Looks like a high resolution PS2 Pro game.I completed it on PC. Game has a lot of areas with foliage (even a forest later). This was taken few hours in:
I have no idea how foliage looks in later areas looks on Pro, most of the footage is from the beginning.
Because can't be fair in any discussions without to be tragically hysterical when PS5Pro, Sony or PSSR are involved. I bet whatever you want when PSSR2 will be released it won't change a shit. I mean he said exactly the same stuff well before to own the ps5 pro, he is clearly biased and bought it just to lame who dare to say otherwise. I have to use the ignore list him for the exasperation because also he also like harassing you with lol reaction everytime you said something about the matter. He clearly doesn't care about the other opinion and he just want to take the point in everything, it's literally impossible to have a serious confrontation which not end in warring about the PSSR with him.
get a therapist
You don't have to use PSSR. You can run the native 4k mode with added RT reflections in gameplay instead of just replays. Silent Hill F aside, I can't think of any other game that is not an improvement over the base version. Even games with no official pro support run much better.
GT7, run at native 4k/120fps disabling PSSR and RT. I don't think GT7 have a good RT implementation to sacrifice both FPS and resolution
I mean if for you is too expensive, forget about it. And if you don't like artifacts upscaler well it's the same. People continue to repeat DLSS4 is flawless but honestly I seen a couple of video about it and I found very similar artifacts on it but the thing is PSSR flaws are a lot more scrutinized and exposed than the DLSS by DF in my opinion.
because artifacts are far more present and annoying on handheld mode and impossible to ignore. But I can live with it.
The battle of upscalers has always being about nitpicking.
Looks like a high resolution PS2 Pro game.
Not sure what Konami was
True that, most people were fine with RDR2 on PS4 which was a smearing blur fest. Heck any game with TAA at 1080p was pretty much garbage to me but most people were fine with it. This upscaling shit is for us nerds who notice this shit, but like anything on Gaf it just becomes tribal shit flinging
What about other console upscalers like say DLSS. Switch 2 'tiny' DLSS hasn't been pretty at all and used over "full fat" implementations more often than not due to performance targets. Nintendo themselves don't even use DLSS in any of their own games as far as I know.
Should had Nvidia delayed the RTX 2000? DLSS 1.0 sucked and everyone was laughing back then in 2018 and how is DLSS now?
I don't know what exactly is it supposed to be that full FAT DLSS but from my personal experience every single game I tried has a lot of more artifacts than PSSR on switch 2. If that was the famous DLSS2 below 1080p is clearly worse than the first PSSR iteration without any kinda of doubt, especially in motion, in fact in the last Tomb Raider updated if I'm not wrong runs at native 1080p and scaled above with the DLSS; it's the best implementation I seen in all the games I tried. At least on switch 2, below 1080p DLSS2 doesn't work that well not at least to the same level of the PSSR.
Then Nvidia should have delayed the launch of RTX 2000 series or DLSS 1.0 launch for 2020 right?
The standard DLSS model on Switch 2 is better than the current PSSR. The lite model is worse as it needs to run on a mere 27 TOPS of INT8 compute in portable mode while using as little as frametime as possible. That's simply due to a limitation of hardware.
Sure let's think about DLSS 1.0 and 2.0 same thing right? 1.0 sucks and 2.0 don't suck.
Lol no absolutely.
I remember wanting to play Metro Exodus back then with DLSS and it just looked like shit, so i just stopped playing until i had better hardware cause native was off the table with high FPS.
Sure what about motion? I don't play still in a spot. Does PSSR need works? Of course they need to improve it specially in UE5 games.DLSS1 is completely different beast than all ML upscalers after that.
DLSS2 is better than PSSR1. DLSS3 destroys PSSR1:
It's the worst ML upscaler overall. And even worse when it presents issues in third party games.
The standard DLSS model on the Switch 2 is DLSS 3.7, preset model E. It's the best CNN model Nvidia made. So yes.
And I told you all the games I tried with resolution below 1080p show more artifacts than PSSR. I doubt all are lite version. But I guess it's normal? I don't think DLSS2/3 are thinking for resolution below 1080p.
I disagree about the results on Switch but let's ignore that for a minute and go to your point about TOPs. Does it matter if say a game is using the performance improvement for some other thing and trying to keep frametime for the upscale as low as possible? Hence why 'tiny' DLSS exists on Switch in the first place despite it having 'standard' DLSS. It's clearly capable of standard DLSS by your own admission so clearly it is not a hardware limitation but one of choice to achieve certain settings and framerate targets. Same is true of PS5 Pro just at a higher scale (60fps,higher settings/raytracing etc).
What game? What rendering resolution? What output resolution?
Starwars Outlaw, Hitman 3 are the only I remind, but I tried many demo and honestly when the native resolution doesn't hit 1080p natively, IQ is filled of unstable artifacts. The only game with stable IQ tried is Tomb Raider, but I don't seen all this superiority to the PSSR if I can say, especially in motion. And again DLSS2/3 weren't AI based I guess it's normal they have more raw edges than PSSR at lower resolution than 1080p? Especially because hardly on pc you use DLSS to scale 900p or 720p. and at 30 fps. Maybe because 30 fps are only on console? There are all wild guesses.
Tiny DLSS exists because Nintendo needed an upscaler that could run within extremely tight performance budgets. The full DLSS model has a much higher frametime cost, which is why no 60 FPS Switch 2 titles use it, and even 30 FPS games struggle to afford it. The "tiny" model isn't the result of design limitations in DLSS itself, it's simply what's required to make DLSS viable on very low-power hardware. On PC you'll never see this tiny model, because the hardware is powerful enough that the cost of the larger model isn't an issue.
Star Wars Outlaws? Did you compare the PC and PS5 version? Or the Switch 2 version?
Exactly and the same is true for PS5 Pro. That's the point. The fact that the PS5 pro has a 300TOPs theoretical performance limit doesn't change this because that still is limited by say implementing raytracing, requiring 60fps, whatever other thing the dev uses the performance for. It's the exact same issue but with tighter frametime budgets (16ms vs 33ms) and with other higher settings eating that performance (say things like raytracing enabled).
Of course it is. I'm not sure why you think it wouldn't be. Its limits are higher fps so even less frametime budget and other taxing features in games like raytracing using up that power.
I think that if the game has FSR4 support on PC and if PSSR 2.x has matching API to it practically speaking we may see PSSR 2.x used in those titles when running on PS5 Pro as you are essentially swapping only the internal implementation and can expect similar output as before; this would be true if the title has PSSR 1.x support or not.
Complete nonsense. Cerny has stated it is allocated about 1ms - of which I did a massive post on, verifying the maths - meaning the TOPs available to PSSR in 1ms are far less than DLSS' latency hiding on an RTX 3090, a latency hiding, giving all modes of PC DLSS more milliseconds on hardware that already has more TOPs.
Is NVIDIA partnered with AMD who can do this in the wild? If yes, then why not?
The full DLSS model literally cannot run on 27 INT8 TOPS at the required resolution and latency. Hence, no 60fps games use DLSS 3.7. This is why Nvidia had to design a downsized, low-capacity network for Switch. The hardware determines the maximum possible model size. That's not the case on PS5 Pro. PS5 Pro's 300 INT8 TOPS is enough to run a full-scale model, similar in size to what DLSS uses on PC. Whatever issues PSSR has today aren't because the hardware forced Sony to cut the model down, they're simply the result of early model design, training data, or implementation choices. That's why Sony can meaningfully improve PSSR with updates, because the hardware is more than powerful enough. PSSR, like DLSS, can have better models that don't require additional processing time. It doesn't mean the PS5 Pro Hardware wasn't fully utilized, it's just that the newer iteration of PSSR can use that much larger compute to run a better model. I said that the Switch model can potentially also improve, but I was pretty clear in that any gains would be limited as it is so heavily constrained by hardware. Yes, PS5 Pro games still have frametime budgets, ray tracing costs, etc. But that's a different type of constraint than what Switch faces. Frametime budgets restrict how fast a model can run, not how big the model is allowed to be. On Switch, tiny DLSS was created because the full model is physically not viable for all scenarios. On PS5 Pro, PSSR is not facing issues because the hardware is the bottlenecks. The difference is PS5 Pro's constraints aren't forcing a reduced-capacity neural network, while Switch's constraints are. Hence, why comparing PSSR to tiny DLSS in terms of "both are limited by budgets" misses the key point, that one is a hardware-mandated downscaled model while the other is not.
Cerny stated that where exactly? And what calculations?
Compared to TAA / TSR and FSR2 in those titles and in motion, which has the best motion clarity and the least artefacts though? We are not talking about miles away in terms of costs there.Cerny stated that where exactly? And what calculations?
We have screenshots from developer builds confirming the 2ms cost:
PSSR is still slower than FSR:
Much heavier vs TAA:
Oh, I agree, the visual gains are worth the slight drop in performance. That goes with any AI model over FSR/TAAU, be it PSSR, DLSS, FSR4, etc... I just don't see PSSR only having a cost of only 1ms. FSR2 is already over 1ms, and PSSR is heavier than that. The current model, that is.
It's been like that since day 1 for me (perf mode). There was always something "odd" to my eyes when driving around.
Nah, keep the RT so the reflections are 60fps and not 30fps cubemaps of the base game. That is more jarring.
you seem to think it's about some hard cutoff when it isn't. The 27 INT8 TOPs is enough to run a full scale model at 30fps correct? Meaning those 27 INT8 TOPS is enough to run that full scale model.
It's the same constraint. Yes the model can improve too and it will but the PS5 Pro has the same constraints and its model was developed specifically for it. It's a little older but it was still built on hardware constraints and frametime budgets in games using the hardware available to it.
Not sure what you're getting at here but it doesn't make sense. Why is the full model "physically" not viable?
so where does this so called "hardware mandate" not apply anymore? 67 TOPs, 90 TOPS, 100TOPS? Where does this "hardware-mandate" to downscale begin? There is no cutoff. Switch 2 can physically run full DLSS. Tiny DLSS only exists to try to meet framerate targets like any other hardware.
I'm not sure how much simpler this can be. Tiny DLSS is limited so that it can run on only ~27 TOPS of INT8 compute, especially in 60 fps games. That's why its image quality is worse. Something had got to give. PSSR's issues on PS5 Pro are not because the hardware is weak, the Pro has over 300 TOPS. The noise/artifacts people sometimes see are just early-model or training issues, not hardware limits.
I play strictly on cockpit view and the RT mode was simply not worth it atm. With PSSR on, it boils too much, the jaggies on the road side details are quite visible and distracting AND the LoD is scaled back so there is noticeable pop-in. And without PSSR, the RT doesn't do much at all in cockpit mode, but still causes LoD to be scaled back.
