no DLSS?

[Angelus]

NT

[Jakubi]

Originally posted by Worse:

Originally posted by Worse:

Ok, it doesnt have DLSS and the performance is partly catastrophic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ca2zSn1nHQI (German though)

The guy uses a RTX 4090, Ryzen 9 5900x and 32 GB Ram and cant get stable 60 FPS in 1440p. There is supposed to be another patch before release but I wouldnt count on it solving everything.

In addition to that, there are some weird sound distortions in some cutscenes if you happen to exceed 60 FPS without Vsync.

Noone hardware can get to stable 60fps. My rtx 4070ti performs aswell as a 4090. They ♥♥♥♥♥♥ something up

[Jakubi]

There is a mod in work which adds, dlss and frame generation. About twice the fps https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M0AJJoJeEV8

[Worse]

Originally posted by Ronin:

Originally posted by Worse:

The guy uses a RTX 4090, Ryzen 9 5900x and 32 GB Ram and cant get stable 60 FPS in 1440p. There is supposed to be another patch before release but I wouldnt count on it solving everything.

In addition to that, there are some weird sound distortions in some cutscenes if you happen to exceed 60 FPS without Vsync.

Noone hardware can get to stable 60fps. My rtx 4070ti performs aswell as a 4090. They ♥♥♥♥♥♥ something up

I disabled the e-cores on my i7 12700k and set all p-cores to 5.2 Ghz and have always over 60 now (cpu is paired with a RTX 4080)

[AmaiAmai]

Originally posted by Årk Grip:

Originally posted by lefty1117:

get a 4090 and you won't need DLSS

I have the 4090, 13900K, and 64GB of 6000MHZ RAM…. I would like dlss and frame generation. Why buy this expensive gpu just for Devs not to include all the features for it?

You bought the GPU from Nvidia. Devs make zero dollars supporting that GPU. Why would they care?

[Fractal]

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Originally posted by Årk Grip:

I have the 4090, 13900K, and 64GB of 6000MHZ RAM…. I would like dlss and frame generation. Why buy this expensive gpu just for Devs not to include all the features for it?

You bought the GPU from Nvidia. Devs make zero dollars supporting that GPU. Why would they care?

Maybe, because NVIDIA cards are more popular in hi-end middle-end segment? Maybe because they technologies double fps? Maybe because it can double selling a game? But with who I talk if you don’t ask this questions to yourself.

[AmaiAmai]

Originally posted by Fractal:

Maybe, because NVIDIA cards are more popular in hi-end middle-end segment? Maybe because they technologies double fps? Maybe because it can double selling a game? But with who I talk if you don’t ask this questions to yourself.

Ask on r/gamedev or any other place where indie game devs gather whether or not they will support DLSS. The resounding answer will be no .

Want to know why? Maybe because they don't like the licensing agreement Nvidia forces on them? Maybe because the technologies you talk about are irrelevant to them and a majority of their audience? Maybe because it won't have any real effect on sales?

Reality is that Nvidia and their GPU and technologies aren't supported by a vast majority of game developers. That isn't changing just because you got convinced to buy into Nvidia's product stack by marketing.

Priority has and will always be to develop things for everyone, not a walled garden or small subset. Doing otherwise is a waste of project resources and an incredibly poor decision.

[flat_Lander1]

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Originally posted by Fractal:

Maybe, because NVIDIA cards are more popular in hi-end middle-end segment? Maybe because they technologies double fps? Maybe because it can double selling a game? But with who I talk if you don’t ask this questions to yourself.

Ask on r/gamedev or any other place where indie game devs gather whether or not they will support DLSS. The resounding answer will be no .

Want to know why? Maybe because they don't like the licensing agreement Nvidia forces on them? Maybe because the technologies you talk about are irrelevant to them and a majority of their audience? Maybe because it won't have any real effect on sales?

Reality is that Nvidia and their GPU and technologies aren't supported by a vast majority of game developers. That isn't changing just because you got convinced to buy into Nvidia's product stack by marketing.

Priority has and will always be to develop things for everyone, not a walled garden or small subset. Doing otherwise is a waste of project resources and an incredibly poor decision.

This is just untrue most of the games now are made in Unreal Engine and unreal engine supports both dlss and fsr plugins and are easy to implement
The age of when every company had custom built in-house engine are long gone so most of the games are coming out on some kind of already existing engine (most likely UE) and all of them supports nvidia or amd features e.g Frostbite, RAGE, UE, Cryengine, Unity

[Worse]

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Now, explain to me how untrue it is when there is an issue during development of the game? Ever read the license on Nvidia's technology or just pretend its open and not a black box?

https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

Where exactly is your issue with it?

[AmaiAmai]

Originally posted by Worse:

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Now, explain to me how untrue it is when there is an issue during development of the game? Ever read the license on Nvidia's technology or just pretend its open and not a black box?

https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

Where exactly is your issue with it?

Maybe try reading the license? Why would any game developer enter an agreement with Nvidia, when they've done nothing for them?

Logically speaking what does DLSS and other Nvidia library features add for a majority of the customers? Nothing. And for that you will enter a contract with a company that did nothing for development, offers nothing, and doesn't pay you to enter said contract....and be restricted in how you use and maintain your own product?

Sounds like a lopsided relationship, and that is what we call exploitation in the business world. I would never be exploited by a company to appease some people that decided to buy an overpriced GPU.

It's not just Nvidia I would never add to a game. Any propietary nonsense can never inch its way into my projects of any kind. It's either FOSS or it's trash and not going into anything I have a hand in.

FSR is FOSS There is no contract to use it, and you can modify it how you like.

Lastly, if Nvidia cared they can add DLSS on the driver side. They won't do it because they are scared someone might find out exactly how to unlock it on older GPUs. For instance there's really no reason besides marketing BS why a RTX 3000 couldn't do DLSS 3, despite what Nvidia claims.

And if you look at history, Nvidia has a history of suing people for making their older products or competition work better with their own software.

TLDR: Nvidia doesn't pay to write code for the games, no one in their right mind would enter a legal contract that can have the possibility of a lawsuit with them. Only an idiot would.

[patrick68794]

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Originally posted by Worse:

https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

Where exactly is your issue with it?

Maybe try reading the license? Why would any game developer enter an agreement with Nvidia, when they've done nothing for them?

Logically speaking what does DLSS and other Nvidia library features add for a majority of the customers? Nothing. And for that you will enter a contract with a company that did nothing for development, offers nothing, and doesn't pay you to enter said contract....and be restricted in how you use and maintain your own product?

Sounds like a lopsided relationship, and that is what we call exploitation in the business world. I would never be exploited by a company to appease some people that decided to buy an overpriced GPU.

It's not just Nvidia I would never add to a game. Any propietary nonsense can never inch its way into my projects of any kind. It's either FOSS or it's trash and not going into anything I have a hand in.

FSR is FOSS There is no contract to use it, and you can modify it how you like.

Lastly, if Nvidia cared they can add DLSS on the driver side. They won't do it because they are scared someone might find out exactly how to unlock it on older GPUs. For instance there's really no reason besides marketing BS why a RTX 3000 couldn't do DLSS 3, despite what Nvidia claims.

And if you look at history, Nvidia has a history of suing people for making their older products or competition work better with their own software.

TLDR: Nvidia doesn't pay to write code for the games, no one in their right mind would enter a legal contract that can have the possibility of a lawsuit with them. Only an idiot would.

Good thing you're not in a position, and never will be, to decide what or what not to add to any commercial game. You're spreading false information and just making things up because you have some irrational hatred for a company.

[AmaiAmai]

Originally posted by patrick68794:

Good thing you're not in a position, and never will be, to decide what or what not to add to any commercial game. You're spreading false information and just making things up because you have some irrational hatred for a company.

Either you can't read or you're the one being dishonest. FIRST LINES of the agreement you accept.

This license is a legal agreement between you and NVIDIA Corporation ("NVIDIA") and governs the use of the NVIDIA RTX
software development kits, including the DLSS SDK, NGX SDK, RTXGI SDK, RTXDI SDK and/or NRD SDK, if and when made
available to you under this license (in each case, the “SDK”).
This license can be accepted only by an adult of legal age of majority in the country in which the SDK is used. If you are
under the legal age of majority, you must ask your parent or legal guardian to consent to this license. If you are entering
this license on behalf of a company or other legal entity, you represent that you have legal authority and “you” will mean
the entity you represent.
By using the SDK, you affirm that you have reached the legal age of majority, you accept the terms of this license, and you
take legal and financial responsibility for the actions of your permitted users.

Again, many game devs choose not to agree. That's the hard reality and why DLSS isn't and won't be in many games without modders.

[patrick68794]

Originally posted by Eclisis:

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Oh really? Tell Nvidia to prove me wrong. You do know people have scanned the actually silicon arrangments and there aren't any different things between them?

Nvidia's own engineer claimed it himself before the statement was backtracked by Nvidia's "head of AI" because "RTX 4000 is so much faster in the optical flow accelerator".

https://wccftech.com/nvidia-engineer-says-dlss-3-on-older-rtx-gpus-could-theoretically-happen-teases-rtx-i-o-news/

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Older-NVIDIA-GeForce-RTX-GPUs-might-get-DLSS-3-support.655140.0.html

But now seeing the lack of RTX 4000 performance vs. RTX 3000, the only selling feature happens to be DLSS 3.

But regardless, it won't matter because 99.9 percent of games won't have devs waste their time at their expense to implement something for only a small subset of people. That's reality.

By the way, if you don't believe the hardware has and is already there:

https://developer.nvidia.com/opticalflow-sdk

But remember, you can't decompile or examine or redistribute or mention how to do so, or face Nvidia's lawyers.

The 4000 series out performs the 3000 series a lot without DLSS especially with raytracing which isn't even usable on the 3000 series

the 4070ti is a better GPU than the 3090ti, the 3000 series was the biggest rip off in history yet everybody's made at the 40 series lmao

Aside from the 4000 series having about the average generational improvement that we've seen over the last four or five generations of Nvidia GPUs the rest of what you said here is wrong.

Ampere overall had a larger generational increase in performance over Turing than Ada Lovelace has had over Ampere. The 3070 has also been one of the best price/performance bargains since the 970 in 2014. It was $500 and performs almost identically to the $1200 2080ti.

Ray tracing is also perfectly viable on Ampere without DLSS at lower resolutions (and even 4K in some games with the 3080 and up) and the 4070ti is only faster than the 3090ti at 1080p, and that includes RT performance. At 1440p they're basically identical and at 4K the 3090ti is faster.

[Doctor Hades]

DLSS requires the tensor cores on the RTX cards to work. This is what gives the technology its advantage over software solutions such as FSR and XeSS. At this point, with DLSS2 and now DLSS3 frame generation, I don't think anyone can argue that it is the superior option in most games for NVIDIA GPU users. I have seen enough YouTube videos and played around with the other upscalers myself to know this is true.

Sure, with tweaking, DLSS could very well be made to run on older GPUs but why would NVIDIA bother doing that when FSR and XeSS exist as alternatives for older NVIDIA GPUs to use?

The point I am making is that FSR, XeSS and DLSS should be supported in *ALL* PC games going forward. There really is no excuse not to. AMD GPU users would then have the option to use XeSS if they don't like FSR2 (which is lacklustre in this game and barely improves the performance at all on my system - EA version before anyone comments!).

AMD are just being very anti-consumer and we see this time and time again in their so-called sponsored games. Usually, "AMD sponsored" means "Very high chance that it will run poorly on any PC" in my experience. Resident Evil 4 seems to be a rare exception but even that launched with issues (lacklustre RT, to cater for last gen AMD GPUs and current gen consoles, and crashes with RT when the VRAM limit is exceeded).

[DarkWaterSong]

Originally posted by Miller:

AMD sponsored, so most likely not

Nope. Not sponsored (there would be an AMD splash screen if it was), the devs just did not pay Nvidia for the rights to DLSS. Also have a friend who tried out a 3rd part driver that I cannot recommend on his 4080, and this really looks like a driver issue with that card. He was getting over 200 FPS when he started disabling most of the non render cores on his card.

[Worse]

Originally posted by AmaiAmai:

Maybe try reading the license? Why would any game developer enter an agreement with Nvidia, when they've done nothing for them?

Logically speaking what does DLSS and other Nvidia library features add for a majority of the customers? Nothing. And for that you will enter a contract with a company that did nothing for development, offers nothing, and doesn't pay you to enter said contract....and be restricted in how you use and maintain your own product?

Sounds like a lopsided relationship, and that is what we call exploitation in the business world. I would never be exploited by a company to appease some people that decided to buy an overpriced GPU.

It's not just Nvidia I would never add to a game. Any propietary nonsense can never inch its way into my projects of any kind. It's either FOSS or it's trash and not going into anything I have a hand in.

FSR is FOSS There is no contract to use it, and you can modify it how you like.

Lastly, if Nvidia cared they can add DLSS on the driver side. They won't do it because they are scared someone might find out exactly how to unlock it on older GPUs. For instance there's really no reason besides marketing BS why a RTX 3000 couldn't do DLSS 3, despite what Nvidia claims.

And if you look at history, Nvidia has a history of suing people for making their older products or competition work better with their own software.

TLDR: Nvidia doesn't pay to write code for the games, no one in their right mind would enter a legal contract that can have the possibility of a lawsuit with them. Only an idiot would.

I read it and ask where your issue with it lies. Instead of a precise answer, you continued to throw around wordshells... Its Nvidias technology, so yeah, the make a contract. What part of this contract is a disadvantage for the programmer?

Are you trying to imply that DLSS is not superior to FSR? This would just be wrong, so I ask again: What is your point, exactly?

Edit: I read later that you suggested to introduce DLSS on the driverside alone. This just shows that you dont understand how DLSS works and why it is better in quality than FSR.