Star Wars Jedi: Survivor: FSR 2.2 vs. DLSS 2 vs. DLSS 3 Comparison

[maxus24]

Star Wars Jedi: Survivor, an AMD sponsored title, got patched with official support for the NVIDIA DLSS Super Resolution and Frame Generation technologies. In this mini-review, we examine and compare the image quality and performance improvements provided by these technologies.

Show full review

 

[kabarsa]

Thank for checking out the latest patch. How does it compare in terms of traversal stutters ? from what I've seen so far everyone say it's still there, game is still not smooth.

 

[Denver]

This is the first time that I don't have the impression that the text was just a copy and paste.

I noticed artifacts in all three scenarios tbh.

 

[lemonadesoda]

Can someone give me a concise 3 sentence summary?

 

[colossusrageblack]

Your options are blurry or grainy.

 

[Space Lynx]

dlls3 frame generation is amazing at 1440p, double the fps wow... I am semi-regretting not going Nvidia this round. really happy with my new rig, but yeah frame gen is impressive, at maximum i really can't tell much of a difference honestly. so the fact you'd get double fps at 1440p is kind of nuts.

 

[Trunks0]

This is not an FSR 2.2 title. Source is AMD themselves.

Latest AMD FSR 2 & 3 Supported Games List

As some of you may know, we have been highlighting the latest updates to AMD’s FidelityFX Super Resolution1 technology over the last couple of months. The latest version, AMD FSR 3, transforms gaming experiences with massive and responsive framerates in supported games using a combination of...

community.amd.com

If your going to report technical information, you should verify that information is correct and make corrections when it is not. This mistake happened the last time you guys reported on this game

 

[PerfectWave]

how compare quality when you cant even take snapshot of same image ....

 

[kabarsa]

dlls3 frame generation is amazing at 1440p, double the fps wow... I am semi-regretting not going Nvidia this round. really happy with my new rig, but yeah frame gen is impressive, at maximum i really can't tell much of a difference honestly. so the fact you'd get double fps at 1440p is kind of nuts.

I use it wherever its available, it saves some CPU bound games like Witcher3 NextGen or Starfield with mod, and makes others very smooth, like Remnant2, and of course allows RT Overdrive in CP2077 to be playable and smooth, I can't think of a genuine bad example right now related to FG itself. But with Jedi Survivor high fps still feel bad and unusable because of stutters, especially if you run through semi-open location. It's very frustrating, no fps can compensate those frametime spikes, feels horrible compared to other games. I do not believe they will ever fix it

 

[ZoneDymo]

Can someone give me a concise 3 sentence summary?

well I mean, nothing new to say right?

AMD has some sharpening with it with some might prefer, but you can always add and subtract it somehow.

DLSS and FSR look the same but AMD has yet to fix the shimmering and occlution artifacts (and tbh I think its taking them too long)

DLSS 3 makes the fps number look higher but it adds some input lag so pick your poison.

 

[EatingDirt]

dlls3 frame generation is amazing at 1440p, double the fps wow... I am semi-regretting not going Nvidia this round. really happy with my new rig, but yeah frame gen is impressive, at maximum i really can't tell much of a difference honestly. so the fact you'd get double fps at 1440p is kind of nuts.

It's a ~40% FPS increase at 4k(78->106). I don't know the intricate details of DLSS3, so maybe if the GPU isn't busy(1080p & 1440p), it's capable of generating more frames when the game is more CPU limited. Or the numbers are off(Maybe the 106 should 160?).

Like always though, Frame Generation is great when you're already getting these high FPS numbers. If you have a less capable GPU, like something around the 4060, and you're only getting 40-50 FPS with DLSS2 on, DLSS3 is going to be a worse experience than simply leaving it off because of the added input latency, even if the FPS says you're getting 80-100 FPS, especially on titles that don't support Reflex(this game doesn't appear to be supported).

Also of note, the FSR image, only in the 4k image, has a different ground texture(it's missing the green texture) than DLSS & TAA, strange little texture bug? or didn't wait long enough while changing settings for the texture to load?

 

[harm9963]

4k max RT raw, 70 to 80 fps average, DLSS3 no FG , Quality settings,115 to 136 Fps l, FG is not needed for my system.

 

[john_]

Some thoughts.

I prefer the low sharpening of FSR over the soft image of DLSS. I think DLSS does need some sharpening option.

The DLSS implementation not being as good as expected does give an indication that it is not just a switch. It needs work from developers.

Wonder how the official version of DLSS compares to the unofficial patch. That could be interesting. Especially when in the review it is said that going to an older version of DLSS FG fixes some things.

That being said, having to pause and zoom in to find differences, I think it isn't really a big deal. And while DLSS in general is better, here we see that the way a tech is implemented is an important parameter.

Wonder why they gone with FSR 2.1 instead of 2.2.

 

[The Norwegian Drone Pilot]

It was said in the 'Conclusion' that DLSS didn't work in 'Fullscreen' mode. For me, the DLSS works the same in both 'Fullscreen' and 'Windowed Fullscreen' mode. Same FPS in both modes.

 

[GreiverBlade]

looking at Cal right shoulderpad in the 1440p quality comparison ... is it me or DLSS look awfully blurry,
actually in performance settings it does too, not sure if it would be worth the 34fps more since 78fps is already good enough for a SP game.
now that i look at the 4K comparison zoomed on the same spot ... i notice the same also

actually nr.2, wait what? why the quality setting has 2fps higher for AMD than the performance

oh, well ... i prefer hardware agnostic solutions ... even if i had an Nv card rather than a AMD card ... and to me, personal opinion ofc, FSR look sharper and slightly better at 1440p/4K than DLSS and the FPS difference is not that much a deciding factor.

peace.

 

[Cryio]

Reminder that Jedi Survivor is an UE 4.26 title that uses FSR 2.0!

Not 2.2, not 2.1, but 2.0. Easily verified with an Unreal file checker.

 

[Trunks0]

Reminder that Jedi Survivor is an UE 4.26 title that uses FSR 2.0!

Not 2.2, not 2.1, but 2.0. Easily verified with an Unreal file checker.

I seem to remember there being debate on it. But had a hard time finding anything now. The way it artifacts looked more like 2 than 2.1.

It is a shame that TPU seems to refuse to make corrections when they report data incorrectly

 

[EsliteMoby]

UE4 games in general have the ugliest forced TAA blur next to Red Dead 2 making the native comparison with upscaling pointless.

 

[tomcug]

Reminder that Jedi Survivor is an UE 4.26 title that uses FSR 2.0!

AMD themselves claim it's FSR 2.1.

 

[Vayra86]

I use it wherever its available, it saves some CPU bound games like Witcher3 NextGen or Starfield with mod, and makes others very smooth, like Remnant2, and of course allows RT Overdrive in CP2077 to be playable and smooth, I can't think of a genuine bad example right now related to FG itself. But with Jedi Survivor high fps still feel bad and unusable because of stutters, especially if you run through semi-open location. It's very frustrating, no fps can compensate those frametime spikes, feels horrible compared to other games. I do not believe they will ever fix it

Yep, and with FG, you're making the gap between peak and minimum FPS that much higher, so frametime variance that much bigger. It actually adds to its 'impact' in the gaming experience, rather than fixing anything. Snake oil comes to mind

 

[obsidian24776]

Could we not have image quality comparisons of each upscaling tech on its native hardware? Does running FSR on Radeon make any difference to image quality in motion as well as in static images compared to running it on Nvidia/Intel? Oh and as others have said Jedi Survivor is not a FSR 2.2 title according to AMD.

 

[tomcug]

Does running FSR on Radeon make any difference to image quality in motion as well as in static images compared to running it on Nvidia/Intel?

No, there's no difference. FSR works identically no matter what hardware you run it on. XeSS is different tho, running it on Arc GPUs gives better quality due to better upscaling kernel being used thanks to matrix multiply units in Xe architecture.

 

[londiste]

Yep, and with FG, you're making the gap between peak and minimum FPS that much higher, so frame time variance that much bigger. It actually adds to its 'impact' in the gaming experience, rather than fixing anything. Snake oil comes to mind

Have you tried playing with FG? I am not fond of it but after playing with it turned on for a while I will begrudgingly say it will become a thing whether we like it or not. Tried in a few different games but played quite a few hours of Hogwarts with DLSS FG and I must say it works remarkably well. Yes, Hogwarts is relatively low-tempo making it a good use case and I do see the increased movement artifacts plus the transition artifacts but 1.5x-2x the frame rate and smoothness it brings is hard to argue.

 

[Vayra86]

Have you tried playing with FG? I am not fond of it but after playing with it turned on for a while I will begrudgingly say it will become a thing whether we like it or not. Tried in a few different games but played quite a few hours of Hogwarts with DLSS FG and I must say it works remarkably well. Yes, Hogwarts is relatively low-tempo making it a good use case and I do see the increased movement artifacts plus the transition artifacts but 1.5x-2x the frame rate and smoothness it brings is hard to argue.

Oh yeah, it'll become a thing I'm sure... Have played with it, don't like it, pretty sensitive to latency / differences in responsiveness, and that's not even considering artifacts. Also... its smoother... but Hogwarts doesn't remotely need it Even combat is slow as molasses, built for gamepad and analog sticks. You say good use case... I see a game that now has artifacts added to what should be an immersive experience first and action game next. Whats the point?

There are many things 'a thing' these days that I strongly dislike. Such is life I guess I'm not seeing much in the new 'generation' of gaming/gamers though that really benefits me OR makes us play better content. The crutches to maintain performance in games that really don't have much to show for it are just hilariously silly to me. Darwin will fix this in the end, hopefully. The bottom line is the vast majority of devs in big studios are brutally untalented these days, and it shows - in writing, dialogue, graphics vs performance, in soul/character of the games, everything. That vast majority is simply producing fast food, and the kitchen is ill equipped to ever push a real menu with wholesome items. FG fits right in, as does DLSS / FSR and RT. Just pour half a dozen abbrevation-sauces over your game and maybe marketing can make it look like something eh? Its disgusting and the results prove time and time again that its not really a nice way forward. Millions are poured into content that's forgotten tomorrow and buggy today.

And then occasionally a game like BG3 comes out that just runs native, flawlessly, with no crutches and looks the part, proving to everything else how deep down the rabbit hole of bullshit they went. There's a sharp drop in the quality of releases and it seems to coincide perfectly with these fake frame technologies.

 

[Wye]

Looks like FSR has skipped antialiasing.