NVIDIA is full of shit
Technology
134
Beiträge
53
Kommentatoren
613
Aufrufe
-
@FreedomAdvocate This is my last answer.
Anti Consumer = working against the Consumer ...
^^^ if you define NVidias Consumer as business
If you define NVidia Consumers as common people wanting a gamer gpu than you can keep believing that they try to do all those things to make you the cheapest and best offer and keep buying them.
I am not going to stop you! Since you don't know me and you don't know my experience and past with nvidia and seem not want to accept my standpoint -> i am not going to force it on you. But i want to ask you to refer from calling something "most stupid" just because you aren't sharing the other opinion...
Ok cool, so you do think that having to pay for a GPU is “anti-consumer” and think that everything should be free.
We’re done here.
-
I'm sorry, I would be really impressed if you shit a rocket at a demon in doom eternal and it exploded and all kinds of shits flying around but you noticed the reflection of another around a corner on a shiny wall at the same time. There might be like 4 frames of this captured.
Yes, I play a lot of FPS games. I have an ultra wide monitor and 144Hz.
Not to mention, raster is capable of doing these things, it's just not "as realistic". I've watched several comparison videos.
Well you’d be impressed then
Playing a lot of fps games doesn’t mean you can play at a high level. Having an ultrawide monitor and 144hz is completely irrelevant lol. There are people with 4K 200+hz monitors and 5090s who are trash at competitive play.
Raster isn’t capable of these things, that’s why it’s never been done until raytracing came along. Rasterization rasters what is on the screen, nothing outside of that.
-
So it has limits? Oh no….. At 1000fps you can’t do much rendering effects at all. Luckily no one, and I do literally mean no one, plays games at 1000fps.
Yes, but that also means there's no FPS advantage at all at 500 Hz using DLSS and people do play at 500Hz
-
Yes, but that also means there's no FPS advantage at all at 500 Hz using DLSS and people do play at 500Hz
If you’re playing games at 500fps you don’t need DLSS. What is your point? Again - it’s for situations where you can’t get a good framerate at the settings you want to use.
How is this hard to understand?
-
If you’re playing games at 500fps you don’t need DLSS. What is your point? Again - it’s for situations where you can’t get a good framerate at the settings you want to use.
How is this hard to understand?
My point is my 2060 can't reach 500 fps even if you run the game in DLSS. You need a more powerful GPU, DLSS can only increase your FPS if the FPS is terrible, it can't boost you from 250 to 500
-
My point is my 2060 can't reach 500 fps even if you run the game in DLSS. You need a more powerful GPU, DLSS can only increase your FPS if the FPS is terrible, it can't boost you from 250 to 500
But no one said it would?
-
But no one said it would?
It would if DLSS didn't add latency, but it does
-
It would if DLSS didn't add latency, but it does
It adds rendering time, not "latency" btw.
DLSS improves framerates at basically no cost, to let people hit playable or high framerates at quality levels they couldn't without it. It's not for hitting 500fps, it's for hitting 30/60/100 etc.
-
It adds rendering time, not "latency" btw.
DLSS improves framerates at basically no cost, to let people hit playable or high framerates at quality levels they couldn't without it. It's not for hitting 500fps, it's for hitting 30/60/100 etc.
It doesn't render anything, so it can't add rendering time, it just generates an upscaled version of an already rendered frame
-
It doesn't render anything, so it can't add rendering time, it just generates an upscaled version of an already rendered frame
Ok so you definitely don't understand how DLSS works lol.
DLSS has to be implemented by the developers of the game. They literally have to use the DLSS APIs in their game code. DLSS requires things like the player input and motion vectors for all scenes, materials, and objects that are in the frame. It adds time to the rendering pipeline. The more powerful your GPU the less rendering time it adds.
We're getting way off track now anyway, so to go back to the start: DLSS Super Resolution is amazing because it lets you get a framerate bump with either little-to-no visibile change to IQ, to a very noticeable degradation of IQ depending on how much of a framerate bump you get. It is one of the most significant advancements in gaming this century IMO.
On my PC with a 4070 Super, I can play COD BO6 at a near locked 120fps on my 4K 120hz VRR tv at "4K" using DLSS, whereas my PC definitely cannot do that without DLSS. It looks like native 4K, and believe me I've taken many screenshots and compared them at 300% zoom lol.
-
Ok so you definitely don't understand how DLSS works lol.
DLSS has to be implemented by the developers of the game. They literally have to use the DLSS APIs in their game code. DLSS requires things like the player input and motion vectors for all scenes, materials, and objects that are in the frame. It adds time to the rendering pipeline. The more powerful your GPU the less rendering time it adds.
We're getting way off track now anyway, so to go back to the start: DLSS Super Resolution is amazing because it lets you get a framerate bump with either little-to-no visibile change to IQ, to a very noticeable degradation of IQ depending on how much of a framerate bump you get. It is one of the most significant advancements in gaming this century IMO.
On my PC with a 4070 Super, I can play COD BO6 at a near locked 120fps on my 4K 120hz VRR tv at "4K" using DLSS, whereas my PC definitely cannot do that without DLSS. It looks like native 4K, and believe me I've taken many screenshots and compared them at 300% zoom lol.
That screenshot said generated, not rendered. DLSS generates the final frame taking the motion vectors and the rendered lower resolution frame. It does not go in the rendering pipeline since the lower resolution frame has to be completely done rendering
