![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Not sure here, the "16K image" it tried to generate never existed (the 4k native version of the game neither for all the model know)
This is a dumb take.
Also to anyone who is arguing "creative intent": You'd better have never used a reshade filter, or texture pack, or any kind of mod really or you are altering the creative vision of the artists/developers!
Also to anyone who is arguing "creative intent": You'd better have never used a reshade filter, or texture pack, or any kind of mod really or you are altering the creative vision of the artists/developers!
I think it is funny how suddenly a ton of people supposedly give a shit about the vision/intent of the developers with regards to DLSS 5, when we never heard from them before on any of the other technologies that are used to alter the way a game looks or plays. Now they care so much they'll defend it from the very people who created the game! "No, you don't understand! This isn't the vision you had, it is bad and evil!"
It is just hate for hate sake.
The real issue, which he mentions, is the performance cost. We'll see if they can improve it any, and maybe games that use the filters to only use it on certain things won't get hit as hard but if not, it'll be one of those that you'll really have to think about. Like I can't imagine using it in Cyberpunk, already that's running at only around 50-70fps native with path tracing on. I'm not going to turn PT off, and I am not willing to cut that in half so I can't see using it there.
I mean, we'll see and I'll test it, but I suspect not. Path tracing does a whole lot more than I think DLSS5 is capable of. One simple but good example would be off-screen reflections. If there is an object out of screen space that should be reflected/refracted in a surface, path tracing can do that. There's no way for DLSS5 to do it, since it it inference based on the final scene.
DLSS 5 right now doesn't support upscaling, it is native or DLAA.Also to anyone who is arguing "creative intent": You'd better have never used a reshade filter, or texture pack, or any kind of mod really or you are altering the creative vision of the artists/developers!
I think it is funny how suddenly a ton of people supposedly give a shit about the vision/intent of the developers with regards to DLSS 5, when we never heard from them before on any of the other technologies that are used to alter the way a game looks or plays. Now they care so much they'll defend it from the very people who created the game! "No, you don't understand! This isn't the vision you had, it is bad and evil!"
It is just hate for hate sake.
The real issue, which he mentions, is the performance cost. We'll see if they can improve it any, and maybe games that use the filters to only use it on certain things won't get hit as hard but if not, it'll be one of those that you'll really have to think about. Like I can't imagine using it in Cyberpunk, already that's running at only around 50-70fps native with path tracing on. I'm not going to turn PT off, and I am not willing to cut that in half so I can't see using it there.
So much for "A.I. Slop", eh?
So that appears to not be accurate.
How is better technology a "nail in the coffin" for gaming?
There has been a war against gaming studios for several years now, aimed at bringing them under control, and so far, they’re losing it.
From my understanding it will use regular DLSS 4.5 to do the upscaling and DLSS 5 will work from the final render at the very end of the pipeline.... it is not the DLSS 5 NR model that do it in one go. It does not upscale yet.
We will have to see if it is not worth that 50% fps hit.... i.e. some games (like Ubisoft engine) at low setting + DLSS5 seem to look better than at ultra setting without it and the performance hit being almost nill, we can imagine people finding what it is really good at reconstructing and whichs setting you can go to low/medium without loosing much quality and what you need to keep, so the general fps hit will not be that harsh
what if we ask AI to interpolate and or extrapolate the prediction? could be curious
Honestly I am pleasantly surprised with the takes here. This is an older forum, so I figured most people here would be anti-AI anything. Cool to see lots of reasonable takes with nuance here. Better then what I'm seeing from my peers in discord.
I think that a general misunderstanding of how different this is, than your traditional sharpening or others filters.
I think there is 2 different kernel of issues, AI in particular but an older and more general closed API (would it be DirectX by microsoft, Glide by 3dfx and so on) with hardware vendor.
The literal definition of generative AI that it generates new data. Not filling gaps in existing data. By your definition an OCR software would be generative AI because it fills in the characters based on partial data.
DLSS upscale looking better than native is nonsense, it is only perceived that way by some because it blurs edges acting as "free" anti-aliasing.
yes which DLSS 4.5 transformer do, it recognize that something is hair, text, cable and generate new data to fill it (it never seen the actual 4k image or the 16k training version, that never exist here), it is not working with base resolution and the 16k to fill gaps.
Looking better is quite subjective, but objectively it does add missing information into the image, that became less than 1 pixel in the low bit float precision render pipeline and not there.
Yes, it's not just a filter, but it's easy to explain.
