I think enabling DLSS on PC at 1080p upscales from 720p internally. It looks pretty good and I keep it on for games that support it

@@arthurb5194 on balanced mode I think it's 720p Performance is probably closer to 540p

​@@pyramidschemer4083 Yeah Performance mode tends to look a bit iffy when I tried it in Control and the Back 4 Blood demo, at 1080p. Still, it's an amazing piece of tech and I hope AMD does an AI upscaler in the future too.

Most people don't seem to. When I say it's the future of gaming, the PC cucks always take offense. How dare I doubt native resolution.

@@arthurb5194 performance mode is for 4K, I wouldn’t go lower than quality mode for 1080p if you even neee dlss for 1080p

True. I couldn't care less about raytracing, but DLSS is a fantastic technology.

In a sense. ARM is just not very well-equipped for gaming in it's current state, our current optimization on x86 is aggressively optimized for SIMD operations and lookup tables, both of which are ARM's weakest point.

@Russell White Having a good gold efficiency power supply helps a ton too cause it waste far less power while still putting out the amount you need.

@@dial2616 The shift to more aggressive multi-threading in next-gen might help with Intel shifting to big-little architecture, which is something ARM has had for a while. Having that in common will make port optimization just a little bit easier for ARM.

Virtual Reality desperately need it

Beware that this is the reasoning that gave birth to the PS4 and Xbox One, 2 system with a CPU so underpowered that effectively hindered game development (or at least shaped it not in a good direction: flashy graphics but little interaction).

Taking information from other frames basically.

The trick is its actually resolving it from a 1440p source spread out over the past 4 frames. Basically every frame the 720p source is offset by half a pixel which allows it to sample different data even when the camera is really static. By doing this over 4 frames you get 4 unique 720p frames with different data, then with some AI upscaling you get that amazing result. (Note, this is a very simplified explanation of whats going on, but the gist of it is correct)

@@SirDragonClaw hmm, sounds like a checkerboarding.

@@SirDragonClaw Thanks! I was wondering the same, where did it get that extra info! The Doom eternal cutscene example was what triggered my curiosity, you can clearly see stars that basically aren't there in 720p. Again, tbanks for that eli5!

@@maratnugmanov The old checkerboarding doesn't keep as much temporal data. It also goes through a pass of AI inference, but I'm not that convinced that it adds a lot in detail and is more used to get rid of temporal artefacts that they couldn't resolve with a motion vector map.

Yup. A solid, locked 60fps is my only requirement for gaming.

Yeah even the latest and best Mobile chips struggle to run games at 60fps. Its just not that viable right now. Just accept 30.

@@perfectlyslicedegg3348 Like what exactly?

@@minecraftpvp8040 The Steam Deck.

All I need is 4K at 120 fps

Worth it. When you get the chance go for it. Also, scary profile pic...

Can't wait to one day upgrade to a 1080ti 🤤

@@brunomiiguel can't wait to one day want to say that I can't wait to upgrade to a 1080ti

Its good but it depends on the game. I feel like problem with PC right now is actual good games.

I’m waiting for RDNA3 and Zen 4

And 60fps

classic Nintendo

Well next generation Switch, that means at least in 2022/2023, using Xavier wouldn't make any sense. Orin will already be a few years old, exactly like how the X1 was 2 years old when the OG Switch released. And they released it in a hurry to get sales to improve. This time they will do it better. Much better ? Who knows. But better.

Man i wish for the latter.

Nintendo will spend as little money on r&d as possible and make something that is just good enough.

@@trixniisama Nintendo always goes with the cheapest solution: GameBoy/GameGear, DS/PSP, 3DS/Vita -> Switch2/Steamdeck.

4K 30fps? 🤮 ...Each to their own.

@@gogreengameon2146 so like all PS5 and Xbox games in quality mode

@@carlosfer2201 yeah.....🤮

The switch 2 won't have any difficulty getting 4k 60fps games with dlss.

Tell that the Software Developers.

They're still doing that to this day its crazy how oblivious fanboys are.

even first party games dip under 540p in some situation. would be nice to see dlss in nintendos hardware. but like always nintendo cooks its own soup. and we will never see dlss -.-

I dont think dlss works that way. The image quality would still be better with 720p to 4k ultraperformance than upscaling it to just 1440p. Havent tested it tho and it wouldnsurely help with frametime.

@@phunkstar7347 The only ones that come to mind are the Xenoblade games and Yoshi's Crafted World. For the most they're usually either native or keep a native res most of the time with small res drops at times.

I was thinking this when Alex talked about not using DLSS in docked. I think it will need to. Even in handheld you really notice it dropping to 540p. Personally I would DLSS up to 720p in handheld. It'll make ports like The Witcher 3 much more compelling on Switch, especially if the upscale in docked is so good that people don't notice the difference with the Xbox Series X version (apart from the framerate, obviously)

1080p 60fps would be enough for me at that screensize

I find 30 year old 16-bit snes graphics at 60fps more appealing than compromised, upscaled low-framerate modern titles.

@@jannclaudebinoya but some people do play switch in docked mode on a 4k-tv. for handheld imho 720p is still good enough at that screen size, it's just .. switch player don't actually know what 720p looks like, because almost every 3d game renders at a lower resolution, making the image look blurray and kind a mess (e.g. xenoblade 2).

60fps requires the CPU grunt to be there as well though, which DLSS cannot help out with. Assuming an NVIDIA Tegra SoC is used, the Switch 2/Pro/Super/whatever will be using an Arm processor, which is unlikely to drive more complex game logic at above 30 fps.

@@jannclaudebinoya I think they’re going to stick with 720p in handheld mode, just for power consumption purposes, so high frame rates shouldn’t be difficult. They’ll let it draw more power to reconstruct to higher resolutions in docked mode.

yeah that's a big assumption considering the rest of the analysis is based on it, I would have liked more depth here

It's practically all 1.9ms, what else would that additional time be using besides DLSS?

I don't think breaking down DLSS matters for his point. He was just saying if it takes 1.9ms to do something given 110TOPS (and similar architecture) then how long does it take if you only have 20TOPS? His assumption assumes basically IDENTICAL architecture hence the linear scaling. If you compared a GPU at 100% frequency then compared at 20% frequency you should get 5x difference in TIME to process. He only did this to estimate how long DLSS would take to do the same task with less processing power to see if 60FPS is even feasible for certain types of games. You don't need to break down what's going on with DLSS any further. (I'm not sure how easy it would be to break down "motion predicting" vs "inference" as it's all kind of tied together and is going to vary greatly depending on what's going on in the scene at a given time. Which is why, as he said, the best-case for DLSS is a static image. In that case there's NO motion prediction obviously so in a sense the DLSS "time budget" can be spent just making a static image look better without wasting time doing other calculations like getting rid of motion artifacts.)

@@TheGoncas2 The temporal information. Motion vectors that can be done on any GPU.

@@photonboy999 I would think you still need to do motion vectors even if the camera is not moving. You don't know if a vector is 0 unless you calculate it first. You can't just rely on the camera movement and tell it to skip the temporal part if the camera is still, because thousands of other things in the screen could be moving. The still image at 12:28 still has motion. The character breathes, and the background is moving. In addition to that XeSS works the same was as DLSS. It implements "Jitter" It moves the image on purpose to causing every frame to have motion vectors. It needs motion vectors in order to produce usable results. It hates 0 vectors.

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang is a very ambitious man though. He could pull it off, upselling both his team and Nintendo “to stick it up” to Steam Deck, Series S and ultimately AMD. But can he do it really, though? Maybe someone should send him the link to Alex analysis here ;P

They never do what the fans want and it's annoying af

Exactly. Before people get excited they must remember this is Nintendo we are talking about. They just gave us a freak LAN port ffs... in 2021!!! I'm sure DLSS is a major priority for them lol

Imagine a new wave racer with ps5 performance behind it :(. A man can dream....

Not really. Before Wii, that wasn't totally true of their consoles, and after Wii, it was more of odd and surprising hardware choices. Hell, I personally didn't peg them to go with an Nvidia solution at all with the Switch and I didn't expect the Switch concept as well, nor was I expecting 3D gimmick of 3DS. It also kinda depends on their 'gimmick' for their next console, since it may not be a straight up 'Switch 2'.

I wonder if Nvidia could find a way to make two of them work in tandem, so you would have one in the Switch giving you 720p/60 handheld, and then docked you'd have a second GPU to handle the DLSS and output. It would need some substantial cooling either way

@@coleG112 I guess this is theoretically possible but would be a very costly solution since it would require two chips and a high speed bus to connect the two. And the development cost on top of that.

@@rajackar Not to mention the additional space required in an already fairly slim package. That's going to be a lot more bulky.

@@rajackar for sure. But it also would be an optional thing that all Switch users would benefit from, regardless of model. But I doubt they could pull that off effectively with the current chip. Maybe it’d be something they can plan on for the “Switch 2 Dock Pro” lmao

Nice thought!

speak for yourself, weirdo. who tf wants to play on 65+ inch tv while only really getting 38 inch's with the rest being black bars?

@@Hello-ig1px me, if it'd be blurry as hell like Halo 3 was

@@NeoTechni Uhh well how about you use a smaller screen then? You will get the same results, go play your games on a 16 inch monitor.

@@Hello-ig1px Getting more options to finetune games is fine by me. In many games I'd rather trade image fidelity for better framerates, or even push the console higher, back to its SoC's rated clocks. The thing about systems like the Switch is that they're actually underclocked in their stock factory configuration, to get the battery to last longer. I would've liked to have been given a beefier battery that allowed me the choice to push it back to its rated clocks and remove the stock underclock in the system, because while the SoC is rated for it and remains stable, they decided to use a battery that isn't rated for the greater power draw of the SoC running at its full strength, and can suffer permanent degradation under sustained use with the stock underclocking disabled. And that really sucks, because it locks people like me who have the know-how to perform this kind of tweaking to only using the system at its fullest when it's docked.

@@Hello-ig1px I shouldn't have to buy new hardware to get things software can do. And I'm not alone in this as there's a plugin for Vita (sharpscale) that does this

It has been done with bsnes HD allready 👍

At the expense of battery life. There is always a compromise and price to pay. You have to cut corners somewhere to make it affordable for consumers

@@Hybredno. Not really. Having a dock with enhanced cooling that enables a higher power limit when docked would have no impact on the battery life since it would be getting power through the dock. Just make the dock have a USB-C connection to the Switch and 20W Power delivery would be super easy. Battery life is a complete non-factor in this scenario

@@Hybred So nintendo could increase battery. 200$ phones have 5000mah batteries. Most phones much smaller and thinner than the switch have 2 batteries(for fast charging at 50+w) totalling upto at least 4500mah capacity. The switch could at least hold a 6000mah battery. But Nintendo won't do shit.

@@santhoshsridhar5887 I'd rather have more efficiency than a bigger battery. The bigger the battery, the more the device will weigh. The Switch is already borderline too heavy for a handheld device for long play sessions. The Switch 2 should not become heavier.

yes if weve learned anything from the past gen by looking at switch's sales is that the audience is really picky about how they look and perform /s

Or alternatively they could create custom DLSS for Orin instead, which would be significantly cheaper. They can take advantage of the fact that we know screen size for Switch Pro and it will always stay same.

@@vishxification0 Better hardware = More expansive games = More customers

@@vishxification0 Releasing better hardware is not appealing graphics to their consumers, it's about getting 3rd party devs to manufacture for their platform.

@@ZK-ff2ru im not sure thats how it works. at all.

Oh wow yeah. I wonder could you double the battery life of a switch in handheld. But I have a feeling the lower the starting resolution the more this technique breaks down as there is so little detail in lower resolutions.

dlss reconstructs the image, it doesn't upscale. Also the switch 2 will run 10th gen games in 1080p easily while dlss will convert it to 4k.

Are they selling 50-feet screen yet? :P

Yup. Loving this tech

Why would you need to go beyond 8k?

Tech is amazing, but I find it hard to see the uses of gaming at 12k resolution. Only thing that would make sense at that res would be VR... Even then I think 8k should suffice.

@@Neilos-sd6ti I also don't see the point.

The good news about the Switch 2 is, the longer they wait to upgrade the hardware, newer architectures become available to them. I want to see a Lovelace switch.

What graphics card have you got that the performance is so bad

You'll just have to buy them once again for a new system ofcourse.

You don’t have to imagine. Emulators are scaling the image to 4k already.

@@Sly2Cooper most nintendo consoles are backward compatible by 1 or 2 generations. wii was backward compatible with gamecube. wii u backward compatible with wii. game cube backwards compatible. 3ds as well. it's likely switch 2 will be too.

There's way better looking games not sure why u would choose those 2 as examples lol

@@bern9642 and none of them do not enhance any game from previous gen in BC mode. Because how else will they sell you new version of their past-gen title for $60 once again?

Yes, It is Trillion Operations Per Second (TOPS).

Especially since exclusives like Returnal could only run at 1080p anyway...

You can run games at 4K but they'll be basic games with blurry textures and extremely simplistic lighting. It's not the same as true next gen games on real consoles.

Handhelds & home consoles are still 2 different markets. It's not 4K alone that makes that difference.

They wouldn't have pokemon, and assuming nintendo secured exclusivity again, monster hunter. And a dedicated portable system can't really succeed without at least one of those games.

I get they still wouldn't have the gpu/cpu/ram/power to use modern lighting simulation, particules, name it. but still a hell of a shortcut where the other AMD based consoles are a little stuck, arguably wasting ressources on resolution still

yeah, the fact that it would hardware integrated and native for the consoles makes a huge difference

This probably isn't possible since dlss needs 16k images of in game content to train dlss for that specific game, but I believe if a switch 2 with dlss were to happen Nintendo and Nvidia would make it easier to do that by then

He once had some bugs during his depth prepass. and since then, it is there.

He once got in a fight with a guy saying RT is just about puddle reflections and nothing more.

He fought the youtube algorithm after his upload notification was not instant

@@dampflokfreund ahahahahaha

This is _Nintendo_ we're talking about. Switch 2 is likely the last name they would pick.

@@mjc0961 I agree. But the same goes for the "pro". It's more likely to be the new Nintendo switch as the revision and the switch U for the next gen console. But either way, pro and next gen don't belong together. That's conflating the revision with the successor.

@@mjc0961 after the fiasco of wii u, there is no way they will go with switch pro.

@@shane_MK I agree, if switch call it switch 2, some youtubers will call it switch pro. lol. Nintendo will have to come up with a whole new name.

@@clayjack9969 it won't be called switch 2. lol when has nintendo ever done that? and I really doubt nintendo will use pro when sony and co use it. Nintendo will go with something very new. they went from famicom to super to 64 to gamecube to wii to wii u (which failed) to switch. the next name be something none of us will be able to predict.

Emulates a Unreal 4 game haha no...

They aren't going to ditch Nvidia after having such a successful product. Would make sense for backwards compatibility too. Nvidia wouldn't want AMD to have every console either.

@@_TheElMan True that. I also wonder if another ARM OEM like Qualcomm, Google, or Mediatek would partner with Intel Xe graphics (or Nvidia RTX) once the new Intel and TSMC foundry fabs come online in the US around 2023.

@@handlemonium Intel could have their own SOC. Remember they have their own GPUs out soon

I think even now it's possible to do that by changing some ini settings or something like that. I remember being able to do that to the DLSS in Control when it was using DLSS 1.0, and setting the input resolution to 1080p (with 1440p display) because even the quality mode was too blurry (ended up not using it in the end).

Only reason anyone has a Switch is for the exclusives. Some have been underwhelming, but overall having a Switch for the exclusives are worth it. Should definitely have something else for third party games.

@@yungmatt009 Yet the Steam Deck will have so many more games that you can't play on Switch than vis a vis. And that's without getting into Switch emulation on the Steam Deck.

@@HeloisGevit Yes, but who cares when all of said games will be available on literally every platform.

Steam deck will eventually be able to emulate the switch. Either this iteration or the next. But it's coming.

Yet, the Switch will still outsell the Steam Deck 10:1 no problem. Ultimately the Steam Deck is just for playing the same games you already play on a tonne of other systems at better quality. While the Switch offers games you get nowhere else. I don’t think the Steam Deck is bad, but let’s not kid ourselves that it is going to be a massive seller outside hardcore gamers.

gamecube?

Not quite as a gamer changer as we like to think as all the other platforms are implementing their own version of upscaling tech, basically, they all have the same advantage so the gap is still massive from Nintendo and the other consoles or even the Steam Deck for that matter. Beside, lets be honest, Nintendo doesn't really want to compete with the other consoles, they go out of their way to make so the performance gap is so massive to not step on Sony's and Microsoft's toes because they know they likely can't compete if those other two throw money at the problem, hence why Nintendo stays a gen behind. Problem for Nintendo is the Steam Deck if that takes off as that is more or less targeting that sector and doing it much better but Nintendo won't be worried yet because it's a long way on if the Steam Deck is a success or not, it's sure got a lot of hype around it and on the surface, it's far better than a walled garden that Nintendo offers.