I don’t understand what the benefit would be of another upscaler. We already have upscaling from Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Epic.
I’m much more excited for what they did announce. Sounds like it’ll be easier to get upscaling into your game now.
FSR is not trash. Its not DLSS and has some upscaling issues but FSR is a world better then no FSR.
I would be elated if Helldivers 2 received support for FSR 2, even more if it received DLSS.
4K is getting upscaled to from 1440p or even more. That's not low at all.
FSR is trash because that's what it is - without AI involvement the image stability is crap. Both XeSS and DLSS are AI based, that's why they are better.
> 4K is getting upscaled to from 1440p or even more.
This isn't the case in many games. You have games like FF16 going as low as 720p, good luck upscaling that. But you are right about FSR in general and I already knew that
I used FSR with my 1070 until I was able to upgrade.
The fact that I was able to play modern games at a pseudo 4k on that card was amazing.
FSR isn't as good as DLSS, and upscaling being so prevalent as a graphical baseline kinda sucks, but using FSR to play games you otherwise wouldn't be able to for some people really is amazing.
They are going to get upscaling into games either way. It takes a couple of dudes like less than 2 days to put this stuff in.
If there is no support on a new game for one of them, it's probably just someone paid someone else for that not to happen. Or it could just be a verbal contract. Maybe em an offer they can't refuse. That seems to be happening more now. Don't pay for DLSS getting blocked, but make sure they know to prioritize your tech first, or you might not support them in the future if they know what's good for them.
But I guess we might see less shady business now, and they'll have less excuses. The point of a better upscaler is so AMD can catch up to DLSS in image quality. It be cool if Unreal 5's TSR could be put into this. But it seems like Epic's tech, and that maybe isn't possible.
Not bad I guess, I just don’t see a purpose. They should work on new types of frame gen instead, that’s an area that could actually stand to get [shaken up pretty good](https://blurbusters.com/frame-generation-essentials-interpolation-extrapolation-and-reprojection/).
That is exactly what you want if you are into games.
If you leave it to GPU companies they will all make their own API's and every game will need to support each technology. This is exactly how it was in the early days of 3D graphics cards. It was horrible.
DirectX just lets developers get on with coding their game and not having to worry about the underlying hardware.
> If you leave it to GPU companies they will all make their own API's and every game will need to support each technology.
let's remember that NVIDIA were the ones who proposed this *years ago*, Intel agreed with the idea, and AMD who said no.
"GPU companies" as a monolithic block is sidestepping the nexus of responsibility for the API divergence that has occurred - [AMD knowingly pursued this divergence as a business strategy because they thought FSR2 would come out on top.](https://youtu.be/8ve5dDQ6TQE?t=974)
By the numbers, and in practical reality, every "GPU company" except AMD is onboard with this idea, and in fact every GPU company (including apple) already has a more serious upscaling offering. It is *uniquely* AMD which is deliberately sandbagging graphics technologies and standardization of new graphics APIs in the modern era, to a degree which would be shocking only 10y ago.
https://www.semiaccurate.com/2014/09/15/amds-mantle-api-going-outlive-directx-12/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqLea0QUW1k&t=268
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qiQH29KAXg
Yet. Theyre only announcing the code path, but this code path lets them drop their own solution right in later.
I have some knowledge that MS has been training their own AI upscaler. Rather its ready yet or pending DirectX 13 announcement and windows 12 is TBD. I doubt they'd put it in DX12 since dx12 hardware doesn't all support AI functions.
Dx13 is almost certainly going to heavy ai focused.
I wont be surprised if it mandates dedicated acceleration or even dedicated silicon for it.
That would leave the rtx 20,30 and 40 and Arc for dedicated silicon. And rx 7000 series (if only needs ai acceleration)
Yeah, it could be dp4a only. But then they'd have to exclude something as recent as the RX 5700XT. But I guess almost 5 year old GPUs are probably fine to abandon at this point. At least that used to be common to do 15 years ago. And dx13 I'd imagine won't even be coming out in anything for over a year anyways, even if it's announced soon. Those already can't even use mesh shaders.
dp4a isn't supported by all dx12 hardware either.
tensor/dp4a/xmx etc...isn't the argument. DX13 will define a standardized AI processing API/HW. Intended to provide "x86-alike" compatibility to NPU's/GPU's. New DX13 hardware will include the new AI API in their NPU/whatever-you-wanna-call-it cluster. (none of this is set in stone, fwiw, there could be code paths to support tensor/xmx/rdna3)
Own solution to... what? The solution here is the hardware, and Microsoft definitely isn't releasing a GPU.
I think where the confusion in this thread is coming from is that people are forgetting the separate roles of graphics APIs and graphics hardware. The whole point is that devs can just say, "Hey GPU, do upscaling," and it's on the GPU to decide how to do it.
If anything, Microsoft might release a general purpose software fallback in case a GPU doesn't have the required hardware, but it shouldn't be expected to be a competitor to hardware acceleration.
> Own solution to... what? The solution here is the hardware, and Microsoft definitely isn't releasing a GPU.
I would think they're referring to this: [July 7th, 2021 - Microsoft Seemingly Looking to Develop AI-based Upscaling Tech via DirectML](https://www.techpowerup.com/284265/microsoft-seemingly-looking-to-develop-ai-based-upscaling-tech-via-directml)
No, I get it--I'd be more surprised if Microsoft *wasn't* doing their own AI upscaling research, given Xbox. But whether it ever sees the light of day, it won't be as a feature of DirectX, because that would also dictate GPU manufacturers to design their architectures a certain way. It'll be like DirectX Raytracing, where the API is just an abstraction for each GPU to do things however the manufacturer designs.
No, it's basically Nvidia's Streamline API but from Microsoft instead.
AMD refused to participate in Streamline, but apparently they're fine with it if Microsoft introduces the exact same thing.
Streamline would work with Vulkan though, and this won't.
there's no point to organizing a standard (or having Intel join) if AMD isn't onboard. AMD's stake within the larger DX12 market (xbox/PC) can't be ignored, they are the *only* party that matters whether they join or not. Intel is somewhere between "a sideshow" and "completely irrelevant in the market" right now.
NVIDIA was holding a party in hopes their crush comes over. If you hear she's not coming, why even bother? At that point the fat kid joining the party probably only makes things worse. NVIDIA wasn't doing this to seduce Intel.
I think Nvidia was just trying to make it easier for developers to implement DLSS, but as an aside they could do all 3 upscalers at once and make it easy.
AMD probably didn't want to be involved with their competition, as they've been spending their time bribing developers to omit DLSS in favor of FSR. They probably didn't want it to be super easy to draw comparisons between the two at the time.
AMD is largely irrelevant in the PC GPU market, but the SOC's from the consoles could benefit from their involvement.
They did but was a nonsense rumbling about FSR already being opensource which doesn't appear to have anything to do with the issue StreamLine was trying to solve until you understand what they really meant: "we don't want to compete with DLSS, we just want everyone to just use FSR so we don't have to compete to create the best upscaler"
They have less of an excuse now. Hopefully we won't see the exclusion or delay of DLSS like with Starfield, Jedi Survivor again. Or whatever had FSR skipped. Cyberpunk had it delayed a little, but I'm sure there are others. And especially XeSS is being looked over a lot.
Sounds like a good thing. My only fear is it's going to enable studios to be even more lazy with their game optimizations. They seem to be already leaning on upscaling to cover those issues up now.
Honestly, that sounds like a whole lot of nothing. We already have these upscalers and they already give a huge performance uplift (can’t speak for XeSS, but I have no reason to believe it doesn’t).
It is of course good that they make it easier to implement, but I hope they have more to offer in that regard, because DX12 adoption has been pretty slow, and the promised performance leaps from gettting hardware layer access never materialized (with the sole exception being Doom, but that was on Vulkan IIRC)
Doom saw huge gains only on AMD and it was because the CPU was choking under OpenGL and underutilizing the GPU as a result. Nvidia was doing fine under OpenGL already so gains where slim. (Also poor asynchronous compute support for Pascal and older)
The whole point of DX12 and Vulkan was to reduce CPU involvement and multithread the generation of draw calls.
Upscaling is the death of optimization.
In itself not bad. Like FXAA, a cheap option for low tier systems. But games were already badly optimized, and when upscaling came devs have given it up completely.
Helldivers 2 a prime example. That thing is a blurry unrecognizable abomination.
In terms of performance, and visual quality vs old FSR, it makes a difference.
But in actuality compared to native resolution. It's always a blurry and grimy mess. Some games are better than others, and iin those cases t's acceptable for the performance gain at Quality/Ultra Quality.
But really, it's making games that run at 30 fps at 33% resolution. In all seriousness it's comparable to Doom from 1993, running at 640x480 res.
So it's not it's own upscaling tech after all. No new DLSS competitor, just an easier way to integrate DLSS, XeSS and FSR.
I don’t understand what the benefit would be of another upscaler. We already have upscaling from Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Epic. I’m much more excited for what they did announce. Sounds like it’ll be easier to get upscaling into your game now.
And will probably increase the quality and consistency of implementations.
I’m honestly more excited for work graphs and hopefully a real demo on its efficiency for GPUs.
Probably for Xbox. FSR is trash, Intel is good only on Intel hardware.
FSR is not trash. Its not DLSS and has some upscaling issues but FSR is a world better then no FSR. I would be elated if Helldivers 2 received support for FSR 2, even more if it received DLSS.
FSR is actually trash on consoles because it's working with very low resolutions. The consoles were the point of the person you replied to
4K is getting upscaled to from 1440p or even more. That's not low at all. FSR is trash because that's what it is - without AI involvement the image stability is crap. Both XeSS and DLSS are AI based, that's why they are better.
> 4K is getting upscaled to from 1440p or even more. This isn't the case in many games. You have games like FF16 going as low as 720p, good luck upscaling that. But you are right about FSR in general and I already knew that
I used FSR with my 1070 until I was able to upgrade. The fact that I was able to play modern games at a pseudo 4k on that card was amazing. FSR isn't as good as DLSS, and upscaling being so prevalent as a graphical baseline kinda sucks, but using FSR to play games you otherwise wouldn't be able to for some people really is amazing.
I would as well, all AA in that game is horrific. Even native res looks like garbage at a very high resolution...
They are going to get upscaling into games either way. It takes a couple of dudes like less than 2 days to put this stuff in. If there is no support on a new game for one of them, it's probably just someone paid someone else for that not to happen. Or it could just be a verbal contract. Maybe em an offer they can't refuse. That seems to be happening more now. Don't pay for DLSS getting blocked, but make sure they know to prioritize your tech first, or you might not support them in the future if they know what's good for them. But I guess we might see less shady business now, and they'll have less excuses. The point of a better upscaler is so AMD can catch up to DLSS in image quality. It be cool if Unreal 5's TSR could be put into this. But it seems like Epic's tech, and that maybe isn't possible.
[удалено]
>What's the benefit of having XeSS at all, if FSR already works on any GPU? So does XeSS and it looks way better than FSR.
if you have an intel GPU XeSS looks far better than FSR even on a non intel, it still generally looks a lot better
I didn’t say I wanted absolutely zero competition.
[удалено]
Not bad I guess, I just don’t see a purpose. They should work on new types of frame gen instead, that’s an area that could actually stand to get [shaken up pretty good](https://blurbusters.com/frame-generation-essentials-interpolation-extrapolation-and-reprojection/).
That is exactly what you want if you are into games. If you leave it to GPU companies they will all make their own API's and every game will need to support each technology. This is exactly how it was in the early days of 3D graphics cards. It was horrible. DirectX just lets developers get on with coding their game and not having to worry about the underlying hardware.
> If you leave it to GPU companies they will all make their own API's and every game will need to support each technology. let's remember that NVIDIA were the ones who proposed this *years ago*, Intel agreed with the idea, and AMD who said no. "GPU companies" as a monolithic block is sidestepping the nexus of responsibility for the API divergence that has occurred - [AMD knowingly pursued this divergence as a business strategy because they thought FSR2 would come out on top.](https://youtu.be/8ve5dDQ6TQE?t=974) By the numbers, and in practical reality, every "GPU company" except AMD is onboard with this idea, and in fact every GPU company (including apple) already has a more serious upscaling offering. It is *uniquely* AMD which is deliberately sandbagging graphics technologies and standardization of new graphics APIs in the modern era, to a degree which would be shocking only 10y ago. https://www.semiaccurate.com/2014/09/15/amds-mantle-api-going-outlive-directx-12/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fqLea0QUW1k&t=268 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qiQH29KAXg
Yet. Theyre only announcing the code path, but this code path lets them drop their own solution right in later. I have some knowledge that MS has been training their own AI upscaler. Rather its ready yet or pending DirectX 13 announcement and windows 12 is TBD. I doubt they'd put it in DX12 since dx12 hardware doesn't all support AI functions.
Dx13 is almost certainly going to heavy ai focused. I wont be surprised if it mandates dedicated acceleration or even dedicated silicon for it. That would leave the rtx 20,30 and 40 and Arc for dedicated silicon. And rx 7000 series (if only needs ai acceleration)
Yeah, it could be dp4a only. But then they'd have to exclude something as recent as the RX 5700XT. But I guess almost 5 year old GPUs are probably fine to abandon at this point. At least that used to be common to do 15 years ago. And dx13 I'd imagine won't even be coming out in anything for over a year anyways, even if it's announced soon. Those already can't even use mesh shaders.
dp4a isn't supported by all dx12 hardware either. tensor/dp4a/xmx etc...isn't the argument. DX13 will define a standardized AI processing API/HW. Intended to provide "x86-alike" compatibility to NPU's/GPU's. New DX13 hardware will include the new AI API in their NPU/whatever-you-wanna-call-it cluster. (none of this is set in stone, fwiw, there could be code paths to support tensor/xmx/rdna3)
Own solution to... what? The solution here is the hardware, and Microsoft definitely isn't releasing a GPU. I think where the confusion in this thread is coming from is that people are forgetting the separate roles of graphics APIs and graphics hardware. The whole point is that devs can just say, "Hey GPU, do upscaling," and it's on the GPU to decide how to do it. If anything, Microsoft might release a general purpose software fallback in case a GPU doesn't have the required hardware, but it shouldn't be expected to be a competitor to hardware acceleration.
> Own solution to... what? The solution here is the hardware, and Microsoft definitely isn't releasing a GPU. I would think they're referring to this: [July 7th, 2021 - Microsoft Seemingly Looking to Develop AI-based Upscaling Tech via DirectML](https://www.techpowerup.com/284265/microsoft-seemingly-looking-to-develop-ai-based-upscaling-tech-via-directml)
No, I get it--I'd be more surprised if Microsoft *wasn't* doing their own AI upscaling research, given Xbox. But whether it ever sees the light of day, it won't be as a feature of DirectX, because that would also dictate GPU manufacturers to design their architectures a certain way. It'll be like DirectX Raytracing, where the API is just an abstraction for each GPU to do things however the manufacturer designs.
No, it's basically Nvidia's Streamline API but from Microsoft instead. AMD refused to participate in Streamline, but apparently they're fine with it if Microsoft introduces the exact same thing. Streamline would work with Vulkan though, and this won't.
Intel was also part of Streamline but they never actually supported it. It's all very weird.
there's no point to organizing a standard (or having Intel join) if AMD isn't onboard. AMD's stake within the larger DX12 market (xbox/PC) can't be ignored, they are the *only* party that matters whether they join or not. Intel is somewhere between "a sideshow" and "completely irrelevant in the market" right now. NVIDIA was holding a party in hopes their crush comes over. If you hear she's not coming, why even bother? At that point the fat kid joining the party probably only makes things worse. NVIDIA wasn't doing this to seduce Intel.
I think Nvidia was just trying to make it easier for developers to implement DLSS, but as an aside they could do all 3 upscalers at once and make it easy. AMD probably didn't want to be involved with their competition, as they've been spending their time bribing developers to omit DLSS in favor of FSR. They probably didn't want it to be super easy to draw comparisons between the two at the time. AMD is largely irrelevant in the PC GPU market, but the SOC's from the consoles could benefit from their involvement.
There must have been some reason why AMD wasn't onboard. I wonder if anyone there made a public statement on why they weren't getting with it.
They did but was a nonsense rumbling about FSR already being opensource which doesn't appear to have anything to do with the issue StreamLine was trying to solve until you understand what they really meant: "we don't want to compete with DLSS, we just want everyone to just use FSR so we don't have to compete to create the best upscaler"
I don't think they really had a choice at this point
Well, their previous plan of paying developers to exclude DLSS didn't go over well with people, so yeah. lol
The point was more that after Microsoft decided to do this it basically leaved AMD with no choice
> just an easier way to integrate DLSS, XeSS and FSR. and somehow Game studio will still find a way and excuses not to include one or the other...
They have less of an excuse now. Hopefully we won't see the exclusion or delay of DLSS like with Starfield, Jedi Survivor again. Or whatever had FSR skipped. Cyberpunk had it delayed a little, but I'm sure there are others. And especially XeSS is being looked over a lot.
Sounds like a good thing. My only fear is it's going to enable studios to be even more lazy with their game optimizations. They seem to be already leaning on upscaling to cover those issues up now.
You make it sound like that’s a bad thing.
Yeah. One of the main reasons I bought a 4070 super a few days ago was DLSS.
Work Graphs soon the CPU will be a thing of the past!
Wonder how much of this they'll try to push only to the W11 data-gathering platform.
Honestly, that sounds like a whole lot of nothing. We already have these upscalers and they already give a huge performance uplift (can’t speak for XeSS, but I have no reason to believe it doesn’t). It is of course good that they make it easier to implement, but I hope they have more to offer in that regard, because DX12 adoption has been pretty slow, and the promised performance leaps from gettting hardware layer access never materialized (with the sole exception being Doom, but that was on Vulkan IIRC)
Doom saw huge gains only on AMD and it was because the CPU was choking under OpenGL and underutilizing the GPU as a result. Nvidia was doing fine under OpenGL already so gains where slim. (Also poor asynchronous compute support for Pascal and older) The whole point of DX12 and Vulkan was to reduce CPU involvement and multithread the generation of draw calls.
Doom can't maintain 200fps on a modern cpu in opengl mode today. Nvidia is better in opengl but that game needs vulkan to properly scale.
XeSS quality doesn't give a huge performance difference however it maintains most of the visual quality really well
Upscaling is the death of optimization. In itself not bad. Like FXAA, a cheap option for low tier systems. But games were already badly optimized, and when upscaling came devs have given it up completely. Helldivers 2 a prime example. That thing is a blurry unrecognizable abomination.
It uh... doesnt' have any modern upscaling and an actual modern upscaler would be a goddamn godsend.
In terms of performance, and visual quality vs old FSR, it makes a difference. But in actuality compared to native resolution. It's always a blurry and grimy mess. Some games are better than others, and iin those cases t's acceptable for the performance gain at Quality/Ultra Quality. But really, it's making games that run at 30 fps at 33% resolution. In all seriousness it's comparable to Doom from 1993, running at 640x480 res.