DLSS or FSR support?

Ho3n3r said:
Nah. I just live in the real world. They simply don't have the resources. It won't fall out of the sky magically if you just pray for it.
Click to expand...
So now that they've made all the money, they should have the resources for this, right? Or is it still everyone else's fault but the developers?
 
Luke Cook117 said:
So now that they've made all the money, they should have the resources for this, right? Or is it still everyone else's fault but the developers?
Click to expand...
You can't assign fault to something that was never promised. There are so many things you can attribute to being "the fault of the developers" (actually management, developers just do what they're told, they don't actually decide whether it gets in or not) - no free practice servers, no ability to host a server in one's own country, lack of consequence to blatant insanity in daily races, horrible replay system etc.

But this one in particular is a blameless "crime".
 
Just as a suggestion, has anyone tried Radeon Super Resolution? If so, what were the results like? I have a 75hz monitor so high fps isn't my priority.
 
If they’re not going to bother to try to optimise this more and instead worry about driver swaps and custom liveries constantly (see last few updates), then support for both is much needed, especially with how good both are now instead of more traditional anti aliasing techniques.

Performance still tanks for me on occasion with a 4090/7800x3d setup, especially as soon as the sun dares to set and the circuit lights turn on. In an endurance sim… The wild fluctuations between fps depending on time of day, what corner you’re at etc etc is larger than even ACC ever was, and that’s saying something.
 
zzmadd said:
Frame generatios is ABSOLUTELY useless in competitive gaming. It adds latency which is exactly the opposite you need in driving a car.
Click to expand...
You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. If you use framegen to go from 120ps to 240fps, the added input lag is negligable. We're talking about <10ms.

On top of that, many of the new framegen systems use player input to create frame offset to adjust the displayed frame in line with most recent input. This means that the perceived input delay is even less. And since racing games dont use direct input to move camera, this feature is even of lesser importance.
 
Aydhe said:
You have absolutely no clue what you're talking about. If you use framegen to go from 120ps to 240fps, the added input lag is negligable. We're talking about <10ms.

On top of that, many of the new framegen systems use player input to create frame offset to adjust the displayed frame in line with most recent input. This means that the perceived input delay is even less. And since racing games dont use direct input to move camera, this feature is even of lesser importance.
Click to expand...
This is correct. FrameGen shows real value on displays ~240 Hz and above with higher frame rates (100+) with very little to no perceivable downside. It's when you're trying to uplift from low frame rates (for example, 30 fps -> 60 fps) that you may hit noticeable latency issues.
 
Then why aren't competitive FPS games using it? At least I am not aware pros would typically enable it.
 
JES said:
Then why aren't competitive FPS games using it? At least I am not aware pros would typically enable it.
Click to expand...
I didn't say the latency cost was zero. Just that it becomes a diminishing factor at higher base framerates. It's especially going to be difficult to ever perceive a difference in a sim racing title, where your controls are analog devices.
 
JES said:
Then why aren't competitive FPS games using it? At least I am not aware pros would typically enable it.
Click to expand...
it's diminishing return, when you insert extra frame at 30fps you're adding about 33ms delay. If you do it at 60 it's 16ms. if you do it at 120 it's about 8ms. The higher the base framerate, the lower the delay.

Then you have to combine it with how racing games work differently to FPS games. In FPS you have direct input from your mouse, in racing game's it's an analog controller which makes all latency and delays much harder to percieve. Best example is if you try playing same game on mouse and controller coming from 120fps to 60fps. Mouse will feel almost unplayable, while controller will still feel fine.

And with racing games, I believe it would be possible to detach rendering pass from physics and handling so while your display might've been delayed by 16ms, your wheel could be made to respond in realtime as it is now, so delay in sim racing game could actually be made pretty irrelevant.
 
Aydhe said:
And with racing games, I believe it would be possible to detach rendering pass from physics and handling so while your display might've been delayed by 16ms, your wheel could be made to respond in realtime as it is now, so delay in sim racing game could actually be made pretty irrelevant.
Click to expand...
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the rendering pass is already decoupled from the physics in LMU, and most other realistic simulators. Otherwise, the physics simulation calculation becomes a function of frame rate (which is variable), and we've seen how problematic this can be with other racing titles (won't name names).
 
StrayTexel said:
Someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the rendering pass is already decoupled from the physics in LMU, and most other realistic simulators. Otherwise, the physics simulation calculation becomes a function of frame rate (which is variable), and we've seen how problematic this can be with other racing titles (won't name names).
Click to expand...
Physics calculations are decoupled in most of modern engines so it's highly likely.
 
Botmeister37 said:
DLSS is fantastic, love it and use it a lot on games. But not for a simulator. Fake frames are not friends with fast paced inputs from steering wheels and pedals. Graphically I agree it would help immensely.
Click to expand...
Well, it can be just for the anti-aliasing or upscaling (DLAA or DLSS) to improve visual fidelity and add performance improvements. Need not be used to generate more frames.
 
Those of us using mid-tier GPU’s would really love DLSS.
Even with texture streaming now added, I do get the occasional stutter, and my graphics settings are low/mid.
Has S397 provided any feedback as to the likelihood of it being added, or is DLSS a feature that needs to be baked in early on to the dev cycle for software?
 
aaron0288 said:
It really isn’t. They should be credited for it looking as good as it does and running as well as it does. ACC, which admittedly has far better night lighting, still runs slower (without DLSS) and that came out 2018… Yup, you can put DLSS on and get a bump, but this only really works at 4K. ACC is so blurry as standard that turning on DLSS/FSR at anything below 4K makes it look pretty awful.

Add ray tracing/path tracing and yeah, you’ll want DLSS as it halves or worse the FPS, for what would be such a minimal bump in graphics/lighting, especially in a fast paced sim racing title. Again, it would help LMU particularly with it’s night lighting which unfortunately is pretty poor imo, but ray tracing/path tracing would be such a waste of the developers time. Imo of course.
Click to expand...
That is untrue for ACC and DLSS at the latest versions (which you get with one click with DLSS Swapper).
Lazza said:
...
Click to expand...
 
rimboo said:
That is untrue for ACC and DLSS at the latest versions (which you get with one click with DLSS Swapper).
Click to expand...
If you’re going to quote a post from a year and a half ago, then yes, I would hope things with DLSS would have improved in that time too!
 
Until FSR & DLSS are supported, I'm having great results with AMD's AFMF. I've tried Lossless Scaling but it wasn't as good. Nvidia's equivalent to AFMF is called Smooth Motion Frames. Give it a try!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top