More DLSS...

polonyc2 said:
of course there is...DLSS has been proven in independent tests to be the superior upscaling tech over FSR
Click to expand...

It's simple, the consoles dont use DLSS and game developers are focused on making it work on consoles. Hate to tell you but DLSS would take more work to verify and they obviously don't feel it's worth it since FSR works on Nvidia cards and Intel. It simply comes down to costs and as a developer I am not likely to sink extra money into something that is almost always over budget and behind schedule for a feature only some people would benefit from. Not everything in life is some huge conspiracy, it's just obvious business sense.
 
Gideon said:
It's simple, the consoles dont use DLSS and game developers are focused on making it work on consoles. Hate to tell you but DLSS would take more work to verify and they obviously don't feel it's worth it since FSR works on Nvidia cards and Intel. It simply comes down to costs and as a developer I am not likely to sink extra money into something that is almost always over budget and behind schedule for a feature only some people would benefit from. Not everything in life is some huge conspiracy, it's just obvious business sense.
Click to expand...
This is a great explanation, if it wasn't patently false.

Adding DLSS is just as easy as adding FSR. The fact that a developer adds FSR but purposely omits DLSS says worlds and the fact that AMD is already getting a pass for this by the usual suspects is fucking mind boggling.

To top it off, AMD and Nvidia's comments regarding this issue tells you everything you need to know. AMD doesn't even address the concern head-on.

To clarify, there are community sites that track the implementation of upscaling technologies, and these sites indicate that there are a number of games that support only DLSS currently (for example, see link).


AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution is an open-source technology that supports a variety of GPU architectures, including consoles and competitive solutions, and we believe an open approach that is broadly supported on multiple hardware platforms is the best approach that benefits developers and gamers. AMD is committed to doing what is best for game developers and gamers, and we give developers the flexibility to implement FSR into whichever games they choose.


AMD Spokesperson
Click to expand...

While Nvidia answers the question straight forward.

NVIDIA does not and will not block, restrict, discourage, or hinder developers from implementing competitor technologies in any way. We provide the support and tools for all game developers to easily integrate DLSS if they choose and even created NVIDIA Streamline to make it easier for game developers to add competitive technologies to their games.
Keita Iida, vice president of developer relations, NVIDIA
Click to expand...
 
Gideon said:
It's simple, the consoles dont use DLSS and game developers are focused on making it work on consoles. Hate to tell you but DLSS would take more work to verify and they obviously don't feel it's worth it since FSR works on Nvidia cards and Intel. It simply comes down to costs and as a developer I am not likely to sink extra money into something that is almost always over budget and behind schedule for a feature only some people would benefit from. Not everything in life is some huge conspiracy, it's just obvious business sense.
Click to expand...
One way to speculate it would be to look is it significantly more common on AMD sponsored games than overall (if the sample size is big enough), if the answer is no it happens as often for non AMD sponsor title than for the sponsored one, then you would be probably right.
 
Marees said:
No. FSR 2.2 does the job. Check the medium post I linked above
Click to expand...
No, it doesn't. In some of the most recent releases that only have FSR, the game runs better on my PC with it left turned off than being turned on at any quality.
Gideon said:
It's simple, the consoles dont use DLSS and game developers are focused on making it work on consoles. Hate to tell you but DLSS would take more work to verify and they obviously don't feel it's worth it since FSR works on Nvidia cards and Intel. It simply comes down to costs and as a developer I am not likely to sink extra money into something that is almost always over budget and behind schedule for a feature only some people would benefit from. Not everything in life is some huge conspiracy, it's just obvious business sense.
Click to expand...
"Some people"
Last I checked, NVIDIA still holds 80% of the discrete GPU market. Yes, I know that includes pre-Turing hardware, but the share of owners with Turing or newer is going to continuing growing.

The DLSS SDK and Streamline are freely available to developers. Streamline easily integrates all current deep learning upscaling algorithms into your project, including FSR. There is no licensing cost involved.
ZeroBarrier said:
This is a great explanation, if it wasn't patently false.

Adding DLSS is just as easy as adding FSR. The fact that a developer adds FSR but purposely omits DLSS says worlds and the fact that AMD is already getting a pass for this by the usual suspects is fucking mind boggling.

To top it off, AMD and Nvidia's comments regarding this issue tells you everything you need to know. AMD doesn't even address the concern head-on.



While Nvidia answers the question straight forward.
Click to expand...
I'd bet that the NVIDIA haters didn't even know that NVIDIA has a toolkit that easily integrates DLSS, XeSS, and FSR at the same time. Not to mention that DLSS is baked into both Unreal Engine 4 and 5. It takes the developer time and effort to remove DLSS support from games on Unreal Engine. Why would developers be doing that if not for the demands of their benefactor?
 
Armenius said:
I'd bet that the NVIDIA haters didn't even know that NVIDIA has a toolkit that easily integrates DLSS, XeSS, and FSR at the same time. Not to mention that DLSS is baked into both Unreal Engine 4 and 5. It takes the developer time and effort to remove DLSS support from games on Unreal Engine. Why would developers be doing that if not for the demands of their benefactor?
Click to expand...
Star Wars: Jedi Survivor anyone?
 
ZeroBarrier said:
This is a great explanation, if it wasn't patently false.

Adding DLSS is just as easy as adding FSR. The fact that a developer adds FSR but purposely omits DLSS says worlds and the fact that AMD is already getting a pass for this by the usual suspects is fucking mind boggling.

To top it off, AMD and Nvidia's comments regarding this issue tells you everything you need to know. AMD doesn't even address the concern head-on.



While Nvidia answers the question straight forward.
Click to expand...

Which just speaks to being ignorant of how game, or really software, development works. Dev's have limited time & resources to do stuff when working on games. FSR 2.x gets you upscaling across everything, all PC's and Consoles. Green lighting more time and QA to get a vendor locked PC only feature in place... is very likely not to get ok'ed by a manager jungling his teams time.

AMD's response though, was a brain dead standard PR answer. Super stupid.
 
TrunksZero said:
Which just speaks to being ignorant of how game, or really software, development works. Dev's have limited time & resources to do stuff when working on games. FSR 2.x gets you upscaling across everything, all PC's and Consoles. Green lighting more time and QA to get a vendor locked PC only feature in place... is very likely not to get ok'ed by a manager jungling his teams time.

AMD's response though, was a brain dead standard PR answer. Super stupid.
Click to expand...
Bullshit, and everyone already knows it. Dedicating more dev time in stripping dlss out of UE is the exact opposite of your defense. and this is something we already know about Jedi Survivor. Stop defending this, this is not the fucking hill to die on.
 
IF AMD and Nvidia have some “unspoken rules” regarding game sponsorship then even asking the dev studios will probably go nowhere since who is going to sabotage future deals by going public.

It’s fairly safe to assume both the major GPU players are going to engage in some screw your neighbor tactics and ultimately it’s not consumer friendly to push games away from features people may want.
 
ZeroBarrier said:
Bullshit, and everyone already knows it. Dedicating more dev time in stripping dlss out of UE is the exact opposite of your defense. and this is something we already know about Jedi Survivor. Stop defending this, this is not the fucking hill to die on.
Click to expand...

It's worth debating because your ignorant of how this works. While the plug-in is there and getting it functional is easy... getting it working properly takes extra time. Not to mention, the more you modify UE for your game, the more QA you have to do to ensure the default implementation is working properly.

A hill to die on? No. But your spreading misinformation by saying it's easier than it is.
 
TrunksZero said:
It's worth debating because your ignorant of how this works. While the plug-in is there and getting it functional is easy... getting it working properly takes extra time. Not to mention, the more you modify UE for your game, the more QA you have to do to ensure the default implementation is working properly.

A hill to die on? No. But your spreading misinformation by saying it's easier than it is.
Click to expand...
You are the one spreading the misinformation here. In any case I'm done debating with someone defending this bullshit, I'll just ignore your from here on out.
 
ZeroBarrier said:
You are the one spreading the misinformation here. In any case I'm done debating with someone defending this bullshit, I'll just ignore your from here on out.
Click to expand...
??? Chill out abit, I don't understand your stance. You can't just turn on the DLSS plug-in and expect it to work properly. Same goes for FSR 2.x. You have to do some QA to ensure it's working properly.
 
Armenius said:
"Some people"
Last I checked, NVIDIA still holds 80% of the discrete GPU market. Yes, I know that includes pre-Turing hardware, but the share of owners with Turing or newer is going to continuing growing.
Click to expand...

Well were talking around 52 million current generation consoles and counting and then you have 28 million peak active users in Steam. You then have to average out the % that have DLSS capable cards. Seems obvious to me which one I would spend far more time on, rather then investing more time and money into the smaller install base. Nvidia sells lots of cards but many were lower end, same for AMD. Higher end cards that run all these features is not a super high % of Steam users.
 
ZeroBarrier said:
Hilariously, the unoffical mod to add dlss makes the game run way better than fsr. You can't even make this shit up.
Click to expand...
I know, not only is quality better, but with Frame Gen its smooth as hell too from what I have seen. If it was not for the fact my 4090 actually plows through this game decently without it and I do not need FSR, I'd have almost paid the $5 for the mod. But screw that, should have been in the game from the start. I just run it with nvidia freestyle sharpening and it looks and plays well enough at 4K.
 
TheHig said:
Finally if I’m a dev with a limited budget and can dedicate time and money into only one upscaler would I choose the one that works for all GPUs? Probably. Even if it’s not the absolute best solution.
Click to expand...

This isn't a reason. IF you are using TAA in your game or are using any of the major game engines, both DLSS and FSR are easy to implement. Or are you really suggesting that Respawn, the game studio behind Apex Legends, could only afford to put FSR but not DLSS into Star Wars: Jedi Survivor?
 
Not at all. I can believe that some suit / bean counter type would arbitrarily choose whatever is easiest and cheapest though. Or cater to whoever is writing the checks.

I’m not in the game development space at all so I have no idea what really goes on there. As a consumer I would like to see the big studios that do have the $$ support as many technologies as possible. I’m always looking for native performance myself and think upscaling tech is a nice to have and useful. The downside of it is games getting pushed out with shitty optimization and relying on DLSS or FSR etc to make up for it. That is just bad for PC gaming in the long run imo.
 
Gideon said:
Seems obvious to me which one I would spend far more time on, rather then investing more time and money into the smaller install base.
Click to expand...
The implementation of DLSS and FSR in games is trivial these days. They are included in game engines. There is almost zero development time and cost. With Unity and Unreal it's almost literally tick the box to enable.

Gideon said:
Well were talking around 52 million current generation consoles and counting and then you have 28 million peak active users in Steam.
Click to expand...

Your Seam Figures are way off. the 28 million figure is the number of concurrent players playing online on all once, and that's not right either, as it has reached 33 million this year. There are 130 million active monthly users on Steam. If you check the hardware survey there are over 40% of Steam gamers using cards that are capable of DLSS. That's over 50 million gamers.
 
TheHig said:
Not at all. I can believe that some suit / bean counter type would arbitrarily choose whatever is easiest and cheapest though.
Click to expand...

No, it's nothing to do with that. The costs have already been paid if you are using a game engine.

TheHig said:
Or cater to whoever is writing the checks.
Click to expand...

And this is kind of the point. There really are no development or cost reasons for not using both techs in your game. One man studios have no problem doing it. So, somebody, somewhere has made the decision not use DLSS in their game based on other factors. The games that haven't DLSS are all AMD sponsored.

Coincidence? I will let you decide.
 
reaper12 said:
No, it's nothing to do with that. The costs have already been paid if you are using a game engine.



And this is kind of the point. There really are no development or cost reasons for not using both techs in your game. One man studios have no problem doing it. So, somebody, somewhere has made the decision not use DLSS in their game based on other factors. The games that haven't DLSS are all AMD sponsored.

Coincidence? I will let you decide.
Click to expand...
Here is the funny thing about it too, FSR works on all cards, so why would AMD actually tell these studios not to use DLSS as well? It's not like anyone is going to drop their nvidia card to buy an AMD card if the feature works on nvidia anyway (although FSR looks like garbage vs. DLSS IMO). The only reason would be DLSS 3.0 and Frame Generation. AMD cards get absolutely shit stomped by this feature and my guess is AMD does not want that in the benchmarks for these games they "sponsor" (although I like the Steam threads saying "Ruined by AMD" instead).
 
I run Jedi Survivor with FSR off. I get weird artifacting with it on and no real fps benefit. RTX is still broken on one of the planets and only fixes the poor SSR but not enough to warrant it on compared to a game like Cyberpunk where rtx and full path tracing actually made the world look realistic (HDR + path tracing). HDR and path tracing in that game actually made a bright sunny day in game look like it was a scorching heat day.
 
It'd be nice if the game devs would actually fix some of their shitty current implementations of DLSS and DLAA.
 
reaper12 said:
The games that haven't DLSS are all AMD sponsored.

Coincidence? I will let you decide.
Click to expand...
No, AMD doesn't sponsor that many games, doesn't sponsor all of the games which Nvidia does not sponsor.

What you said, is something the internet made up. And then collectively agree'd that it sounds like it must be the reason for the sky falling.

Elden Ring sold over 20 million copies and got an Ray Tracing patch. Isn't sponsored by anyone and doesn't have DLSS or FSR. That's a huge fail for both Nvidia and AMD, for not building a relationship with Fromsoftware.

Nvidia and AMD both could be doing a lot more, to make sure that developers know about their technologies earlier in the development cycle---and implement those technologies with good results. Sponsored game or not. From the information we have seen, it seems remarkably hands-off-----except for when its not, I guess. Even then, it can still somehow result in a mess. See: Cyberpunk supposedly had close work with Nvidia. Yet, the Ray Reconstruction mode looked like butt upon release. Maybe it still does?---I don't play that game.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top