NVIDIA RTX owners only - your opinion on DLSS Image quality

[Macro Device]

I remember I saw UQ in The Alters, performance was similar to DLAA.

Weird. What I see with FSR is 110 FPS with Quality (66%), 91 FPS with 77% and 62 FPS with 100% (CP77, 1440p High, 6700 XT). Can't test DLSS out but the result must be similar.

 

[chrcoluk]

yeah. taa is just awful, can't imagine people still prefer native+taa. It looks blurry enough in static shots, let alone in motion, where it's just a total mess.
dlss q/b look sharper, but leave a little more jaggies in static shots. They look much clearer in motion though.
The real winner is and has always been DLAA, it's close to pixel perfect in static shots and in motion as well.
comparison:

Imgsli

This is the issue for me, I have been comparing on screenshots, and motion is important.

I see Nvidia finally released the stuff needed, hopefully Nvidia app now lets you turn everything off that hurts performance? As it now finally has a good feature with the DLSS override. Guessing will also need to use the latest CyberPunk to play with it, not the one with the old balancing?

I feel like DLAA is the modern version of SGSSAA. Not as good, but still a big improvement over standard AA in modern games.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

Tried it in a couple games at 1440p ultrawide and it doesn't change much for me still would prefer not to use it.... I had to run games on both my computers locally to even tell the Transformer model was better but during normal gameplay I can't tell them apart. Ultra performance and balanced are still terrible with Quality being I will use it if I have to... The transformer model does look slightly over sharpened to me and a little more crunchy is the best way I can describe it not sure I like how it handles foliage better at least when not zoomed in.

 

[Chrispy_]

This is the issue for me, I have been comparing on screenshots, and motion is important.

DLSS's first 5-6 years have been given more praise than they deserve because reviewers take screenshots of static scenes so often. Static screenshots make nice before/after comparisons and are taken with zero movement in order to get the closest/fairest comparison between different settings.

The thing is, DLSS absolutely excels at static screenshots, but that's not how people actually play games and until DLSS4's transformer model, DLSS has been total ass in motion. Compare these pairs of screenshots:

DLSS Performance in motion vs DLSS Performance while static - the image quality in motion is so obviously awful - we've got texture corruption, lots of jaggies, and an image that is somehow both too soft and also too noisy. When you stand still, it looks fine.


Native vs DLSS Performance while static for comparison; When you're standing still, even DLSS performance does a good job of detail and clarity IMO. The image is still a little too soft, but most of the detail is there as long as nothing moves.

 

[Macro Device]

the detail is there as long as nothing moves.

 

[Apocalypsee]

True, DLSS looks awful in motion, even more pronounced when I use 27-inch 1080p display, it's not as bad on my 15-inch 1080p laptop. The transformer models look better, still not 100% but definitely a noticeable difference and actually usable. I'm happy that I can use it on my aging 2060 Super

 

[ViperXTR]

That's what DLSS4 transformer model is aiming to fix, the blur and smear when moving. It's not 100% perfect but it's a good start and will only start getting better.

Also, there's a new DLSS4 transformer preset on the new drivers, introduces Preset K which a bit of an improvement on the current preset J, still testing