Nvidia filled us in on the details of 8K gaming and DLSS with the Ampere graphics cards.
Nvidia Clears Up 8K DLSS Upscaling With GeForce RTX 3090 : Read more
Nvidia Clears Up 8K DLSS Upscaling With GeForce RTX 3090 : Read more
Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?
It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.Because it's not upscaling in the way you're thinking. It's using Ai Tensor Cores to recreate the image using DLSS 2.0.
That can only be true if your source is extremely bad.It quite often ends up looking even better than native resolution.
Obviously, so they can claim to do "8k" rendering while doing only 2560x1400.Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?
Introduces additional lag.Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?
It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.
The author is conflating two different situations here in a confused manner. Let's take situation 1: Display-constant FOV viewing, which encompasses most gaming and video situations. In this case, assuming equal frame rates of course, the smaller the pixel (the higher the ppi) the better. For these situations, the author's last statement is correct; his first statement incorrect.That works out to a pixel size of 0.161mm, and while it's mostly okay, I'd be more comfortable with something closer to 0.242mm...I have to use 150% DPI scaling to comfortably read most text...I could sit six feet away from a 65-inch 8K TV and get roughly the same experience as sitting three feet away from a 28-inch 4K monitor.
There is no such thing as "plain old" upscaling, in the manner you mean. There are dozens of different algorithms used for upscaling, from a simple nearest-neighbor transform up through various interpolation schemes, ending in one of the newest and perhaps the most sophisticated approach: DLSS.It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.
Calling an opinion 'incorrect' is sort of silly, probably because you're trying to read an opinion as a factual statement. The pixel sizes are facts, yes; the experience of those pixel sizes is opinion. Was the opinion not expressed clearly enough? Probably. I'll go edit it to try and clarify exactly what I'm trying to say. (I need DLSS for my writing, sometimes.)The author is conflating two different situations here in a confused manner. Let's take situation 1: Display-constant FOV viewing, which encompasses most gaming and video situations. In this case, assuming equal frame rates of course, the smaller the pixel (the higher the ppi) the better. For these situations, the author's last statement is correct; his first statement incorrect.
The second case encompasses most computer monitor usage, where higher resolution expands display fov, and information content per unit area of display is constant. Here the reverse is true. An 8K display at six foot would render onscreen text or other objects 1/4 the size as a 4K display at 3 feet, for a far different viewing experience.
With all due respect, I wasn't taking issue with your opinion, and and I believe you've missed my point. You prefaced the pixel size remark with the question, "How does 8K DLSS upscaling look?" In the context of rendering fixed-scale fonts, pixel size does indeed matter, and your opinion is not only valid, but one that I (and most people, I believe) would agree with. But that's not DLSS.Calling an opinion 'incorrect' is sort of silly....
did any1 assume native 8k?
it was alwasy goign to be upscaled.
I was being factual about pixel sizes. The experience of those pixel sizes is more opinion -- and I wasn't really even thinking about DLSS at different target resolutions.With all due respect, I wasn't taking issue with your opinion, and and I believe you've missed my point. You prefaced the pixel size remark with the question, "How does 8K DLSS upscaling look?" In the context of rendering fixed-scale fonts, pixel size does indeed matter, and your opinion is not only valid, but one that I (and most people, I believe) would agree with. But that's not DLSS.
In the context of DLSS or upscaling of any sort, a smaller pixel size never translates into a poorer experience. I may be being presumptuous, but I don't believe your opinion IS your opinion in that case. If you play a fixed-fov video game on a hypothetical 24" screen at 16K resolution, you would not find those microscopic pixels "too small" -- because the objects rendered in them would occupy your same field of view as when rendered at 4K, 2K, or 1080p.
By the way, may I belatedly congratulate you on your move here? I always found your columns in your prior home the highlight of the issue.
Most likely yes -- but certainly no worse.At 4K vs. 1440p, I'm pretty sure 4K wins... At 8K vs. 4K? Maybe 8K wins, but I'd bet it's a statistically insignificant win...
If we're both talking about the visual FOV size-- surely this is incorrect? Whether DLSS renders text natively to a specific size or upscales it to that size -- the visual size must remain constant. Else text and UI elements will no longer align properly with the graphical elements, no?This of course assumes that you get a final rendered result where text size remains constant. Which, using DLSS to upscale to different target resolutions, it actually wouldn't
Like I said, I'd need to check, but the 'best practice' approach for upscaling is usually to render all the graphics stuff at the lower resolution and then upscale. Then apply UI elements at the target resolution. So for example, I can run MS Flight Simulator at 720p with 30% resolution scaling and all the planes, land, buildings, etc. look super blocky, but the text remains legible because it's only drawn after all the upscaling takes place. So the text and UI still target 720p.If we're both talking about the visual FOV size-- surely this is incorrect? Whether DLSS renders text natively to a specific size or upscales it to that size -- the visual size must remain constant. Else text and UI elements will no longer align properly with the graphical elements, no?
Agree completely, that poster has plainly not seen DLSS in action and how it can add detail that isn’t there even in native resolution. Aka 4k rendering with 8k dlss upscaling has more detail than native 4k or native 4k with upscaling done by say a TV.There is no such thing as "plain old" upscaling, in the manner you mean. There are dozens of different algorithms used for upscaling, from a simple nearest-neighbor transform up through various interpolation schemes, ending in one of the newest and perhaps the most sophisticated approach: DLSS.