To be honest, he can talk about anything and I'll watch it. There's something about the way he speaks that makes me feel comforted.

@@peterpcholkin1842 yeah definitely, same here

@@peterpcholkin1842 reported for sexually suggestive content

Gay

@@grilledlettuce1845 Are you in denial?

I'll be honest with you, I didn't even know ACC had a VR option lol, I thought it was only AC. I'm too broke for VR atm but that is good to hear since I play ACC a ton and I know how crap VR can run sometimes. I always commend AMD for their open source projects and general availability, such as the "hairworks" thing we saw years ago and also freesync vs gsync

@@smothdude ACC VR is apparently very bad and has been in that state since launch. I don't have VR myself but I haven't heard a single positive thing about ACC's VR... If this actually makes it playable that would be huge.

The more open source mindset of AMD is what gets me, i cant hate it

Yeah Chivalry 2 uses it by default and its pretty good, comparable to FSR (also requires TAA). As bonus you can pick specific scaling instead of choosing arbitrary levels

In addition, Temporal Super Resolution actually already available since Unreal Engine 4.26.

it dog shit that why no one use it, check avengers game dlss is better than native because it uses taa . these new tricks are the future dlss and amd fsr 2.0 not 1.0 which will be launched with rdna 3 using hardware accelerator

@@samdovakin2977 Except that Avengers uses Crystal Dynamics's own engine, not Unreal Engine 4. Unreal's temporal upscaling is miles better than Avengers engine's TAA, holding up fairly clean frames in 50% screen resolution.

Anything temporal (except RT) is painful imo.

Yeah. Nvidia says DLSS requires Tensor cores so why do people want Nvidia to port it to the SteamDeck? It's not possible. FSR for the win. PS: FSR is open source so if anyone wants to know how it works they can just look at the code.

The problem is, there are better ways of upscaling than FSR already. Temporal Anti-Aliasing Upscaling is platform agnostic and looks better than FSR, many game engines already have it built into their resolution scaler. Although you can combine the two.

that is exactly why DLSS is so much better. Anything you do has drawbacks and advantages. DLSS - proprietary, better looking FSR - open source, worse looking Of course, this is also a power move by NVIDIA but hey, when you have the brand power NVIDIA has, you can pull things like this. Yes, this is a trend with NVIDIA vs AMD, like it happened to G-Sync vs FreeSync. But NVIDIA isn't daft, as soon as both techs kinda hit their ceiling they opened their graphics cards to work with FreeSync as well. But, at the end of the day, NVIDIA cards are simply better. Period. If you ever do some professional work (blender for example) you'll know what I mean. And no, I don't mean speed, I mean quality. You'd go bonkers if you saw NVIDIA's software team. I have professors that have worked with them, and it's kinda insane Edit: Just to be clear, when I say "so much better" it really only applies to pixel peeping. Just playing the game normally the difference is barely noticeable (except with text maybe, FSR seems to still struggle)

@@SilenceGProd God bless the guys at AMD, it's admirable how much they care about open-source software.

@@PPedroFernandes DLSS isn't actually proprietary. It just requires tensor cores on the die.

Keep looking forward, always keep looking forward.

The Xess!

Why? XeSS will require intel hardware but it also has an "open version" which don't. It's a pretty stupid approach. AMD and Intel should have teamed up on making "FSR/XESS" as ONE feature instead of this. I don't think XeSS will get much attention tbh. Lets talk again in 1-2-3 years...

same, Intel has lots of knowledge when it comes to neural network image enhancing, similar to Nvidia and unlike AMD.

@@Dr.WhetFarts That's foolish to say. The open version is only there because there will be intel chips without XMX support which is needed for XeSS so they are releasing an open version for all GPU's supporting DP4A technology as such they are just catering for themselves. That's why it's always better to buy Intel or Nvidia if you have the money.

FSR is actually way better in realistic scenario of playing in 1080p or 1440p at balanced presets.

FSR seems to only do temporal AA, upscaling and unsharp mask. You can do that yourself with any hardware ever built. Nothing impressive about it and results look like expected.

@@aleksazunjic9672 no it isn't, stop lying.

@@oxfordsparky wipe your nose :P

@@MrBluelightzero Same here

In ue4.25 the installation was a bit tricky. You had to install a custom version of unreal. Took about 30 minutes or so. In 4.26+ you need to download their plugin from the nvidia developer website(there is a direct link in the unreal marketplace). Then you drag the plugin file into the plugin folder and press a checkbox to enable it in the plugin list. Past that there are options to disable TAA in reflections and a slider for sharpness. Although no dev has done this to my knowledge, you should be able to disable DLSS sharpening and use FSR's superior CAS sharpening, which may improve visual quality. For FSR you have to do a git install of a patch. I have never done that before, but it looks similar to installing stuff on linux. Requires a bit more technical knowledge than a plugin file. Past that you have settings to change the render floating point from 32 to 16 and a setting specifically for Nvidia GPUS that fixes errors with that change in floating points. You have options for Mipmapping and then a list of options for CAS (the thing that actually makes FSR look good). An option for... HDR PQ Dither Amount? Then ways to make FSR happen before film grain and Abberation, which is great. And ontop of this, you can enable a setting to make FSR run after another upscaler. So maybe 1080p>1440p dlss/TAA-U than 1440p>4k FSR. Which may be interesting. personally, reading through the documentation and trying out DLSS. DLSS is a bit easier to install and setup in Unreal Engine. But neither seems difficult enough to where it would actually matter. Any UE dev may as well install both

nVidia is not technically more powerful. FSR is much more useful where it counts - in 1080p or 1440p resolution. Even if you have nVidia card, it is better to use FSR .

@@aleksazunjic9672 sadly not true. Where FSR beats DLSS is at 4k in some cases. This is because FSR is given 1-2 million points of information, which it can easily mask and process. Vs DLSS, which is made to take tiny amounts of information and generate new data in the missing parts. 1-2m data points is a bit excessive for DLSS, but 0.5m data points (720p) is more than enough for DLSS to make a good 1080p or 1440p image. Its nowhere close to enough for FSR. What FSR truly does better is twofold: 1. Contrast Adaptive Sharpening. their sharpening filter, which is just another tech from amd, is amazing and probably the best in the industry under super sampling. 2. No motion vectors. For games made before 2016 or on very low tech platforms. Dlss and TAA-U (the best hardware agnostic upscaler) both require motion vectors. FSR does not, so 2d games and older 3d games are only compatible with fsr. Outside of those situations, TAA-U is a better hardware agnostic approach and DLSS is better at upscaling from lower resolutions (as stated in the video above). At the end of the day, if your a small dev using a pre built engine. Just include both. If your a big dev, Nvidia and AMD will send engineers over to implement them for you. Both have their upsides and nobody will complain about having more options

@@CFIREKytb Well, nope. What FSR actually does is rendering models at lower resolution and then simply upscaling them plus some anti-aliasing and other "smoothing" . Performance to quality is mostly related to this drop in resolution - it is similar to resolution scaling which some games already have natively. Where FSR works best is a situation when your GPU could let's say run game in 1080p high, but you want to play in 1440p . In this case FSR with balanced/high settings could give you decent FPS bust in 1440p with minimal quality loss. DLSS is quite a different attempt - you need to have very high images pre-rendered , and then your GPU attempts to "guess" which of lower quality images it produces matches to those high quality pre-rendered data. Obviously, this often fails miserably, especially if you didn't train AI enough in your game, and if your GPU does not have enough time to guess correct picture . As a rule of thumb. DLSS works best in AAA titles with high budget and with high-end cards (that would actually run game nicely even without DLSS :D ) . From a consumer and developer side of things, DLSS is simply not worth of effort. FSR gives consistently better results in most cases where your GPU is slightly "bellow the curve" (lets say you have 20 FPS and want solid 30+ FPS experience) . DLSS works better only in some impractical corner cases.

Isnt FSR AMD only?

@@faultboy nah it’s on NVIDIA cards too

what resolution tho? in 1080p i agree anything below ultra quality is garbage

at this point DLSS vs FSR is just another situation like G-Sync vs Freesync, the open source technology will eventually take over.

@@faultboy works eith basically anything, but it is and will be more optimised through newer radeon drivers. Although Nvidia could technically optimise their drivers as well for it if they wanted since its open source

great tech? it's barely better than just downscaling

AMD is losing more and more GPU marketshare and Intel soon comes out with their GPUs that is targetting AMDs prime segment; LOW to MID-END. Nvidia has 85% dGPU marketshare as it is... AMD better wake up or they won't even have 10% marketshare in a few years...

@@Dr.WhetFarts it's not my fault that millionaires invest in nVidia and not AMD. The stock price doesn't reflect the public opinion. Look at Gamestop, just cause people invested in it doesn't mean that the company is actually doing great. nvidia sucks, intel sucks and that's how it is

Good guy for opensource lmao. Open source these days is just an excuse for companies not to actively develop things themselves and just push the work on community shoulders when they decide to silently abandon the project. Yes, now that it's in active development it's able to bring back life to old gpus which is great for low end gaming stations but I struggle to see it keep up in the long run especially now that the upscaling technology is getting more and more popular. Ue5's taau and intel's Xess are already looking very promising and there are more solutions coming. Instead of focusing on software based solution AMD should definitely start developing a hardware ai acceleration implemented down their product stack to the lowest end GPUs and preferably manufactured by someone else than TSMC. Also as a sidenote, Nvidia is undoubtedly filled with greedy bastards but even if spatula lord decided to force DLSS to be opensource it would be to no use because unlike FSR, Dlss relies on tensor cores that are only present in Volta, Turing and Ampere GPUs.

They are not Making it open source, they are using already existing openSource projects. Great example is gpuOpenns denoiser - guess who did the research and created that? Hint: Not AMD.

Oh my God, this is an absolutely game changer. Definitely will try it out

This video is already corrected. The first version FSR was presented more as an AA solution, or at least presented as doing AA. I commented about it just as you did on the first video. He took the video down, and then now this version is up, where he have added a couple segments where he clarifies. Most of the video is the same, so it has a slight disconnect in what he says. :)

Absolutely. DLSS should be available for the majority of users.

@@2kliksphilip thats understandable, to me coming up with a script feels the hardest for me, i can come up with an idea present it and a more improved situation comes out smoother in my head than if i were to try and write a script, so i solute you for your skill. You've come a long way keep it up!

FSR quality looks like first version of DLSS

why the fuck would you use fsr with doom... it runs on literally anything

@@scarpusgaming Battery Live gets extended

You can already run FSR on all titles using e.g. Magpie (dont let yourself scare away from the Chinese writing).

@@tarakivu8861 , I'm not using Windows so I'm as interested there :) I've heard of Magpie however I'm familiar with the inner workings of the implementation. It would be interesting to see how it will fare against AMD's driver side implementation through Adrenalin (not sure what the marketing term was - RadeonSuper Resolution was it?)

@@PakoSt Lossless Scaling is on Steam, it's pretty cheap too.

@@alejandro6070 I'm on Linux with Radeon ;) As such, it's pretty easy to get what I need without helper tools. Good for Windows users though. It would be interesting to see comparison between Lossless Scaling and the Adrenaline driver level FSR implementation (whenever that is released).

Do you happen to know the performance difference between Magpie & the Lossless Scaling app on Steam?

same, its a real game-changer for people with non-RTX gpus!

It probably will considering how easy it is to integrate. I hope DLSS 3 or whatever the next big version will be called will be easier to integrate and even better too cause both are great.

@@batt3ryac1d as far as I know DLSS 2.0 no longer requires training each game indivudually. So it does take less time to add, but it still requires those expensive GPUs people are trying to get

@@minerkey682 True, but the game developers need to tweak their game to “play nicely” with DLSS

@@bearpuns5910 yeah, its much more work compared to FSR - apparently it took a dev just 2-3 hours to implement Super Res

i respectfully disagree, flickering is a far bigger problem for me

@@ThylineTheGay Different tastes I guess. TAA is so distracting and makes all motion look so strange. Especially in Mafia and RDR2

Same, it's probably alright at 4k but at 1080p or 1440p it's just too blury and overly sharp at the same time. Id rather use something as simple as fxaa tbh but taa is often the only option because it's necessary for modern effects to work properly. Hopefully that might change with dlss and fsr

Confirmo 👍😎😎

@@existentialselkath1264 Exactly. Such a shame because outside of the smearing it's easily the best AA method when it comes to performance impact and visual quality. Weirdly though DLSS in RDR2 turns on TAA and sets it to max, which means the smearing still comes into play as well as the DLSS itself.

Cant take that DLSS did not "win" in performance lol.

@@subcinericius what the fuck are you talking about? I'm just asking what version he used and if he knew about the better anti-ghosting in the beta DLSS lmao this has nothing to do with performance

​@@2kliksphilip sure it's understandable you won't test every single version of dlss to pick the best for this game, I just wanted to know if you knew about the beta versions 😋 thanks for taking the time to respond !

I'd rather trust Intel than AMD when it comes to that. Intel has lots of knowledge training neural networks for image processing related tasks very much like Nvidia does, but Intel tends to open source them ;)

FSR always performs better if you're not CPU limited though due to lower overhead & therefore produces a higher framerate (which is totally irrelevant for FSR since it's a spatial upscaler that doesn't use anything else but current frame data).

@@markjacobs1086 I just wanted to touch on the fact that DLSS has better image quality when running at a high framerate, so the image quality is better at 240fps than at 60fps, especially in motion, but high fps isn't a given when upscaling due to lack of gpu power