though. Great at 4K (however, I need something faster than 6700 XT to run it with RT ON).

adilazimdegilxFSR3 mostly gets rid off ghosting behind the cars compared to FSR2 but it's not perfect.

Does it work any faster though?

TheDeeGeeAMD being AMD i guess, it works fine on my 4070 Ti.

I have a mobile 3080 in my work laptop and its still available there.

So basically windows 10 = no HAGS And windows 11 HAGS works for Radeons.

GoldenXWe waited a year for this, and it seems like someone just pushed the in-development branch to production.

We got FSR3.0, which is just 2.2 + framegen.
Even like that, using FSR3.0 in game looks much worse than FSR2.2, which is somehow still available. The image is much more unstable.
NativeAA looks worse than DLSS performance.
And to top it off, framegen is enforced to run only on 3.0, when even in that version it was possible to decouple it, something the mods have been doing for months.

All in all, the real star of the show is XeSS1.3 being lighter and closer in quality to DLSS, what CDPR did to implement FSR is an utter joke.
Hopefully the modding community solves it, the .dll files are there.

Is FSR usually closer to DLSS? I read an article not long ago, I cant remember where sadly, but if I find it again will link it, someone was doing testing on all of the upscaling tech's and the person commented that XeSS has got remarkably close to DLSS, comparable visuals with 4% less frame rate impact whilst FSR they felt was a gen or two behind on it.

I think I came across it when looking up info on PSSR.

Beginner Macro Device94 percent frames are fake brrrrrrrrrrrtttttttttt!

we are hitting fakeness levels that shouldnt even be possible!

Beginner Macro DeviceBoth XeSS and FSR are a horrid mess at 1440p if you do Balanced though. Great at 4K (however, I need something faster than 6700 XT to run it with RT ON).

Agree. I normally target 120+FPS without RT and SSR in this game as I enjoy that fluidity over visuals (it's still a FPS afterall). But I'm mostly done with the game anyway so it doesnt hurt exploring high fidelity. Still I cant really do more than sightseeing if its under 60 FPS so I have to do with Balanced upscaling. At least AFMF2 is now helping on that.

Beginner Macro DeviceDoes it work any faster though?

Tested shortly on a roof viewing mostly static area. Not a single frame difference between FSR2 and 3. XeSS 1.3 does give higher frame rates though. Could be a bug. Although I have no running mods on 2.13, my game files are quite old and a bit of a mess. I might be running different XeSS .dll.

chrcolukIs FSR usually closer to DLSS?

No way. One gotta be blind to see no difference. FSR is at least 3.5 years behind.

adilazimdegilxI normally target 120+FPS

Wish I had a monitor that can do more than 60 FPS. Will prolly reinvent gaming for myself when I get a 144+ Hz one. It will wait though since I'm allergic to resolutions lower than 4K.

And the game is first person, yes, but it's not strictly a shooter. Rather an action-packed adventure.

adilazimdegilxXeSS 1.3 does give higher frame rates though

The opposite here. I'm having XeSS slower than FSR but holy drone, is it miles ahead of the latter in terms of clarity.

Beginner Macro DeviceThe opposite here. I'm having XeSS slower than FSR but holy drone, is it miles ahead of the latter in terms of clarity.

You sure you are using XeSS 1.3? (Either with patch or by changing .dlls) Then maybe my version is really broken. :laugh:

adilazimdegilxsure you are using XeSS 1.3

I'm sure I'm not. I'm using 1.3.1. 1.3 was my poison before that and it ran slower than FSR, too.

Beginner Macro DeviceI'm sure I'm not. I'm using 1.3.1. 1.3 was my poison before that and it ran slower than FSR, too.

Spoiler: XeSS 1.3.1. 50% scale.

Spoiler: FSR 2.1 at the same 50%

I guess my files are beyond saving. Checked my Xess dll, it was on 1.30. Updated to 1.31. I still get higher numbers on XeSS. These are all on 1440p, RT Ultra (preset), Balanced mode for upscalers. (Arent they are all the same scaling at the same preset now?) I'll try a clean install. Thinking my FSR results are broken.

adilazimdegilxI still get higher numbers on XeSS.

Probably because its Balanced mode is now 50% render, whereas FSR renders things at 59 percent at the Balanced mode.

That's why I compared via setting the scaling ratio manually. Still, too odd even if my assumption on 50/59 is true.

RuruHow about better optimizing of games instead of optimizing upscaling techniques? :D
edit: typo

This, but more so this game is a flickering mess without RT enabled.

I went back to test a few things with the 4080S I have before doing some part swaps, and noticed that without RT enabled theres texture flickering on medium distance buildings/geometry everywhere in this game. At first I though it had to do with AF, or DOF settings, and after googling + trying everything I could find, the only fix was to turn RT back on. And just like that all the flicker was gone.