Boys…I know that TAA is a huge reason why modern games looks so blurry. I like DLSS Quality and think it looks better than native. (At 4k) What I was saying here is that a new technology like this probably won’t be good for the further of optimization of games. Also Frame Gen makes games all smeary and just imagine a tech that upscales pixels, frame gens, and then also compress and upscales low res textures…. Yea it prob would look blurry..
I don't think that image compression made by AI will be worse than what we have now, we're comparing S3TC compression, a 20 years old codec, updated to manage new necessities, to an entirely new concept of low-latency compression. And we're talking about a static image, not influenced by motion vectors that could blur the image. I think also that the entire opposite thing will happen, the now very blurred textures will become more defined and sharpened as AI can extrapolate more information about sharp lines than s3tc. This will not fix TAA blur, but it will fix texture that looks blurry on close-ups (pixel value interpolation) and low res. I worry about IA model size on vram for low-end gpus and latency
@ That’s definitely a possibility. That’s why in the video I say it’s entirely possible this will work great, in which case devs will eventually abuse this tech for games that have even less optimization
@@SiliconSteak of course there'll be the time when they'll abuse the tech, but I hope that will be after RTX6000 at least. As for now NTC requires nvidia tensor core and cuda only IA model (as written on the paper), so probably it'll be a patch/setting only for nvidia cards
@@hankstorm3135 it doesn't use TAA, DLSS is it's own TAA. When DLSS is enabled normal TAA, and any other AA gets disabled. I will say I notice DLSS usually gives me personally a better image than straight TAA, I play at 4k so i get a little pixel help and at 1080p i'd never use dlss.
I just love how Doom 2016 looked and ran like a dream 8 years ago in 2K resolution on GTX1070. Can't understand what really happened since then. It makes no sense whatsoever what we experience with games right now. It's like game design tools were degraded to the level that even RTX4080 can't fix. And now even consoles (PS5 Pro) getting some kind of upscaling and will totally go same path in the next few years.
The achievements of the software industry of the last 30 years is astounding. They've managed to undo several orders of magnitude in performance gains afforded to them by the hardware industry
It's Unreal Engine 5 usually when you have those super demanding games. Unreal Engine 5 is pretty heavy as is but the games made in that engine rely heavily on the built-in features to do the optimizing rather than manually putting in the effort.
if you don't nothing then you will say things like this, raytracing is very taxing on hardwre and problem is our haardware has hit a limit and can't go beyond that so upscaling, denoisiing is the only way... and the neural texture compression arugement goes the opposite way , the vram requiement increase rate will be limited with that, you dont have to manually load 4k texture on the vram to do it but it can be rendered real time with neural texture compression without loss of quality and making it possilble and vaiable for future too
This isn't complicated, DLSS allows devs to go "Our graphics target for this new game is expected to be the 40 series at the top tier of the performance budget (at 4K) given the latest hardware capabilities available on the market, which includes path tracing. We can add DLSS/FSR etc... support so gamers on aging hardware (like the RTX 2060) can use upscaling to still hit our 60fps performance targets at 1080p". This makes perfect sense from a dev perspective as it allows more players to play their game at decent framerates. I still remember all the bitching when Quake 3 required an expensive 3D accelerator card to run and a lot of gamers were still using CPU based software rendering... some things never change.
Everyone is naked... under their clothes, too. AI is not THAT GOOD yet. It still shows massive issues with "physics" so when you move around the wrinkles in your shirt is a dead giveaway that your shirt is at least NOT AI.
@@Flomockia Agreed. If you're going to offer any kind of competition, you really need to offer a better product for less cost to the consumer, not just offer a cheaper alternative which doesn't outperform the competition.
DLSS and FG are ruining game development. No dev takes the time anymore to natively optimize a game to run at nativ res with a good framerate. It’s like they think ‘meh they get 60fps with dlss and fg, good enough’. There are still tons of games which make a 4090 struggle in 4k and that simply shouldn’t be the case. Don’t like where this is heading.
Been programming graphics for nearly 3 decades and I find all this spatial upsampling, temporal upsampling, temporal aggregation/accumulation/amortization to be very sad. I want pure raw clean exact frames. If the hardware can't handle it then it can't handle it, period. I don't want to pretend like my hardware can do something that it can't and accept a bunch of upsampling/interpolation artifacting that we never had before. It's like they've normalized ickiness.
Is just to easy and efficient for a min maxer' corporation to chase talking points and side quests to brag about instead of raw old school performance. What we have now was always around the corner and implementations that increase latency and reduce imagine quality in favor of some other goal will be more and more frequent. Until the practice can be improved to the point of actual replacement or more likely just stagnate and flop due to it becoming a detriment not living up to the dream of a new cow full of potential to be milked infinitely. My personal opinion is that when crypto dropped the big investors and tech companies replaced it with Ai to keep the train going, it has all the chances to fail for it is an artificially pushed replacement for money first and the rest second.
i dont mind having a technology that give old gpus a boost , its less e waste .but the sad part about all these technologies is that they re used as a selling point for last gent hardware lool .
It's a technology that would be fine if they were giving it to you to urge you to buy their product because it would last longer than the competition. There is a place for it. Upscaling allows a lot of gamers the opportunity to play on really crummy GPUs. But yeah this idea that you are magically getting more frames has got to stop being sold by Nvidia. These aren't more frames. It's just smoothening out with a latency and graphics penalty. It's absurd how they have marketed this and how a lot of tech content creators have bought it hook line and sinker. They gonna give you the same GPU like the 3060 vs the 4060 and then just give you a new version of DLSS that 'makes it perform better' even though the rasterization is almost identical. The government needs to go after this monopoly already.
13:26 High IQ solution - playing all the older games that you always wanted to play, but for some reason always postponed and delayed and never got to them. I have an entire long list on my phone's notebook app.
Playing Metro Exodus with Ray Tracing on 7900XTX is crazy nice now that GPU can catch up to now on AMD side lol Metro Exodue max graphics and ray tracing at 4K is 60fps-90fps depending on if its cutscene or gameplay. at 1440p max graphics with ray tracing is 90fps-130fps. I like to play my steam old backlog of games with my 7800X3D+7900XTX sapphire nitro, its really amazing to max out every one of those old games.
I'm so happy I grew up in the "golden age of gaming" I have nostalgia for older graphic and finally buying and playing those masterpieces in 4k 120fps is amazing
Yeah only play games before 2013 when TAA took over and blurred everything. Or just use a better solution than TAA for modern games. Like AI Super Sampling.
Meanwhile, Intel gives you lots of VRAM, good rasterization, good ray tracing, AI upscaling, frame generation, and now greatly improved drivers all for $250.
We now have like 5 layers of vasiline in our game visuals and we are being told it looks the same or even better. Layer 1 matte finishs they have their use . Layer 2 taa just in general. Layer 3 runnig the game at a lower resolution and useing fancy versions of taa to make it look less like a lower res and making it blurry. Layer 4 frame gen interpolation (nvidia is lying bu saying it isnt interpolation when thats litterally what it is doing interpolating imbetween frames) Layer 5 ultra texture compression that will totally look like normal textures truuuust us bro. And the secret 6th layer Low sample rt. Im sad becuase i like all these things individally aside from taa but they are just bad when all put together on top of eachother with no reguard for maintaining visual clarity at most ill use rt and upscaleing but i wont use anything more becuase it starts looking bad, and it was already questionable in the first place. Rt is awsome when its done well and noisy as hell when done poorly and upscaleing is just not consistent frame gen looks bad and adds input lag and forced taa as the only option for aa is just terrible and is done to force you into just useing upscaleing instead becuase taa is just bad on its own and this texture compresion tech is going to just not be great even if it does work since its just gonna be something that couldnjust lead to bad looking textures.
nvidia fanboys crying right now, im playing stalker 2 is a real example of that at 1080 medium high without TAA the game looks noisy AF and you are obligated to use some form of TAA even at 1440p when im playing older games they feel like 4k compared to play a new game theese days
Genuine question, can anyone name me one aspect where games have improved visually enough to warrant the gargantuan optimisation and performance regression we’re seeing? I’m not denying they’re better, but surely not better enough to run substantially worse in comparison to both “new” DOOM games, The Division and Mirrors Edge Catalyst, all absolutely stunning games. This isn’t even mentioning the issues with ray tracing (HUB made a good video on this) or upscaling/aliasing tech just being awful, try playing an older game at target resolution (say 4K) native and look at how much clearer the games are, comparative to new releases running 4K Upscaling, and then account for the fact if you turn off Aliasing newer releases can look *worse* due to aliasing being used to cover for amateur mistakes. Anyone accepting this current state of affairs is an enemy to all consumers, who just want decently optimised games that can run well and not look blurry on midrange (overpriced) hardware.
@@sulimanthemagnificent4893 we live in the era of diminishing returns, when every step is hard and advertising is the only way to push consumers buying stuff
Character Visuals. In Cyberpunk the character visuals look amazing. I also put an 8k skin mod on top of that, but even then I didn't care to replace the clothes with an upscaled mod version, just not needed. (except of course on the inconsequential npc's but they just look weird all around so idk where to start there.) The path tracing is nice too but idk, sometimes it kind of fades into the background unless you're viewing it on again, upscaled textures via a mod. Clear, 4k textures will beat out whatever upscaling mumbo jumbo they come up with. It's simply no contest. That's my problem all over with upscaling, a true 4k image will always look infinitely better, which is why we when saw how Cyberpunk ran without upscaling, for example, I passed on a 4090 waiting for a card that can truly run modern games at 4k without a DLSS crutch. That said, DLSS does a *decent* job in cyberpunk but other games you do approach the "oily" scenario he talks about. I think a good outcome however is the merging of graphics and AI which will take awhile, but I've seen the textures it can already output and they look good. But then you run into the problem, your gunna need alot of vram, and thus an expensive card. To run it native.
@4keveryday694 Name the *obviously pronounced* visual improvements that warrant the performance regressions those games have relative to the examples I named.
@@sulimanthemagnificent4893 I did in my first sentence. Character visuals. Also higher res Textures (There's now 8k textures in msfs2024 for example.) and Path Tracing with high quality textures is *extremely* noticeable in it's realism, producing movie quality visuals in Cyberpunk. That's just the TLDR of what I said.
Mind you, this is my first impression of you. 😂 I love how AMD caught a stray in the middle of this. I know they're like, “Hey! I thought we were talking about NVIDIA here.” 🗿😭 Great video!
I've said this before and I'll keep saying it - Old games looked much sharper and felt much smoother. The ones that come out feel so clunky and heavy... DLSS does feel like a crutch that devs use instead of actually optimizing their game. Oh and, f*** TAA, it's the worst thing that happened in terms of games getting blurry.
UE5 REQUIRES upscaling tech to cover up it's garage shortcut unoptimized output. All to allow the interns to churn out a game so they can fire all the staff, and then rehire for the next project. It's fucked the entire industry into same looking, vaso smeared horrible performing trash. This shit is embarrassing, hardware dozens of times more powerful than just a decade ago and yet games that look and play much worse.
@@Berserkism Exactly. Devs back in the days were optimizing the shit out of games so that they could run in almost anything. Unfortunately, the hard work, raw knowledge of low to mid level language usage of those days were slowly replaced in favor of abstraction, frameworks, shortcuts and whatnot, all to reduce the skill ceiling required to jump into development. Unity and Unreal are exactly that. Junior game devs of today likely won't be able to code at the level of old devs, and companies seem to no longer want to develop a customized engine to fit the specific requirements of their games and rather opt for a license to use an existing game engine that might just do the work.
i completely disconnected from the whole pc building sphere when the 30-series came out. I just now realised the 3060 came with 12 gb vram while 4060 and the 5060 will be coming out with 8 gb. No way they downgraded the amount of vram lmao
@@roilo8560 Well, if you are into the new Indiana Jones Game, that runs better on a 3060, as the 4060s VRAM is not enough. Not my type of game though, I rather play something older and more optimized. I am sure there are a few other examples but I don't know. I also got the card for creative software which can benefit off of more VRAM as well, like Photoshop. In most games you won't run into problems but especially on high resolutions and settings like raytracing the difference is bigger. I am thinking about upgrading to a 4070 or 7800xt next year though, as I want more raw power anyway. But for the moment I am happy and can play all games I want to play.
@@henson2k It most certainly is a gaming card. The 4090 struggles with many games at max RT settings, even at native 1440p. UE5 and Path Tracing are so demanding, that in native 1440p rendering even the mighty 4090 needs at least another 2x boost in performance to run well in most of those games.
me and my dad used to joke about how video cards were getting bigger and bigger back in ~2008. One of the things we used to also joke about is that cards would get so big one day that you would instead of slotting the card in your computer, you'd start to slot CPU, ram etc INTO the graphic card lol
One issue with DLSS is that it is a horrible experience with even 1080p for some games. For example, black myth wukong. Many aspects of the render pipeline are already sub sampled, that is why you will see some objects and edges looking lower res than expected. It is also why the edge sharpness is a night and day difference if you play it natively at 1080p on a 1080p display and run it using DSR to render at 4K and downscale to 1080p. Many modern demanding games use many elements which are rendered half or a quarter resolution when not using any kind of upscaling, and those wreak havoc on all current upscalers since there are just too few samples for machine learning to make an accurate upscale, thus leading to issues such as unstable fine details, weird artifacts in shadows, and certain elements being far more blurry than expected. While sample limitations are an issue with all upscalers, the issue is that the fewer samples it has to work with, the more noticeable the issues become as the artifacts happen closer to the viewport.
If I have to enable DLSS on a game, then it's time to lower my settings. I refuse to use an algorithm that makes my game uglier just to get better FPS.
That's why you don't use 1080p with DLSS Quality. You use DLDSR x2.25 (1620p) and go DLSS Balanced/Performance which looks and runs way better than 1080p Native
Except they are gaining more. Just about a week ago JPR report that nvidia market share now is at phenomenal 90% up from 88% from the quarter before that.
I've heard that a Mac with 32 gigs of RAM can comfortably run a 22 gb model, because the 32 GB is shared between the CPU and the GPU, so I may be finally buying a Mac, against my better judgement...
Also gotta remember, DLSS FG on a 4080 Super uses like 1.5GB of extra vram which means in Indiana Jones you can't even enable that with full RT since Nvidia GPUs are low on vram... It soon adds up Even when I tried Dragon Age veilguard 4k Max settings Fade focused DLSS Quality, guess what I enabled FG and vram is literally pretty much maxed out in places and then FPS drops to 24fps That's why a 5080 16GB makes zero sense if vram is going to increase at 4K You need at least 20GB
there probably isn't an incentive to upgrade video cards for many gamers, but there is one case: VR. With the release of UEVR, we get to play the latest Unreal Engine games like Black Myth Wukong in full 360° immersive environments. I've played games where adding 3D caused the sum of its effects to be greater than its parts. All this to say, it sucks how much these new cards are going to cost when I want one so bad.
when it comes to textures I think you mean Neural Compression Technique which doesn't actually upscale a texture but rather compresses the file size of a texture while retaining the quality and resolution of it. So for example, if you have a non-compressed texture of 4096x4096 which is 256MB in size. You can compress it with conventional method down to ~5MB, but that will make texture smaller in resolution and it will lose out on a lot of detail. Meanwhile, with neural texture compression you can compress that same texture to ~4MB size, but it will also retain same resolution which alone will leave much more detail in. Essentially, if I get this right, artists draw high quality textures and then engine compresses them into smaller versions for different quality presets. So by the time GPU renders game it just loads that compressed texture and with current methods textures that are compressed using current techniques are ~3 times the size of the ones compressed by neural compression technique at the similar quality. So this techology if used in video games will essentially allow textures that under normal circumstances would require GPU with 12GB of RAM to run on one that has only 4-6GB and all game developers will only need to swap out compresion tool from current they use to nVidia's new neural one. As for Neural Renderring, that is completely different topic and I currently can't even imagine how that would work. EDIT: Also, if I understand properly textures compressed using neural compression technique should benefit all GPU's and should not be exclusive to only nVidia new generation GPU's as they will be pre-compressed and will come with games. This should also allow for higher texture quality in console and handheld games.
Yeah I agree. I bought a laptop with 3070Ti 8GB of RAM not the 3080Ti with 16GB of RAM version because the reviews said it was better for the value. Then every games that use image upscaling like DLSS/FSR always get stutter in some scenes or areas even though the FPS never gets below 60. I didn't know what was the problem back then until I checked that it was the VRAM that wasn't enough. I learned my lesson.
I recommended a 4060 prebuilt to a friend because she upgrading from a pretty old system plus because of where she lived it was best option for the price. Sure she got a few more GB of vram than her original, but I won't lie to you. I went out of wau to try and find her something with at least 12gb of vram in price rage that was good prebuilt. It was hard.
Go with AMD graphics card, if you dont really need top notch 4080/4090 performance, AMD can do the same or better for less than half cost. All/most things people say is from the past, AMD pre 2017 yes those could have some serious bad problems, but now it works great. Both Nvidia and AMD can have some rare problems, but those get fixed ...sure in general, as Nvidia is bigger company, they tend to fix errors and bugs faster, but any product that been out for more than 6months, most and worst problems have been fixed, for both companies. Most new problems is more of individual game issues and the game company have to patch it, not the hardware problem.
@@supersmurf4884 Currently 1080p is still enough with 8gb vram except for unoptimized games, so the RTX 4060 is still good enough, especially when you need to work. With AMD working on software is still very limited, it is still more suitable for gaming unless you are a Linux user then that is when AMD GPUs are really good
Theres a Demo of Neural Rendering running on 4090 in nividias page so Neural Rendering might be Available to 4000 series, also dlss 4 (the upscaler) might be available to every rtx gpu just like dlss 3 wch was also marketed as 4000 series only yet the upscaler was available to all rtx gpus alongside Ray reconstruction, only the feature that is frame generation was not available for anything below 4000
The 3080 had 384 bit bandwidth, why did they go back to 256????? I thought it was to make the 4090 look even better but now the 5090 has 32gb and 512bit but the 5080 only gets half of both???????? While AMD will likely put 24gb on a card that costs 600€ less?????
The prices on GDDR7 alone are going to make the 5 series insane. I saw it quoted at $20 a gig which puts the 5090 at $640 cost just in VRAM. It begs the question - is GDDR7 a worthwhile addition to a card like the 5060 or would a larger quantity of GDDR6X be fast enough and perform better?
Great question. I think GDDR7 will give a significant performance boost to the 5060 since it was so memory starved before, but I think most people would rather have 12GB of vram. I actually talked about how vram is going to drive up the price of the 5090 like crazy in my video "The 5090 Specs Leaked and Its a BEAST".
I've been checking some videos about game devs and engine devs, it seems we have so much resources that devs don't spend any more time to improve and optimize their games. The problem is that we have now hit a barrier where graphics look worse than old games yet use/waste more resources.
FSR/DLSS at the start was a bonus, now its essential, Rastor was always the true king but its fading fast. You got a card to last 4-5 years easily, now your thinking of upgrading every gen. That was always the game plan since Ray Tracing arrived..
The worst thing that using DLSS/FSR in Unreal 5 games is mandatory, because even in native 4K, games like Stalker 2 are extremely pixelated, noise and just weird and you have turn DLSS on to make it normal looking, even on balanced it looks better than native 4K in UE5 which is just WTF bizzare and it should not be the thing, native 4K should always look better. But on other hand, it's nice that DLSS solves aliasing better than all modern postFX AA technologies, so you are killing to flies with one hit, but I don't want it to be mandatory!! That's sick. Instead of some stupid texture upscaling, what about to return to technologies that worked in the past? There was a reason for texture compression and stuff like that, what they do now makes 0 sense, gaming industry is falling to it's bottom. Just look at Stalker 2, game sometimes looks really great, but then there are palces where it looks like big WTF like in interiors with some fog and a lot of shadows, it's totally noise, blurry, unclear and it looks worse than 10+ years old games, I don't want such evolution of games, I want outdated games that are sharp. BTW, when you mentioned Pray, I played it few years ago on my old RTX 2070 Super and it runs in native 4K with carefully set details in like 60-80 FPS and it looks great. This was the last generation of proper games. 15:55 - XeSS in Stalker 2 is actually almost comparable to DLSS, image quality on ultra performance is very similar and FPS just slightly worse than DLSS. FSR on ultra performance looks like garbage, you need to set it to balanced or quality to have the same image as DLSS on ultra performance and that's a problem for AMD.
Current games running rasterized at 1080, 1440 (16:9) can hit 100+frames without upscaling without frame gen. Its the overhaul for dynamic RT that's causing this draw. Comparing the RTx 50 for RT to GTX 500 series for rastur is what I feel we're at a similar place in the development of this technology. Game and tech dev reach a developmental platueau and the direction pivots and we kinda start over. 8bit, 16bit, 2D sprites, voxel 3D, pasteurized 3D, and now Ray Tracing
The way i see it, it will NOT save VRAM. The textures will be lower resolution and thus smaller on the hard drive however they will load that and upscale it and save upscaled version in VRAM so VRAM usage will essentially be the same. If that is not the case it would mean upscaling every single texture every single time during render which doesn't make any sense to do and no matter how fast the hardware it's a waste of compute and energy.
you mistaking what its does, neural texture compression goes futher than just scaling the texture, its actually reduced the amount of vram by holding the texture already in new format, its doesn't need to decode every draw call, its just render at once in today photorealism texture is entirely raw, its take far too long to encode and decode it that why stream is super slow
@@darkpain2452 You're right it does more than just upscale the texture. But even on Nvidia's short I just found that demonstrates the tech it takes nearly 3 times as long to render the same quad with a texture. Even if you save memory that's way slower and for a complex scene that effect would just stack for every texture.
@@Vitis-n2v 25% Cpu perfomance increase every new generation, and gpu perfomance is increasing 35% every year, but memory is only expected to double every 5 years, and the shrink of cores, most of cpu today is just memory NPU are differents, their performance is increasing 80% every year at the moment its cost a lot perfomance but the reduction in vram is worth more direct storage was big thing because its load 3 seconds entire scene, games have stopped having big loading screen, games of today cost 200 gb, with neureal texture compression its going to reduced to only 15 gb this techonology is so advanced and complex, does nvidia has any chance to pull this off? in my opinion, ray recontruction is simply more madness than frame generation, its exactly a AI PHYSICS LIGHTING capable of undertand lighting in scene, to render without overwhelming amount path tracing
I was already aware of this so i ordered rtx 4070 ti S a month ago and anyway I'm usually playing 8+ old games and just few current AAA. From rtx 50xx series seems like everything will be fake, frames, resolution, etc..poor optimisation...
so when its released and based on his dream and no hard facts, you're somehow aware.so you bought a card that will be last gen in 1 month. maybe you can start a new fad of going back a gen every time a new chip is released. by 2029 you'll have that shiny new atari 2600.
@mainsource8030 precisely, I don't like to buy the latest hardware, usually I'll go for the previous gen, which is already tested, patched, etc...and I'm quite sure the will be "surprises" with the latest hardware.
Its very simple, the models should be trained only for the game they are going to be running on. Would solve all the blurry and ghosty mess. The upscalers are being trained as TAA, they should be trained as decoders...
How would AI upressing textures save VRAM? Disk space maybe as games don't have to be packaged with high res textures. But the upscaled texture would still have to be stored somewhere in VRAM after upscaling to be displayed by the game.
I was playing valheim recently and accidentally turned off TAA. Bro this looks so good in 1440p, never turned it on again XD. Now i crave to see how 4k looks
I don't think FSR does look worse than DLSS I just upgraded my Rx6800 to a 4080 Super and tbh it's the same. Maybe it's my 47 year old eyes but I am a young 47 and my eyesight is not that bad. FSR quality is all I pretty much used anyway and it looks the same as DLSS quality and apart from Ray tracing it's not a huge jump from my old Rx 6800 to my new 4080 super. Yes it's better but the rx6800 was an awesome GPU too.
You're right. It only has more fizzle and noise on some things when the resolution scaling starts low, and you begin to drop the Quality setting down. Personally I don't like any of them, I think DLSS is blurry, I can clearly see it and the "issues" it fixes are generated by the techniques being implemented into games now in the first place. If they stopped using these rush techniques the mess wouldn't need to be covered up with a smear filter in the first place. Though I do think that open tech like FSR does help extend the life of hardware and that is a very good thing.
I kind of disagree. - Performance wasn't better in those days. 18 years ago I didn't even get 30 FPS in many games with a good midrange PC. - 60 FPS became standard about 12 years ago in graphically demanding games. (Of course, E-Sports and old games were different.) - You are spoiled. - Most of the time I would massively prefer playing at 4k DLSS Performance over 1080p with MSAA or FXAA. It doesn't look perfect but way better. - Neural texture compression is NOT going to really decrease image quality by that much, you won't see a difference. BUT Yea, they will pretent that you won't need that much VRAM, and that is not okay. You cannot really replace VRAM with stuff like that. More VRAM would always be way better, because you could do so many things with more VRAM but developers won't make it happen if the VRAM isn't there.
@@bmwofboganville456 the problem is that even in freaking 1080. the MINIMUM resolution for modern gaming 10 years ago. now needs DLSS and FSR today! sometimes even framegeneration!! recent games like stalker 2 require you to have upscaling in 1080p to even achive 30. so in those cases, yes, gaming has indeed regressed.
@@ambientlightofdarknesss4245 But don't forget, that is with stuff like Raytracing, which we didn't even dared to dream of 10 years ago. Such things at the moment take 3x more performance for negligible better, if even at all better, graphics. But we want it, we humans always want to go higher, faster, better, we want to see the limits.
Lol. What a moronic take! Nvidia is innovating software! That's innovation. DLSS is phenomenal. You don't need hardware based innovation only! We need good graphics and good performance. If it comes from software. Good. If it comes from hardware. Good.
@@jal.ajeerafunny the only moron here is you. If you have to have that software to run games semi well then it’s dogshit. I have a 4090 and a lot of games I’m only getting 60-100 fps when settings are maxed on new games. It’s dogshit and will continue to get worse.
who cares about Nvidia sheep's - those people claiming that amd has less features and giving money to Nvidia are the problem not Nvidia that is milking those people
On the part of less VRAM usage if you assume the nvidia white paper is 100% true and it can work perfectly which is never the case but in this lets assume it will be. You will save 1/8 of the VRAM cost with the newest tech for texture reading in the Tensor cores. It will also max out your Tensor cores on most 40 series cards to do so too. So no other DLSS features turned on will work. Why will they not? The white paper's method takes over the entire TPU (Tensor Processing Unit) to work. DLSS 4 will not fix what happens in TAA. The put os having it look like someone just throw oil or an over blown blur effect onto the seen is overly aggressive use of TAA. Compressed textures already existed since the 1990s they just have been iterating of how much compression is acceptable and how to compress it in a way that is close to if not lossless quality. I think nvidia does understand that you will just recommended a higher end card that does have the requirements by making the lower end no longer have them. Yes Intel can do good here just almost nothing on steam says what Intel card it is compatible with while it does with nvidia and for most AMD. AI Upscaling alike to script based upscaling in the 1990s ran into the wall of it is so much overused and used instead of optimizing the code that it is or is getting known for bad quality. For example compare bicubic to trilinear upscaling. Video games mostly stopped using upscaling after trilinear upscaling was seen as bad quality. It isn't bad at up to 150% it is when you go to 4x the same and above the artifacts still to appear often enough for it to be seen as bad. For AI upscaling it is running into the same issue. 4x upscale doesn't look good. 125% it isn't noticeable but if you are doing that why not use the lower compute method of trilinear? I see his argument the problem is unless AMD also starts to have Tensor Cores on their GPU the tech he is talking about will not come to games are require you to have a nvidia graphics card to play. If it is a good game the modding community might make a mod pack to convert the neural network processing images which will all be noise when seen by streaming processors and whatever Intel is calling theirs to a thing is looks like the actual image. It will increase VRAM used by 1/8 at most unless they did it wrong and it takes more. The processor needed for that tech is already in the Snapdragon elite X gen 2, Intel Rapor Lake and AMD AI CPUs. The problem is where it will be useful in games isn't when playing on integrated graphics. His fear explains why the 5090 is a 32GB GPU while having the needed type of cores for the Tensor compression method to compress and uncompressed textures. There are many things that most likely will stop it from coming to games. Mostly as the type of cores isn't the only thing missing on the GTX 1000 and before it is also the number of something registers to get a quick enough interface as it is has to be inside the chip that even then L2 isn't quick enough to have it not take more time than using the normal texture decompression. Yes every video game image is compressed. Video game size would blown if we had to have all uncompressed image files. Most are saved in .jpg before being include in an archive file. . jpg can be lossless quality if saved like that alike to the same vein as .png can be saved as a lossy image file. Both file types are image compression file types. The tech is cool but alike to most Unreal Engine 5.5 and 5.6 features it will most likely be used in animated movies not video games. Why? For both you the user who set it up know where to put everything and what GPUs you are using. For Hollywood either a RTX Ada 6000 or A100 as those 2 are the most common. the H100 and B200 are not that common for animation renders. Then they can craft the world to be able to render inside of 3 months. While video games need to render millions of frames in around a day if you leave your game running for that long movies to get what they want a minute per frame is acceptable. The reason why this new tensor compression and reading tech will take off? When your movie is over 16 million frames even a few parts of a millisecond can save your hours is not days of time.
Upscaling like DLSS was made for older cards so they can keep up with newer games. Not for newer cards to keep up with newer games. It's totally lazy on the devs part of not optimizing the games to run proficiently, especially in Unreal engine. 5.. it's trashing our games and making them blurry. TAA is the worst.
a technology that should ve been used to bring back old gpus to life is now used as an excuse to sell you new gen gpus loool .i think i should quit gaming , being a gamer is now a sign of low IQ ngl . cant believe that people are paying shit tons of money on a gpu thats suposedly meant to run late gen games on higher resolution except that you need to use a feature that makes that same game look shittier . DLSS is now celebrated and used as a selling point when it should be the opposit . if you have to rely on dlss to run a game then you shouldnt buy that gpu to begin with .
The only possible way for the card to be more v ram efficient is through the ssd, games optimized for direct storage (games need to be optimized to bring in data only when its needed), and those 16 pcie gen 5 lanes preventing the bottlenecking you see in current graphics cards
Neural rendering..if it is really like what i think of....that would be a nightmare for multiplayer games, because everyone will see slightly different view for same object...unless nvidia know something that i dont.
Rendering has *always* been "cheats", always, the definition of rasterization is in itself, a cheat. It has ALWAYS been smoke and mirrors, techniques and shortcuts are inseparable from real-time rendering. You are just now picking a bogeyman to focus your misdirected ignorant anger at because you are being grifted and lack an ounce of critical thought, like the millions standing with you.
As for 8GB, it is already obsolete, since consoles have more available VRAM to dedicate to their GPU. This is why at the moment due to the consoles like the PS5, most development studios making games for consoles and PC, have largely optimized for 12GB. and where VRAM limited, e.g., a game like Hogwarts Legacy, the compromises needed for 8GB carry a far higher visual toll than expected. And as seem from the many videos from independent game devs that have delved into the performance issues of Unreal engine 5, especially when it comes to lighting, have shown that video card makers are unable to compensate for it. Unreal Engine 5, traded performance for ease of use in those areas, to a point where some functions involve an order of magnitude more instructions to complete, and often the workaround from many studios, is more of a brute force method of reducing compute workload by simply rendering certain aspects of the scene at a lower resolution to save a few milliseconds that the render pipeline needs for another aspect of the game engine. With those habits not changing anytime soon, I feel DLSS will only have more trouble going forward.
But DLSS 4 isn't out yet. Maybe they used some very avanced groundbreaking AI shit, and if you put one pc with a game at 4K with DLSS 4.0 on, and other pc with the same components and the same game at 4K with DLSS 4.0 off, and they look EXACTLY the same
correct me if i am wrong, but didn't older games have good compression techniques that basically reduced file size while maintaining quality. Take a JPEG vs PNG. You maintain the majority of image quality while reducing image quality dramatically. I feel like this is an issue with modern gaming. It feels like modern games no longer compress well anymore. Maybe someone who knows more can tell me more. And let me guess, DLSS 4 is only for 5000 series
So Nvidia is justifying the anemic VRAM on 4060 and (what looks like) the 5060... with DLSS4? I am genuinely curious to see how THAT comes out in 3rd party testing.
Imagine a AAA so bad optimized that even with a 5080 and DLSS 4.5 we have nearly 60 fps on 4k! Time will come where DLSS is not enough! Ask yourself what we would have done when DLSS and FSR would released later? Non of these current games would be playable!
My RTX 4070 Ti Super is a slightly cut down 4080, and I play Halo Infinite on High settings at 1440p on a 144 Hz monitor, getting about 180 fps in game, and about 250 fps in the Matchmaking screen. I don't use DLSS or Ray Tracing at all.
You know all those mods that improve graphics and performance in games? Like that Skyrim grass mod that not only added more grass but more FPS? Doesn't it seem like it would be better to make a worse game, then simply "mod" it to look and perform better? If a bunch of strangers can do it for free. Why couldn't the developers?
I build and flip PCs. That is a build I sold. That is my workbench. I found if I don’t do cable extensions the builds don’t sell. Also the extensions only cost $13 off Ali express so it’s worth. Check out my $550 or $640 pc build video to get an idea of what to buy.
What "Oil" is bro talking about? 1440p DLSS Quality often looks better than TAA native. 4k DLSS Quality and Balanced often looks better than native. Sure, if you are running 1080p DLSS performance/balanced, it will look terrible, but use it right and it looks on par with native, with better AA. Bro is stuck in 2021 when they had DLSS 2.0 and it wasn't as good as today's DLSS 3.8.1.0
It’s genius really. It’ll basically force the market to get off of all these cards without the technology. Otherwise, all the new games would be way too demanding for their graphic cards.
Traditional TAA can look quite good at native 4K. The problem is many devs do not put enough care into its implementation, which is why DLSS Quality is usually preferable on the image quality side in addition to the performance improvements gained. The Frame Gen side of DLSS rarely looks and feels good enough for my uses; Hitman III is the only game where I find it tolerable. Back to native 4K, DLAA implementation thus far is not as good to my eyes as FSR3 Native AA, though the sample size is currently small.
Boys…I know that TAA is a huge reason why modern games looks so blurry. I like DLSS Quality and think it looks better than native. (At 4k)
What I was saying here is that a new technology like this probably won’t be good for the further of optimization of games. Also Frame Gen makes games all smeary and just imagine a tech that upscales pixels, frame gens, and then also compress and upscales low res textures…. Yea it prob would look blurry..
I don't think that image compression made by AI will be worse than what we have now, we're comparing S3TC compression, a 20 years old codec, updated to manage new necessities, to an entirely new concept of low-latency compression. And we're talking about a static image, not influenced by motion vectors that could blur the image.
I think also that the entire opposite thing will happen, the now very blurred textures will become more defined and sharpened as AI can extrapolate more information about sharp lines than s3tc. This will not fix TAA blur, but it will fix texture that looks blurry on close-ups (pixel value interpolation) and low res.
I worry about IA model size on vram for low-end gpus and latency
@ That’s definitely a possibility. That’s why in the video I say it’s entirely possible this will work great, in which case devs will eventually abuse this tech for games that have even less optimization
@@SiliconSteak of course there'll be the time when they'll abuse the tech, but I hope that will be after RTX6000 at least. As for now NTC requires nvidia tensor core and cuda only IA model (as written on the paper), so probably it'll be a patch/setting only for nvidia cards
DLSS still uses TAA. it just cleans it up.
@@hankstorm3135 it doesn't use TAA, DLSS is it's own TAA. When DLSS is enabled normal TAA, and any other AA gets disabled. I will say I notice DLSS usually gives me personally a better image than straight TAA, I play at 4k so i get a little pixel help and at 1080p i'd never use dlss.
"this will save your vram"
Alright this year 5060 is 4gb vram
lmao dont give them ideas
@@arma9150 they already have too many ideas
6060 will be 512 mb
@@dingickso4098 Don't make jenson feel nostalgic please
the 4050 has 6GB and 4GB SKUs I believe.
I just love how Doom 2016 looked and ran like a dream 8 years ago in 2K resolution on GTX1070. Can't understand what really happened since then. It makes no sense whatsoever what we experience with games right now. It's like game design tools were degraded to the level that even RTX4080 can't fix. And now even consoles (PS5 Pro) getting some kind of upscaling and will totally go same path in the next few years.
The achievements of the software industry of the last 30 years is astounding. They've managed to undo several orders of magnitude in performance gains afforded to them by the hardware industry
I also tested Doom 2016 on that Optiplex. I love the visuals in that one too
It's Unreal Engine 5 usually when you have those super demanding games. Unreal Engine 5 is pretty heavy as is but the games made in that engine rely heavily on the built-in features to do the optimizing rather than manually putting in the effort.
if you don't nothing then you will say things like this, raytracing is very taxing on hardwre and problem is our haardware has hit a limit and can't go beyond that so upscaling, denoisiing is the only way... and the neural texture compression arugement goes the opposite way , the vram requiement increase rate will be limited with that, you dont have to manually load 4k texture on the vram to do it but it can be rendered real time with neural texture compression without loss of quality and making it possilble and vaiable for future too
This isn't complicated, DLSS allows devs to go "Our graphics target for this new game is expected to be the 40 series at the top tier of the performance budget (at 4K) given the latest hardware capabilities available on the market, which includes path tracing. We can add DLSS/FSR etc... support so gamers on aging hardware (like the RTX 2060) can use upscaling to still hit our 60fps performance targets at 1080p". This makes perfect sense from a dev perspective as it allows more players to play their game at decent framerates. I still remember all the bitching when Quake 3 required an expensive 3D accelerator card to run and a lot of gamers were still using CPU based software rendering... some things never change.
Nvidia will do ANYTHING to not put more vram in their cards 😂 theyre like a stubborn child bruh
VRAM is expensive, and a 5080 doesn't really need more than 16GB of RAM unless you're playing at 8k or some super ultrawide resolution.
UE5 is memory efficient, latest games rarely go over 8gb. Few games struggle, you can lower the textures then.
Bruh you know nothing all new games use 10gb vram on1080 p so in the future 16gb isnt enough evn for 1440@@squirrelsinjacket1804
you want 40 cent extra on your card, without paying extra 100 dollars?
@@kanta32100 Depends. Some are awful some are good. Its good if the dev does a good job.😊
"I am completely naked right now"
*Nice try Diddy*
_dangit I thought you would take the bait.._
@just rang the doorbell. Hurry… I’m naked too, the neighbors are outside!
We are all...
Everyone is naked... under their clothes, too. AI is not THAT GOOD yet. It still shows massive issues with "physics" so when you move around the wrinkles in your shirt is a dead giveaway that your shirt is at least NOT AI.
@@CD-vb9fi I’m running it on my Ryzen 4070 and it works fine. You must be poor and have low end hardware /s
You don't exist. My RTX5090 that I have right now is just imagining it with neural rendering.
Says who? You're just a bunch of letters on a screen that MY 5090's neural rendering is imagining
Wake up!
Your 5090 ti with 8 gb vram haha
Me too. My 5090 is killer. Nothing can stop it. It's neural rendering everything including the world around me!
My 5090 can neural render me a hot wife with Ray tracing quality, but only 16gb vram
I don't care if it's DLLS4, DLSS5 or DLSS25. I'm not buying a 8gb card in 2025, period.
By mid 2025, 8GB will be required to get a game to actually load, but not to play.
Intel needs to make a higher end card for the mid end range
@@Flomockia Agreed. If you're going to offer any kind of competition, you really need to offer a better product for less cost to the consumer, not just offer a cheaper alternative which doesn't outperform the competition.
DLSS and FG are ruining game development. No dev takes the time anymore to natively optimize a game to run at nativ res with a good framerate. It’s like they think ‘meh they get 60fps with dlss and fg, good enough’. There are still tons of games which make a 4090 struggle in 4k and that simply shouldn’t be the case. Don’t like where this is heading.
even Left 4 Dead 2 at 16K resolution with MSAA 8x kills the 4090 so uh.. nothing Im just saying.
@@dingickso4098 But you know what MSAA does? You are pretty much rendering game in 8 times higher resolution when you set it to 8x.
@@dingickso4098I specifically said a 4090 shouldn’t be struggling at 4k. No idea why you bring up 16k since that’s totally irrelevant to my point.
@@juliusjacob1416 Cause I can
@@dingickso4098bro how much ragebait did you want to generate from this statement
Nobody cares about 16k
I'm watching this video using DLSS 4.
144p upscaled to 4k 😂
@garry5280 No it's 1p.
Yes, 1p upscaled to 24k 1000fps.
@@tstager1978 1p means one prompt?
@@BlacKi-nd4uy no its 1 scan line
Been programming graphics for nearly 3 decades and I find all this spatial upsampling, temporal upsampling, temporal aggregation/accumulation/amortization to be very sad. I want pure raw clean exact frames. If the hardware can't handle it then it can't handle it, period. I don't want to pretend like my hardware can do something that it can't and accept a bunch of upsampling/interpolation artifacting that we never had before. It's like they've normalized ickiness.
Is just to easy and efficient for a min maxer' corporation to chase talking points and side quests to brag about instead of raw old school performance. What we have now was always around the corner and implementations that increase latency and reduce imagine quality in favor of some other goal will be more and more frequent. Until the practice can be improved to the point of actual replacement or more likely just stagnate and flop due to it becoming a detriment not living up to the dream of a new cow full of potential to be milked infinitely. My personal opinion is that when crypto dropped the big investors and tech companies replaced it with Ai to keep the train going, it has all the chances to fail for it is an artificially pushed replacement for money first and the rest second.
i dont mind having a technology that give old gpus a boost , its less e waste .but the sad part about all these technologies is that they re used as a selling point for last gent hardware lool .
It's a technology that would be fine if they were giving it to you to urge you to buy their product because it would last longer than the competition. There is a place for it. Upscaling allows a lot of gamers the opportunity to play on really crummy GPUs. But yeah this idea that you are magically getting more frames has got to stop being sold by Nvidia. These aren't more frames. It's just smoothening out with a latency and graphics penalty. It's absurd how they have marketed this and how a lot of tech content creators have bought it hook line and sinker. They gonna give you the same GPU like the 3060 vs the 4060 and then just give you a new version of DLSS that 'makes it perform better' even though the rasterization is almost identical. The government needs to go after this monopoly already.
Peopel wants a Gpu the size of a playstation 5 OG 😅
saddest thing is it can handle it but developers are getting lazier.
13:26
High IQ solution - playing all the older games that you always wanted to play, but for some reason always postponed and delayed and never got to them. I have an entire long list on my phone's notebook app.
@@katytis2012 that’s what I do, Stalker 2 will wait
Playing Metro Exodus with Ray Tracing on 7900XTX is crazy nice now that GPU can catch up to now on AMD side lol Metro Exodue max graphics and ray tracing at 4K is 60fps-90fps depending on if its cutscene or gameplay. at 1440p max graphics with ray tracing is 90fps-130fps. I like to play my steam old backlog of games with my 7800X3D+7900XTX sapphire nitro, its really amazing to max out every one of those old games.
I'm so happy I grew up in the "golden age of gaming" I have nostalgia for older graphic and finally buying and playing those masterpieces in 4k 120fps is amazing
Yeah only play games before 2013 when TAA took over and blurred everything. Or just use a better solution than TAA for modern games. Like AI Super Sampling.
Facts. I'm playing my library of 167 games from 1995 to 2024, from System Shock to Stalker 2. Most mostly maxed out 1440p 144fps. What a time it is.
Meanwhile, Intel gives you lots of VRAM, good rasterization, good ray tracing, AI upscaling, frame generation, and now greatly improved drivers all for $250.
that intro was way outta pocket 😂
it got me fully bricked
@@BCterm dude got that Henry Cavill physique. Understandable.
We now have like 5 layers of vasiline in our game visuals and we are being told it looks the same or even better.
Layer 1 matte finishs they have their use .
Layer 2 taa just in general.
Layer 3 runnig the game at a lower resolution and useing fancy versions of taa to make it look less like a lower res and making it blurry.
Layer 4 frame gen interpolation (nvidia is lying bu saying it isnt interpolation when thats litterally what it is doing interpolating imbetween frames)
Layer 5 ultra texture compression that will totally look like normal textures truuuust us bro.
And the secret 6th layer
Low sample rt. Im sad becuase i like all these things individally aside from taa but they are just bad when all put together on top of eachother with no reguard for maintaining visual clarity at most ill use rt and upscaleing but i wont use anything more becuase it starts looking bad, and it was already questionable in the first place. Rt is awsome when its done well and noisy as hell when done poorly and upscaleing is just not consistent frame gen looks bad and adds input lag and forced taa as the only option for aa is just terrible and is done to force you into just useing upscaleing instead becuase taa is just bad on its own and this texture compresion tech is going to just not be great even if it does work since its just gonna be something that couldnjust lead to bad looking textures.
nvidia fanboys crying right now, im playing stalker 2 is a real example of that at 1080 medium high without TAA the game looks noisy AF and you are obligated to use some form of TAA even at 1440p when im playing older games they feel like 4k compared to play a new game theese days
Dsc
holy fucking missing full stop and comma bro god damn what the hell is with this word salad holy shit.
Genuine question, can anyone name me one aspect where games have improved visually enough to warrant the gargantuan optimisation and performance regression we’re seeing?
I’m not denying they’re better, but surely not better enough to run substantially worse in comparison to both “new” DOOM games, The Division and Mirrors Edge Catalyst, all absolutely stunning games.
This isn’t even mentioning the issues with ray tracing (HUB made a good video on this) or upscaling/aliasing tech just being awful, try playing an older game at target resolution (say 4K) native and look at how much clearer the games are, comparative to new releases running 4K Upscaling, and then account for the fact if you turn off Aliasing newer releases can look *worse* due to aliasing being used to cover for amateur mistakes.
Anyone accepting this current state of affairs is an enemy to all consumers, who just want decently optimised games that can run well and not look blurry on midrange (overpriced) hardware.
@@sulimanthemagnificent4893 we live in the era of diminishing returns, when every step is hard and advertising is the only way to push consumers buying stuff
Character Visuals. In Cyberpunk the character visuals look amazing. I also put an 8k skin mod on top of that, but even then I didn't care to replace the clothes with an upscaled mod version, just not needed. (except of course on the inconsequential npc's but they just look weird all around so idk where to start there.) The path tracing is nice too but idk, sometimes it kind of fades into the background unless you're viewing it on again, upscaled textures via a mod. Clear, 4k textures will beat out whatever upscaling mumbo jumbo they come up with. It's simply no contest. That's my problem all over with upscaling, a true 4k image will always look infinitely better, which is why we when saw how Cyberpunk ran without upscaling, for example, I passed on a 4090 waiting for a card that can truly run modern games at 4k without a DLSS crutch. That said, DLSS does a *decent* job in cyberpunk but other games you do approach the "oily" scenario he talks about. I think a good outcome however is the merging of graphics and AI which will take awhile, but I've seen the textures it can already output and they look good. But then you run into the problem, your gunna need alot of vram, and thus an expensive card. To run it native.
RDR2, CP, GTA 6,
@4keveryday694 Name the *obviously pronounced* visual improvements that warrant the performance regressions those games have relative to the examples I named.
@@sulimanthemagnificent4893 I did in my first sentence. Character visuals. Also higher res Textures (There's now 8k textures in msfs2024 for example.) and Path Tracing with high quality textures is *extremely* noticeable in it's realism, producing movie quality visuals in Cyberpunk. That's just the TLDR of what I said.
Devs: Should we optimise game?
Devs: NEVER! Use DLSS.
Game: *Crashes running 3fps looking shit on all settings.*
I agree with you. In alanwake 2 with RT, ultra settings and 4k resolution i have 4fps😁
Mind you, this is my first impression of you. 😂 I love how AMD caught a stray in the middle of this. I know they're like, “Hey! I thought we were talking about NVIDIA here.” 🗿😭 Great video!
Good to hear you liked my weird vibe 🗿
@@SiliconSteak Immaculate vibes! Keep up the great work! 💯💪
I've said this before and I'll keep saying it - Old games looked much sharper and felt much smoother. The ones that come out feel so clunky and heavy... DLSS does feel like a crutch that devs use instead of actually optimizing their game. Oh and, f*** TAA, it's the worst thing that happened in terms of games getting blurry.
UE5 REQUIRES upscaling tech to cover up it's garage shortcut unoptimized output. All to allow the interns to churn out a game so they can fire all the staff, and then rehire for the next project. It's fucked the entire industry into same looking, vaso smeared horrible performing trash. This shit is embarrassing, hardware dozens of times more powerful than just a decade ago and yet games that look and play much worse.
@@Berserkism Exactly. Devs back in the days were optimizing the shit out of games so that they could run in almost anything. Unfortunately, the hard work, raw knowledge of low to mid level language usage of those days were slowly replaced in favor of abstraction, frameworks, shortcuts and whatnot, all to reduce the skill ceiling required to jump into development. Unity and Unreal are exactly that. Junior game devs of today likely won't be able to code at the level of old devs, and companies seem to no longer want to develop a customized engine to fit the specific requirements of their games and rather opt for a license to use an existing game engine that might just do the work.
i completely disconnected from the whole pc building sphere when the 30-series came out. I just now realised the 3060 came with 12 gb vram while 4060 and the 5060 will be coming out with 8 gb. No way they downgraded the amount of vram lmao
The 3060 was available with 8gb as well. I bought a 12GB version last year when I could have bought a 4060 for the same money for this reason mostly.
@jayzn1931 the fact that the 60s arent coming out in 8 gb vram anymore is mindboggling
I wonder what my 3060 could do that a 4060 couldn't
@@roilo8560 Well, if you are into the new Indiana Jones Game, that runs better on a 3060, as the 4060s VRAM is not enough. Not my type of game though, I rather play something older and more optimized. I am sure there are a few other examples but I don't know. I also got the card for creative software which can benefit off of more VRAM as well, like Photoshop.
In most games you won't run into problems but especially on high resolutions and settings like raytracing the difference is bigger.
I am thinking about upgrading to a 4070 or 7800xt next year though, as I want more raw power anyway. But for the moment I am happy and can play all games I want to play.
@@jayzn1931 perhaps the 4060 performs better with dlss on that game, then?
I just got a steam deck and I've found myself playing the old gems. I basically have 100s of untouched games
I use arch linux
XD
How dare you talk about the 5 series without complaining about the price with unconfirmed leaks.
It almost looks like the 90 series is no longer a gaming card. its becoming this Workstation Ai F You Edition. The more you buy, the more you save!!!
@@Kapono5150 because it is not gaming card
Xx80 series is higest end gaming gpu not xx90 same as 1080ti vs titan x
@@henson2k It most certainly is a gaming card. The 4090 struggles with many games at max RT settings, even at native 1440p. UE5 and Path Tracing are so demanding, that in native 1440p rendering even the mighty 4090 needs at least another 2x boost in performance to run well in most of those games.
me and my dad used to joke about how video cards were getting bigger and bigger back in ~2008. One of the things we used to also joke about is that cards would get so big one day that you would instead of slotting the card in your computer, you'd start to slot CPU, ram etc INTO the graphic card lol
Don't get me wrong this tech is incredible!
But the trend of poor optimization created by DLSS will become even worse
yea, DLSS should've been the cherry on top, but it became a bandaid for all perf issues in so many games.
One issue with DLSS is that it is a horrible experience with even 1080p for some games. For example, black myth wukong. Many aspects of the render pipeline are already sub sampled, that is why you will see some objects and edges looking lower res than expected. It is also why the edge sharpness is a night and day difference if you play it natively at 1080p on a 1080p display and run it using DSR to render at 4K and downscale to 1080p. Many modern demanding games use many elements which are rendered half or a quarter resolution when not using any kind of upscaling, and those wreak havoc on all current upscalers since there are just too few samples for machine learning to make an accurate upscale, thus leading to issues such as unstable fine details, weird artifacts in shadows, and certain elements being far more blurry than expected.
While sample limitations are an issue with all upscalers, the issue is that the fewer samples it has to work with, the more noticeable the issues become as the artifacts happen closer to the viewport.
If I have to enable DLSS on a game, then it's time to lower my settings. I refuse to use an algorithm that makes my game uglier just to get better FPS.
That's why you don't use 1080p with DLSS Quality. You use DLDSR x2.25 (1620p) and go DLSS Balanced/Performance which looks and runs way better than 1080p Native
Degrading Nvidia marketshare is a good thing.
not if what replaces it is sh1t.
Except they are gaining more. Just about a week ago JPR report that nvidia market share now is at phenomenal 90% up from 88% from the quarter before that.
@@arenzricodexd4409 and this monopoly ruins the market
It will probably be exclusive to generation 50, that's terrible. It could also work on generations 40
so you are assuming, then condemning them before you even have an answer because this idiot had a dream and a clickbait title, jesus
I've heard that a Mac with 32 gigs of RAM can comfortably run a 22 gb model, because the 32 GB is shared between the CPU and the GPU, so I may be finally buying a Mac, against my better judgement...
Or wait for the strix point halo, unless you're in a hurry
Also gotta remember, DLSS FG on a 4080 Super uses like 1.5GB of extra vram which means in Indiana Jones you can't even enable that with full RT since Nvidia GPUs are low on vram...
It soon adds up
Even when I tried Dragon Age veilguard 4k Max settings Fade focused DLSS Quality, guess what I enabled FG and vram is literally pretty much maxed out in places and then FPS drops to 24fps
That's why a 5080 16GB makes zero sense if vram is going to increase at 4K
You need at least 20GB
I'll never run out of indie games to play anyway and they always perform well.
If vram isn’t a problem, why release 32gb?
For blurry textures ..you wanna try Stalker 2 . Wow it's a mess
there probably isn't an incentive to upgrade video cards for many gamers, but there is one case: VR. With the release of UEVR, we get to play the latest Unreal Engine games like Black Myth Wukong in full 360° immersive environments. I've played games where adding 3D caused the sum of its effects to be greater than its parts. All this to say, it sucks how much these new cards are going to cost when I want one so bad.
when it comes to textures I think you mean Neural Compression Technique which doesn't actually upscale a texture but rather compresses the file size of a texture while retaining the quality and resolution of it. So for example, if you have a non-compressed texture of 4096x4096 which is 256MB in size. You can compress it with conventional method down to ~5MB, but that will make texture smaller in resolution and it will lose out on a lot of detail. Meanwhile, with neural texture compression you can compress that same texture to ~4MB size, but it will also retain same resolution which alone will leave much more detail in.
Essentially, if I get this right, artists draw high quality textures and then engine compresses them into smaller versions for different quality presets. So by the time GPU renders game it just loads that compressed texture and with current methods textures that are compressed using current techniques are ~3 times the size of the ones compressed by neural compression technique at the similar quality. So this techology if used in video games will essentially allow textures that under normal circumstances would require GPU with 12GB of RAM to run on one that has only 4-6GB and all game developers will only need to swap out compresion tool from current they use to nVidia's new neural one. As for Neural Renderring, that is completely different topic and I currently can't even imagine how that would work.
EDIT: Also, if I understand properly textures compressed using neural compression technique should benefit all GPU's and should not be exclusive to only nVidia new generation GPU's as they will be pre-compressed and will come with games. This should also allow for higher texture quality in console and handheld games.
0:28 "you're going to buy it you'll love it" ☠
Yeah I agree. I bought a laptop with 3070Ti 8GB of RAM not the 3080Ti with 16GB of RAM version because the reviews said it was better for the value. Then every games that use image upscaling like DLSS/FSR always get stutter in some scenes or areas even though the FPS never gets below 60. I didn't know what was the problem back then until I checked that it was the VRAM that wasn't enough. I learned my lesson.
I recommended a 4060 prebuilt to a friend because she upgrading from a pretty old system plus because of where she lived it was best option for the price. Sure she got a few more GB of vram than her original, but I won't lie to you. I went out of wau to try and find her something with at least 12gb of vram in price rage that was good prebuilt. It was hard.
Go with AMD graphics card, if you dont really need top notch 4080/4090 performance, AMD can do the same or better for less than half cost. All/most things people say is from the past, AMD pre 2017 yes those could have some serious bad problems, but now it works great. Both Nvidia and AMD can have some rare problems, but those get fixed ...sure in general, as Nvidia is bigger company, they tend to fix errors and bugs faster, but any product that been out for more than 6months, most and worst problems have been fixed, for both companies. Most new problems is more of individual game issues and the game company have to patch it, not the hardware problem.
Intel b580
they should be fine in latest games in 1080p and decrease a few setttings like textures
@@supersmurf4884 Currently 1080p is still enough with 8gb vram except for unoptimized games, so the RTX 4060 is still good enough, especially when you need to work. With AMD working on software is still very limited, it is still more suitable for gaming unless you are a Linux user then that is when AMD GPUs are really good
Theres a Demo of Neural Rendering running on 4090 in nividias page so Neural Rendering might be Available to 4000 series, also dlss 4 (the upscaler) might be available to every rtx gpu just like dlss 3 wch was also marketed as 4000 series only yet the upscaler was available to all rtx gpus alongside Ray reconstruction, only the feature that is frame generation was not available for anything below 4000
The next versions of DLSS, FSR, XeSS frame generation need to include Asynchronous Spacewarp for framerate independent camera movement!
The 3080 had 384 bit bandwidth, why did they go back to 256????? I thought it was to make the 4090 look even better but now the 5090 has 32gb and 512bit but the 5080 only gets half of both???????? While AMD will likely put 24gb on a card that costs 600€ less?????
4:07 I prefer Vaseline, thank you very much!
The prices on GDDR7 alone are going to make the 5 series insane. I saw it quoted at $20 a gig which puts the 5090 at $640 cost just in VRAM. It begs the question - is GDDR7 a worthwhile addition to a card like the 5060 or would a larger quantity of GDDR6X be fast enough and perform better?
Great question. I think GDDR7 will give a significant performance boost to the 5060 since it was so memory starved before, but I think most people would rather have 12GB of vram. I actually talked about how vram is going to drive up the price of the 5090 like crazy in my video "The 5090 Specs Leaked and Its a BEAST".
it depends on how they take advantage of the tensor cores. especially for DLSS if you want GDDR7 neural rendering is essential
The end is nigh my fellow AMD users, we will suffer another defeat
lol, what are you even talking about?
FSR 3.0 is actually pretty good, but ray tracing performance compared to Nvidia is still dog shit.
The ray tracing, frame gen and dlss is a complete garbage for now. I have nvidia 4070 btw.
Since I don't care about RT! I'm sticking with my Sapphire Pulse 7900xtx
IDK what some of you guys are saying, on high my 7900xt can do ray tracing at 60 for most games on my ultra wide
I've been checking some videos about game devs and engine devs, it seems we have so much resources that devs don't spend any more time to improve and optimize their games. The problem is that we have now hit a barrier where graphics look worse than old games yet use/waste more resources.
Bold of you to assume the 6090 is only going to cost 2 grand
FSR/DLSS at the start was a bonus, now its essential, Rastor was always the true king but its fading fast. You got a card to last 4-5 years easily, now your thinking of upgrading every gen. That was always the game plan since Ray Tracing arrived..
The worst thing that using DLSS/FSR in Unreal 5 games is mandatory, because even in native 4K, games like Stalker 2 are extremely pixelated, noise and just weird and you have turn DLSS on to make it normal looking, even on balanced it looks better than native 4K in UE5 which is just WTF bizzare and it should not be the thing, native 4K should always look better. But on other hand, it's nice that DLSS solves aliasing better than all modern postFX AA technologies, so you are killing to flies with one hit, but I don't want it to be mandatory!! That's sick.
Instead of some stupid texture upscaling, what about to return to technologies that worked in the past? There was a reason for texture compression and stuff like that, what they do now makes 0 sense, gaming industry is falling to it's bottom. Just look at Stalker 2, game sometimes looks really great, but then there are palces where it looks like big WTF like in interiors with some fog and a lot of shadows, it's totally noise, blurry, unclear and it looks worse than 10+ years old games, I don't want such evolution of games, I want outdated games that are sharp.
BTW, when you mentioned Pray, I played it few years ago on my old RTX 2070 Super and it runs in native 4K with carefully set details in like 60-80 FPS and it looks great. This was the last generation of proper games.
15:55 - XeSS in Stalker 2 is actually almost comparable to DLSS, image quality on ultra performance is very similar and FPS just slightly worse than DLSS. FSR on ultra performance looks like garbage, you need to set it to balanced or quality to have the same image as DLSS on ultra performance and that's a problem for AMD.
Well I mean stalker games have always had bad AA so I'm used to jaggies lol
Threat Interactive is great at exploring this issue. They are pushing upscaling to the max it will kill their competitors and the consumers' wallets.
Stalker 2 is basically made by small indie studio with noob devs, I wouldn't consider that game as benchmark for AAA graphics in 2024.
Return to SMAA, fuck this shit.
@@critical-thinker666 They are not noobs, they already made some great games since 2007.
Current games running rasterized at 1080, 1440 (16:9) can hit 100+frames without upscaling without frame gen. Its the overhaul for dynamic RT that's causing this draw. Comparing the RTx 50 for RT to GTX 500 series for rastur is what I feel we're at a similar place in the development of this technology. Game and tech dev reach a developmental platueau and the direction pivots and we kinda start over. 8bit, 16bit, 2D sprites, voxel 3D, pasteurized 3D, and now Ray Tracing
The way i see it, it will NOT save VRAM. The textures will be lower resolution and thus smaller on the hard drive however they will load that and upscale it and save upscaled version in VRAM so VRAM usage will essentially be the same. If that is not the case it would mean upscaling every single texture every single time during render which doesn't make any sense to do and no matter how fast the hardware it's a waste of compute and energy.
Maybe… maybe it was just a silly dream…
you mistaking what its does, neural texture compression goes futher than just scaling the texture, its actually reduced the amount of vram by holding the texture already in new format, its doesn't need to decode every draw call, its just render at once
in today photorealism texture is entirely raw, its take far too long to encode and decode it
that why stream is super slow
@@SiliconSteak its possible, but who is going to be wizard to do it? this isn't even could call science, its just magic entirely
@@darkpain2452 You're right it does more than just upscale the texture. But even on Nvidia's short I just found that demonstrates the tech it takes nearly 3 times as long to render the same quad with a texture. Even if you save memory that's way slower and for a complex scene that effect would just stack for every texture.
@@Vitis-n2v 25% Cpu perfomance increase every new generation, and gpu perfomance is increasing 35% every year, but memory is only expected to double every 5 years, and the shrink of cores, most of cpu today is just memory
NPU are differents, their performance is increasing 80% every year
at the moment its cost a lot perfomance but the reduction in vram is worth more
direct storage was big thing because its load 3 seconds entire scene, games have stopped having big loading screen, games of today cost 200 gb, with neureal texture compression
its going to reduced to only 15 gb
this techonology is so advanced and complex, does nvidia has any chance to pull this off?
in my opinion, ray recontruction is simply more madness than frame generation, its exactly a AI PHYSICS LIGHTING capable of undertand lighting in scene, to render without overwhelming amount path tracing
i remember can it run Crysis with a 8800GTX and i wasn´t that playable on max setting
I was already aware of this so i ordered rtx 4070 ti S a month ago and anyway I'm usually playing 8+ old games and just few current AAA.
From rtx 50xx series seems like everything will be fake, frames, resolution, etc..poor optimisation...
so when its released and based on his dream and no hard facts, you're somehow aware.so you bought a card that will be last gen in 1 month. maybe you can start a new fad of going back a gen every time a new chip is released. by 2029 you'll have that shiny new atari 2600.
@mainsource8030 precisely, I don't like to buy the latest hardware, usually I'll go for the previous gen, which is already tested, patched, etc...and I'm quite sure the will be "surprises" with the latest hardware.
What is your mic attached to?
Rode lav go on my t-shirt routes to my M1 air. Rec through audacity
I am waiting for RTX AI where GPU will play games for you.
Its very simple, the models should be trained only for the game they are going to be running on. Would solve all the blurry and ghosty mess. The upscalers are being trained as TAA, they should be trained as decoders...
dlss 5.1 gonna be wild
How would AI upressing textures save VRAM? Disk space maybe as games don't have to be packaged with high res textures. But the upscaled texture would still have to be stored somewhere in VRAM after upscaling to be displayed by the game.
Your dreams are more credible than MLID
Savage comment
I was playing valheim recently and accidentally turned off TAA. Bro this looks so good in 1440p, never turned it on again XD. Now i crave to see how 4k looks
I don't think FSR does look worse than DLSS I just upgraded my Rx6800 to a 4080 Super and tbh it's the same. Maybe it's my 47 year old eyes but I am a young 47 and my eyesight is not that bad. FSR quality is all I pretty much used anyway and it looks the same as DLSS quality and apart from Ray tracing it's not a huge jump from my old Rx 6800 to my new 4080 super. Yes it's better but the rx6800 was an awesome GPU too.
You're right. It only has more fizzle and noise on some things when the resolution scaling starts low, and you begin to drop the Quality setting down. Personally I don't like any of them, I think DLSS is blurry, I can clearly see it and the "issues" it fixes are generated by the techniques being implemented into games now in the first place. If they stopped using these rush techniques the mess wouldn't need to be covered up with a smear filter in the first place. Though I do think that open tech like FSR does help extend the life of hardware and that is a very good thing.
I had a rx 6800 for a bit. Great card
Ive got a 4070ti 12gb and a 1080p 144mhz moniter will dsll 4.0 even help me or is that just for 4k monitors
Still chilling with a 1080ti for 1080p 60fps gaming without DLSS with no real issues. DLSS is a farce.
DLSS is awesome and lets us play in gorgeous 4K. 1080 is shit
Bro yall go so hard with these comments 😂😂
@@robosergTV Sunk cost fallacy cope?
Even my phone can do more than 1080p nowadays...
@@darkcggaming so can my setup, but I only have 1080p TV because MOST media formats are native 1080p.
on Ark survival Ascended you are forced to use Fsr , and you cant even disable it
Rip
I kind of disagree.
- Performance wasn't better in those days. 18 years ago I didn't even get 30 FPS in many games with a good midrange PC.
- 60 FPS became standard about 12 years ago in graphically demanding games. (Of course, E-Sports and old games were different.)
- You are spoiled.
- Most of the time I would massively prefer playing at 4k DLSS Performance over 1080p with MSAA or FXAA. It doesn't look perfect but way better.
- Neural texture compression is NOT going to really decrease image quality by that much, you won't see a difference.
BUT
Yea, they will pretent that you won't need that much VRAM, and that is not okay.
You cannot really replace VRAM with stuff like that. More VRAM would always be way better, because you could do so many things with more VRAM but developers won't make it happen if the VRAM isn't there.
Agreed, many gamers are total idiots tho.
Too many people comment with nostalgia goggles. 1080p 60fps was a normal PC monitor a decade ago, today people want 4k60 or high framerate 1440p.
The point isn't really that performance and image quality where always better, the point is rather that both qualities have regressed very recently.
@@bmwofboganville456 the problem is that even in freaking 1080. the MINIMUM resolution for modern gaming 10 years ago. now needs DLSS and FSR today! sometimes even framegeneration!! recent games like stalker 2 require you to have upscaling in 1080p to even achive 30. so in those cases, yes, gaming has indeed regressed.
@@ambientlightofdarknesss4245 But don't forget, that is with stuff like Raytracing, which we didn't even dared to dream of 10 years ago. Such things at the moment take 3x more performance for negligible better, if even at all better, graphics.
But we want it, we humans always want to go higher, faster, better, we want to see the limits.
I would like to know whether Nvidia could use a similar process to improve textures for older games.
Honestly, even if DLSS is an exclusive for 5000 series cards, it probably won't really be in wide use until 6000 series cards are on the market.
Nvidia no longer wants to innovate they'd rather leave it up to software rather than the hardware to push gaming
Lol. What a moronic take! Nvidia is innovating software! That's innovation. DLSS is phenomenal. You don't need hardware based innovation only! We need good graphics and good performance. If it comes from software. Good. If it comes from hardware. Good.
no they want to innovate hardware, they just dont want to sell it all to the plebs at plebs prices. gamers are being treated like backup plan for them
@@jal.ajeerafunny the only moron here is you. If you have to have that software to run games semi well then it’s dogshit. I have a 4090 and a lot of games I’m only getting 60-100 fps when settings are maxed on new games. It’s dogshit and will continue to get worse.
@@KhanhDinh291 we are, they sell h100's for over 100,000 dollars
i mean the 5060 having 8gb of vram is ridiculous, i'm gonna switching to amd for this year for 1440p if they have good RT performance
they really downloaded more vram
Don't forget it could utilize DirectStorage with gpu decompression (gDeflate) that could be leveraged by RTX IO at some points
Been waiting for that for a while
who cares about Nvidia sheep's - those people claiming that amd has less features and giving money to Nvidia are the problem not Nvidia that is milking those people
Yes, but on other hand, what else can we do when we need DLSS support?
@@jakejoyride game developers don’t take AMD seriously
On the part of less VRAM usage if you assume the nvidia white paper is 100% true and it can work perfectly which is never the case but in this lets assume it will be. You will save 1/8 of the VRAM cost with the newest tech for texture reading in the Tensor cores. It will also max out your Tensor cores on most 40 series cards to do so too. So no other DLSS features turned on will work. Why will they not? The white paper's method takes over the entire TPU (Tensor Processing Unit) to work.
DLSS 4 will not fix what happens in TAA. The put os having it look like someone just throw oil or an over blown blur effect onto the seen is overly aggressive use of TAA.
Compressed textures already existed since the 1990s they just have been iterating of how much compression is acceptable and how to compress it in a way that is close to if not lossless quality.
I think nvidia does understand that you will just recommended a higher end card that does have the requirements by making the lower end no longer have them. Yes Intel can do good here just almost nothing on steam says what Intel card it is compatible with while it does with nvidia and for most AMD.
AI Upscaling alike to script based upscaling in the 1990s ran into the wall of it is so much overused and used instead of optimizing the code that it is or is getting known for bad quality. For example compare bicubic to trilinear upscaling. Video games mostly stopped using upscaling after trilinear upscaling was seen as bad quality. It isn't bad at up to 150% it is when you go to 4x the same and above the artifacts still to appear often enough for it to be seen as bad. For AI upscaling it is running into the same issue. 4x upscale doesn't look good. 125% it isn't noticeable but if you are doing that why not use the lower compute method of trilinear?
I see his argument the problem is unless AMD also starts to have Tensor Cores on their GPU the tech he is talking about will not come to games are require you to have a nvidia graphics card to play. If it is a good game the modding community might make a mod pack to convert the neural network processing images which will all be noise when seen by streaming processors and whatever Intel is calling theirs to a thing is looks like the actual image. It will increase VRAM used by 1/8 at most unless they did it wrong and it takes more.
The processor needed for that tech is already in the Snapdragon elite X gen 2, Intel Rapor Lake and AMD AI CPUs. The problem is where it will be useful in games isn't when playing on integrated graphics.
His fear explains why the 5090 is a 32GB GPU while having the needed type of cores for the Tensor compression method to compress and uncompressed textures. There are many things that most likely will stop it from coming to games. Mostly as the type of cores isn't the only thing missing on the GTX 1000 and before it is also the number of something registers to get a quick enough interface as it is has to be inside the chip that even then L2 isn't quick enough to have it not take more time than using the normal texture decompression. Yes every video game image is compressed. Video game size would blown if we had to have all uncompressed image files. Most are saved in .jpg before being include in an archive file. . jpg can be lossless quality if saved like that alike to the same vein as .png can be saved as a lossy image file. Both file types are image compression file types.
The tech is cool but alike to most Unreal Engine 5.5 and 5.6 features it will most likely be used in animated movies not video games. Why? For both you the user who set it up know where to put everything and what GPUs you are using. For Hollywood either a RTX Ada 6000 or A100 as those 2 are the most common. the H100 and B200 are not that common for animation renders. Then they can craft the world to be able to render inside of 3 months. While video games need to render millions of frames in around a day if you leave your game running for that long movies to get what they want a minute per frame is acceptable. The reason why this new tensor compression and reading tech will take off? When your movie is over 16 million frames even a few parts of a millisecond can save your hours is not days of time.
Upscaling like DLSS was made for older cards so they can keep up with newer games. Not for newer cards to keep up with newer games.
It's totally lazy on the devs part of not optimizing the games to run proficiently, especially in Unreal engine. 5.. it's trashing our games and making them blurry. TAA is the worst.
This kid breaks it down in this video to the T.
th-cam.com/video/lJu_DgCHfx4/w-d-xo.htmlsi=i7I_1yyIPSu_k_Em
So will dlss 4.0 be not available for the 4070 tis?
a technology that should ve been used to bring back old gpus to life is now used as an excuse to sell you new gen gpus loool .i think i should quit gaming , being a gamer is now a sign of low IQ ngl . cant believe that people are paying shit tons of money on a gpu thats suposedly meant to run late gen games on higher resolution except that you need to use a feature that makes that same game look shittier . DLSS is now celebrated and used as a selling point when it should be the opposit . if you have to rely on dlss to run a game then you shouldnt buy that gpu to begin with .
The only possible way for the card to be more v ram efficient is through the ssd, games optimized for direct storage (games need to be optimized to bring in data only when its needed), and those 16 pcie gen 5 lanes preventing the bottlenecking you see in current graphics cards
I’m here way too early. 👀
TH-cam hasn't even processed the video lol
Neural rendering..if it is really like what i think of....that would be a nightmare for multiplayer games, because everyone will see slightly different view for same object...unless nvidia know something that i dont.
Im tired of playing with cheats, I want native advancement.
Rendering has *always* been "cheats", always, the definition of rasterization is in itself, a cheat. It has ALWAYS been smoke and mirrors, techniques and shortcuts are inseparable from real-time rendering. You are just now picking a bogeyman to focus your misdirected ignorant anger at because you are being grifted and lack an ounce of critical thought, like the millions standing with you.
As for 8GB, it is already obsolete, since consoles have more available VRAM to dedicate to their GPU. This is why at the moment due to the consoles like the PS5, most development studios making games for consoles and PC, have largely optimized for 12GB. and where VRAM limited, e.g., a game like Hogwarts Legacy, the compromises needed for 8GB carry a far higher visual toll than expected. And as seem from the many videos from independent game devs that have delved into the performance issues of Unreal engine 5, especially when it comes to lighting, have shown that video card makers are unable to compensate for it. Unreal Engine 5, traded performance for ease of use in those areas, to a point where some functions involve an order of magnitude more instructions to complete, and often the workaround from many studios, is more of a brute force method of reducing compute workload by simply rendering certain aspects of the scene at a lower resolution to save a few milliseconds that the render pipeline needs for another aspect of the game engine.
With those habits not changing anytime soon, I feel DLSS will only have more trouble going forward.
Nvidia doesn't care about gaming and gaming marketshare. It's allll about Datacenter AI.
I wouldn't say they 'don't care', just that GPUs are a comparatively small piece of the pie now. I really don't know what you're complaining about.
@@squirrelsinjacket1804 probably the overpriced and underwhelming cards.
wrong
But DLSS 4 isn't out yet. Maybe they used some very avanced groundbreaking AI shit, and if you put one pc with a game at 4K with DLSS 4.0 on, and other pc with the same components and the same game at 4K with DLSS 4.0 off, and they look EXACTLY the same
Facts 6:26.
finally someone who sees the real consequences caused by all these graphics "innovations"
6090 will be more than two grand bro.
unless ww3 starts then either doesn't come out or releases at 5k plus. Wait for the 6090 bros are risking it with one I think.
Thr 5090 will already be 2k plus. If not at MSRP than definitely at retail prices.
correct me if i am wrong, but didn't older games have good compression techniques that basically reduced file size while maintaining quality. Take a JPEG vs PNG. You maintain the majority of image quality while reducing image quality dramatically. I feel like this is an issue with modern gaming. It feels like modern games no longer compress well anymore. Maybe someone who knows more can tell me more. And let me guess, DLSS 4 is only for 5000 series
I think you’re right..
So Nvidia is justifying the anemic VRAM on 4060 and (what looks like) the 5060... with DLSS4?
I am genuinely curious to see how THAT comes out in 3rd party testing.
It's like how lobbying in more honest times, would just be called bribery.
Imagine a AAA so bad optimized that even with a 5080 and DLSS 4.5 we have nearly 60 fps on 4k! Time will come where DLSS is not enough! Ask yourself what we would have done when DLSS and FSR would released later? Non of these current games would be playable!
My RTX 4070 Ti Super is a slightly cut down 4080, and I play Halo Infinite on High settings at 1440p on a 144 Hz monitor, getting about 180 fps in game, and about 250 fps in the Matchmaking screen. I don't use DLSS or Ray Tracing at all.
Just wait until you see DLSS 5. It will be able to literally render olive oil on your screen.
You know all those mods that improve graphics and performance in games? Like that Skyrim grass mod that not only added more grass but more FPS?
Doesn't it seem like it would be better to make a worse game, then simply "mod" it to look and perform better?
If a bunch of strangers can do it for free. Why couldn't the developers?
Exactly.
Uses special PCI-E cables, but cant afford watercooling
BTW whats your gaming table called?
I build and flip PCs. That is a build I sold. That is my workbench. I found if I don’t do cable extensions the builds don’t sell.
Also the extensions only cost $13 off Ali express so it’s worth. Check out my $550 or $640 pc build video to get an idea of what to buy.
WHAT DEGREE FOCUS ON HARWARE PLEASE
What "Oil" is bro talking about? 1440p DLSS Quality often looks better than TAA native. 4k DLSS Quality and Balanced often looks better than native. Sure, if you are running 1080p DLSS performance/balanced, it will look terrible, but use it right and it looks on par with native, with better AA. Bro is stuck in 2021 when they had DLSS 2.0 and it wasn't as good as today's DLSS 3.8.1.0
It’s genius really. It’ll basically force the market to get off of all these cards without the technology. Otherwise, all the new games would be way too demanding for their graphic cards.
Traditional TAA can look quite good at native 4K. The problem is many devs do not put enough care into its implementation, which is why DLSS Quality is usually preferable on the image quality side in addition to the performance improvements gained. The Frame Gen side of DLSS rarely looks and feels good enough for my uses; Hitman III is the only game where I find it tolerable. Back to native 4K, DLAA implementation thus far is not as good to my eyes as FSR3 Native AA, though the sample size is currently small.
Can my 4070 ti super run dlss4?
New games are not optimized. It makes no sense to think it is normal to run a 400watts graphics card only to barely get 60fps in a game.
Arkane studios' games never get old
10 fps rasterised, 100 fps with dlss5 but it looks like you have a film grain filter on
My first thought about the neural engine was that it was going todo something like stable diffusion for pictures.
Can someone work out how to just solder on and extra few gigs of VRAM onto our graphics cards??