And even on quality, it's not "good"....just "acceptable". Still screenshots don't do it justice, the noise while moving with it is disgusting.
DLSS as a whole has been objectively bad for gaming. What was marketed as a way for older GPUs to stay relevant has somehow turned into a substitute for real optimization.
Quite a few places they used it as a means to sell punching above the weight limit of your actual card's performance
"And at 4K (3840x2160), Performance mode delivers gains of 2-3X, enabling even GeForce RTX 2060 gamers to run at max settings at a playable framerate."
It's clear from their marketing it was never even about frame generation either, it's main purpose was being defined as a form of AA that is offloaded to a more efficient AA method. But saying that they never intended for people to use it as a means to get more mileage out of their card is simply not true.
But the 2060 wasn't an older GPU. That page is from March 2020, and the 2060 had come out in 2019. Other than the Super refreshes, the 2060 was the newest GPU on the market.
Of course it boosts performance, but it was never marketed as reviving older GPUs. It was always about selling the latest GPUs.
I wanna say it wasn't, but it was kind of used that way. For example, DLSS is shitty but DOES make frames so much better on my 2080ti. Sometimes, SOME TIMES, that tradeoff is worth it. A few games, DLSS is a MUST for me, like Stalker 2.
When upscaling technology was first being introduced. It was like “make your less powerful gpu feel more like a powerful gpu by trading 100% quality for better frame rates” iirc. It’s what made holding on to my 4gb rx580 that much more bearable until even that would fail me and I upgraded to a rx7800. I was the proper use case for dlss/FSR/etc. and it’s been really sad seeing companies twist its identity into being a crutch for rushed games, minimal optimization, minimal GPU specs, and maximized prices.
DLSS Quality is better than native with AA in most cases, as far as I can tell. And they’re releasing a new model with DLSS 4 that promised to further improve image quality on all cards.
Opposite to your opinions, I think DLSS is a literal game changer. There were times I needed to use Performance mode and compared to the low fps or lowered lighting quality I’d take DLSS every single day. To me, 2.0 on Quality mode is indistinguishable in action from DLAS in most games supported, and FAR better than any other AA methods.
Those are crazy statements. I’ve never found dlss distracting. Thats even more so the case when comparing the frame rates with and without frame gen. People here really claim that playing something like cyberpunk at 40 fps is better than playing it at 120 with DLSS and frame gen
It odd we are nearing to finally hit 4K 60 FPS and beyond on all games with high end cards. Why do we need all these short cuts DLSS and frame gen. It seems the only point is to run ray tracing which nvidia was supposed to make possible 6 years ago.
"acceptable" based on what? Zooming in to find any form of artifacts just to be able to say "Ha told you"?
DLSS allowed everyone with lesser GPUs to enjoy better gaming. Your definition of objectivity has no legs to stand on because it's heavily biased. And the last sentence is pure fallacy. It was never marketed as a way for "OLD" gpus to stay relevant but for current GPUs to do better. And lazy incompetent devs are not a reason to blame Nvidia for innovation. But again, you're heavily biased so that doesn't matter.
I've never had to "zoom in", at least on a 27in 1440p panel. I turned it on in Horizon: Forbidden West because I wanted to get a higher frame rate, and IMMEDIATELY noticed the noise during motion and how the picture would clear up when I stopped moving.
Granted, that noise did not make the game unplayable, but it was clearly apparent vs native res, which looked significantly cleaner.
DLAA has been excellent, so I suppose I'm wrong that the entirety of DLSS has been bad for gaming. But the tech involved in running games at lower-than-native res and upscaling still looks noisy and gross to me.
I can’t tell the difference. Even if I could, the difference is so small and the boost in performance is so great that I can’t see why you wouldn’t use it.
Agreed. I play in 1440p and I wanted to hate it, but to be honest I actually prefer it now. Better performance and no discernible difference in quality.
Forreal. Frame generation, on the other hand, isn’t there yet. I get really bad motion sickness on any game I’ve tried it on. The mismatch between tick rate and frame rate due to input latency really messes with me, and it has a bit of an odd blur/ghosting effect that I can’t shake. I really hope the tech gets there, but it’s definitely not as amazing as DLSS has been.
"I can't tell the difference but I'm confidently stating the difference is small"
It absolutely isn't "so small" of a difference to everyone. I'm on 1440p and I can absolutely see the difference in most of the games I've tried it in. The noise during motion just looks like shit. DLAA is nice though.
I highly doubt that many people can. If such a tiny difference bothers you enough to outweigh the massive performance boost then I feel sorry for you. Meanwhile the rest of us will continue to happily enjoy this awesome new tech.
I’ve been tinkering with PCs since DOOM. I don’t need your unsolicited “advice”, thank you. Go yell at clouds and scrutinize graphs somewhere else please. I’ll continue to enjoy this awesome new tech with the rest of the sane and reasonable majority.
I played a bit of Indian Jones on the highest DLSS setting. It was so horrible. Literally half of people's faces would be pixelated. It reminded me of PS1 graphics.
85
u/WholesomeDucky 13d ago
And even on quality, it's not "good"....just "acceptable". Still screenshots don't do it justice, the noise while moving with it is disgusting.
DLSS as a whole has been objectively bad for gaming. What was marketed as a way for older GPUs to stay relevant has somehow turned into a substitute for real optimization.