Microsoft marketed the Xbox Series S as a 1440p machine. This might actually help them fulfil that dream, instead of a 1080p game now we might get 1440p.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
I'm fairly impressed with it as an option. If I had the scenario where I was not able to run a game at Native 4K at 60FPS, but Ultra Quality FSR knocked me over 60FPS, I think I would pick that option without thinking too much about it.
It's obviously not going to compare with DLSS or stand up to a native 4K image, but I like the options FSR offers, if the game actually supports it. If they can continue to improve that image quality loss:performance gained ratio with updates, it could be a useful tool where DLSS is not available.
It's obviously not going to compare with DLSS or stand up to a native 4K image, but I like the options FSR offers, if the game actually supports it. If they can continue to improve that image quality loss:performance gained ratio with updates, it could be a useful tool where DLSS is not available.
Hey, if I could use DLSS 2.0 on my card or actually purchase a card that took advantage of it, I'd definitely choose that instead. It's not an even remotely comparable situation.
Considering how many exclusive marketing deals Nvidia has and has had in the past (and usually had games running better on their hardware, included features like PhysX, etc.), I wouldn't be worried.
Seems like a decent feature for those who will use it. I was playing Cyberpunk comfortably at around 73fps back when I used a 1080P monitor - upgrading to a 3440*1440 monitor saw my performance drop down almost exactly thirty frames. Changing graphics settings doesn't really help in any measurable way. If CD Projekt RED implement FSR in Cyberpunk you can bet I'll be taking advantage of it.
Mid 40's fps just isn't good enough. If FSR ultra quality gets me to around 60fps I'll be happy, and definitely happy to be able to get back to my Cyberpunk save.
Mid 40's fps just isn't good enough. If FSR ultra quality gets me to around 60fps I'll be happy, and definitely happy to be able to get back to my Cyberpunk save.
I've noticed this as well. The thread has plenty of people seemingly angry that it's getting attention despite being "just a spatial upscaler" or writing it off entirely because they don't think the tiny image degradation at say FSR ultra quality is worth the performance improvement - or at least the claims AMD made before it released today.
An option in game's settings menu, similarly to DLSS.
Yes.
+30% isn't bad considering that quality drop can be rather minimal and likely invisible in a typical 4K TV viewing environment.
But with an exception of games with really blurry TAA (like Terminator) the results are in line with what I was expecting - anything below UQ is trash.
And in case of a typical monitor usage case (close distance, pixels being visible) even UQ may have too high of a IQ impact.
As I've said I'd put FSR UQ against DLSS2 Performance in IQ comparison. But this is definitely title dependent. Some games may actually look fine even with FSR Balanced.
If you're seeing angry people here, then you're reading the thread wrong. What people is wondering is if AMD solution will be better than what devs have in-house. And of course people will write off image degradation compared to native when you have DLSS with native/almost native image quality. Doesn't mean AMD solution is bad.
1. Looks better than expected from a Spatial Upsampler, curious as to how or if they'll improve it
2. I wonder when/if it lands on the consoles and what it means for PS4/Pro and XB1S/X for a little while longer.
3. I'm curious if studios will really bother to use it for consoles if they have their own methods that prove more effective, seems like a waste there, but this seems more geared for the PC space than consoles honestly.
4. This seems pretty good for those with AMD cards and better than having absolutely nothing, and it is supposed to be much better optimized for AMD cards.
And for fun, since Intel seems to be throwing their hat in the ring, Intel where is your solution?? ;-)
2. I wonder when/if it lands on the consoles and what it means for PS4/Pro and XB1S/X for a little while longer.
3. I'm curious if studios will really bother to use it for consoles if they have their own methods that prove more effective, seems like a waste there, but this seems more geared for the PC space than consoles honestly.
4. This seems pretty good for those with AMD cards and better than having absolutely nothing, and it is supposed to be much better optimized for AMD cards.
And for fun, since Intel seems to be throwing their hat in the ring, Intel where is your solution?? ;-)
Intel is looking to adopt FSR(Why AMD didn't tested on Intel GPUs is something to wonder). However Raja tweet implied that they will look into a ML-based solution.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say angry - but lot of people here are outright dismissive. I used it on Anno on my pc and it was quite impressive for what it does. If you do side by side, u might notice some technical downgrades but that's about it. DLSS access is fairly expensive, what amd offers here as an open source and cross platform solution is worth the trade offs as far as I'm concerned.
I expected a lot worse, like none of the modes would be acceptable. I'm genuinely surprised and happy that its solid at 1440p/4K. 1080p and below is questionable but at least it gives people an option that might've never had it before. However I'm seeing people dogging on even the 4K quality mode, if anybody actually expected it to be 1:1 with DLSS 2.0 idk what to say but it definitely looks far better than 1.0 and a solid upscaling solution from AMD for all gamers especially during this GPU shortage.
I think I misinterpreted the below statement in the Guru3D article.
AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution - preview
AMD has announced its FidelityFX Super Resolution technology as an answer to fight off DLSS from NVIDIA. Will the new feature make enough of a difference, and is image quality not a huge issue? Let's...
www.guru3d.com
Why FideltyFX Super Resolution?
I mean, when you think about it concerning technologies like DLSS or DirectML, AMD always will be behind in either image quality or performance. Even with pending DirectML support and now technology like FidelityFX Super Resolution, you need to realize; it still needs to be run over the existing compute engine as some sort of shader code. So no matter how we look at it, there will be a compromise, whereas NVIDIA can offload its ML supersampling to the tensor cores. It's the sole reason why they implemented these specific DL/AI cores in the first place. Up to last week, we've not been 100% sure how AMD is applying FideltyFX Super-Resolution. Even after a briefing with AMD, they did not precisely explain that, but logic dictates this is a simply shader running over the render engine, with two extra passes
We'll see. The dream would be for every new game to support both. I'm just worried about devs that only have the resources to do one going for the more "accessible" solution.
The key is making sure both options are very easily integrated.
FSR already struggles when targeting 1080p, it's going to be a non-starter below that.
Seems like a fairly solid upscaler, as in better than letting the game handle things itself, but not much more than that. Too bad it doesn't work too well at lower resolutions.
There are definitely some weird attitudes about it around here.
It would need to be implemented per-game, and many games already use solutions made by the devs themselves. Comparisons would need to be made between those solutions and FSR.
I saw a 52fps boost from native UW1440p to FSR Quality in Godfall.
102fps to 154fps.
Wow, that ended up looking way better than I expected. And the fact that it could be implemented through ReShade means that in the future one would not need to wait for a game to be patched by the developer.
Ah, ok that's great then. I was mostly referring to this video where his FPS was pretty much the same but that could've been an issue on their end.
From those comparison images it doesn't look too bad IMO, but I'd have to see it blown up on my big screen and in motion to make a final judgement.
People are just skeptical. On the GPU side for a while AMD has had a habit of using best case scenarios and stuff like that when talking about performance. Because of that there's a bit of a "I'll believe it when I see it" attitude towards anything out of AMD's GPU side—rightfully earned in my opinion.
The uploader of this video says its at 1080p, so it could be that they're having a CPU bottleneck.
It supports ultra-wide? awesome. DLSS 1.0 didn't work for it. Will be good for me on non-DLSS titles.
Hopefully it comes to games I already have or wont always need developer implementation one day because It would pretty much add a bit of life to my 1060mobile laptop.
Yeah I want to see image quality and performance comparisons of 4K native versus 1660p native versus Ultra Quality FSR (so 4K up from 1662p). Not convinced at this point.
according to reviewers, FSR doesn't work well for below 1080p internal.
apparently this video isn't using FSR?
yeah! can't wait support for ReShade
free "upgrade" for all games!
He said in theory. I don't know if that would be possible. If it was, AMD wouldn't need developer implementation on their side. But we'll see on the future.
Yeah, just watched a reviewer saying the same thing.
I am not sure how possible it is to reduce the resolution of a game pre-hud in reshade even though it has a higher selected resolution in menu. I do not think I have ever seen a reshade shader do that?
GeDoSaTo can with DX9 on a per game basis
While true, it would be on a very tiny screen in the end which hide a lot of the imperfections, so it could be better than nothing?
Edit: I should add I haven't seen the review about it being bad at lower than 1080p, only theorized.
Last edited:
This actually looks better than expected, running very well. Looking forward to more games being implemented.
Looking forward to the Digital Foundry analysis. I wonder how 1800p to 4K output vs 4K Ultra Quality FSR (1662p) stack up.
Looking forward to the Digital Foundry analysis. I wonder how 1800p to 4K output vs 4K Ultra Quality FSR (1662p) stack up.
According to GPUOpen website, FSR source code won't be released until later next month. It looks obvious that AMD is trying to avoid direct comparisons with DLSS.
I wonder how useful this could be for mobile games. The pixel density of mobile devices means a lot of imperfections could be less noticeable, doesn't it? And this could help the game hit the device's target resolution without putting too much strain on the GPU, or even push better graphics.
Never seen either. It's seems GeDoSaTo was being ported by Durante for DX11 but it seems he has abandoned the project(Man has a lot of work to do, so it's understandable). Also, look foward to your analysis of FSR on DF(If you're going to do one).
Yet it still looks pretty damn good. All AMD needed was for it to be good enough, and this is good enough. I'd be very happy with this.
Good on AMD for getting something that looks better than DLSS 1.0 on their first try.
KitGuru's video he does a comparison between Quality and 1440p Native, I timestamped it. I assume you can't select native 1662p for Ultra Quality comparison. You can easily tell that the FSR Quality is more aliased than 1440p. Albeit, definitely a bit softer. It's about 8.12% less FPS than 1440p but 49.42% more FPS than 4K. I would say it's pretty solid.
How so? AMD can reach devs to implement their solution. They don't need the source code in public to do that. We already know of games with DLSS support that will have FSR support(Edge of Eternity), so it's a matter of waiting for the developers implementation.
And they should at the moment, really. DLSS is probably gonna be better every time since it's a hardware solution. Hardware solutions are almost always much better than software solutions, but the crowd won't get that and will just pile on FSR for not being as good as DLSS.
This is one of those instances where something is great if you have your expectations checked at the door. For me, FSR is better than expected judging by the reviews.
I mean, it is not a coincidence that they have only partnered with games that don't use DLSS at launch and the source code remains hidden for a whole month, because once the source code is available they can't avoid direct comparisons.