Discussion AMD Gaming Super Resolution GSR

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
4,526
3,713
136
Yes... and requires a bigger more expensive chip.
- And it ties you to the NV ecosystem. Nintendo is a pretty big dog all their own, last thing they'll want to do is hem themselves in with a single provider due to a proprietary software feature.

If anything, I could see Nintendo insisting NV post DLSS over to run on general compute shaders.
 

Dribble

Platinum Member
Aug 9, 2005
2,004
544
136
Yes... and requires a bigger more expensive chip.
There is a sizable performance hit from doing FSR 2 and it's larger on lower end chips because it's using the shader cores. Tensor cores do not take a lot of die space, it's more efficient to use them. Dedicated hardware is more efficient then general purpose hardware.

- And it ties you to the NV ecosystem. Nintendo is a pretty big dog all their own, last thing they'll want to do is hem themselves in with a single provider due to a proprietary software feature.

If anything, I could see Nintendo insisting NV post DLSS over to run on general compute shaders.
This doesn't make any sense. It's a console you are tied into an eco system anyway, if it's an NV chip you are tied into using NV anyway, all consoles are coded to the metal which is very proprietary.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
- And it ties you to the NV ecosystem. Nintendo is a pretty big dog all their own, last thing they'll want to do is hem themselves in with a single provider due to a proprietary software feature.
Nintendo is going to keep using Nvidia.

Before Nvidia Nintendo's tool chain honestly had been a total mess. Nvidia's main selling point is its software, ecosystem and tool chain.

Nintendo is not a company systematically building up systems and frameworks over time. Instead they like to build fresh stuff as projects and drop them again one or more generations onward. Nvidia offers a solid base to build upon for Nintendo's and third party developers from which I can't see them wanting to move away from.
 

Leeea

Platinum Member
Apr 3, 2020
2,580
3,896
106
Yes, they'll strive to show all the places FSR 2.0 fails and this is GOOD.
Thing is, if you look for a evaluation that was not done by Nvidia's marketing department, you will see they point out places where the latest version of DLSS also falls on its face.

Hardware Unboxed did a good one like this.


Focusing on the problems with one product, while ignoring all other problems of the other product is not:
"The best investigation thus far. "
"GOOD "

It is marketing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and DiogoDX

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
That's really cool and encouraging that such mods are possible! There are plenty old games that could profit but don't see any official support by their developers anymore. Though the amount of games supporting DLSS through a dynamic library used for this hack is obviously smaller.
 

uzzi38

Platinum Member
Oct 16, 2019
2,370
4,995
116
That's really cool and encouraging that such mods are possible! There are plenty old games that could profit but don't see any official support by their developers anymore. Though the amount of games supporting DLSS through a dynamic library used for this hack is obviously smaller.
Every game that supports DLSS in general is potentially open to a similar solution. So I mean, it's not a massive list of games, but it's quite a few times the number of FSR 2.0 native games lol
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
FSR2 Implementation to DLSS2 titles in matter of hours?
Yeah, as long as DLSS in implemented using dynamic libraries (DLL files) that can be used to hook up FSR 2.0 instead. That's essentially what we were talking about before.
 

moinmoin

Diamond Member
Jun 1, 2017
4,057
6,106
136
This came out a while ago, but RNDA3 is meant to get an AMD tensor core equivalent: https://www.guru3d.com/news_story/tensor_core_equivalent_likely_to_get_embedded_in_amd_rdna3.html

This is no suprise to anyone as the only way they could compete on an equal footing with DLSS is with the same custom hardware.
That's better placed in the RDNA3 thread since FSR 2.0 (which this thread is about) already showed that GPUs don't need tensor cores at all to compete on an equal footing with DLSS. But tensor cores can be useful for other stuff.
 

DiogoDX

Senior member
Oct 11, 2012
745
277
136
Last edited:

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
4,526
3,713
136
AMD's MO has always been about doing more with less (or in many cases generalized hardware). Its the Alton Brown GPU design philosophy: never have a single purpose compute unit in your GPU, everything should have at least 2 or more functions at any given time.

I think its just the product of being the underdog and market follower. 10 years of having to be outrageously cost conscious against their competition everywhere will do that to a company.

That's a lot of words to say I'd bet dollars to donuts that AMD is not putting in any fixed function tensor hardware into their GPUs.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY