• 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.

RDNA 3 rumours Q3/4 2022

Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I still don't get peoples obsession with DLSS, as above if you have weak GPU just turn a few settings down, at least that way bits of it don't look like Minecraft.

If you have an RTX 3070 or higher, why would you even need it?
 
Associate
Joined
1 Oct 2020
Posts
576
I still don't get peoples obsession with DLSS, as above if you have weak GPU just turn a few settings down, at least that way bits of it don't look like Minecraft.

If you have an RTX 3070 or higher, why would you even need it?
Pushing higher screen rates on high resolutions is a big use case. Turning down setting is an option for sure, but if DLSS is available it tends to provide a good uplift for little, if any degradation. Certainly not a huge amount that I notice in gameplay at the very least.

I'm still not swayed on the "better than native" but having a 144hz UW screen means I am not maxing it in some games without DLSS, or some sort of upscaling.

NEED is a strong word. But it is a bonus.
 
Associate
Joined
22 Nov 2018
Posts
2,407
Humour me for a second, do you need dlss on more powerful GPUs? You get best image quality and more performance with more powerful GPUs or have people forgotten about that?

I don't look too get more powerful hardware to compromise

In 8 years time when the 3090 is £144 used, I'm sure DLSS would be a great help for 1080p gaming.

People forget that a lot of budget GPUs like the 980 Ti started off as high end.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Pushing higher screen rates on high resolutions is a big use case. Turning down setting is an option for sure, but if DLSS is available it tends to provide a good uplift for little, if any degradation. Certainly not a huge amount that I notice in gameplay at the very least.

I'm still not swayed on the "better than native" but having a 144hz UW screen means I am not maxing it in some games without DLSS, or some sort of upscaling.

NEED is a strong word. But it is a bonus.

Better than native is Nvidia marketing, some bits are pre rendered and sent with drivers, its literally just a fraction of a few scenes, its purely so they can tell reviewers where to look and which screen shots to use to which they then get sycophantic about "how it looks better than native" when the reality is the remaining 99% of the games doesn't. have you noticed how in the last two years driver size has tripled? a wopping 800MB now...

What annoys me about it, because i think its quite cynical, is how its marketed as a replacement for raw performance, its getting increasingly expensive to innovate real performance advancements, our shareholders are getting nervous, but its ok, we have this cheap way of getting around it, we simply render at a lower resolution and scale it up and people will love it because we have turned tech journalists in to sycophantic NPC's who at our whim tell people its actually better than having the raw muscle to drive pixels.
 
Last edited:
Associate
Joined
26 Jun 2015
Posts
280
In 8 years time when the 3090 is £144 used, I'm sure DLSS would be a great help for 1080p gaming.

People forget that a lot of budget GPUs like the 980 Ti started off as high end.
Yeah it's great for weak cards, but my point isn't about them. I want to ask people are they still gonna use or wish for dlss when they are upgrading to the high end.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,855
Humour me for a second, do you need dlss on more powerful GPUs? You get best image quality and more performance with more powerful GPUs or have people forgotten about that?

I don't look too get more powerful hardware to compromise
I still don't peoples obsession with DLSS, as above if you have weak GPU just turn a few settings down, at least that way bits of it don't look like Minecraft.

If you have an RTX 3070 or higher, why would you even need it?
I'll bite....

Because as proven by various tech press sites who do in depth comparisons/analysis (and no not just DF but TPU, gamers nexus, hardware unboxed, oc3d etc. [unless they are nvidia shills too?]) and the many many many consumers, it simply looks as good as native or in a lot of cases better because of its superior temporal stability and ability to render more detail and have less ghosting over 99% of the TAA implementations (which is about 95% of games now) and also it just so happens to increase performance substantially. What's not to like?

Why would you want to reduce graphical settings especially RT settings and get lesser IQ "overall" as a result because of refusing to use upscaling tech. is beyond me....

Unless you have got some footage/screenshots to show where DLSS is "significantly" harming IQ (outside of the hand picked scenes and not including dlss 1.0 comparisons....)?

I have a 3080 and play on a 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60 display, hitting 4k60 natively is easy enough with a 3080, however, I still use dlss because it gives better than native "overall" IQ, funnily dlss is more beneficial for me on my 3440x1440 175hz screen but obviously people with 100+hz 4k screens will find it extremely beneficial.

EDIT:

Better than native is Nvidia marketing, some bits are pre rendered and sent with drivers, its literally just a fraction of a few scenes, its purely so they can tell reviewers where to look and which screen shots to use to which they then get sycophantic about "how it looks better than native" when the reality is the remaining 99% of the games doesn't. have you noticed how in the last two years driver size has tripled? a wopping 800MB now...

What annoys me about it, because i think its quite cynical, is how its marketed as a replacement for raw performance, its getting increasingly expensive to innovate real performance advancements, our shareholders are getting nervous, but its ok, we have this cheap way of getting around it, we simple render at a lower resolution and scale it up and people will love it because we have turned tech journalists in to sycophantic NPC's who at our whim tell people its actually better than having the raw muscle to drive pixels.
How about all the consumers showing their own comparisons on reddit and other forums like here? Are they also shills? (this includes the people doing comparisons of FSR 2 too so it's not just "nvidia mindshare" bs that you like to keep hampering on about)
 
Associate
Joined
26 Jun 2015
Posts
280
I'll bite....

Because as proven by various tech press sites who do in depth comparisons/analysis (and no not just DF but TPU, gamers nexus, hardware unboxed, oc3d etc. [unless they are nvidia shills too?]) and the many many many consumers, it simply looks as good as native or in a lot of cases better because of its superior temporal stability and ability to render more detail and have less ghosting over 99% of the TAA implementations (which is about 95% of games now) and also it just so happens to increase performance substantially. What's not to like?

Why would you want to reduce graphical settings especially RT settings and get lesser IQ "overall" as a result because of refusing to use upscaling tech. is beyond me....

Unless you have got some footage/screenshots to show where DLSS is "significantly" harming IQ (outside of the hand picked scenes and not including dlss 1.0 comparisons....)?

I have a 3080 and play on a 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60 display, hitting 4k60 natively is easy enough with a 3080, however, I still use dlss because it gives better than native "overall" IQ, funnily dlss is more beneficial for me on my 3440x1440 175hz screen but obviously people with 100+hz 4k screens will find it extremely beneficial.
You didn't address anything I said, with more powerful hardware, why would you need to use dlss to compromise image quality. Think about that an upgrade cycle does.
 
Associate
Joined
26 Jun 2015
Posts
280
If you get 4k 60, FPS max settings in a game and it sticks with no drops or 1440p 120 FPS rock solid, what purpose does dlss serve
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I'll bite....

Because as proven by various tech press sites who do in depth comparisons/analysis (and no not just DF but TPU, gamers nexus, hardware unboxed, oc3d etc. [unless they are nvidia shills too?]) and the many many many consumers, it simply looks as good as native or in a lot of cases better because of its superior temporal stability and ability to render more detail and have less ghosting over 99% of the TAA implementations (which is about 95% of games now) and also it just so happens to increase performance substantially. What's not to like?

Why would you want to reduce graphical settings especially RT settings and get lesser IQ "overall" as a result because of refusing to use upscaling tech. is beyond me....

Unless you have got some footage/screenshots to show where DLSS is "significantly" harming IQ (outside of the hand picked scenes and not including dlss 1.0 comparisons....)?

I have a 3080 and play on a 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60 display, hitting 4k60 natively is easy enough with a 3080, however, I still use dlss because it gives better than native "overall" IQ, funnily dlss is more beneficial for me on my 3440x1440 175hz screen but obviously people with 100+hz 4k screens will find it extremely beneficial.

EDIT:


How about all the consumers showing their own comparisons on reddit and other forums like here? Are they also shills? (this includes the people doing comparisons of FSR 2 too so it's not just "nvidia mindshare" bs that you like to keep hampering on about)

How about all the consumers showing their own comparisons on reddit and other forums like here? Are they also shills?

Of course they are, even if they don't know it.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,855
You didn't address anything I said, with more powerful hardware, why would you need to use dlss to compromise image quality. Think about that an upgrade cycle does.
I did:

I have a 3080 and play on a 3440x1440 175hz and 4k60 display, hitting 4k60 natively is easy enough with a 3080, however, I still use dlss because it gives better than native "overall" IQ, funnily dlss is more beneficial for me on my 3440x1440 175hz screen but obviously people with 100+hz 4k screens will find it extremely beneficial.

See this bit too:

Unless you have got some footage/screenshots to show where DLSS is "significantly" harming IQ (outside of the hand picked scenes and not including dlss 1.0 comparisons....)?

The only times I see dlss "harming" IQ is from cherry picked scenes by people with an agenda or/and using older versions of dlss.

Of course they are, even if they don't know it.
Enough said :cry:


As per usual, seems amd reddit is a better place for getting better discussion, even they acknowledge the strengths of upscaling tech, be that dlss or fsr 2.

Remember, if you're going to go against the grain, at least post something to back up your statements.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
I did:



See this bit too:



The only times I see dlss "harming" IQ is from cherry picked scenes by people with an agenda or/and using older versions of dlss.


Enough said :cry:


As per usual, seems amd reddit is a better place for getting better discussion, even they acknowledge the strengths of upscaling tech, be that dlss or fsr 2.
Your signature says enough.
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
Yup it's very appropriate given how I seem to be the only one capable of posting any evidence or links to others testing to backup my claims unlike some :)

If you think that you don't know who Jimmy McGill is, he's a classic high functioning sociopath. its all about him, at any cost, truth doesn't come in to it.

Its a great show BTW.
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,855
This sounds all so familiar eh @tommybhoy
If you read rather than as usual echoing another person's post to suit your narrative, you would see I covered the reasons to use dlss even if performance is already there with native :rolleyes:

Reddit and forums are not on the approved official source list. Straight from the horses mouth.

Again read.... Humbug is saying it's only these bought for tech reviewers stating about dlss being better than native despite it also being the large consumer base also finding the same as per tech reviewers finding including amd fan base.... Seems like TPU, gamers nexus, hardware unboxed can only be trusted when they post news that certain people/sides want to hear but as soon as they post something that goes against said agenda, all of a sudden, they are bought for/bias :cry:

Better than native is Nvidia marketing, some bits are pre rendered and sent with drivers, its literally just a fraction of a few scenes, its purely so they can tell reviewers where to look and which screen shots to use to which they then get sycophantic about "how it looks better than native" when the reality is the remaining 99% of the games doesn't. have you noticed how in the last two years driver size has tripled? a wopping 800MB now...

So if tech reviewers can't be trusted and the consumer base of both brands can't be trusted then who can be trusted? An individual from some forum who posts nothing to back up his claims? :cry:
 
Caporegime
Joined
17 Mar 2012
Posts
41,175
Location
ARC-L1, Stanton System
If you read rather than as usual echoing another person's post to suit your narrative, you would see I covered the reasons to use dlss even if performance is already there with native :rolleyes:



Again read.... Humbug is saying it's only these bought for tech reviewers stating about dlss being better than native despite it also being the large consumer base also finding the same as per tech reviewers finding including amd fan base.... Seems like TPU, gamers nexus, hardware unboxed can only be trusted when they post news that certain people/sides want to hear but as soon as they post something that goes against said agenda, all of a sudden, they are bought for/bias :cry:



So if tech reviewers can't be trusted and the consumer base of both brands can't be trusted then who can be trusted? An individual from some forum who posts nothing to back up his claims? :cry:

I'm describing to you one of the ways DLSS works, you're a proponent of it, if you don't know how it works i'm not going to waste any of my time proving something to you that you should intrinsically understand as a proponent.

As for trust, again its not my job to convince you not to trust tech journalists, you either do or you don't, you have to arrive at that decision by yourself, as i have. A lot of them, not all, have a vested interest in keeping Nvidia on side, sometimes they even have their own agenda driven interests.

I have my reasons for taking what they publish with a large serving of salt. I'm not asking you to agree with me, what sort of a place of discussion would it be if we expected people to change their mind for our account?
 
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
26,855
I'm describing to you one of the ways DLSS works, you're a proponent of it, if you don't know how it works i'm not going to waste any of my time proving something to you that you should intrinsically understand as a proponent.

As for trust, again its not my job to convince you to trust tech journalists, you either do or you don't, you have to arrive at that decision by yourself, as i have. A lot of them, not all, have a vested interest in keeping Nvidia on side, sometimes they even have their own agenda driven interests.

I have my reasons for taking what they publish with a large serving of salt. I'm not asking you to agree with me, what sort of a place of discussion would it be if we expected people to change their mind for our account?
Why does it matter how it works? Do you really think people/the consumers care how the end results are achieved? End results being:

- better temporal stability
- achieving same/better IQ than native
- increasing performance substantially thus allowing graphical effects to be dialled up

As "backed up" by both tech reviewers and the consumers "evidence" in their footage. For my work, I don't go to my clients explaining how their software product works because they don't care, they care about the "experience and end result", simple as that.

"oh but it's cheating, you're still running lesser resolution" or whatever reason, who gives a flying **** :cry:

Again, it's on you to back up comments like this:

as above if you have weak GPU just turn a few settings down, at least that way bits of it don't look like Minecraft.

I have tried dlss myself and it matches exactly what the tech reviewers have shown. If you don't like it or don't want to use it for whatever excuse, that's fine, no one nor myself are convincing you to use it, just don't try to pass of your stance as "fact" when it is clearly wrong, especially when you don't post anything to strengthen your posts.
 
Top Bottom