[HotHardware] AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution – Say NO To Pixel Peeping

1 : Anonymous2021/07/07 15:01 ID: ofkmqh
[HotHardware] AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution - Say NO To Pixel Peeping
2 : Anonymous2021/07/07 16:31 ID: h4dbsb2

He's not completely wrong. I can barely tell the difference between 1440p and 4k when sitting 2 feet away from my monitor while actually playing a game in motion.

That said, image quality does matter. It isn't valid to just wave your hand at the whole thing and say "you won't notice unless you pause and squint", because that's subjective. Maybe Jimmy John won't, but Billy Bob will.

ID: h4ddynw

Sure but people's option of technologies like FSR is largely based on their subjective experience since it's all about tricking your brain into not noticing the drop in quality.

I'm pretty sure there are people who can tell the difference between native res and FSR Ultra Quality in motion just like there are those that can't tell the difference between native res and FSR Balanced. It's all subjective.

ID: h4djagw

Right, so a responsible reviewer should say "some people might not notice the image quality impact, and your mileage may vary, but here's how it looks in A/B testing against native (and DLSS2, when those games are available).

ID: h4dthhh

The in motion aspect should not come into play as much with FSR... as it doesn't use motion vectors... people sensitive to flickering on the other hand or other artifacts that FSR specifically has or exacerbates.

ID: h4e48la

Dang Billy Bob, always throwing a wrench in things.

ID: h4dw509

The bigger question is which change is more noticeable, going from 100% visual fidelity down to 90%, or going from 45fps to 75fps.

If we lose 10% of the texture definition, but gain 40% performance, is that really a visual downgrade?

If the frames are a little less sharp, but I'm getting 50% more frames, how much visual data am I actually losing?

I know that there are those who loathe compromise, which is why I'm glad that FSR has an "Off" option, but for me stepping up to 60fps+ is about as big an upgrade as turning the texture resolution up another notch.

ID: h4dzsra

Image quality is still downgraded in your scenario, yes, but the tradeoff for smooth framerates would be more than worthwhile to most people.

ID: h4el1j0

That said, image quality does matter.

If you're using any form of upscaling you're already agreeing to give that up a bit though, for FPS. It's the whole reason it's attractive at all right now is people really want more FPS out of games.

ID: h4elyhg

Not really, DLSS2 is black magic in some games. But yes, there's usually a trade-off, just depends how much.

ID: h4eo8dl

Indeed. Kinda suspicious they didnt say this when DLSS was compared using zoomed in screenshots all the time lol

3 : Anonymous2021/07/07 15:17 ID: h4d1o2u

What do you mean? How am I supposed to play the game if I don’t screenshot every frame and view it at 400% zoom?

ID: h4dv6hg

Them: "No, you can't just like FSR, look at how that fencing flickers at 5x magnification!"

Me: "Lol, 120fps go zooom...:"

4 : Anonymous2021/07/07 15:38 ID: h4d4ixn

Please note that according to HotHardware this content was sponsored by AMD but they did not influence the content or preview it before publication.

ID: h4dcoiz

I mean, isn't the act of being sponsored going to have some kind of influence purely by definition? I'm not saying AMD handed them a list of do's and don'ts, but by simply being a sponsor, that's obviously going to have some kind of influence over the bias of the reviewer, right?

ID: h4de4x2

That's why sponsorships are disclosed so that you can take that into consideration.

ID: h4e1h15

People will have an inherent bias when it comes to everything, sponsorship or not

5 : Anonymous2021/07/07 16:18 ID: h4d9z34

Sounds like Intel when they say "no benchmarks please, only measure subjective responsiveness of system".

ID: h4eamtl

No reviewer does numerical comparisons of DLSS/FSR's accuracy versus the native image anyway. It's all subjective. If everyone compared e.g. the mean squared error versus the native image, you'd have a point.

ID: h4ddc1v

To be fair technologies like FSR are in large part about the subjective experience if you're comparing them to native resolution.

With CPUs you can get objective data that shows that CPU A is faste

efficient/better value than CPU B.

6 : Anonymous2021/07/07 20:16 ID: h4e6k6l

This is why I just use 1440p. It would be interesting to see 4k brought down with fsr to the same performance as 1440p and see which visual wise ends up better.

7 : Anonymous2021/07/07 16:59 ID: h4dfjfh

FSR/DLSS is an answer to 4k and ray tracing.
as the hardware isn't enough to push fps with ray tracing the answer is to render less and then upscale.

Other than that, buy a card that runs your games well and run them native.
AMD is faster with common 1080p and 1440p resolutions than their competition.
90% of all gamers should simply buy more amd cards like the 6700xt.

ID: h4ec2cy

Proud 6700xt owner here. Best decision I ever made.

ID: h4ef2xb

I have an OC 6900xt. The price is absurd, and most people either can't afford it or say "fuck it".

This gives longer live to cards like the FuryX.. but quite purposefully AMD won't support these cards anymore.
In any case, this is good news, even for console players as it is going to Xbox now, and I expect to PS5 too.

8 : Anonymous2021/07/07 15:58 ID: h4d78ww

All I know is that on my 1440p monitor I can see a clear difference between native and FSR Quality, no pixel peeping or side by side comparisons required.

Sure, at 4K the difference is far less noticable but especially when looking at how FSR was marketed with being available for all older and weaker hardware, 4K isn't exactly the usecase of most people that have waited for FSR.

As is the specific usecase in that video, what percentage of 5700XT owners do play at 4K ?

For a review that says it's sponsored but not influenced by AMD, they're making quite sure to only use the most benefitial scenario for FSR, which is 4K.

ID: h4d7p7u

I see what you mean but as a 2070 (almost the 5700XT equivalent) owner with a 4k monitor, this is definitely very useful.

ID: h4eenbp

The in motion aspect should not come into play as much with FSR... as it doesn't use motion vectors... people sensitive to flickering on the other hand or other artifacts that FSR specifically has or exacerbates.

I can tell the difference on my 4K HDR monitor, and yes, it is better than 1440 but not much better than the upscaling that some good games like Control do (I would say it is about as good as Control).
Also, this disables dynamic resolution for the time being..

9 : Anonymous2021/07/07 16:32 ID: h4dbujo

I don't have to go pixel peeping to notice the sharpening artifacts and ghosting / motion artifacts in both DLSS and FidelityFX though.

I continue to notice these things under normal circumstances under normal gameplay. They distract me during normal play and thus cause me to go in and disable them.

It's just how it is from my perspective. I'm not necessarily complaining, just saying that these technologies are not for me and I do not like using them, that's all.

I'm glad for all the people who do like it.

ID: h4djhqx

FSR doesn't cause Ghosting.

ID: h4djola

No, but DLSS does. FSR looks over-sharpened to me and without a way to control the sharpness strength I do not prefer to use it.

10 : Anonymous2021/07/07 15:59 ID: h4d7dho

I mean it makes sense, my criticism of DLSS is how it looks like at 1x when looking at straight edge anti aliasing (it is good for non straight edges). This is absolutely horrible for rendered text in game (for example dials on a cockpit) I don't go pixel peeping for that.

ID: h4dbpk4

DLSS also has artifacts in motion where as FSR seems to be better in that department. Still prefer native quality over either imo. FSR seems to be cool for igpus.

I was looking for 64x AA in DLSS but Nvidia seems to be deleting posts from people asking about it /shrug.

11 : Anonymous2021/07/07 16:27 ID: h4db6qn

I tested FSR at 3440x1440 with quality mode with an 6700xt and put sharpening ris to 100% and it was way better than native without RIS. So at 1440p FSR its more than good at least at quality and ultra quality mode if we use RIS sharpening with it. No difference at all with native resolution

I mean

Native<FSR Quality+100% Sharpening

Native+50% sharpening=FSR Quality+100% sharpening

ID: h4dsueq

Please clarify like: FSR RCAS ?? developer strength + CAS 100% in your test Native + CAS/RIS 50%

how much oversharpening artifacts appeared in the FSR +RIS ?

ID: h4dvov2

I meant FSR quality with ris sharpening from amd control panel. No artifacts with ris at all. Native without 0% ris is more blur than fsr quality with 100% sharpening. So at least for 1440p fsr is more than enough it gave about 50 60% frames.


Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x