AMD Releases FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 Source Code Through GPUOpen

[btarunr]

Today marks a year since gamers could try out AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution technology for themselves with our spatial upscaler - FSR 1. With the introduction of FSR 2, our temporal upscaling solution earlier this year, there are now over 110 games that support FSR. The rate of uptake has been very impressive - FSR is AMD's fastest adopted software gaming technology to date.

So it seems fitting that we should pick this anniversary day to share the source code for FSR 2, opening up the opportunity for every game developer to integrate FSR 2 if they wish, and add their title to the 24 games which have already announced support. As always, the source code is being made available via GPUOpen under the MIT license, and you can now find links to it on our dedicated FSR 2 page.



Along with the FSR 2 API, and the full C++ and HLSL source code behind it, you'll also discover our Cauldron-based sample and comprehensive API documentation to help you with your integration. We put a lot of effort into the documentation to help developers with their integrations as much as possible, so you can add FSR 2 to your game or engine and really achieve the highest possible quality. Please check it out!

The version you'll be downloading today from GitHub is v2.0.1, which reflects the ongoing improvements we've been making since you would have first seen FSR 2 in action earlier this year.

FSR 2 supports both DirectX 12 and Vulkan, with plugins for Unreal Engine 4.26/4.27 and Unreal Engine 5 due very soon. It will also be available through the Xbox Game Development Kit.

We've also updated the FSR 2 page here on GPUOpen - you'll find new screenshot comparisons and updated content.

Note that FSR 1 can still be exposed as its own upscaling option in addition to FSR 2 in game titles. Both technologies have different characteristics which may be suitable for a wider range of platforms and user preferences. For example, our FSR 2 partner title DEATHLOOP exposes both.

We're really excited to finally get the source code, docs, and the sample out to developers, so head over to our updated FSR 2 page now to see what's new!

View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Deleted member 185088]

That's some good news, hopefully the end of DLSS or it being open.

 

[fancucker]

DLSS remains the benchmark standard. Every Nvidia RTX GPU presents an immense value advantage in that aspect.

 

[kapone32]

This is huge for FSR 2.0 adoption. Looks like Freesync all over again.

 

[skizzo]

did I read this right....it looks like they are doing away with "Ultra Quality" mode on FSR 2.0? It is as follows on FSR 1.0

Ultra Quality
Quality
Balanced
Performance

But now it's going to be
Quality
Balance
Performance
Ultra Performance

I want to say Ultra Quality was like rendering at like 3200x1800 if your native screen res is 4K
So now, for example, the best setting you could use is quality which renders at 2560x1440

I like everything I've read so far except this change! If you need to use "ultra performance" then you should just be lowering your display's resolution. It's only 33%!!! Because yea a lot of ppl on 4K screens want to play a game at 720p! Imagine how shitty that will look for ppl on 1080p or even 1440p displays! Might as call it "make your game look like it was designed for the Gamecube or N64" at that point

 

[droopyRO]

This is huge for FSR 2.0 adoption. Looks like Freesync all over again.

Hopefully. But as it now seems, the game devs are not in a hurry to implement it.

 

[EatingDirt]

DLSS remains the benchmark standard. Every Nvidia RTX GPU presents an immense value advantage in that aspect.

Does it ever get tiring being a massive shill for a corporation that doesn't care about you?

On to the subject at hand, this is great. I expect FSR 2.0 to gain more ground, and become, at the very least, a constant companion to games that are implementing DLSS due to it being supported on all graphics cards.

 

[Punkenjoy]

It have been reported by many that FSR 2.0 is worst on Nvidia GPU versus AMD GPU (At least for RNDA2 GPU, not sure about polaris, Vega and RDNA1). A lot of image or video comparison have been done on Nvidia GPU so take that with a grain of salt. It look like RDNA 2 have less movement artefact versus nvidia in god of war by example.

So NVidia users should keep using DLSS no matter what right now. It's also in some situation doing a better job for case that FSR 2.0 doesn't handle very well yet.

A possible reason for the lack of ultra quality is FSR 2.0 rely on the compute units of the GPU. It have a cost and it's not sure if a Ultra quality would provide enough performance to offset the cost of the upscaling. We will see as that might come in the future.

They still have some work to do, but it's very interesting and it's good to have a good vendor agnostic solution that everyone can use.

 

[R0H1T]

Hopefully. But as it now seems, the game devs are not in a hurry to implement it.

Pretty sure more games will implement FSR in the coming days than DLSS, you can bet on that! Also consoles say howdy to this (welcome) development

 

[Space Lynx]

DLSS remains the benchmark standard. Every Nvidia RTX GPU presents an immense value advantage in that aspect.

Open Source is the main difference between DLSS and FSR, and if history has taught us anything open source always wins out. Hell, these days I can even play any game I want on Linux, I literally don't even need Windows anymore, great fucking time to be alive.

 

[Lew Zealand]

It have been reported by many that FSR 2.0 is worst on Nvidia GPU versus AMD GPU (At least for RNDA2 GPU, not sure about polaris, Vega and RDNA1). A lot of image or video comparison have been done on Nvidia GPU so take that with a grain of salt. It look like RDNA 2 have less movement artefact versus nvidia in god of war by example.

So NVidia users should keep using DLSS no matter what right now. It's also in some situation doing a better job for case that FSR 2.0 doesn't handle very well yet.

A possible reason for the lack of ultra quality is FSR 2.0 rely on the compute units of the GPU. It have a cost and it's not sure if a Ultra quality would provide enough performance to offset the cost of the upscaling. We will see as that might come in the future.

They still have some work to do, but it's very interesting and it's good to have a good vendor agnostic solution that everyone can use.

Not all Nvidia users, as my 1660S, 1080, and 1060 are DLSS-exempt (as are my AMD GPUs ofc), so I'll take FSR 2 thank you.

 

[Space Lynx]

Not all Nvidia users, as my 1660S, 1080, and 1060 are DLSS-exempt (as are my AMD GPUs ofc), so I'll take FSR 2 thank you.

It was nice of AMD to help y'all out

 

[sixor]

Xbox series xs needs this asap, games like sniper elite 5 really could use this

 

[Lionheart]

Xbox series xs needs this asap, games like sniper elite 5 really could use this

This! Current gen consoles really need this. It could solve the whole 4k 30fps quality mode or 60fps 1440p performance mode, they can meet in the middle somewhere using FSR 2.0 with added RT effects, especially with Unreal Engine 5, that is gonna be demanding.

 

[InVasMani]

This is a godsend to humanity if it leads to less and less console ports being frame rate capped at 30FPS or 60FPS.

 

[Verpal]

Open Source is the main difference between DLSS and FSR, and if history has taught us anything open source always wins out. Hell, these days I can even play any game I want on Linux, I literally don't even need Windows anymore, great fucking time to be alive.

Considering NVIDIA control 80+% of the market, I have doubt on whether FSR would ''win'' due to being open source, or is it just another ''win'' like freesync? Whereas G-sync are still being perceived as superior and just as compatible?

Personally, my guess is DLSS would still be a selling point, and consumer would probably give NVIDIA a bit of extra point when considering which VGA to buy, whilst FSR 2.0 become wipespread, but doesn't really benefit AMD as it is normalized as new baseline like freesync.

 

[mechtech]

DLSS remains the benchmark standard. Every Nvidia RTX GPU presents an immense value advantage in that aspect.

Possibly...........

However

Are you old enough to remember VHS and Betamax?

 

[damric]

That Lossless Scaling app on Steam with FSR was like a free GPU upgrade for my Vega64.

 

[Lew Zealand]

DLSS is an undoubtedly better image scaling algorithm for games, I see no shilling in the original statement at all. Stating the facts that hurt your fanboyism towards companies other than NVIDIA doesn't invalidate them.

True, DLSS is the best upscaling tech, but FSR 2 is very close and works on over 90% of the Steam Survey top 50 GPUs while DLSS only works on about 20%.

If you can reach the vast majority of the installed base with one tech while you only reach a small minority with another similar competing tech, the more widely usable one can sway the market towards adopting that pan-usable tech.

 

[trsttte]

Considering NVIDIA control 80+% of the market, I have doubt on whether FSR would ''win'' due to being open source, or is it just another ''win'' like freesync?

You're missing something very important with that number: a much smaller subset of the 80% has access to DLSS since it only works on Turing and above cards which reduces the market share to about 20% (summing rtx cards with above 1% market share from the steam hw survey).

DLSS didn't gain a lot of traction probably because it's expensive to implement and now that a similar and simpler technology exists that work in a much wider market (that even includes consoles) it pretty much only has a destination, the graveyard of interesting but proprietary and closed tech.

 

[kapone32]

Considering NVIDIA control 80+% of the market, I have doubt on whether FSR would ''win'' due to being open source, or is it just another ''win'' like freesync? Whereas G-sync are still being perceived as superior and just as compatible?

Personally, my guess is DLSS would still be a selling point, and consumer would probably give NVIDIA a bit of extra point when considering which VGA to buy, whilst FSR 2.0 become wipespread, but doesn't really benefit AMD as it is normalized as new baseline like freesync.

If history is anything to go buy this will go the same way Freesync and Gsync went. You can actually buy a 4K 120HZ Panel with VRR (Freesync) for less than $900. It won't have a DP 1.4 port but it will have HDMI 2.1 why? It is because HDMI is THE standard for Display technology. DP 1.4 is better than HDMI 2.1? In fact I will use Freespace 2 as a great example of why Open source is better for future development. There is a mod for Freespace 2 called the Blue something that is some of the best Military Sci fi I have played in terms of story.

 

[trsttte]

It is because HDMI is THE standard for Display technology.

Wow wow oh hold up, I wouldn't go that far. It's the standard for general consumer electronics but computers still favour vesa display port, they're both competing standards (which is often quite annoying actually).

Freesync vs gsync has nothing to do with hdmi vs display port, it just so happens that the gsync module is now outdated and since vesa freesync technology became much more widespread (by being open... what a shocker) nvidia doesn't seem to care to update the module because there aren't that many advantages on gsync over freesync anyway and they weren't able to make it standup in the market when the tech was new let alone when it's now common place to have freesync on everything (with hdmi even adopting it for their vrr tech)

Regarding Display Port vs HDMI, Display Port is actually somewhat more open, I don't know why HDMI was able to become the standard for consumer AV equipment, maybe they were more open to going along with copyright cartels about HDCP stuff and are more willing to play along with manufacturers shenanigans making the features of the standard all optional (great for the consumers of course.. ), HDMI 2.1 may now be better than DP 1.4 but they're basically always one upping each other with each revision.

 

[Minus Infinity]

did I read this right....it looks like they are doing away with "Ultra Quality" mode on FSR 2.0? It is as follows on FSR 1.0

Ultra Quality
Quality
Balanced
Performance

But now it's going to be
Quality
Balance
Performance
Ultra Performance

I want to say Ultra Quality was like rendering at like 3200x1800 if your native screen res is 4K
So now, for example, the best setting you could use is quality which renders at 2560x1440

I like everything I've read so far except this change! If you need to use "ultra performance" then you should just be lowering your display's resolution. It's only 33%!!! Because yea a lot of ppl on 4K screens want to play a game at 720p! Imagine how shitty that will look for ppl on 1080p or even 1440p displays! Might as call it "make your game look like it was designed for the Gamecube or N64" at that point

Yes that's been known since it was announced. Quality FSR 2 is better than Ultra quality FSR 1 and pretty much equal to DLSS2.3 (other than for thin objects) At 4K I can't see any real differences between DLSS and FSR2. At 1080p FSR2 destroys FSR1 which was frankly garbage.

 

[ratirt]

That is a good news. FSR2.0 open. I wonder what NV will do with that and its DLSS. It would seem AMD is not going to stop or block usage of that feature ever. I would be surprised if they did.
For those who were saying DLSS is an open source feature. DLSS was never an open source feature FSR 2.0 is in all extent and that is what DLSS should have been.

 

[wolf]

Nice one AMD, just keep improving it is all I ask, which does seem like a given.

Going to be an awesome few years + of reconstruction / Upscaling advancement for everyone.

DLSS, TSR, FSR, XeSS... Fascinating stuff.