WYP
News Guru
Radeon has brought cutting-edge upscaling to the masses with FSR.
Read more about AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution technology.
Read more about AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution technology.
AMD gives gamers everywhere a performance boost with FidelityFX Super Resolution
- Thread starter WYP
- Start date
KingNosser
Well-known member
I tested it in Godfall, used ultra quality, couldn't tell the difference but i sure saw higher fps. With some time and more game support this is working very well. For this being day one of it's launch it sure has me intrested for the future really well done AMD 
Dicehunter
Resident Newb
I tested it in Godfall, used ultra quality, couldn't tell the difference but i sure saw higher fps. With some time and more game support this is working very well. For this being day one of it's launch it sure has me intrested for the future really well done AMD
Considering this is the first iteration, It's a hell of a lot more polished compared to the 1st iteration of DLSS.
I tested it in Godfall, used ultra quality, couldn't tell the difference but i sure saw higher fps. With some time and more game support this is working very well. For this being day one of it's launch it sure has me intrested for the future really well done AMD
I just tested it with my 2080ti. My setting in Godfall to ultraquality, I gained 50 fps, but my god, the picture quality was atrociously bad.
edit* Not as bad as I made it out to be. Had a weird bug where gfx settings seem to change when I enabled FSR.
Still a decline in quality which I can compare to DLSS 1.0 Metro Exodus days ( for those who saw that disaster) but im very VERY impressed with the fps gain.
Godfall is very well optimised. I had Raytracing on, and steady 150fps with FSR off. Enabled FSR and saw graphics decline but peaked at 205 fps at times in my mission room.
That said, Guru3D made some good comments on this new feature. Its not something that will last long. AMD need to get in on the deep learning asap.
Viewing Godfall through my monitor with HDR etc etc, its at times comparable to DLSS 1.0 sadly. But FSR does give a much better FPS boost than DLSS 1.0 did.
That said... im doing this with an Nvidia GPU so my opinion probably counts for very little here.
Last edited:
I have to strongly disagree on this being temporary. Why would we ever go back to giving up this free performance? When the tech will only get closer to the native thing for a lower cost as the techniques are adjusted (AMD has left a lot on the table by going for maximum generational cross-compatibility with their current approach) and where applicable NN models get more mature. It's a way to significantly increase efficiency with regards to power consumption, memory requirements, transistor budget, ect, it's essentially an extra layer of near-lossless full graphics pipeline compression, reducing the requirements of every stage and then expanding out at the end. Surely the more likely route is this becomes heavily integrated at a hardware level, and becomes ubiquitous in laptops and consoles.
This tech will also of course have a direct impact on lowering the cost of entry for GPUs and PC gaming, which would be indefinite, in the future, surely almost all low end gaming will use NN-upscailing, and with enough time it will surely become the sensible option in terms of graphics trade offs for everyone but those with the very top tier card of a generation, as this tech becoming the standard means devs can push games harder in other what will by then be more noticeable ways (More raytracing and so on)
Last edited:
KingNosser
Well-known member
As much as it can work on Nvidia it's unfair to expect it to work as well as on AMD.
My CPU holds my card back a fair bit atm, but i gained 60fps over 1440p at max settings with DXR, really can't tell the difference at all. It needs more games and support but i feel it will spread faster than dlss did least in my view.
I would expect AMD to build on it going forward but for a first day it's really good and i'm not even a big fan of upscaling, but ultra quality is kinda a no brainer really turn it on and forget like most settings.
I'd say where dlss is better by a fair way is on the lower end of the settings like performance mode dlss does have the upper hand slightly there, the only real issue for AMD is that Nvidia have money and will throw it at devs to get exclusive dlss into games faster.
The only thing for me while the fps boost is nice and the render isn't noticable i actually get good fps anyways so it's not a huge need, but maybe further into my 6800XT's life span this can drag it out a fair bit longer if it's in enough games.
My CPU holds my card back a fair bit atm, but i gained 60fps over 1440p at max settings with DXR, really can't tell the difference at all. It needs more games and support but i feel it will spread faster than dlss did least in my view.
I would expect AMD to build on it going forward but for a first day it's really good and i'm not even a big fan of upscaling, but ultra quality is kinda a no brainer really turn it on and forget like most settings.
I'd say where dlss is better by a fair way is on the lower end of the settings like performance mode dlss does have the upper hand slightly there, the only real issue for AMD is that Nvidia have money and will throw it at devs to get exclusive dlss into games faster.
The only thing for me while the fps boost is nice and the render isn't noticable i actually get good fps anyways so it's not a huge need, but maybe further into my 6800XT's life span this can drag it out a fair bit longer if it's in enough games.
Because its temporary until AMD improve with a new feature. Free performance at the cost of graphical fidelity is not "that" appealing to me. I do favour FPS over fidelity, but from what I see so far, (not just my nvidia card but youtube comments and other reviews) the drop in visuals is extreme.
JohnnyGuru said it well
This is why. It will serve as a feature until AMD get their hands on proper Deep learning. Once they have it, I think FSR will disappear from games and we will have AMD DL pushed to the masses as we did with DLSS.
Physx was once the next big thing pushed to many games and we all loved it, but hated its performance hit. Where is it now? Technology features evolve and things need to turn to legacy and then get dropped. That is where I see FSR going but only if AMD can find an answer to DLSS which is succeeding very well thanks to RTX Tensor cores.
And this is what AMD/Nvidia dont really want. They need you to upgrade. Adding a feature that benefits the last 3 generations of GPUs allowing you to wait another 2 years before purchase doesn't help AMD very much.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
Warchild, PhysX is integrated into many game engines as there physics pipeline, to be fair. It's evolved a lot. I don't think it's a good comparison, though doesn't invalidate your opinion.
AMD just needed to say they had a competitive answer even though it's not ideal. It's just a marketing ploy while they work on something better.
AMD just needed to say they had a competitive answer even though it's not ideal. It's just a marketing ploy while they work on something better.
Yes so PhysX turned into legacy tech in the background that we have no control over. Think back to Batman (Arkham asylum i think?) we had control over PhysX quality or even to turn it off. I think Havok (may it R.I.P) handled PhsyX extremely well as it as a puff piece for the tech feature. Maybe I just worded things badly. Point I was trying to make is that FSR is just an old feature redeployed to show AMD that they are making an effort to answer to DLSS and that it is not really something they want to heavily invest into. Deep learning AI is where it is at.
That said though, the FPS increase is a whopping value. If you consider my Godfall test was on Max settings and raytracing to full. Jumping an extra 50fps is an achievement. The downside is the whopping drop in graphical quality at times. And do not even think about running performance FSR. You might as well have 20/20 vision and borrow someones long sighted glasses and look at the game through those lens, that is how it looks.
AMDs current technique specifically avoided "proper" deep learning as a key to its success. Maybe eventually they will make version using neural nets for limited scenarios, but that wouldn't have met their design goals for FSR at all. AMD managing to make FSR run entirely as a shader is why it has insane cross compatibility, and is so simple to implement, and why those of us with NVidia GPUs might soon frequently find FSR to be our only available option in many titles that would otherwise never be able to or find it cost effective to implement DLSS.
The issue of FSR is not whether it looks as good as native, its whether it looks better than using a scaled down resolution normally, as this is the scenario it will be deployed most heavily, running high res/framerates with low end cards.
Last edited:
Well its simple because its nothing but a temporal scaler, something that has been around for ages. However they have to get in on the deep learning.
Nvidia are already way ahead on this. Intel have its super sampling XeSS along with the deep learning of their Xe HPG. We havent seen much but it could become a threat on market share.
FSR is a spatial shader, and DLSS is a temporal-spatial shader (Spatial just means they use data from the current frame, temporal means data from other frames is also factored in) that are both making some use of neural networks, but in quite different ways. Temporal shaders of course give rise to their own set of issues, such as ghosting, that using a purely spatial technique avoids.
NVidias tensor cores are just fused multiply add instruction blocks for matrices, they are not particularly innovative and AMD doesn't need them to accelerate or carry out this type of workload, traditional execution units on GPUs can suffice if not quite as fast. Simple neural nets like this run quite well for inference.
NVidia might have slightly more mature tech, but as is often the case with any format war, the real battle is not over which is better quality, it is over which is easier to distribute, the winner of almost every format war in history has been due to the latter and not the former.
From the patent for FSR, which avoided mention of deep learning on all but the technical diagram, likely to avoid the now very marketing heavy nature of the term now in general parlance, and the fairly light use. The innovation of the system seems to be in AMDs application of both linear and non-linear downsampling neural networks to preserve both colour and complex shapes, with a little more work this technique it could be a strong contender.
Last edited:
NeverBackDown
AMD Enthusiast
PhysX isn't legacy tech though. Physics in games are constantly getting better and PhysX is a large part of that. It's constantly being updated. You don't need control over it, it's just working for everybody collectively improving games. Sure by now it's been updated so much most of it has been refactored and new features, but doesn't mean it's not useful. It was a significant technology and was significant for gaming for an extremely long time. It's usefulness is so profound that's why I feel it's not a great comparison. AMD FSR is nowhere near it a better comparison would have been AMD tressfx, imo.
I won't try to change your mind though.
What AMD might be planning is regular temporal techniques but also concurrently developing a better temporal alternative with AI and then be able to have 2 different techniques available for gamers of old and new without the need for DLSS exclusive. It could work on all cards with AI processing using better temporal algorithms for clear picture quality.
Similar threads
