• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Fidelity Super Resolution 2.0

Soldato
Joined
24 Oct 2005
Posts
15,840
Location
North East
I hope x4 gets fsr 2 as it needs badly a better aa option to get rid of shimmering imo. The inbuilt taa of fsr 2 would be nice to have in that.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
No I'm not, I'm saying you are gurning for the sake of gurning over a feature you didn't pay for.

I bought into Turing at launch for RTX then DLSS, aye that was amazing, **** RTX and even worse DLSS at that time.

Have you been using RTX/DLSS since launch when it was ****?

Again, if you read my post thoroughly, you would see that I cover all them points pretty well.....

In the "current" market, are you saying the only reason people buy nvidia gpus is purely for dlss and nothing else? As that is the only way it would classify as a "buy in cost" in todays market.... The only way I would agree with that was back when turing launched and dlss was the main selling point for turing where people did buy "solely" for the dlss feature and nothing else. "Now", things like DLSS, nvenc encoder, reflex, NIS etc. are all just bonuses when buying a nvidia card.

MSRP of 6800xt is £600 and 3080 is £650, depending on what you value and if you consider the extra £50 premium to be the "buy in cost" for dlss, I think most would agree that the extra £50 is very much worth it.....

You took my example to go "oh you classify that extra £50 as being the cost for buying into DLSS" when clearly I'm just using it as an example of why you "might" consider it to be a buy in in "todays" market.

I made it pretty clear that back with turing, dlss was the main selling point and very much a case of being a buy in, what makes it different "nowadays" is that every nvidia card since turing has access to dlss now thus I view it as simply being an extra bonus on top i.e. you aren't getting a choice of a nvidia card with dlss support and another one with no dlss support.... Same way I would view SAM, RIS etc. as being part of amds "bonuses/feature set" i.e. people don't buy AMD hardware just to get access to "SAM" and it's not something you get a say in if you want to buy a gpu without the support for it.... It's like saying people "buy into" dx 12, vulkan, VR etc. support.

That was why I did not buy turing because dlss and RT was the main selling points and they were **** back then.

You obviously have to buy hardware, the point is I didn't pay AMD a penny for 1060 FSR support, whereas I paid Nv for DLSS suport.

Maybe you need to word your posts better as when I read that, it just sounds to me like you are making out the only reason you and others buy into nvidia is for dlss, much like how you say in the next post that was why you bought into turing purely for RT and DLSS:

No I'm not, I'm saying you are gurning for the sake of gurning over a feature you didn't pay for.

I bought into Turing at launch for RTX then DLSS, aye that was amazing, **** RTX and even worse DLSS at that time.

Have you been using RTX/DLSS since launch when it was ****?




Added this to my last post:

Regardless of what you post to suit said narrative and getting back to the main point and topic at hand, you can't deny the following:

- FSR 2 uptake is slow as **** given amds own timing ETAs as shown in all their "PR" articles/talks

- FSR 2 is not in majority of games that either "need" it or that people "care" about, I suppose for budget/lesser rigs such as you expressed with your laptop example, then yes, it is a god send, however, being an enthusiast (what a surprise given the forum we're on) and having a good rig, it takes a lot more to impress me especially if amd want to win the likes of myself and others back next round of gpus.....

- FSR 2 results are rather disappointing given the length of time gamers (more so amd gamers) have been waiting for now, deathloop has been their poster boy for showing what FSR 2 can do and the results aren't quite there compared to their competitors feature, then when you look at other titles like FS, GOW, the results are even less impressive, it's almost like they spent so long purely on their showpiece i.e. deathloop that they forgot about other games....
 
Associate
Joined
1 Oct 2020
Posts
586
FSR 2 is not in majority of games that either "need" it or that people "care" about, I suppose for budget/lesser rigs such as you expressed with your laptop example, then yes, it is a god send, however, being an enthusiast (what a surprise given the forum we're on) and having a good rig, it takes a lot more to impress me especially if amd want to win the likes of myself and others back next round of gpus.....
And is this not exactly who upscaling technology is aimed at? Possibly not game changing for people with high end GPU trying to get from 40 to 70 fps, but if FSR 2 turns a game from unplayable to playable on a budget rig? Perfect.

Whether it's better or not is kind of irrelevant, if you're trying to game on some sort of budget you have to take what you're given, and having FSR is a god send in this case, as you say.

It's why I think upscaling is very important moving forward, not simply for more efficiency, but also to hopefully make more games available to more people. Cost is a huge problem to entry in gaming now, upscaling will improve the experience for so many.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
Q. How much did you an Nv user pay AMD to use FSR1/2?
A. NOTHING-its a FREE feature.

Then gurn and gurn about how said FREE feature is not as good as a paid for feature.:o

In that argument, one if us is biting the pillow face down and it aint me.:p

And resort to petty antics like replacing my post with "nonsense" because you can't address points as per usual :cry: :o

Do you think when people are paying in the same bracket for new gpus "now" that they will be using your logic in deciding which gpu to go for? Oh said competitor does this better but but but.... said other said company offer the feature for free to us even though they charge much the same as said competitor.....

If you can't understand where you are wrong or be open to seeing a different take (once again) then that's your problem, not mine :)

And is this not exactly who upscaling technology is aimed at? Possibly not game changing for people with high end GPU trying to get from 40 to 70 fps, but if FSR 2 turns a game from unplayable to playable on a budget rig? Perfect.

Whether it's better or not is kind of irrelevant, if you're trying to game on some sort of budget you have to take what you're given, and having FSR is a god send in this case, as you say.

It's why I think upscaling is very important moving forward, not simply for more efficiency, but also to hopefully make more games available to more people. Cost is a huge problem to entry in gaming now, upscaling will improve the experience for so many.

Of course if you're a budget gamer or/and and have older hardware then yes, FSR will be a godsend as I said in that post but the problem is:

- when you are charging pretty much the same as said competitors hardware "now"
- when said feature is not in titles that need it or/and titles that people care about

Also, it could be argued that playing at both 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60, high end gaming enthusiasts need upscaling tech just as much as budget gamers too.

AMD have made it very clear that they are a premium product/brand just like nvidia now with their pricing thus they need to start offering the same quality if they want to win back nvidia owners. Back at ampere launch, nvidia had/has RT perf. lead and DLSS, which is largely why a lot of us went for ampere over rdna 2 (whether people like it or not, that is what swayed it for a lot of people as attested by likes of HU [where they picked nvidia for every tier]), going forward with the next gen gpus right around the corner, they still aren't a match on the RT front obviously and their upscaling tech "still" is nowhere in the same league in both how it performs and the selection of games it's in (amd fans had you holding out hope since day 1 that amd would deliver a dlss "killer" without the need for hardware and that it would be the next coming yet from my POV, still waiting..... I'm impatient these days, I want to get the best experience now, not in 1, 2 or even 3 years time when the next best thing is out and newer/better games are out). Essentially where/how exactly are amd making the likes of myself and others in the same boat want to move back? If I go back to amd with rdna 3, as it is right now, I'm going lose a better upscaling tech, not just in terms of how it performs/looks but I'm going to lose access to it entirely, this is what amd needs to address, at the very least get it in more games "now" not in several months time.....

PS. nvidia do budget options too for the budget gamers entering the market "now" and in fact, having "access" to both dlss and fsr might even be worthwhile for them especially since dlss is in more games where upscaling tech is "needed"..... the biggest advantage for FSR is more so for the extreme older hardware where dlss can't be used at all i.e. you need 20xx onwards for dlss.
 
Associate
Joined
1 Oct 2020
Posts
586
I see where you're coming from with a lot of your points, but not sure on this one.
Also, it could be argued that playing at both 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60, high end gaming enthusiasts need upscaling tech just as much as budget gamers too.
Not sure need is the right word. Extra fidelity is lovely, but if you're targeting that segment its likely because you already have a gpu that can pretty much get there.

Lower down the chain, it could be the difference between physically being able to play it or not.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,498
Location
The KOP
Very disappointing show of FSR 2 games. This is why AMD have a hard time of winning back market share because they are way too late and then show up with tech that isn't as good and don't get their tech in games that "need" it or that people "want" to play....

What happened to this supposedly being very quick and easy to implement (the biggest pro that everyone kept going on about with FSR) especially if games already had dlss added? Is this just because amd have done what they usually do, throw it over the fence to developers and go do as you please?

Sniper elite 5 is a game that badly needs FSR 2, the shimmering is extremely noticeable and immersion breaking for me, probably the worst game I have played in last couple of years for it. I think this is AMD sponsored too so the chance of seeing dlss/dlaa is zero.

Geeez its been out like a month it will need time just like anything else does.

Remember DLSS was once only in a couple of games at one point. DLSS needed a full year before it started showing up strong now games release with it and I expect the same going forward for new titles.

Like FSR 1.0 it's the same story here that users like yourself was saying it's only in a couple titles now it's in just has much as dlss within a year.

FSR 2.0 will need a year to get a good understanding of the the up take on it.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
I see where you're coming from with a lot of your points, but not sure on this one.

Not sure need is the right word. Extra fidelity is lovely, but if you're targeting that segment its likely because you already have a gpu that can pretty much get there.

Lower down the chain, it could be the difference between physically being able to play it or not.
With a 3080 (and even a 3090 wouldn't get me the fps/settings I desire) at them resolutions/refresh rate and max settings, a 3080 isn't cutting it especially with heavy RT unless you use the lower presets of DLSS/FSR, more so if I am wanting to hit close to 175hz to get the best from oleds motion clarity.

A budget gamer won't care about graphics/visual or hitting >60 fps so will be more happy to compromise than likes of myself.

But agree, it's all subjective that side of things.

Geeez its been out like a month it will need time just like anything else does.

Remember DLSS was once only in a couple of games at one point. DLSS needed a full year before it started showing up strong now games release with it and I expect the same going forward for new titles.

Like FSR 1.0 it's the same story here that users like yourself was saying it's only in a couple titles now it's in just has much as dlss within a year.

FSR 2.0 will need a year to get a good understanding of the the up take on it.

Whilst technically true, amd have been doing all the pr etc. for ages now and going on about these things:

- making it so it is accessible on all kinds of hardware, they obviously nailed that and good on them but a bit pointless if it isn't getting into the games "now", what makes this worse is probably because nvidia have had this for the past 2+ years now..... if we were talking about only a couple of months, fine but 2+ years is a long time in the pc/gaming market
- making it so it has zero ghosting/motion issues given they and the amd fans give dlss **** over its ghosting/motion issues, however, FSR 2 hasn't achieved perfect motion either, look at the samples over on amd reddit where there is ghosting especially in FS, it's like dlss 1 levels
- making it so it is far easier and quicker to add than dlss, so far it doesn't look like it and going by developers comments, it's not as easy as amd fans will have you believe especially on the testing front.... more so with FSR 2 i.e. it will take just as long as dlss or perhaps even longer if not a plugin in the engine
- amd stated in their own pr article how if a game has dlss already, it is extremely quick:

sZP0ito.png


This is why I raised this point:

Is this just because amd have done what they usually do, throw it over the fence to developers and go do as you please?

Do they need to get more involved and help developers in order to get FSR 2 adopted more quickly? Part of me thinks it is very much this (especially when I think back to Roy's comments on things like tressfx and how they wanted to "come up with solutions and allow developers to use and add to it as they pleased" or something along those lines i.e. an over the fence approach), working in the development industry, I know first hand how hard it can be to implement 3rd party/vendors software without any support/guidance.

And your last point pretty much echoes my thoughts on this:

I'm impatient these days, I want to get the best experience now, not in 1, 2 or even 3 years time when the next best thing is out and newer/better games are out). Essentially where/how exactly are amd making the likes of myself and others in the same boat want to move back? If I go back to amd with rdna 3, as it is right now, I'm going lose a better upscaling tech, not just in terms of how it performs/looks but I'm going to lose access to it entirely, this is what amd needs to address, at the very least get it in more games "now" not in several months time.....
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
Good to see AMD users on amd reddit also expressing the same sentiments as myself :) Might force AMD to act quicker.



Ghost of war :p


Seems amd reddit is the place to be for logical reasoning/posts now:

I think Deathloop was essentially AMD’s equivalent to Control for Nvidia. A best case scenario as AMD likely worked with the devs to implement it. The real test for FSR is out in the wild where AMD is not involved.

Remember though chaps, it's free..... :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
Sadly the truth does seem to rustle jimmies :cry: Hence the lack of any real substance to try and debunk said points once again thus you get the usual fingers in ears, lets post one liners taking jabs to distract from the topic at hand :D

Tommy and co. be best taking their axe to grind over to amd reddit as there are a fair few unhappy punters over there too :eek: Seems they need to be told "it's free!!!!!!" :cry:




EDIT:

What do the amd owners think of GOW implementation then?
Satisfied with amds result? Or wish they would do better?
Would you still use it despite all the rather negative downsides as to how much it harms IQ in motion?
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
I couldn't use FSR2 with that image quality.
Couldn't have said it better.

I don't think even the early versions of dlss has ghosting this bad?!

KNVgmC4.png


Everyone is sensitive to different things but for me the kind of issues being shown with FSR 2 are a no go for me, shimmering, aliasing and those disocclusion issues are extremely immersion breaking in motion, I rather have slight ghosting over all of them (although not as bad as the above....). It's why I have stopped playing sniper elite 5 and I'm not even using FSR 1 in that! The native image is just awful for shimmering/aliasing, people say oh who cares about a thin line of a railing in the background but in SE 5, you have loads of railings, thin fences, power lines, foliage etc. so the issue is right in your face....

Would love to know why dlss is considerably ahead, is it down to having the optimisation/implementation more or less nailed after all this time or/and is the hardware just making it that much better?

Will AMD sort this with optimisation over time? Or do they need hardware to assist with getting it on par with dlss? If so, does that mean if people want to see good results or at least be free of these issues, they'll have to upgrade to RDNA 3 (assuming amd add hardware to help)?
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,498
Location
The KOP
Sadly the truth does seem to rustle jimmies :cry: Hence the lack of any real substance to try and debunk said points once again thus you get the usual fingers in ears, lets post one liners taking jabs to distract from the topic at hand :D

Tommy and co. be best taking their axe to grind over to amd reddit as there are a fair few unhappy punters over there too :eek: Seems they need to be told "it's free!!!!!!" :cry:




EDIT:

What do the amd owners think of GOW implementation then?
Satisfied with amds result? Or wish they would do better?
Would you still use it despite all the rather negative downsides as to how much it harms IQ in motion?

Not something I have noticed when playing tbh
I haven't played much though with FSR 2.0 just got past a boss fight I was on.
 
Soldato
Joined
4 Jan 2009
Posts
2,643
Location
Derby
My 1060 3gb lasted a while longer when I used NIS. I didn’t buy a 3060 for rtx or dlss, I just wanted a better card at a decent price, thanks to Nvidia I could get one ‘eventually’.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,498
Location
The KOP
Does anyone have video footage of god of war FSR 2.0 running on rdna vs nvidia?

Supposedly RDNA 2 does a better job going from few posts on reddit.

I have watched back footage from 6800xt and I can not see anything that digital foundry is highlighting. But mind you the gameplay I am watching isn't slowed down or framed to loop either.

I'll play around with my own game later and see if I can see anything myself.

Edit
FSR 2.0 in God of War is simply broken in its current state. No chance this is what FSR 2.0 is intended to be like.
Just like in the past DLSS got its fair share of criticism when the game showed a bad image Battlefiled I believe was one title back then.
God of war FSR 2.0 is quite bad I have a 4k video processing to show what I mean.
 
Last edited:
Soldato
Joined
21 Jul 2005
Posts
16,722
Location
N.Ireland
Yep DLSS 1.0 was rubbish, most said it was like vaseline. Ages later they got better and with 2.0 was something to shout about. To simply expect first attempt to be awesome is unfair, much like AMD with their first ray tracing attempt. Let's also remember when Intel actually release a GPU they will have to go through the same iterations. The difference between AMD and Intel is they have other markets to work with whereas nvidia just focus on dominating the GPU segment.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,867
Video attached showing the glitch around kratos looks like it's bugging out defo a bug and not how FSR 2.0 should be running.

Noticed you had film grain and motion blur on. Might be worthwhile disabling post processing effects like that.
 
Soldato
OP
Joined
25 Nov 2011
Posts
20,498
Location
The KOP
Can you upload your save for that level to test on Nv?
I'm on a different level but I don't get that on Nv using FSR [email protected]

I have uploaded to dropbox try this link https://www.dropbox.com/s/3jbjlajpuonffz1/game.zip?dl=0

Noticed you had film grain and motion blur on. Might be worthwhile disabling post processing effects like that.

Will have a mess later with some settings. It might very well just be this area that is bugging out.
 
Top Bottom