The very bad news is, Nvidia says turning DLSS 5 on will currently reduce performance by 50-60%. And that’s across the board—no matter the game.
Measure it when it’s out. Stop clucking and cackling about unlaid eggs.
The launch most likely will not be flawless. You will get your opportunity to some feathers when the damn chicken finally comes to roost.For fucks sakes, I don’t want “realistic” graphics, I want high and smooth FPS, they have been calling their games “realistic” for the past 20 years. Just make the game with a unique art style and optimise it.
Every single “realistic graphics” game looks shit after 5 years while Mario is over here still looking great decades after release.
No the games have to look like real life don’t you get it? Nevermind that fortnite and Minecraft, the two biggest games out there have cartoonish graphics and literal pixelated cubes no! We need to be able to see the reflection in a drop of sweat! And more AI!
Games should have “style” and “performance”? Bah. What poppycock I say, another billion to the AAAA games! For the investors! /s
I’m actually kinda interested in how this will change what emulated games look like. Can it improve the visuals in Aria of Sorrows? Or like old racing games?
I bit of a derailment here, but having done my annual LotR rewatch recently, some of the CGI is starting to stand out for me. Apparently a remaster would cost way too much, and trying to work with such old scenes would be neigh impossible today due to compatibility issues. But I’ve wondered if a similar tech can be applied, not to change the visuals, but to apply better lighting/shading to things like balrog, or gollum.
I want to be very clear I don’t wish for a Star Wars-type remake. LotR may be the best trilogy ever, and it seems less and less likely to ever be dethroned as such.Depends on what you think the word “improve” means.
You know what AI reminds me of? That Xavier the renegade angel episode where the monks built that machine to do the monk chants for them and all but two monks remained afterwards and the two that were left in the monastery were playing video games and had put on weight. And the monks said something like: surely engaging in western luxuries will not make us lazy.
Edit : ayyyyy full episode https://www.wco.tv/xavier-renegade-angel-episode-11-vibracaust
I gotta re-watch this show now. Such a banger
There aren’t enough drugs in the world to get me to understand that show.
Okay so I figured it out a while back and an old manic-depressive friend always used to tell me there’s no point to that show, it’s a nonsense show; He’s so wrong and always has been, I always tried to tell him if you paid attention to the story line and not the trippy shit, you’ll realize season 1 is about Xavier trying to live the life that he has created for himself through his own previous misfortunes and follows the search for the father’s killer. Season 2, is about Xavier figuring out who he once was and is trying to connect to his past and is on the search for an ultimate connection to his past and inner self until he realizes he’s been insane the whole time.
You’re welcome : https://www.wco.tv/anime/xavier-renegade-angel/?season=all
I didn’t realize skeptical (sceptical) had North American (British) variations. That’s my learning for today!
Skeptical is widely used in Britain too, it’s about 50/50
If chopping people’s arms off to make them run faster is a strategy then this is equivalent to chopping of someone’s legs to make them prettier.
I’ve been a fan of the most cutting edge videogame graphics since that Half Life 2 E3 demonstration in 2002. Didn’t hear anyone complaining about better graphics for less performance at that time. The ragdoll physics, the water reflections, the smart new NPC AI, got people hyped to buy the latest 256mb or 512mb GPUs that were expensive at the time. Hell I remember when the PS2 showcase knocked everyones socks off.
Know what I didn’t hear? “Ragdoll physics is destroying gaming. The real way would be to pay a village of animators to do keyframe animations of every possible way a character can fall over, instead they use this tool as an excuse to cut back on animators. This is an affront to devs artistic vision and a slap in the face to animators who are now out of potential work.” I didn’t see these complaints when Nvidia release DX9, DX10, or DX11, that all required the latest GPUs of the time and slowed down framerates on the “more affordable” GPUs. Doom 3 ran like shit on my 128mb Geforce 3. Except now that this has an association to AI, people are being prejudiced. That 128mb Geforce 3? I bought that from money I saved shoveling driveways in the winter when I was 13. Once upon a time, GPUs were that affordable.
I think the only reason people are pissed at this fancy new graphics technology, which once upon a time would have us excited, is because the economy is so shit and nobody can afford the GPUs anymore (thanks Trumps economy.) That and the association of AI not being used on our general QoL but at our expense so that a few people can make a buck. You’d have to be a very special moron to say “AI is the reason the economy is bad” and say all this is the fault of AI. It seems that everybody is still looking past the dominant religion of “capitalism” to blame our current problems on. AI implies fancy new tech that everyone could have access to. Capitalism limits that access, and then weaponizes it against us. And yet the current bandwagon is the “AI Hate Train” meanwhile turning a blind eye to Trumps economy and capitalism. Makes sense tho considering most gamers are pro-Trump, right-leaning, economically and politically illiterate incels.
Taking this bait, I think the problem is that these features are doing multiple things, and almost all of them are bad in the name of “better” graphics (which is subjective)
- characters look worse, like AI slop filters were added over their faces and bodies
- creative vision of the people making the game is bastardized behind these “enhancements” altering the look and feel of the game.
- higher bar for entry for performance requirements and still getting poor performance if you do bite the bullet for a more expensive setup
- a lot of these games aren’t that good, don’t get me wrong a few are, but having to buy extra equipment and push your PC to get marginally better graphics to play an “okay” game isn’t gonna make people jump for joy.
You used half life 2 as an example, that was arguably one of the greater games out there at the time, tech and story wise, when it released. People bought better equipment because they wanted to, and even then, the game was still really good. Not so much with these new releases.
You can blame the complaints on people hating AI, they do. But it’s not like everyone who doesn’t like these games and their requirements is hating it just because of DLSS. The problem is people are complaining about performance along side other issues and DLSS is being presented as “the solution to performance issues” when it’s not even close.
This is either excellent bait or really missing the point. You can hate two things. Fuck trump, but also fuck AI and everything it represents.
What does it represent to you? Once upon a time the idea of robots or machinery doing all our work for us, it was a dream. Only under capitalism is that a bad thing, because then people won’t be forced to work for unedible money. AI could be a great thing. Under capitalism though, it represents something potentially terrible.
Tell me something, if AI technology applied to protein folds helps us discover a cure for cancer or alzheimers, would you refuse the treatment “because it’s AI”? Then apply that to any other technological shortcut that created our modern medicine, like MRIs and CT scans or EKG’s. Are those great technologies, or “a ton of lost jobs that humans could have done”? “CT scans are bad because it requires less brain surgeons,” or “EKG’s are bad because a human could be doing those measurements but have been cheaped out by technology.” “What about the cognitive offloading from pocket calculators?” (A real argument made at the time, btw.) Did you know that in Victorian times it was someones job to walk down the streets ringing a bell to wake people up in the morning? People were paid to knock on peoples windows so that they could wake up at a certain time. Are you mad at alarm clocks for taking their jobs? How is AI any different but just on a bigger scale? What are the problems that AI implementation and shortcuts that DOESN’T have to do with relying on a paycheck to live? Is relying on a paycheck to live the only way a society can function? Or does capitalism depend on that, and anything that shakes that is potentially dangerous to our capitalist-centric society?
Capitalism can’t handle AI. That’s not AIs fault, that’s capitalisms shortcomings and inherent unsustainability. Everything wrong with AI is just capitalism, I have yet to see evidence prove me otherwise.
You whole argument seems to be “we didnt think it was bad in the past, so its not bad in the present and wont be in the future”
Its such a weak point of view. When we learn something is bad for us we should take steps to stop it. Regardless of whether or not we once thought it would be the best thing ever.
We grow. Priorities change. Fancy graphics got fancy enough that people stopped caring. Games got less fun so people took it upon themselves to fix that. A high number of indie games have done the rounds and made millions. Because they are actually fun.
You are right that we used to be happy when better gfx came along and we all would gladly shell out for the latest nvidia card. But those were different times. Back th3n we could afford it. Back then gfx were bad and every new generation actually made a tangeble and noticeable improvement.
These days there is barely a difference between a ps4 and ps5.
So stfu. Because you are just wrong.
Let me ask you something: would you use a trebuchet in lieu of an elevator to reach the 15th floor of a building?
That sums it pretty much up perfectly.
The overwhelming majority loves DLSS. Until recently, the discussion of Nvidia vs. AMD boiled pretty much down to AMD’s FSR not being on par with DLSS. People legit didn’t buy AMD because AMD had worse AI upscaling.I like that I can actually use FSR on my 9070 XT to get the notoriously performance-hungry 7 Days To Die to look good and run smooth at 2160p60.
I like that I can just download AI models from Hugging Face and run them locally (cloud AI helped me get the finicky tools installed properly).
My gripe with AI is that I can’t get more than 16 GiB VRAM on an affordable GPU with good AI inference performance. Without the artificial market segmentation, the 9070 XT would have 32 GiB VRAM. I bought mine in the summer dip last year - just before the RAMpocalypse started.
I would definitely slot a cheap Chinese 32 GiB inference accelerator with good FOSS support next to my gaming GPU if there was one. I probably will do so in a few years when China ramped up a massively overbuilt chip sector guaranteeing their independence from western markets fast - and then flooding the global market with the surplus after their own market is saturated.I play on Gentoo btw.
Wait, what is even the point of using an upscaling technology if it makes your game run slower than without it? Why wouldn’t I just run native res at that point? Is their only point that “it looks better” in their minds?
You can make black people look white in your games.
Wonder if it could also make female protagonists look like men, might be useful for the sort of people who complain that a game is woke when there is a women
Well, gonna be real gay when that transgender protagonist is now in a romantic scene with a dude.
No worries, we’ll just undude the dude in the romantic scene as well and oh shit now we have two transes
What’s the point of running 4k over 1080p?
Yes. It does make the game look better at the cost of framerate…
???
I think you’re missing the point of the question here. DLSS was meant to “fake” performance, i.e. you could have the game run at an upscaled 4k, when your PC can’t do native 4k. Now it’s reducing the performance at those upscaled 4k again, so you could just run native 4k at the same FPS.
Yes, their only point is that it looks better “in their minds”, as you say. This feature in particular isn’t meant to improve performance.
Personally I think the more subtle application of it can look pretty good, but it seems hard to control and does more harm than good. And that is even ignoring the massive performance impact that almost guarantees it to be unusable. Nvidia published some performance numbers that looked impressive, but that was using pretty agressive upscaling and 6X frame gen which is stupid because for frame gen to be decent you need a high base frame rate, which they didn’t get on anything other than the 5090 and arguably the 5080, or by pairing the GPU with a lower resolution that doesn’t really make sense for them (like you wouldn’t normally buy a 5070Ti for 1080p).
So it’s closer to an ML shader than actual supersampling?
Instagram filter for your games is a term I’ve heard to describe what it is. They put all their crappy new features under the DLSS brand now, little to do with supersampling. At least personally I wouldn’t call frame-gen supersampling either, but this is even worse.
Yes, I think that’s a pretty accurate way to describe it.
total polar opposite of its original purpose.
But it’ll keep the hype cycle going for a little bit longer! Line must go up!
Generating stock value?
that too, but I w as referring to enabling shittily coded games to run on midrange hardware
Live service gaming is about to get so much worse when companies start obsessing about adding this.
That’s on the poor suckers that play live service games.
Probably. I’ll just keep avoiding those I guess.
Dayum well beauty isn’t cheap. And it is only first gen it’s pretty cool tech. Get well soon you guys
Stop supporting Nvidia. If you don’t see the writing on the wall, you’re part of the problem.
Inb4 the flak from fanboys who think that a $5 trillion corporation is in their best interest: they certainly aren’t in your interests as a gamer, and they’re making money (in part) off of those who have forgotten what gaming is about.
Also inb4: yes, losing some frames to not have to deal with Nvidia’s bullshit is worth it.
Inb4^2: AMD is not a saint. But whataboutism has never fixed anything.
PhysX, G-Sync, HairFX, etc.
The writing was on the wall for a long time already.
I will never get how Nvidia got THAT popular amongst gamers. Like sure, Nvidia always had some benefits in certain usecases. But how many people were actually capturing game footage as a job and needed the best hw encoders? How many gamers also used their gaming rig also as a workstation for things where CUDA is essential? A lot! For sure. But not >90% market share a lot.
I believe HairFX is Unity’s version of AMD’s TressFX, so not an Nvidia tech in this case.
Yeah, sorry. I meant Hairworks.
I honestly blame AMD for consistently missing every opportunity to actually be competitive in the space. So much so that they’ve spawned a phrase. “AMD never misses an opportunity to miss an opportunity”.
It’s not hard for Nvidia to capture the market when AMD doesn’t compete at all for anything other than the low end market except in a blue moon. Their name is synonymous with mid range at best cards. If you want high end you literally only have one choice and I say that as someone who owns a 7900 XTX. Even that card, which was designed to be competitive with the 4080, comes with a whole lot of compromises that make the card only competitive in pure raster performance, Linux compatibility, and literally nothing else.
You mentioned some of the technologies that Nvidia cards have. You’re right that not everyone needs every feature but being on the other end of that spectrum also sucks. Not having compatible hardware encoders means you take a performance hit every time you screen share your game in discord. Not having CUDA means your card is basically ONLY good for video games (yes I know rocm exists but trying to use it is a frustrating experience compared to CUDA). Having Ray tracing performance that’s so far behind the competition means you’ll always be making a sacrifice in either quality or performance. Choosing AMD means consistently watching Nvidia create new technologies and waiting for AMD to reinvent them a generation later to lackluster support.
I’ve been AMD-only since forever, since before AMD cards even existed, my computer ran an ATi card when AMD bought them and when they went from being team green to team red. I swore off nVidia after they killed 3dfx, that’s decades ago.
I never had problems running games except when they were infected by nVidia’s fuckery, and I never had to put much effort in avoiding them.
Gamers just care more about big numbers and shiny things more than they care for the well-being of their hobby, and are directly responsible for part of the AI-shitshow we’re in nowadays.
Not having problems is the bare minimum. But my point is that the reason we have such a skewed market is because despite AMD making good cards, Nvidia makes better cards. They’re more feature packed and more performant. The only thing they’re not is cheaper than AMD. Cheaper gets you some customers but as long as the goal is to eventually “upgrade” to an Nvidia card they’ll never be the market leader. People just want to play games and whatever is able to play games the best is what they’ll want. Politics be damned. AMD has had 20+ years to fight Nvidia and their own reputation but failed at nearly every turn. That’s why we’re here.
Blaming consumers for AI doesn’t truly track to me when these companies feed into each other’s profits like some kind of snake of Ouroborus. Gamers never asked for ai. Games just became another place where ai is (unfortunately).
Blaming consumers for AI doesn’t truly track to me when these companies feed into each other’s profits like some kind of snake of Ouroborus. Gamers never asked for ai. Games just became another place where ai is (unfortunately).
But this is exactly what you get for “not caring for anything but raw performance and features”. You get features that noone asked for and especially features that’ll bind you into their ecosystem. They tried since forever. Hairfx, physx and now dlss/“ai”.
You’re right though, I might sadly add. People don’t care. 5090 is fastest? Then 5090 it’ll be.
Yeah, you’re confirming that
gamerspeople care more about numbers and shiny things than principles. Who cares if you’re destroying your hobby, when you can have slightly better lighting in a game?
Gamers made nVidia’s fortune and nVidia is one of the main reasons for the crypto and ai messes. It’s not the only factor but it’s one.The crypto mess isn’t Nvidia’s fault. The biggest crypto coin wasn’t even mined on GPUs anymore when the cryptocalypse happened and GPUs got literally unaffordable and unobtainable for a few years. The Ethereum devs made their mining algorithm require lots of VRAM in an attempt to make their blockchain more democratic because ASIC miners would not work as well. This backfired by suddenly making gamer GPUs the sweet spot for mining Ethereum. Nvidia profited a lot. But the Ethereum devs are actually to blame. They fucked this up hard and then dragged out the algorithm switch to from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake for years. After Ethereum switched to PoS, GPU prices were recovering slowly - until the AI rush started.
The RAMpocalypse literally has been caused by Sam Altman buying the (western) world’s RAM production without even being able to put it anywhere. This is basically venture capital ruining it for everyone.
Nvidia is a big player and their intel-style market segmentation sucks. But they actually make produce GPUs. The real fuckery is venture capitalists enabling OpenAI’s CEO to ruin the tech market for everyone.Capitalism has an Epstein class problem. Without those CEOs, the RAMpocalypse hadn’t happened. Nvidia couldn’t sell GPUs which have no place to actually get installed in. The AI company financing circle jerk had been busted by the US government.
The current mess is literally the democrats fault. They could have done proper politics instead of their abstruse post-woke shit. Trump had never won. Musk had not gutted governmental oversight (there wasn’t much, but it at least existed).
Fucking democrats wasting their power to do irrelevant shit to nag the rednecks into voting Trump instead of doing literally anything else.Just to be clear, I’m not arguing against your point. I’m largely agreeing with you. People do genuinely care more about enjoying their hobby than whatever principals they should be upholding to ensure it’s future. For most people the politics involved isn’t a consideration for something that’s usually an escape from reality. My goal was to explain why the status quo is the way it is and most of it does come down to whatever makes the games the prettiest. I can’t fault people for that. Everything in life shouldn’t require research and an ethics check. These kinds of issues are why we have elected officials and governing bodies and it’s their failures you should be upset at.
My goal was to explain why the status quo is the way it is and most of it does come down to whatever makes the games the prettiest. I can’t fault people for that.
You can and you should. Just blindly going through life chasing your own enjoyment at the expense of everything else is egoistical and detrimental to civil society. Egoism is what is destroying the world.
Everything in life shouldn’t require research and an ethics check.
Unfortunately it does, and while I agree we can’t fix everything at once, some things are easier than others.
These kinds of issues are why we have elected officials and governing bodies and it’s their failures you should be upset at.
Yeah, and that’s another thing where people should pay more attention, but they don’t because they care more about their immediate satisfaction, with hobbies and enjoyment, rather than long-term outlooks.
I agree. Especially the marketing department hyping up their upcoming products to an unhealthy degree really hurt their reputation. Because those promises always failed to deliver in the last >decade.
But personally i’m now 12(?) years only on AMD cards and i was never plagued by all the famous downsides AMD GPUs supposedly and actually have. Which doesnt mean there are tons of valid criticism to be made against them.
I get why Nvidia was and is the market leader. They offered the most feature complete and fastest products most of the time. Always with a bit of proprietary fuckery involved which personally always turned me off. There are a lot of valid reasons why somebody would prefer a Nvidia card right now or in the past.
My point was that i dont get why they are so disproportionally more popular. If you wanted the fastest halo product… sure there wasnt a contest since the 290X(which still is debatable). But AMD had almost always pretty great midrange offerings which most consumer buy anyway. Especially in the last three generation they had their shit together and were IMHO pretty competitive in every price bracket besides the very high end. Still, they lost even more market share.
Personally I think they’re recent losses are probably a result of the fact that Nvidia is so dominant and Intel entered the market. It’s hard to compete against someone who’s got ~70% market share while a new guy shows up and manages to only steal from your slice. The advantage Nvidia has of being the world’s most valuable company has got to be near insurmountable for AMD at this point. Even if AMD had an outright better product there’s a, not so small amount of people, who would probably still buy Nvidia just to be on the winning team.
But AMD had almost always pretty great midrange offerings which most consumer buy anyway. Especially in the last three generation they had their shit together and were IMHO pretty competitive in every price bracket besides the very high end. Still, they lost even more market share.
In the US maybe. Any time I looked at AMD cards in recent years, they were more expensive than nVidia equivalents. And that was even before Lisa Su started courting Donald Trump and the AI industry. There’s a cult following around AMD and they and retailers both abuse that.
I’m not in the US and AMD has always been cheaper for me. Hardware Unboxed made a few videos about pricing in recent years and in the regions they covered AMD was also always cheaper than Nvidia. Aside from a few outliers.
Never seen that unfortunately. Nvidia cards are always sold a bit above MSRP while AMD cards are sold far above MSRP. And of course AMD itself targets an MSRP as close to nvidia as possible while still being a tiny bit lower. Gotta keep profit margins rather than increasing market share I guess.
You know shit’s crazy when you’re rooting for INTEL to treat customers better than AMD or nvidia.
Yeah, okay that sucks. But makes comparisons easier i guess? Nvidia wins at default unless you want good open source Linux drivers. Which arent a lot of people to be fair.
I really hope Intel will still release consumer GPUs in the future. The B580 was a pretty nice GPU at MSRP. But i couldnt even recommend it to anyone because it almost always was 30% above MSRP where i live. With that price you could have gotten just a better card in every metric.
I will never get how Nvidia got THAT popular amongst gamers
It was the only gfx card maker back then that doesn’t sucks, and the only real competitor is AMD and they kinda sucked. Games made back then are mostly optimised for nvidia. And then they have shadowplay which capture footage from x second/minute ago with a press of a button, which popularised sharing funny clips. AMD only get better like a few years ago, then Intel enter the race. Today Nvidia doesn’t really offer much advantage for most people because of the price. If chinese gfx card maker catch up, Nvidia will probably have to fully pivot to AI company to survive.
haha you make it sound like any GPU will be affordable in the first place
I wouldn’t use it, even if it was adding performance. Nvidia really found a new technology that is even worse than Frame Generation.
DLSS5 looks bad, but after using for a little while frame generation does have some use cases. It requires a high refresh monitor to be worth anything first and foremost to ensure there’s space for the interpolated frames between a high base frame rate. I use a 144hz monitor, so with 2x frame rate I still get a perfectly playable 72fps based latency.
I found it to be good while playing Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 because it let me turn up the other settings while consistently looking smooth. It’s a slow enough game that the increased latency isn’t noticeable.
It’s especially helpful for CPU bound games like Helldivers 2 and Victoria 3 because the interpolation happens after the main rendering. I could not get HD2 above ~90fps with my CPU, but with frame gen on the CPU only had to render 72fps. It also meant I could turn DLSS scaling off, which meant the generated frames were based on native renders and everything looked better. Victoria 3 went from a painful 20-30fps to a much more tolerable 4-60.
All that said it does have serious issues. The increased latency means I’ll never use it for a reaction time based shooter like Enlisted or Deadlock. A few games just don’t look good with it. Star Wars Jedi Survivor had poor performance anyway, but turning frame gen on both makes it feel like it plays worse while also adding terrible ghosting effects and artifacts.
I’ve been interpolating movies and tv shows since 2015, so I think I was better able to set my expectations for the downsides of interpolation.
AI frame generation makes sense on lower hardware but to turn your games into slop? Why the hell? Why not enhance the 3d rendering or ray tracing with this ** crap.
I would actually argue it does not. Frame generation requires a minimum of 45-60 FPS so with such a requirement it does not take a game from unplayable to playable. Additionally, those frames don’t lead to the same experience as if the GPU had natively rendered the game because it does not account for the user input for those frames. It literally delays the next frame to insert a fake frame in between, leading to an increase in latency, so the only experience improvement is a smoothing of the rendering but it makes the visual quality worse and the latency worse. To me, this does not make sense and has been very wrongly advertised by nvidia with claims such as an 5070 = 4090, so so wrong.
Edit: frame generation is only appeasing the people for whom higher FPS = better, without looking at the real user experience such as frame pacing, latency, visual quality etc.
Looking at the basic performance charts Nvidia has provided us so far, the ultra-high frame rate figures are based on 6x Multi Frame Generation.
Let this sink in for a moment.
Are you saying that the 50-60% lower framerate is with with 6x framegen on?
Yes, pretty much. Each those diagrams and numbers Nvidia put on screenshots, look down at the bottom it says Multi Frame Gen 6x. It’s small, most people would miss.
Edit: Removed explanation, it was a bit unnecessary complicated.
I want to make sure I understand this right. The 6X here means that for every one real frame generated by the GPU, the next six frames that follow will be AI generated?
I’m pretty sure its 1 real frame every X frames so 6x would be 1 real, 5 generated.
This is how I understand it too. 6x frame generation means 6 times the amount it had before. If it had 10 frames before, then 6x means 60 frames in total, which are 50 of them fake frames. Note to anyone reading this: Frame Generation is also adding lag. So anyone saying Frame Generation is increasing performance just because the numbers go higher, did not understand what it is. In fact Frame Generation is decreasing performance.
Now imagine you use DLSS and RayTracing, and to feel good you add Frame Generation. What an abomination is this?
Frame generation is for when you can play at native 60 FPS but want more. More native frames don’t give you less noticeable input lag. But more (fake) frames still feel smoother. That’s the sweet spot for frame gen: playing at 120 FPS when your card can only do a little more than 60 FPS native (some native frames are sacrificed to the AI gods to get the fake frames to interleave with the real ones).
The advertising is ridiculous though.What the hell is even the point of that? (Other than to sell graphics cards…)
A marketer’s dream (but garbage to everyone else).
Man you’re basically not even playing the game at that point.
Just one 6th of it.^^
at best. that’s just framegen. You forgot upscaling. it internally renders at 540p…
In that answer, I forgot indeed. And the DLSS 5 image styling on top after upscaling… First Ai: Image upscaling, on top second Ai: DLSS 5 styling, on top third Ai: Frame Generation. And that assumes that the original input image from the developers was created without Ai. I mean Unreal Engine has some builtin Ai features and so on.
The article goes into this.
Looking at the basic performance charts Nvidia has provided us so far, the ultra-high frame rate figures are based on 6x Multi Frame Generation. So, while the little RTX 5060 can churn out a 258 fps result in NBA 2K27 at 1080p Ultra settings with ray tracing and DLSS 5 enabled, the game underneath will actually be running at around 43 fps.
258 / 43 = 6I haven’t looked at the raw numbers, but if the A.I. is reducing performance by 60%, you can do some basic math and estimate that your game would have 110FPS normally. So the A.I. technically comes out ahead by a lot of frames. But, are those frames actually valuable? 60fps is enough for me personality, and 120fps is more than enough for almost everybody, so anything more than 120 is basically fluff.
Also I don’t really want to play a game where 5/6 of frames are “fake”. Imagine just walking along in Elden Ring and you glitch through a wall, but the wall never existed, it was hallucinated by the A.I. based on surrounding geometry, and then you get hit by a random fireball the A.I. accidentally left out. I would be pissed. I can’t even imagine all the strange visual artefacts and glitches the A.I. would introduce. Like your character gaining and losing fingers in The Sims multiple times per second.
It’s not even just 1/6 frame, because there is upscaling with Ai before, plus the upscaled image is probably changed a bit with the new DLSS 5 imagery. So the one full frame isn’t even a full frame.
What’s the upscaling with A.I. “before” that you’re talking about?
DLSS can upscale the image. Lets say from 1080p to 4k, with Ai. Then the DLSS 5 cosmetics are added, these new ones we see in the screenshots. That’s also Ai. And at last 6x Frame Generation with 5 generated images in between real images, with Ai.
Isn’t the input lag going to be insane if the game runs at, say, 10 fps? This would have to come with some kind of new render pipeline where the simulation can somehow still run at a higher framerate.
Exactly (we almost posted at the same time, where I explicitly talked about this in the other reply, lol, also with 10 fps as example. :D). There is a reason why Nvidia does not share the latency. I have no idea how this is legal.
I don’t really get how frame generation works, but at what point are you extrapolating so much that it gets out of sync with the gameplay? Surely there’s a limit…
The game can pass movement vectors so they gen image can adapt.
The main images are fully rendered
It delays the task frame from showing and then generates between frame, then more between frames and again more (6x 5 total frames)
Upscaling was a mistake, I always turn it off and end up with higher or at least the same frame rates. It’s just another fucking thing like motion blur, chromatic aberration and lens flare. It makes the game look and feel worse at the expense of performance.
Upscaling was meant for older gpus. To lower the resolution in the game while making it fit the monitor resolution. I have no clue why flagship models need upscaling.
No, it was meant to offset the performance loss of raytracing in games. That is why it was introduced.
I always use DLSS Quality if available (and sometimes it is the only kind of render scaling available) and always have a ~20% performance boost with almost no image quality loss.
I’ve started downscaling
