• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

FSR4 support in most games

XoR_

XoR_

2[H]4U
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
2,145
Optiscaler has now FSR4 support!
https://github.com/cdozdil/OptiScaler?tab=readme-ov-file


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jg41sT8sAuY

BTW. Imho comparing FSR4 to FSR3.1 in this case doesn't make any sense because the best upscaler for AMD hardware was/is not FSR2/3 but XeSS.
FSR2/3/3.1 is in fact terrible in comparison and barely usable in most cases with either too much smearing (FSR2) and still blocky look or even more blocky look and still lots of smearing (FSR3.x).
XeSS on the other hand doesn't look as good on AMD/Nvidia as it does on Intel cards (where it is quite amazing) but even with DP4a version isn't too far from early DLSS2. At least in Fortnite where I am forced to use DLSS 2.2 I don't see that much improvements from using it over XeSS - image is slightly sharper (XeSS is on the softer side) and performance is slightly better with DLSS but that is about it, otherwise very comparable.

Anyways, FSR4 seems to be generally between DLSS3 and DLSS4 so it is better than XeSS and should be faster on RNDA4 so for these cards it is a no brainer.
One word of warning: please only use Optiscaler for single player games. It does hook DLLs and there are known cases of getting banned in multi-player games from using DLL hooking...
 
XoR_ said:
Optiscaler has now FSR4 support!
https://github.com/cdozdil/OptiScaler?tab=readme-ov-file


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jg41sT8sAuY

BTW. Imho comparing FSR4 to FSR3.1 in this case doesn't make any sense because the best upscaler for AMD hardware was/is not FSR2/3 but XeSS.
FSR2/3/3.1 is in fact terrible in comparison and barely usable in most cases with either too much smearing (FSR2) and still blocky look or even more blocky look and still lots of smearing (FSR3.x).
XeSS on the other hand doesn't look as good on AMD/Nvidia as it does on Intel cards (where it is quite amazing) but even with DP4a version isn't too far from early DLSS2. At least in Fortnite where I am forced to use DLSS 2.2 I don't see that much improvements from using it over XeSS - image is slightly sharper (XeSS is on the softer side) and performance is slightly better with DLSS but that is about it, otherwise very comparable.

Anyways, FSR4 seems to be generally between DLSS3 and DLSS4 so it is better than XeSS and should be faster on RNDA4 so for these cards it is a no brainer.
One word of warning: please only use Optiscaler for single player games. It does hook DLLs and there are known cases of getting banned in multi-player games from using DLL hooking...
Click to expand...

Wished there was a list of FSR games that work with Optiscaler for FSR 4. Available list includes older no FSR 4 versions.
 
I got you. But the whole point of comparing new tech vs last is gen to gen. Its not about intel upscaler. Goal is to show how much FSR is improved over 3.1 to show the ultimate improvement.
 
NKD said:
I got you. But the whole point of comparing new tech vs last is gen to gen. Its not about intel upscaler. Goal is to show how much FSR is improved over 3.1 to show the ultimate improvement.
Click to expand...
I don't focus on FSR4 improvement over FSR3 or 2 but instead I focus on how terrible FSR2/3 was and how on older AMD cards the upscaler to use is not FSR2-3 but XeSS - and especially if you already use OptiScaler.

FSR2-3 I always said was made by AMD to showcase why engineers when creating TAA didn't already use the tech for upscaling 😅
 
KazeoHin said:
Saying AMD's FSR has improved so much is like telling a woman she's lost weight.

It doesn't necessarily mean she's pretty, but it definitely means that she was previously fat.
Click to expand...
But it's plain as day that FSR4 is bare minimum as good as DLSS3. Some are saying better. Not quite DLSS4. This isn't a minor improvement, it's vast.
 
OFaceSIG said:
But it's plain as day that FSR4 is bare minimum as good as DLSS3. Some are saying better. Not quite DLSS4. This isn't a minor improvement, it's vast.
Click to expand...
From DigitalFoundry videos and some other sources like IGN and such I would say FSR4 looks better than DLSS3
 
How many of yall speaking against FSR4 have run it? Are we speaking with data and user experience?
 
RAutrey said:
How many of yall speaking against FSR4 have run it? Are we speaking with data and user experience?
Click to expand...
Who speaks against FSR4?
It is at least as good as DLSS3 and generally considered to be slightly better. It is however worse than DLSS4 no question about it.
It is also vastly superior to prior FSR versions and also better than XeSS DP4a (aka the best upscaler for Radeons before RDNA4) and even XeSS XMX

If AMD released FSR4 before DLSS4 it would imho got a lot of praise for being better than DLSS3 (mostly)
It is hard to be as excited otherwise. Solid and very usable upscaler but Nvidia as usual stole the spotlight because of AMD being sluggish and being few years behind Nvidia in these things.

Also AMD would get more praise for upscalers if they gave older RNDA users something - at least as good as XeSS but realistically RDNA3 should be able to do at least as good upscaler as what Ampere and Turing cards can run.
Something like slightly reduced FSR4 should be doable given theoretical specs and good AI models performance when software is optimized for the card.
Otherwise its only 9070 XT users with someone who got e.g. 7900XTX left only being able to use XeSS... or FSR2/3 for a bit better performance but FSR2/3 is ugly as heck in comparison.
 
The XTX doesn't need upscaling unless 4K high refresh is a must. I prefer 1440P less pixels to scan with old man eyes. The heat factor is a consideration as well.
 
learners permit said:
The XTX doesn't need upscaling unless 4K high refresh is a must. I prefer 1440P less pixels to scan with old man eyes. The heat factor is a consideration as well.
Click to expand...
Upscaling is needed for RT in a lot of games at 1440p unless you have a 4090 or 5090. Using RT in the games that really made an effort takes the graphics to another level. Even a 5070 ti needs upscaling for RT at 1440p, and that is significantly faster with RT on than the XTX.

The problem for AMD was that Nvidia came out with the DLSS 4 TF model and used it as a commercial for their new cards by making it usable on older GPUs. Basically lets you try the new magic out before you buy a new card that runs it a lot better. Once you have tried the TF model, it is impossible to go back to CNN. The TF model at quality setting has tradeoffs vs native rendering and DLAA TF model is usually a step ahead of regular native rendering. The old CNN model at anything outside of DLAA was noticably inferior to native and you only used it when it meant you could turn on some extra features that made the game look a lot better.

FSR4 looks to be slightly ahead of the CNN model, but behind the TF model of DLSS. The DLSS4 CNN model was something you used when it was absolutely need, the TF model is something you often want to use. Unfortunately the FSR4 model looks like it falls into the same category as the CNN model. FSR4 did prevent the new AMD cards from falling further behind Nvidia, but it didn't help them catch up, as Nvidia increased the gap before AMD reduced it to the same amount again.

It would have made a lot of sense to have it out on older cards so people with 6000 or 7000 series could try it out and see if it is worth it, just like Nvidia enabled DLSS TF model on many generations back.
 
learners permit said:
Perhaps but those games I'll avoid if they can't be run on my hardware. Still do not care about RT.
Click to expand...
You should. Rt is the new high settings. Why buy a high end card if you can't even use the shinies? DLAA looks amazing on the new transformer model especially. DLSS Q has tradeoffs but it's worth it to increase the settings further for a better overall picture.
 
Last edited:
evhvis said:
It would have made a lot of sense to have it out on older cards so people with 6000 or 7000 series could try it out and see if it is worth it, just like Nvidia enabled DLSS TF model on many generations back.
Click to expand...
RDNA3 should be able to run mostly the same algorithm but would be nice to tweak it directly for its AI acceleration engine. Namely use smaller model at higher precission. Otherwise something like Turing and Ampere cards have similar issue and Nvidia made DLSS4 works - it was at the price of much worse performance.

RNDA2 has nothing for accelerating AI and while XeSS showed it is possible to make upscaler with ML it also is quite a cut down version of lighter upscaling algorithm. FSR4 looks to be much heavier.

I doubt we will get any ML based upscaler from AMD for RDNA2 let alone RDNA1.
RDNA3 and especially RDNA3.5 makes a lot of sense for AMD to add support.

BTW. Having the same upscaler for different cards having different quality can backfire.
XeSS is great example where on Intel cards XeSS is much better but you rarely see proper comparisons and more like comparing everyting on single RTX card to make testing simpler.
AMD needs to be extra careful here.

Though here maybe it will work opposite way. If AMD makes FSR4-lite like algorithm for RDNA3.5 and RNDA3 and call it FSR4 then it might benefit from people seeing mostly comparisons with full FSR4 running on RNDA4
 
noko said:
Frame Gen, in a nutshell, sucks. Conclusion.
Click to expand...
Correction: amd frame gen sucks particularly since they don't have Nvidia's reflex tech.

I use Nvidia's which is higher quality tensor core based, and works with minimal artifacts in most games/cases. It's awesome so long as my base fps is 60ish to give better smoothness, animations, and motion blur persistence on my high refresh display. Reflex helps minimize the added input lag.
 
GoldenTiger said:
Correction: amd frame gen sucks particularly since they don't have Nvidia's reflex tech.

I use Nvidia's which is higher quality tensor core based, and works with minimal artifacts in most games/cases. It's awesome so long as my base fps is 60ish to give better smoothness, animations, and motion blur persistence on my high refresh display. Reflex helps minimize the added input lag.
Click to expand...

View: https://youtu.be/3nfEkuqNX4k?si=2IbkoPXEVgCrnnxW

Frame Gen, in a nutshell, sucks. Conclusion.
 
noko said:

View: https://youtu.be/3nfEkuqNX4k?si=2IbkoPXEVgCrnnxW

Frame Gen, in a nutshell, sucks. Conclusion.
Click to expand...

Framegen is a tradeoff, it has some advantages and some drawbacks. While you can see the issues clearly when they zoom and do slowmo, they aren't all that noticable when you are playing. Using 2x framegen feels a lot smotther at the cost of some smaller artifacts, that aren't all that noticable, along with a small increase in input lag. It is a tradeoff and a nice tech to have access to.

Framegen is something you have to experience for yourself before you can comment on how good or bad it is. A lot of youtubers make good money from making shocking and negative videos, but a lot of those videos make things out to be much worse than they actually are. Judging framegen from a video is like someone driving around in a Prius saying a sports sedan drives like shit because they saw someone on youtube highlight some deficiencies with a microscope. The reality is that some gamers will love framegen, some will not care and some will hate it after trying it.
 
No more "We believe FSR should work on all GPU's..." ??

And no outcry from the AMD fanbase??

Nvidia tech that only works on Nvidia = bad: Loud crying, fits, tantrums, declarations of 'I'll never buy!', fear and loathing in Las everywhere...

AMD tech that only works on AMD = <crickets>.
 
Last edited:
FSR 4 to have official support in 200 games by the end of this year

Marees said:

AMD FSR Redstone Official: Over 200 Games Supported By End of 2025, 40+ Games With Redstone Frame-Gen & Over 3x Performance​


AMD says that the FSR Redstone update will support 200 games by the end of 2025, and this support is for the upscaling technology alone.



View attachment 771719
Click to expand...
 
GoldenTiger said:
Correction: amd frame gen sucks particularly since they don't have Nvidia's reflex tech.

I use Nvidia's which is higher quality tensor core based, and works with minimal artifacts in most games/cases. It's awesome so long as my base fps is 60ish to give better smoothness, animations, and motion blur persistence on my high refresh display. Reflex helps minimize the added input lag.
Click to expand...

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpAZF_-qsI8

AMD's new framegen for redstone is also pretty dog currently. Poor frame pacing, it throws the generated frame out immediately instead of pacing it evenly, hope they can patch it
 
ivandagiant said:

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpAZF_-qsI8

AMD's new framegen for redstone is also pretty dog currently. Poor frame pacing, it throws the generated frame out immediately instead of pacing it evenly, hope they can patch it
Click to expand...

Been reading thing might have to do with vsync setting. Where they recommend it on for stable frames and off otherwise. People on reddit pointed it out.
 
I really, REALLY want to like Radeon... and that's why I hate them so much.

You create a technology to compete with the much larger Nvidia DLSS ecosystem 2 years late and Debut it in... ONE poorly-received game's Multiplayer mode? Not even the full game?


Like... who the fuck at AMD negotiated with Activision to implement their tech in JUST the multiplayer? Like really? Couldn't have spared the money and resources to implement it in the full game? No? What about the PLETHORA of amazing games out? Not a SINGLE GOTY contender studio was worth reaching out to?

You didn't think to get a few teams together to implement it with a big update in 5-6 games already out and selling well? No? You went immediately to the single most disappointing Call of Duty game in history?

Like, at this point I swear AMD's approach to marketing and outreach needs to be studied and documented in detail. There's NO POSSIBLE WAY to fail this hard without learning from your mistakes again and again...
 

View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n7bud6P4ugw
Here's a 14-odd minute video that basically says "Hardware Unboxed got it right". In this follow-up coverage, we take a look at the undoubted quality improvements of FSR Redstone ML frame generation over the legacy FSR 3.1 "analytical" version, before looking at the reason we don't recommend using it: the delivery of frames is so uneven, it can actually look less smooth than running with frame-gen off.
Click to expand...

1765984329918.png



Frametime graph says it all. Green line is DLSS frame gen, red is AMD's. Not anything new, just Digital Foundry confirming the frame pacing issues
 
I hope AMD can compete with DLSS at some point. They're closer than ever, but still seem to have a ways to go for frame gen at least. But for now upscaling is more important and it seems they're pretty much at DLSS' level now on the upscaling front.
 
Last edited:
KazeoHin said:
You went immediately to the single most disappointing Call of Duty game in history?
Click to expand...
Not sure if this is fully serious of course, black Ops 7 was released what just a month ago, do people think that the decision regarding FSR redstrone ray generation was made post the disappointing launch ? That would be quite the last minute call and a quick implementation, I could easily even imagine that AMD plan was to have it ready for the game release, but it got delayed.

AMD got to be on arguably the biggest video game franchise in history new title, one they have a long history with, just great actual work/get by AMD teams, that was unlucky.
 
Last edited:
Earlier this year, I thought FSR was finally going to hit its stride with RDNA 4 hardware and Sony getting on board, and I was cautiously optimistic. Now almost a whole year has gone by, and nothing has changed. Image-quality comparisons are meaningless without broad support and a cohesive ecosystem, and I’m sorry to say that FSR feels just as far from catching up with DLSS 3.5 as it did back in February, to say nothing of DLSS 4. I’m still happy with my 9070 purchase because I was never going to pay $900 for a 5070 Ti back then (also wouldn’t pay $750 now), or settle for 12 GB VRAM in a 5070, but I’ve given up hope that FSR will ever become meaningful.
 
I got a 9070xt for exactly the same reasons, but I'm not sure I agree that nothing has changed. We got FSR4, FSR4 auto enhancement of FSR3 gamed, and now Redstone between April and December. Doesnt AMD have a pretty decent ecosystem of features going now? Practically everything I play is fsr3 with fsr4 enhancement available.

Redstone is bringing up the image quality to being neck and neck with DLSS4 and ray reconstruction is coming to games over the next couple of months to help close a good chunk of the RT performance gap.

How is this not a pretty good place for AMD to be considering they're massive underdog who has no choice but to copy the feature sets of Nvidia who has 90% of the market?

Seems like AMD is on the way up as being competitive and moving semi-quickly quickly at the moment?

If they keep this up they'll be at "close enough" to feature parity with Nvidia by end of Q1.
 
I guess it depends on your library. Out of the games I play, not a single one can use FSR 4 upscaling, not even through Optiscaler, and that hasn’t changed between February and now. I’m glad that others are having a different experience, though. It gives me hope, and I’d love to be proven wrong.
 
arthur_tuxedo said:
I guess it depends on your library. Out of the games I play, not a single one can use FSR 4 upscaling, not even through Optiscaler, and that hasn’t changed between February and now. I’m glad that others are having a different experience, though. It gives me hope, and I’d love to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...
Then those games also don't have DLSS 2.0 or higher.

Optiscaler can intercept DLSS calls, and use that to inject FSR. It doesn't work for every game with DLSS 2.0. But, it does work for most.

------------------------------------------
From Optiscaler Github:
https://github.com/OptiScaler/OptiScaler

How it works?​

  • OptiScaler acts as a middleware, it intercepts upscaler calls from the game (Inputs) and redirects them to the chosen upscaling backend (Output), allowing user to replace one technology with another one. Inputs -> OptiScaler -> Outputs
  • Or put more bluntly, Input is the upscaler used in game settings, and Output the one selected in Opti Overlay.
Note
  • Pressing Insert should open the Optiscaler Overlay in-game with all of the options (ShortcutKey= can be changed in the config file).
  • Pressing Page Up shows the performance stats overlay in the top left, and can be cycled between different modes with Page Down (keybinds customisable in the overlay).
  • If Opti overlay is instantly disappearing after trying Insert a few times, maybe try Alt + Insert (reported workaround for alternate keyboard layouts).
jllZGQ2ZDM3ZGUmWC1BbXotU2lnbmVkSGVhZGVycz1ob3N0In0.png
 
Very few of the games I play (mostly VR games) support any kind of upscaling, and most of them aren't demanding enough on my 9070 to bother with Optiscaler, I can just brute-force them with native rendering. If I had a 9060 XT, I'd probably need to use it a lot more. Portal RTX is the only game I've ever used Optiscaler with, and it made a moderate difference. It's a cool tool and I'm glad it exists, it just doesn't have much impact on my gaming experience right now. It's also not perfect in every game, according to their game list. Some games have artifacts, and others don't have the same performance boost as with a real DLSS card.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top