At inference time, our neural network takes as input the rendering attributes (color, depth map and dense motion vectors per frame) of both current and multiple previous frames, rendered at a low resolution. The output of the network is a high-resolution color image corresponding to the current frame. The network is trained with supervised learning. At training time, a reference image that is rendered at the high resolution with anti-aliasing methods, paired with each low-resolution input frame, is provided as the target image for training optimization.
Now we need an image comparison between DLSS and RadeonFX...because claiming stuff is easy, when there are no comparsion.With DLSS or Radeon FX, an RTX 2060 Super can hit 60fps at 4K with minimal adjustments to quality in Death Stranding
ExtremeTech mention THG & ArsTechnicaNow we need an image comparison between DLSS and RadeonFX...because claiming stuff is easy, when there are no comparsion.
Until then I would not consider them "equal"...and neither should you.
Again, I need data (pictures, videoes) because I don't trust the "eyes of reviewers"...I still shudder about the hexagonal "circle" reflections in "Noir", something most reviewers and people missed completely.ExtremeTech mention THG & ArsTechnica
THG and Ars Technica have performance write-ups. The latter tested a 2016 Alienware laptop with a GTX 1060, similar to my own, and found that the system is capable of 60fps at 1440p if you activate AMD’s FidelityFX CAS and use 1440p (ironically, 1440p runs faster than 1080p, according to their testing). Death Stranding also includes a few missions with ties to the Half-Life and Portal universe — these are described as nice tie-ins, but not being worth the price of purchase in and of themselves.
According to Ars, while DLSS 2.0 improves performance on the RTX 2060 Super, AMD’s FidelityFX CAS apparently improves performance more, with better visual fidelity. This is not to imply DLSS 2.0 performs poorly: THG notes that using DLSS 2.0 can boost a desktop RTX 2060 up to 77fps, well above the 60fps threshold.
One interesting difference is THG and Ars award different winners in terms of overall image quality. When describing AMD’s FidelityFX, THG writes: “[T]he sharpening and upscaling causes some visible shimmer. It’s not terrible, and it’s a way to boost framerates that some people will undoubtedly appreciate, but the effect was certainly noticeable when moving around.” Here’s Ars: “FidelityFX CAS preserves a slight bit more detail in the game’s particle and rain systems, which ranges from a shoulder-shrug of, ‘yeah, AMD is a little better’ most of the time to a head-nod of, ‘okay, AMD wins this round’ in rare moments.” Ars takes note of several places where DLSS still struggles with rendering, where AMD FidelityFX renders things perfectly
Again, I need data (pictures, videoes) because I don't trust the "eyes of reviewers"...I still shudder about the hexagonal "circle" reflections in "Noir", something most reviewers and people missed completely.
Very convenient that this is lacking...
There is a reason we read reviews and look at the presented data and not just take your word for anything.
Both Digital Foundry and Hardware Unboxed did VERY detailed dive into previous DLSS 2.0 titles and found them to be quite remarkable. MUCH better than a simple resize and sharpen.
IIRC, Metro has DLSS 1.0 which has to be trained with each game. Probably was trained with HDR off. Yet another reason why DLSS 1.0 sucked. It's fragile. If the conditions it was trained under change, it can break.Also, I just got an HDR monitor and I noticed DLSS doesn't work right with HDR.
At least on Metro, not sure there are a lot of other games with DLSS and HDR but it definitely messed that game up (super faded colors).
So I did some more testing. I think Gears 5 was not the best implementation for render scaling.
Was getting all sorts of choppiness and there are a bunch of people with the same issue (nothing to do with AMD).
However, I downloaded Rage 2 to the AMD machine and it works a lot better. In this case, I could set resolution as low as 720p and it still looked okay.
I mean, it was playable at 720p (if a little soft) but with about 50% better performance. 900p seemed more like the sweet spot, and it looked great.
Note that in Rage it said Fidelity FX Sharpening and Upscaling, so maybe this is something more than Gears is doing.
So maybe this is more comparable to DLSS than I initially thought. Not sure how hard it is to implement, but AMD seems to have a decent roster of games using it so far.
Also, not sure if people realize, it works equally on AMD and Nvidia GPUs, so that would be a big reason for developers to support it over being locked to Nvidia.