News Old Nvidia gaming GPUs enjoy huge performance uplifts from new mod — DLSS 3 to FSR 3 mod enables frame generation to deliver up to 75% better perfo...

[purpleduggy]

You can improve every GPU's performance by 10x by simply counting every frame 10 times before the screen refreshes.
Just squint and wiggle your head a little to stimulate motion. It's pretty much the same thing

do you at least own nvidia stock?

 

[purpleduggy]

AMD make old Nvidia GPU faster. Nvidia very angery

 

[Pierce2623]

do you at least own nvidia stock?

I do. Still don’t buy their overpriced GPUs, though. I prefer to make money off of idiots rather than be one.

 

[purpleduggy]

That means nothing. Both Nvidia and AMD GPUs have had optical flow fixed-function-blocks for well over a decade: it sits in the hardware video encoder pipeline.
The problem is those FFBs are intended for video encoding. But what frame synthesis algorithms need is the raw motion vector field itself. If there is no low-latency (within a frame interval) route to pass the rendered frame to the FFB and then pass the optical flow vector field back to main GPU memory then that FFB is not of much use for frame synthesis. Sure, you can compute the vector field in software, but the entire point of frame synthesis is to generate frames without increasing GPU workload, so that defeats the entire point.
FSR-3 sidesteps that by ignoring optical flow and just using the game's generated motion vector field, which does not include all motion (misses transparency, texture motion, post-process motion, animated particle motion, etc). This is why FSR-3 experiences weird artefacting under frame synthesis that is not present with DLSS3's hybrid implementation.

i have both a 4090 with DLSS3 and a 7900xtx with FSR3, the end result is pretty similar and unless you go pedantically benchmark it, you won't notice much of a difference. plays most games well at the most common resolutions. FSR3 and DLSS3 makes a big improvement on older cards, FSR3 especially (which both Nvidia and AMD cards can use).

 

[Bamda]

Once again AMD does what NVIDIA couldn't or should I say wouldn't.

 

[punkncat]

Admittedly, I was skeptical about this tech in general. Thought of it much like a cheat...up until trying to gauge the performance of a system based in a 970 for consideration on pricing to performance. The uplift in performance is significant like from basically unplayable to acceptable in terms of frame rate.

 

[bit_user]

Both Nvidia and AMD GPUs have had optical flow fixed-function-blocks for well over a decade: it sits in the hardware video encoder pipeline.

Source?

Don't presume that video encoders use optical flow to compute motion vectors. They don't. Video encoders don't care about the accuracy or consistency of motion vectors - just whether they happen to provide a more efficient representation of the frame differences. Typically, you use optical flow when you actually do care about things like accuracy and consistency.

 

[bit_user]

i have both a 4090 with DLSS3 and a 7900xtx with FSR3, the end result is pretty similar and unless you go pedantically benchmark it, you won't notice much of a difference.

I'm sure the quality of frame generation depends on the native frame rate. If you're interpolating a 80 Hz output to 160 Hz, the artifacts should be a lot less noticeable than if you're interpolating a 30 Hz output to 60 Hz. That's because the frame-to-frame differences are much smaller, which serves both to make interpolation easier and the artifacts even less noticeable.

If you wanted to really stress these technologies, try evaluating them at the same resolution, but using lower-end cards.