Discussion [WCCFTech] What’s Up With The Missing NVIDIA DLSS Support In AMD Sponsored FSR Titles?

[igor_kavinski]

Almost all games have significantly bigger QA issues to focus on, and I expect almost no time will be spent on testing for scaler image quality.

Ah so it's just an experimental feature. If it works as expected, great. If not, don't bother about it. It isn't supposed to be perfect. Got it.

Only nGreedia should put a disclaimer in their marketing materials about that.

"DLSS will work only in games that implement it".

"DLSS image quality may not always be perfect, even in QUALITY mode".

 

[Heartbreaker]

Ah so it's just an experimental feature. If it works as expected, great. If not, don't bother about it. It isn't supposed to be perfect. Got it.

Only nGreedia should put a disclaimer in their marketing materials about that.

"DLSS will work only in games that implement it".

"DLSS image quality may not always be perfect, even in QUALITY mode".

At least it's not FSR which is pretty much always worse than DLSS, even Intel XeSS is more often better than FSR, and it's Intels first shot at it, leaving AMD little excuse why FSR is so bad.

 

[igor_kavinski]

At least it's not FSR which is pretty much always worse than DLSS, even Intel XeSS is more often better than FSR, and it's Intels first shot at it, leaving AMD little excuse why FSR is so bad.

Both Intel and nGreedia spend way more than AMD on R&D.

Also, Intel has license to use nGreedia patents due to the settlement terms of a past lawsuit. Don't think AMD has that benefit.

Let's see what AMD does with FSR3.

 

[Tup3x]

yeah but market trend has shown them always overcharging the first couple of months, then flooring the price after.
But again who knows as other pointed the 7900XT can be bought on sale now for about 750.

But they can pull a Jensen, give the 7800XT 24 GB of ram, and charge a AMD Tax on it to 800 dollars like Nvidia

Well... They probably never learn and find a way to screw up this launch as well. At least the price should drop like a cows tail shortly after the launch.

 

[DeathReborn]

Both Intel and nGreedia spend way more than AMD on R&D.

Also, Intel has license to use nGreedia patents due to the settlement terms of a past lawsuit. Don't think AMD has that benefit.

Let's see what AMD does with FSR3.

Those patents for what it's worth was up to Kepler, so Maxwell onwards they have no access without a separate agreement. HYPR-RX was scheduled for H1 2023, they missed that boat & it's not in the 23.7.1 drivers so earliest would be 23.8.1, but I doubt it'll come in Q3 now. FSR3... RDNA4 series I reckon.

 

[igor_kavinski]

HYPR-RX was scheduled for H1 2023, they missed that boat & it's not in the 23.7.1 drivers so earliest would be 23.8.1, but I doubt it'll come in Q3 now.

Maybe they are waiting to launch it alongside 7800 XT.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Those patents for what it's worth was up to Kepler, so Maxwell onwards they have no access without a separate agreement. HYPR-RX was scheduled for H1 2023, they missed that boat & it's not in the 23.7.1 drivers so earliest would be 23.8.1, but I doubt it'll come in Q3 now. FSR3... RDNA4 series I reckon.

The reason XeSS is better than FSR is the same Reason DLSS is, and isn't patents. It's because they both use Deep Learning on their temporal scaling, and AMD doesn't.

Edge cases will be a nightmare to try and code around for FSR, while XeSS and NVidia will just need to train their network to deal with it.

I'm betting RDNA4 will have have better Deep Learning capability and improved FSR 3 will also be Deep Learning based.

 

[Panino Manino]

By the way, don't the Zen 4 APUs have some Xilinx hardware? Ryzen AI?
When it's going to be used?

 

[GodisanAtheist]

By the way, don't the Zen 4 APUs have some Xilinx hardware? Ryzen AI?
When it's going to be used?

Hell RDNA3 has "AI Accelerators" and I figured those would be used for FSR3 but for the moment it sounds like more unused instruction sets.

 

[Heartbreaker]

HWUB reacting to AMD fan comments on their "AMD blocking DLSS" video:

 

[Panino Manino]

Hell RDNA3 has "AI Accelerators" and I figured those would be used for FSR3 but for the moment it sounds like more unused instruction sets.

I had forgotten. Shouldn't AMD have already enabled these things to help with FSR2? So much unused hardware.

 

[Heartbreaker]

I had forgotten. Shouldn't AMD have already enabled these things to help with FSR2? So much unused hardware.

They can't retroactively do that. They have sent out FSR as source code, so once it's included in games it's fixed at what that source code did, and the current source code implements a shader based human coded algorithm.

AMD might be wise to start shipping FSR as a DLL (Dynamic Link Library, not something Deep Learning related) implementation like NVidia does ASAP.

Thus to they could easily drop a new DLL that could then be retroactively replaced in games for the latest FSR implementations, eventually including a Deep Learning version. The DLL would then include the Deep Learning version for newer cards that support Deep Learning and the Shader version as fallback for older cards. The longer they wait to do this, the messier it gets when FSR eventually gets a Deep Learning version, and it seems certain is only a question of when, not if.

As it stands now when FSR gets Deep Learning update. Every single game would need to be updated with the help of the original game developers, which is a huge headache to say the least.

As far as RDNA3 AI capability, it appears improved over RDNA2, but still doesn't appear to be doing something equivalent to NVidia Tensor cores (or Intel equivalent), so RDNA 3.5 or RDNA 4 might be needed.

N32 is taking so long, I wonder if it might have been delayed for RDNA 3.5.

AMD's Phoenix APU seems to be the first real instance of something like Tensor cores, using Xilinx Tech.

 

[Ranulf]

I'll give Tim at HUB a break on the fanboy arguments but his rant starting at 11m20s or so, the "FSR works on all hardware" section is where he really shows a blind spot in thinking that many are making in this drama over upscalers and fake frames. I've not watched all the rest on his DLSS SDK license counterpoint, which I think I first saw that on OverclockersUK forums thread but the black box, closed source argument is valid especially in the legal context of branding and most especially not wanting closed code that the dev can't mess with and might cause issues down the road with the game code.

Overall, it is just amazing that all of a sudden this is such a big deal. All because a popular much anticipated game Starfield is going to be FSR only. It is probably because of marketing tie ins to sell amd cpus and the game is going to be on xbone and PC (no ps5 iirc) and it is cheaper for the devs to do. It is Bethesda game on top of it. They'll probably need all the help they can get.

Who really cares? I guess Nvidia owners that paid a lot for their cards and want that superior tech to be used. Its upscaler and fake frames nonsense that these companies need to keep performance at 60 fps (or even 30 for the console versions). All because of a rumor mill site that many of these tech journalists etc. malign. A site that has an article from two years ago with the riftbreaker dev talking about why they went with fsr and didn't use dlss. Namely, it will be supported on a majority of their customer's hardware.

 

[Heartbreaker]

I'll give Tim at HUB a break on the fanboy arguments but his rant starting at 11m20s or so, the "FSR works on all hardware" section is where he really shows a blind spot in thinking that many are making in this drama over upscalers and fake frames. I've not watched all the rest on his DLSS SDK license counterpoint, which I think I first saw that on OverclockersUK forums thread but the black box, closed source argument is valid especially in the legal context of branding and most especially not wanting closed code that the dev can't mess with and might cause issues down the road with the game code.

Overall, it is just amazing that all of a sudden this is such a big deal. All because a popular much anticipated game Starfield is going to be FSR only. It is probably because of marketing tie ins to sell amd cpus and the game is going to be on xbone and PC (no ps5 iirc) and it is cheaper for the devs to do. It is Bethesda game on top of it. They'll probably need all the help they can get.

Who really cares? I guess Nvidia owners that paid a lot for their cards and want that superior tech to be used. Its upscaler and fake frames nonsense that these companies need to keep performance at 60 fps (or even 30 for the console versions). All because of a rumor mill site that many of these tech journalists etc. malign. A site that has an article from two years ago with the riftbreaker dev talking about why they went with fsr and didn't use dlss. Namely, it will be supported on a majority of their customer's hardware.

This just comes across as more AMD fan excuses, like Tim was pointing out.

You shouldn't give cover to bad corporate behavior, just because you favor one corporation more than the other. They should all be held to a better standard of conduct.

HWUB has been at the forefront of holding NVidia's feet to the fire, now they do to the same for AMD one time, and the AMD fans rush to support, and make excuses for AMDs bad behavior. The same people likely cheered HWUB, and jeered NVidia when it was the target.

AMD is not your friend, don't give them cover to be shady.

 

[Ranulf]

I'm still waiting for definitive proof beyond a games list. You can call it fan excuses all you want. I can cite similar examples as Tim or you in getting flack for calling out bad practices. One is an Intel fanboy for calling out AMD's cpu price jump etc. etc.. I get flack for still giving AMD flack over Ryzen cpu support issues. How dare I want real proof. I've even offered counter proof with the wccftech article on Riftbreaker. As usual, it is down to money, budgets and marketing nonsense to get you excited to buy new product which runs great on new gpu/cpu product. Consume and enjoy.

 

[Heartbreaker]

I'm still waiting for definitive proof beyond a games list. You can call it fan excuses all you want.

It's been three weeks.

If you still want to pretend AMD isn't blocking DLSS, Provide some kind of reasonable justification, other than the obvious, why AMD still can't answer the question, put to them by multiple media outlets, multiple times?? ,

Or even if they don't want to answer questions, just issuing a clarification statement on their own website explaining their position where they can be crystal clear and not taken out of context. AMD is very quick to respond to big media outlets on other issues, but 3 week in, and this simple question still completely stymies them?

Come on... We are approaching Bill Clinton WRT Monica Lewinsky levels of evasiveness.

It's absurd that AMD can't answer the question. They must think the truth is so bad, that all this negative speculation is a better outcome.

I can cite similar examples as Tim or you in getting flack for calling out bad practices. One is an Intel fanboy for calling out AMD's cpu price jump etc. etc.. I get flack for still giving AMD flack over Ryzen cpu support issues. How dare I want real proof. I've even offered counter proof with the wccftech article on Riftbreaker. As usual, it is down to money, budgets and marketing nonsense to get you excited to buy new product which runs great on new gpu/cpu product. Consume and enjoy.

Lot of whataboutism, in there. As far as Rift breaker, you also noted they added XeSS, which scuttles the previous claim.

"We would rather invest our time in other technologies that can be accessed by all of our players."

So, they Avoid DLSS and implement XeSS... Because they only support tech that can be accessed by all their players? Total nonsense. Actions do not line up with statement at all.

Most likely they have NDA tied to their partner agreement that stops them from mentioning why they can't implement DLSS. So they dropped some nonsense cover statement, that doesn't explain their behavior at all.

 

[Ranulf]

XESS was added just recently with a new expansion. Maybe Intel paid them. Maybe they had time/money to do it, who knows. You can apply the same standard to DLSS games that took forever to add in FSR2. Some only after modders did it (cyberpunk if I remember right).

My guess is, as usual it is all about time and money. And maybe contractual agreement or just unwritten expectations.

This whole assertion by wccftech started with whataboutisms. Good God.

 

[PJVol]

Or even if they don't want to answer questions, just issuing a clarification statement on their own website explaining their position where they can be crystal clear and not taken out of context.

Omg... not sure you understand the world you live in.

 

[sandorski]

HWUB reacting to AMD fan comments on their "AMD blocking DLSS" video:

Whatever.

 

[Heartbreaker]

XESS was added just recently with a new expansion. Maybe Intel paid them. Maybe they had time/money to do it, who knows. You can apply the same standard to DLSS games that took forever to add in FSR2. Some only after modders did it (cyberpunk if I remember right).

My guess is, as usual it is all about time and money. And maybe contractual agreement or just unwritten expectations.

This whole assertion by wccftech started with whataboutisms. Good God.

Still making excuses...

 

[Ranulf]

Still making excuses...

Same as you. All sound and fury, signifying nothing.

 

[Heartbreaker]

Same as you.

Where am I making excuses?

You keep giving cover to AMD, when pretty much All the media outlets at this point have come to the same obvious conclusion.

You can't keep bringing up WCCFtech like the boogeyman. No one is relying on them, they might have been the first to point it out, but since then major outlets like GN and HWUB did their own research, reached out to AMD independently.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

I have not changed my opinion that AMD has indeed paid for exclusivity in at least some of the titles lacking DLSS support. All of them? Possibly not.

Regardless, I see it as a case of

I can certainly understand how they reached the point where they'd engage in tactics like this. They are the tech equivalent of bad luck Brian. The good guy AMD image that endeared them to budget gamers, never paid the bills. Nothing they have done in the dGPU space has worked, and they keep losing market share. No holds barred is maybe all that's left to try.

Most of the people making a big deal out of this, are the ones that don't buy their stuff anyways. AMD may have factored that into the strategy. If you doubt that, ask yourself why Tim has a dedicated video aimed at AMD defenders. Because those are the ones buying AMD hardware. It's nigh impossible to lose sales from a boycott by gamers that are not your customers. Then there's the fact that it's the worst video card market maybe ever. If you are going to goof up, now's the time. The final factor in the equation is that most people have short memories, and a new drama will come along soon and... squirrel!

 

[dr1337]

AMD is not your friend, don't give them cover to be shady.

Sponsorship features aren't shady in any context.

In this world what people choose to talk about is what forms a consensus and ultimately the culture around us. Nvidia is a much bigger company that has already cornered the market. To call a sponsored tech that runs on all GPUs instead of three specific generations from one brand 'shady' is actually counter-intuitive to your point.

No big corporation is our friend but if everyone is really upset about sponsorships then why are people and journalists only talking about AMD let alone FSR? Do you really believe if AMD dropped every sponsorship over night, that nvidia would follow suit and ditch gameworks? If AMDs behavior is really so bad then why isn't every headline and forum poster talking about sponsorships across the industry as a whole?

The near monopoly with customers currently complaining about prices, features, and reliability, is staying out of these headlines and criticisms online. The company being given cover by the internet masses to be shady isn't AMD.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Where am I making excuses?

This entire controversy was created from whole cloth by people like CapFrameX. Nobody leaked internal documents from any developer clearly showing that AMD "blocked" publishers from doing anything. You've presented an already-shaky correlation between AMD sponsorships and DLSS3 being absent from games, and mistaken it for causation.

Correlation does not equal causation.

Failing any actual evidence, you've pilloried anyone who objects to your logical fallacies and then proceeded to pollute this entire thread with posts based on continued reliance on bogus assumptions. The worst part is that major YouTube channels like HWUB are now coming along for the ride. Meanwhile nobody has presented any actual evidence backing up your claims. AMD's silence, however vexing, doesn't prove anything either; meanwhile their own devs have taken the trouble to go out on Twitter and post flat denials. But again I am repeating myself.

Fact is nobody even knows what, if any, support AMD is offering to get their name on these titles. Nobody can show us even how much money changed hands. It's kind of hard to accuse a company of lining people pockets when you don't even have the receipts.

Show us actual evidence or show yourself the door. Thanks.