Rage3D Discussion Area

Rage3D Discussion Area (http://www.rage3d.com/board/index.php)
-   Other Graphics Cards and 3D Technologies (http://www.rage3d.com/board/forumdisplay.php?f=65)
-   -   Nvidia RTX DLSS/Ray Tracing Discussion (http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=34049038)

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by acroig (Post 1338121890)
This, 100% agreed.

To be honest if there's no further DLSS updates for Metro I'm ok with it, it's pretty good as is.

Next game to have DLSS is Anthem, we'll see how that goes. Not sure if that's my kind of game though.

Jay20016 Mar 2, 2019 09:40 AM

You like to make assumptions and then go on tirades don't you? Would you like my login credentials so that you can continue to argue with yourself, or would you like to answer a question to continue?

My entire thing with this entire "feature" is that it is effort put into something that is only used when they allow and gives an inferior result to boot. It doesn't matter if your, plucked from the anus, 90% as good is enough for you it's wasted energy and resources on creating a mummer's farce that could've been spent on other optimizations that benefit the whole.

acroig Mar 2, 2019 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121907)
To be honest if there's no further DLSS updates for Metro I'm ok with it, it's pretty good as is.

Next game to have DLSS is Anthem, we'll see how that goes. Not sure if that's my kind of game though.

I might pick it up when it goes on deep sale.... in 2 weeks. ;)

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jay20016 (Post 1338121908)
You like to make assumptions and then go on tirades don't you? Would you like my login credentials so that you can continue to argue with yourself, or would you like to answer a question to continue?

My entire thing with this entire "feature" is that it is effort put into something that is only used when they allow and gives an inferior result to boot. It doesn't matter if your, plucked from the anus, 90% as good is enough for you it's wasted energy and resources on creating a mummer's farce that could've been spent on other optimizations that benefit the whole.

:lol: Plucked from the anus? :lol:

Your argument would be valid if Nvidia was taking away resources from something else. Let's call it VAJ69. So Nvidia works to implement VAJ69 in games, somehow I think the same "wasted resources" argument for DLSS would be applied to VAJ69 as well.

The way I see it, Nvidia gave us a choice with DLSS and it appears to be primarily aimed at RTX owners because ray tracing is demanding in the first place.

So 90% of native 4k at 140% the performance seems like a really good option to me. OPTION. If it sucks, like in Battlefield 5, I won't use it. But it works very well in Metro so I use it.

These 4k screenshots show there is very little detail lost if you want to see for yourself.

https://wccftech.com/metro-exodus-up...t-nvidia-dlss/

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121887)
Your baited statements like these have been reported:

It's fun to watch all the RTX 2080ti owners fall for a placebo effect to substantiate their expensive purchase.

But, hey, keep believing in the placebo effect, if it makes you happy and feel better for spending $1300 on a GPU. :D



Essentially you dropped in with those statements with the clear intent to troll/bait.




All of your comments are wrong and your issue you won't admit being wrong even with facts presented directly to you. Such as the case when you had all sorts of misinformation about Deep Learning itself and others had to correct you on numerous occasions.

As I said before, Battlefield 5 removed ray tracing on objects that didnt need them, like leaves. Did you see any reflections on leaves before the RTX performance patch? No, so that wasteful resource was eliminated. And there was an RTX rendering bug that allowed a large number of light bounces that they fixed.

I feel I am repeating myself here. There are videos from Digital Foundry and Dice themselves on the specific improvements in the other Battlefield 5 thread. Go have a gander.

If all you wanted to say was ray tracing is only really playable in 1080p "fully utilized", then that is yet another wrong statement...just for the fact that Battlefield 5 was fully playable at 1440p 60fps BEFORE any performance patches. Again, I feel I'm repeating myself here, this was posted in the Battlefield 5 RTX thread.

I'm sorry that you take my comment as a personal insult, it wasn't, it was just my observation, for people to justify their $1300 purchase. It's not a baited comment, it is my opinion of the situation.

The long ago arguement about deep learning, was not argued about with many others.. only you and 1 single comment from 1 other person, with me not continue the argument as we both have different perspectives and meaning on the definition of AI and deep learning.

You complain about about baited questions, but you continue to bring up old arguments in different threads and topics over and over that happened months and years ago, you have done it with AMD, Intel, Nvidia, etc.. Just to try and bait me into starting up old arguments again, all thought I have dropped it, hence why I discontinued arguing with you about it. Including coming into other forums topics (gaming the latest) to just drop snide comments and to try and run me out of those discussions.

I have not conceded, or admitted I am wrong concerning DLSS because from how I read and my interpretation of the full definition of AI and deep learning (machine learning).. DLSS does not meet the definition, in which I gave evidence that supported my position.. But that is an old argument, that we just need to agree to disagree on.. so stop bringing it up.

As for Battlefield 5 they went from, I believe 72 ray traces to 30.. that is reducing it by over 50%.. to sit and eat up the excuse that it was un-needed is just a pr statement to make people feel okay with the change and manipulate the facts to accept that Ray tracing optimizations, when indeed they removed many of the ray tracing being done to a lot of surfaces. Again, Battlefield 5 does not fully implement ray tracing, nor does metro, so you can stop talking out both sides of your mouth.. one minute saying it is impossible to fully use Ray tracing, as we don't have the hardware to do it yet, and then say that Battlefield 5 was playable at 60 fps before the fix with ray tracing, when you have already admitted that we cannot use Ray tracing to it's fullest.. Battlefield 5 doesn't even come close. So you counter your own argument with your own statements, as well as the fact that you manipulating facts, because the only way you could have been getting 60fps with raytracing prior to the optimization patch was if you had all settings on low.. ultra, it wasn't happening according to this demonstration and has a hard time doing it with the optimizations (NO DLSS, but even DLSS added to it goes along with my comments above concerning that it is all being done at 1440p and then upscaled to 4k, including the raytracing):


NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121889)
Are you and Jay competing for the Nobel prize to see who can repeat the same thing over and over again?

We already know 4k DLSS is 1440p upscaled. The question is if DLSS is doing enough a good job to warrant its use.

For Metro Exodus, YES.

For Battlefield 5, NO.

Metro Exodus gives a good, clear representation of the benefits of DLSS. It's quite funny reading the doomsday argument about blurring, artifacts, etc.. when I'm playing the game right now with everything Ultra including RTX and DLSS looks picture perfect as can be. I'd say it's about 90% equivalent to the native 4k image, with none of the aliasing artifacts.

Don't take my word for it though. There are other 2070/2080/2080Ti owners here. DLSS also works great at 1440p according to acroig since that's his native resolution.

:lol: And you completely ignore that just upscaling without the use of DLSS has equal performance and a better quality picture, or for argument sake, equal quality.. which translates to: DLSS is just smoke and mirrors and is don't nothing. This is where my placebo perspective comes into play.

It's also funny that nearly every review out there will completely disagree with your 90% equivalent of native 4k image, with some having the same opinion that has already been brought up here: that it just looks like they are using a sharpness filter in the latest fix in Metro. Now, we are not going to agree on most of this, so this is where you need to sit back and agree to disagree..

Everyone has a right to have different opinions, even if they don't support your positive outlook on the technology/company. We all have a right to voice such opinions (even if they seem wrong to you, or in the end, are completely wrong). But nobody had the right to chastise, or talk down to, and make fun of others for that have those difference of opinions, which it seems is what you like to do to everyone that disagrees with YOUR opinion. I admit, I am a stubborn person, and I am very hard to sway from my beliefs, and I am a very course and straight forward speaking person which to some comes across as insulting (personal trait that I have been trying to manage for years), but I don't generally attack people and make fun of people in such a matter continually and/or on purpose. I don't know if the same could be said about you, because once you get tired of someone's position, you don't just simply say, lets agree to disagree, you just start making personal attacks and making fun of such people, dropping snide remarks, and never drop it and you seem to hold a grudge in every conversation and topic going forward. It's been 30+ years, but every time you do it, I feel like I am back in middle school and high school. So, do us all a favor, if you feel like you are repeating yourself and/or are tired of discussing the topic, just simply agree to disagree and don't bring it up again.

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 12:04 PM

It's clear the only reason you came in with those blanket insultive comments towards every 2080ti owner here is to poison this thread with vitriol, as you have in countless other threads. Thats why i alerted the mods o your presence here, especially with those starting comments.

Rather than go back and forth with your nonsense, here are my thoughts on bf5 prior to any patch:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=34048514

Looks i was getting 52+ at Rotterdam at Ultra at 1440p. Seems more than playable than just 1080p.

Now, show me evidence of image quality diminished after the performance optimizations. Make sure it includes before and after shots

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121930)
It's clear the only reason you came in with those blanket insultive comments towards every 2080ti owner here is to poison this thread with vitriol, as you have in countless other threads. Thats why i alerted the mods o your presence here, especially with those starting comments.

read my edit in my above comment, this is a perfect example. Thanks.

Quote:

Rather than go back and forth with your nonsense, here are my thoughts on bf5 prior to any patch:

http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthread.php?t=34048514

Looks i was getting 52+ at Rotterdam at Ultra at 1440p. Seems more than playable than just 1080p.

Now, show me evidence of image quality diminished after the performance optimizations. Make sure it includes before and after shots
Again, you are talking out both sides of your mouth, as you said:
Quote:

just for the fact that Battlefield 5 was fully playable at 1440p 60fps BEFORE any performance patches.
You did not say 52 fps. So thanks for showing us evidence of how you change up the facts to suit your position. For the record, I actually missed the 1440p as it didn't register because we have been mainly talking about 4k, so my actual response was geared towards 4k, not 1440p.. but you have even validated my point with your own examples using your own previous posts, as 52 fps is not 60 fps either way. :D

As for showing you evidence of image quality diminishing after the performance optimizations: WHY?

I never made such a statement, or implied that was the case, All I said is they reduced the amount of ray tracing by 50% and running a watered down version of ray tracing, so why would I show you evidence of such image quality changes or diminishes after the optimizations, that I never said exist?

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 01:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121934)
read my edit in my above comment, this is a perfect example. Thanks.

No such example existed. Thanks.


Quote:


Again, you are talking out both sides of your mouth, as you said: You did not say 52 fps. So thanks for showing us evidence of how you change up the facts to suit your position. For the record, I actually missed the 1440p as it didn't register because we have been mainly talking about 4k, so my actual response was geared towards 4k, not 1440p.. but you have even validated my point with your own examples using your own previous posts, as 52 fps is not 60 fps either way. :D

Thanks for showing us (yet again) that you only see what you want to see.

Do yourself a favor, scroll down a few posts, look at the top left corner of that screenshot. What framerate do you see there?

In fact you're so clung up on that 52 number here is what I said exactly:

60fps vsync locked in that area with all those reflections going on. Other areas did dip into the 30's but I was surprised overall it stayed above 50fps most of the time.


Seriously, you're doing the "you" thing where you dig yourself a hole and refuse to climb back up with dignity due to your inability to acknowledge you're wrong or misunderstood something. I'll give you a pass on this one if it makes you feel better.


Quote:

As for showing you evidence of image quality diminishing after the performance optimizations: WHY?


Quote:

I never made such a statement, or implied that was the case,
Quote:

All I said is they reduced the amount of ray tracing by 50% and running a watered down version of ray tracing, so why would I show you evidence of such image quality changes or diminishes, that I never said exist?
What is a "watered down version of ray tracing"?

Please, show me a watered down version of this ray tracing. This would naturally show up in the reflection quality post patch.

Shouldn't be too hard, one of the things every reviewer checked after the performance patch was to see if ray tracing quality diminished in any way. Please, show me your source where this was confirmed and the before/after screenshots.


Or... could it be the internal optimizations did not affect visible ray tracing output overall? Nah, it has to be watered down. Just waiting on your visual proof.....

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121937)
just more examples of me manipulating my own comments to mean what I need them to mean at the time I am using them to support my position

:lol: Why must you bring in a completely different thread to try and support your argument on a comment you made in this thread? Either way, being playable at 60 fps means you are averaging 60 fps, not above 50 fps, or 52 fps, or hitting hitting 60fps. But you can manipulate your various comments to mean what ever you want, as I am done with talking about it.

Battlefield V has been a watered down version of Ray tracing from the start, and their optimizations reduced the amount of ray tracing from there. But, again, you are cherry picking my comment, manipulating it, and trying to mold it into your own definition to mean what you want it to mean so you can argue about it, knowing damn good and well that is not what I said, meant, or implied.. so stop!

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 01:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121941)
Being playable at 60 fps means you are averaging 60 fps, not above 50 fps, or 52 fps, or hitting hitting 60fps, but you can manipulate into meaning what ever you want. I am done talking about it.

Nothing is manipulated, the data is there to see and you've found yourself on the wrong end again and can't admit to it. You stormed in here clamoring how ray tracing in BF5 was only good for 1080p, I showed you I was hitting 60 fps vsync locked at 1440p and RTX Ultra in that section I was testing in.


Quote:

Battlefield V has been a watered down version of Ray tracing from the start, and their optimizations reduced the amount of ray tracing from there. But, again, you are cherry picking my comment, manipulating it, and trying to mold it into your own definition to mean what you want it to mean so you can argue about it, knowing damn good and well that is not what I said, meant, or implied.. so stop!
Watered down from the start? From what? Please provide specifics.

Also still waiting on those screenshots that shows a reduction in ray tracing quality from before the performance patch and afterwards. Side by side would be preferable since it would immediately show the difference.

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 02:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121943)
Nothing is manipulated, the data is there to see and you've found yourself on the wrong end again and can't admit to it. You stormed in here clamoring how ray tracing in BF5 was only good for 1080p, I showed you I was hitting 60 fps vsync locked at 1440p and RTX Ultra in that section I was testing in.


Watered down from the start? From what? Please provide specifics.

Also still waiting on those screenshots that shows a reduction in ray tracing quality from before the performance patch and afterwards. Side by side would be preferable since it would immediately show the difference.

More cherry picking and manipulation. First the talk of ray tracing only being good at 1080p was brought up months ago, when it was first introduced. And as optimizations and changes are being made, you keep making comments towards those that stated such a thing as time progresses, which at the time was accurate statements and if ray tracing was fully implemented, is still accurate today. Tell you what, how about you go argue with Bill Gates on his comment "640K ought to be enough for anybody." since he stated that years ago.. and see where it gets you, because you are kind of doing the same thing here about past comments made by Many people as if they hold true today, based off of what was happening months ago. Then you ignore parts of what I say, aka cherry picking my comments and trying to manipulate them to all mean the same.

In this thread. I said Battlefield 5 and Metro does not fully utilize Raytracing, and if fully Utilized, it would only be good at 1080p (I will add to that comment, and say that it may not even be able to do that as it might be a stretch with todays hardware). You even admitted that we don't have the hardware to fully utilize ray tracing.. So what do you call it? I call it a water down version since it can't be fully utilized. I have no reason to summit any screen shots of image quality differences, as I have not argued that point, it is all a made up argument that is only in your head, because you have made it up to try and argue something else with me. Please stop.

Now you have went from playable at 60 fps, to hitting 60 fps. Completely two different statements with two different meanings. But, we can go round and round all day long, because you will just continue being you, manipulating and cherry picking and try to argue made up stuff that was never intended. So,it is time to firmly say it is time to just agree that we disagree and end it.

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121947)
More cherry picking and manipulation. First the talk of ray tracing only being good at 1080p was brought up months ago, when it was first introduced. And as optimizations and changes are being made, you keep making comments towards those that stated such a thing as time progresses, which at the time was accurate statements and if ray tracing was fully implemented, is still accurate today. Tell you what, how about you go argue with Bill Gates on his comment "640K ought to be enough for anybody." since he stated that years ago.. and see where it gets you, because you are kind of doing the same thing here about past comments made by Many people as if they hold true today, based off of what was happening months ago. Then you ignore parts of what I say, aka cherry picking my comments and trying to manipulate them to all mean the same.

In this thread. I said Battlefield 5 and Metro does not fully utilize Raytracing, and if fully Utilized, it would only be good at 1080p (I will add to that comment, and say that it may not even be able to do that as it might be a stretch with todays hardware). You even admitted that we don't have the hardware to fully utilize ray tracing.. So what do you call it? I call it a water down version since it can't be fully utilized. I have no reason to summit any screen shots as I have not argued that point, it is all a made up argument that is only in your head, because you have made it up to try and argue something else with me. Please stop.

Now you have went from playable at 60 fps, to hitting 60 fps. Completely two different statements with two different meanings.

Please provide specifics. In what state was Battlefield 5 "fully ray traced" that you claimed was only playable at 1080p? At what point did it become "watered down"? Where is the before/after screenshots when ray tracing in BF5 was "watered down" from its initial state?

Mangler Mar 2, 2019 02:31 PM

Has anyone ever claimed that the rtx cards would be able to fully raytrace anything?

Didn't nvidia themselves push the hybrid rendering aspect from the start?

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Exposed (Post 1338121948)
Please provide specifics. In what state was Battlefield 5 "fully ray traced" that you claimed was only playable at 1080p? At what point did it become "watered down"? Where is the before/after screenshots when ray tracing in BF5 was "watered down" from its initial state?

Now you are just trolling, as I never said Battlefield ever fully utilized ray tracing even at 1080p I said IF, hence why I consider it a water down version of Ray tracing, which is what it is.

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121951)
Now you are just trolling, as I never said Battlefield ever fully utilized ray tracing even at 1080p I said IF, hence why I consider it a water down version of Ray tracing, which is what it is.

Is there a difference in image quality with RTX Ultra from the release game to after the RTX performance patch?

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 02:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangler (Post 1338121950)
Has anyone ever claimed that the rtx cards would be able to fully raytrace anything?

Didn't nvidia themselves push the hybrid rendering aspect from the start?

Not sure. But isn't DLSS the hybrid rendering aspect they are talking about?

Exposed Mar 2, 2019 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangler (Post 1338121950)
Has anyone ever claimed that the rtx cards would be able to fully raytrace anything?

Didn't nvidia themselves push the hybrid rendering aspect from the start?

No one has claimed that. Not even Microsoft's own DXR specifications specifies anything of the sort.

What DXR allows is purpose specific ray tracing that can be used in tandem with traditional rendering. Reflections for BF5, global illumination for Metro Exodus.

That's why it is strange certain individuals would bring up the argument "well it's not fully ray traced", completely ignoring the uplift in visual quality this hybrid rendering already gives.

Case in point, another game to include ray tracing later this month (Justice MMO). HUGE difference in quality with the ray tracing renderer enabled. This game does both ray traced illuminations and reflections.


Cream Mar 2, 2019 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mangler (Post 1338121950)
Has anyone ever claimed that the rtx cards would be able to fully raytrace anything?

Didn't nvidia themselves push the hybrid rendering aspect from the start?

They certainly did.

Can't believe how childish some so called adult can act over a piece of technology.

Cream Mar 2, 2019 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121954)
Not sure. But isn't DLSS the hybrid rendering aspect they are talking about?

Anyone that has even slightly put a bit of effort into researching ray tracing and Nvidia SHOULD know that these card are nothing but a stepping stone. Instead of looking at what they cant' do why not look at what they can do. Maybe appreciate the HUGE jump in raytracing performance over anything that has gone before.

SIrPauly Mar 2, 2019 04:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by NWR_Midnight (Post 1338121954)
Not sure. But isn't DLSS the hybrid rendering aspect they are talking about?

Hybrid is raster+raytracing, too.

https://devblogs.nvidia.com/effectiv...dering-engine/

NWR_Midnight Mar 2, 2019 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cream (Post 1338121970)
If you're 'Not sure' why not find out before you act like a spoilt 12 year old. Anyone that has even slightly put a bit of effort into researching ray tracing and Nvidia SHOULD know that these card are nothing but a stepping stone. Instead of looking at what they cant' do why not look at what they can do. Maybe appreciate the HUGE jump in raytracing performance over anything that has gone before.

Excuse me? What's with the unwarranted personal attack, specially since I am not acting like a spoilt 12 year old? I don't know you, nor have I ever had any conversation with you, but you sure gave me a insightful first impression of you.

What the RTX can and can't do is all relative to the topic, as is the level of implementation each game uses. Every piece of technology is just a stepping stone to what is coming next as it is a never ending cycle.

Babel-17 Mar 3, 2019 12:15 AM

Owner of a RTX 2080 FE here. I game on a 43" Sony XBR 800D, fwiw. My only experience with DLSS is from that Final Fantasy demo. I thought DLSS did a good job of eliminating noise, which I hate.

I'm not trying to change any minds, I'm just conversing with fellow RTX owners.

Two things. 1) Are we familiar with RAR files? Compression (which allows a 10 pound sack to hold eleven pounds of stuff) aside, broken RAR files can be fixed by parity (PAR) files. Those files contain information that has a relationship to the data that should be stored in the unbroken files. Apply them, and if you have enough of them, they can fix any broken RAR file in a collection. We can look at the files resulting from a training session as parity files, and a resolution under 4K, like 2560 x 1440 as being a bit broken, and by applying the training files, the image is repaired (albeit imperfectly).

2) My Sony incorporates a technology (Reality Creation) that has some similarity to DLSS. When playing back low resolution/low bit rate video, it can look blurry and blocky when upscaled to my panel's native 3840 x 2160. But Sony includes a library of general information for how stuff should look, and it can apply that to add clarity and reduce blockiness. The idea dates back to the 90s, and it's continually been improved on. My impression is that Sony keeps beefing up the library it includes with the sets it sells, and improving how it's implemented.

https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/P...032/index.html

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-l...ony-lcd-s.html

My point here is that DLSS isn't mumbo jumbo, nor is it that radical an idea. Just like Sony keeps improving on DRC, so too will nVidia improve on DLSS.

LordHawkwind Mar 3, 2019 06:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bill dennison (Post 1338121734)
only DLSS is at lower res

you can have RT at full 4k 30 to 45 FPS


It's fun to watch all the non RTX owners with their sour grapes

...
is it perfect no is it better than anything AMD has now oh hell yes


and my 2080 ti runs division 2 beta cranked up to max at 4k well witch is the main reason I got it (to run games at 4k) not for DLSS or RTX they are just a bonus

sorry AMD has no card that will run games at 4k well when they do I will buy one but till then Vega 2 is a joke so NV is the only game in town .

I played the first part of the Division 2 yesterday and was getting between 80 -90 fps with everything cranked up at 1440p. More than enough for me.

BTW forget about ray tracing on the latest tomb raider it's now available on game pass for the Xbone. Can't see them being bothered update from hereon-in.

jimjobob Mar 3, 2019 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Babel-17 (Post 1338122020)
Owner of a RTX 2080 FE here. I game on a 43" Sony XBR 800D, fwiw. My only experience with DLSS is from that Final Fantasy demo. I thought DLSS did a good job of eliminating noise, which I hate.

I'm not trying to change any minds, I'm just conversing with fellow RTX owners.

Two things. 1) Are we familiar with RAR files? Compression (which allows a 10 pound sack to hold eleven pounds of stuff) aside, broken RAR files can be fixed by parity (PAR) files. Those files contain information that has a relationship to the data that should be stored in the unbroken files. Apply them, and if you have enough of them, they can fix any broken RAR file in a collection. We can look at the files resulting from a training session as parity files, and a resolution under 4K, like 2560 x 1440 as being a bit broken, and by applying the training files, the image is repaired (albeit imperfectly).

2) My Sony incorporates a technology (Reality Creation) that has some similarity to DLSS. When playing back low resolution/low bit rate video, it can look blurry and blocky when upscaled to my panel's native 3840 x 2160. But Sony includes a library of general information for how stuff should look, and it can apply that to add clarity and reduce blockiness. The idea dates back to the 90s, and it's continually been improved on. My impression is that Sony keeps beefing up the library it includes with the sets it sells, and improving how it's implemented.

https://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/News/P...032/index.html

https://www.avsforum.com/forum/166-l...ony-lcd-s.html

My point here is that DLSS isn't mumbo jumbo, nor is it that radical an idea. Just like Sony keeps improving on DRC, so too will nVidia improve on DLSS.

Sony had some pretty amazing upscaling for video games in their high end models. I briefly owned a 930 and the end result of upscaling games from 1080 game me an image almost as impressive as 4k native. Upscale a 4k DSR image output at 1080 back to 4k looked even better than native 4k by a long shot. Too bad the corners would warp and cause light bleed. My LG oled kills it in everything else but I miss the upscaling.

bill dennison Mar 3, 2019 11:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordHawkwind (Post 1338122029)
I played the first part of the Division 2 yesterday and was getting between 80 -90 fps with everything cranked up at 1440p. More than enough for me.

BTW forget about ray tracing on the latest tomb raider it's now available on game pass for the Xbone. Can't see them being bothered update from hereon-in.

https://schedule.gdconf.com/session/...-nvidia/865256

LordHawkwind Mar 3, 2019 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bill dennison (Post 1338122063)

So theirs an engineers conference to talk about it but no information about it ever being released. Maybe in the next Tomb Raider :lol:

acroig Mar 3, 2019 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordHawkwind (Post 1338122067)
So theirs an engineers conference to talk about it but no information about it ever being released. Maybe in the next Tomb Raider :lol:

Weird, right?

Babel-17 Mar 3, 2019 01:42 PM

Here's a newer and better link that imo better gets to the point I was trying to make about the similarity to DLSS to be found in how Sony improves lower quality images.

Quote:

See more detail with databases for noise reduction and upscaling
Dual database processing

One database is used to clean the picture, reducing on-screen noise. The other is used to upscale the resolution, improving clarity. These two powerful image improvement databases work together, dynamically improving pixels in real time. Each database has tens of thousands of references, amassed from our experience creating content for TV and movies over the years.
https://www.sony.com/electronics/4k-...-upscaling-tvs

Lol, even the image of the eagle looks like "DLSS on, DLSS off". :)

Off topic but that's for 2018's lower high end model. I just checked, and I bought my X800D going on three years ago, back in July 2016. I could argue myself into buying a set like this, but it lacks the newest version of HDMI, and any display port. But it does do "1440p @ 120 Hz
: Yes (forced resolution required) "
which is intriguing. https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/sony/x900f

I just did some searching and I'm not seeing Sony getting behind HDMI 2.1 yet in its 2019 LED sets. Some other manufacturers aren't as shy, and might be tempting me. Anyone know if nVidia has said anything recently about the possibility of the RTX series cards HDMI connectors being capable of HDMI 2.1 connectivity by way of a software update? I remember there being curiosity about that when the RTX series was released.

bill dennison Mar 3, 2019 03:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LordHawkwind (Post 1338122067)
So theirs an engineers conference to talk about it but no information about it ever being released. Maybe in the next Tomb Raider :lol:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jJEXRrK-kWQ

:bleh:


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners. Copyright 1998-2011 Rage3D.com