By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - PC Discussion - FSR 2.0! now with Temporal Up-Sampling! (and better image quality)

I wonder what GTX 1070 being the weakest hardware on Nvidia's side to support FSR 2.0 means for Switch. FSR was sooner or later going to drop underpowered hardware, but I thought 2.0 would possibly make it on Switch (Is this out of the question now?)

I also don't know if Switch 2 will even be powered by an Nvidia GPU at all. Nvidia might get greedy with their prices and try to take advantage of Nintendo's potential want for a backwards compatible Switch successor. Resulting in either a pretty high price point, or Nintendo going AMD and ditching backwards compatibility altogether.



Around the Network
Kyuu said:

I wonder what GTX 1070 being the weakest hardware on Nvidia's side to support FSR 2.0...

If FSR 2.0 will run on a GTX 1070, it will also run on a GTX 1060 or GTX 1050 Ti.

It's the same architecture with the same driver.

Just because AMD drew an arbitrary line for their recommendation doesn't mean that slower models with the same architectiure can't benefit (with lower 1080p settings or with 900p, 800p or 720p output.



JRPGfan said:

From AMD marketing:

"AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 technology is a temporal upscaling solution with incredible image quality that is the result of many years of research into upscaling technologies. It has been built by AMD from the ground up to deliver similar or better than native image quality and help boost framerates in supported games."

"FSR 2.0 temporal upscaling uses frame color, depth, and motion vectors in the rendering pipeline and leverages information from past frames to create very high-quality upscaled output and it also includes optimized high-quality anti-aliasing. Spatial upscaling solutions like FSR 1.0 use data from the current frame to create the upscaled output and rely on the separate anti-aliasing incorporated into a game’s rendering pipeline. Because of these differences, FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 delivers significantly higher image quality than FSR 1.0 at all quality mode presets and screen resolutions."

Video explaining it:

The short of it?

It boosts performance, while giveing pretty much near equal image quality.



Zoomed in on screengrabs:  (left most = native 4k, then FSR 1.0, and lastly FSR 2)


(left most Native 4k, then FSR 1.0, and lastly FSR2.0)

PCgameshardware.de has a tool for compairsion if  you want to see for yourself:

Link here:
https://www.pcgameshardware.de/commoncfm/comparison/clickSwitchNew.cfm?article=1391135&page=1&draft=-1&rank=3

And you conveniently don't mention that some of those are using quality mode: Going from 1440p to "4k". And the final result is still worse than dlss going from 1080p to 4k years ago. By the time fsr manages to handle 1440p to 4k perfectly, dlss will be close to converting 720p into 4k perfectly. If fsr ever manages proper 1080p to 4k conversions many years from now, dlss might already be flirting with 540p to 4k and 1080p to 8k conversions.



Conina said:
Kyuu said:

I wonder what GTX 1070 being the weakest hardware on Nvidia's side to support FSR 2.0...

If FSR 2.0 will run on a GTX 1070, it will also run on a GTX 1060 or GTX 1050 Ti.

It's the same architecture with the same driver.

Just because AMD drew an arbitrary line for their recommendation doesn't mean that slower models with the same architectiure can't benefit (with lower 1080p settings or with 900p, 800p or 720p output.

As a GTX 1060 6GB owner, I sure hope you're right and my PC can benefit from it without any weird workarounds!



Kyuu said:
Conina said:

If FSR 2.0 will run on a GTX 1070, it will also run on a GTX 1060 or GTX 1050 Ti.

It's the same architecture with the same driver.

Just because AMD drew an arbitrary line for their recommendation doesn't mean that slower models with the same architectiure can't benefit (with lower 1080p settings or with 900p, 800p or 720p output.

As a GTX 1060 6GB owner, I sure hope you're right and my PC can benefit from it without any weird workarounds!

Probably AMD didn't want to advertize FSR 2.0 for GTX 1060 GPU due to their high share on Steam.

GTX 1070 - 1080 Ti + GTX 16xx series are already more than 20% of the Steam hardware base. With GTX 1060 included, 30% of the Steam hardware base would benefit from FSR 2.0 (all GPUs of the competitor without DLSS access):

While only 5% of the Steam hardware base which will benefit from FSR 2.0 are their own GPUs. Even if they include the other Polaris GPUs (which I expect) and the R9-series (which won't happen) already twice of the competitors legacy GPUs would benefit from FSR 2.0 than their own legacy GPUs.

With GTX 1060 officially included, the ratio would be over 3:1 in favor of the competitor's benefit:



Around the Network

One thing I will say is people should keep their expectations in check until DF comes out with their comparisons. FSR 2.0 isn't an alternative to DLSS... It's an alternative to TAA upsampling which has been implemented in various games for a while. The benefits of that is that it can be implemented in a more wide variety of hardware but we have seen what TAA Upscaling can do and it's limitations. There's a reason why AMD is only comparing images that are being upscaled to 4k (and not 1440p) and why they aren't doing image comparisons against DLSS despite Deathloop having DLSS.

So while what AMD is doing with FSR 2.0 is fantastic, I would keep your expectations in check until we have DF doing their comparisons because whether it be AMD, Nvidia or Intel, they will always show their product in the best light.



             

                               Anime: Haruhi                                                                                                           Nsfw Anime Thread                                     

JRPGfan said:

It already has DLSS....
So adding FSR2.0, should be like 1-2 days of work (max 3) (according to AMD).
Just a question if they can spare (bother with) a programmer, working a day or two on it.

I know it has DLSS?, I was saying that they should properly impliment FSR 2.0 once it's fully released. 

They already have FSR 1.0, but it's shit, mainly due to how CDPR's version of TAA works.

You say it'll take that much time, but we only just got patch 1.5 this year, while the game was released way back in Dec 2020, I wouldn't expect FSR 2.0 to be put into the game until later on this year, if not next year at best.

They can spare, they clearly made absolute bank from 2077 sales, they aren't poor, it's just a matter of "do they care to do it sooner rather than later?".



Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see

So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"

So Digital Foundry (kind of) made the first meaningful comparison between DLSS2 and TSR (via Unreal Engine 4 which was not supposed to support TSR?), and the results were great. In stills, they're VERY close (as opposed to TAAU being outclassed), but in motion DLSS2 starts showing noticeable advantages in a number of aspects as expected.

Curiously, the PS5 version used FSR1. We'll see if TSR gets any improvements from Unreal Engine 5, and how it'll compare to FSR2.

Last edited by Kyuu - on 28 March 2022

Kyuu said:

So Digital Foundry (kind of) made the first meaningful comparison between DLSS2 and TSR (via Unreal Engine 4 which was not supposed to support TSR?), and the results were great. In stills, they're VERY close (as opposed to TAAU being outclassed), but in motion DLSS2 starts showing noticeable advantages in a number of aspects as expected.

Curiously, the PS5 version used FSR1. We'll see if TSR gets any improvements from Unreal Engine 5, and how it'll compare to FSR2.

Not that surprising since AMD hasn't said that the PS5 supports FSR2. Which is odd since they announced old card of their main competitor do. But from all recent GPU only the PS5 one hasn't been confirmed as that it supports FSR 2. Perhaps Microsoft made a deal since they specifically did mention Xbox consoles. Its very doubtful and would lead Sony to Intel/Nvidia for the PS6, but possible in theory.



Please excuse my (probally) poor grammar

Qwark said:
Kyuu said:

So Digital Foundry (kind of) made the first meaningful comparison between DLSS2 and TSR (via Unreal Engine 4 which was not supposed to support TSR?), and the results were great. In stills, they're VERY close (as opposed to TAAU being outclassed), but in motion DLSS2 starts showing noticeable advantages in a number of aspects as expected.

Curiously, the PS5 version used FSR1. We'll see if TSR gets any improvements from Unreal Engine 5, and how it'll compare to FSR2.

Not that surprising since AMD hasn't said that the PS5 supports FSR2. Which is odd since they announced old card of their main competitor do. But from all recent GPU only the PS5 one hasn't been confirmed as that it supports FSR 2. Perhaps Microsoft made a deal since they specifically did mention Xbox consoles. Its very doubtful and would lead Sony to Intel/Nvidia for the PS6, but possible in theory.

Well... FSR2 isn't available yet on any platform, what's curious is the lack of TSR on the PS5 version (instead they apparently went FSR1, which also isn't "officially" supported on PS5). I'm sure all three UE5 demos on PS5 were TSR reconstructed, so this might have to do with UE4's optimization.

TSR is supposed to be a UE5 feature and yet it's available on Ghostwire (UE4) PC but not PS5.