News Nvidia Clears Up 8K DLSS Upscaling With GeForce RTX 3090

[Admin]

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

 

[nofanneeded]

Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?

 

[HyperMatrix]

Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?

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. Look up some videos. It quite often ends up looking even better than native resolution. Although there are a few bugs to be worked out due to over-sharpening of some elements. DLSS went from being an absolute joke with versions 1.0 through 1.9, to an absolutely amazing piece of tech in version 2.0. Night and day difference.

 

[setx]

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.

It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.

It quite often ends up looking even better than native resolution.

That can only be true if your source is extremely bad.

Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?

Obviously, so they can claim to do "8k" rendering while doing only 2560x1400.

 

[drivinfast247]

Upscaling from lower resolution into 8K resolution ? 5000$TV can do it natively , so why bother upscaling from the card itself ?

Introduces additional lag.

 

[HyperMatrix]

It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.

No. It’s not. I don’t even have time to argue with this level of ignorance and arrogance.

 

[Endymio]

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.

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.

 

[Endymio]

It's exactly plain old upscaling. Well known in image and video processing for years.

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.

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

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.

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.)

What I was trying to say is that, having used computers for many years (decades even), with modern LCDs for PC use, I find anything smaller than around 0.25mm for pixel size starts to mean native 100% DPI with no other scaling means stuff is 'too small' for me to comfortably read at monitor viewing distances (of around three feet). And for various reasons, running Windows with DPI scaling at 100% is vastly preferable for me.

So, 4K on 28-inch displays is too small and I don't really see a major difference in clarity between 4K and 1440p on a 28-inch screen size at around three feet (for videos and some games). Obviously for Windows use there's more resolution, which means smaller windows and text, but if I open a movie, or a game that scales UI, assets, and everything else based off the resolution? Yeah, I'm not really going to notice the difference between a 28-inch native 1440p and 28-inch native 4K display. (Unless a game has zero anti-aliasing, in which case I'd definitely notice -- Project CARS 3 is a good example of this, in a bad way, because what game doesn't support post-process AA these days!?)

Take that a step further and give me a 28-inch 8K display. It will be useless at 100% DPI scaling, and I'd end up at 200% scaling, giving the same effective resolution as 4K in a lot of scenarios. But again, DPI scaling still breaks on a lot of apps, which means irritation. Even if the DPI scaling worked perfectly, however, as someone in my mid-40s, I can pretty much guarantee that 8K with 200% DPI scaling vs. 4K with 100% DPI scaling isn't going to matter to me. I really won't see the extra clarity of 8K. Maybe in my 20s that wouldn't have been true. Maybe. But definitely not now.

You're right that the second bit about 8K 65-inch at six feet vs. 4K 28-inch at 3 feet wasn't about resolution. It's about how much of my field of view the screens would occupy. To read text on an 8K display more or less comfortably at 100% scaling, though, it would have to be a 60-inch display with me sitting at three feet away. Or if I were 10 feet away, I'd need about a 180-inch display.

 

[Endymio]

Calling an opinion 'incorrect' is sort of silly....

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.

 

[hotaru251]

did any1 assume native 8k?

it was alwasy goign to be upscaled.

 

[nofanneeded]

did any1 assume native 8k?

it was alwasy goign to be upscaled.

Not really , you can still use 4 x 4K monitors which are equivalent to 8K but much much better for 60-144hz 4K screen exist , but 8K is still at 60hz

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

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.

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.

Theoretically, rendering at 1080p and using DLSS to upscale to 1440p, 4K, 8K, or even 16K, things should look better as the target resolution increases. But the opinion part comes in how much better it would look. At 4K vs. 1440p, I'm pretty sure 4K wins out in a double-blind test. At 8K vs. 4K? Maybe 8K wins, but I'd bet it's a statistically insignificant win. 16K vs. 8K (not that 16K exists, really), for normal size screens, I'm sure I couldn't tell the difference.

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 -- not without some changes to how the scaling is done. Right now, the game renders at one resolution, DLSS upscales to a higher resolution, and then the UI and text gets rendered at the target 'native' resolution so that there are no upscaling artifacts. At least, I think that's how it works? I'd maybe need to double check on a few games. Non-DLSS games definitely upscale in this manner, though.

As for my move, I switched from PC Gamer to Tom's Hardware in February. If you're referring to Maximum PC, I'm still planning to contribute a monthly Tech Talk column (now that the COVID-19 craziness has subsided -- COVID has severely rocked the magazine / print world, along with the reductions in travel and such).

 

[Endymio]

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...

Most likely yes -- but certainly no worse.

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

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?

 

[JarredWaltonGPU]

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?

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.

How text is rendered in games varies. Sometimes it's drawn in the 3D game world as a texture. Other times it's overlayed later on in the rendering pipeline. There are pros and cons to both approaches, but generally speaking you want text to be as clear as possible, so no upscaling is best. But then do you scale the font size of the text?

This is the tricky part. In some games, you want more or less a fixed FOV on the text. In others, you want to be able to put more text on the screen. For 8K, obviously you would want to have a minimum of scaling to 4K FOV equivalent or users would be in trouble. Most likely it ends up being a game developer decision. Death Stranding might scale the text that's rendered into the game world (for objects placed by others) but use native text for UI elements.

 

[scyto]

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.

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.