RDNA4-Exclusive AMD FSR 4 Technology Comes to 30+ Games at Launch, Over 75 Games By End of year

[AleksandarK]

Thanks to VideoCardz, we are getting confirmation that AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) 4.0 technology will be available for more than 30 games at launch, and over 75 games by end of the year. The leak notes that the support for FSR 4.0 will be coming only to games with FSR 3.1 already implemented. By manually toggling it in AMD Software, users can enable FSR 4.0 in their supported games. There is even a way to enable it thought HYPR-RX, but that will be limited to the support game list, too.

AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution technology has evolved through four distinct generations, each marking significant architectural shifts in upscaling approach. FSR 1 implemented basic spatial upscaling with broad hardware compatibility across AMD's GPU lineup dating back to RX 400 series. FSR 2 pivoted to temporal techniques, adding native anti-aliasing support while maintaining compatibility with RX 590 cards and select Ryzen APUs. FSR 3 introduced frame generation technology for the first time, requiring newer RX 5000 series hardware for this feature while keeping basic upscaling accessible to older GPUs. FSR 4 represents AMD's most advanced implementation to date, combining temporal upscaling with machine learning techniques, native AA, and frame generation—though requiring the latest RX 9000 series hardware based on RDNA 4.


Below is a list of FSR4-supported games at launch:

The Alters, Bellwright, Call of Duty: Black Ops 6, Creatures of Ava, Dragonkin: The Banished, Endoria: The Last Song, FragPunk, Funko Fusion, God of War: Ragnarok, Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered, Horizon Forbidden West, Hunt: Showdown 1896, Incursion Red River, Kristala, Marvel Rivals, Marvel's Spider-Man 2, Marvel's Spider-Man Remastered, Marvel's Spider-Man: Miles Morales, MechWarrior 5: Clans, Monster Hunter Wilds, Nightingale, No More Room in Hell 2, PANICORE, Predator: Hunting Grounds, Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart, Remnant 2, Smite 2, The Axis Unseen, The Last of Us: Part I, The Last of Us: Part II Remastered, Until Dawn, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marines 2, Kingdom Come: Deliverance II, Dynasty Warriors: Origins, and Civilization 7.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[ZoneDymo]

its such a mess....here is hoping people will mod it again so you can just replace dlss with it

 

[esserpain]

I don't recognize a third of these games. Not a good start. Hopefully, game developers and AMD get their shit together with implementing this. NVIDIA desperately needs a kick in the ass.

 

[windwhirl]

I don't recognize a third of these games. Not a good start. Hopefully, game developers and AMD get their shit together with implementing this. NVIDIA desperately needs a kick in the ass.

There are a number of well known / highly expected titles tho, so it's not that terrible.

 

[Space Lynx]

There are a number of well known / highly expected titles tho, so it's not that terrible.

75 games by end of year is not too bad. Nvidia will have about 150 though most likely for DLSS4 by end of year.

I'd like to see AMD focus on some games like Kingdom Deliverance II, and more newer released in-demand games.

 

[Arkz]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

 

[sethmatrix7]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

I’d rather they leave RDNA3 in the dust than continue to leave FSR a shitty ghosting mess.

 

[RaphaelOne]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

Technologies requiring separate dedicated execution units are largely pushed by nvidia. Of the current leading GPU manufacturers, AMD focuses more on universal solutions and thanks to this, for example, owners of competing older GeForces can use AMD FSR, while nvidia DLSS is unavailable due to the lack of appropriate dedicated execution units. On the other hand, FSR v1 works even on old Polaris (GCN4) and Vega (GCN5), i.e. on hardware from the pre-RDNA era. @ Since the market and users have gone crazy about AI, AMD has released the next version of FSR - based on AI. That's why there is "only RDNA 4". No wonder.

 

[x4it3n]

Knowing that there are Mods for DLSS working with FSR on AMD GPUs, I wonder if we will get some Mods to enable FSR 4 on Nvidia GPUs when some games do not support DLSS & FG !

 

[Arkz]

Technologies requiring separate dedicated execution units are largely pushed by nvidia. Of the current leading GPU manufacturers, AMD focuses more on universal solutions and thanks to this, for example, owners of competing older GeForces can use AMD FSR, while nvidia DLSS is unavailable due to the lack of appropriate dedicated execution units. On the other hand, FSR v1 works even on old Polaris (GCN4) and Vega (GCN5), i.e. on hardware from the pre-RDNA era. @ Since the market and users have gone crazy about AI, AMD has released the next version of FSR - based on AI. That's why there is "only RDNA 4". No wonder.

It runs on the AI cores and most certainly won't be heavily taxing them. 9070 XT has 128 AI cores and I'm sure FSR4 will work on all RDNA4 cards, right down to the weakest ones with like 32.

7900 XTX has 192 AI cores. If it doesn't get FSR4 then honestly, screw AMD.

 

[alwayssts]

So it won't be in Black Myth for reviews? That's pretty damning.
I guess my crusade will be for every outlet to test Spider-man 2 using RT/up-scaling as I'll explain below, as the metrics are similar (RT-limitation, up-scaling limitation).

Once again, people need to take a long, hard, stare at this page.
I would very-much appreciate any outlet that will retest cards like that, especially TPU, showing averages and 1/.1% lows. I appreciate TPU because I can easily link it.

Most importantly, 4k 'performance' (where the page shows 47fps for a 4080) and 1440p 'quality' (where it shows a 4080 56fps).
This is up-scaling ~1080p to those native resolutions. These are the first/second comparison/drop-down menus.

These are "the" performance tiers moving forward. I know many understand, but many truly do not. Reviewers need to explain this a lot better, because it will become important very soon.

While once-again the goal for AMD needs to be the later at 60fps, and will not do the former (why N48 needs to be 'mid-rage'); it's important FSR4 not use too much performance (even if it causes a hit to IQ).
This can be improved in later generations.

Perhaps they haven't upgraded BMW yet as it can't with FSR4?
I don't know, but that would make sense to me...if they wouldn't want to show <60fps mins using ~1080p->1440p (960p up-scaling) mins in reviews. Rather leave it ambiguous...
...Because if they can't do that this product (N48) truly does not make any sense.

As I've said, when THOSE (BMW) benchmarks were done, we had DLSS3. Once again, 4080 was 56fps because if you overclocked it you could maintain 60fps.
With DLSS4 it will not bc uses ~7% more perf. This is by design. AMD needs to not make this 'mistake' with FSR4, although I would argue they already are with their chosen product segmentation.
DLSS was updated so things like this *will* happen, not just so products like 5070 (which is generally a 1080p card) will look ok scaling other less-demanding games from 1080p-4k, where DLSS3 did not.
That's how they getcha. I don't expect DLSS4 to be the last time, nor was it the first, but it is a provable instance to why you should pay attention to these things. Most don't, and that's the problem.

I will wait for the first metric, as that truly is where many people are going to end up as more transition to RT/4k screens, and will also likely be the general aim of next-gen consoles. At least, it *should* be.
Obviously there are more instances of dynamic resolution scaling on consoles. That's the point of better PC hardware; to keep higher resolutions and frame rate consistent.

It truly is not just 'one game'. It's the RT/up-scaling standard, and just the easiest way to show it.
Spider-man 2 can show similar results, although is important in that case to showcase minimum frame rate (worst-case scenario).
BMW is more consistent/heavy (as far as I can tell), where there are moments SM2 can be *much* lighter. They both have almost-identical mins/limitations (bc RT/up-scaling).
Using averages benefit nVIDA, where they can benefit from higher bandwidth and does not show buffer limitations.
I will argue until the end of time the point of higher-end hardware comes from maintaining a threshold of decent performance in the most-demanding moments, not how many frames you can get; real or fake.
WRT how cards are segmented and how developers aim their settings, that is 60fps. This is why RT is taking so long to be standardized, as it *is* asking a lot of current hardware to run/up-scale it decently.

I understand some hardware can't. But then they shouldn't sell it that way, and products hence should be priced accordingly.

 

[Arkz]

I’d rather they leave RDNA3 in the dust than continue to leave FSR a shitty ghosting mess.

No reason FSR4 can't run on RDNA3 AI cores just like it will on RDNA4.

 

[k0vasz]

I barely play games on day1, so it's not a big deal for me, but the quality compared to DLSS is still in question (and also the launch of FSR4. as far as I remember, FSR3 delayed a LOT)

 

[x4it3n]

No reason FSR4 can't run on RDNA3 AI cores just like it will on RDNA4.

It probably can run, but maybe not as quickly. But it should be possible yeah. Making it exclusive to RDNA 4 like Nvidia with FG/MFG on RTX 40s/50s would be pretty tough for AMD. They do not have the mindshare nor market share like Nvidia...

 

[RaphaelOne]

It runs on the AI cores and most certainly won't be heavily taxing them. 9070 XT has 128 AI cores and I'm sure FSR4 will work on all RDNA4 cards, right down to the weakest ones with like 32.

7900 XTX has 192 AI cores. If it doesn't get FSR4 then honestly, screw AMD.

You're right. AMD will most likely release FSR4 for RDNA3-AI cores at a later date. For now, the priority is to get the fresh RDNA4s polished and performing. It's happened many times in the past, previous GPU architectures received support for newer technologies - after some time.

 

[john_]

I guess Nvidia demos like Cyberpunk 2077 will never get a good FSR version because Nvidia obviously is NOT blocking frame generation support in that game for RTX 3000 and RTX 2000 owners.


And obviously we shouldn't expect an online drama here, seeing only Nvidia's proprietary techs being correctly implemented and supported, because the developer will never have to gave in and offer good FSR 3.1(4) support, after for example a community uproar, because we never have community uproars, when a situation favors Nvidia.

 

[Space Lynx]

I’d rather they leave RDNA3 in the dust than continue to leave FSR a shitty ghosting mess.

yeah I agree, FSR4 looks much better because its using dedicated hardware the rdna3 cards simply don't have. I'm ok with this decision. I just hope FSR4 takes over. no one ever thought freesync would beat out gsync early on, but here we are

 

[john_]

yeah I agree, FSR4 looks much better because its using dedicated hardware the rdna3 cards simply don't have. I'm ok with this decision. I just hope FSR4 takes over. no one ever thought freesync would beat out gsync early on, but here we are

Because of FreeSync success, I believe Nvidia started an online campaign when FSR 2.0 came out, where press, online trolls and many gamers who where convinced that this was the absolute truth, are constantly bashing FSR as absolute garbage and promote DLSS like it is the best thing ever. Now, even if FSR 4 is great and on par with DLSS 3.x, that was great until yesterday, Hardware Unboxed, a Youtube channel that everyone use as reference, because of their tests and reviews, a channel that is followed by over a million people, already started a new campaign to make DLSS 4 look as the new best thing ever. And for that the same channel that was promoting DLSS 3.x as the best thing ever, now makes it clear to the viewer that DLSS 3.x is clearly inferior.

Nvidia isn't taking any chances with DLSS here and we have seen that DLSS support is used from users and press as a deciding factor in favor of buying Nvidia graphics cards, no matter the price and the lack of DLSS in a game, even if there is XeSS 1.3 or FSR 3.1 support, a reason to talk negatively about that game.

For FSR 4 to win market share, there are many things that need to happen.
It needs to be better than DLSS 4. Being equal, losing here, winning there, wouldn't be enough, because the press will be showing and focusing only in those cases where DLSS 4 will be better.
It needs AMD to start pressing those big tech channels to explain their findings, when calling FSR garbage. And AMD needs to become Nvidia. No CPUs and graphics cards to those sites that are clearly favoring Nvidia. AMD had done that once, I thing it was either with Fury or Vega only to come out and apologized later. No apologies.
It needs to start investing in developers and it needs to start pushing for FSR 4 implementation. If Nvidia favoring press and trolls start uproars, no apologies, no nonsense replies. Just throw a list of games that have good DLSS implementation and either bad or no FSR implementation and nothing else.
And, very important, NOT TO MESS UP WITH 9070 SERIES RELEASE.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Knowing that there are Mods for DLSS working with FSR on AMD GPUs, I wonder if we will get some Mods to enable FSR 4 on Nvidia GPUs when some games do not support DLSS & FG !

Yeah should work with all RTX cards, but then most games support DLSS which is better anyway.

On these forums at least AMD fans say they don't like upscaling anyway so AMD shouldn't waste too much time with FSR regardless.

 

[LabRat 891]

Cool and all, but...
All AMD has to do for a successful launch, at this point is
A. Have inventory in-stores/stock
B. Not release silicon to the market with maybe/maybe not gimped hardware
C. Not light on fire

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

It runs on the AI cores and most certainly won't be heavily taxing them. 9070 XT has 128 AI cores and I'm sure FSR4 will work on all RDNA4 cards, right down to the weakest ones with like 32.

7900 XTX has 192 AI cores. If it doesn't get FSR4 then honestly, screw AMD.

Nvidia does the exact same thing and AMD is NEVER going to be competitive with Nvidia by being more generous.

 

[Hecate91]

Cool and all, but...
All AMD has to do for a successful launch, at this point is
A. Have inventory in-stores/stock
B. Not release silicon to the market with maybe/maybe not gimped hardware
C. Not light on fire

B & C are easy to not do, A is going to be the important thing for AMD to get right especially if they're going for $700+ on the XT.

 

[AusWolf]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

I guess they've stepped up (or down) to Nvidia's level.

 

[tfdsaf]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

Tell that to Nvidia, Each DLSS is unable to run on every previous generation.

Why should AMD create inferior features just to make sure GPU's from 5+ years ago are also able to have it?

I think this is a good thing, they don't have to waste time making it work on older hardware and can just focus on the present and future!

 

[Super XP]

Being exclusive to 9000 is just bad. Not being able to use this on a 7900 XTX is bad. And the leaked pricing is bad. It's all just bad.

Being exclusive for to RDNA4 and beyond is a smart move by AMD. Like others have said, leave the older baggage in the past and move forward. Trying to appease older GPUs will complicate this tech further.