Red Dead Redemption 2 receive NVIDIA DLSS Performance Boost of up to 45% on GeForce RTX GPUs
Click here to post a comment for Red Dead Redemption 2 receive NVIDIA DLSS Performance Boost of up to 45% on GeForce RTX GPUs on our message forum
Ricepudding
Tried this yesterday, honestly the gains from native 21:9 1440p to quality mode it looks fine but i gained maybe 8-10% performance in the area i tested quite small of things considering
cucaulay malkin
very disappointing numbers.
erazerswe
Curious about the best settings for my Gigabyte 3060 OC (without dlss though) Right now i have textures set at ultra and most other things at high and get 73 fps average according to the benchmark. I also heard via youtube-videos that you wont notice much difference from high to ultra except textures. Any settings-tips would be appreciated though, cheers!
Dragam1337
As always dlss will work better at higher resolutions.
I plan on testing it at 8k later tonight.
BuildeR2
Huh, seems odd that they don't even show any Vulkan results. While DX12 did run better (with a good bit of crashing) on my 1080Ti, my 2080Ti has always run better under Vulkan with async compute enabled. I'm curious how DLSS Balanced or Quality mode would help under Vulkan @ 4k with High/Ultra settings.
Anybody know if Rockstar or nvidia has just abandoned Vulkan for RDR2, or just didn't feel the need to test it?
nizzen
I use 2x 3090 nvlink in this game. Much better
aufkrawall2
At least you get better texture filtering with D3D12 when using DLSS, as it utilizes negative LOD bias, which Nvidia filters with lower quality (shimmering) on OGL/Vulkan vs. D3D10/11/12 when set to HQ mode (Q is bad anyway). You can test this by using 3DCenter Filter Tester with D3D10 vs. Vulkan (DXVK).
cucaulay malkin
so that is the reason dlss provides lower perf increase than usual
dlss runs on top of dx12
right ?
Krizby
DLSS run on Vulkan just fine: Doom Eternal, Wolfenstein Youngblood, Rainbow Six Siege
aufkrawall2
DLSS runs via CUDA with any API. 🙂
It doesn't boost performance much in RDR2 as the game scales poorly with lower resolution in general on at least GeForces. The better negative LOD bias texture filtering with D3D12 HQ should only be slightly more expensive vs. worse quality with Vulkan.
cucaulay malkin
stupid me,I played youngblood dlss myself
it looked fantastic btw, 1440p quality was better than native.With a tremendous fps boost.
so dx12 is the preferred way for nvidia ?
what about rdna2 ?
aufkrawall2
I could imagine that it's sufficient in YB, as it has much cleaner visuals without TAA than RDR2. The latter seems to expect that there's its TAA that blurs away lots of artifacting (among other things 🙁 ).
With DLSS in terms of texture shimmering, yes (I'll check again though). Not sure if this applies to general performance.
Vulkan worked better for me with RX 6800 (higher fps, less stutter).
cucaulay malkin
so dx12 dlssq is the preferred way for good performance/quality balance ? or dx12 native with in game AA ?
kapu
Same for me . Much better on vulkan . Almost any game with vulkan works better on my R6800.
Dragam1337
Without dlss vulkan has better performance than dx12, but it looks worse .
D1stRU3T0R
the fact that is isn't limited to 4 GPU-s?
that blurry upslcaler ? please.... it blurs even the simplest games at 77% "ultra quality" preset.upscalers belong on consoles when you play *most* of the games, you don't look at that much detail, like with CSGO, Battlefield, PUBG. While I agree detail quality is VERY important, you DON'T use DLSS or FSR IF you want high details lol
be real,fsr is dlss 1.0 only easier to do - hell nah, more like DLSS 1.9 (but srsly, very close to DLSS 2), but even that had just like 1 game lmao
if amd's master plan is to incorporate this into every game then it's a bad plan. any reason for this? Like for real, I don't see why would be bad in any world. Like yea, it's like saying Tesla with electric motors are bad, you can't argue that it's not perfect, but it's something that did something huge for everyone
cucaulay malkin
really ?
huge ?
tell me,how many of us were using upscalers before fsr ? I can't recall having a single conversation about them in any of the forums I frequent.I never even thought about using one.
The deal is either give me image as good as native (or very close) or we don't really care.I think everyone who chooses particular resolution does it because that's what they want to consider their standard.Upscalers can scram.So can dlss 1.0 and badly implemented 2.0
you realize 1.9 is like 2.0 but runs on cuda cores ?
except it really isn't.
then where is fsr in cs,pubg or bf ?
new bf already announced dlss support.
you're making a pretty big case out of it,but at this point it's adoption rate will be pretty much limited to amd sponsored games like re8 and fc6.
Reddoguk
This is with a 1440p res.
Minimum fps = 17 fps
Average fps = 119 fps
Maximum fps = 170 fps
TimmyP
How can DLSS "work better" at higher resolutions when you cant use the quality setting? You have to stick to the noisy performance modes, while using it at native *with quality DLSS results in a substantial performance increase and an IQ increase as well (free TAA, more appears in reconstruction especially in distance).
Dragam1337
Go read about how dlss works.
