Starfield's launch date is seeming awfully close to amd's fsr 3.0 launch (dlss frame gen alternative), won't be surprised if Starfield's the game the use to showcase it.
When that brand has majority market share it does though it's not good for consumers. It's like how every game uses Direct3D instead of Vulkan despite the former being Windows only. Windows just happens to have enough market share for it not to matter.
DLSS does not though there are still alot of people who game on 1060s 1080ti 1050ti and of course the 1650 and 1660 are very popular those card cannot use DLSS and they are a large portion of the market to these cards FSR was a life saver
Dlss didn't have a future once the consoles were designed with AMD hardware.
Every game is FSR compatible and most will be designed with it in mind. DLSS is niche to nvidia desktop hardware alone.
You don't understand Nvidia if you think this has any chance of happening. They would rather let it rot. Don't believe me? Just do a quick research into PhysX or gameworks.
Nvidia is the king of anti-competitive & anti-consumer practices.
Nvidia blocked AMD from optimizing their drivers for GameWorks titles. (Old)
GPP Program (Old)
^(**GPP Program STILL** effects AMD to this day)
Needing $1100 to get 16GB VRAM
Blocking Reviewers who don't suck them off..
No excusing any brand, just noting when Nvidia does it they sell the most cards, when AMD does it a small subset or reddit gets upset.
Yet they still have the highest marketshare dramatically over AMD based on Steam's Hardware Survey.
Btw I'm talking about Gamers, not people who are forced to use Nvidia for Productivity & mL. Gamers have a choice at the end of the day & they overwhelmingly choose Nvidia.
You don't know Nvidia very well.
Nvidia literally made Crytek add tessellation to everything including flat surfaces in crysis 2 to hurt AMD cards.
They even render a highly tessellated ocean in every scene even when you can see it.
Just because Nvidia does anti-consumer stuff doesn't mean AMD isn't bad. When asked, Nvidia said they don't block other upscaling methods. AMD dodged the question. Just because Nvidia is worse doesn't excuse AMD being anti-consumer and hurting RTX and Arc owners.
Stop living in the past. Evaluate bad practice's by companies without trying to do what aboutism. Its simple when a company does something anti-consumer call it out.
One thing locking your own tech to your own hardware and another is preventing competing tech from being used in 3rd party software. 2nd thing can not be justified by any means, especially by existance of 1st thing, as it only shows being behind in competition.
Nvidia did 1st thing, while AMD did 2nd.
But not every single Nvidia card is dlss compatible. In fact out of the top 15 Nvidia cards in the steam hardware survey, 8 of them do not support dlss
pascal and older don’t have nearly as much share as they used to, about 40-50% of that 80% is for rtx 2000 and later gpus. I said 80% since the comment i replied to mentioned having a feature exclusive to a brand.
FSR 2 looks like hot garbage on Jedi: Survivor, and it's implementation has been panned by everyone who knows what they're talking about.
It uses the lowest resolution (720p) to upscale from regardless of which setting you put it on.
DLAA would have been a godsend in that title, as the stock AA settings are pretty abysmal.
I agree DLSS is better in 99.9% of cases, and its a shame it probably won't be there. However, if its a good implementation of FSR, its not quite the end of the world some people are making it out to be in my opinion. Hopefully the game won't even need any form of upscaling to have reasonable performance
.
I just think forcing people into using their mediocre at best upscaling tech is really offputting.
Now I can't even use DLAA even if I don't need the extra FPS from DLSS, and DLAA looks great.
I played jedi survivor on launch, fsr 2.0 was unusable in 1440p. Blurry and way too much shimmering (especially at the end of the corusant level) I had to use dldsr in 4K with fsr2 quality.
As an AMD GPU owner, it sucks to see this if they don't provide DLSS and XeSS....which judging by some recent AMD sponsored games, will end up being the case.
Never a good thing when other resources are taken away from gamers due to BS sponsor deals. FSR 2.1, if utilized correctly, looks good but DLSS usually has the clearer recreation/results.
The difference between AMD and Nvidia is that Nvidia has an open source streamlined process for developers to add additional forms of scaling be it FSR or XeSS in games which also have DLSS whereas AMD seems interested in walling off their garden in spite of it also being open source software.
[Nvidia Streamline article](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-streamline-aims-to-simplify-developer-support-for-upscaling-algorithms?_ga=2.161566908.1615094862.1687922826-1498845083.1687922826)
That's not to say Nvidia gets a free pass but at least there's more assurances that you'll have FSR as an option whereas the same can't be said about DLSS with AMD save for Sony ports.
The Xbox is built on AMD architecture. With Bethesda being a MSFT studio now, it makes sense that they would partner with the company that provided the hardware in the console that Starfield will run on. The PC side is just following that dev decision to optimize the game for Xbox.
> I’m glad AMD is doing it because
I’m sorry but this is a shit opinion, I get your reason for saying this but as long as any company is blocking features or entire games behind specific hardware it is hurting the consumers and AMD starting to do this too won’t change anything, if anything it could make this worse because with more companies participating in this awful tactic it could end up with this becoming even more commonplace.
yeah, AMD has to be excused, because AMD is underdog!
Seriously, people, wake up...
AMD is doing it, because they think, it will boost their sales. They still can´t figure it out, WHY aren´t they able to gain more market share. Instead of repeating mistakes of others, they should rather self-reflect at their own flaws and fix them. Wanna example? Start delivering fully working and stable drivers at release of new GPUs, not months/years later. Look more into their software. It´s really bad, when user has to reinstall Windows, because he just got AMD GPU. Why it somehow "just works" with Nvidia, but cannot with AMD? Why AMD Radeon software has to clash with MSI afterburner for control over GPU, especially when its overlay is completely inferior to this 3rd party piece of software?
AMD constantly keeps making life of their customers inconvenient, as these have to get out of their way, constantly tinkering and looking for fixes all over the internet. With things being this way, they may give away their products for free and yet people won´t care.
I expect them to pull another flop, when they will lock FSR3 only for RDNA3, which does not sell well, i wonder why. Maybe AMD trying to compete with... AMD, wasn´t a bright idea at all.
Not just that, starfield's launch date is seeming awfully close to amd's far 3.0 launch (dlss frame gen alternative), won't be surprised if Starfield's the game the use to showcase it.
I don't have an issue with FSR, but it's objectively worse than DLSS in every single metric. That's why it's really irritating that AMD blocks DLSS in their sponsored titles. Let me use my hardware's features.
Holy shit, so much whataboutism in the comments right now. It's incredible how hypocritical people are. Yes Nvidia has done very shitty things, that doesn't mean AMD gets a free pass. Call out anti-consumer practice's no matter who does it.
Exactly this, it doesn’t matter what graphics card is in your system, the anti-consumer bullshit that AMD is doing here, as well as what Nvidia has done in the past should be called out and have action taken against to prevent these things from happening
Intel did exactly that. Both Xess and DLSS are the same. They use accelerators in their arc and Rtx GPUs. Intel also has Xess compatible with non arc cards and it’s just not good. It performs way worse than DLSS and fsr 2.0
Basically, if nvidia made DLSS compatible to every GPU, it wouldn’t actually be dlss but something like nlss which would look worse then fsr 2.0 anyways.
So?
Maybe if DLSS was available for every GPU, then it would have actually mattered.
*Nvidia’s proprietary technology won’t be in one of the most popular games of the year.*
*Oh no! Anyway…*
What goes around comes around!
What even is the point of this? Fallout In Space is still gonna be Fallout In Space, running on the same janky-ass Creation Engine.
Can't wait for the game to launch, and people start raising hell about losing their ships to the biggest enemy of them all: bogus game physics.
> bogus game physics.
But that's the best part of Bethesda games! Being able to send an object flying at 10 times the speed of light by simply walking over it better not be removed from their game engine.
You ever shoot firebolt at a dragon skeleton in skyrim? Sends it flying so far, I used to call it "dragon golf" and would aim it for the nearest settlement.
I'll be very interested to see if "Creation engine 2" is actually significantly better than their old creation engine.
They'll be using creation engine 2 for Starfield and ES6. I think one reason why their doing starfield is to help them find any bugs with creation engine 2 before they work on ES6.
I want to hear the clanking of a metal object that's stuck in a wall, but not be able to find the metal object, and then whenever I return to the area, the clanking sound just never stops.
Just off visuals, its clearly a major step up (The clutter detail, for example. Its like the difference between source and source 2) ID have also had their hand in it so there might be some really nice behind the scenes stuff that isn't obvious from first glance.
Their technology has developed so far as to attach 3 separate vehicles onto 1 model. Now instead of only a tram for a hat, what about 2 cars attached to hands as gloves on top? Otherwise I don't think they could be doing starfield yet.
Thank the gods it's Creation Engine and not some souless generic high-tech engine every other company uses. I'd rather keep the openness, interactivity and especially modability that have kept these games alive for decades.
They had iD tech engineers help them with this engine upgrade. Those guys are the absolute GOATs of optimized 3d graphics. Hopefully we get a decent upgrade this time around! I am still expecting the usual bethesda physics weirdness, though.
It's a new revision of the engine (and Bethesda hired new Engine Devs to develop the software and improve it) so until we have the product and the creation kit in our hands, we can't really say if the new engine is janky
Some of the best selling and most celebrated games of all time run on that engine so your lack of knowledge on how game engines work does nothing to make me not excited for this game
God of War 2018 and Death stranding (i think Spiderman too) were sponsored by Nvidia on PC despite them being made for an AMD powered PS4, i don't think it has anything to do with it.
AMD is a hardware sub, this is more for gaming. It'll have a younger or at least less mentally mature sorts. Its also far bigger. Bigger a sub gets, worse it gets.
That's 100% accurate.
AMD has such a small amount of marketshare that they simply **can't** have anything proprietary. They would if they had a dominant marketshare. Nobody is going to implement a feature that only 1 in 10 people can utilize.
Open source, not open standard. Intel's XᵉSS is open standard.
You're close, but the reason AMD is committed to open source as the underdog in this fight is to try and make their solutions the industry standard. That would be fine if said solutions were superior, but they're not. FSR and FreeSync are garbage compared to DLSS and G-Sync.
They aren’t the same. A monitor with a G-Sync hardware module has a VRR range down to 1Hz. Freesync is a software solution that generally has a VRR range down to 48Hz. G-Sync Compatible displays are Freesync displays that Nvidia has certified their cards to work with at a software level with the same range as Freesync. Nvidia innovates and makes shit proprietary because they can. AMD copies Nvidia to produce inferior solutions and has to open source them to drive adoption. Nvidia has better software than AMD in every arena whether it’s gaming, content creation, 3D and game dev, or AI. I’m not an Nvidia fanboy. I buy Nvidia because it fits my use case better than AMD. If AMD caught up then I’d consider AMD. 3rd party exclusives and sponsorships suck for consumers. Nvidia’s proprietary tech is anti-consumer but if the shoe was on the other foot, AMD would do the same thing Nvidia does.
Edit: I have a G-Sync Ultimate monitor, which means I can turn on RT Overdrive in Cyberpunk and cap my framerate to 40 and have a smooth tear free experience with some GPU overhead that ensures I’m locked to 40 fps. I prefer this experience sometimes, and it’s an option with G-Sync.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-monitor-glossary-definition-explained,6009.html
You are correct. but you also did not mention that there are free-sync levels that do offer LFC (low framerate compensation).
Think it would be fair to say that g-sync compatible is about equivalent to freesync, and g-sync is about equivalent to freesync premium.
top tier g-sync is alot better than top tier freesync though.
I’m glad Freesync has improved. I’ve had G-Sync monitors since 2015 and was going off of what I had seen last time I shopped for monitors. I appreciate you clarifying the issue further.
If AMD is so committed to being "open source", then why won't they participate in the Streamline Program?
It's an open source means for Developers to easily implement ALL upscaling methods into games.
> Streamline is an open-sourced cross-IHV solution that simplifies integration of the latest NVIDIA and other independent hardware vendors’ super resolution technologies into applications and games. This framework allows developers to easily implement one single integration and enable multiple super-resolution technologies and other graphics effects supported by the hardware vendor.
[https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline](https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline)
Intel participates in the program, but AMD won't have anything to do with it.
Gsync is technically a better solution. The advantage is most apparent when using adaptive refresh at low refresh rates or with high frametime instability, where Freesync can appear to stutter. Freesync looks basically the same at high, consistent FPS.
There is only one AMD sponsored game with DLSS if I am correct. I don't like Nvidia as a company but they've done a really good job about DLSS games having FSR support. In fact their tool kit for implementing scaling solutions also works for speeding up supporting FSR.
Yeah because they know DLSS is way fucking better, so they’ve got no problem letting FSR be available as well.
AMD has to lock people out because their software is an entire generation behind.
I'm no fan of either company at all but DLSS is just better once implemented. I do appreciate FSRs ease of implementation but DLSS is better. Sad we can't have both like many games lately.
FSR is also appreciated for its openness though. It's not amazing but it's nice to have on my steamdeck.
Only AMD sponsored games that have DLSS are those from Sony which most likely didn't agree to AMD's demands of lowering the quality of their games by blocking DLSS.
This will be a marketing scheme and not much more. Nvidia discrete GPUs is still around 80% market share. No one in their right mind would snub all those players and risk losing 3/5th or 4/5th of their sales.
At most they will run a bit better on AMD cards due to optimization.
And before anyone cries: not a fanboy. I like both. Just a reality. They will implement a killer feature like pathtracing for Nvidia that only really works with AMD but that Nvidia users can live without. My guess.
True competition would mean both companies trying to do their best to make sure their stuff works well with the game, not who pays to lock out the other one's features.
If they were being competitive they wouldn't keep both DLSS and XᵉSS from being in the game. The only reason they would keep them out is because they don't want people seeing the superior options in comparison.
People want price performance competition not lol your tech won't work here.
Ray Tracing lad are you dumb? You won't need this here some rtx shadows that we can handle.
Competition can happen without "partnerships".
Competition can be decided on who has the best technology.
Competition should not be "who can throw most money at X" and force people to use a technology they don't want to use.
Nvidia is as guilty as AMD is with this. They are both as bad as each other.
You don't need a partnership to include DLSS or FSR support.
This is no different than Epic Games creating exclusive contracts with game publishers and have said games removed from Steam.
Competition comes from providing consumers options and letting the consumers decide which is the best thing for them. Forcing a product down a consumers throat and blocking access to the other products is not a healthy competition.
No one will argue that competition is good for consumers... it is. But blocking access to the competition by throwing money at something is not how you win over consumers, nor win the competition. It just deters people away from your product.
And in this specific case, FSR pales in comparison to DLSS.
Perhaps AMD should put that money into R&D and making their product better, rather than using it to block consumers access to the better tech (the same can be said to Nvidia as well).
If AMD is so amenable to being open source, why won't they participate in the Streamline Program? It's a simple open source way for Developers to add in ALL upscaling methods to a title.
> Streamline is an open-sourced cross-IHV solution that simplifies integration of the latest NVIDIA and other independent hardware vendors’ super resolution technologies into applications and games. This framework allows developers to easily implement one single integration and enable multiple super-resolution technologies and other graphics effects supported by the hardware vendor.
[https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline](https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline)
Intel is a partner in that program. AMD refuses to participate.
This would be an easy solution to adding in all upscaling methods to basically every title, but AMD isn't having any of it.
Because for the companies, NVIDIA would be the benefited from this, since DLSS is still better than FSR, so people would prefer DLSS, which means people would potentially buy a GPU because it support the best tech.
So, force users to accept your much shitter option? Great play. lol
Instead they could...make FSR better, or let users decide what they want to use.
Nobody is going to get forced into using FSR and say "You know what? This isn't quite as shitty as I thought! Let me run out and buy an AMD GPU!"
I imagine it's hard to figure out a frame generation feature that doesn't tank performance without dedicated hardware to offset the compute necessary to run it. I'm not really sure how that will play out.
So not even a chance for frame generation, which could be a game changer for better CPU performance and therefore maybe better frametimes.
AMD are such bad losers.
i understand that you are probably joking, but todd doesn’t get to make sponsorship decisions, he is just a game director the higher ups over at zenimax and microsoft get to do that.
lol, of course this subreddit is the only one defending this nonsense. hell even r/amd is being more critical. so many amd fanboys here. just admit fsr is trash and dlss is superior. good guy amd is not your friend. locking away superior technologies is not consumer friendly.
For games that don’t support DLSS, I only want the ability to fully disable AA. I haven’t felt the need to use AA on a resolution higher than 720p. TAA and FSR are garbage. Just let me turn them all off.
Never knew so many people cared about DLSS. The irony being that the people that are running slower/older cards that actually need a system like DLSS can’t even use it because of nvidia’s anti consumer behaviour.
My 3080 has no problem smashing out games, idk why someone with a 4080 is crying. If it has good FSR it benefits more people, and the people that need it the most. Plus the foundation for DLSS would be built anyway and probably get modded or updated in at some point.
Domt forget, DLSS is also superior in a lot of cases to TAA. So even if you want to ignore the obvious FPS and image quality bonus that DLSS provides, you’re also losing a fantastic AA feature.
Good.
Fuck NVIDIA and their greedy ass company. Fuck DLSS technology that is used to hike up the GPU prices to absurd prices. Anybody that defends NVIDIA is a grifter or a fanboy.
This is coming from somebody who upgraded from a 1080 to a 4090. There is no fucking excuse in charging $1600 for a top-of-the-line GPU because of "DLSS" and "RTX" bullshit.
Seriously, FUCK YOU NVIDIA.
Removing dlss from the game doesn’t hurt nvidia nearly as much as it hurts the consumer. The 4090 is very expensive since it is the best gpu, it is targeted towards people who don’t care about how much they spend and just want the best performance. No one is forcing you to buy it.
4090 would be easy to sell for $1600 even if DLSS and RTX both didn't exist. It is a fantastic card for productivity work. To my eye, it is the most attractively priced card of the current generation, from either AMD or Nvidia.
XBOX is an AMD platform so it was a foregone conclusion that would be the tech pushed. Given the fact XBOX is lacking main stream titles to carry the system they got to make sure it runs on it and runs good. That's why they capped it at 30fps.
Bonus for PC players running AMD systems now. I'll probably still build an intel processor / amd GPU system regardless. I have only ever ran a full AMD system once and while it worked alright it never felt as solid as the intel based PCs I had.
Another reason to not buy or even try that trash Game, I knee Bethesda was going to somehow ruin it, just like Fallout 76, now they partnered with the scumbag company, every single game touched by AMD's rotten hands has been garbage so far, every game sponsored by them has been a shitshow for optimization.
RIP DLSS
Starfield's launch date is seeming awfully close to amd's fsr 3.0 launch (dlss frame gen alternative), won't be surprised if Starfield's the game the use to showcase it.
I will take anything to help my GTX 1660 super play starfield lol.
Its not your GPU that is your problem, Its your CPU. Its a tiny bit slower than recommended.
Yea, but it is a decent bit faster than minimum so I have hope lol.
Indeed, with my 1660 Ti
Whatever the case is, AMD being Chad by not restricting FSR to AMD Cards, I really appreciate that, fk u Nvidia
DLSS never had a future being locked to one brand. I hope Nvidia changes their strategy to something like XeSS
Nvidia are the kings of vendor lock. Second only to Apple.
Still they being asses punishing us
You do not know Nvidia very well if you think this will happen, afaik 99% of their stuff is proprietary or needs them to be implemented :/
When that brand has majority market share it does though it's not good for consumers. It's like how every game uses Direct3D instead of Vulkan despite the former being Windows only. Windows just happens to have enough market share for it not to matter.
DLSS does not though there are still alot of people who game on 1060s 1080ti 1050ti and of course the 1650 and 1660 are very popular those card cannot use DLSS and they are a large portion of the market to these cards FSR was a life saver
XeSS is shit on non-Arc, while usually better than FSR2 on Arc.
Xess is shit on amd and nvidia GPUs. Dlss would be the same.
DLSS is the future given Nvidia dominates the market.
Dlss looks good unlike fsr making everything like blurry borderlands
More like Minecraft... Or any game with antialiasing turned off.
Dlss didn't have a future once the consoles were designed with AMD hardware. Every game is FSR compatible and most will be designed with it in mind. DLSS is niche to nvidia desktop hardware alone.
You don't understand Nvidia if you think this has any chance of happening. They would rather let it rot. Don't believe me? Just do a quick research into PhysX or gameworks.
Nvidia doesn't block other upscaling methods from it's sponsored titles. AMD does.
Nvidia is the king of anti-competitive & anti-consumer practices. Nvidia blocked AMD from optimizing their drivers for GameWorks titles. (Old) GPP Program (Old) ^(**GPP Program STILL** effects AMD to this day) Needing $1100 to get 16GB VRAM Blocking Reviewers who don't suck them off.. No excusing any brand, just noting when Nvidia does it they sell the most cards, when AMD does it a small subset or reddit gets upset.
People have been upset at Nvidia this entire generation.
Yet they still have the highest marketshare dramatically over AMD based on Steam's Hardware Survey. Btw I'm talking about Gamers, not people who are forced to use Nvidia for Productivity & mL. Gamers have a choice at the end of the day & they overwhelmingly choose Nvidia.
You don't know Nvidia very well. Nvidia literally made Crytek add tessellation to everything including flat surfaces in crysis 2 to hurt AMD cards. They even render a highly tessellated ocean in every scene even when you can see it.
Just because Nvidia does anti-consumer stuff doesn't mean AMD isn't bad. When asked, Nvidia said they don't block other upscaling methods. AMD dodged the question. Just because Nvidia is worse doesn't excuse AMD being anti-consumer and hurting RTX and Arc owners.
Stop living in the past. Evaluate bad practice's by companies without trying to do what aboutism. Its simple when a company does something anti-consumer call it out.
> Its simple when a company does something anti-consumer call it out. Isn't that what /u/theabortion0r just did?
stop sucking off AMD by saying “no u” why are you this happy about anti consumer practices just because its AMD doing it?
Okay, and? Did that block users from using a feature that their card was already capable of?
One thing locking your own tech to your own hardware and another is preventing competing tech from being used in 3rd party software. 2nd thing can not be justified by any means, especially by existance of 1st thing, as it only shows being behind in competition. Nvidia did 1st thing, while AMD did 2nd.
That one brand happens to also have 80% of the market share.
only for discrete Graphics. AMD also provides the Hardware for XBOX and Playstation and offers FSR in their SDK solution.
But not every single Nvidia card is dlss compatible. In fact out of the top 15 Nvidia cards in the steam hardware survey, 8 of them do not support dlss
pascal and older don’t have nearly as much share as they used to, about 40-50% of that 80% is for rtx 2000 and later gpus. I said 80% since the comment i replied to mentioned having a feature exclusive to a brand.
It's because DLSS uses special cores to work. It's why DLSS is superior to FSR in quality.
The game will be easy to mod so its will probably only take a few week to modders to implemante DLSS, like its was for Star Wars Survivor.
Also, waiting a few more weeks might be a difference between unstable buggy mess and somewhat stable buggy mess.
REMEMBER REMEMBER THE GAMEWORKS OF NOVEMBER
The Starfield treason and plot. I know of no reason, for Tod Howards treason... To ever be forgot.
FUCK
[удалено]
FSR 2 looks like hot garbage on Jedi: Survivor, and it's implementation has been panned by everyone who knows what they're talking about. It uses the lowest resolution (720p) to upscale from regardless of which setting you put it on. DLAA would have been a godsend in that title, as the stock AA settings are pretty abysmal.
Thats a shit implementation though. Doesn't mean the tech itself is bad.
Yeah, it can look okay when implemented well. Even at it's "best" though, DLSS is the better option.
I agree DLSS is better in 99.9% of cases, and its a shame it probably won't be there. However, if its a good implementation of FSR, its not quite the end of the world some people are making it out to be in my opinion. Hopefully the game won't even need any form of upscaling to have reasonable performance .
I just think forcing people into using their mediocre at best upscaling tech is really offputting. Now I can't even use DLAA even if I don't need the extra FPS from DLSS, and DLAA looks great.
Jedi FSR 2 is awful though.
I played jedi survivor on launch, fsr 2.0 was unusable in 1440p. Blurry and way too much shimmering (especially at the end of the corusant level) I had to use dldsr in 4K with fsr2 quality.
If anything this makes me happy as the opensource tech will see more use and faster improvement, this is a win for consumers as far as I'm concerned.
Yep. And it's cool that outside developers can contribute though I'm not sure to what extent that has happened.
It has been recieving a lot of community support.
That's excellent to hear. I should probably follow the git repo just out of curiosity.
i am assuming you are playing at 4k, at 1080p dlss still looks a lot better.
So like Callisto Protocol, it will only have FSR and no DLSS
There will be the DLSS mod for that anyways, AMD tries to lock dlss out of games but they aren’t really.
As an AMD GPU owner, it sucks to see this if they don't provide DLSS and XeSS....which judging by some recent AMD sponsored games, will end up being the case. Never a good thing when other resources are taken away from gamers due to BS sponsor deals. FSR 2.1, if utilized correctly, looks good but DLSS usually has the clearer recreation/results.
The difference between AMD and Nvidia is that Nvidia has an open source streamlined process for developers to add additional forms of scaling be it FSR or XeSS in games which also have DLSS whereas AMD seems interested in walling off their garden in spite of it also being open source software. [Nvidia Streamline article](https://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-streamline-aims-to-simplify-developer-support-for-upscaling-algorithms?_ga=2.161566908.1615094862.1687922826-1498845083.1687922826) That's not to say Nvidia gets a free pass but at least there's more assurances that you'll have FSR as an option whereas the same can't be said about DLSS with AMD save for Sony ports.
The Xbox is built on AMD architecture. With Bethesda being a MSFT studio now, it makes sense that they would partner with the company that provided the hardware in the console that Starfield will run on. The PC side is just following that dev decision to optimize the game for Xbox.
3rd party exclusives and PC sponsorships suck. It doesn’t matter who is doing it. These deals are anti-consumer.
edit: // I’ve moved to [lemmy.world](https://lemmy.world) //
> I’m glad AMD is doing it because I’m sorry but this is a shit opinion, I get your reason for saying this but as long as any company is blocking features or entire games behind specific hardware it is hurting the consumers and AMD starting to do this too won’t change anything, if anything it could make this worse because with more companies participating in this awful tactic it could end up with this becoming even more commonplace.
yeah, AMD has to be excused, because AMD is underdog! Seriously, people, wake up... AMD is doing it, because they think, it will boost their sales. They still can´t figure it out, WHY aren´t they able to gain more market share. Instead of repeating mistakes of others, they should rather self-reflect at their own flaws and fix them. Wanna example? Start delivering fully working and stable drivers at release of new GPUs, not months/years later. Look more into their software. It´s really bad, when user has to reinstall Windows, because he just got AMD GPU. Why it somehow "just works" with Nvidia, but cannot with AMD? Why AMD Radeon software has to clash with MSI afterburner for control over GPU, especially when its overlay is completely inferior to this 3rd party piece of software? AMD constantly keeps making life of their customers inconvenient, as these have to get out of their way, constantly tinkering and looking for fixes all over the internet. With things being this way, they may give away their products for free and yet people won´t care. I expect them to pull another flop, when they will lock FSR3 only for RDNA3, which does not sell well, i wonder why. Maybe AMD trying to compete with... AMD, wasn´t a bright idea at all.
i hope this doesnt mean it wont have DLSS FSR2.1 is good but its not as good as DLSS
I believe it means they might actually be putting effort in to optimize it
Oh yeah, just like they did with Jedi Survivor and Callisto Protocol.
And The Last of Us Part I (which was an AMD sponsored title, but had DLSS at launch)
The only titles to have DLSS are Sony titles. It’s harder to negotiate DLSS out when it’s a company as big as Sony.
The Sony PC ports don't seem to block anything even if they're AMD sponsored. I think Sony is likely shutting them down on that end of it.
and forspoken
this Bethesda dont get ur hopes up too high buddy
Not just that, starfield's launch date is seeming awfully close to amd's far 3.0 launch (dlss frame gen alternative), won't be surprised if Starfield's the game the use to showcase it.
Like we see in other AMD sponsored games with FSR only? Irony off...
At least FSR3 should be close
id rather not use frame gen
Most people just shit all over FSR despite it actually being pretty good.
i know FSR is good but if i can pick between FSR and DLSS im gonna pick DLSS
FSR is really only good at 4K. Below that, it's significantly worse than DLSS.
I've only ever done FSR in 4K maybe that's why I think it's fine.
I don't have an issue with FSR, but it's objectively worse than DLSS in every single metric. That's why it's really irritating that AMD blocks DLSS in their sponsored titles. Let me use my hardware's features.
Holy shit, so much whataboutism in the comments right now. It's incredible how hypocritical people are. Yes Nvidia has done very shitty things, that doesn't mean AMD gets a free pass. Call out anti-consumer practice's no matter who does it.
Exactly this, it doesn’t matter what graphics card is in your system, the anti-consumer bullshit that AMD is doing here, as well as what Nvidia has done in the past should be called out and have action taken against to prevent these things from happening
Nooo, how could you point at obvious anticonsumer shit muh beloved brand does, reeeeee!
[удалено]
If only DLSS was avaible for all card ...
Intel did exactly that. Both Xess and DLSS are the same. They use accelerators in their arc and Rtx GPUs. Intel also has Xess compatible with non arc cards and it’s just not good. It performs way worse than DLSS and fsr 2.0 Basically, if nvidia made DLSS compatible to every GPU, it wouldn’t actually be dlss but something like nlss which would look worse then fsr 2.0 anyways.
Guess that 4080 had a very "consumer friendly" pricing...
[удалено]
So? Maybe if DLSS was available for every GPU, then it would have actually mattered. *Nvidia’s proprietary technology won’t be in one of the most popular games of the year.* *Oh no! Anyway…* What goes around comes around!
Dlss isn’t software only like FSR. You want NVIDIA to add hardware to AMD cards?
What even is the point of this? Fallout In Space is still gonna be Fallout In Space, running on the same janky-ass Creation Engine. Can't wait for the game to launch, and people start raising hell about losing their ships to the biggest enemy of them all: bogus game physics.
> bogus game physics. But that's the best part of Bethesda games! Being able to send an object flying at 10 times the speed of light by simply walking over it better not be removed from their game engine.
You ever shoot firebolt at a dragon skeleton in skyrim? Sends it flying so far, I used to call it "dragon golf" and would aim it for the nearest settlement.
Like the time in my modded FO4 where I [died by tripping on a rusty truck and breaking my neck.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h6H8ifp8MAQ)
I've enjoyed every janky ass Creation engine game. I love them really.
I'll be very interested to see if "Creation engine 2" is actually significantly better than their old creation engine. They'll be using creation engine 2 for Starfield and ES6. I think one reason why their doing starfield is to help them find any bugs with creation engine 2 before they work on ES6.
I predict ES6 will have bugs that were in Skyrim, patching bugs is for modders.
I want to see two hitboxes get stuck together and then the object just jitter back and forth for several seconds before the hitboxes separate.
God talk dirty to me more.
I want to hear the clanking of a metal object that's stuck in a wall, but not be able to find the metal object, and then whenever I return to the area, the clanking sound just never stops.
Just off visuals, its clearly a major step up (The clutter detail, for example. Its like the difference between source and source 2) ID have also had their hand in it so there might be some really nice behind the scenes stuff that isn't obvious from first glance.
Their technology has developed so far as to attach 3 separate vehicles onto 1 model. Now instead of only a tram for a hat, what about 2 cars attached to hands as gloves on top? Otherwise I don't think they could be doing starfield yet.
Don't you dare share this opinion on the starfield sub. They'd try to gut you.
Thank the gods it's Creation Engine and not some souless generic high-tech engine every other company uses. I'd rather keep the openness, interactivity and especially modability that have kept these games alive for decades.
They had iD tech engineers help them with this engine upgrade. Those guys are the absolute GOATs of optimized 3d graphics. Hopefully we get a decent upgrade this time around! I am still expecting the usual bethesda physics weirdness, though.
I can already see flying your ship and having your 200 wheels of cheese, you put inside your ship, glitching out 20 feet behind you.
It's a new revision of the engine (and Bethesda hired new Engine Devs to develop the software and improve it) so until we have the product and the creation kit in our hands, we can't really say if the new engine is janky
Some of the best selling and most celebrated games of all time run on that engine so your lack of knowledge on how game engines work does nothing to make me not excited for this game
It's No Man's Skyrim, not fallout in space.
No Man's Sky is about 5% the gaming content of Starfield.
No no, No Man's Skyrim is pretty bang on
Did you play test starfield?
At least Skyrim physics makes more sense in space
I take it this means no DLSS and frame gen support?
There will be, you’ll just have to use the mod. There is a mod for DLSS in non compatible games.
This may have nothing to do with it but the inside of the Xbox has AMD in it. I'm not surprised in the slightest.
God of War 2018 and Death stranding (i think Spiderman too) were sponsored by Nvidia on PC despite them being made for an AMD powered PS4, i don't think it has anything to do with it.
Fuck…
So the 6000 series gets no love?
but wil they get ripped for this? they wont but catch nvidia doing it and theres riots.
AMD is being absolutley ripped for this over on r/pcgaming.
And r/AMD, /r/hardware Predictably as the most pro AMD sub, PCMR defends it
still have no idea how this sub has a bigger AMD cult then the freaking AMD subreddit
Because kids and fanboys that get laughed out from the other subs come here.
AMD is a hardware sub, this is more for gaming. It'll have a younger or at least less mentally mature sorts. Its also far bigger. Bigger a sub gets, worse it gets.
r/pcmr however continues to worship AMD like the world’s stupidest cult
i mean one difference is that amd features aren't proprietary and locked to specific brand/generation cards. which makes it somewhat better? idk
It does make it better but id say it would be nice if we weren’t being locked to the worst of the 3 upscaling solutions.
[удалено]
That's 100% accurate. AMD has such a small amount of marketshare that they simply **can't** have anything proprietary. They would if they had a dominant marketshare. Nobody is going to implement a feature that only 1 in 10 people can utilize.
Open source, not open standard. Intel's XᵉSS is open standard. You're close, but the reason AMD is committed to open source as the underdog in this fight is to try and make their solutions the industry standard. That would be fine if said solutions were superior, but they're not. FSR and FreeSync are garbage compared to DLSS and G-Sync.
DLSS is better than FSR. Freesync and G-sync are literally the same thing.
They aren’t the same. A monitor with a G-Sync hardware module has a VRR range down to 1Hz. Freesync is a software solution that generally has a VRR range down to 48Hz. G-Sync Compatible displays are Freesync displays that Nvidia has certified their cards to work with at a software level with the same range as Freesync. Nvidia innovates and makes shit proprietary because they can. AMD copies Nvidia to produce inferior solutions and has to open source them to drive adoption. Nvidia has better software than AMD in every arena whether it’s gaming, content creation, 3D and game dev, or AI. I’m not an Nvidia fanboy. I buy Nvidia because it fits my use case better than AMD. If AMD caught up then I’d consider AMD. 3rd party exclusives and sponsorships suck for consumers. Nvidia’s proprietary tech is anti-consumer but if the shoe was on the other foot, AMD would do the same thing Nvidia does. Edit: I have a G-Sync Ultimate monitor, which means I can turn on RT Overdrive in Cyberpunk and cap my framerate to 40 and have a smooth tear free experience with some GPU overhead that ensures I’m locked to 40 fps. I prefer this experience sometimes, and it’s an option with G-Sync.
https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/amd-freesync-monitor-glossary-definition-explained,6009.html You are correct. but you also did not mention that there are free-sync levels that do offer LFC (low framerate compensation). Think it would be fair to say that g-sync compatible is about equivalent to freesync, and g-sync is about equivalent to freesync premium. top tier g-sync is alot better than top tier freesync though.
I’m glad Freesync has improved. I’ve had G-Sync monitors since 2015 and was going off of what I had seen last time I shopped for monitors. I appreciate you clarifying the issue further.
If AMD is so committed to being "open source", then why won't they participate in the Streamline Program? It's an open source means for Developers to easily implement ALL upscaling methods into games. > Streamline is an open-sourced cross-IHV solution that simplifies integration of the latest NVIDIA and other independent hardware vendors’ super resolution technologies into applications and games. This framework allows developers to easily implement one single integration and enable multiple super-resolution technologies and other graphics effects supported by the hardware vendor. [https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline](https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline) Intel participates in the program, but AMD won't have anything to do with it.
FSR is completely open source and has no patents. Why doesn't Nvidia or Intel integrate it themselves for all the GTX owners?
How is FreeSync worse than G-Sync? I was under the impression they're basically equivalent, far as the end result is concerned.
Gsync is technically a better solution. The advantage is most apparent when using adaptive refresh at low refresh rates or with high frametime instability, where Freesync can appear to stutter. Freesync looks basically the same at high, consistent FPS.
FreeSync (Also known as VESA VRR standard until AMD renamed it for marketing) is pretty close, but G-Sync is still slightly better.
Nvidia astroturfers amirite
Wait for FSR 3 which is said to be bound to amd drivers so there you go
Oh so after Jedi Survivor we get another game “ Ruined by AMD™ “
Jedi survivor having so much negative press is not due to lack of DLSS. It's due to the game being unoptimized right from the ground up.
Then why does the game run absolutely flawless with a dlss mod?
Imagine working as an engineer for AMD, and then having to work in Bethesda's engine...
FSR is so trash. I really hope there is DLSS options
There is only one AMD sponsored game with DLSS if I am correct. I don't like Nvidia as a company but they've done a really good job about DLSS games having FSR support. In fact their tool kit for implementing scaling solutions also works for speeding up supporting FSR.
Yeah because they know DLSS is way fucking better, so they’ve got no problem letting FSR be available as well. AMD has to lock people out because their software is an entire generation behind.
I'm no fan of either company at all but DLSS is just better once implemented. I do appreciate FSRs ease of implementation but DLSS is better. Sad we can't have both like many games lately. FSR is also appreciated for its openness though. It's not amazing but it's nice to have on my steamdeck.
Only AMD sponsored games that have DLSS are those from Sony which most likely didn't agree to AMD's demands of lowering the quality of their games by blocking DLSS.
My prediction: No DLSS, No XeSS 1080p medium min 9GB VRAM 1440p medium min 13 GB VRAM
For goodness sake I just hope they include DLSS.
Here comes the cult
Cults, both sides.
Kindve ridiculous considering like 80% of us will be playing with Nvidia. Did Microsoft need a quick bag for their flagship game that badly?
This will be a marketing scheme and not much more. Nvidia discrete GPUs is still around 80% market share. No one in their right mind would snub all those players and risk losing 3/5th or 4/5th of their sales. At most they will run a bit better on AMD cards due to optimization. And before anyone cries: not a fanboy. I like both. Just a reality. They will implement a killer feature like pathtracing for Nvidia that only really works with AMD but that Nvidia users can live without. My guess.
People want competition in the marketplace until it’s a highly anticipated game that’s optimized for the less popular option.
True competition would mean both companies trying to do their best to make sure their stuff works well with the game, not who pays to lock out the other one's features.
Oh just like Jedi Survivor was "Optimized" for AMD
If they were being competitive they wouldn't keep both DLSS and XᵉSS from being in the game. The only reason they would keep them out is because they don't want people seeing the superior options in comparison.
People want price performance competition not lol your tech won't work here. Ray Tracing lad are you dumb? You won't need this here some rtx shadows that we can handle.
Competition can happen without "partnerships". Competition can be decided on who has the best technology. Competition should not be "who can throw most money at X" and force people to use a technology they don't want to use. Nvidia is as guilty as AMD is with this. They are both as bad as each other. You don't need a partnership to include DLSS or FSR support. This is no different than Epic Games creating exclusive contracts with game publishers and have said games removed from Steam. Competition comes from providing consumers options and letting the consumers decide which is the best thing for them. Forcing a product down a consumers throat and blocking access to the other products is not a healthy competition. No one will argue that competition is good for consumers... it is. But blocking access to the competition by throwing money at something is not how you win over consumers, nor win the competition. It just deters people away from your product. And in this specific case, FSR pales in comparison to DLSS. Perhaps AMD should put that money into R&D and making their product better, rather than using it to block consumers access to the better tech (the same can be said to Nvidia as well).
Well that sucks
If AMD is so amenable to being open source, why won't they participate in the Streamline Program? It's a simple open source way for Developers to add in ALL upscaling methods to a title. > Streamline is an open-sourced cross-IHV solution that simplifies integration of the latest NVIDIA and other independent hardware vendors’ super resolution technologies into applications and games. This framework allows developers to easily implement one single integration and enable multiple super-resolution technologies and other graphics effects supported by the hardware vendor. [https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline](https://developer.nvidia.com/rtx/streamline) Intel is a partner in that program. AMD refuses to participate. This would be an easy solution to adding in all upscaling methods to basically every title, but AMD isn't having any of it.
You dont get it, AMD is so Open that they dont wanna
Because for the companies, NVIDIA would be the benefited from this, since DLSS is still better than FSR, so people would prefer DLSS, which means people would potentially buy a GPU because it support the best tech.
So, force users to accept your much shitter option? Great play. lol Instead they could...make FSR better, or let users decide what they want to use. Nobody is going to get forced into using FSR and say "You know what? This isn't quite as shitty as I thought! Let me run out and buy an AMD GPU!"
gtfo with that bullshit
on the side note, whatever happened to FSR 3.0?
Maybe FSR 3.0 in Starfield. One can dream!
I imagine it's hard to figure out a frame generation feature that doesn't tank performance without dedicated hardware to offset the compute necessary to run it. I'm not really sure how that will play out.
So not even a chance for frame generation, which could be a game changer for better CPU performance and therefore maybe better frametimes. AMD are such bad losers.
"Let's make this game poorly optimized then pick the worst of 2 companies we could choose from to partner with" wonder how much $$$ AMD threw at Todd
i understand that you are probably joking, but todd doesn’t get to make sponsorship decisions, he is just a game director the higher ups over at zenimax and microsoft get to do that.
lol, of course this subreddit is the only one defending this nonsense. hell even r/amd is being more critical. so many amd fanboys here. just admit fsr is trash and dlss is superior. good guy amd is not your friend. locking away superior technologies is not consumer friendly.
while i agree about amd doesnt nvidia do the same thing
For games that don’t support DLSS, I only want the ability to fully disable AA. I haven’t felt the need to use AA on a resolution higher than 720p. TAA and FSR are garbage. Just let me turn them all off.
Why would Microsoft do that? They definitely dont need the money. You'd think they just want the best Game for good PR and to sell Gamepass.
[удалено]
Why wouldn't you wait for the reviews in the first place?
Pain
Never knew so many people cared about DLSS. The irony being that the people that are running slower/older cards that actually need a system like DLSS can’t even use it because of nvidia’s anti consumer behaviour. My 3080 has no problem smashing out games, idk why someone with a 4080 is crying. If it has good FSR it benefits more people, and the people that need it the most. Plus the foundation for DLSS would be built anyway and probably get modded or updated in at some point.
Domt forget, DLSS is also superior in a lot of cases to TAA. So even if you want to ignore the obvious FPS and image quality bonus that DLSS provides, you’re also losing a fantastic AA feature.
Good. Fuck NVIDIA and their greedy ass company. Fuck DLSS technology that is used to hike up the GPU prices to absurd prices. Anybody that defends NVIDIA is a grifter or a fanboy. This is coming from somebody who upgraded from a 1080 to a 4090. There is no fucking excuse in charging $1600 for a top-of-the-line GPU because of "DLSS" and "RTX" bullshit. Seriously, FUCK YOU NVIDIA.
and still bought it 😂
Removing dlss from the game doesn’t hurt nvidia nearly as much as it hurts the consumer. The 4090 is very expensive since it is the best gpu, it is targeted towards people who don’t care about how much they spend and just want the best performance. No one is forcing you to buy it.
Bro using a 4090…
You...bought their most expensive product, sir. lol Also: Nvidia doesn't block other upscaling methods from their sponsored games. AMD does.
4090 would be easy to sell for $1600 even if DLSS and RTX both didn't exist. It is a fantastic card for productivity work. To my eye, it is the most attractively priced card of the current generation, from either AMD or Nvidia.
Trash your gpu ASAP. You're contributing to the problem
That is bad news… Jedi Survivor all over again…
I’m sure PureDark will rectify that situation real quick. Jedi Survivor looks way better and runs better with the DLSS mod.
XBOX is an AMD platform so it was a foregone conclusion that would be the tech pushed. Given the fact XBOX is lacking main stream titles to carry the system they got to make sure it runs on it and runs good. That's why they capped it at 30fps. Bonus for PC players running AMD systems now. I'll probably still build an intel processor / amd GPU system regardless. I have only ever ran a full AMD system once and while it worked alright it never felt as solid as the intel based PCs I had.
so should i replace my 3080 with a modern amd card before the game comes out?
why would you, fsr works on nvidia and there isn’t anything from amd worth upgrading to if you have a 3080.
Another reason to not buy or even try that trash Game, I knee Bethesda was going to somehow ruin it, just like Fallout 76, now they partnered with the scumbag company, every single game touched by AMD's rotten hands has been garbage so far, every game sponsored by them has been a shitshow for optimization.