mikeysg:

Alex of DF must be pretty upset with more games supporting FSR 2.0

aufkrawall2:

Don't think so, as it will offer magnitudes of opportunities to demonstrate that DLSS is better. 😀

Neo Cyrus:

Is it really better if it's locked down to one asshole company and requires dedicated die space?

aufkrawall2:

If AMD don't solve the transparency/occlusion issues of FSR 2.0: yes. 2.5 years have passed since DLSS 2.0 in Youngblood, how much more time do you want to give AMD? (Well, you apparently already went RTX card yourself...)

aufkrawall2:

Dedicated hardware makes inference part of DLSS faster, probably by a large margin. By how much we'll see with XeSS, but neither you nor me do know that yet. Criticizing them for investing silicon to make things faster is just silly.

aufkrawall2:

Also, Nvidia can only commit as much assery as their competitors allow them to do. FSR 2.0 having issues and you buying their high-end cars despite you hating them just proves their point to keep things closed...

Neo Cyrus:

No, and no. The benchmarks so far show DLSS barely being faster than FSR 2 despite having dedicated hardware. Criticizing them for having dedicated hardware for it is far from "silly" considering it was never meant for gaming to begin with. RT and Tensor cores were meant for pro workloads, potential uses in gaming was a complete afterthought, not at all close to the primary goal. nVidia's approach to AI upscaling is the same as their asshole approach to VRR, they're looking for a marketing advantage that they know can't possibly last forever. Good upscaling being locked to nVidia will die off just as VRR being locked to nVidia died. I bought my 3080 before FSR 1.0 even existed, and during a time that there was literally 0 stock of AMD cards, I've had it for almost 2 years now. The days of DLSS being added value are over, no one is going to buy nVidia cards just because of DLSS anymore.

Neo Cyrus:

No, and no. The benchmarks so far show DLSS barely being faster than FSR 2 despite having dedicated hardware.

aufkrawall2:

Because FSR 2.0 is not DL based, like multiple other TAAUs before. You likely have some weird misconception what TAAU does, as many unfortunately have. If you think it looks good enough, fine. But speak for yourself. My impression after testing both DLSS and FSR 2.0 extensively in GoW is that FSR 2.0 looks to be flawed at a fundamental design level when it comes to sudden screen content changes. And I say that as somebody who criticized DLSS smearing issues a lot. But DLSS smearing in GoW is completely harmless vs. the issues FSR 2.0 has in GoW (or rather with its dynamic content). You must have low expectations for image quality if you think this TAAU in its current form should completely replace DLSS.

Seth-01:

What about Fortnite ?

aufkrawall2:

Because FSR 2.0 is not DL based, like multiple other TAAUs before. You likely have some weird misconception what TAAU does, as many unfortunately have. If you think it looks good enough, fine. But speak for yourself. My impression after testing both DLSS and FSR 2.0 extensively in GoW is that FSR 2.0 looks to be flawed at a fundamental design level when it comes to sudden screen content changes. And I say that as somebody who criticized DLSS smearing issues a lot. But DLSS smearing in GoW is completely harmless vs. the issues FSR 2.0 has in GoW (or rather with its dynamic content). You must have low expectations for image quality if you think this TAAU in its current form should completely replace DLSS.

Seth-01:

What about Fortnite ?

Trunks0:

Most of the issues present FSR 2.0 are solvable in the same way the same the issues where in TAA itself.

cucaulay malkin:

of course they are but they require updates from developers it's not as simple as dropping a dlss dll into the folder and having contrails and ghosting reduced.

Trunks0:

(I think it's Anti-Cheat systems that prevent it in some cases?).