Question AMD's answer to DLSS, FFSS. Mentioned in [GraphicallyChallenged][YT].

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
53,783
8,019
126

Sorry, no need to watch the video, basically just stating that FFSS (FX Super-sampling) is coming to AMD, to combat NVidias's DLSS.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Tlh97 and 7beauties

GodisanAtheist

Diamond Member
Nov 16, 2006
4,144
2,796
136
I know 36 is basically ancient but *waves cane* this cancer of putting every-god-damn-thing in video format has to stop.

Even more mind blowing when so many videos are formatted for muted phones so are just text overlay on random video snippets... ITS JUST AN ARTICLE THAT I CANNOT READ AT MY OWN SPEED THAT WAS LIKELY MORE TIME CONSUMING TO ACTUALLY MAKE.

Also, get off my lawn.
 

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,144
816
136
I know 36 is basically ancient but *waves cane* this cancer of putting every-god-damn-thing in video format has to stop.

Even more mind blowing when so many videos are formatted for muted phones so are just text overlay on random video snippets... ITS JUST AN ARTICLE THAT I CANNOT READ AT MY OWN SPEED THAT WAS LIKELY MORE TIME CONSUMING TO ACTUALLY MAKE.

Also, get off my lawn.
Google how many lbs in a stone.
10 minute video starting with the story of how when he was a boy, his mother used to take him to the garden and they'd walk.....

Recipes are the worst for that. Just tell me how many teaspoons of each spice for the beef roast rub. No one cares about your life story or that magical christmas at Nana's house.
 

insertcarehere

Senior member
Jan 17, 2013
502
408
136
I know 36 is basically ancient but *waves cane* this cancer of putting every-god-damn-thing in video format has to stop.

Even more mind blowing when so many videos are formatted for muted phones so are just text overlay on random video snippets... ITS JUST AN ARTICLE THAT I CANNOT READ AT MY OWN SPEED THAT WAS LIKELY MORE TIME CONSUMING TO ACTUALLY MAKE.

Also, get off my lawn.
I just get a chrome extension to set at 1.85x playback speed and do sponsor blocking nowadays, too much filler to sit through otherwise.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GodisanAtheist

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
Maybe Google or Apple can develop something for their mobile devices that will scrub the video/audio for content and render it as simple text.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

guachi

Senior member
Nov 16, 2010
761
415
136
Google how many lbs in a stone.
10 minute video starting with the story of how when he was a boy, his mother used to take him to the garden and they'd walk.....

Recipes are the worst for that. Just tell me how many teaspoons of each spice for the beef roast rub. No one cares about your life story or that magical christmas at Nana's house.
You can't copyright a recipe so the added text has some purpose in this case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
4,101
4,891
136
You can't copyright a recipe so the added text has some purpose in this case.
The text he's referring to has nothing to do with trying to copyright anything. It's filler like the telling a story about the first time they tasted this recipe with a huge background of where they were, why they were there, who they were with, what clothes they were wearing, etc. etc. The real reason they do this is they make you scroll through all this filler that has embedded ads all the way through until you get to the actual recipe at the bottom. It's just trying to monetize the page as much as possible but really the only useful thing for the reader is the actual recipe at the bottom of the long article.

Edit: Just to add, the list of ingredients and cooking instructions isn't able to be copyrighted, but if you gave detailed instructions while adding a deeper understanding of why the ingredients are chosen or how to use them properly, you could copyright that and it would actually be useful for the reader.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

JoeRambo

Golden Member
Jun 13, 2013
1,603
1,712
136
I think at this point it is obvious that any proper super resolution support needs motion vectors from game engine to function properly. And that means game engine needs to specifically support said technology.
Once said support is built in, there is a matter of potential speed up and quality of upscaled picture, that depends on algorithms and hardware.

I think it is obvious right now that DLSS 2.0 algorithms are state of the art, but built in hardware support is also critical - things need to happen "concurrently" to make the most speed up possible.
For example on Turing, NV had the following "workflow" for RT + DLSS
1612951395226.png


And in Ampere DLSS step can happen concurrently with other work on chip now:

1612951498811.png

So without dedicated hardware it would be just a blob of additional shader code (via DirectML), competing with rendering, limiting performance gains and/or hurting resulting image quality. That is why AMD is taking their sweet time with technology, no easy shortcuts possible.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
Didn't AMD also say they wanted something that could be more of an open standard so that developers weren't stuck with separate implementations for consoles and PCs where each hardware/GPU vendor requires a specific configuration and individual implementation that just makes it take more time.

Maybe that's not feasible because good luck getting both Sony and Microsoft agreeing on anything as far as the consoles go and Nvidia will try to do their own thing for as long as they can.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
5,764
1,654
136
Didn't AMD also say they wanted something that could be more of an open standard so that developers weren't stuck with separate implementations for consoles and PCs where each hardware/GPU vendor requires a specific configuration and individual implementation that just makes it take more time.

Maybe that's not feasible because good luck getting both Sony and Microsoft agreeing on anything as far as the consoles go and Nvidia will try to do their own thing for as long as they can.
Yes, they did. And it has worked in the past (Just look at FreeSync vs GSync). And while things may vary at the API level for the two consoles, they will be the similar at the hardware level. Much like how RRT is essentially the same at the hardware level.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
It still took something like five years for Nvidia to come around to supporting FreeSync and they seem to have done so rather begrudgingly. The game studios would all have to pressure Nvidia to adopt whatever standard AMD might develop and the game studios are unlikely to do that if Nvidia keeps giving them money or promotional deals to use Nvidia technology. I'm pretty sure GameWorks is still being used even though some of that has been known to cause performance issues even on Nvidia cards.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leeea

DeathReborn

Platinum Member
Oct 11, 2005
2,508
432
126
It still took something like five years for Nvidia to come around to supporting FreeSync and they seem to have done so rather begrudgingly. The game studios would all have to pressure Nvidia to adopt whatever standard AMD might develop and the game studios are unlikely to do that if Nvidia keeps giving them money or promotional deals to use Nvidia technology. I'm pretty sure GameWorks is still being used even though some of that has been known to cause performance issues even on Nvidia cards.
You mean Adaptive Sync right?
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
You mean Adaptive Sync right?
Both GSync and FreeSync were implementations of adaptive sync. My point was that even though Nvidia now supports FreeSync (or some version of it) with their cards, it took five years to get to that point, which meant separate displays for a long time. I think this xkcd comic sums up my sentiments rather nicely:



I can see why everyone says they want a standard, but a lot of people tend to really want everyone else to do it their way. So I have a feeling we're just going to wind up with a lot of different super sampling (or whatever they wind up getting called) implementations that don't work well together and make the landscape a bit muddier.
 

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,964
487
136
Yes, they did. And it has worked in the past (Just look at FreeSync vs GSync). And while things may vary at the API level for the two consoles, they will be the similar at the hardware level. Much like how RRT is essentially the same at the hardware level.
Historically when it comes to software AMD look at what Nvidia has, announce something similar that's going to be better because it's open source (which normally means they expect open source devs to develop it for free with minimal AMD support), it never works and they quietly drop it.
 

PhoBoChai

Member
Oct 10, 2017
119
389
106
I think at this point it is obvious that any proper super resolution support needs motion vectors from game engine to function properly. And that means game engine needs to specifically support said technology.
Once said support is built in, there is a matter of potential speed up and quality of upscaled picture, that depends on algorithms and hardware.

I think it is obvious right now that DLSS 2.0 algorithms are state of the art, but built in hardware support is also critical - things need to happen "concurrently" to make the most speed up possible.
For example on Turing, NV had the following "workflow" for RT + DLSS
View attachment 39483


And in Ampere DLSS step can happen concurrently with other work on chip now:

View attachment 39485

So without dedicated hardware it would be just a blob of additional shader code (via DirectML), competing with rendering, limiting performance gains and/or hurting resulting image quality. That is why AMD is taking their sweet time with technology, no easy shortcuts possible.
Doesn't make much difference in final perf.

Compare DLSS perf in Turing vs Ampere in reviews and see for yourself.

Because while it can run concurrently, it still has to share a very limited pool of registers as all the other shaders so you're bottlenecked by something else.
 

Dribble

Golden Member
Aug 9, 2005
1,964
487
136
Yeah, look at Mantle. /s
You can look if you like, it backs up what I said - it was used in a tiny number of games and only worked well for a few cards in those games. No support for those games was maintained even for the next gen cards released a few months later. It quietly died. Mantle was released in 2013. Vulkan (it's successor) is the first thing to actually work properly and even today (2021) only used in a small fraction of games and it's really only id that make it work well.

Mantle should have been pretty simple - it was basically AMD exposing all their existing low level driver code to outside users. Unlike FFSS or whatever their DLSS equivalent is going to be called it didn't really require new software, just a bit of a clean-up of what they already had.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SMU_Pony

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
Mantle was specific to AMD's cards and it's good that it ultimately morphed into an open standard that isn't controlled by AMD alone. It's honestly the perfect example of how different parties can come together to create an open standard that can be used by anyone. AMD trying to keep pushing and maintaining Mantle wouldn't have been good for the industry. Because it's an open standard it has support from AMD, Nvidia, Intel, and many ARM SoC vendors and we don't have every vendor making their own specific Vulkan-like APIs that require tweaks and changes for each hardware platform.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
5,764
1,654
136
Mantle was not GPU specific. But it did require a driver that only AMD had at the time as they were actively developing it. Vulkan is literally the exact same thing under a different name (Khronos group renamed it as part of the hand over). Mantle was always intended to go open source. Just like FreeSync was created to be open source (AdaptiveSync)

AMD also offer an open source Linux driver. Unlike nVidia that makes nearly everything as proprietary as possible, and doesn't even offer an open source driver for Linux.
 

7beauties

Member
Mar 24, 2008
73
6
71

Sorry, no need to watch the video, basically just stating that FFSS (FX Super-sampling) is coming to AMD, to combat NVidias's DLSS.
This is assuming that AMD's FFSS is on par with Nvidia's DLSS. I hope so because I'm an AMD fanboy. Since all Nvidia 3080 and 3090 cards are out of stock as well as AMD's 6800XT and 6900XT cards, I'm willing to buy an AMD card with FFSS technology. My worry is, since I don't have bots to instantly scoop up these cards, I'll have to check Amazon, Best Buy, and Newegg around the clock and get little sleep. What a bloody mess.
 

Mopetar

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2011
6,781
3,878
136
If it's good it's good I suppose, but I'm still not in any hurry to get excited about what's essentially dropping my resolution and being able to fake enough of the difference that I might not notice.

This has a strong potential to turn into a can of worms that I don't think we'll be happy that we opened. At a minimum we should stop calling the results 4K or anything beyond what the native render resolution actually was. If the cards have ways of doctoring that image to make it scale up better that's fine, but it's not a native image rendered at that resolution.
 

Stuka87

Diamond Member
Dec 10, 2010
5,764
1,654
136
If it's good it's good I suppose, but I'm still not in any hurry to get excited about what's essentially dropping my resolution and being able to fake enough of the difference that I might not notice.

This has a strong potential to turn into a can of worms that I don't think we'll be happy that we opened. At a minimum we should stop calling the results 4K or anything beyond what the native render resolution actually was. If the cards have ways of doctoring that image to make it scale up better that's fine, but it's not a native image rendered at that resolution.
Yeah, getting fed up with review sites mixing DLSS "4K" with real 4K. They should NOT be mixed.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY