NVIDIA RTX owners only - your opinion on DLSS Image quality

[dogwitch]

Oh boy, seems like Nvidia just one up AMD again by porting FSR code (or very similar) into their new Sharpen+ filter in the 471.11 driver (only via Geforce Experience overlay, NVCP does not have this option yet).
The result is quite mindblowing, here is an example of CP2077 4K Native vs 4K DLSS Performance with Sharpen+
View attachment 205071View attachment 205072
This make the 4K DLSS Performance look 99% like 4K Native, people would be hard pressed the tell these 2 apart in a blind test.
I have also tried 1080p and DLSS Quality with Sharpen+ look remarkably better than Native due to DLSS having better quality AA, kinda insane really.

Note that you can only take screenshots with Sharpen+ applied with Shift+Print Screen, I was scratching my head off when Afterburner doesn't take screenshots with Sharpen+ applied.

blow it up past 80 inches. then you will notice it,

 

[wolf]

Oh boy, seems like Nvidia just one up AMD again by porting FSR code (or very similar) into their new Sharpen+ filter in the 471.11 driver (only via Geforce Experience overlay, NVCP does not have this option yet).
The result is quite mindblowing

I suspected they might make a move like this, and it's still very early days but clearly nothing is stopping them. If the ease of implementation really is true (example given of a dev taking only ~2 hours to imp it into their game), Nvidia could've had a source get them the code in the last couple of weeks to toy with it. DLSS remains, and they have their own FSR called Sharpen+ either for non DLSS capable cards or available to stack.

Said it before already today but RTX users are the biggest winners here and will get the best of both worlds in any given game. People act like you buy an RTX card *just* to get RT or DLSS and "py the Nvidia tax", the reality is now their entire lineup will be capable, it's just another value add or talking point, considering at given price points cards from both camps are generally within spitting distance of each other or not far from it.

 

[londiste]

Oh boy, seems like Nvidia just one up AMD again by porting FSR code (or very similar) into their new Sharpen+ filter in the 471.11 driver (only via Geforce Experience overlay, NVCP does not have this option yet).
The result is quite mindblowing, here is an example of CP2077 4K Native vs 4K DLSS Performance with Sharpen+

It is a matter of perspective or perception to quite a large degree. To my eyes Sharpen+ (unsurprisingly) has a lot of sharpening artifacts.

 

[wolf]

blow it up past 80 inches. then you will notice it,

Seems like an extremely unrealistic situation just to nitpick it? Much more so than usual, at least.

 

[nguyen]

It is a matter of perspective or perception to quite a large degree. To my eyes Sharpen+ (unsurprisingly) has a lot of sharpening artifacts.

The beauty of Nvidia freestyle Sharpen+ is that you can adjust Sharpen/Texture as you like, it takes a bit of effort to fine tune the visuals to be as close to 4K Native. However I believe the previous comparison was already too close to tell without pixel peeping.
How about I up the difficulty this time

For >100% more FPS and IQ to be this close, DLSS Balanced/Performance mode and Sharpen+ are killer combo

 

[dogwitch]

Seems like an extremely unrealistic situation just to nitpick it? Much more so than usual,

4k really for big screen.
go to a movie theater. that what they are using .

smaller screens you want Pixels per inch (ppi).
there 2 different things.

 

[wolf]

4k really for big screen.
go to a movie theater. that what they are using .

I mean, I get your point, it's going to make pixel peeping easier, but most people gaming on 4k either use a 48" or smaller, usually much smaller, or if you're gaming on a 65"+ chances are you're sitting a bit further back.

 

[dogwitch]

I mean, I get your point, it's going to make pixel peeping easier, but most people gaming on 4k either use a 48" or smaller, usually much smaller, or if you're gaming on a 65"+ chances are you're sitting a bit further back.yeah

yeah and that when 4k is not really good for.

 

[tabascosauz]

I don't really play Siege (tbh I used to play exclusively PvE and spent lot of time exploiting map quirks and bot behaviour to "max" out the highest possible score in THunt lol) but installed it because they added DLSS 2.2 to the game. The DLSS implementation itself I didn't find overly impressive (I can generally push 165 or close to it at all times at VHigh/Ultra native 1440p), but I wanted the .dll. Between 3 DLSS 2.0 implementations:

The Siege .dll is the newest, 2.2.6.0.
The MW2019 .dll is 2.1.58.0.
The War Thunder .dll is 2.1.40.0. It's also about 3MB smaller than the others.

It doesn't look like they go back and update the DLSS component at all. What you get at launch appears to be what you get.



The 2.2 .dll is a direct replacement for MW2019, so far doesn't seem to be any issues, but I don't play the slightly more demanding Warzone part of the game. Half of me wants to say that there's a slight IQ improvement when character is in motion (almost like they did a bit of sharpening specifically for when char is in motion), other half of me says there's no difference. No real improvement to performance.

The 2.2 .dll doesn't work for War Thunder. The game still runs all the same, but the graphics menu no longer has a dropdown menu, just a box that shows the "Off" setting. Not a surprise, of course, due to Gaijin being a dumpster fire, the game engine being a dumpster fire, the game always being a buggy dumpster fire, and the DLSS 2.0 implementation being a dumpster fire. Not a loss for me, since I always just run native @ 120fps capped.

I could also test No Man's Sky now with DLSS, but I long since soured on that game since the much-lauded-by-everyone (Origins? I think) update unilaterally broke half my bases by changing the world biomes from temperate to perpetual biohazardous storms.

 

[nguyen]

Yup, just tried DOOM Eternal with RTX/DLSS and I'm a little disappointed with RT. The performance penalty with RT is not big but the quality is not good. The reflections shimmer alot, probably caused by low ray counts, and there is no option for higher quality RayTracing, just ON/OFF.

DLSS on the other hand is exellent, with DLSS Quality provide a smidgen higher IQ than Native 4K, the included DLL is version 2.1 so I replaced it with the ver 2.2 DLL for the heck of it.

DLSS Quality with Sharpen+ however is way above Native 4K IQ wise, running at the same performance. (Left is Native, right is DLSS Quality Sharpen+)

 

[phanbuey]

That looks awesome on the right

 

[wolf]

Yup, just tried DOOM Eternal with RTX/DLSS and I'm a little disappointed with RT. The performance penalty with RT is not big but the quality is not good. The reflections shimmer alot, probably caused by low ray counts, and there is no option for higher quality RayTracing, just ON/OFF.

I tend to agree, it looks like a low ray count, there's that bit of shimmer and some noise about the image, like you'd see on Metro with RT set to normal and like Metro also appears to worsen the lower the resolution too. Some reflections have had a nice visual impact but it would seem probably ~80% of gameplay, the level design won't really show it off in a big way.

DLSS on the other hand is exellent, with DLSS Quality provide a smidgen higher IQ than Native 4K, the included DLL is version 2.1 so I replaced it with the ver 2.2 DLL for the heck of it.

Yeah agreed here too, even the standard DLL with no modding, DLSS Quality looks stunning. I also added a dash of Sharpen in NVCP as I played the game like that before anyway. This should really benefit the lower teirs of cards that want to pump up their FPS / increase output res. For myself @ 3440x1440 144hz, I got my wish, framecapped at 140fps just like before with no RT/DLSS.

 

[HiVoltageJL]

Since I got my 3080 I've only been Playing Battlefield V and for some reason although it shows
a DLSS tab its always greyed out no matter what my options are set to, It can't be accessed.

 

[AusWolf]

My 2070 is still quite new (for me), and I've only tried DLSS in Cyberpunk 2077 so far.

My opinion:

• The game is borderline unplayable with RT on Psycho and DLSS off.
• By only setting DLSS to Quality, I get 35-40 FPS average which I'm happy with.
• I can see the quality difference between DLSS off and Quality when I shift between the two settings being stood in one place, but I'm enjoying a full gameplay experience moving around and doing stuff in the game.
• DLSS 'Performance' looks quite bad, and the performance improvement over 'Quality' isn't so great either.

All in all, DLSS 'Quality' is great, but 'Performance' is quite awful.

 

[kane nas]

My 2070 is still quite new (for me), and I've only tried DLSS in Cyberpunk 2077 so far.

My opinion:

• The game is borderline unplayable with RT on Psycho and DLSS off.
• By only setting DLSS to Quality, I get 35-40 FPS average which I'm happy with.
• I can see the quality difference between DLSS off and Quality when I shift between the two settings being stood in one place, but I'm enjoying a full gameplay experience moving around and doing stuff in the game.
• DLSS 'Performance' looks quite bad, and the performance improvement over 'Quality' isn't so great either.

All in all, DLSS 'Quality' is great, but 'Performance' is quite awful.

I also have a 2070, try my friend to lock the frames via msi afterburner and through your screen settings to 30 or 45 frames, my experience with rtx and dlss quality in cyberpunk is the best so far the only bad thing in everyone to guess the game is sh@t storm ...

 

[wolf]

My 2070 is still quite new (for me), and I've only tried DLSS in Cyberpunk 2077 so far.

My opinion:

• The game is borderline unplayable with RT on Psycho and DLSS off.
• By only setting DLSS to Quality, I get 35-40 FPS average which I'm happy with.
• I can see the quality difference between DLSS off and Quality when I shift between the two settings being stood in one place, but I'm enjoying a full gameplay experience moving around and doing stuff in the game.
• DLSS 'Performance' looks quite bad, and the performance improvement over 'Quality' isn't so great either.

All in all, DLSS 'Quality' is great, but 'Performance' is quite awful.

RTX Psycho is one hell of a heavy tickbox to enable, this setting seems almost more geared for RTX 40 series / RDNA3 and beyond, so playable at all is a feat.

If your specs are correct, you're on a 1080p display, which means that quality (plus a sharpen if it interests you) would be the most viable setting, much less and the internal render res is just too low to salvage good image quality from. I mean performance mode is rendering internally at 540p and it's just a bit slight to get enough base information from at 1080p / 24" output

 

[nguyen]

My 2070 is still quite new (for me), and I've only tried DLSS in Cyberpunk 2077 so far.

My opinion:

• The game is borderline unplayable with RT on Psycho and DLSS off.
• By only setting DLSS to Quality, I get 35-40 FPS average which I'm happy with.
• I can see the quality difference between DLSS off and Quality when I shift between the two settings being stood in one place, but I'm enjoying a full gameplay experience moving around and doing stuff in the game.
• DLSS 'Performance' looks quite bad, and the performance improvement over 'Quality' isn't so great either.

All in all, DLSS 'Quality' is great, but 'Performance' is quite awful.

You can download the DLSS ver2.2 .dll from WccfTech and copy it to CP2077 installation folder, that will improve the visuals of the DLSS Performance mode. I tried 1080p DLSS Performance on my laptop and when combine with the new Sharpen+ filter, the visuals is quite comparable to Native 1080p but with 2x the FPS.
Also like @wolf mention, the Psycho RTX option is not meant for current gen of GPU.

 

[AusWolf]

I also have a 2070, try my friend to lock the frames via msi afterburner and through your screen settings to 30 or 45 frames, my experience with rtx and dlss quality in cyberpunk is the best so far the only bad thing in everyone to guess the game is sh@t storm ...

The game is not a shitstorm. Don't read launch reviews, they're massively outdated. It still has a few bugs, but if you can see past them, it's a great experience. I wouldn't be playing it otherwise.

As for locking the fps: why would I do that?

RTX Psycho is one hell of a heavy tickbox to enable, this setting seems almost more geared for RTX 40 series / RDNA3 and beyond, so playable at all is a feat.

If your specs are correct, you're on a 1080p display, which means that quality (plus a sharpen if it interests you) would be the most viable setting, much less and the internal render res is just too low to salvage good image quality from. I mean performance mode is rendering internally at 540p and it's just a bit slight to get enough base information from at 1080p / 24" output

Well, RTX Psycho + DLSS Quality is playable, so I can't complain. My spec info is accurate - I don't yet feel the need to upgrade from 1080p.

You can download the DLSS ver2.2 .dll from WccfTech and copy it to CP2077 installation folder, that will improve the visuals of the DLSS Performance mode. I tried 1080p DLSS Performance on my laptop and when combine with the new Sharpen+ filter, the visuals is quite comparable to Native 1080p but with 2x the FPS.
Also like @wolf mention, the Psycho RTX option is not meant for current gen of GPU.

That sounds interesting. I wonder why it's not included in the game by default.

 

[wolf]

Excellent points @nguyen , @AusWolf if you're getting into a lengthy play of CP2077, it could be well worth the minimal time investment to change up that DLL and experiment with sharpening to get DLSS Performance mode looking better, (or even DLSS Balanced) if DLSS Performance doesn't quite get there for you, as IQ can be highly comparable when done right.

For the time being I'm sticking with Sharpen in the NVCP settings as it carries no performance impact, Sharpen+ appears visually demonstrably better, but through the GFE overlay carries a 10-15% performance impact on it's own. So there is certainly room to tweak and match the visuals + performance against your personal tastes and squeeze a significant amount more from it all.

 

[londiste]

That sounds interesting. I wonder why it's not included in the game by default.

It is about the release cycle. Slightly older version was implemented in the game because that is what was available when it was worked on. Pretty sure there are compatibility and testing considerations for the developer with switching versions that we do not care about when simply switching the dll. Maybe they will revisit DLSS version in some patch.

 

[nguyen]

Just tried out The Ascent and both RT and DLSS surprised me

on one hand the cost of RT is debilitating, from 97FPS down to 27FPS (78%perf drop off)
https://imgsli.com/NjMxNTI

on the other hand DLSS Performance look to be indistinguishable from 4K Native RT ON (without any sharpen filter) while bringing 2.5x the perf

The Ascent 4K Ultra RT ON - Imgsli

I will explore further into the game and see if DLSS make any difference to RT quality

Edit: 4K DLSS Performance actually looks better than 4K Native, DLSS has better AA resolve.

The Ascent 4K Ultra RT ON - Imgsli

 

[Cheese_On_tsaot]

I only have a 2060 but yeah it good, all you need to know.

uh, you are supposed to change the input icon on the OLED TV to PC mode to reduce the input delay. After changing to PC mode, the input delay on LG CX is 6.7ms and only 5.3ms on the C1, mind you even the best 1440p240hz IPS screen have 6.6ms input delay

View attachment 199547

Also the pixel response time with OLED screen are only 2ms at worst and for IPS screens are 4.5ms
View attachment 199548

so yeah, unless you are playing competitive CSGO, OLED TV are quite suitable for competitive battle royal titles like Fortnite and Warzone.

My Gigabyte M27Q is just .2 slower on response time than the 175hz ASUS ROG unit selling at 777 GBP on Amazon right now, I paid 350 for mine from box.co.uk. And beats the ROG on overshoot, RIP.

Gigabyte M27Q (rev. 1.0) Review

The Gigabyte M27Q (rev. 1.0) is a 27-inch 1440p budget-friendly gaming monitor with extra productivity features. It has a maximum refresh rate of 170Hz and VRR s...

www.rtings.com

 

[dogwitch]

Just tried out The Ascent and both RT and DLSS surprised me

on one hand the cost of RT is debilitating, from 97FPS down to 27FPS (78%perf drop off)
https://imgsli.com/NjMxNTI

on the other hand DLSS Performance look to be indistinguishable from 4K Native RT ON (without any sharpen filter) while bringing 2.5x the perf

The Ascent 4K Ultra RT ON - Imgsli

I will explore further into the game and see if DLSS make any difference to RT quality

Edit: 4K DLSS Performance actually looks better than 4K Native, DLSS has better AA resolve.

The Ascent 4K Ultra RT ON - Imgsli

what funny with that is basic rt to.

 

[nguyen]

what funny with that is basic rt to.

The Ascent actually went nuts with RT Reflection

 

[wolf]

DLSS looks downright excellent in Back 4 Blood, there is literally only one situation in the whole game I can tell the difference. When at a character selection screen there seems to be some ghosting trails off the character model, perhaps a newer DLL fixes it? In any case it's not present at any point during gameplay which is as good as imperceptibly interchangeable with native.