Question Is it worth upgrading from RX 7700 XT to an NVIDIA GPU just for DLSS4/DLAA and better image quality ?

[sarah5678]

Hi everyone,

I've always used AMD GPUs and currently own an RX 7700 XT, which performs well.

But I'm wondering:
Would it be worth upgrading to an NVIDIA card like the RTX 4060 Ti 8GB, a used 3070 Ti, or even a 3080, just to gain access to visual technologies like DLSS 4 or DLAA, which some say can offer image quality even better than native resolution?

I’m someone who values image quality, visual clarity, and graphic details more than just frame rates.

So here’s my key question:

👉 At native resolution (with TAA or native FSR, no DLSS or DLAA), and using identical in-game settings, is there actually any noticeable difference in image quality or clarity between an AMD GPU and an NVIDIA GPU?

Or are they visually identical in practice and such differences are negligible or unnoticeable?

And what about when you do use DLSS 4 or DLAA on NVIDIA cards — is the improvement in visual quality significant enough to justify switching from a strong card like the RX 7700 XT?

I’ve searched a lot online but couldn't find a clear side-by-side comparison.

I'd really appreciate any input, comparisons, screenshots, or experiences — especially from users who have tested both sides.

Thanks in advance!

 

[QyInvoLing]

In China currently the price of 5060ti is completely a piece of (what you know), so even if you want to switch to NVIDIA, there's no recommended card. Don't buy any 40/30 series card now except the price of them is significantly lower than their current price.

At native resolution (with TAA or native FSR, no DLSS or DLAA), and using identical in-game settings, is there actually any noticeable difference in image quality or clarity between an AMD GPU and an NVIDIA GPU?

Or are they visually identical in practice and such differences are negligible or unnoticeable?

No, there isn't.

And what about when you do use DLSS 4 or DLAA on NVIDIA cards — is the improvement in visual quality significant enough to justify switching from a strong card like the RX 7700 XT?

No, I tested 5070ti+DLSS4 in several games, and I didn't noticed SIGNIFICANT improvement of visual quality compared to non-super-resolution enabled situations.

Meanwhile, if you have to enable FSR/DLSS/XeSS to get 60FPS fluent gaming experience, then DLSS4 is siginificantly more powerful than FSR3 in visual quality. Take Black Myth Wukong as an example, XeSS2(tested using Arc B580), FSR3(my 7900gre) would blur the layered leaves of the trees, but DLSS4 won't. FSR4(using 9070) blurs the leaves a little but not that much. Generally even DLSS4 cannot output a better visual quality than pure resolution. I also tested DLAA(using the latest transformer model) in only one game(Honkai Star Rail) and I still doesn't noticed any significant improvement.
All these experience I provide is in the test scene that I've not enabled frame generation, only super resolution.

Taking your favor of better image quality instead of FPS into consideration, I'll say that once you can play you favourite games in 60FPS without FSR3 enabled, then you have no necessity to upgrade it.

 

[CelicaGT]

All upscaling reduces image quality in some manner. The transformer models introduced in DLSS4 and FSR4 fix some issues but introduce others. It varies game by game, so there is no blanket NVIDIA is better or AMD is better for image quality in regards to upscaling. I would say that NVIDIA is -generally- better but there are several games I play that the FSR implementation is of a higher quality and/or performs better, even on an NVIDIA card. I always advise people to choose their GPU based solely on raster/ray tracing performance and consider the upscaling a perk. Additionally it's good to seek out reviews with benchmarks of games you ACTUALLY play, not just a generic geomean.

 

[beyondlogic]

if you want the best image quality don't use fsr period. or dllss. basically its not worth it your better to tweak the display or monitor your using and make sure its using full native. make sure card is set to Full Range RGB

and ips monitors are the best in terms of colours. sometimes blacks can be a issue but a good one will do great.

also it can be preference of how stuff looks i find amd gpus sometimes can look a bit weird and nvidia gpus look better to me.

I haven't had time to test image quality with 7700xt vs amds newest ones but i do know the 6000 series from my own experience had some image issues depending on the game. from what i can tell this was more fixed on there newest series.

 

[dark_globe]

there is no reason to replace your current gpu with the likes of 4060Ti or even older 3070(Ti) -
you would actually be going backwards in terms of rasterization performance and
also in terms of available VRAM .

when it comes to those features:
FSR4 is much better than any other previous gen of this technology .
DLSS is generally supported by more games and (maybe) a little bit better overall
(but again it depends on the games you play) .
in any case to make a meaningful upgrade over your current gpu you would need at least rtx 5070 or radeon 9070 .
(but we have no clue what the rest of your system looks like so it depends...)

 

[JayGau]

if you want the best image quality don't use fsr period. or dllss. basically its not worth it your better to tweak the display or monitor your using and make sure its using full native. make sure card is set to Full Range RGB

I so strongly disagree with that. At 4k ultra and dlss set to quality or even balanced the image quality is still way better than with settings tweaked down to get the equivalent frame rate without upscaling. DLSS is getting so good that in many cases it's almost impossible to see the difference. Of course native will always be better, but if you can't run it with a decent frame rate dlss is a very good option. And although it's generally better than fsr, I saw a few games where fsr was doing better (Starfield and Hogwarts Legacy for example).

 

[beyondlogic]

I so strongly disagree with that. At 4k ultra and dlss set to quality or even balanced the image quality is still way better than with settings tweaked down to get the equivalent frame rate without upscaling. DLSS is getting so good that in many cases it's almost impossible to see the difference. Of course native will always be better, but if you can't run it with a decent frame rate dlss is a very good option. And although it's generally better than fsr, I saw a few games where fsr was doing better (Starfield and Hogwarts Legacy for example).

well of course its going to look ok at 4k lower resolutions not so much.

i also disagree that you cant tell diffrence alot of time its either to soft blurry or sharp.

 

[John Chesterfield]

alot of time its either to soft blurry or sharp.

Not if you use the transformer model of DLSS..

 

[beyondlogic]

Not if you use the transformer model of DLSS..

That model still suffers from lighting glitches it's resolves some issues but it can still look like a hot mess even in 4k depends on how eagle eyed you are but I've noticed it.

 

[John Chesterfield]

That model still suffers from lighting glitches it's resolves some issues but it can still look like a hot mess even in 4k depends on how eagle eyed you are but I've noticed it.

If you sit there pixel peeping maybe.