It does not objectively look better, and I have seen it in motion and switched back and forth. It looks very processed and sharpened, which some like the look of and others do not. Same thing with old movies, some like them smoothed and sharpened to look more "modern" and some hate it.

TAA and sharpening already gives off this look, so many are likely used to it from that as well. That doesn't mean it's a good thing.

It cannot be implemented at the driver level. Each developer needs to implement it into their own game. DLSS 2 requires access to motion vectors which can only be accessed if it's coded into the game specifically.

On the upside, implementation sounds relatively easy and painless. There isn't a reason why developers shouldn't adopt this into their titles.

Quote from: Mustafa Ozd on March 26, 2020, 14:58:18
I tried DLSS 2.0 on Control with rtx 2060. Game looks blurry with dlss 2.0. I think its not impressive as it mentioned.

Maybe you need your eyes checked. I use DLSS 2.0 on a 2060 too and it looks even better than native resolution. This tech is really amazing.

DLSS  Was already working great on my RTX 2060 (Triton 500) also max graphics 50 + fps on turbo. also control is awesome. but i'll look into dlss 2.0, will it come to previous games too, like BF V , or metro exodus, etc?

I tried DLSS 2.0 on Control with RTX2060, its way less blurry than DLSS 1.0 but the sharpening seem a bit too much

Anyone saying it /ales the image worse or that it requires per game training is obviously ignorant on the most recent updates and most likely didn't even read the above article.

The system no longer even offers a per game option and every game uses a universal method that gets better and better with each and every game that uses it. Before this update digital foundry was already calling the version in Youngblood as DLSS 2.0 (again before Nvidia actually released a 2.0) and showed how it made the image as good if not better in every since of the way that mattered.

Now with the latest version Nvidia is showing that they too feel its improved to the level that it needs to be defined as being significantly improved over what most people remember again so many people's only knowledge seems limited to the results from launch like battlefield 5 which wasn't good.


Now it's actually living up to its promises and I'm super pumped I saw the potential back then and knew with time it would improve (and this type of thing would take off in more places than Nvidia and their so called overpriced gpu's). Now we have everyone singing the praises of this type of technology when it's applied elsewhere but still so many have this stigma from DLSS early days and really need to get educated on what this ACTUALLY looks like TODAY.

And for the guy who said he's used control with the newest version and it was terrible either A. You didn't actually do it B. You did it before the newest version when control wasn't still so great C. You did recently do it and your eyes / taste are just terrible and don't have any clue what you're talking about.

Digital foundry (you know THE GO TO PEOPLE for image quality analysis whose input helps millions) said that it was truly a game changer and it shows that the future is in this tech and with Youngblood forward (and now the previous control but nothing else earlier can be really updated like it was) this tech will automatically provide you with performance equal to several gpu's above your current cards native performance and without loss in quality.

You can't really ask for more than that.

I tried DLSS 2.0 on Control with rtx 2060. Game looks blurry with dlss 2.0. I think its not impressive as it mentioned.

Quote from: Freedom on March 25, 2020, 23:53:40
This is incorrect. DLSS 2.0 does not require per app training. The developer needs to provide the system inputs but the system can be applied on any game. You can read more on the blog post. This really is a game changer.

Quote from: Valantar on March 25, 2020, 23:19:00
This article misrepresents how DLSS works. It can't be "implemented on a driver level" beyond what is currently done; the algorithm needs to be trained for each game. I guess it would be possible to make a more generally applicable version, but it would inevitably look worse, and potentially lead to weird artefacting.

Ah, so just a poorly written article then. That is indeed very impressive, and as the source states it is a very major change from the previous version. That the article fails to point this out is a significant oversight. It nonetheless seems like it reaquires non-trivial developer input to work, but likely far, far less than the previous version. Interesting indeed!

This is incorrect. DLSS 2.0 does not require per app training. The developer needs to provide the system inputs but the system can be applied on any game. You can read more on the blog post. This really is a game changer.

Quote from: Valantar on March 25, 2020, 23:19:00
This article misrepresents how DLSS works. It can't be "implemented on a driver level" beyond what is currently done; the algorithm needs to be trained for each game. I guess it would be possible to make a more generally applicable version, but it would inevitably look worse, and potentially lead to weird artefacting.

This article misrepresents how DLSS works. It can't be "implemented on a driver level" beyond what is currently done; the algorithm needs to be trained for each game. I guess it would be possible to make a more generally applicable version, but it would inevitably look worse, and potentially lead to weird artefacting.

I played control with dlss 2.0 and it looks sharper than 1080p , it's truly magical what they achieved. Maxed graphical settings ,dlss off around 60 fps average, but with the same setting and dlss on 80 GPS average.  I'm using a 2070 super.