“Well, first of all, they’re completely wrong,” Huang said in response to a question from Tom’s Hardware editor-in-chief Paul Alcorn about the criticism.
“The reason for that is because, as I have explained very carefully, DLSS 5 fuses controllability of the of geometry and textures and everything about the game with generative AI,” Huang continued.
Just a elongated way to say AI slop.
I’m glad that I already have all the games I like in my library for years now and none of this bullshit matters to me
My main problem is that, even if the technology were to work exactly as advertised, for the first time, PC gaming is moving to an era where our games no longer look the same.
We’ve all seen how every previous version of DLSS worked. The promise of lowering system requirements of high resolutions caught enough attention to draw a crowd, game devs used it to increase the system requirements for lower resolutions instead, AMD and Intel had to develop their own different implementation to stay competitive, and lots of mainstream gaming now requires DLSS and the like on all but the most expensive cards (sometimes even then).
The tech will get better. It always does. Whether that improvement will come fast or slow doesn’t really matter. I think most points of controversy will fade as we’re starting to see this applied to new games. After all, if a game were to be developed knowing that it would be using DLSS 5, the argument that artistic intent will be violated will hold less strength. If DLSS 5 were to ruin the artistic intent of a ground-up DLSS 5-developed game, it wouldn’t be shipped. Future titles being “DLSS 5±mindful” and future improvements to the AI used should get the technology working ever closer to the vision that is being advertised today.
But when that starts to happen, the story will play out exactly the same as it always has for DLSS. It creates results that are “good enough”, so game devs move their development resources elsewhere. Then some management layer catches onto this tech, and finds out that they can just take these resources and move them right into their personal paycheck. End result is games that look generations old and barely run unless you use DLSS 5. By then FSR and XeSS will have to follow suit; if they don’t, AMD and Intel will have the cards that are not only comparatively featureless and weaker, but also produce uglier visuals. But because these generative AI models will never be the exact same between these manufacturers, the output will also never be the same.
And then we move to the weird reality where games look different on different cards, and driver (or, in the case of consoles, system) updates could fundamentally change what games look like, independent of developer input (turns out that artistic integrity can still end up in jeopardy, huh). And unlike with the current AI upscalers we have, where there is a ground truth for the result and we can always obtain it with better hardware, DLSS 5-developed games will always have to rely on it for their “fancy effects” (read: looking like something other than a GameCube game in 2030).
That’s my problem with DLSS 5
Games have had graphics settings for quite some time
And the only setting that will look the same across hardware and driver versions is dlss off, which I think was their point, what is yours?
Your comment is so asinine that I’m going to assume you’re Jensen Huang. Go home Mr. Jensen, we don’t need you here. Go spend some time with your family.
This is long winded but I firmly believe this explains a lot about the industries frenzied push into all these odd directions… All of it. Here seems as good as any place to dump this mess I’ve been stewing on:
I really think it’s important that raytracing, while novel, wasn’t created to improve visuals. It wasnt created to make a programmers life easier. It was created because it was computationally difficult and could be optimized for. It was a fantastic play by nvidia. They created a feature that functionally did very little but they could get an entire cycle ahead of the competition in that optimization. Differentiation of products, in a duopoly, is a big deal. Amd dove right into it - knowing full well that this would leave them brutally behind… But this was a fortuitous event: despite the disadvantage.
Why? Simple. GPUs have been struggling against Moore’s law. Framerates were exceeding ranges even monitors can refresh at. And worse yet there was another hard limit: our eyes. How do you sell cards that have no perceivable value?
Reality is we may well be reaching a point where additional resolutions and framerates dont matter. Badly optimized games only buy so much time.
These companies aren’t stupid. Crypto? They loved it. Computationally expensive. Always need faster… Until we didnt. What now? Demand was plummeting for overpriced high end cards.
Go back and look at when AI and nvidia got in bed. The earnings call was due to be a bloodbath after all these cards were rotting on shelves, unpurchased, and depreciating daily. It was coming ro light that they had been selling cards to miners under the table and that was going to get ugly fast. I have never, in my life, heard a company talk so much about a product on a earnings call – that wasn’t theirs. Not a word breathed about unsold cards barely any numbers discussed. ChatGPT referenced so many times that there was confusion as to whether nvidia actually owned it. The Q/A at the end was comedy gold. People were so confused.
AI was the perfect save. AI is a power virus. Want to fix the black box? Train a black box to mangage that black box. Its a computational sinkhole. They’ve extracted value from gamers to dimishing returns. Meanwhile they can sell the ultimate snake oil to investors: virtual slave labor. Unpaid workers. In floods private equity. Gamers stopped mattering immediately. All of these advances are software. From a GPU design company. Why? It shuts up the peasants while they continue rebranding the “snake oil” to get whoever is buying. Weve nearly achieved the panacea. Just a bit longer!
Behold: we have dressed our industry in the finest of the emperors newest clothes. You can either start selling them or be the only one who doesn’t.
🫧
From a programming and visuals standpoint: Ray tracing was always sought after, and it is peak graphical fidelity. It makes visuals better, and (shader) programming easier, more physics-based. It’s not just differentiation, the industry has been dreaming of realtime ray-tracing for 30 years. With slow, continuous movement in that direction.
Dont get me wrong. Its absolutely a very novel and useful feature. It made shit look great. I’m not down on the tech: I’m just saying the push for it wasn’t for the industry. It was to kill framerates and sell cards.
I doubt it. This thing was in the pipeline for decades. It wasn’t just nvidia doing the thing because moore’s law. Everybody was interested and excited, while the moore’s law was alive and well. Literally can’t find better quality, but intel was pushing tech demos such as this.
The actual push for adoption and walled garden of NV RTX is… honestly, just business as usual. Nvidia did exact same with PhysX. Once they have the technological edge, they push hard to pump their ecosystem. They always played evil.
It is good business. Shit for the consumer (unsurprising) … But really aside from Jensen’s apparent ego - I’m curious why nvidia has any interest in the gaming sector. I feel like they accomplished the perfect transition.
Ah fuck, more generative AI!
“No, actually, you’re completely wrong!”
OK…? Then what is it?
“It’s generative AI.”
Remember, he’s never talking to us, he’s talking to major stockholders.
Even some of those can read the room and reach the conclusion that “if people won’t buy it, I won’t make profits”
I’ve said this before, and I’ll say it again.
Nvidia is destroying gaming.
They started the destruction with the idea of 4k gaming.
When they realized native 4k gaming wasnt going to be feasible… They knocked gaming to the ground and started kicking it in the ribs with this upscaling bullshit, because who doesnt love a 1080p picture shittily stretched to 4k?
And they curb stomped it by making video cards cost more than what most people make in a fucking month.
and they’re beating its unconscious body with bats over this DLSS5 AI obsession bullshit.
and at every step of the way, the gamers were there to deliver dumptrucks of money because they don’t give a fuck about ruining everything as long as they can have their new shiny. Being in the cool kids club by having a new shiny is more important than the havok they are wrecking with their decisions to support this shit.
But don’t worry…They’ll still go online and cry about the unfairness of it all.
and AMD is desperately trying to play catchup so they can try to steal a sliver of the bullshit pie as well, before someone tries to point out me not addressing AMD (since its not the topic), or try to hail it as the saviour of gaming kind.
Well 4k gaming was always going to happen for high-end hardware, they just pushed faster adoption to sell more cards. It’s only now starting to be ready without DLSS.
It does suck indeed, though. I’m quite happy with 1440p and my next card, whenever I can actually afford and justify the upgrade, will allow me to reach 120 fps more easily, without DLSS.
I have a 4k monitor at 60hz and a 2k at 90. The 2k is an easy immediate choice for anything outside of 4x(sweet, sweet ui real estate).
I do know what you mean, but 4k means 4k vertical lines (nearly) and your 1440p screen has 2.5k vertical lines, so while some manufacturers get it wrong, it’s not actually a 2k monitor. 2.5k would be more appropriate, as 2k is pretty much 1080p :)
Yeah I just use marketing terms out of laziness
Don’t you guys have phones?
Same exact vibes.
But we thought everyone was okay with repackaged interpolation! Why not repackaged Instagram filters!?
I think most people are ok with frame gen because it doesn’t touch the actual content. It just moves things around a bit with motion vectors which actually was kind of a thing even before AI although not very good. It didn’t repaint the game into some different art style.
Also there were real frames in there.
This is going to 100% replace the game graphics.
I think most people are ok with frame gen because it doesn’t touch the actual content. It just moves things around a bit with motion vectors which actually was kind of a thing even before AI although not very good. It didn’t repaint the game into some different art style.
Naw most people are not ok with fake frames, and like raytracing is getting less and less likely to be left on. Most people however hate fake frames not due to the frames themselves but the motion blur effect that seems to be needed to make things look ok on top of the frame gen (no one likes motion blur).
You are right that this is going to replace game graphics to some degree since its another shortcut game studios can use to cut costs (and the industry is kinda struggling at the moment). Why spend effort, time and money making a model look good when you can use a tool to gloss over the work and while it does not look “good” per say it will look better then it should.
Yep, I’m more suggesting that this was the logical path they would have continued down.
I personally don’t like the generation because it’s functionally noise and can effect the feel / responsiveness of the game. Upscaling seems pretty reasonable - but like many I just can’t abide by the notion that we are counting a generated frame as a frame for benchmark sake.
I’m not against framegen existing. It’s a preference. Same as that feature on TVs. To each their own.
Back to the new dlss though: yeah it was inevitable they go here… and I’m personally thrilled this was the line everyone more or less took issue with.
“It fuses the controllability of the geometry and textures and everything about the game with the uncontrollable and unpredictable element of generative AI!”
“Well, first of all, they’re completely wrong,”
Proceeds to explain exactly what everyone hates about it.
Trillions invested to make unoptimized games barely run, and make it look worse at the same time, instead of just investing like 1/10th into optimization during dev cycles.
NVIDIA really is like a parasitic cancerous growth on the side of the games industry, it’s existence increasingly predicated on the destruction of current standards, overtaking their function to ensure survival and it’s continuous ever expanding cancerous growth
So- this would potentially render in-game cosmetics useless. You could just DLSS some cosmetic over your character for ‘free’ and skip paying for in-game cosmetic items. You could retexture or skin a model into something else with this tech, theoretically.
Heck, this could be a banned feature for online competitive games if you DLSS enemies to be easier to see.
Non-gaming applications of such tech are kinda frightening, but good to be aware of the possibility. AI swapping of characters has been something they’ve been working on. I’m guessing it will be sold as some kinda feature where you can give the AI some model of yourself, and it swaps the main character of a show or movie for your likeness. People will find it neat and try it and it will sorta work, but mostly just be a novelty. Then you’ll see that data get used for advertising, where they swap out the character in the Ad for you to catch your attention. If they try to catalog every person, this could be valuable and used to maliciously scam people by cloning your voice to mimic you and do all sorts of terrible things.
I imagine in a few years after some major scams and such that we’ll need some new verification systems to try to ensure that transactions are between real people and not just AI with your information. Yes, it will be intrusive and tracking, but will be required to maintain online commerce. Online marketplaces will struggle and possibly collapse without some way to authenticate a transaction. Hey, we may see a return to physical stores and doing everything in person again!
Just think, between that and DOGE nerds having you info, you might as well have no identity. We might as well all be black boxes.
Wouldn’t this be implemented by the game itself? Or are they letting people use it on whatever they want? I honestly haven’t researched too much because I won’t be using it anyway.
“The consumers don’t know what they want. I, the CEO, know what the consumers want. And the consumers want to give me money!”
“Do you guys not have two GPUs?”
Jensen Huang has all the GPUs, he can probably play games where each character has its own dedicated GPU and every atom and molecule of the environment is rendered in real time with a hyper-realistic physics engine, with built-in AI that plays for you so that even your idle pastimes are automated giving you more time to WORK AND PRODUCE VALUE FOR THE OWNER-CASTE.
“This game only needs two GPUs to run, what’s the problem?”
None of this is done for the average consumer/gamer. We’re not the consumers he’s addressing.
DLSS is a consumer product.
The more you buy, the more you save!
STOP BUYING NVIDIA
i feel like we might as well drum up som boycotting spirit while we’re at it. Shaming certainly has an effect as evidenced by his statement here, and if we could add to that a collectivist ‘no more money for you doofus’ energy i think that’d be swell.
We aren’t their main customers anymore, and it would least force them to also aknowledge this themselves. Hopefully.
Idk folks, keep adding pressure on these ghouls, seems to at least have gotten their attention
STOP BUYING NVIDIA
I gave them.up in 2020. The measurable difference between them and AMD didn’t warrant the expenditures, and neither did Intel. Absolutely no issues since.
Boycotts in a duopoly, especially when most clients are businesses, don’t work.
Feels odd to say it but suddenly I’m happy Intel didn’t (completely) shit the bed.
I never understood why everyone was completely happy with one manufacturer having dominance. Everyone seem to think it was just ok for them to be no competition in the market. Here is exactly why we need that competition.
Exactly. The more compititon the better. Imagine what we’d get if nvidia was split into 3 new companies and had to compete. 5 total companies suddenly would be very motivated to make a substantial product to bring to market at a competitive price. We as consumers need this diversity to keep the market honest and moving forward.
Unfortunately social media users who post are not the average gamer and that’s very apparent when 95% of the discrete GPU market is Nvidia now.
Plus doesn’t help the only other two competitors is AMD who are also jumping on the AI bandwagon and doing not actively competing. Then there’s Intel that’s in bed with Nvidia now.
Would have to boycott pretty much all hardware. I don’t know of any large hardware manufacturer that’s not chasing the AI investment money and bribing the Trump admin.
Don’t have to do anything, I’m just being vocal about certain feelings hoping others do the same. Boycotts don’t work yadda yadda sitting on yours also don’t work bla bla…
in really not invested in what you decide to do at the end of the day, keep buying or don’t or whatever suits your fancy… I can just feel this move tainting Nvidia and their products with an inherent ‘ewww’ reaction on my part which very strongly disentivises ever buying their shit, and I feel like it’s generally good if people are honest about how they feel about phenomena in general, that’s how shared sentiments, zetgeist and ‘common sense’ is created u know
