AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution

NightReaver

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Apr 20, 2017
Messages
1,169
Yup. CUDA wasn't really for gamers, PhysX or streamers, it was for bigger things outside of gaming. It just helped nVidia unify the architecture. The same is true for Tensor cores, they are mostly useless for gamers but great for bigger things related to AI. And yet again let them unify the architecture.

*shrug* at least the gaming side get something, even if it's minior outta of it all.
I get that. It's just annoying when you try to compare the gaming merits of a selection of GPUs and someone comes in talking about CUDA. Nvenc I understand somewhat more...but again it seems most people end up streaming for a handful of people, aka a side hobby.
 

lopoetve

Fully [H]
Joined
Oct 11, 2001
Messages
32,561
Good for them. Still not something the average buyer of something such as a 3060 would care about outside of being a marketing point. Yet you run into the "but CUDA!" often enough where you'd swear everybody and their grandma is trying to do ML.

It's just marketing.
Depends on who you count as your average buyer. It’s been an effect on market supply for sure - I’ve sold a LOT of 2080TI and 3080 for… AI/ML work. You can stuff more of the FE cards in an R740 or DL380 than you can the dedicated RTX datacenter cards - and at lower power. More cores, less ram, wider footprint. There are companies buying consumer kit and modified cables just for this. Also doesn’t require weird licensing. 3060? Nope. But the bigger cards? Ayup.
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,864
That's the marketing at work. Same with how suddenly everyone is concerned with being able to do machine learning on $300-400 gpus and how literally everyone is now a wannabe streamer and NEEDS nvenc.

Yeah but anyone semi serious about it should be thinking of a better way to do it. For most it seems to be a sideshow hobby. Idk, hardly anything I'd pay extra for I guess.

Are you maybe confusing NVENC with something else?

Off topic but, NVENC is pretty incredible, really. You have to have a dedicated stream PC with at least a 3900x, to get stream quality more/less better than NVENC (with the StreamFX plugin to reveal some extra quality settings). But a 3900x can only do that sort of quality at 1080p/60. If you want 1080p 120 or 1440p at all, while maintaining those same high quality settings.....you would need an even better CPU. But NVENC can do that stuff no problem. That's one of the best things about it. Its very performant and the settings work well across all kinds of content and resolutions. This also means that your high res local recordings are a lot better, as well. Because you can run them with the highest quality settings or very near it, and maximize the extra bitrate you are using for a recording. Local recordings with NVENC tend to look nearly lossless, at reasonable bitrates.

Whereas with X.264, I find I'm constantly having to tweak stuff, to wring out the best bits I can. And its really annoying. and if you want to do high res recordings, you either have to drop the quality settings a lot or have a very expensive CPU. With NVENC, you can spend that money on the GPU and get NVENC as part of the deal.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,304
FRS 2.0 finally looks like proper DLSS alternative. And most likely this is what FSR was supposed to be all along.

Now all the people and reviewers who forcefully ignored how bad FRS 1.0 actually was and insisted its almost as good as DLSS will see it in fact was pretty terrible
FSR 1.0 "Ultra Quality" vs DLSS Performance
1652430786537.png


FRS 2.0 Performance vs DLSS Performance
1652430920432.png


DLSS seems sharper but I would not say its a big deal or anything. Certainly either tech is good.
It is very nice FSR 2.0 runs on wide variety of hardware.

This time AMD did a good job.
Now I am interested how it looks in actual gameplay
 
Joined
Jan 16, 2013
Messages
3,208
I'm really wondering how many games we will see this implemented in. I'm surprised popular MP shooters like Apex still doesn't have DLSS.
 

XoR_

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jan 18, 2016
Messages
1,304
Is raytracing performance on the same level as Nvidia's with FSR 2.0?
This technology has nothing to do with ray tracing really.

The real question is if FSR 2.0 has less performance impact on AMD cards vs Nvidia cars and if it does then how much. I would not expect much difference though and definitely not enough to overthrow Nvidia's RT advantage.

Personally I am happy AMD made this new tech because its licensing model and open source nature means more games will have temporal image upscaling. Also on consoles!
This is what FSR should be all along and most likely AMD just needed more time to work on it and that is why FSR 1.0 existed in the form it did.
 

Gideon

2[H]4U
Joined
Apr 13, 2006
Messages
3,008
Is raytracing performance on the same level as Nvidia's with FSR 2.0?

It should improve it, however I doubt it will close the gap between the two. But if a game was marginal before FSR 2.0 then most likely it will be completely playable now with ray tracing.
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,864
The real question is if FSR 2.0 has less performance impact on AMD cards vs Nvidia cars and if it does then how much.
Digital Foundry breaks it down into frame times/milliseconds. And it does look like FSR 2.0 actually currently takes more time per frame, to process, on AMD cards, than on Nvidia. But its more complicated than simply stating that. As the per frame cost on Nvidia cards actually differs a notable amount, depending upon the architecture. And not in an intuitive way (see: newer architecture doesn't necessarily mean faster processing of FSR 2.0).

Additionally, what it actually means in end framerates also is not easy to breakdown because.....well AMD is generally slower in Deathloop than Nvidia is, anyway. (see: 6700 XT and 3060 ti are often very close in performance, in many games. But in Deathloop, 3060 ti performs notably better.) Deathloop just isn't actually a great showcase for AMD performance.

On an Nvidia card, we see across different reviews that FSR is at worst, about 5fps behind DLSS, at each quality mode.
 

ZeroBarrier

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
424
Just watched the full DF video, and so far I gather FSR 2.0 is much better than FSR 1.0, but still not as good as DLSS. And it mostly runs faster on nvidia cards than on AMD cards with a few outliers depending on architecture and resolution. I guess we will have to wait for more titles to support FSR 2.0 before we know if this behavior is what should be expected.
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,864
Just watched the full DF video, and so far I gather FSR 2.0 is much better than FSR 1.0, but still not as good as DLSS. And it mostly runs faster on nvidia cards than on AMD cards with a few outliers depending on architecture and resolution. I guess we will have to wait for more titles to support FSR 2.0 before we know if this behavior is what should be expected.
Since it's open source; if developers want to, they can tweak and customize FSR 2.0 to mitigate visual issues for their specific game.
It could mean that FSR 2.0 improves relatively more quickly than DLSS has, since DLSS 2.0.
 

ZeroBarrier

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
424
Since it's open source; if developers want to, they can tweak and customize FSR 2.0 to mitigate visual issues for their specific game.
It could mean that FSR 2.0 improves relatively more quickly than DLSS has, since DLSS 2.0.
Did you watch the video? No amount of tweaking will fix those glaring issues; and as far as mitigating them, I don't see how they can mitigate them to the degree that an AI assisted upscaler does. As far as FSR improving quicker than DLSS, I suspect it will not. There is just no way for an upscaler to insert missing information without the help of AI; so for FSR to improve to the degree that DLSS has, they will eventually have to go with AI assistance.
 

TrunksZero

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 15, 2021
Messages
222
Did you watch the video? No amount of tweaking will fix those glaring issues; and as far as mitigating them, I don't see how they can mitigate them to the degree that an AI assisted upscaler does. As far as FSR improving quicker than DLSS, I suspect it will not. There is just no way for an upscaler to insert missing information without the help of AI; so for FSR to improve to the degree that DLSS has, they will eventually have to go with AI assistance.
Kinda of a silly thing to say. Because you wouldn't say that if you looked at how far we have come from FXAA to TXAA to where TAA is today (*shiver* I don't even like reading that in my head. Way to many A's eh? lol). FSR 2.0 can absolutely be tweaked and improved. Even developer side.
 
Last edited:

ZeroBarrier

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
424
Kinda of a silly thing to say. Because you wouldn't say that if you looked at how far we have come from FXAA to TXAA to where TAA is today (*shiver* I don't even like reading that in my head. Way to many A's eh? lol). FSR 2.0 can absolutely be tweaked and improved. Even developer side.
FXAA/TXAA smooth an image out. They do not try to insert missing information where there is none.

This is what you get when you don't have AI inserting missing information. Play with the sliders all you want; without AI, information isn't just going to magically appear where there is none.
1652728151041.png
 

chameleoneel

Supreme [H]ardness
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
5,864
FXAA/TXAA smooth an image out. They do not try to insert missing information where there is none.

This is what you get when you don't have AI inserting missing information. Play with the sliders all you want; without AI, information isn't just going to magically appear where there is none.
View attachment 474342
This example is about tracking the animation properly. Not.....inserting missing information? The amount of frames in the animations doesn't change, based on the rendering resolution. This is the current FSR 2.0 code not correctly tracking Deathloop's animations. Could simply be an issue of sub-optimal motion vectors and/or depth buffers. Or maybe something else. However, something like this should be relatively easy to fix, if they want to.

DF also later posted on twitter and said that in Deathloop, if you stand still, animations of other characters can get stuck in the DLSS buffer and actually cause a bunch of smearing/ghosting on the character model. An issue that Dying Light 2 had, but was fixed. They didn't publish this in their youtube video. Its unclear if they left it out or only discovered it, later.

https://twitter.com/Dachsjaeger/status/1525037005893259264/photo/1
FSoE2ovXEAAawmF.png

-----------
Similarly, the swirly sharpening trail behind the Character's hands/guns/gadgets is obviously a problem of the sharpening filter incorrectly accounting for the motion blur effects. It might go away or be much less visible, with the sharpening turned down. Which the user can do. It also may not be there in quality mode. Digital Foundry only showed it in performance mode. Regardless, developers should be able to tweak the FSR sharpening code, to behave differently specifically when Deathloop's motion blur is happening.

DLSS has ghosting from hands/guns/objecs. So, you have a visual "artifact", whichever solution you choose.
 
Last edited:

TrunksZero

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 15, 2021
Messages
222
FXAA/TXAA smooth an image out. They do not try to insert missing information where there is none.

This is what you get when you don't have AI inserting missing information. Play with the sliders all you want; without AI, information isn't just going to magically appear where there is none.
View attachment 474342

I think your just missing an element. DLSS, FSR 2.0 and Epics TSR are really just iterations of TAA tech. Generally taking the same idea/data further to not just anti-alias the image, but upscale it. Allot of the issues we are seeing with FSR 2, can be resolved. And it's easier to see how when you take a closer look at TAA itself.

This is a great article on TAA. Allot of what is described here could apply in helping deal with issues in DLSS, FSR 2.0 and TSR.
https://www.elopezr.com/temporal-aa-and-the-quest-for-the-holy-trail/

Which is all to say, the issues we are seeing, are solvable.
 

Marees

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Sep 28, 2018
Messages
1,051
FSR reviewed on Intel integrated graphics... for the sake of science

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-fsr2-tested-on-intel-integrated-graphics

I proceeded to run some benchmarks, first at native 720p and very low settings, then with native but with temporal anti-aliasing (TAA) and FidelityFX CAS (Contrast Aware Sharpening) enabled, and finally with FidelityFX Super Resolution 1.0 as well as FSR 2.0, both using the "Performance" upscaling mode in order to provide maximum framerates. Screenshots are below, and FSR 1.0 looked quite awful, with a very blurry appearance plus sort of a "static" interference error that kept showing up, possibly from the falling snow. FSR 2.0 on the other hand was still quite serviceable.

Now granted, playing at 720p with 100% upscaling isn't going to be ideal, but was it workable? Almost! I'd even go so far as to say FSR 2.0 looked better than native, at least using the default very low settings that disable temporal AA. But how did Deathloop perform?

Deathloop FSR 2.0 Testing on Intel Graphics

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)
Deathloop FSR 2.0 Testing on Intel Graphics

(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)
So yeah, that's actually not too bad! The starting point of 28 fps for Iris Xe was almost high enough to be playable, though with TAA+CAS that dropped to 26 fps. FSR 1.0 gave 22% more performance, averaging 34 fps — at the cost of image quality. FSR 2.0 helped a bit in framerates as well, to the tune of 16%, just clearing 30 fps. That's the minimum we shoot for in order to deem a game "playable."
 

applegrcoug

Limp Gawd
Joined
Aug 28, 2021
Messages
230
Today Farming Simulator 22 released FSR 2.0. I tried it out for a few minutes vs dlss on a 3080. I really couldn't tell much difference visually. If anything, the billboards were readable from further away with FSR. Both gave me 55ish fps at 4k, but I was only walking.

I should feel ambitious and record it on some different GPUs.
 

ZeroBarrier

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
424

DWolvin

2[H]4U
Joined
Nov 13, 2002
Messages
2,944
I think you mean the dude in the crosswalk? He's sinking into the ground a little, it happens in all three versions if you look carefully (and seems common in game). For a first effort from a hobbyist I'd say great effort and it'll probably get better later.
 

TrunksZero

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jul 15, 2021
Messages
222
I think you mean the dude in the crosswalk? He's sinking into the ground a little, it happens in all three versions if you look carefully (and seems common in game). For a first effort from a hobbyist I'd say great effort and it'll probably get better later.
Yeah the modder mentions that bugs should be expected. But it's still really cool.
 

ZeroBarrier

Limp Gawd
Joined
Mar 19, 2011
Messages
424
I think you mean the dude in the crosswalk? He's sinking into the ground a little, it happens in all three versions if you look carefully (and seems common in game). For a first effort from a hobbyist I'd say great effort and it'll probably get better later.
No, I mean his shadow seems to stick to his moving foot and it looks like he is walking on sticky oil.
 
Top