AMD FSR ,Extended Life for your NVidia 10 series GPU

bigquads said:
Can someone dumb this down for me? ELI5 please? I have a GTX 1060 3GB and play mainly just CSGO. Will I see fps improvements?
Click to expand...
You'll see performance improvement in the range of 30% - 100% depending upon which FSR mode you use in game with a slight to significant drop in quality. Which mode should be used depends upon what is acceptable for you & where you start noticing a drop in quality. I would assume you would be playing games on a 1080p monitor, in that case you should start with FSR mode set to ultra quality & go down from there. I don' think you would wanna go down past quality mode as the image quality decline is very significant after that. Again all this depends form person to person, some care about performance some car about quality so choose your own poison accordingly. One thing to note is that this is not a global change so only games which have added support for FSR will provide these benefits.
roofrider said:
@DanteErodov Did you check Kitguru's review? I read they did a better job than DF at TAAU vs FSR and found FSR to be better (?) I didn't watch their video yet.
Not sure if there's any truth to this, but DF tends to be biased towards NV and not the best source for AMD content some say.
Click to expand...
Just checked that review on vimeo & I have to the results vary quite a bit depending upon the game. Also YouTube is not really a good platform to be judging these screenshots on.
  • In Godfall, I can clearly see the quality drop even in 4k ultra quality mode & even the reviewer says that the image looks overall sharper with TAA but has a bit more shimmering so FSR is the better choice which I think is a correct assessment. At 1080p though even in ultra quality mode the quality loss is very significant to my eyes & here I found the TAA upscaled image to be better overall compared to FSR.
  • In Anno, it is very difficult to find quality differences at 4k ultra FSR so it is one of the good result here. I think this might be because of the nature of the game, where the camera is usually zoomed out a lot & minor details are not directly in front of you.
  • Terminator Resistance, seems to be the best case scenario for 4k ultra quality FSR. Although 1080p results still show some noticeable quality loss in ultra quality mode. This game however seems to use low quality assets & doesn't even apply any sharpening filters on native image so that might be the reason behind the better than average result.
Long story short, FSR is clearly doing some reconstruction which is definitely better than dropping equivalent resolution in game but how much it ends up being better than already existing up-sampling techniques, like TAA or checkerboarding in console games or TSR for that matter, depends a lot upon individual games. I think how FSR performs in games like Far Cry 6 & RE: Village will give a much better idea regarding the overall quality.
 
Last edited:
So, this sounds about right? With all of the below modes giving nearly 30% percent FPS increase, depending on the game.
4K Ultra - Good, pretty close to native
1440p Ultra - Pretty good, worth using
1080p Ultra - Not as good, but understandable considering the lower input resolution

I'm interested in 1440p. Will anyway have to wait for the other games support it. Surprisingly, contrary to AMD's earlier statement that it's up to Nvidia to optimize FSR for their cards, it seems to work on every GPU out of the box?
 
roofrider said:
Surprisingly, contrary to AMD's earlier statement that it's up to Nvidia to optimize FSR for their cards, it seems to work on every GPU out of the box?
Click to expand...
As I understand it, FSR is game dependent. So if a game runs on a particular GPU, it automatically supports FSR as well. But by optimisations, I take it that AMD means that there could be driver level optimisations Nvidia could implement to further improve FSR. So basically FSR will run better with optimisations, but not that it won't run without any of those - it'll still function, but maybe just not as efficiently on cards not officially supported (basically all Nvidia cards, and AMD cards older than 400 series)
 
roofrider said:
So, this sounds about right? With all of the below modes giving nearly 30% percent FPS increase, depending on the game.
4K Ultra - Good, pretty close to native
1440p Ultra - Pretty good, worth using
1080p Ultra - Not as good, but understandable considering the lower input resolution

I'm interested in 1440p. Will anyway have to wait for the other games support it. Surprisingly, contrary to AMD's earlier statement that it's up to Nvidia to optimize FSR for their cards, it seems to work on every GPU out of the box?
Click to expand...
Irrespective of DF's take, the following is certainly true. Mostly you are getting sharper edges and no information addition to the image within edges. 1440p Ultra will essentially have 1108p resolution for the textures with sharper, upscaled edges.
FSR is essentially a single frame spatial imagine enhancement technique that looks for edges and resolves those them smartly into a higher resolution grid. Jaggies and shimmer from standard upscaling are the worst upscaling artefacts and FSR aims to comprehensively address this. However, all the upscaler has to work with is the standard image - it does not gain any additional information from prior frames, neither are specific buffers isolated or rendered at a higher resolution. By default, it also 'inherits' whatever anti-aliasing solution is in play - typically TAA. So FSR does not replace TAA and cannot improve upon its flaws. The lack of a temporal component means that in-surface detail - the image 'inside' the edges - does not gain any further information, so resolves in a less distinct manner. AMD uses its contrast adaptive techniques here seen in CAS, but this cannot resolve extra detail.

Each has a distinct scale factor: 1.3x for Ultra Quality, 1.5x for Quality, 1.7x for Balanced and 2.0x for Performance. However, for users on a 1440p display, there is less internal data to work from, meaning that the drawbacks of the technique are more noticeable - though FSR's edge-smoothing still looks good.

Those are some quite large performance wins - but the question is - are they worth it for the image quality changes brought on by FSR? In my opinion, other than the ultra quality mode at 4K or in content like Terminator Resistance, I find the image quality changes brought on by FSR to be a step too far to be considered similar enough to the native resolution to be an alternative. FSR leaves me in a strange place - I like where it is going, but I am not wholly convinced of its quality and a reason for that comes when you compare it to other ways to enhance image quality.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Just found an interesting thread showcasing UE5 TSR in action, it compares native vs TAA vs TSR & the corresponding performance benefits.

This example compares 1080p ->1440p conversion using TSR with a native 1440p image so roughly in between quality & ultra quality mode of FSR. As can be seen here, the difference in quality is very subtle & looks very good at least in still shots. This examples compares 1080p -> 1440p conversion between TAA & TSR & we can notice a slight increase in clarity even in still image in favor of TSR. In motion, TSR actually eliminates many of the shortcomings of TAA l& again is also supported by every hardware which supports Shader model 5, so all dx11 capable GPUs. Now FSR so far has been better than TAA is some instances while being worse in others & TSR is an improvement over that so it could really end up being very competitive to FSR, infact it already looks better when upscaling lower resolutions compared to FSR. All in all, good times ahead.. we'll definitely get more mileage out of our current GPUs.

Source: here
 
roofrider said:
Look into this well
Click to expand...
Good find, this is very interesting. In fact I would go on to say that in the screenshot he has shared, the FSR image looks even better than native which is a bit odd. Particularly these ones:

Native (r.DepthOfFieldQuality 0):
https://imgur.com/llCG7Kp
FSR Ultra Quality (r.DepthOfFieldQuality 0):
https://imgur.com/tYfMja1

Update: I think FSR is doing a sharpening pass as well on the image which must be causing this discrepancy but it doesn't impact the analysis. With these changes, FSR does look a lot better than TAA which is just what AMD need. DF will most probably acknowledge their mistake & release a new video defending themselves & still underplaying FSR.
Looks like DF has acknowledged the issue & updated their article with changes as per the reddit thread but still as per their screenshots the result still looks in TAAU favor. One thing that I have noted this time is that they are doing a 1080p -> 4k comparison, so using FSR performance mode. So it is a possibility that TAAU might be better able to resolve details at these low resolutions due to it having extra data from previous frames & FSR is superior at higher quality modes.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1408031812962635783
 
Last edited:
DanteErodov said:
One thing that I have noted this time is that they are doing a 1080p -> 4k comparison, so using FSR performance mode. So it is a possibility that TAAU might be better able to resolve details at these low resolutions due to it having extra data from previous frames & FSR is superior at higher quality modes.
Click to expand...
Thanks, all in all seems good. There's also a possibility to set any scale factor, 1.2x or 1.4x for in-between modes.

In addition to fixed scaling, FSR may be used in “arbitrary scaling” mode, whereby any area scale factor between 1x and 4x is supported. This mode is typically used for Dynamic Resolution Scaling, whereby source resolution is determined by a fixed performance budget to achieve a minimum frame rate.
Click to expand...
link
 
TheCoolerPlayer said:
Catchy, sure. Correct? Not entirely. Pretty sure there are way more people owning non-10 series cards than 10 series owners.
And moreover, FSR doesn't work on just 10 series cards or older GPUs, but basically all GPUs - even those not specifically optimised for FSR since it's implemented at the game level, not driver level. So the title, although not incorrect, is still quite the misrepresentation just for the sake of catchiness. I thought I was on a forum, not browsing for click bait articles.
Click to expand...
the reason for bit catchy title is ,most of us might be having 10 series ones , and if i put a very dry title wont be good participation , there is another discussion thread regarding Intel -DG2 which would be more interesting than RTX and amd gpu threads/discussions.
 
DanteErodov said:
Good find, this is very interesting. In fact I would go on to say that in the screenshot he has shared, the FSR image looks even better than native which is a bit odd. Particularly these ones:

Native (r.DepthOfFieldQuality 0):
https://imgur.com/llCG7Kp
FSR Ultra Quality (r.DepthOfFieldQuality 0):
https://imgur.com/tYfMja1

Update: I think FSR is doing a sharpening pass as well on the image which must be causing this discrepancy but it doesn't impact the analysis. With these changes, FSR does look a lot better than TAA which is just what AMD need. DF will most probably acknowledge their mistake & release a new video defending themselves & still underplaying FSR.
Looks like DF has acknowledged the issue & updated their article with changes as per the reddit thread but still as per their screenshots the result still looks in TAAU favor. One thing that I have noted this time is that they are doing a 1080p -> 4k comparison, so using FSR performance mode. So it is a possibility that TAAU might be better able to resolve details at these low resolutions due to it having extra data from previous frames & FSR is superior at higher quality modes.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1408031812962635783
Click to expand...
FSR is indeed going to be useful for those who need to game in 4K. At 2K though, if I am getting 50 FPS on native and let's say 65 with FSR, I would still go with native. Also, looking at static images may be a bit misleading, TAAU will handle motion better but even then there will be the odd artifacts compared to native.

It is good to have options but hope this doesn't mess up the support from developers. RTX users will still get the best out of upscaling with DLSS. Pretty sure FSR 2.0 will have to move to ML when AMD choses to dedicate the equivalent of Tensor cores.

Let's see how support build up over time. Having both co-exist will be great, Nvidia needs to make DLSS integration easier with game engines which is what they are focusing on now. It will basically come down to whether PC will get lazy ports from consoles which will only have FSR or dedicated ones which integrate both.
 
t3chg33k said:
It will basically come down to whether PC will get lazy ports from consoles which will only have FSR or dedicated ones which integrate both.
Click to expand...
I am sure Nvidia will try to pump in a lot of money to make sure developers choose DLSS now more than ever.

I am expecting most games in the next couple of years to feature at least some sort of upscaling technology, either in engine(TAUU or TSR etc.) or FSR or DLSS. Many games will end up providing more than one option due to the simplicity of both FSR as well as in engine upscaling. DLSS might not be available on all games but it will still continue to have significant presence, sometimes even alongside FSR. Hopefully things will improve & ultimately consolidate at some point & we'll have a common standard in the future.
 
Back
Top