NIS is really disappointing

[Deus_nsf]

This is absolutely not a criticism on the software, but on Nvidia, and it's not even related to the software, I used NIS through the software, but also through the drivers directly, and it is a huge step down compared to FSR. It's a real shame because they could have used FSR in their drivers to bypass bilinear scaling in fullscreen, but no, they decided to use their own thing which is much worse than FSR.

[sashimi]

Personally, I think NIS produces more contrast and sharper image than FSR at resolutions lower than 720p, which is great for low spec gamers, especially since its an in-driver implementation

[Deus_nsf]

getheadofstate님이 먼저 게시:

Personally, I think NIS produces more contrast and sharper image than FSR at resolutions lower than 720p, which is great for low spec gamers, especially since its an in-driver implementation

well, I used it for 1080p to 1440p, and also 480p to 1440p. I thought it was disappointing in both instances, the driver implementation making it work in fullscreen exclusive is the only interesting thing it has right now.

[xvt]

It actually looks good.
https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/r5eady/static_image_native_1080p_and_nis_77_0_sharpening/

[Deus_nsf]

it is better than bilinear scaling but inferior to FSR by a long shot in my opinion

[xvt]

In the link I posted there's objective evidence that at 77% resolution with no sharpening it looks like native.

[Deus_nsf]

it's weird maybe I did something wrong but when I use it on Stalker for example, from 1080p to 1440p, despite NIS indicator being green (so it means it's working) I can tell it is much worse than native, with or without sharpening on top of it. and with FSR it looks better than NIS, again with or without sharpening.

[✘GreedoShotFirst✘]

NIS definitely retains more detail at it's default setting from my experience (0 sharpness). FSR relies more on sharpening to compensate for it's softer image.

Personally, I think NIS is nice at 0 sharpness only. It has more detail but simultaneously looks lower res or 'compressed' for some reason, especially if sharpening is increased. It doesn't help that colours are worse with NIS too.

FSR with decent sharpening settings to compensate for it's blurriness looks more pleasant.

[itsLee333]

✘GreedoShotFirst✘님이 먼저 게시:

Personally, I think NIS is nice at 0 sharpness only. It has more detail but simultaneously looks lower res or 'compressed' for some reason, especially if sharpening is increased. It doesn't help that colours are worse with NIS too.

FSR with decent sharpening settings to compensate for it's blurriness looks more pleasant.

Yep. NIS is just way too sharp and adds noise to texture details, also the edges aliasing for it is simply unimpressive. Add oversharpening on top of that, with the fact that it unbalances saturated colors and it becomes very frustrating.

I've been trying out optimized FSR more than normal FSR recently and I'm kinda liking it tbh. It doesn't oversharpen details far from the camera that much like normal FSR does. But it needs a little more sharpening than the other.

[Entelechia]

FSR doesn't retain sharpness on small details while NIS does but at the cost of some oversharpening and chroma shift. Unfortunately no silver bullet exists.

Also kinda disappointed that this software got rid of custom sharpness as you could find the setting for particular games with it. Kinda considering going back to 1.6 just for it.

[Deus_nsf]

Oh yeah I noticed the chroma shift too compared to FSR!