Its wild to me how they can go through all these extra compute steps to generate an extra frame and that's some how more efficient that generating one normally.
this post was submitted on 22 Aug 2023
28 points (100.0% liked)
Gaming
30555 readers
386 users here now
From video gaming to card games and stuff in between, if it's gaming you can probably discuss it here!
Please Note: Gaming memes are permitted to be posted on Meme Mondays, but will otherwise be removed in an effort to allow other discussions to take place.
See also Gaming's sister community Tabletop Gaming.
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
It's probably not that much faster than or efficient than traditional rasterization, but ray-tracing gets exponentially more expensive to absolutely completely fill in the scene. For the RT scenario it actually does make sense. Even rendering out frames and animations in blender you don't let the renderer go on forever. At some point it's more effective to let it stop and denoise it. The earlier you can get away with doing that the better.
Upscaling is for consoles. I don't care how fancy the algorithm is. Render every pixel!
Playing at 4k+ resolutions, the difference between a well implemented quality DLSS and native ranges from barely distinguishable to objectively better because DLSS is also great anti aliasing. And even if you really need native resolution, DLAA is almost always better than any other anti aliasing method. Before DLSS 2 came out you might have had a point, but now I simply disagree with your statement.
Releasing dlss 3.5 on old cards eh? Scared of FSR 3 or something? It's unusual for nvidia to support anything besides the current generation these days.
Frame Generation still only works on 40 series cards. Only RR will come to 20 and 30 series.
I know, that's why I said 3.5 not 3.