Support NeoGAF

[Zathalus]

Man, its sad to see NXGamer actually defending this. Same old tired arguments that have no basis in reality.

 

[Buggy Loop]

If it has RT it will obviously run better on Nvidia with RT enabled

I haven’t seen any official confirmation that the game has RT as of now?

Now if it does, I would bet on RT shadows or some useless shit like that. Will not flex Nvidia’s RT hardware

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I haven’t seen any official confirmation that the game has RT as of now?

Now if it does, I would bet on RT shadows or some useless shit like that. Will not flex Nvidia’s RT hardware

Even crappy console tier RT still runs better on Nvidia. See Hogwarts Legacy for a recent example

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Looks like no DLSS/XeSS confirmed.

 

[Fredrik]

Man, its sad to see NXGamer actually defending this. Same old tired arguments that have no basis in reality.

He used to have a crappy rig when doing console versus PC comparisons. Don’t remember what he had though. Something not working too well with DLSS I assume. Only reason one would defend AMD exclusivity as I see it.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I have been tested (not really scientifically) two systems and honestly the 7900 XTX holds it own somewhat decently against a 4090 without DLSS and Ray Tracing at my ultrawide resolution of 3440x1440

The main outliers I found so far in my few games was Forza Horizon 5 at ultra was running 150ish fps on the 4090 but only 100ish on the 7900XTX and Flight Sim 2020 was about the same numbers

Most other games were fairly close like in Cyberpunk 2077, Horizon Zero Dawn, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Red Dead 2

I do think missing out on DLSS is going to hurt Starfield though

 

[StereoVsn]

I know that. But it is still extra work, and they are being paid to not do work. It's a no-brainer.

It's technology supported by about 50-60% of their use base, maybe 70% considering Nvidia's market share and that DLSS is supported starting with 2000 series cards.

So I case of Starfield they are taking unneeded funding (considering who is bankrolling them) to piss off the majority of their PC customers. It's a stupid thing to do. And they are being eviscerated for it in the media, YouTube and forums.

 

[StereoVsn]

Nobody is pro Nvidia I would say, this ain’t sport teams, in the sense that no I do not recommend any GPUs of this generation (outside balls to the wall 4090). I also no longer buy underdogs just for pity buying like I did for ATI/AMD for so long.

The problem is AMD is fleecing just as much as Nvidia, for worse tech and features, worse resell value, not as professional centric, etc etc. What is supposed to happen? They are nowhere near aggressive to retake the market.

Yep, that's correct. People here dislike Nvidia just as much as anyone else due to their pricing strategies and selling GPUs this gen that are seriously underpowered considering the price.

Or looking at Nvidia 4060/4060ti and stating that these cards are shit for that price.

The issue is that AMD is doing same thing with worse tech, just look at the damn 7600.

Their only cards worth owning are 6700/6750/6950 depending on the price or 7900xtx on a good sale.

AMD squandered a great opportunity here to cash in on folks' unhappiness with Nvidia and instead managed to draw fire on themselves with 7600, lack of 7800 series, and DLSS shenanigans.

Their marketshare is shrinking! Thats in the face of Nvidia cards that aren't selling much and Intel who barely has a strategy after latest cuts.

 

[smbu2000]

Something that can be used on all GPUs vs. something that can only be used on a limited selection of GPUs? I’ll take FSR in that case.

I can use it on both my laptop and my desktop. One is Nvidia and one is AMD.
If they end up adding DLSS later, then that is just a bonus.

 

[01011001]

Something that can be used on all GPUs vs. something that can only be used on a limited selection of GPUs? I’ll take FSR in that case.

something that people want to use vs. the shitty thing that people use if they really have to.

I'll take the former

 

[Irobot82]

lol AMD is old Nvidia. I love the drama.

 

[nemiroff]

Something that can be used on all GPUs vs. something that can only be used on a limited selection of GPUs? I’ll take FSR in that case.

I can use it on both my laptop and my desktop. One is Nvidia and one is AMD.
If they end up adding DLSS later, then that is just a bonus.

400 posts and you still miss the point.

1. It literally takes a couple of hours or so to implement DLSS.
1b. The actual cost for MS/Bethesda to include it is about 300 fucking Dollars..
1c. FSR is actually harder to implement than DLSS.
2. It's a trivial matter to include ALL upscalers at the same time
3. AMD is paying to deliberately block competing tech for users
4. DLSS is the best upscaler
5. The majority of people own a Nvidia card

 

[Fredrik]

4. DLSS is the best upscaler
5. The majority of people own a Nvidia card

This is really all that needs to be said.

To use an analogy this is kinda like when a game is EGS exclusive, it really doesn’t matter that it’s there and perfectly okay, when the majority want a Steam release it’s going to be a noisy release.

 

[winjer]

400 posts and you still miss the point.

1. It literally takes a couple of hours or so to implement DLSS.

Only it the game engine already has a plugin developed, like Unreal Engine.
For other games, it will take a few days.

1b. The actual cost for MS/Bethesda to include it is about 300 fucking Dollars..

Only after FSR2 has been implemented, so most of the work with the necessary buffers is done.

1c. FSR is actually harder to implement than DLSS.

That is complete BS. They are both very similar in implementation. Same with XeSS.

2. It's a trivial matter to include ALL upscalers at the same time

That is correct. After implementing the first upscaler, even on an engine that don't have plugins, implementing the rest is much easier, cheaper and faster.

3. AMD is paying to deliberately block competing tech for users

So is NVidia. And they have a long history of doing it.
But somehow, it's only bad when AMD does it.

4. DLSS is the best upscaler

Correct.

5. The majority of people own a Nvidia card

Also correct.
But there are more people with consoles. And DLSS does not work on consoles.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

This is really all that needs to be said.

To use an analogy this is kinda like when a game is EGS exclusive, it really doesn’t matter that it’s there and perfectly okay, when the majority want a Steam release it’s going to be a noisy release.

I think the most important part is that by all accounts it would’ve been trivially easy to support both DLSS and FSR, and the only reason it’s not supported is because AMD struck a deal to deliberately omit it.

That’s honestly bullshit and I’m done with AMD products unless they reverse it. It’s one thing if there’s some feature that takes significant effort to include and AMD contributes money/resources to devs to implement it. It’s another thing to just straight up pay devs not to support their competitor’s features.

AMD can eat shit. They used to get a lot of good will from gamers and people bought their products in part because they thought AMD deserved to succeed. Looks like they can kiss that goodbye

 

[NeverYouMind]

High end Nvidia users have panties in a bunch because they can't get exclusive treatment. They payed more, so why don't the developers give them more?

Hardcore Nvidia users acting like they even had AMD cards in their hypothetical future PC builds. FSR will continue to improve across all 3 card brands while DLSS will stay proprietary with improvement on only the latest Nvidia cards.

 

[Fredrik]

But there are more people with consoles.

More people have Xbox Series S/X consoles?
Tbh I have no idea but this comment surprised me, going by friends the PC platform is significantly larger than Xbox Series, like it’s not even close. But I’ve never actually looked at any console vs PC sales figures.

 

[Fredrik]

I think the most important part is that by all accounts it would’ve been trivially easy to support both DLSS and FSR, and the only reason it’s not supported is because AMD struck a deal to deliberately omit it.

That’s honestly bullshit and I’m done with AMD products unless they reverse it. It’s one thing if there’s some feature that takes significant effort to include and AMD contributes money/resources to devs to implement it. It’s another thing to just straight up pay devs not to support their competitor’s features.

AMD can eat shit. They used to get a lot of good will from gamers and people bought their products in part because they thought AMD deserved to succeed. Looks like they can kiss that goodbye

Nvidia is bad too tbh but the last AMD graphics card I had was a ATI All In Wonder.
I went with a Ryzen 9 7900x CPU this time though. Should’ve waited on Intel’s CPUs but rushed it.

 

[winjer]

More people have Xbox Series S/X consoles?
Tbh I have no idea but this comment surprised me, going by friends the PC platform is significantly larger than Xbox Series, like it’s not even close. But I’ve never actually looked at any console vs PC sales figures.

Was was talking in the general market. The PC market is bigger than the Xbox console market.
Without the PS5, consoles lose a big chunk of the market.
Then again, RTX cards are around 25% of GPUs in the market. So between consoles and PCs, there are a lot more people without support for DLSS.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Nvidia is bad too tbh but the last AMD graphics card I had was a ATI All In Wonder.
I went with a Ryzen 9 7900x CPU this time though. Should’ve waited on Intel’s CPUs but rushed it.

Yeah for sure, I’m not here to white knight for Nvidia, they are shitty too. But AFAIK there has never been a case where AMD had some feature that was trivial to support and devs wanted to support it, only for Nvidia to strike a deal to omit it. I think that’s crossing a line that should not be crossed.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Was was talking in the general market. The PC market is bigger than the Xbox console market.
Without the PS5, consoles lose a big chunk of the market.
Then again, RTX cards are around 25% of GPUs in the market. So between consoles and PCs, there are a lot more people without support for DLSS.

So what? That’s completely irrelevant. The reason DLSS is excluded has nothing whatsoever to do with market share.

Fact is there is absolutely no reason not to support both. Only reason they didn’t is because their deal with AMD prevented it.

 

[winjer]

So what? That’s completely irrelevant. The reason DLSS is excluded has nothing whatsoever to do with market share.

Fact is there is absolutely no reason not to support both. Only reason they didn’t is because their deal with AMD prevented it.

I agree, that all games should have DLSS2, FSR2 and XeSS.

What you ignore is that NVidia is doing the same thing.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

I agree, that all games should have DLSS2, FSR2 and XeSS.

What you ignore is that NVidia is doing the same thing.

No they’re not. They have never struck a deal with a developer to NOT support a competitor’s feature.

See for yourself what Nvidia and AMD said about it (skip to around 6 minutes)

 

[winjer]

No they’re not. They have never struck a deal with a developer to NOT support a competitor’s feature.

See for yourself what Nvidia and AMD said about it (skip to around 6 minutes)

Yes, NVidia is blocking FSR2. There are as many recent games sponsored by NVidia without FSR2, as there are games sponsored by AMD without DLSS2.
And before, there are many more games sponsored by NVidia, that never got FSR2. Despite being so easy to implement.
And then there is NVidia blocking the FSR2.1 mod. For example in Kena and Dying Light 2.
NVidia has the longest track record in manipulating the competition tech in games. And now is no different.
What those statements show is that Nvidia is better at lying. But actions speak louder than words. And NVidia's actions don't lie.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Yes, NVidia is blocking FSR2. There are as many recent games sponsored by NVidia without FSR2, as there are games sponsored by AMD without DLSS2.
And before, there are many more games sponsored by NVidia, that never got FSR2. Despite being so easy to implement.
And then there is NVidia blocking the FSR2.1 mod. For example in Kena and Dying Light 2.
NVidia has the longest track record in manipulating the competition tech in games. And now is no different.
What those statements show is that Nvidia is better at lying. But actions speak louder than words. And NVidia's actions don't lie.

Really? Show me any proof that Nvidia struck a deal that stipulated a game cannot support FSR. Nvidia even created a tool to enable devs to support other upscaling tech aside from DLSS (it talks about this in the video).

It doesn’t make sense why Nvidia would even try to block FSR. It works on Nvidia cards, and if a game supports both FSR and DLSS then every review is going to compare the two and point out that DLSS is better.

 

[winjer]

Really? Show me any proof that Nvidia struck a deal that stipulated a game cannot support FSR. Nvidia even created a tool to enable devs to support other upscaling tech aside from DLSS (it talks about this in the video).

It doesn’t make sense why Nvidia would even try to block FSR. It works on Nvidia cards, and if a game supports both FSR and DLSS then every review is going to compare the two and point out that DLSS is better.

I already gave you a few examples.
Not to mention a very long history of NVidia manipulating the market against the competition.
Don't e naïve, believing that only AMD is doing these things now.

 

[Zathalus]

Yes, NVidia is blocking FSR2. There are as many recent games sponsored by NVidia without FSR2, as there are games sponsored by AMD without DLSS2.
And before, there are many more games sponsored by NVidia, that never got FSR2. Despite being so easy to implement.
And then there is NVidia blocking the FSR2.1 mod. For example in Kena and Dying Light 2.
NVidia has the longest track record in manipulating the competition tech in games. And now is no different.
What those statements show is that Nvidia is better at lying. But actions speak louder than words. And NVidia's actions don't lie.

No action has shown Nvidia to be blocking FSR2. Any game that doesn't support FSR2 does not equate to Nvidia blocking it, the developer may just not have bothered adding it to the game or does not want the game to be modified. Immediately blaming Nvidia with zero actual proof makes no sense. When Nvidia was questioned they directly confirmed they do not block anything. Another nail in the coffin for the theory that Nvidia blocks anything is that went out of the way to develop Nvidia Streamline.

AMD doesn't get the same benefit, as AMD had the ability to confirm they don't block anything when questioned, but the response they gave basically confirmed that they do. Them refusing to sign on to the open-source (when Intel did) Nvidia Streamline is damning as well.

 

[SmokedMeat]

The thing is, these upscalers don't use that much tensor power. For example, in CP2077, XeSS running on DP4A is 2-3 fps diference from DLSS.
AMD could very well have an ML upscaling pass like XeSS, that ran just fine of their RDNA 2 and 3 cards. RDNA3 even has a bunch of WMMA instructions to accelerate these calculations, so it probably wouldn't even lose performance.

If AMD doesn't improve FSR2, then XeSS will become the preferred open upscaler, even for AMD users.

I love that XESS is open for everyone. It’s great having an alternative to FSR.

 

[winjer]

No action has shown Nvidia to be blocking FSR2. Any game that doesn't support FSR2 does not equate to Nvidia blocking it, the developer may just not have bothered adding it to the game or does not want the game to be modified. Immediately blaming Nvidia with zero actual proof makes no sense. When Nvidia was questioned they directly confirmed they do not block anything. Another nail in the coffin for the theory that Nvidia blocks anything is that went out of the way to develop Nvidia Streamline.

AMD doesn't get the same benefit, as AMD had the ability to confirm they don't block anything when questioned, but the response they gave basically confirmed that they do. Them refusing to sign on to the open-source (when Intel did) Nvidia Streamline is damning as well.

Really, games getting small updates that suddenly block FSR2 mod.
And the evidence that people have for AMD blocking is the WCCFtech article that claimed there are more AMD sponsored games without DLSS2, than NVidia sponsored games without FSR2.
But that article ignored a few NVidia sponsored titles, that did not support FSR2. ToTTenTranz posted a more comprehensive list.
And here is an even bigger list:

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Really, games getting small updates that suddenly block FSR2 mod.
And the evidence that people have for AMD blocking is the WCCFtech article that claimed there are more AMD sponsored games without DLSS2, than NVidia sponsored games without FSR2.
But that article ignored a few NVidia sponsored titles, that did not support FSR2. ToTTenTranz posted a more comprehensive list.
And here is an even bigger list:

None of what you have said is proof that Nvidia paid devs not to support FSR.

 

[Zathalus]

Really, games getting small updates that suddenly block FSR2 mod.
And the evidence that people have for AMD blocking is the WCCFtech article that claimed there are more AMD sponsored games without DLSS2, than NVidia sponsored games without FSR2.
But that article ignored a few NVidia sponsored titles, that did not support FSR2. ToTTenTranz posted a more comprehensive list.
And here is an even bigger list:

What games? Dying Light 2? FSR2 was officially added. Kena? FSR2 mod works again. Updates to a game breaking a mod is not evidence of any foul play on Nvidia's part as updates break mods all the time. Correlation does not imply causation.

Once again, lack of support by itself is insufficient evidence to claim a company is blocking something. I wouldn't be blaming AMD either, but they confirmed that they do.

 

[winjer]

None of what you have said is proof that Nvidia paid devs not to support FSR.

Only because you don't want to believe it. The proofs are the same, a list of games with and without support.
And for some reason, you chose to believe NVidia, the company that has done these things the most, by a gigantic margin.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

No action has shown Nvidia to be blocking FSR2.

Trying to block FSR2 is probably a losing battle at this point.

If anything, Nvidia should be sending engineers towards dev houses to implement DLSS2 for them, but it looks like it hasn't been happening as often as before because Nvidia only cares about high-margin AI cards (and rightly so if they're just catering to investors).

And then instead of complaining to Nvidia, fans are accusing AMD of blocking DLSS.

 

[Kenpachii]

Somebody inform bethesda they could make money with a DLSS DLC

hahaha

 

[DeepEnigma]

So much denial about nVidia pulling the same shit. These companies aren't your friends.

 

[winjer]

What games? Dying Light 2? FSR2 was officially added. Kena? FSR2 mod works again. Updates to a game breaking a mod is not evidence of any foul play on Nvidia's part as updates break mods all the time. Correlation does not imply causation.

Dying Light 2 had FSR 2.1 mod working very well. All of a sudden the game blocks the FSR 2.1 mod, and ads FSR 2.0, that looks much worse than the mod.
And Kena is still blocked. I played it a couple of months ago and there was no longer a way to use the FSr2.1 mod. There has been no updates since the one that blocked the mod.
Recently, there are almost no games that can use the FSR 2.1 mod, because NVidia blocked it in recent versions of DLSS.
BTW, AMD is not blocking the DLSS mod.

Once again, lack of support by itself is insufficient evidence to claim a company is blocking something. I wouldn't be blaming AMD either, but they confirmed that they do.

When did AMD sated they are blocking DLSS in games?
This is the quote AMD gave to Wccftech. It's just corporate speak, but nothing saying what you claimed.

To clarify, there are community sites that track the implementation of upscaling technologies, and these sites indicate that there are a number of games that support only DLSS currently (for example, see link).

AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution is an open-source technology that supports a variety of GPU architectures, including consoles and competitive solutions, and we believe an open approach that is broadly supported on multiple hardware platforms is the best approach that benefits developers and gamers. AMD is committed to doing what is best for game developers and gamers, and we give developers the flexibility to implement FSR into whichever games they choose.

AMD Spokesperson to Wccftech

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

Dying Light 2 had FSR 2.1 mod working very well. All of a sudden the game blocks the FSR 2.1 mod, and ads FSR 2.0, that looks much worse than the mod.
And Kena is still blocked. I played it a couple of months ago and there was no longer a way to use the FSr2.1 mod. There has been no updates since the one that blocked the mod.
Recently, there are almost no games that can use the FSR 2.1 mod, because NVidia blocked it in recent versions of DLSS.



When did AMD sated they are blocking DLSS in games?
This is the quote AMD gave to Wccftech. It's just corporate speak, but nothing saying what you claimed.

Right, first they gave a non-answer, then when the Starfield news came out they were asked again point blank whether their deal blocked DLSS and their response was “no comment”. Seems pretty damn obvious that they are blocking it (Steve from GN said as much)

 

[winjer]

Right, first they gave a non-answer, then when the Starfield news came out they were asked again point blank whether their deal blocked DLSS and their response was “no comment”. Seems pretty damn obvious that they are blocking it (Steve from GN said as much)

That is evidence of nothing. And NVidia saying they don't is also evidence of nothing.
It's not rare that these companies outright lie to the media and to consumers. Especially Nvidia.
But for some weird reason, you decided to believe in NVidia, of all companies.

 

[DonkeyPunchJr]

That is evidence of nothing. And NVidia saying they don't is also evidence of nothing.
It's not rare that these companies outright lie to the media and to consumers. Especially Nvidia.
But for some weird reason, you decided to believe in NVidia, of all companies.

When you ask someone point blank “did you do this thing that makes you look like a huge asshole” and they keep dodging the question and giving non-answers, and they have every reason to unambiguously deny it if it were false, then it’s pretty damn obvious it’s true. I don’t believe for a second that you are as stupid as you’re pretending to be.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Yes, NVidia is blocking FSR2.

So much fucking extrapolations from AMD fans its insane.

Go on twitter and ask the devs directly why they didn't include FSR 2, please do. Just like peoples are doing with DLSS. Nvidia's stance is they don't block any upscalers. Go ask the devs then, please do. You could have your own little drama controversies if a dev came in to say that the contract made them forced to skip FSR2.

Until then, you're full of it.

 

[Zathalus]

Trying to block FSR2 is probably a losing battle at this point.

If anything, Nvidia should be sending engineers towards dev houses to implement DLSS2 for them, but it looks like it hasn't been happening as often as before because Nvidia only cares about high-margin AI cards (and rightly so if they're just catering to investors).

And then instead of complaining to Nvidia, fans are accusing AMD of blocking DLSS.

I'm not accusing AMD of doing anything. They confirmed it themselves. And you don't need engineers to implement DLSS. Any game that has TAA can implement it. Heck even games that had zero TAA support can have it implemented by mods as well. Even emulators can implement it.

Dying Light 2 had FSR 2.1 mod working very well. All of a sudden the game blocks the FSR 2.1 mod, and ads FSR 2.0, that looks much worse than the mod.
And Kena is still blocked. I played it a couple of months ago and there was no longer a way to use the FSr2.1 mod. There has been no updates since the one that blocked the mod.
Recently, there are almost no games that can use the FSR 2.1 mod, because NVidia blocked it in recent versions of DLSS.
BTW, AMD is not blocking the DLSS mod.

So wait, Nvidia told Techland to break the mod but then release FSR (and Xess) but make sure FSR is not the latest version? You do realise how stupid that sounds? What's Jedi Survivors excuse? That is plain FSR2 as well, is that somehow Nvidia's fault too? Or, and I know this sounds crazy, we just have some incompetent developers? I wouldn't be surprised if deploying FSR was left to a junior developer that grabbed the wrong version off of GitHub and marked his PBI as complete.

When did AMD sated they are blocking DLSS in games?
This is the quote AMD gave to Wccftech. It's just corporate speak, but nothing saying what you claimed.

It's corporate speak to avoid saying no. Says it all really. A simple statement like Nvidia did would have done the job.

 

[winjer]

When you ask someone point blank “did you do this thing that makes you look like a huge asshole” and they keep dodging the question and giving non-answers, and they have every reason to unambiguously deny it if it were false, then it’s pretty damn obvious it’s true. I don’t believe for a second that you are as stupid as you’re pretending to be.

But I'm not denying that AMD is doing these things. What I'm saying is that NVidia is also doing them.
For some reason you completely believe on NVidia's word, despite the constant lies over 2 decades.

 

[winjer]

I'm not accusing AMD of doing anything. They confirmed it themselves. And you don't need engineers to implement DLSS. Any game that has TAA can implement it. Heck even games that had zero TAA support can have it implemented by mods as well. Even emulators can implement it.

AMD confirmed nothing, you are just reading into it. And Nvidia's denial means nothing from a company that has lied to us so many, many times.
The question is why are you willing to believe one company and not the other, when they are obviously doing the same thing.
You clearly have a very biased vision of the tech world. But let me remind you that none of these techs are our friends.

TAA, is similar to temporal upscalers, but they are not the same thing. There is still a good amount of work to be done.
It still takes a good amount of work from professionals to do it.

So wait, Nvidia told Techland to break the mod but then release FSR (and Xess) but make sure FSR is not the latest version? You do realise how stupid that sounds? What's Jedi Survivors excuse? That is plain FSR2 as well, is that somehow Nvidia's fault too? Or, and I know this sounds crazy, we just have some incompetent developers? I wouldn't be surprised if deploying FSR was left to a junior developer that grabbed the wrong version off of GitHub and marked his PBI as complete.

NVidia updated their DLSS SDK to block the FSR2 mod. That's why there are almost no new games where that mod works. When just a few months ago, there was a constant flow of games where the mod worked.
NVidia is the kind of company that had two paths for Physx, on that ran on GPUs but blocked on the competition. And another that run on the CPU, but was extremely de-optimized.
A company that for decades had deals where they blocked the competition from accessing the games they sponsored, so AMD could not optimize their drivers in time for launch.
Blocking a mod, in comparison is a small thing for NVidia. They have done so much worse.

And in the case of Jedi Survivor, if AMD really is doing some shaddy stuff there, why would they implement FSR2.0, the worst version of the tech, by far. One would expect it to support FSR2.2, like most recent AMD sponsored games.
Seems more like a case of sheer incompetence of Respawn. The state of the game was very telling of that.
You might say that implementing DLSS is easy, after implementing FSR2, but you ignore the long list of NVidia sponsored games, that don't have support for FSR, nor XeSS. All of which would also be easy to implement.

 

[ToTTenTranz]

I'm not accusing AMD of doing anything. They confirmed it themselves.

They did not.

 

[Buggy Loop]

Only it the game engine already has a plugin developed, like Unreal Engine.
For other games, it will take a few days.

A few days? So basically to setup motion vectors... like 99% of games have been doing for half a decade to support native res with TAA. Shock & awe, so much work.

Only after FSR2 has been implemented, so most of the work with the necessary buffers is done.

TAA

That is complete BS. They are both very similar in implementation. Same with XeSS.

Harder in the sense that to not make it look like complete shit they're probably struggling as fuck.

That is correct. After implementing the first upscaler, even on an engine that don't have plugins, implementing the rest is much easier, cheaper and faster.

First upscaler being TAA

Not to mention a very long history of NVidia manipulating the market against the competition.
Don't e naïve, believing that only AMD is doing these things now.

Oh this i want to hear. The non stop ranting of AMD fans of unfairness when AMD assists SIGGRAPH every years and both participate in API consortiums, but always get caught its pants down mere months before release of tech.

AMD claimed gameworks hindered games at the source code level, which is a flat out lie and debunked (source code is open, no such thing found)

AMD's chief gaming scientist, Richart Huddy, claimed they were working with CD Project red from the beginning for Witcher 3. Nvidia had the hairwork press conference 16 months before the game releases. Then Huddy claims that they were caught with the pants down 2 months before release (cmon) on this tech and that it was crippling performances. Wanted to implement TressFX 2 months before a game release, which of course, that's too fucking late. Were they working with CD Project red from the beginning or not? How do you not see the press conference on hairworks and make a pikachu surprised face 2 months before release? Incompetence.

The controversy over GameWorks was also fueled by flawed observations like in The Witcher 3 where they zoomed like 2cm from Geralt's hairs (the game dynamically scale the tessellation factor based on viewing distance) just to make a point. Which of course in the cult means that they just don't understand what they are seeing (too much tessellation extrapolated from not understanding) and think the game is stacked against them.

Or the Crysis 2 water under map that the cult thought was made just to tank performances on AMD. The wireframe mode is always rendered, during gameplay the ocean is culled and didn't affect performance. Brainlet move right there.

For all the above, the cult screamed bloody murder and then AMD fixed their shitty tessellation performance on Polaris. Suddenly the cards were sometimes performing even better than Nvidia and all those claimed unfair and unrealistic benchmarks that were biased towards Nvidia, were now just normal expected performance.

And all this "bu but my tessellation is Nvidia's way of hurting AMD performances" is the cherry on the sundae as fucking ATI invented the first card to have hardware tessellation with the Radeon 8500 in 2001.

Remember Project cars? The cult attacked the devs again claiming that it's sabotaging AMD, and the developer shut down so fast it imploded faster than the Titan submersible, with AMD tweeting that they are working on their drivers to fix the problem.

Portal RTX is tailored to Nvidia? Nvida gimping poor AMD?
They looked into the game and how AMD handled the AGNOSTIC API calls and it has nothing to do with RT. AMD's compiler thought it best to peg the shader at 256 VGPRs which is the maximum use per wavefront and is spilling to cache. AMD compiler basically makes one GIGANTIC Ubershader that takes 99ms of frametime by itself.

The truth is that while AMD kept claiming sabotage, the hard fact is that they basically laid off the vast majority of those on the field engineers that actually made the Gaming evolved program in circa 2015, circa 2010 they had engineers in the top 100 studios, had roughly 50% market share, had Mantle to bypass DX11 / Gameworks, Bullet physics to counter Physx.

They fumbled, hard.

When Nvidia was losing ~30% performances for gameworks that barely improved visuals, AMD could have consolidated almost every console ports of the era to Mantle and actually IMPROVE performances. They didn't. They pulled the plug, on almost all of the above, and waited patiently for DX12 and Vulkan while they bled market share to ridiculously low numbers where even Intel is a threat.

BTW AMD is late on their promise of frame gen, with the whole HYPER-RX package. Talk about reactionary announcement, they had to promise something to counter DLSS3. I guess we'll now count the games that support DLSS 3 frame gen exclusively as unfair Nvidia deals to cripple AMD in a year or so, can't wait for a stupid list like we see popping in this thread.

 

[Zathalus]

I'll never understand people blindly defending GPU vendors. I'm not blindly defending anyone, Nvidia has done horrible things in the past and the entire 4000 series (bar the 4090 perhaps) is a travesty. Just in this case I see no compelling evidence of Nvidia wrongdoing.

The logic doesn't even make sense, Nvidia is of course blocking FSR2 because the game Sackboy doesn't support it. A winning strategy from Nvidia that will surely impact sales of video cards due to the 3 people that bought it on Steam. Or the other massive seller that is the System Shock Remake. As opposed to the niche indie AMD titles like Jedi Survivor, Starfield, and RE4.

Another point is that Nvidia is likely not doing anything is that FSR is straight up worse then DLSS, so Nvidia looks good if both FSR and DLSS is supported but the same cannot be said of AMD. Oh, you want your AMD sponsored game to look the best it can be? Better buy Nvidia! Hah, I can see why AMD wants DLSS blocked.

Funnily enough nobody can explain the existence of Nvidia Streamline and why AMD is refusing to sign on to it. It's even open-source.

 

[Reallink]

I have been tested (not really scientifically) two systems and honestly the 7900 XTX holds it own somewhat decently against a 4090 without DLSS and Ray Tracing at my ultrawide resolution of 3440x1440

The main outliers I found so far in my few games was Forza Horizon 5 at ultra was running 150ish fps on the 4090 but only 100ish on the 7900XTX and Flight Sim 2020 was about the same numbers

Most other games were fairly close like in Cyberpunk 2077, Horizon Zero Dawn, Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Red Dead 2

I do think missing out on DLSS is going to hurt Starfield though

Why are you spending a $1000+ price premium to avoid 1 hour of lego assembly labor?

 

[winjer]

A few days? So basically to setup motion vectors... like 99% of games have been doing for half a decade to support native res with TAA. Shock & awe, so much work.

TAA
Harder in the sense that to not make it look like complete shit they're probably struggling as fuck.

First upscaler being TAA

If you think it's that easy, then why do you think NVidia, Intel and AMD have SDKs for their tech? And specific plugins for game engines like Unreal and Unity.
The reality is that it's a lot more complicated than what you try to make it seem.

Oh this i want to hear. The non stop ranting of AMD fans of unfairness when AMD assists SIGGRAPH every years and both participate in API consortiums, but always get caught its pants down mere months before release of tech.

AMD claimed gameworks hindered games at the source code level, which is a flat out lie and debunked (source code is open, no such thing found)

AMD's chief gaming scientist, Richart Huddy, claimed they were working with CD Project red from the beginning for Witcher 3. Nvidia had the hairwork press conference 16 months before the game releases. Then Huddy claims that they were caught with the pants down 2 months before release (cmon) on this tech and that it was crippling performances. Wanted to implement TressFX 2 months before a game release, which of course, that's too fucking late. Were they working with CD Project red from the beginning or not? How do you not see the press conference on hairworks and make a pikachu surprised face 2 months before release? Incompetence.

The controversy over GameWorks was also fueled by flawed observations like in The Witcher 3 where they zoomed like 2cm from Geralt's hairs (the game dynamically scale the tessellation factor based on viewing distance) just to make a point. Which of course in the cult means that they just don't understand what they are seeing (too much tessellation extrapolated from not understanding) and think the game is stacked against them.

Or the Crysis 2 water under map that the cult thought was made just to tank performances on AMD. The wireframe mode is always rendered, during gameplay the ocean is culled and didn't affect performance. Brainlet move right there.

For all the above, the cult screamed bloody murder and then AMD fixed their shitty tessellation performance on Polaris. Suddenly the cards were sometimes performing even better than Nvidia and all those claimed unfair and unrealistic benchmarks that were biased towards Nvidia, were now just normal expected performance.

And all this "bu but my tessellation is Nvidia's way of hurting AMD performances" is the cherry on the sundae as fucking ATI invented the first card to have hardware tessellation with the Radeon 8500 in 2001.

NVidia did have a good advantage in tesselation at that time, and they force ridiculous levels of tessellation. Which hindered performance on all GPUs, even NVidia. But even more on AMD, that like you said, had lower capabilities.
Here is the performance graph for enabling hairworks. Even on a top end PC of the time, with an NVidia card, the performance loss was huge. But the improvement to visuals were negligible.
People even did mods, reducing tessellation for hairworks without any visual diference and a big performance gain.

About Crysis 2, yes the sea was culled. But that was not the only object being tessellated. Many more were rendered, with ridiculous levels of tessellation.
Here is an example of a road cement block, that never needed this amount of triangles. Not even close.
Don't try to defend this crap and call other people fanboys, when you ignore all this BS.
I had an NVidia card at the time I played Crysis 2 and could have gotten better performance if it wasn't for this non-sense with tesselation.

Portal RTX is tailored to Nvidia? Nvida gimping poor AMD?
They looked into the game and how AMD handled the AGNOSTIC API calls and it has nothing to do with RT. AMD's compiler thought it best to peg the shader at 256 VGPRs which is the maximum use per wavefront and is spilling to cache. AMD compiler basically makes one GIGANTIC Ubershader that takes 99ms of frametime by itself.

Source for this?

The truth is that while AMD kept claiming sabotage, the hard fact is that they basically laid off the vast majority of those on the field engineers that actually made the Gaming evolved program in circa 2015, circa 2010 they had engineers in the top 100 studios, had roughly 50% market share, had Mantle to bypass DX11 / Gameworks, Bullet physics to counter Physx.

They fumbled, hard.

When Nvidia was losing ~30% performances for gameworks that barely improved visuals, AMD could have consolidated almost every console ports of the era to Mantle and actually IMPROVE performances. They didn't. They pulled the plug, on almost all of the above, and waited patiently for DX12 and Vulkan while they bled market share to ridiculously low numbers where even Intel is a threat.

BTW AMD is late on their promise of frame gen, with the whole HYPER-RX package. Talk about reactionary announcement, they had to promise something to counter DLSS3. I guess we'll now count the games that support DLSS 3 frame gen exclusively as unfair Nvidia deals to cripple AMD in a year or so, can't wait for a stupid list like we see popping in this thread.

In 2010's, AMD had around 30-35% market share. Not 50%, don't try to inflate things.
Supporting A low level API is too much for one company. Even with DX12, it took almost a decade for it to become the norm. And Mantle became Vulkan, so it was no loss.
Not eve MS was able to push DX12 to be adopted faster. And they have much more disposable budgets to invest in tech, than AMD.

Neither Bullet, nor Havok were made by AMD.
And even GPU Physx died out, because neither devs nor gamers cared that much about physics effects in games.
If it wasn't for NVidia sponsoring some games to implement Physx, it probably would not be used in any game.

Consoles don't use Mantle. Each has it's own proprietary API.
No way AMD, or any company could convince MS or Sony to use some other API.

Regarding Hyper-X, I think it's a bad idea. I only use Anti-Lag.
I really don't care for Radeon Boost and Super Resolution. So a feature that enables all three is a no go for me.
AMD should focus on improving FSR" and making FSR3, instead of wasting time and resources with Hyper-X.

 

[CrustyBritches]

I still don't get the outrage. Maybe Nvidia should be giving their customers more cores and more VRAM instead of gimping the hardware and making people rely on software to compensate.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Why are you spending a $1000+ price premium to avoid 1 hour of lego assembly labor?

Have built several of my previous PCs and just don't care to do it anymore if I am being honest