Denial:

No it doesn't. That's my point. If the framerate with DLSS on is higher, then communication with the tensor cores is literally never adding to the render time vs's the render time of a 4K native image. It's always decreasing it vs that native image. You can't have a higher framerate with a higher render latency.

I understand that, but I have stated repeatedly that render time isn't what I'm referring to.

Let's say we have a GPU ...

I understand what you're saying there; I don't disagree with any of that. But like you said, we're talking past each other, so yeah - let's leave it at that.

I think the question is, "which will be the lesser of the 2 evils (less latency)". Until we get hands on and test, a philosophical discussion. I'll stay optimistic. Statistically historical, a good bet ; )

Why would anyone want to upscale content that's next to their eyes? I can only imagine how bad DLSS will look with a headset when it already looks poor with monitors.

Prince Valiant:

Why would anyone want to upscale content that's next to their eyes? I can only imagine how bad DLSS will look with a headset when it already looks poor with monitors.

Well you need AA and most games AA ends up looking blurry and has motion artefacts (sparkling edges), if DLSS is sharper and doesn't have the motion artefacts which is generally the case for DLSS 2.0 on the quality setting then it's a no brainer.