Nvidia RTX DLSS/Ray Tracing Discussion

[acroig]

Originally Posted by bill dennison

about 6 months

So he's not wrong then.

[bill dennison]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

Was thinking more-so about fidelity but both of those features are welcomed but not sure about disruptive. Personally liked the efficiency of infinity cache.

Freesync disrupted the hell out of G-sync

[bill dennison]

Originally Posted by acroig

So he's not wrong then.

some what
there were never many Mantle games released

Mantles only job was to push Microsoft off DX11( that NV ruled in ) and it worked very well and added Vulkan to DX12

and AMD is still better at DX12


and a NV only backer screaming about proprietary
pot and kettle

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by bill dennison

Freesync disrupted the hell out of G-sync

AMD didn't really do much for FreeSync though.. that's a VESA standard that AMD adopted.

[Trunks0]

Alright guys, back to about DLSS. Lets not derail to much in here

[Ziklitschli]

Exposed

I'll adress the "meat". Not to further the main debate though, but because those are actually good examples of why I don't want the debate anymore.

Originally Posted by Exposed

- You have an RTX 2060 and admit to not playing any games with ray tracing and DLSS other than Mechwarrior 5.

My suspicions about DLSS are based on common sense. You don't need to bring any technical analysis, or have any first hand experience with the technique to ask a simple question

"Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when TAA (or equiv.) blurring is out of the equation?"

and no amount of screaming and kicking changes that. So, I answered all the inquiries about my setup only out of courtesy (which was a mistake, btw, and gradually led to a "wall of text" that you were so eager to jump on) but it's completly irrelevant to my point, you've wasted and are still wasting a lot of time with what for me is basically just noise.

Also I don't dismiss any of the analysis, I just don't think they claim they say the same thing as you. They compare to native with TAA and bring conclusions about native with TAA, not a sweeping dream like conclusions about reconstruction improving on pure 4k image or producing nearly indistinguishable from x64 supersampled image in game, where for the latter again you need zero technical analysis to know is not happening. It's a semantic thing here just as much as technical, which I think I said like a year ago or sth already.

Not to mention, when Trunks0 did my work for me and found a guy who did exactly what I was asking for all the time, compared to native without TAA, and came with exactly the conclusions I predicted, that it can't match let alone surpass it, you don't even mention it.

Originally Posted by Exposed

- You claim 1080p DSR from 4k gives the same level of detail as native 4k. My simple HD/4k picture and your Nvidia image link proves this simply is not the case (despite whatever marketing speak you're reading).

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

Games with FXAA/ SMAA only like Destiny 2, look much better on 1080p with DSRx4. It's sth like 2560 detail/ sharpness wise but stabilised and brought together by SSAA.

Originally Posted by Exposed

This just cleans up the image but you're still pixel limited/. You could do the same (at a lesser extent) at 4k as well.

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

Ofc you are pixel limited. but less detail is culled when you supersample.

Originally Posted by Exposed

What's with the pixels? You think it doesn't matter? Are you saying if on a native 4k monitor you set a game to 1080p and enable DSR it will have the same output as native resolution? No it won't, because you still have only 1080p worth of pixels to display the final result. Again, this isn't hard to showcase if you think the former is a better option.

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

No, but not because of physical number of pixels. It's not the limiting factor for detail.

So, as you can clearly see, I never said that it gives the same detail as 4k, actually I did exactly the opposite, denying it time and time again. All I said was that the physical number of pixels is not a limit for 1080p DSR from 4k, so 2x2 supersample. You'd see improved detail from 4x4 still, just like you see improved detail from DSR over plain 1080p, ofc diminishing and I don't know where the limit is. Though if nVidia is doing x64 so 8x8 to teach their little robots, must mean it makes sense still, doesn't it.

So you misrepresent my position, and then repeat it over and over again and this is only one example, you do so much of it that all over the place that it quickly gets impossible to discuss anymore. See below.

Originally Posted by Exposed

- You claim it is better to run no AA than DLSS.

This is actually uncomfortable. No, I didn't.

If you're about this quote

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

Yes I also want to convince everyone that it's better to play without AA than with DLSS, because of that detail I don't ever care about when I lose it playing 1080p x4 DSR (not because pixels though). See I'm writing these for you now.

then see bolded. If not, IDK.

I never run games without AA btw. Still haven't even played Bloodborne for that very reason, it might be the first quite soon though, as they seem adamant to never fix a game that needs fixing the most.

Originally Posted by Exposed

You constantly bring up RGSS is better than DLSS for AA but never consider the feasibility it simply isn't practical to run. You should know this best of all with a low end 2060.

Sgssaa is impractical to run on latest and greatest AAA console ports. It is feasible on dozens of games I still play, many more than DLSS titles are there in general. Like entire ps3 generation, just few days ago I played Alien Breed for example, Dead Space 1&2 etc etc.

And the low end 2060 is a super powerful card for vast majority of games, just not the heaviest from a last year or two. I don't need new games, I'm happy playing sth like Roma Surrectum mod for Rome 1 (looks great btw http://www.rage3d.com/board/showthre...991762&page=8), PC for me is having history of gaming three clicks away at all times.

Anyway the natural answer to a sweeping "DLSS is best AA on the market" is "SGSSAA". The natural answer to "DLSS is the best AA for newest titles with raytracing if you want to keep performance" is "Yes". You're constantly mixing the two, same with DLSS. Again nothing to do with what, how and where I play.

Btw, one of my first quotes

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

That's because, for games with fxaa only that don't respond well to it (some do actually), supersampling is the only option, and even for MSAA you need insane resources that make it hardly viable for newest titles.

So, again, you're trying to prove sth to me that I said in the first place, and then call it frivolous when the only thing I'm left with is to throw one liners at the absurdity.

To sum up, I said all of this in multiple forms already, obviously leads to nowhere, so let's agree to disagree and actively avoid discussing anything ever again.

[NIGELG]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

When is the last time Amd offered a disruptive feature first? Usually hear about the consoles and being more open for over ten years, like here with Bill



And yet Amd continues to lose discrete share.. Have been hearing this as far back when Amd had Sony, X-box and Nintendo

SAM caused Nvidia to rush out their Reziable BAR. A feature I am very concerned about using on my 3070 with all the BIOS flashing etc.

AMD was predicted to be put out of business years ago by Nvidia and Intel. You would do well not to rule out a comeback by AMD in graphics just like they did with CPU'S.AMD should not be under estimated. Ask Intel.

Anyhow this is a DLSS/Ray Tracing thread and I am on record as saying I like the features(DLSS/Ray Tracing) but they certainly are not must haves at this point.

[Ziklitschli]

Mechwarrior 5 Mercs

[NIGELG]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

It seems Amd is content with bringing the console experience to the Pc instead of innovating new Pc gaming experiences..

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

Sorry, if I upset some but firmly believe AMD and starting to see more effort in investing in an ecosytem and developer tools like FidelityFX. Amd isn't complaining any more and working hard to build the brand and ecosystem.

Contradicting statements here, Sir.

[LordHawkwind]

Originally Posted by NIGELG

SAM caused Nvidia to rush out their Reziable BAR. A feature I am very concerned about using on my 3070 with all the BIOS flashing etc.

AMD was predicted to be put out of business years ago by Nvidia and Intel. You would do well not to rule out a comeback by AMD in graphics just like they did with CPU'S.AMD should not be under estimated. Ask Intel.

Anyhow this is a DLSS/Ray Tracing thread and I am on record as saying I like the features(DLSS/Ray Tracing) but they certainly are not must haves at this point.

Flashing the bios for me was the easy bit just make sure you get the right bios for your card and it takes about 30 seconds. Asus also provide a guide (probably most do) which was easy to follow to make changes in the bios. The pain was my windows installation was on the old file system, but as Acroig did it just takes a command line instruction to change that. Hey presto resizable bar enabled. Here's a link to the Asus guide which explains it all https://edgeup.asus.com/2021/guide-h...red-gaming-pc/

Can't say I've noticed any difference but it's free and might come in useful in future titles.

[Ziklitschli]

Mechwarrior 5 TXAA (or whichever cancer there is) with Fidelity FX sharpen

[acroig]

Z these pics you're posting are meant to show what?

[Ziklitschli]

The first batch are DLSS. I said I will post. I actually wanted to post them in the game thread, where I think I saw a post how it looks 2010ish, and I disagree heh

The other two are if smb wanted to compare.

[acroig]

Got it, TY.

[Exposed]

Originally Posted by Ziklitschli

Exposed

My suspicions about DLSS are based on common sense. You don't need to bring any technical analysis, or have any first hand experience with the technique to ask a simple question

"Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when TAA (or equiv.) blurring is out of the equation?"

and no amount of screaming and kicking changes that. So, I answered all the inquiries about my setup only out of courtesy (which was a mistake, btw, and gradually led to a "wall of text" that you were so eager to jump on) but it's completly irrelevant to my point, you've wasted and are still wasting a lot of time with what for me is basically just noise.

Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when TAA (or equiv.) blurring is out of the equation? -- The answer is still yes. This includes comparisons to other forms of AA such as SMAA, MSAA, and SSAA itself.

Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when NO AA is out of the equation? The answer is going to be "at least on par" in terms of fine detail, and "better" since DLSS eliminates all the drawbacks of running with no AA in the first place like razor sharp edges, stepped lines, shimmering, etc..

Digital Foundry did a great comparison of a game that basically had no AA. I suggest you watch this and listen to how they bash TAA in the beginning for all it's blurriness and how DLSS 2.0 would perform against this game that had no default TAA to begin with.



Nioh 2's basic rendering lacks much in the way of any form of anti-aliasing at all. It's pretty much as raw as raw can be. So the question is: can DLSS retain its performance advantage and still provide an actual increase to image quality up against native resolution rendering? Remarkably, the answer is yes.


In general, the drawbacks with DLSS 2.0 isn't really to do with it's fine detail reconstruction (which is it's strength), but it's temporal artifacts that occasionally manifests.

Also I don't dismiss any of the analysis, I just don't think they claim they say the same thing as you. They compare to native with TAA and bring conclusions about native with TAA, not a sweeping dream like conclusions about reconstruction improving on pure 4k image or producing nearly indistinguishable from x64 supersampled image in game, where for the latter again you need zero technical analysis to know is not happening. It's a semantic thing here just as much as technical, which I think I said like a year ago or sth already.

You are dismissive of their analysis from your own words. They even made a video specifically for your comparison no AA argument, see prior link.

Not to mention, when Trunks0 did my work for me and found a guy who did exactly what I was asking for all the time, compared to native without TAA, and came with exactly the conclusions I predicted, that it can't match let alone surpass it, you don't even mention it.

And yet there are other articles from more reputable sites that found the opposite. Including our very own eyes who own Metro Exodus enhanced edition and posted our own comments here in this forum. If you have to "find a guy" to make your point, rather than doing your own homework, then maybe you should rethink how you debate. BTW that guy didn't come up to the same conclusions as you, and his raw DLSS quality screenshots from his folder don't match your conclusions either. I hate to say it you might want to do your own research and provide your own links rather than try to have someone else do it for you and then you skim/summarize over it.

So, as you can clearly see, I never said that it gives the same detail as 4k, actually I did exactly the opposite, denying it time and time again. All I said was that the physical number of pixels is not a limit for 1080p DSR from 4k, so 2x2 supersample. You'd see improved detail from 4x4 still, just like you see improved detail from DSR over plain 1080p, ofc diminishing and I don't know where the limit is. Though if nVidia is doing x64 so 8x8 to teach their little robots, must mean it makes sense still, doesn't it.

So you misrepresent my position, and then repeat it over and over again and this is only one example, you do so much of it that all over the place that it quickly gets impossible to discuss anymore. See below.

Detail is directly related to the number of physical pixels. There's no getting around it.

https://i2.wp.com/overmental.com/wp-...02/boixmms.jpg

Anyway the natural answer to a sweeping "DLSS is best AA on the market" is "SGSSAA".

Then prove it. Post your screenshots (I would really rather it be a detailed game and not something old looking like Mechwarrior 5 though). Make sure to include performance numbers.

[NIGELG]

Originally Posted by Exposed

Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when TAA (or equiv.) blurring is out of the equation? -- The answer is still yes. This includes comparisons to other forms of AA such as SMAA, MSAA, and SSAA itself.

Does the reconstruction still produce better detail than native when NO AA is out of the equation? The answer is going to be "at least on par" in terms of fine detail, and "better" since DLSS eliminates all the drawbacks of running with no AA in the first place like razor sharp edges, stepped lines, shimmering, etc..

Digital Foundry did a great comparison of a game that basically had no AA. I suggest you watch this and listen to how they bash TAA in the beginning for all it's blurriness and how DLSS 2.0 would perform against this game that had no default TAA to begin with.



Nioh 2's basic rendering lacks much in the way of any form of anti-aliasing at all. It's pretty much as raw as raw can be. So the question is: can DLSS retain its performance advantage and still provide an actual increase to image quality up against native resolution rendering? Remarkably, the answer is yes.


In general, the drawbacks with DLSS 2.0 isn't really to do with it's fine detail reconstruction (which is it's strength), but it's temporal artifacts that occasionally manifests.





You are dismissive of their analysis from your own words. They even made a video specifically for your comparison no AA argument, see prior link.



And yet there are other articles from more reputable sites that found the opposite. Including our very own eyes who own Metro Exodus enhanced edition and posted our own comments here in this forum. If you have to "find a guy" to make your point, rather than doing your own homework, then maybe you should rethink how you debate. BTW that guy didn't come up to the same conclusions as you, and his raw DLSS quality screenshots from his folder don't match your conclusions either. I hate to say it you might want to do your own research and provide your own links rather than try to have someone else do it for you and then you skim/summarize over it.









Detail is directly related to the number of physical pixels. There's no getting around it.

https://i2.wp.com/overmental.com/wp-...02/boixmms.jpg




Then prove it. Post your screenshots (I would really rather it be a detailed game and not something old looking like Mechwarrior 5 though). Make sure to include performance numbers.

Very useful videos here. The differences are stark in some of the Control comparisons.

[Trunks0]

It's very well documented by Digital Foundry and others that DLSS 2.0 can loose fine details or effects like partial details and some texture details(See Wolfenstein: Youngblood, Death Stranding and Cyberpunk for easy to reference examples). It's not a deal breaker, as it can reconstruct/resolve other stuff. But this is one of the trade-offs of DLSS.

I'd love it if some one did a really big breakdown on DLSS 2.0. Pointing out the positives and negatives. A Deep drive across some of the best implementations and worst implementations. But we don't really have one. So we scramble around trying to find articles and youtube videos for per-game case examples.

And Digital Foundry, as much as I love em, has been getting more and more sus on their analysis stuff. To the point where some times there stuff is starting to sound like advertisement instead of a real analysis. The Metro Exodus Enhanced edition one is a pretty good example. That was more like a paid expose' on whats new in the enhanced edition and less of a breakdown and proper analysis of whats going on.

[acroig]

@ Pauly - DLSS seems to work with engines as a plug in. Unreal engine has it as does others so I would guess developer work may not be as much to get it implemented.

[Trunks0]

SIrPauly, yup. I'd generally turn it on if I had it unless there is a known issue or something looked off to me.

And acroig is right. It is way easier to implement now as it works in a more generalized fashion.

[LordHawkwind]

Originally Posted by Trunks0

SIrPauly, yup. I'd generally turn it on if I had it unless there is a known issue or something looked off to me.

And acroig is right. It is way easier to implement now as it works in a more generalized fashion.

DLSS also seems to check what your GPU can render and from my experience is only enabled if you can't render a game at a specific FPS. I have a few games that support DLSS but I can't enable it because it decides at my resolution of 3440x1440 I don't need it to get the best frame rates.

From Nvidia "When your GPU’s frame rendering time is shorter than what it takes to execute the DLSS model, we don’t enable DLSS. We only enable DLSS for cases where you will receive a performance gain. DLSS availability is game-specific, and depends on your GPU and selected display resolution."

If it works it's free and if it doesn't that just means you don't need it. Sounds good to me.

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by LordHawkwind

DLSS also seems to check what your GPU can render and from my experience is only enabled if you can't render a game at a specific FPS. I have a few games that support DLSS but I can't enable it because it decides at my resolution of 3440x1440 I don't need it to get the best frame rates.

From Nvidia "When your GPU’s frame rendering time is shorter than what it takes to execute the DLSS model, we don’t enable DLSS. We only enable DLSS for cases where you will receive a performance gain. DLSS availability is game-specific, and depends on your GPU and selected display resolution."

If it works it's free and if it doesn't that just means you don't need it. Sounds good to me.

...huh? Unless you're using GeForce Experience, which is automatically setting your in-game settings, then you should be able to enable DLSS unless you're playing a game that has not been updated to DLSS 2.0, in which you cannot enable it due to the 3440x1440 resolution that is typically not supported for earlier versions of DLSS.

Nothing is free, either. There are trade-offs with DLSS. It's definitely the best all-around solution for higher performance while sacrificing minimal or nearly indistinguishable IQ, but it's not always the best in motion.

I don't understand why you'd play Fortnite at 720p (which isn't your native resolution) and then say that DLSS handles geometry and aliasing well. What are you investigating? That DLSS uses TAA and TAA does it's job?

[NIGELG]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

Just investigated 720p a bit in Fortnite and to my surprise Dlss handles geometry and texture aliasing respectfully. Stark difference with Dlss than with no aa. Tend to investigate very low resolutions to see limitations easier and then work up to higher resolutions.

So you got your RTX?

[Trunks0]

Originally Posted by Nunz

I don't understand why you'd play Fortnite at 720p (which isn't your native resolution) and then say that DLSS handles geometry and aliasing well. What are you investigating? That DLSS uses TAA and TAA does it's job?

He said why

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

Tend to investigate very low resolutions to see limitations easier and then work up to higher resolutions.

[Nunz]

...but what is being investigated? What limitations?

[Nunz]

He's not a gamer. That's a paid promotion by NV. If you think that anything said in that video can be even remotely honest or objective.. well that would be interesting

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by SIrPauly

This paid promoter talks about and shared some limitations and not all rosy. certainly offered more data than you.

I've shared thoughts and info on DLSS before. I've also used it since it's inception, something you can't say. This topic is a circular roundabout that goes nowhere. I'm sure you're doing a lot of "investigation" playing at 720p.. lol.

Your smartass comment is humorous though. I'm not surprised you've managed to find and watch a video paid for by NV, though

[LordHawkwind]

Originally Posted by Nunz

...huh? Unless you're using GeForce Experience, which is automatically setting your in-game settings, then you should be able to enable DLSS unless you're playing a game that has not been updated to DLSS 2.0, in which you cannot enable it due to the 3440x1440 resolution that is typically not supported for earlier versions of DLSS.

Nothing is free, either. There are trade-offs with DLSS. It's definitely the best all-around solution for higher performance while sacrificing minimal or nearly indistinguishable IQ, but it's not always the best in motion.

I don't understand why you'd play Fortnite at 720p (which isn't your native resolution) and then say that DLSS handles geometry and aliasing well. What are you investigating? That DLSS uses TAA and TAA does it's job?

Firstly I've never played Fortnite in my life that was Sir Pauly's post. Personally I always play a game at my monitors native resolution and never used DSR or AMD equivalent ever. TBH will never do that but that's just my opinion everyone else can do what they want.

I can tell you, as a fact, in some games DLSS is greyed out in the menu for my card and resolution. Just look at my last quote from Nvidia it explains it all about DLSS. Maybe for a 3080 it's always enabled but I don't own that card so I don't know. What do you want me to say I'm just telling you my personal experience for my card and system.

[Nunz]

I just explained to you why it's grayed out.. 3440x1440 wasn't supported in a lot of intiial DLSS games..

[LordHawkwind]

Originally Posted by Nunz

I just explained to you why it's grayed out.. 3440x1440 wasn't supported in a lot of intiial DLSS games..

TBH the only game I own with DLSS 2.0 is COD CW which I haven't played in a few months. In my native resolution I'm getting 100FPS with RT so why do I need it?

[Nunz]

Originally Posted by LordHawkwind

TBH the only game I own with DLSS 2.0 is COD CW which I haven't played in a few months. In my native resolution I'm getting 100FPS with RT so why do I need it?

Who said you need it? Holy hell. The reason it's greyed out literally has nothing to do with the marketing **** you quoted or because it's a 3090. It's literally due to your resolution and old DLSS that doesn't support 21:9.