RoboFu
One of the green rats
Nvidia and AMD will just start compensating for the boost. Less hardware improvements at a premium cost over time. As long as the numbers are a bit higher each time. Which makes the whole thing moot at some point.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
AMD announces frame generation for all DX11 and DX12 games
- Thread starter HeisenbergFX4
- Start date
Nvidia and AMD will just start compensating for the boost. Less hardware improvements at a premium cost over time. As long as the numbers are a bit higher each time. Which makes the whole thing moot at some point.
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
Based on the provided info, FSR3, which uses motion vectors, will be implemented by devs and supported on AMD cards RX 5700 and up, and Nvidia cards RTX 2000 and up.
The driver-level AFMF, which does not use motion vectors, is part of the HYPR-X package and only supported on RDNA3.
The driver-level AFMF, which does not use motion vectors, is part of the HYPR-X package and only supported on RDNA3.
Buggy Loop
Member
Where does it say that?
DF’s doesn’t go there, not sure how you would interpret that from DF’s article, so another source?
“Outweighing that, we think, is the fact that it should work with any DX11 or DX12 game - and one of the best things about PC gaming is the wealth of options given to users. And soon we'll have another, potentially potent one. The only slight downer? AMD is integrating it into its HYPR-RX package, which is exclusive to RDNA 3 GPUs - a touch strange bearing in mind that FSR 3, the more complex frame-gen solution, is more broadly compatible.”
Last edited:
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
This is where we’re headed. Cut down GPUs with better software implementation, sold at higher prices.
The more Nvidia extends its lead the worse prices are going to be.
winjer
Gold Member
You are right, Hyper-x is only on RDNA3.
I thought it was just Anti-Lag+
Although the new AMD Control panel will let toggle individual settings of Hyper-X, just not Anti-Lag+ for older GPUs.
Last edited:
Buggy Loop
Member
Quoting myself from a previous thread
“Peoples can validate that for themselves if they think old RTX cards are left out. You can test by using either the older Video Code SDK that provides optical flow analysis functions for hardware as old as Maxwell or the new Optical Flow SDK for Turing>.
Prior to Ada the way of loading data into the OFA was either from NVDEC or from very slow managed memory buffers and even tho D3D buffers were supported it the latency was nowhere near useable for interactive real time rendering.
With Ada the OFA fixed function units can access the entire memory directly via address masking, as well as the L3 cache and likely have had a substantial number of other hardware specific changes to facilitate this. Ada’s higher clock speed also helps.
Ampere is actually slower than Turing for motion vector extraction, but has fewer features such as not going under 4x4 grid, while FG uses 1x1 or 2x2
At same clock to Ampere, Ada is 2.5 to 4 times faster than Ampere. Leave the clock of Ada back to normal and it’s even higher.”
I would wait to see the latencies of AMD side before jumping to conclusions that it’ll be worth it. Especially since DF says that it’s compute dependent.. the kind of games that NEED frame gen to be playable are typically compute heavy, we’re talking Cyberpunk 2077 overdrive kind of “need”. Otherwise, if your goal is to go from 120 fps to >200 fps, i would but a big question mark on latency. AMD solution seems akin to the Turing optical flow.
Kataploom
Gold Member
Well, it's basically exclusive anyway since it relies on Anti-Lag+, I don't think it's worth it without it. The only reason I got hyped for this news is because of reports from people claiming DLSS 3 FG has less input lag than native
winjer
Gold Member
Of the bundled tech that Hyper-X has, the only one I would be interested is Anti-Lag+.
I really don't care about RSR and Boost.
So it's a shame that is not going to be available for Older GPUs.
Hugare
Member
Boggles my mind that Nvidia cant do driver level DLSS yet
RTX Remix can easily put RTX/DLSS into old games.
They just want to force the customers hands. Hopefuly AMD will make them make a move.
Grildon Tundy
Member
That's my understanding of it, maybe with better, more accurate detail because they're doing it via a slightly different method.
Fake performance is like baked ray-traced lighting. As long as it looks good and the game feels good to play, I don't care if it's "fake". Remains to be seen if FSR 3 succeeds in that, though.
Grildon Tundy
Member
I'm amazed modders haven't figured out how to do that yet. There was that one guy claiming he was able to get it working on a 2070 with Cyberpunk 2077 right around 3.x's release, but the radio silence since then makes me think he was full of it.
winjer
Gold Member
MarkMe2525
Banned
We won't have to wait too long for these answers
rickybooby87
Member
Thankfully, the first two FSR3 enabled games launch in September, so we'll get a TASTE real soon.
Last edited:
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
But we'll have to wait till sometime in Q1 2024 for the driver level "every game" version... if AMD releases the Fluid Motion Frame update in time.
AMDs catch-up solutions have always been hyped up but subpar in quality. But after this announcement, I expect even less. It now sounds like a generic solution, slightly better then your TV can do. It will not have access to information that DLSS frame generation has (motion vectors, depth buffer, ..), so it will not deliver comparable quality and it can also not tackle the latency issue. Disappointing.
Last edited:
Xcell Miguel
Gold Member
At driver level we have DLDSR which upscale the whole frame to a higher resolution then lower it to the native screen resolution.
It provides better a better filtered image, it's DSR but with AI.
The issue is that it does it to the whole image, thus UI and 2D stuff gets filtered too. I think that's why they allow it with DSR only, as it then gets lowered back to the screen's resolution, thus UI and 2D stuff does not appear that filtered.
RTX Remix does not only work at driver level, it has to be injected in the game exe via DLLs, a bit like reShade does.
There's no driver magic only, game engines have to support it too, either natively or via injections like RTX Remix, it needs motion vectors and other data from the engine.
Otherwise quality is lower and UI gets included in the upscale or frame generation.
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
AMD Fluid Motion Frames ("frame generation for all DX11/DX12 games") is exclusive to RDNA 3 GPUs (less than 1% of Steam gamers today).
DLSS can be used by more than 40% of Steam gamers today.
Last edited:
The Cockatrice
I'm retarded?
Gaf is insanely bipolar. nvidia does good thing: "omg nvidia so good thank you wow senpai" amd then also does good thing: 'omg fuck nvidia greedy frame gen possible on any gpu OMG!@!!!"
Jesus its like these 2 companies are playing you like children and we keep suffering with unoptimized trash games. FSR1 was absolute dog shit and shocker a lot of games still use it for some reason. FSR2 is half as good as dlss2 so if you're expecting some miracle from frame gen amd software, then good fucking luck lmao.
Jesus its like these 2 companies are playing you like children and we keep suffering with unoptimized trash games. FSR1 was absolute dog shit and shocker a lot of games still use it for some reason. FSR2 is half as good as dlss2 so if you're expecting some miracle from frame gen amd software, then good fucking luck lmao.
DemonGamerTTT
Member
I commented on the other topic...
They are claiming that their anti lag van fiz the added lag from the generated frames... But I'm not convinced.
I really want to see some tests or play some games directly that have this technology enabled.
They are claiming that their anti lag van fiz the added lag from the generated frames... But I'm not convinced.
I really want to see some tests or play some games directly that have this technology enabled.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Good news but I'm more intrigued by DLSS 3.5...
JohnnyFootball
GerAlt-Right. Ciriously.
I'd love this if it means that titles that are locked to 60 fps on PC can appear to be 120 fps.
Catphish
Member
Indeed I have. If nvidia is doing the same thing, fuck them, too.
Low Moral Fibre
Member
Will be impressive if it really is up there with DLSS 3 which works ok in the stuff I've tried it in (but a small sample size for sure and it is apparently complete shit in Immortals). Frame by frame you will surely see artifacts with DLSS 3 but hard to spot at 120+ FPS as they aren't constant artifacts in every single frame like you get with something like the FSR in Jedi Survivor.
The quality of FSR upscaling makes me think the quality of this will be a long way from DLSS 3 once you can compare like with like on the same screen but hopefully not the case as competition is great for everyone outside of shareholders.
FSR 2 is still years behind from the stuff I've tested. Like is there a newer FSR version than 2.2 that I can try in any newer game? I've tried Jedi Survivor, Cyberpunk 2077 and Forza Horizon which I think are 2.2 (Cyberpunk maybe 2.1 I dunno) and all look absolutely dreadful in motion with FSR and have much worse artifacting to the point I would never pick them unless I was struggling to hit 60fps.
I don't use FSR even in something like Jedi Survivor which is the worst performing game Ive played recently with drops to the high 60s on parts of Kobah with RT on (while it's 120fps elsewhere). With a good upscaler I'd be near to my screens refresh rate most of the time but I'd rather not bother with FSR as it looks so bad.
The quality of FSR upscaling makes me think the quality of this will be a long way from DLSS 3 once you can compare like with like on the same screen but hopefully not the case as competition is great for everyone outside of shareholders.
FSR 2 is still years behind from the stuff I've tested. Like is there a newer FSR version than 2.2 that I can try in any newer game? I've tried Jedi Survivor, Cyberpunk 2077 and Forza Horizon which I think are 2.2 (Cyberpunk maybe 2.1 I dunno) and all look absolutely dreadful in motion with FSR and have much worse artifacting to the point I would never pick them unless I was struggling to hit 60fps.
I don't use FSR even in something like Jedi Survivor which is the worst performing game Ive played recently with drops to the high 60s on parts of Kobah with RT on (while it's 120fps elsewhere). With a good upscaler I'd be near to my screens refresh rate most of the time but I'd rather not bother with FSR as it looks so bad.
darrylgorn
Member
We need some BG3 benchmarks stat
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
FSR 3 is next month, and is the more impressive tech. AFMF is a nice side dish.
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
What are you smoking? 99% of the time it’s AMD getting shit on.
The Cockatrice
I'm retarded?
Meat
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Looking forward to seeing a more detailed analysis with some actual footage. Frame interpolation without motion vectors or latency mitigation feels like the kind of shit we turn off on our TV as soon as possible.
But for new games that are using the full stack of FSR and latency mitigation, I'm more optimistic. I'm not expecting DLSS3 levels of clean frames, but for games that are already clearing 60fps it might be good enough to fool the eye.
But for new games that are using the full stack of FSR and latency mitigation, I'm more optimistic. I'm not expecting DLSS3 levels of clean frames, but for games that are already clearing 60fps it might be good enough to fool the eye.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
.
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
AFMF is the feature people are excited about. That's what is making the headlines ("every game frame generation"), yet less than 1% of PC users will be able to use it when it arrives next year.
FSR3 is a poor mans DLSS3.
Last edited:
JimboJones
Member
Hopefully it's being used on games that are targeting 120fps modes, in that case the need for VRR should be diminished as instead of framerates in the 70-100 range it could hopefully deliver interpolated 120.
Guess we'll see, but sounds promising.
X-Wing
Member
What is this comparison? The entirety of DLSS with only FMF? Not even you can think that's honest.
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
FMF was the most exciting part of AMD's news today with "frame generation for all games".
AMD locked the most exciting feature behind RDNA3 which accounts for less than 1% of GPUs on Steam today.
FSR3 vs. DLSS3 will probably end up being the same as FSR2 vs. DLSS2. DLSS with the advantage in quality.
FSR is a poor mans DLSS.
Last edited:
twilo99
Member
Thanks for clearing that up
Kataploom
Gold Member
$800-$1000 high end cards must be pretty mainstream around your neighborhood but that's not the case everywhere else buddy. The RDNA 3 mid range cards are just about to release in two weeks.
Last edited:
Leonidas
AMD's Dogma: ARyzen (No Intel inside)
RDNA3 has been under $260 already.
Kataploom
Gold Member
So that RX 7600 competing with <$200 6600 XT is also hot around your home? You gotta live in a pretty unique place
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
So you are buying Intel GPU's?
Grildon Tundy
Member
This really puts it into perspective. Thanks. I'm more excited about FSR 3 in that case.
Krappadizzle
Member
It's great that AMD is still trucking along, and any extra performance for any cards is ALWAYS a good thing. That said, AMD, I'd love to see you guys leading instead of reacting. Though I guess at this point, I'd bet NVIDIA has most of the great developers on payroll and AMD isn't left with much choice but to be reactive instead of revolutionary.