Install Steam
login
|
language
简体中文 (Simplified Chinese)
繁體中文 (Traditional Chinese)
日本語 (Japanese)
한국어 (Korean)
ไทย (Thai)
Български (Bulgarian)
Čeština (Czech)
Dansk (Danish)
Deutsch (German)
Español - España (Spanish - Spain)
Español - Latinoamérica (Spanish - Latin America)
Ελληνικά (Greek)
Français (French)
Italiano (Italian)
Bahasa Indonesia (Indonesian)
Magyar (Hungarian)
Nederlands (Dutch)
Norsk (Norwegian)
Polski (Polish)
Português (Portuguese - Portugal)
Português - Brasil (Portuguese - Brazil)
Română (Romanian)
Русский (Russian)
Suomi (Finnish)
Svenska (Swedish)
Türkçe (Turkish)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamese)
Українська (Ukrainian)
Report a translation problem
Discussions Rules and Guidelines
Report this post
It is an excellent app for the money though. The new frame generation is fairly impressive. The reviews of the RTX 5000 cards should be interesting. I hope someone does a comprehensive comparison.
Also, what people fail to understand about real or fake frames, is that we are steadily approaching the limits of silicon for use in high power computing. This while we are unfathomably far away from the limits of human vision.
Framerate amplification in the form of DLSS/FSR and frame-interpolation/extrapolation are the only way we are going to get close to anywhere near the limits of human vision.
You or me disliking this fact doesn't change the situation. I don't like it, by the way. I believe it's negatively effecting end-products/games by allowing for poorer optimization.
The benefits of higher framerates scale well past what today's consumer monitors are capable of displaying. And all but today's most powerful hardware can reach the limits of today's top monitors, natively and without interpolation. And this only in a handful of games.
It absolutely is a viable alternative tho, and while it can't replicate the same performance/quality of DLSS in direct comparisons during best case scenarios, it offers a lot more versatility, and has more use-cases. IMO it's more useful, BUT DLSS still has it's place and I'm grateful for both..
Recently I've finally found a good way to play an early access game that;s got pretty bad optimisation. And that was to run the game at 1080p windowed with DLSS quality enabled, and then run LSFG to scale it to 4k with x3 FG. DLSS by itself only got me so far, and LS really pushed this not only into viable territory, but it's lovely to play now tbh.
I'm revisiting the more demanding games in my library and seeing how smooth I can get them to run with LS while pumping up the graphics. Even with DLSSFG if you have the hardware for that, it's still limited to where it's been implemented, but LS can be used on anything, which is amazing.
DLSS4 will never really be a true replacement for LS - and that isn't a slight to DLSS4, it's just reality, DLSS4 can't fairly compete due to lack of universal usability.
Just start from flawless and work your way up from there. Genius, somebody tell AMD and keep this a secret from Nvidia.
The following 2 statements can be true at the same time, without people dying even;
-Lossless scaling is an amazing program that allows nearly anybody Frame Generation for the mere cost of 7 bucks.
-Lossless scaling is inferior to DLSS/FSR’s Frame Generation from a picture quality point of view. It is so in-part because DLSS/FSR-FG has access to game engine data, which LSFG does not.
And yes, i'd also much rather have MSAA instead of TAA/DLSS/FSR and well-done baked lighting instead of RTX. But reality is that most consumers do not, and development-studios really, really, REAAALY do not.
It's done, the genie is out of the bottle. Best we can do is point out the flaws so that people become aware of them and companies will fix these to prevent backlash. While hoping for the tech to advance and improve, quickly.
What is ridiculous however, and makes you look like a jealous tw*t, that does not know what he’s talking about; Is out of one corner of your mouth saying that DLSS 3/4 and DLSS (M)FG suck, while praising Lossless Scaling out of the other.
If you don’t own an Nvidia GPU, but would like to; Spend more time putting yourself into a position from which you can acquire one, instead of whining about them like a jealous *****.
You're out of your mind with Nvidia hate, no other explanation for how unreasonable your rants are. If frame generation is a "failed tech" then what are you doing here? Oh but LS is not made by Nvidia so it's le good. Acquire critical thinking.
It didn't even launch with LSFG.
Sure but that's absolutely not what he means. He thinks LS's "fake frames" are better than Nvidia's "engine frames", whatever those terms means, you'd have to ask the poster.
I quote:
"I can't imagine what Nvidia could come with if they dare looking at actual fake frames solutions and why they are obviously better in almost any way than engine frames."
I see it is about the right tool for the job.
Most GPU drivers have inbuilt upscaling. using lossless scaling for that will probably mean more lag. There are probably some exceptions.
I have and RTX 3080, with NISS in the drivers I can use if I wish.
The beneifit . it seems now is frame generation.
For fast paced shooter game, it is apparently not suitable, due to lag.
For slow moving pretty & GPU demanding games is where it may shine.
For those with Nvidia 2000 & 3000 cards, who like the prettier slow moving games, it seems the most benefit. DLSS4 upscaling is soon available for those cards, but not the frame generation. So hopefully improved performance & lower GPU for the RTX 3000 & 2000 cards. Whatever game you play, make sure the frame rate is not below those suggested values for frame rate and multiplier and game.
I bought lossless scaling just a few days ago, and are extremely impressed for the price.