• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Discussion AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) may work on Nvidia GPUs?

Kedas

Senior member
Dec 6, 2018
267
223
86
There is a rumor that FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) of AMD will also work on Nvidia GPU's o_O

At first you think that is nice and practical, but:

If FSR is equally as good as DLSS or close to it why would developers even care about doing the work again for DLSS also, "FSR implemented" -> you have no reason to complain...
On top of that is that it's most likely less work for developer to implement FSR than DLSS.

So IF that would be the case Nvidia would actuality have to reduce the performance of FSR in their drivers to keep DLSS alive. (or buy enough developers/games)
 

Spjut

Senior member
Apr 9, 2011
899
85
91
I don't see why this would be a surprise. AMD has been tight lipped about their upcoming FSR but they've said their goal is to have it work everywhere.
A key component for adoption will probably be if it becomes the go-to solution for consoles and it's easy to share with the PC versions.

AMD's CAS for example works on Nvidia too, and for many years now, AMD has aggressively pushed that their solutions are available to everyone. AMD has bet on that it's more succesful to compete with Nvidia by providing a solution that works for everyone instead of sponsoring games to use their own proprietary tech.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,797
2,566
136
I don't really know if it would or even could kill off DLSS if Nvidia wants to take a game and train a neural network to run on their own hardware. Working with developers means you could deliver that at launch instead of later on after the launch, but really Nvidia could still do it even without developer support if they thought it was worth it.
 

Furious_Styles

Senior member
Jan 17, 2019
313
102
86
I bet nvidia would prefer it to work without any special requirements from devs. But it has evolved greatly from 1.0 -> 2.0 so perhaps 3.0 might be that next step.

That said we will have to see how good AMD's tech is.
 

Leeea

Senior member
Apr 3, 2020
730
814
96
This would be consistent with what AMD has done in the past.

Also is developer and gamer friendly, write once work everywhere.

If it is a ok solution, it will kill DLSS. Even if inferior to DLSS, will still kill it if it passes the good enough bar. Nobody wants to implement a feature twice. DLSS will become only nvidia sponsored titles.


Eventually it will become like monitors. Free sync supported everywhere, both* ways. In the end free sync just won. Gsync became a niche tech that most people avoid because the extra cost associated with it is better spent on getting a better display.

*yep, gsync module monitors had freesync support added:
https://hexus.net/tech/news/monitors/137186-nvidia-add-freesync-support-g-sync-module-monitors/
so geforce cards now can output to freesync, and gsync monitors can also accept freesync (provided a software update was issued for said monitor)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,797
2,566
136
Does Nvidia even need any help or permission from a developer to implement DLSS for a game at all though? I'm sure that having that helps, but if all they need are low res and target res renders that they can use to train the neural network that will produce the upscaled images, that sounds like something that they could do independently of developer support.

Maybe it takes a few months for them to add DLSS support if they don't get the game ahead of launch to start training the network ahead of time, but if that's the case it isn't something that can ever really be killed off. Knowing Nvidia they wouldn't even if what AMD releases becomes some new standard that developers absolutely love, as unlikely as that may be.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
3,078
1,573
136
We'll end up with the same paradigm we've always had: AMD's open but less refined solution becomes the baseline, NV's proprietary but better implemented feature receeds into a niche or is EOL'd.

At the end of the day, I'd only ever use these features to give an old card longer legs, not to make a new card perform better, so from a personal perspective a "good enough" solution would be fine for me (and presumably most people).
 

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,119
979
136
It seems that for Unreal Engine 4 users currently all it takes to implement DLSS is: update engine to UE 4.26, install DLSS 2.0 plugin for UE

There are quite some "silent" updates for games, that release DLSS support without much fanfare. I am playing Everspace 2, and boom after latest update it supports DLSS.

AMD needs such plugins for UE4/Unity on day 1.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
5,797
2,566
136
That is simple:
implement FSR = works everywhere, all done
implement DLSS = still need to implement FSR anyway, more work to do

thereby FSR is always less work then DLSS.
It's not quite that simple:
Implement FSR = extra work you didn't have to do before
Implement DLSS = more extra work, but Nvidia gives you a sack of money to do it

Really, this is just a modern retelling of a tale as old as time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,907
435
136
It seems that for Unreal Engine 4 users currently all it takes to implement DLSS is: update engine to UE 4.26, install DLSS 2.0 plugin for UE

There are quite some "silent" updates for games, that release DLSS support without much fanfare. I am playing Everspace 2, and boom after latest update it supports DLSS.

AMD needs such plugins for UE4/Unity on day 1.
DLSS needs motion vectors or you get the funny trails behind things, most stuff has motion vectors but you need to put some work in for anything that doesn't. I suspect now DLSS has become established generating motion vectors for everything will just become standard game programming, mostly built into the game engines, but for existing games it's not quite so simple.
 

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,119
979
136
DLSS needs motion vectors or you get the funny trails behind things, most stuff has motion vectors but you need to put some work in for anything that doesn't. I suspect now DLSS has become established generating motion vectors for everything will just become standard game programming, mostly built into the game engines, but for existing games it's not quite so simple.
Yeah, i think so too. DLSS is huge incentive to have motion vectors for everything. Devs need to put work to upgrade to UE 4.26 as well, and obviuosly if they have strayed from vanilla engine with custom plugins and so on enabling DLSS might not be possible at all.

AMD will definitely be able to reuse all this good work in game engines, they just need to get out of the door with FidelityFX asap.
 

Kedas

Senior member
Dec 6, 2018
267
223
86
How do you know the algorithm such that it can be concluded it is '''most likely''' '''less work'''
Well because based on what we hear it looks like the number of games that will support FSR will be about the same as DLSS 2.0 (that released more than a year ago). So it is probably easier to implement otherwise it would take longer to get to that same number. (and Nvidia is probably pumping more money in it)
The assumption is that all games that currently support CAS from AMD will probably have FSR also added + some new games.

If FSR cannot deliver the image quality (because it was too simple) it will obviously be a totally different story.
 

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
3,078
1,573
136
Well because based on what we hear it looks like the number of games that will support FSR will be about the same as DLSS 2.0 (that released more than a year ago). So it is probably easier to implement otherwise it would take longer to get to that same number. (and Nvidia is probably pumping more money in it)
The assumption is that all games that currently support CAS from AMD will probably have FSR also added + some new games.

If FSR cannot deliver the image quality (because it was too simple) it will obviously be a totally different story.
- Yeah, but where are you hearing this? Harder to find info on FSR than it is bigfoot.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY