Hot take: DLSS sucks. Just lower your settings.

[Zero]

It's an off-color band-aid AT BEST for people who don't have the hardware to meet higher setting requirements, but the game still looks and runs like garbage with DLSS. I would rather play without DLSS on High than with DLSS on Ultra. I think people's fixation on DLSS is something that is only commonplace because it comes from people who don't actually know anything about PCs trying to pretend they can have discussions with those who actually know what they're talking about. "If only this game had DLSS..." Yeah, if only the game had DLSS you could be looking at a PS2 game and running at 20-30fps variable, congratulations. Just lower your settings to medium and stop complaining about DLSS not fixing your 20-year-old hardware.

[Crystal Sharrd]

I think DLSS does improve textures even when running at the best settings, but I notice it tends to cause blurring when distant objects are moving.
Probably depends on the game, too.

[Tonepoet]

Eeh, it's probably better to turn on D.L.S.S. than to lower resolution because if you lower resolution, you're leaving the upscaling to whatever chip is on your television or monitor, which can add latency depending on how upscaling is implemented.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Crystal Sharrd:

I think DLSS does improve textures even when running at the best settings, but I notice it tends to cause blurring when distant objects are moving.
Probably depends on the game, too.

That's fair. I also, admittedly, have a bias against it because of that blurring issue. I can't stand blurring in games, to the point where I will immediately search for the motion blur setting and turn it off when it's present.

[Zero]

Originally posted by Tonepoet:

Eeh, it's probably better to turn on D.L.S.S. than to lower resolution because if you lower resolution, you're leaving the upscaling to whatever chip is on your television or monitor, which can add latency depending on how upscaling is implemented.

The thing, though, is that you don't really need to be playing at anything higher than 1080p. Don't get me wrong, 4k is all well and good IF your hardware supports it properly, but you don't need to be trying to squeeze 4k out of budget equipment. You're better off just running at 1080p.

[Crystal Sharrd]

Originally posted by Zero:

Originally posted by Crystal Sharrd:

I think DLSS does improve textures even when running at the best settings, but I notice it tends to cause blurring when distant objects are moving.
Probably depends on the game, too.

That's fair. I also, admittedly, have a bias against it because of that blurring issue. I can't stand blurring in games, to the point where I will immediately search for the motion blur setting and turn it off when it's present.

My pet peeve is skirts and dresses clipping.

[D. Flame]

DLSS = upscaling + snake oil

[Azza ☠]

DLSS isn't designed for 20 year old hardware.

Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) is AI upscaling and frame generation.

It's designed is for high-end Nvidia RTX series, older graphics card can't fully support it but they have allowed for it to partly still work on some GTX series.

Ideally you would want to use it if you had a RTX 4090 graphics card and ran your games at UltraHD 4K at 120Hz with HDR and also (optionally) Ray Tracing. A single graphic cards can't generation the FPS required to reach 60 FPS+

Then DLSS 3 or higher really kicks into gear, you can disable AA (Anti-aliasing) and use DLSS instead to double your FPS output with the same quality or even better quality at native 4K resolution and the highest graphic settings.

It means you can get games running at 60-120 FPS for your 120Hz monitor too.

The issue with DLSS is since it's AI generated frames there can be some artifacts. It's trying to detect object movements such as while you are racing a car in a video game and there's explosion going on, it still needs to calculate the movement path and predict where that car is going on the fly in real-time.

So NVidia DLSS has AI-learning super computers running 24/7 learning these games and then they manually tweak and fix those artifacts over time to improve it each graphic card driver release.

The quality of DLSS improves over time by software, without even needing to upgrade your graphics card. It's future proofing it for you.

Ray Tracing is where it really hits your FPS output, but DLSS also boosts your FPS back up, so you can run it at a smooth rate.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yG5NLl85pPo

DLSS is evolving and improving all the time. Sure, it's started off rough, but is seriously getting really good since DLSS 3.

Additionally, DLSS 3.5 is trained using five times more data than DLSS 3, with Ray Reconstruction too. In cases, you will get a better quality images than the standard native image with 4K.

[Electric Cupcake]

DLSS was obsoleted by FSR, anyway.

[Azza ☠]

Originally posted by Electric Cupcake:

DLSS was obsoleted by FSR, anyway.

What? FSR is AMD graphic cards copied version of DLSS for Nvidia graphics card.

DLSS does a better job at delivering it with even a better quality image. You need a Nvidia RTX series graphics card however.

FSR uses bilinear upscaling and machine learning.

DLSS uses machine learning and a cloud network of super computers running AI. It's learning and evolving improvements while it plays those video games itself 24/7.

You know GeForce Now, in which gamers can subscribe to play games on their potato PC or TV via a high speed internet connect to a cloud of RTX 3080 graphic card gaming servers that generate it and then send the streaming gameplay? Well that's also part of it, learning to develop and improve DLSS too.

It comes down to what graphic card you have and the games that support it, but I'll pick DLSS over FSR in a heartbeat, if having the option between the two.

https://youtu.be/oMCC9TgsCDY

[𝚁̶̷𝟹̶̷𝙰̶̷𝙻̶̷]

Idk about DLSS, but I have an emulation rig with an overclocked RX 550 4GB and FSR is a real game changer. Even running older games at 1440p/4K is a task for a 4GB card, but I can use FSR in the driver with Medium/High settings and still get 60 FPS in most cases. Just to kick back and play some older games that look and run a bit better than they did the last time I played them... It works. It's a lot like an Xbox One in terms of it's actual performance, but FSR allows me to get 1080p or more out of it. Doesn't look bad on a 21in monitor either

[[TGSA] oujisan2236]

True


BUT maybe you want higher settings on your mid card

[Masque]

It seems that on my 1080p system, wherever I can use DLAA (Deep Learning Anti-Aliasing) -- which isn't many games I own -- it looks far, far better than DLSS, FSR, or that new Intel XESS.

I wish all the devs would use DLAA. Right now using it on No Man's Sky and Death Stranding, it's flawless.

[Azza ☠]

Originally posted by Masque:

It seems that on my 1080p system, wherever I can use DLAA (Deep Learning Anti-Aliasing) -- which isn't many games I own -- it looks far, far better than DLSS, FSR, or that new Intel XESS.

I wish all the devs would use DLAA. Right now using it on No Man's Sky and Death Stranding, it's flawless.

DLAA is basically DLSS, without the upscaling part.

They kind of merged the two in later versions of DLSS 2+. Now with DLSS you also can select what resolution to scale at, so if you are running a 4K monitor and select 4K resolution (native) it will be like DLAA. Otherwise it upscale if you use a lower resolution, such as 1080p on a 4K.

[Masque]

Is DLAA difficult for devs to code into a game? It seems rare, even in the latest games. I was wishing Pacific Drive had it, but alas.

[Red9republic]

I was just playing the new quiet place game, with dlss, it looks horrible with that on, switches to fsr, and it's flawless. All it does is make everything look like it's moving around, just all blurry and grainy.