DLSS 5 - Generative AI

[MistaSparkul]

excited?

Very. Although I must admit, after gaming at 1440p for the past month, it really isn't that terrible anymore thanks to DLAA. 1440p with anything else whether it's FXAA, SMAA, and especially TAA () just looks so disgustingly blurry/jagged. Still, more pixels is more pixels and can't go wrong with that.

 

[erek]

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=368a1hh3uaw&pp=ugUEEgJlbtIHCQk3DAGHKiGM7w%3D%3D

 

[MistaSparkul]

I think I'll use the performance gain from the new model to run a double pass of Shortfuse + Lecram with DLAA. Already got it setup in Witcher 3, though currently only playable using DLSS instead of DLAA until the performance improvement lands.

Here's how used car salesman Geralt looks with it;


View: https://youtu.be/aAY_WiqcQ0A?is=m3NrPcN5pjL4SL0h

Settings and install guide that I followed:


View: https://youtu.be/79jnvMC0r1s?is=0sX0-qmwl0MKEmO5

 

[the_sextein]

The new version of DLSS5 (3.9.16) that dropped today gave me a 10FPS boost to my base frame rate in cyberpunk at 4k. So up to 60FPS if you are using 6x frame gen. I'm using 2x frame gen so I got a 20FPS boost overall. Pretty happy with that. I'm still using preset B for DLSS because it looks much better than preset C in Cyberpunk and preset C has some micro stutters on my system while preset B is flawless. Preset C does perform about 10FPS better than preset B though.

 

[Captain Newmackwa]

In my case, preset B stutters in Doom: The Dark Ages but preset C doesn't. Subjectively, I don't notice differences in terms of image quality.

 

[Comixbooks]

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/gr...eeping-it-the-hell-away-from-game-characters/

About the performance update using less resources with the new version.

 

[erek]

https://www.pcgamer.com/hardware/gr...eeping-it-the-hell-away-from-game-characters/

About the performance update using less resources with the new version.

“A new version of DLSS 5 on NBA 2K27was just released, and modders have already extracted it and are running it on unsupported games. Modders are comparing performance between the older and newer Neural Rendering (NR) model and found it up to 40% faster than the previous one.

Official DLSS 5 running on unsupported games delivers up to 90% better performance than the leaked version — Nvidia says the new NR model uses 20% less VRAM and processes neural workloads up to 2x faster
​

Nvidia's new Neural Rendering model is smaller but better.”

https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...nd-processes-neural-workloads-up-to-2x-faster

 

[erek]

In this video, Hardware Unboxed tests Nvidia's new DLSS 5 neural rendering model (released in October), which claims to run twice as fast as the original version while reducing VRAM usage by 20% (0:00 - 0:30). The host evaluates these performance claims using NBA 2K27 across the full GeForce RTX 50 series GPU lineup.

Key takeaways:

• Performance Gains: The new model delivers significant speed improvements—averaging about 83% faster at 4K and 94% faster at 1440p across the RTX 50 series (9:42 - 10:06).
• Usability: While the performance hit is still substantial compared to disabling the feature entirely, the new model makes DLSS 5 much more viable for mid-range cards like the RTX 5070 and RTX 5060 at 1440p (12:42 - 13:04).
• Visual Quality: The host finds that image quality remains largely unchanged and that the original visual artifacts—such as lighting flicker, inconsistent skin tones, and halo effects—persist in the updated model (14:30 - 16:59).

Spoiler

• Conclusion: While the October update is a necessary step in the right direction, the technology still requires further optimization in both performance and visual stability before it can be recommended for widespread, everyday use (18:10 - 18:48).”

View: https://youtu.be/k9MQa9pdj8Q?is=05qCH4Ve2XZOyjKk

 

[MistaSparkul]

The new model definitely runs twice as fast, but your actual performance gain will depend. Here's an example using CP2077 at 1440p.

OLD Model (Preset A):

NEW Model (Preset B):

So using the old model, my fps in CP2077 is 78 which is a render time of 12.8ms. Out of that 12.8ms, 3.6ms was used for NR at 1440p resolution. The new model runs twice as fast so instead of a 3.6ms render cost, that is now just 1.8ms. 12.8 - 1.8 = 11ms is now the total render time with the faster model and so the new fps should be 91, and it is so the math completely checks out. In this scenario though, the new model only translates to an actual performance gain of just 16% over the old model, but the gains at 4K will be far more significant. Power consumption did drop by 21 watts at 1440p so there's probably an even bigger power savings at 4K.

 

[erek]

The new model definitely runs twice as fast, but your actual performance gain will depend. Here's an example using CP2077 at 1440p.

OLD Model (Preset A):

View attachment 832108

NEW Model (Preset B):

View attachment 832109

So using the old model, my fps in CP2077 is 78 which is a render time of 12.8ms. Out of that 12.8ms, 3.6ms was used for NR at 1440p resolution. The new model runs twice as fast so instead of a 3.6ms render cost, that is now just 1.8ms. 12.8 - 1.8 = 11ms is now the total render time with the faster model and so the new fps should be 91, and it is so the math completely checks out. In this scenario though, the new model only translates to an actual performance gain of just 16% over the old model, but the gains at 4K will be far more significant. Power consumption did drop by 21 watts at 1440p so there's probably an even bigger power savings at 4K.

kram182 GoldenTiger

​

“NVIDIA's Faster DLSS 5 Model Gets Extracted From NBA 2K27, Modders Report Up to 90% Gains

NVIDIA shipped its faster DLSS 5 Neural Rendering model with NBA 2K27 on October 16, and it didn't take modders long to pull it out and test it elsewhere. Renan Maniero on X extracted the new 310.9.16.0 build of the DLL. That lets people inject it into games that don't officially support DLSS 5 through tools like RenoDX and OptiScaler. The new DLL also keeps the older model around as Preset A, with the new one sitting under Preset B, so comparing the two is as simple as switching presets. Gaming Optimized on X did exactly that, and found the new model running up to 90% faster than the old one in The Witcher 3. The channel points out that the gain varies from game to game, so 90% looks like the best case rather than the norm.

That roughly aligns with NVIDIA's own claims. The company says the October update shrinks the model by 24% to roughly 118 million parameters, cuts VRAM use at 4K by 20%, and runs the neural rendering workload up to 2x faster than the September version. NVIDIA also quoted up to 40% higher frame rates in NBA 2K27 specifically. Officially, DLSS 5 is still limited to RTX 50-series GPUs and GeForce NOW. NVIDIA plans to bring it to the RTX 40-series, though there's no date yet, and there's no word on RTX 30 or RTX 20 support. Modders, apparently, aren't waiting, since the OptiScaler README notes a modified runtime that gets it running on RTX 20-series cards as well.”

 

[the_sextein]

I'm not going to make claims about general operation across all brands of cards but for me. My power usage was around 590 to 614 watts. With the latest driver from Nvidia it dropped to 590 to 605. With the latest update to DLSS 5 it's now sitting at 565 watts all the time. This is in Cyberpunk at 4k with Reno DX DLSS 5 profile 1. DLSS 4.5 Ray reconstruction profile F and DLSS profile C with path tracing, Ultra plus, HDR and about 430 mods with an overclocked card and no under volt. I can't imagine a game that can push the system harder than this. I would say the power usage is no longer being pushed past the safety limits even under the harshest conditions, for me at least.

 

[erek]

“Mods can almost double DLSS 5 performance through Foveation, reducing resolution at the edges of frames — technique makes DLSS 5 possible on high-resolution ultrawide monitors​

This might actually make DLSS 5 more accessible.“

Source: https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-com...ossible-on-high-resolution-ultrawide-monitors

 

[MistaSparkul]

https://wccftech.com/witchfire-crea...ls-it-amazing-expects-dlss-3-acceptance-path/

The haters have definitely gone pretty silent now compared to when DLSS5 was first announced . Even John from DF who acted like he hated it with every fiber of his being is now starting to accept that it actually looks good when used properly.

 

[pendragon1]

The haters have definitely gone pretty silent now compared to when DLSS5 was first announced

whats the point in arguing with the zealots?!

 

[GoldenTiger]

whats the point in arguing with the zealots?!

It isn't just zealots who love dlss5 now .

 

[AVATARAT]

https://wccftech.com/witchfire-crea...ls-it-amazing-expects-dlss-3-acceptance-path/

View attachment 832242

The haters have definitely gone pretty silent now compared to when DLSS5 was first announced . Even John from DF who acted like he hated it with every fiber of his being is now starting to accept that it actually looks good when used properly.

Let’s just suppose: Nvidia is doing with DLSS 5 what it did with ray tracing—reducing the data processed while making the difference barely noticeable. This way, the FPS drop is minimized, and every zealot is satisfied.
But did they actually improve something to make lighting more realistic? Or is it still just a visual trick?

 

[MistaSparkul]

Let’s just suppose: Nvidia is doing with DLSS 5 what it did with ray tracing—reducing the data processed while making the difference barely noticeable. This way, the FPS drop is minimized, and every zealot is satisfied.
But did they actually improve something to make lighting more realistic? Or is it still just a visual trick?

Dude, these are video game graphics, it has ALWAYS been about visual tricks. If this the end result of such tricks then I couldn't care less. This zealot will continue to enjoy the DLSS5 slop.

 

[grifter_66]

Let’s just suppose: Nvidia is doing with DLSS 5 what it did with ray tracing—reducing the data processed while making the difference barely noticeable. This way, the FPS drop is minimized, and every zealot is satisfied.
But did they actually improve something to make lighting more realistic? Or is it still just a visual trick?

All aspects of video game development are "tricks" or we'd just be watching lines of code scrolling across the screen.

 

[AVATARAT]

As mentioned earlier, DLSS5 uses some elements of RT, but its actual purpose is to make the image look nice without paying much attention to where the light is coming from.

 

[LukeTbk]

As mentioned earlier, DLSS5 uses some elements of RT, but its actual purpose is to make the image look nice without paying much attention to where the light is coming from.

I think the RT-lighting noisy passes are one of the DLSS5 input it can receive too, that why it does not have to pay much attention because it has the game raytracing engine that did it already, like for DLSS RR api, the result of those rays and what those light position/bounce mean has been taken into account, I would imagine most//all of those are being used:

https://github.com/NVIDIA-RTX/Streamline/blob/main/docs/ProgrammingGuideDLSS_RR.md

This is by design to work with RT not to replace it, a super denoiser for very limited pathtracing it if you will, filling the gap that you always need to fill because of real time limitation with more knowledge on what it would have probably been with 1,000 rays per pixel than before, that why we see the final output change in games when they add more RT even if DLSS5 is on.

 

[AVATARAT]

Yes, it uses RT as a base (when available), but ultimately it's the AI filter that makes things look more attractive – that's by design.

 

[LukeTbk]

Yes, it uses RT as a base (when available), but ultimately it's the AI filter that makes things look more attractive – that's by design.

I am not sure of the point trying to be made, yes the neural rendering model to estimate what the denoising of the pathtracing should look like, subsurface and material details inference (guessing) is what make things look more attractive, filter is a wrong word for this, filter are purely destructive not additive like this is.

Filtering is usually substracting-denoising high frequency details (think anti aliasing, remove noise by adding blur), this is a additive/generative step, one that do take a lot of the lights situation in place doing so via the ray tracing results as an input (we can see big shift when LOD decision remove things from the raytracing and the info DLSS5 get with the camera getting closer or father because of this for example).

What's mostly going here is removing the destructive denoising filtering step by an additive generative step instead during the raytracing of the realtime rendering (plus doing things about subsurface and materials for now)

 

[MistaSparkul]

Metro 2033 and Last Light Redux got updated today and now include built in DLSS5 which they are labeling as DLSS NR, I think that's a better name for it personally but maybe RTX NR would be more appropriate since it really has nothing to do with DLSS and isn't a performance booster. Seems like they went very very light on the implementation:

https://www.reddit.com/r/metro/comments/1xco8jv/how_do_we_feel_about_the_dlss_nr_implementation/

 

[erek]

Metro 2033 and Last Light Redux got updated today and now include built in DLSS5 which they are labeling as DLSS NR, I think that's a better name for it personally but maybe RTX NR would be more appropriate since it really has nothing to do with DLSS and isn't a performance booster. Seems like they went very very light on the implementation:

https://www.reddit.com/r/metro/comments/1xco8jv/how_do_we_feel_about_the_dlss_nr_implementation/

additional interpretation,

“METRO Redux’s Next-Gen Update Hides a DLSS 5 Surprise, as NVIDIA’s Neural Rendering Gives Old Characters New Life​

4A Games has quietly added NVIDIA DLSS 5 Neural Rendering to Metro Redux (Metro 2033 and Last Light), greatly improving the character faces.

Yesterday, Ukrainian developer 4A Gamesreleased the METRO Redux Next-Gen Updatefor both Metro 2033 and Last Light, the first two entries in the acclaimed post-apocalyptic first-person shooter franchise.
The patch includes a host of technical improvements, including uncapped frame rate, various upscaling options (4A TSR, NVIDIA DLSS, AMD FSR), Screen Space Global Illumination, increased geometry details, increased texture details, 4K textures, improved PBR materials, improved animation and sound quality, spatial audio support, and support for Adaptive Triggers for DualSense and Impulse Triggers for Xbox controllers.“

Source: https://wccftech.com/metro-redux-next-gen-update-dlss-5-neural-rendering-character-upgrade/

 

[Prince Valiant]

Dude, these are video game graphics, it has ALWAYS been about visual tricks. If this the end result of such tricks then I couldn't care less. This zealot will continue to enjoy the DLSS5 slop.

View attachment 832382

We all know that they're tricks, or likely anyone on this forum does. It's a matter of whether or not it improves things visually and the cost. It's so-so on both counts; that's why there are filthy heretics rejecting Jensen's glorious DLSS5 light.

 

[MistaSparkul]

We all know that they're tricks, or likely anyone on this forum does. It's a matter of whether or not it improves things visually and the cost. It's so-so on both counts; that's why there are filthy heretics rejecting Jensen's glorious DLSS5 light.

I think it does and the cost with the new model is now more than worth it. Meh agree to disagree I guess.

 

[Whach]

I've gotta say I was very skeptical of the neural rendering stuff. But, as with anything PC, I messed around with it in various games and gave it a go. Have to say, in Cyberpunk, it was worth it, so much so I'm replaying it after 2 years. However, in a game like 007 First Light, it didn't make much of a difference to be honest - at least to my eye. All it did was lower performance and shoot power consumption up to around 500W from 400.

For reference, I was using this on a RTX 4090 (with an undervolt at 950mV using NV-UV) with the RenoDX mods and MFG unlocked for Ada Lovelace with MFG @ 3x and 4K res 120Hz. Currently also using it with Hogwart's Legacy and it works. Good stuff. Has breathed new life in to some games I haven't touched in ages. In some games it works/looks better, in others not so much. Interesting tech, good stuff. Next game: Witcher 3 remastered - whenever I can make time to get to it =)

 

[djstarfox]

DLSS5 seems like a sham.... the Unreal engine 5 can light up en entire cityscape with a single light source... all based on reflections. We don't need "AI" to "make it pretty" for us. The whole point of a game is to create a virtual environment that's believable... not to copy internet slop.

 

[Whach]

DLSS5 seems like a sham.... the Unreal engine 5 can light up en entire cityscape with a single light source... all based on reflections. We don't need "AI" to "make it pretty" for us. The whole point of a game is to create a virtual environment that's believable... not to copy internet slop.

All I can judge it on is what I see in front of me. If it looks better than the original, I'll use it. Unreal is not something I would base a comparison on though. Still a stuttering mess. Always will be.

 

[MistaSparkul]

I've gotta say I was very skeptical of the neural rendering stuff. But, as with anything PC, I messed around with it in various games and gave it a go. Have to say, in Cyberpunk, it was worth it, so much so I'm replaying it after 2 years. However, in a game like 007 First Light, it didn't make much of a difference to be honest - at least to my eye. All it did was lower performance and shoot power consumption up to around 500W from 400.

For reference, I was using this on a RTX 4090 (with an undervolt at 950mV using NV-UV) with the RenoDX mods and MFG unlocked for Ada Lovelace with MFG @ 3x and 4K res 120Hz. Currently also using it with Hogwart's Legacy and it works. Good stuff. Has breathed new life in to some games I haven't touched in ages. In some games it works/looks better, in others not so much. Interesting tech, good stuff. Next game: Witcher 3 remastered - whenever I can make time to get to it =)

Yeah I tried it out in Metro 2033 and Last Light Redux, both the official implementations as well as through Reshade and it honestly just didn't do a whole lot. Sure it gave it a little bit of enhancement but nothing that WOW'ed me like I've seen in some other games. You will definitely like it in the Witcher 3 though, I just completed a playthrough and got through both DLCs and it was amazing playing with PT + NR.

 

[kram182]

Reshade and it honestly just didn't do a whole lot. Sure it gave it a little bit of enhancement but nothing that WOW'ed me like I've seen in some other games. You will definitely like it in the Witcher 3 though, I just completed a playthrough and got through both DLCs and it was amazing playing with PT + NR.

It's also now in Portal RTX remix FYI if you have that

 

[erek]

“NVIDIA DLSS 5 Arrives in Hogwarts Legacy, War Thunder, and Where Winds Meet, Promising Impressive Performance Boost​

by GFreeman Today, 04:57 Discuss (6 Comments)
NVIDIA is bringing its DLSS 5 neural rendering technology to three more games this month, starting with Hogwarts Legacy on November 5. According to NVIDIA, War Thunder will follow in mid-November, while Where Winds Meet is scheduled to receive support on November 23. NVIDIA is also bringing DLSS 4.5 to several games, and has updated DLSS 4.5 Unreal Engine plugin. NVIDIA was also keen to note that its October 2026 update has significantly reduced the footprint, decreased VRAM usage, and increased performance.

DLSS 5 introduces what NVIDIA calls 3D-Guided Neural Rendering, using AI to enhance lighting, shadows and material details based on information from the game engine. The technology operates as a final rendering stage, using the original frame, geometry, textures and lighting data as its foundation. According to NVIDIA, this approach allows developers to introduce more realistic lighting and material effects without having to explicitly model and render all the additional detail. The company also provides developers with controls to adjust how the technology affects individual scenes, objects and characters, using different AI models, intensity settings and semantic masking to preserve the original artistic direction.“

 

[erek]

"DLSS 5 on Radeon Gets Faster With AMDLSS5 2.0, Up to 64% Performance Uplift​

by DrUsmanSaleem Today, 19:14 Discuss (0 Comments)
AMDLSS5, a free mod that runs NVIDIA's DLSS 5 Neural Rendering on AMD's Radeon RX 9070 and RX 9070 XT, has reached version 2.0 with an engine its developer, Wehaveall, built for the project. Earlier builds were based on Daniel Blanco's DLSS-NR-on-AMD, the tool that first got DLSS 5 working on Radeon cards back in September, but version 2.0 no longer needs files from any other mod. In a 60-second Resident Evil Requiem run at 4K with FSR on an RX 9070 XT, the new build averaged 101.2 FPS with 78.5 FPS 1% lows, up from 91.3 and 66.0 FPS on version 1.6.1. That is roughly 11% and 19% better, respectively.

The headline 64% figure comes from a comparison with unnamed "other mods," which managed 61.6 FPS in the same scene. These are the developer's own numbers from one game on one GPU, and there's no mod-off baseline showing what Neural Rendering costs. Game support now includes PRAGMATA, Nioh 3 and GTA 5 Enhanced, the latter only in offline Story Mode with BattlEye disabled. RX 9060 series cards should work but are untested, while RX 7000 support is an alpha that hasn't been tried on real hardware yet."

 

[Sycraft]

It's also now in Portal RTX remix FYI if you have that

That is one of those cases where I think it is an example of why DLSS 5 currently kinda sucks but could be great: If you look at it, the improvements are pretty subtle. There's nothing about the look that gets really changed, it is just improved. Lighting and shadows just look better. It's another step in making rendering look more correct. It is not some slop filter that screws up or radically alters the game, it takes the existing look and just refines it.

So why does it suck? The performance, of course. It hits heavy as DLSS 5 does, and for that minor an improvement, it isn't worth it. Game is already heavy, and already looks good. Halving frame rate for a minor improvement just isn't something I can see many people taking.

So again, a lot of it will come down to what kind of performance improvements can they get. If they can figure out how to make it run as part of the upscaler, so that it is running on the non-upscaled image which would make it a lot faster, it would likely start being something worth looking at in many cases.

 

[erek]

“DLSS 5 was chosen as the 2027 Gaming Innovation Winner + Honoree in AI for CES 2027 Innovation Awards!”

https://www.ces.tech/ces-innovation-awards/2027/nvidia-dlss-5/

 

[MistaSparkul]

That is one of those cases where I think it is an example of why DLSS 5 currently kinda sucks but could be great: If you look at it, the improvements are pretty subtle. There's nothing about the look that gets really changed, it is just improved. Lighting and shadows just look better. It's another step in making rendering look more correct. It is not some slop filter that screws up or radically alters the game, it takes the existing look and just refines it.

So why does it suck? The performance, of course. It hits heavy as DLSS 5 does, and for that minor an improvement, it isn't worth it. Game is already heavy, and already looks good. Halving frame rate for a minor improvement just isn't something I can see many people taking.

So again, a lot of it will come down to what kind of performance improvements can they get. If they can figure out how to make it run as part of the upscaler, so that it is running on the non-upscaled image which would make it a lot faster, it would likely start being something worth looking at in many cases.

The performance will get better, but in it's current state I think it's already good enough to use even at 4K without the need to run it pre SR, unless you are playing with Path Tracing on top of that, in which case maybe it's actually PT performance that could use some work? Here's Onimusha running 1440p DLAA Preset L and the old preset of NR which has a 3.6ms cost at 1440p, with everything maxed out and 3x FG I can get over 240fps. You would see similar performance at 4K if you ran DLSS Quality and the new preset of NR which has a similar render cost at 4K as the old preset at 1440p.


View: https://youtu.be/2QKckMf-6Ro?is=rH1KXBVbE4lVpmeG

 

[Sycraft]

The performance will get better, but in it's current state I think it's already good enough to use even at 4K without the need to run it pre SR, unless you are playing with Path Tracing on top of that, in which case maybe it's actually PT performance that could use some work? Here's Onimusha running 1440p DLAA Preset L and the old preset of NR which has a 3.6ms cost at 1440p, with everything maxed out and 3x FG I can get over 240fps. You would see similar performance at 4K if you ran DLSS Quality and the new preset of NR which has a similar render cost at 4K as the old preset at 1440p.

For Portal, ya the performance is pretty abysmal. Part of it is probalby because it is nVidia's RTX Remix bolted on to Source, not a new engine, and it actually uses path tracing for primary visibility (most games still use rasterization for that, and PT just for lights and shadows). Either way, at 4k on a 5090 Portal RTX with just PT performs pretty well with upscaling and frame gen. With DLSS 5, the performance tanks pretty hard.

 

[MistaSparkul]

For Portal, ya the performance is pretty abysmal. Part of it is probalby because it is nVidia's RTX Remix bolted on to Source, not a new engine, and it actually uses path tracing for primary visibility (most games still use rasterization for that, and PT just for lights and shadows). Either way, at 4k on a 5090 Portal RTX with just PT performs pretty well with upscaling and frame gen. With DLSS 5, the performance tanks pretty hard.

Shouldn't Portal be using the new preset? Shouldn't be tanking performance that hard unless you were already at 100+ fps without FG. 100fps is a 10ms render time so if you turn on NR then it will add 3.8ms to the render time which brings the fps down to 72. If you have an even lower base frame rate then the performance impact becomes even less. If you were using the old preset however then yes the performance penalty is massive on that one.

 

[MistaSparkul]

Welp I tried it out for myself. 1440p DLAA no FG and RR Preset F, 82fps without NR and 69 with NR. I don't think NR tanked the performance THAT much. If this was 4K then the added render cost would be another 2.2ms so I would drop down to ~60fps for 4K. Path Tracing hits performance a lot harder than this.