Add DLSS already

[p0mpous]

FSR 1.0 is abysmal.

[Balfour]

slop

[p0mpous]

Originally posted by Balfour:

slop

slop?

[Pandora's Actor]

Originally posted by p0mpous:

FSR 1.0 is abysmal.

na it needs fsr 3.1 thats better

[Nedbrytar-Yngve]

Originally posted by Pandora's Actor:

Originally posted by p0mpous:

FSR 1.0 is abysmal.

na it needs fsr 3.1 thats better

FSR 3.1 and DLSS to my understanding are the same amount of work to implement as they both need access to motion vector data. they should add both but even just fsr 3.1 would be a huge upgrade from fsr1

[Atkins]

Best you can get is DDOS

[Khronics]

For those idiots like me, what does it do and why is it good?

[CMDR Sweeper]

Originally posted by Khronics:

For those idiots like me, what does it do and why is it good?

Nvidia marketing in effect, it is a way to get more FPS over 60 by either upscaling (Rendering at lower resolution and scaling the image up to what your monitor runs)
Or newer versions, generate frames with Ai (Can hallucinate) to make the FPS number bigger, however you get input latency, and in some cases, the game still feels like it is still at the lower FPS number.

If you are below 60 FPS, using frame generation is horrible, and the game will really feel like it is the same FPS, even if the FPS counter reads 120 FPS,

[Pandora's Actor]

Originally posted by Nedbrytar-Yngve:

Originally posted by Pandora's Actor:

na it needs fsr 3.1 thats better

FSR 3.1 and DLSS to my understanding are the same amount of work to implement as they both need access to motion vector data. they should add both but even just fsr 3.1 would be a huge upgrade from fsr1

while it takes effort to implement both. there is no reason to doing both. fsr 3.1 is good enough and 99.99% of the players can use it. dlss is only usable for 56,37% of players. if steam hardware survey of jan this year is anything to go by.

[p0mpous]

Originally posted by Pandora's Actor:

Originally posted by Nedbrytar-Yngve:

FSR 3.1 and DLSS to my understanding are the same amount of work to implement as they both need access to motion vector data. they should add both but even just fsr 3.1 would be a huge upgrade from fsr1

while it takes effort to implement both. there is no reason to doing both. fsr 3.1 is good enough and 99.99% of the players can use it. dlss is only usable for 56,37% of players. if steam hardware survey of jan this year is anything to go by.

Just add both.

[ThatCountryDad]

I can agree. I'd like to see DLSS added.

[Svedelicno]

get better pc and you dont need no DLSS. + it wont improve anything since your latency is gonna be crazy, so anything that you gained you gonna lose

and yes sorry it sounds harsh but thats reality. arma is very demanding to run

[p0mpous]

Originally posted by Svedelicno:

get better pc and you dont need no DLSS. + it wont improve anything since your latency is gonna be crazy, so anything that you gained you gonna lose

and yes sorry it sounds harsh but thats reality. arma is very demanding to run

I have an RTX 4090. The game doesnt run anywhere near as well as its should. Its not demanding, its poorly optimised.

DLSS will 100% improve things, to say otherwise is a total lie.

[rckrz6]

Originally posted by Svedelicno:

get better pc and you dont need no DLSS. + it wont improve anything since your latency is gonna be crazy, so anything that you gained you gonna lose

and yes sorry it sounds harsh but thats reality. arma is very demanding to run

dlss will make huge improvements we are not talking about frame gen

[Oppenhimer]

Originally posted by p0mpous:

FSR 1.0 is abysmal.

facts, since they already have fsr at a minimum they should have fsr 3. its absolutely brutal playing with fsr 1. it increases my fps by a bunch at 70% and its way less efficient then 3 or dlss as well so i can only imagine if we had those

[Oppenhimer]

Originally posted by Svedelicno:

get better pc and you dont need no DLSS. + it wont improve anything since your latency is gonna be crazy, so anything that you gained you gonna lose

and yes sorry it sounds harsh but thats reality. arma is very demanding to run

stop telling people to buy a pc that cost mor ethen a car to have decent fps. like if you like defending that ♥♥♥♥ buy everyone else a 4090 and 9800x3d then, if not, stfu already