AMD Believes NVIDIA is Behind in Driver-Based Upscaler Development

[Kaotik]

You don't compare NIS to FSR1, you compare it to Radeon Super Resolution (RSR). RSR when it first came out (RX 5700 XT) was not that good at all, especially since it did add lots of input lag at the time.

RSR is literally FSR1 on driver level. The difference is that FSR is implemented in-engine and can be done before GUI, post process or whatever, while RSR works on final image. The scaling algorithms are the same.

 

[Pepamami]

Breaking news: AMD claims Nvidia "far behind" in race to fit entire foot in mouth

Joking aside, this really isn't something AMD should be trying to lay shots on Nvidia for. FSR/FRTC is great and all, open source good, but DLSS demolishes it 9 times out of 10. If anything they should be coming at a price/performance angle.

does not matter anyway, since GPU market still in a crap state right now. Why bother with price/performance when nvidia made 256bit+ gpus overpriced, people will buy ur 7800X anyway, and 7700X too

 

[nguyen]

AMD should have mentioned how Nvidia is behind in driver based Anti-Lag features too

 

[wolf]

Never understood upscaliing, if I'm paying thousands for a graphics card and screen... I want the best image quality. That is native resolution. No interest in DLSS, FSR or whatever.

Well if you want the best image quality, it should interest you, DLAA is the best AA in the business for native, and since most TAA solutions are so lacklustre, DLSS can often match or exceed native image quality because it's underpinned by DLAA, this is especially the case for 4k.

Also FWIW, Native is not the best image quality, people really need to forget that antiquated notion. Supersampling for example easily exceeds rendering at a given panels native resolution. Sure you need to downsample to that exact native pixel count, but the pixels will have better colour information for a cleaner, more detailed, and more stable image. Native rendering is a good reference point, but it's not where image quality just stops improving.

As for Steinmans amusing jab, yeah somehow I don't think Nvidia are particularly worried by AFMF, and if they are, we'd hear about it in pretty short order But hey the competition is nice and it's refreshing to see AMD's turnaround time to compete in this space improving.

 

[sLowEnd]

Why does AMD love setting themselves up for embarrassment so much? They don't need to say things like this. Show, don't say.

 

[Sabotaged_Enigma]

Speaking of which, I tried the latest driver and latest Bluesky Frame Converter in PotPlayer, and AFMF doesn't work and is nowhere to be found...

 

[ratirt]

I dont care about any upscaling tech since this route is going to cripple hardware performance advancement and since all companies advertise for features, you will pay more for features not for hardware performance increase.

 

[las]

They speak about how its driver-level and "works in all games", sadly the end-result is not even close to Nvidia FG, which actually works very very well.

I hope AMD will be able to improve FSR, AFMF etc. to match Nvidia features or close. (Why is it called AFMF tho haha, should just be called FMF.......) FSR is nowhere near DLSS and DLAA in my testing, way more shimmering and artifacts with FSR.

These features are important for buyers and this is why Nvidia sells way more GPUs than AMD. Steam Hardware Survey shows that AMD dGPU marketshare keeps dropping quarter for quarter. Intel eats marketshare slowly too. If AMD don't react they will drop below 10% marketshare soon.

AMD have one entry in the top 25 which is "AMD Radeon Graphics" their mobile and APU GPU like Intels "Iris Xe Graphics" and "Intel(R) UHD Graphics"
First real AMD GPU is at spot 29, which is the 7 year old RX 580 which sold for around 200 bucks.

They need some good value/perf cards, like RX480/470/580/470 and 5700XT. And this is exactly what Radeon 8000 is going to be, hopefully. No high-end, just good mid-end value cards. Marketshare-eaters.

Just about every of their features are worse than the Nvidia counterpart. You don't get ahead by copying others but AMD should prioritize FSR and AFMF way higher than Ray Tracing performance because even most Nvidia people don't use RT anyway -> We use DLSS, DLAA, DLDSR, FG, Reflex etc. These are the killers features. Yes RT can be used just fine but the fps hit is still way too huge for most people to accept, especially people with high refresh rate monitors. We are simply not going to accept 40-80 fps gameplay with RT when we can get 120-240+ without.

AMD always like to act like the good guy and make their features open source, but RTX users are not going to use FSR if DLSS is an option.

AMD should start inventing some groundbreaking features themselves maybe. Again, you don't get ahead by copying and MCM for GPUs was somewhat of a failure so far.

We won't see a high-end Radeon 8000 offering, but they need to have something big to counter 5000 series, which launch in less than a year from now.

If AMD actually improves FSR to match DLSS/DLAA I could see many people considering AMD GPU again, myself included. However, right now, AMDs features are just too much behind. Raster performance and nothing else in 2024 is not enough. Upscaling is here to stay. Every single developer embraced it and how many AAA games in the last few years released without at least one upscaler? Pretty much none.

With Nvidia you can use DLAA to improve heavily on native. Use DLSS on the higher presets to pretty much match - or even slightly improve - on visuals while boosting performance by 50-75% or use the lower presets if you struggle with performance and just want performance. I use DLAA or DLSS in pretty much every new game at this point.

 

[Vayra86]

My take LOL

AMD couldn't dig themselves deeper..........

'Poor Volta'...

But the truth is, its all completely irrelevant what AMD or Nvidia marketing says. The product makes the reality. So while AMD just dug itself a hole, its not like it will influence anything.

If AMD gets Actual Flashy Motherfkng Frames to go big, it will sell itself. If they don't, they'll release another set of consoles and RDNA cards and keep doing as they do. Whatever.
In the meantime, Nvidia is selling what AMD wants to sell on discrete GPUs. Gosh, its almost like its 2016.

Well if you want the best image quality, it should interest you, DLAA is the best AA in the business for native, and since most TAA solutions are so lacklustre, DLSS can often match or exceed native image quality because it's underpinned by DLAA, this is especially the case for 4k.

Also FWIW, Native is not the best image quality, people really need to forget that antiquated notion. Supersampling for example easily exceeds rendering at a given panels native resolution. Sure you need to downsample to that exact native pixel count, but the pixels will have better colour information for a cleaner, more detailed, and more stable image. Native rendering is a good reference point, but it's not where image quality just stops improving.

As for Steinmans amusing jab, yeah somehow I don't think Nvidia are particularly worried by AFMF, and if they are, we'd hear about it in pretty short order But hey the competition is nice and it's refreshing to see AMD's turnaround time to compete in this space improving.

It shouldn't, because the vast majority doesn't give a rat's ass, they just want to game rather than compare pixels. It needs to look palatable, that's enough, and upscale shouldn't noticeably cost image quality. DLAA and all the other four-to-eighteen-letter turbo features are completely irrelevant except to the niche that is anal about pixels.

Anyone really just playing games for gaming rather than watching graphical improvements meticulously, won't stop to even think about all of this. That is why the only worthwhile thing to talk about in all these technologies is the package that gets offered with every game as a standard thing. That is: a dropdown box with your FSR or DLSS ingame options, saying Quality or Performance or perhaps even some Ultra Quality thing that is actually DLAASSSGGAATURBOMODEWITHSPECIALSAUCETM. Everything that is not elevated to that level of market saturation, is dead in the water and nothing more than a marketing tool for gullible consumers that want to believe.

 

[andreiga76]

Why should NVidia care about making something working on all GPUs?
Most of the PCs are using their GPU, they don't have any competition on the top tier where really money is made with high margins, and they want to push people to upgrade to their newer GPUs.
But again, this is an engineer point of view, thinking GPUs as devices and not as products.

 

[Vayra86]

Why should NVidia care about making something working on all GPUs?
Most of the PCs are using their GPU, they don't have any competition on the top tier where really money is made with high margins, and they want to push people to upgrade to their newer GPUs.
But again, this is an engineer point of view, thinking GPUs as devices and not as products.

Market saturation. All GPUs is more than PCs. Take note how AMD is selling their Zen APUs now as a handheld console, for example.

AMD is moving as many gaming GPUs as Nvidia does, in case you missed it And that's without the booming handheld market.

 

[Dirt Chip]

My take LOL

AMD couldn't dig themselves deeper..........

AMD must be heavily invested in the corn industry, otherwise I cannot understand such blunt statement where you (AMD) have equal to disadvantage at many fields vs Nvidia.

8K will never be a thing, despite vendors interest in pushing such insanity on desktop I'm sure. The idea that someone needs to go beyond 4K for gaming is laughable IMO. What a waste of resources that would be. But I'm sure 85" desktop monitors with 200R curvature will be a thing one day and 8K would look nice from 30cm away.

With the current advance pace using AI upscale tools to do more with less, 8K for the mass will come much more soon than what it take 4K to get to this point in time.

 

[Denver]

I believe they both disgust me spending resources on these artifact insertion and quality reduction techniques. As if games didn't have enough problems already.

-_-

 

[Dirt Chip]

I dont care about any upscaling tech since this route is going to cripple hardware performance advancement and since all companies advertise for features, you will pay more for features not for hardware performance increase.

Better then, you will have monthly subscription to be able to use some upscaling features in a game and/or unlock it in the GPU level. Like in some cars, where you need/cam to pay extra to unlock some features.

In 5 years time or so, most of the fps work will be done by AI upscaling software and not classic raster. Be prepared to evolve along or leave gaming all together.

 

[pavle]

Why does AMD love setting themselves up for embarrassment so much? They don't need to say things like this. Show, don't say.

Pride.

 

[Denver]

Better then, you will have monthly subscription to be able to use some upscaling features in a game and/or unlock it in the GPU level. Like in some cars, where you need/cam to pay extra to unlock some features.

In 5 years time or so, most of the fps work will be done by AI upscaling software and not classic raster. Be prepared to regress and use the clown nose. or leave "gaming" all together.

I fixed it for you. Yes, it's better to get out of such a pile of rubbish, let's practice climbing and tennis.

 

[ratirt]

Better then, you will have monthly subscription to be able to use some upscaling features in a game and/or unlock it in the GPU level. Like in some cars, where you need/cam to pay extra to unlock some features.

In 5 years time or so, most of the fps work will be done by AI upscaling software and not classic raster. Be prepared to evolve along or leave gaming all together.

You know. Few years ago I would have said not possible, never gonna happen but now... well i would not be surprised if it actually happened.
Just like with cars. If you had told me, 10 years ago, i will have to pay a fee to have my seat heated i would laugh my ass out. Now, it is happening in some cases. You know what sucks the most here? In cold countries where you want to use this feature, the price is higher

 

[Macro Device]

let's practice climbing and tennis.

I have a serious back injury and can't do sports. What are other alternatives?

 

[CyberPomPom]

"640 kB is enough for everyone."

The difference in fidelity is real. Calculating power grows, upscaling technology improves. It's a matter of time. Maybe in 10 or 15 years we will have 8K monitors for sub 800 USD and GPUs capable of reasonable 8K gaming at High or at least Medium settings at sub 1000 USD mark. Doesn't sound insane to me (15 years ago, 1080p60 was not a thing, just FYI).

15 years ago, almost to the day.
1600p60 FSAA was also a thing already on many games. And by the end of the year some cards had same performance level as the best of this graph but in 1600p.

 

[ratirt]

I have a serious back injury and can't do sports. What are other alternatives?

Chess is nice
You can't work on you physique, work on your mind.

 

[Macro Device]

Chess is nice

Agree but my brain fails to grasp it. I play strategy video games for very much the same effect. I'm a bronze league hero but hey, better than vegging out.

 

[ratirt]

Agree but my brain fails to grasp it. I play strategy video games for very much the same effect. I'm a bronze league hero but hey, better than vegging out.

I love chess. Games are not as important for me

 

[Dirt Chip]

I for

I fixed it for you. Yes, it's better to get out of such a pile of rubbish, let's practice climbing and tennis.

I forecast a ‘cult’, the like of us tech nerds, that will keep playing only non-AI upscalled games. Retro games and mods of games using only GPU raster power. Just wait 5-10 years. that’s what my Cristal ball is talking anyway.

And copy past this to ‘gasoline cult’ of old school and human driven cars vs electric/other energy sources self driving “cars”.

So many many things will become ‘nostalgic’ in so little time…

 

[wolf]

It shouldn't, because the vast majority doesn't give a rat's ass, they just want to game rather than compare pixels. It needs to look palatable, that's enough, and upscale shouldn't noticeably cost image quality.

Anyone really just playing games for gaming rather than watching graphical improvements meticulously, won't stop to even think about all of this.

All the more reason to use it, if they (your claimed vast majority) don't want to compare and check meticulously, DLSS (and to some extent FSR) is as a good as a no brainer to enable if those people don't give a rats ass. Your generalizations erk me, 'anyone' is simply incorrect, I am anyone, and I play games for gaming, but I also spend somewhere between a moment and a while setting up how I want my visual experience to be first, before I play. If that truly is all you care about, and are happy to get what you're given, and any gaming is just for gaming, I suggest you go with a console.

That is why the only worthwhile thing to talk about in all these technologies is the package that gets offered with every game as a standard thing.

Lol, nah man, interesting take and all but no... the only worthwhile thing to talk about? ... what kind of twisted perspective is that. PC is a platform who's identity is intrinsically inseparable from user choice. Choice of hardware, tweaking, getting the visual experience on a balance of image quality and performance the individual wants, with the full scope to do so.

Want a standard? buy a console. I want options, competition, innovation. I use a PC and am here to talk about it. I 100% understand and appreciate your love and affinity for open standards, believe it or not I love them too, perhaps even ones that come would with every(?) game, but the way you broadly paint gamers with a given brush, and speak in generalizations, not for me at all. I am certain some people are like you describe, good for them I suppose, I speak on behalf of many others too, and I will make my best effort not to claim what anyone/everyone should or should do or care/talk about.

 

[andreiga76]

Market saturation. All GPUs is more than PCs. Take note how AMD is selling their Zen APUs now as a handheld console, for example.

AMD is moving as many gaming GPUs as Nvidia does, in case you missed it And that's without the booming handheld market.

I was talking about PC market.
It's not about how many units you sell, or how much revenue you get, it's all about how much profit you get from each sold unit, AMD is not getting back much profit on those, in fact MS and Sony chose them because NVidia didn't want involved in that market.
You're talking about the booming handheld market, but you forgot Nintendo is a handheld device and they sell more units than PS5, this year with the new Nintendo console/handheld it will be a clear winner in units sold.
NVidia is ok in selling their GPUs to Nintendo because of their special negotiated agreement and because they can sell them at high margins, since they are much reduced versions compared to current generation, based on some info they are even based on last generation.