I laughed so hard. Nice one xD

even though ghosting is bad, ngl it makes the sword look cooler, stronger, faster

@@redbaronmars4176hell nah

@@redbaronmars4176and stop liking your own comment

@@lucaschenJCI liked his comment

Good one bro🤣

😂 I'm taking that one.

Underrated comment

@@MattJDylan Did you use DLSS 2.0?

PiSS lmao

PiSS >>>>

Picture Intact Super Sampling? Give me 14 to-go!!!

Raspberry Pi Super Sampling?

That PiSS really streamlines the flow through the pipeline.

You're not, I can't see the difference and the differences are over blown.

Same I have a hard time telling the difference to

Because you're seeing a video that has been butchered by youtube compression

I can see the differences and they definitely help to understand how the tech stacks up against each other. But, I will agree that if im actually playing the game and not measuring my peepee with graphs and slowmos, I would find it borderline impossible to tell the difference between FSR 3.1 and dlss both at quality. Xess at quality I could prob tell apart in certain games. This being at 4k of course, at lower resolutions i still think that all of the technologies look a bit wack, id rather upgrade than use upscalers at lower resolutions.

As an IT professional for 25 or more years now, I agree. Well, if you go looking for the artifacts you can find them, but the quality difference of most games and tech these days is not like it was in the past. When you played half life, or even the sequel, on a low end GPU to a Mid tier one, the change was pretty big, and if you went from low/mid to top tier, again the performance and graphical changes made a significant change that most untrained or uninformed people would pick up on. I think on average the difference between low, mid, and high tier settings is much less dramatic in this current gaming era. When it comes to upscaling tech, most wont see the difference between 1080p and 1440p (okay maybe some would, but if we talk 1440 to 4k, yeah not many will see the change without slowdown or close inspection. Performance, now that is probably more noticeable to everyone, as playing at sub 60 fps and jumping to a consistent 60 or above can be a game changer, and most will notice the improvement in fluidity, unlike extra grass or slightly clearer textures. So as long as these FG technologies can provide a smoother feel without degrading the image so much the average layman can tell the difference, I think it is a big win, especially for lower spec gamers!

they're the only games with fsr 3.1 support currently so it's not like he had a choice...

Thankfully, if the game does support DLSS 2.0+ then you can use OptiScaler to translate it to FSR or XeSS. It only supports FSR 2.1.2 and 2.2.1 right now but there's a branch with FSR3 support for DirectX11 games.

You'd hope. FF14 just updated with FSR *1.0* last week. I was baffled when I found out since the option isn't labeled with a version number.

@@ironeleven considering the HW requirements for FF14, i wonder what´s even the point of implementing FSR...

uniscaler already mods the older versions

Ghosting in that game is a deliberate design choice

Did the frame jumping DLSS walking also lead you to say "My god, that's bad"? It isn't common, DLSS *GENERALLY* is better, but it is forced to be a closed box so it can make you buy their graphics cards, so that should be a hard nope.

​@@markhackett2302 Look I have a Rx 7800xt PC and I don't use fsr quality. I only use raster because I can't stand that upscaler.

​​@@kagander8619no, it isn't 😂 Source

@@TheSometimeAfter A joke, that is. "Ghost" of Tsushima

The flickering, Ghosting and smearing of FSR is extremely noticeable in many games while playing. I switched to XeSS 1.3 whenever possible because it doesn't have these issues anymore, and the shimmering of XeSS 1.3 is much less noticeable.

For me, the shimmering and flickering are the things I can always spot and it's really distracting. Also if there's overall blurriness. Ghosting is something I don't spot that much during gameplay, although the GoT example here was really bad for FSR.

The zoom, slowmo, and other stuff is done because this is a youtube video. It's meant to drive the point and show examples in the most "understandable" way. For me personally, I can see it, to the point sometimes I'd rather stick to 60 clean fps rather than 90 fps with ghosting. It's one of those once you see it, you can't unsee it.

None of this will matter if AMD does not make a high end product next generation. My 3090 needs to retire soon but I'm hoping for a 5080 competitor from AMD to buy. If there is none, I guess I'm stuck with NVIDIA again 😔

Honestly I've been playing FSR and my monitor it literally looks better than XeSS and performs much better, so these videos are more clerical to me Sorry @hardwareunboxed I trust my fucking eyes more than your videos

DLAA, FSRAA, XeSSAA would be nice indeed!

@@brunogm Google: Translate to English Clicks it. Nothing changes. I swear it's just trolling us now. Though to be fair naming schemes are pretty archaic lmao.

When the 50 series launch.

This reminds me of that tweet that goes "twitter is 90% someone imagining a guy, tricking themselves into believing that guy exists, and then getting mad about it"

shhh, not so loud, the devs will hear you lol

People are going to start switching to AMD fr fr, if/ when that happens

the best temporal AA method in Ghost is SMAA T2x

That surely is a deliberate design choice?

@@trulsdirio who cares if it is a design choice if i do not like it. by the way the sword swing effect is a feature not a bug. hope you like that feature then....

Ghosts of Fukushima

​@@sudd3660What are you going on about

I truly believe ur right. But for me I'm not sure with this new change intel made to the scale that balanced isn't upscaling to 4k from 1440p with their balanced setting

Well, he normalized for performance in the initial comparison. It doesn't really matter how good it looks if it's not at the FPS you want, so he made sure that all the upscaling techniques were performing similarly first.

isn't this equal performance testing?

HUB have hated Intel Arc since day 1.

​@@QuentinStephensAny citations for that? Weird opinion.

His 'binoculars' have interchangeable DLSS/FSR/XeSS upscaling, so you better have curtains on your windows lol

@@MuhlisErtugrul 🤣* *That's actually a brilliant idea though - I'm sure someone could make digital binoculars where the built-in Ai can magnify and upscale the image beyond the raw capabilities of the max zoom level of physical hardware (lenses, mirrors, etc).

@@-T--T- Yeah you're right :D That's a cool idea. We have AI upscalers like Topaz AI but a real-time upscaling (with machine learning tech like DLSS) through lenses like binoculars would be very interesting.

Leave him alone. He's mastered. Aren't you TIroMe ?

Trossard

I don't see any warping from DLSS 🤔

​@@EveryGameGuruAMD fanboys are coping

@@GewelReal Nvidia fanboi is salty :P

​@@seaneriksen2695Salty for what? Being the best lol

@@LeafyTheLeafBoy being at best for spending 2000$ on GPUs that have the same performance as 800$ ones

I am confused when they explain XeSS quality and DLSS quality running at a higher resolution. If that's the case why not compare DLSS/FSR to the same resolution that XeSS is using, which is ultra quality at 1080p. It doesn't make sense to use "XeSS Quality" when they are fundamentally using different data sets.

Why would you need to use a high end Intel CPU for this test? This is a GPU test, so a 7800x3d would technically barely bottleneck less. I do like the idea of more XMX XeSS tests though, everyone seems to just test the DP4A path

@@superamigo987 Because there is performance gap using AMD CPU. It is noticeable gain with INTEL CPU. Also XMX is INTEL specific for ARC. Two different architectures. AMD/Nvidia you can say don't use CPU much at all. INTEL splits the tasks with CPU and it matters. Hence REBAR for the data transfer and use of E cores. Lot less waiting and queuing for lot better performance. CPU is vital. Two silicone's working together. That's why the ARC is very affordable because it is the selling point for the INTEL CPU. Also a reason that I see for Nvidia looking into CPU's also. With INTEL every FPS counts. AMD/Nvidia need almost twice the FPS for same quality of performance. For example 40FPS on 4k with INTEL very playable. AMD/Nvidia need at least twice the FPS because the waiting and queuing with single silicone creates gaps and stutter to be filled. FPS from INTEL is not the same as it is from AMD/Nvidia that share similar architectures. Then there is Intel Application Optimization (APO) paired with INTEL high end CPU that is upcoming and promise 10-50% gain. So if you are looking something that will age like fine wine it is INTEL.

@@superamigo987 It's because almost on one uses Arc GPUs. But it should be added as a 4th option here.

@@radosuafI hope Battlemage will bring us good performance to not left out from these comparisons.

@@PeterPauls First people will have to buy these. Arc ones are not very well priced.

Upscaler performance also depends on your GPU generation and GPU class. You might get completely different performance results on a 4090, 2060 Super, 1080ti, 5700xt, 2080 ti etc.

Yeah man completely agree

Yeah. Comparing DLSS Quality with FSR Balanced feels wrong. Of course DLSS is going to look better.

He basically did that near the end of the video, comparing the "Quality" modes across upscalers, did you actually watch the video? Even in that case, each upscaler uses slightly different internal resolution targets, so you're never going to get a true apples to apples comparison. Comparing them based on actual performance makes sense, as the whole reason these upscaling technologies exist is to provide improved performance while minimizing image quality loss.

Of course it makes sense, the only reason to use upscalers is for performance so normalizing for that is what makes the most sense.

Doesn't the PlayStation use an AMD chip for graphics? Surely that must be related.

All thanks to Nixxes!

@@JayMaverick I never remember I saw reports of both that PlayStation has there own software in the PlayStation. I mean we been upscaling on game systems form at least PS4 erra I remember. At least in the terms on not just scaling on pure math.

​@@xxstandstillxxyeah the ps4 pro been using upscaling since 2015 !

@@xxstandstillxx that is checkerboard rendering. But FSR is being used in many titles this generation since all current gen consoles have AMD chips.

Yeah I agree. To me these upscaler comparisons read a lot like audiophile speaker reviews.

copium.

@@WrexBFyou keep using that word, but I do not think you know what it means. (On a less memey note, I don't have a leg in the game so why would it be?)

Why would you take something inferior when something superior exists. This is nothing like an audiophile snob problem there's a reason each company and now Sony are all spending tens of millions to develop and market their own upscalers. In the future you will be right but for now there are simply inferior and superior ones. They all have their own issues though.

copium.

The problem in motion is ghosting, though. Which isn't about fine detail, but basically just makes motion look bad - the faster the motion, the worse.

FSR has no visual difference on a Nvidia card or Radeon card.

its good but it isn't perfect

The closest you're going to get to native AA in most of these games, is DLAA, native plus temporal anti-aliasing is essentially native, as the temporal AA doesn't really encoura significant cost. What frustrates me is looking at any of these solutions as performance enhancements.. if anything that's a bonus, as the real benefit of the machine learning super sampling is that it does anti-aliasing in motion without many of the significant drawbacks to traditional TXAA or just temporal AA in general.. This is why FSR is such a joke as far as I'm concerned.. Depending on the resolution you're up sampling from, you end up with worse performance in motion than traditional TXAA depending on how it has been implemented.. and on top of that, the absolutely brilliant contrast adaptive sharpening that they have which is usually the perfect solution for TAA blurriness, it's already integrated into the package, and usually in a terrible way. I used to have issues with DLSS, but I didn't realize is that in-game LOD settings were being hyper sharpened so that you could see them in all their blurry glory, not dissimilar to how TXAA is implemented in a lot of best practices, which is silly.. nothing feels like gas lighting like the entire world being blurry until you stop and look at it.. Once I fix the LOD settings, the performance in motion with transparencies and particle effects, it's like going back to the old days in terms of clarity in motion.. throw a light reshade of CAS on top of DLSS or DLAA and you got about as close as a modern game can get to the clarity that we used to have as normal.. depending on if you can fix the LOD settings lol as they are usually trash.. I swear developers... I don't think they have very good eyes lol.

@@JackWse nice post my dude.

You're watching a compressed KZfaq video here which subdues most upscaling artefacts by turning them into compression artefacts. Zooming in is basically necessary to SHOW you how that'd look like on uncompressed footage (I.E. your displays output).

I just finished playing Ghost of Tsushima at 4k with FSR enabled. During the whole 60 hours of gameplay, I experienced ghosting more than once per hour. Usually it was a relatively subtle artifact that disappeared in around 1 second. Sometimes, around 10 times (in 60 hours) in total, the artifact was severe enough that I had to stop playing for a couple of seconds because it interfered with my vision. I knew it was caused by FSR, but it didn't bother me enough to turn it off. The game looks espectacular anyway.

You cant catch everything when looking into this stuff but what you mention about R&C were some issues I came across when looking into it.

I can easily tell the difference. Even dlss at quality looks bad to me at 4k. I play about 5 ft away from a 65" screen though. DLSS makes everything soft and blurry, fsr has ghosting and a LOT of visual noise and shimmering

@@Dempig I experience the same thing you mentioned. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. I would like to have a High Quality Setting between Native and Quality. Its just not good enough to switch to DLSS / FSR / XeSS. Graphics is king, especially with solo games like Horizon or Rachet & Clank where FPS and reaction is less important compared to games like Call of Duty or other E-Sports titles.

@@Dempig 4k 65' is a huge diff to 4k 27"

65 inches at 5 feet! That has to be really immersive. Are you able to see the edges of the screen at that distance without turning your head?

@@itisabird Yep it about perfectly fits my viewing range, I will eventually go bigger I love large screens.

XeSS scaling factors in 1.3 versus earlier versions Preset XeSS 1.3 scaling XeSS 1.0-1.2 scaling Native AA 1.0x (Native) N/A Ultra Quality 1.3x N/A Ultra Quality 1.5x 1.3x Quality 1.7x 1.5x Balanced 2.0x 1.7x Performance 2.3x 2.0x Ultra Performance 3.0x N/A 🤔

@@Chasm9 Thanks! 2 questions: you wrote Ultra Quality twice (1.3x and 1.5x) - what's the difference between them? And secondly: what are the scaling factors of DLSS Quality and FSR Quality? Ty, my wholesome potato in shining armour :D

67% res scale, just like FSR Quality and DLSS Quality modes

Same render resolution as DLSS Quality and FSR Quality. They changed the render resolutions recently and so the old "Quality" became "Ultra Quality".

@@exscape Thanks, guys!

Well..... do they? RDNA2 was a magical generation, RDNA3... not so much, RDNA4 is an RDNA3 bugfix.

Well if AMD is only making a cheaper to build part that matches around the 7900 XT/XTX they won't have any competition in the high end and intel will need a massive power draw reduction to be anywhere near AMD and Nvidias previous gen cards

I mean, Nvidia isn't going to fight until the have a reason to. Intel and AMD have 0 challengers at the top end of the GPU market, and the upcoming GPUs seem to be the same in that AMD isn't going to try to fight the 5090 for supremacy and AMD has already said as much as well. So nothing is changing anytime soon bud

What makes you think thats the vibe lol ? Maybe youre into underdog competition. But nvidia is doing better than ever and looks to take the next gen performance and software crown with their AI advancements.

@@KrazzeeKane who cares about the very high end most people buy way cheaper gpus

Yeah, that entire section seemed pointless. I was actually WTF untiil I saw compariing quality across the board was in a section coming up.

It seems especially pointless since most will not notice the slight performance losses between the different upscalers thanks to displays with adaptive sync, but will most likely notice the big improvements in overall image quality.

It's not pointless because it's inherently an fps-increasing technology, and one that games are increasingly relying on. A 40% performance boost is preferable to a 20% performance boost 5:39. Just going blindly with the same name across different upscalers and only looking at the quality is going to give you a skewed image of the value they provide. With 4K, which is largely what the video is aimed for and where upscalers are the most relevant, that additional performance can make a big difference.

The section comparing the highest quality of those upscaling technologies is in the video. So, what are you mad about?

@@Maxoverpower I don't have an issue with normalizing, it makes sense here, I am just confused as to why they decided to use FSR Balanced in Horizon Forbidden West since, by their own charts, FSR Quality performs as good as DLSS Quality. It's at 4:35. The difference is one frame in the AVG framerates, and the 1% lows are identical. This is as within the margin of error as possible. Shouldn't that particular example constitute the exact same performance uplift?

The cutoff isn't that different though, you aren't going to be playing any recent FSR3.1 games on your RX570 (that's no longer supported by AMD).

Amd abandoned r9 390, meanwhile nvidia only lately abandomed gtx 700 series and still support 900

@@yarost12 well a 1200 dollar gpu not supported like a 3090 is like being ripped off. Compared to a 10 yo 160 dollar gpu

@@user-wq9mw2xz3j We will see when Nvidia develop a new arch instead of using decade old CUDA core.

Especially since the 4070 used might become "older" at the end of the year ...

yeah, it doesn't make sense to me

Use the highest FSR setting, which is FSR quality. Or use XeSS. You should only choose lower FSR setting if you want more fps with a lower image quality.

@@WrexBF Yeah but the video says as "on nvidia gpu's FSR Balanced seems the way to go as quality doesn't give enough frames to justify upscaling".

I promise you wouldn't like the look of it in game

W GPU! Keep it, it'll be nice a memory

Dying how? Does it just need a thermal paste refresher?

What resolution you playing at? I'm at 1440p and went from 3080 to 7900XTX and its awesome

If you can afford the 5080, get it at the end of this year.

@@adi6293 I did the same and was a great jump but I still like the polish of Nvidia products when it comes to drivers and programs. I'll prob go back to nvidia when the 6000 series comes out or what ever is after the 5000 series this year.

16:18 the texture on the blade

@@brunogm Which Tim already pointed out as problematic, so at no point did I have to. Your point seemed to have been inside your head only.

I bet that's just an animation glitch in the game, nothing to do with DLSS being the upscaler. You can see he briefly stops walking to reset the animation, and the movement becomes smooth again.

Because it is the best, So it's the benchmark the other two are aiming for.

It should be compared against native. Otherwise you compare errors to other different errors

You need to rewatch the video.

Agree

I second this. Like, I understand it from a "scientific" perspective, they want to know just how much better the methods are for improving performance, but for gamers, this is an irrelevant stat. All it matters is that the resulting frame-rate is satisfactory for the consumer.

The section comparing the highest quality of those upscaling technologies is also in the video. So, what are you mad about?

4070 actually isn't close to what "most" people use. Most people are a couple generations behind, and the 60 class cards have always been more popular.

@@matthews2243 Higher end GPU users are always delusional about the cards they own. lol.

According to the Steam hardware survey, around 7% of Steam users who use Nvidia GPUs have an RTX 4070 or better

You totally missed the performance 8:55 upscaling part didn’t you💀

@@DrLogic_ The quality mode in Horizon-FW for FSR is just as fast as DLSS quality - so no reason to be running an inferior balanced mode. In Spiderman-MM the FSR balanced is faster than DLSS quality. Still should be comparing quality vs quality, balanced vs balanced and let the user decide the level of performance. Didn’t see any concern about performance matching in previous reviews unless I missed something.

@@DrLogic_ He's right though, for Horizon Forbidden west, the numbers for DLSS Quality are 63 AVG, and 48 for 1% lows, and for FSR Quality it's 62 AVG and 48 for 1% lows. That's as neck and neck as you can get. You can find that at 4:35 in the video.

KZfaq compression kills a lot of fine detail. I've owned both GeForce & Radeon cards with no loyalty to brands. In my opinion I'm just not interested in any upscaling below 4K, it just doesn't look good. But if you do have that native 4K image to source from, DLSS is better and mainly due to the ghosting from FSR. In some games the ghosting is quite bad.

Don't take it personally: I've seen how the protagonist in horizon looks, she would be ghosting me too, no doubt 😔

@@MattJDylan 🤣

DLSS and XeSS are pretty similiar

Because you don't need upscaling on 1080p with any somewhat modern hardware?

Plus the results usually look bad on 1080p even on quality mode. Upscalers are good for high resolution monitors I would like to see DLAA and FSR Native AA on 1080p though.

Because at 1080p quality the contrasts between the upscalers would be even more pronounced. You can already see this from how short the 1440p test segment was, it looks very unfavorable for FSR. It would be even worse at 1080p.

To save AMD from embarrassment.

🧠

must be watching on a 5" phone lol

That's just being a contrarian.

Maybe invest some of the money you save in an eye exam.

I play at 4k, and sometimes the upscaling implementation still looks noticeably worse than native depending on the app. It's relevant to me.

@@sodapopinksi667 Cool👍

It's because there's no point in anything anymore, we don't need the kind of resolution and quality the hardware can provide. Rocking a 20- or 30- series and it's absolutely fine. So these tests that are came up with just to justify some performance advantage that we won't ever use

4k is old and not hard to achieve. 8k 144hz will be the new upcoming res.

Isn't 1080p like 25 years old?

what do you mean? hes mostly comparing image quality on the setting that gives the most similar fps isnt he doing what you want?

@@nahoj.2569 I think he should compare similar quality settings, not try to match FPS. He's using a worse quality upscaling on the AMD card despite it giving more FPS because he's searching for the delta increase in percentage.

One question on RT is why the path tracing result is not used to optimizes the raster Light probe positions on cases of light bleeding and artifacts.

@@brunogm how could it be used to solve these problems?

@@iurigrang light probes are automatically put in the median distance from each other. then actual shading samples from those. Light bleeds and artifacts on normal raster come from these. Later someone has to manually reposition prober to fix it. The lower production cost in RayTracing comes from not needing manual intervention. But one could use RT results to automatically fix light probes and then the game at runtime has better light without realtime RT.

Man i can confirm that as AMD user i dont even touch upscale technology cuz we have a monster in games such rx 7800 xt and rx 7900 series so no need even think about Upscaling things. But 😂in other hand Nvidia 😂 without useing Upscaling tech they will be equal to the last generation from Nvidia 300 series 😂plus is too expensive 😂

@@2284090my go to now with a 7900 xt is native res with the lossless scaling app at x3 frame gen and everything runs and feels extremely well

Bro thinks he smart oh nonono don't tell him

what does that have to do with the actual comparison of the feature ? typical AMD fanboy behavior comment

enjoy using medium quality textures in 3 years if you buy a 4070/4070S

Oh yeah, most of Nvidia's cards are really great if we could just cut the pricing by like 30% lol I think most people would agree that pricing is the worst thing about GeForce at this point. Unfortunate

@@thrafkroos would you mind having a conversation with Nvidia for me and asking them to put more than 12GB in a laptop under $2000? Thanks

@@TheDarksideFNothing The pricing is the reason why I changed my 1080ti for a 6900xt when that dropped in price. I've used Nvidia since the 8800GTX but that current pricing is just... Fucking nuts.

@@thrafkroos I doubt any major changes will happen in 3 years. Next gen consoles will surely increase VRAM usage in games significantly. But they will not launch in 3 years, more like in 4-5 years. But anyway in 3 years games will become much more demanding in terms of raw GPU power. By that time the owners of 4070 S will be lucky to run modern titles at 1080p/High settings. Thus 12GB will still be fine. Look at Hellblade 2, Banishers and Robocop - they use just about 8GB at 1440p. So 4070 Super runs out of power way before VRAM capacity becomes an issue. Since UE5 is the most popular game engine, most games will behave the same way. Only a small bunch of future console ports may become a problem for 12GB cards.

Tbf, I've never once considered them competitors. AG even said he watches this channel sometimes.

Yeah and somehow on his comparison has DLSS on Nvidia and FSR/XESS on AMD. HUB is a big channel only don RTX card for all 3. and as we can see, FSR is worse on nvidia card since it has lower FPS so they need to drop quality setting to have better fps which leads to worse FSR image. This is no longer comparing quality setting image. HUB seem to managed to pull a smoke screen of nvidia marketing here. rarely watch HUB anymore aside for CPU comparison and News.

All of this is filler until the definitive DF video drops.

Ghosting in avatar is due to the preset the developers chose for DLSS, settings the preset to C or E will almost eliminate any ghosting entirely.

I would still like to enable XeSS in CS2.

No one cares; they'll never do a proper scientific method to prove which is better. They're just going to keep doing this because it's all everyone cares about.

they still do.

@@mryellow6918 at what cost, tho?

This is a problem, you're correct. Upscaling is a garbage bandaid tech.

They still do. Except now you can use mid range cards like a 4070 or 7800xt to play at 4k with decent frames. I'd sooner do that using up-scaling rather than play 1440p native.

At least it's over. Next generation they have to give actual performance increases and can't hide behind software whilst charging the same price to performance at native. Hopefully.