Carzy Zarx’s PC Gaming Emporium - Catch Up on All the Latest PC Gaming Related News

[Bofferbrauer2]

Chazore said:

Captain_Yuri said:

So overall, DLSS 2.0 > FSR > DLSS 1.0

Good first attempt but I'd like to see FSR being compared against other Temporal Upscaling Solutions instead of just against Native. But it is a good performance boost that will work with a ton of GPUs. If the game supports DLSS 2.0 or higher and you have RTX card, you should obviously go with that but for everyone else, FSR is a good alternative mainly at 4k.

I have a gut feeling that things are not going to go the way some people think it will, in where FSR replaces DLSS, because if I remember, Nvidia would still have to work on FSR from their end, but why would they when they already have their good DLSS 2.0?. Really I think FSR is going to be AMD catching up from their end, for their cards, while Nvidia is already ahead with DLSS for Nvidia card owners.

Basically, I'm likely to stick to DLSS for games that support it, if a game only supports FSR, then I'm just going to turn RT off (whenever I get to own an RTX card lmao). 

AMD themselves stated that this wasn't their intention and that you can't compare them directly in that regard because they use radically different ways to get that performance uplift.

One question I do have to those who might know more about the technology of both processes: Could you theoretically (on an NVidia GPU) first use DLSS and then FSR each at their highest quality setting to get about twice the frames for just a minimal drop in visuals? Or would a lower DLSS setting reach the same goal with similar or even better graphics?