Avatar image for deactivated-642321fb121ca
deactivated-642321fb121ca

7142

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 20

User Lists: 0

#1 deactivated-642321fb121ca
Member since 2013 • 7142 Posts

Found this interesting, glad I was wrong about the final product.

https://www.techpowerup.com/review/amd-fidelity-fx-fsr-20/

Sometimes better than DLSS.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#2 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23829 Posts

That's one game, and even then its a cherry picked example from AMD from the beginning. We need more games to properly compare it. Even still you can see FSR 2.0 is still having issues with missing pieces of detail in objects like wires and fences vs DLSS. Also FSR 2 looks a little more blurred compared to DLSS in motion. But FSR 2.0 is heading into the right direction keeping Nvidia on their toes.

Avatar image for 04dcarraher
04dcarraher

23829

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#4 04dcarraher
Member since 2004 • 23829 Posts

I wonder if Nvidia could or wants to throw a major wrench into AMD's FSR and intel's xess..... to make their solution the prominent feature to use instead of the others. By taking DLSS and convert the temporal upscaling workload to the shader processors allowing a more open sourced approach allowing other brands and or older gpus able to do the upscaling. However have a caveat where DLSS works best with gpu's with Tensor cores.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17808

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#5 BassMan
Member since 2002 • 17808 Posts

@04dcarraher said:

That's one game, and even then its a cherry picked example from AMD from the beginning. We need more games to properly compare it. Even still you can see FSR 2.0 is still having issues with missing pieces of detail in objects like wires and fences vs DLSS. Also FSR 2 looks a little more blurred compared to DLSS in motion. But FSR 2.0 is heading into the right direction keeping Nvidia on their toes.

The motion clarity is the big one. Too many people are focused on the static image when in reality the viewport is in motion most of the time. This has been one of the major strengths of DLSS vs. traditional TAA. It is much clearer in motion. A good display like an OLED further enhances motion clarity.

Avatar image for BassMan
BassMan

17808

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 225

User Lists: 0

#6  Edited By BassMan
Member since 2002 • 17808 Posts
Loading Video...

So, better than 1.0 but still struggles with motion and transparencies.

Avatar image for tanalgaov
tanalgaov

1

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 5

#7  Edited By tanalgaov
Member since 2023 • 1 Posts

So I'm playing The Witcher 3 on a handheld device that has a native 1200P resolution. If I play the game on native resolution with FSR disabled, I get around 30 FPS. I tried the following options:

Option 1: Set the in-game resolution to native (1200P) then enable FSR 2.0 and set to "Balanced". With this setting, I can hit 60 FPS with LOW settings and the in-game texts are much crisp. I also don't see that big of a difference in terms of the resolution being "scaled down". https://omegle.onl/

Option 2: Set the in-game resolution to 800P then enable FSR 2.0 and set to "Quality. With this setting, I can hit 60 FPS with medium to high settings but the in-game texts are more blurry. With this setting, the overall graphic quality is noticeably blurrier.

I have the following questions:

  1. Do you think Option #1 is better in this scenario?
  2. I've read that for FSR to work, you need to lower the in-game resolution. If that's the case, why does Option #1 boost my FPS if I didn't lower the native resolution?