AMD FSR antialiasing discussion

  • Thread starter Deleted member 90741
  • Start date
ToTTenTranz said:
Another review:

https://www.hardwaretimes.com/amd-f...sr-better-than-traditional-spatial-upscaling/
Click to expand...

This is one of the best attempts I've seen at explaining how FSR works and trying to isolate its contribution beyond sharpening. Unfortunately the LumaSharpen filter used for the comparison seems to be more aggressive than FSR's sharpening so it's not perfect. The images used in the article are also far too small for a proper comparison. The author helpfully made the full resolution 4K images available though so I tossed them into imgsli.

What's strange is that a regular 75% upscale without sharpening seems to be retaining a lot more detail than FSR Ultra which doesn't really make sense.

FSR Ultra:
Terminator - Scene 1 - Imgsli -> branches to the right of the tree in the middle of the shot
Terminator - Scene 2 - Imgsli
Terminator - Scene 3 - Imgsli
Terminator - Scene 5 - Imgsli -> this one is super obvious with the thin trees in the distance
Terminator - Scene 6 - Imgsli

FSR Quality:
Terminator - Scene 7 - Imgsli -> 65% upscale is much better than native so I assume the author screwed up
Terminator - Scene 8 - Imgsli -> 65% upscale retaining slightly more detail than FSR quality
Terminator - Scene 9 - Imgsli -> FSR is doing a better job with the cables better than native in this shot
 
Midgar Studio's dev commenting on FSR vs. DLSS implementation effort for Edge of Eternity:

Can you compare the process of implementing AMD's FSR and NVIDIA's DLSS in Edge of Eternity? Which differences did you encounter?

Implementing DLSS was quite complex to integrate into Unity for a small studio like us; it required tweaking the engine and creating an external plugin to bridge Unity and DLSS. It was complicated, but in the end, it gave amazing results. FSR, on the other hand, was very easy to implement, it only took me a few hours, requiring only simple data. However, it did require the source data to be as sharp as possible since FSR is not a deep learning method and cannot reconstruct loss details. We needed to replace the built-in Unity TAA with the AMD Cauldron TAA (opensource) that we ported to Unity as it is a lot better at preserving details.
Click to expand...

FSR is being applied across the board on all consoles.

He also teases Microsoft's ML super-resolution as one of the features to anticipate from the Series consoles.
 
DegustatoR said:
So it took them a few hours to replace Unity TAA with AMD's one and implement FSR after that? Or only implement FSR which gave bad results prompting them to replace Unity's TAA?
Click to expand...
It clearly reads as: you need a high quality source image and Unity's default TAA implementation was just simply not good enough for that.

Also, on Twitter he wrote that it took 2 hours to implement FSR and another 4 to switch TAA implementation, which is still incredibly fast overall.
 
So their end product will have both Unity's TAA (DLSS) and AMD Cauldron TAA (FSR)?

It should be interesting to compare the final result. He sounds like he's trying to sell FSR, but that's to be expected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DegustatoR said:
So it took them a few hours to replace Unity TAA with AMD's one and implement FSR after that? Or only implement FSR which gave bad results prompting them to replace Unity's TAA?
Click to expand...
I don't think they included the developer's time to implement AMD Cauldron TAA into FSR.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ToTTenTranz said:
Midgar Studio's dev commenting on FSR vs. DLSS implementation effort for Edge of Eternity:



FSR is being applied across the board on all consoles.

He also teases Microsoft's ML super-resolution as one of the features to anticipate from the Series consoles.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you didn't comment on the stated quality preference for FSR at high input resolutions. Personally I have my doubts about that and will wait for the actual comparisons to make my own judgement. However I do wonder if Nvidia's upcoming "Ultra Quality" mode isn't an answer to this possibility. After all, FSR's highest setting has a higher input resolution than DLSS so it's potentially not an apples to apples comparison (although I think performance hit should be the judge of that rather than input resolution). I expect the performance hit of DLSS Ultra Quality to be very low while the quality, especially in the latest iterations should comfortably exceed native resolution. So that will certainly make for an interesting head to head.

EDIT: I should have stated that the preference was based on the "Ghosting and blur" that was introduced by DLSS vs FSR which I would guess is due to using an older (pre-2.2) version of DLSS combined with the additional sharpening of FSR.
 
Blooper said:
Also, on Twitter he wrote that it took 2 hours to implement FSR and another 4 to switch TAA implementation, which is still incredibly fast overall.
Click to expand...
Thanks for that. That is fast compared to DLSS (Unreal) which takes 2 days (a weekend).
 
pjbliverpool said:
I'm surprised you didn't comment on the stated quality preference for FSR at high input resolutions.
Click to expand...

To be honest, he's the game's developer doing a little technical PR. He was never going to say "well we resorted to this really mediocre quality mode to get the performance we needed". Unless there's some big surprise with secret sauce, we know the results that FSR Quality gets.

In this case, I think the value of FSR really came from the fact that it took next to no effort to implement for an indie team making a game in Unity. They managed to seamlessly apply it into pretty much everything, from the 1.3TFLOPs XBOne to 20TFLOPs PC GPUs.
 
ToTTenTranz said:
In this case, I think the value of FSR really came from the fact that it took next to no effort to implement for an indie team making a game in Unity. They managed to seamlessly apply it into pretty much everything, from the 1.3TFLOPs XBOne to 20TFLOPs PC GPUs.
Click to expand...
[my bold]

That's IMHO one of the most important strengths of FSR - downward scalability. Apart from the discussion about a better (or not) tech for highest-end parts, FSR is offering another option for people with medium- to low-spec hardware to adjust the ratio of image quality and performance to their personal taste.
 
CarstenS said:
That's IMHO one of the most important strengths of FSR - downward scalability. Apart from the discussion about a better (or not) tech for highest-end parts, FSR is offering another option for people with medium- to low-spec hardware to adjust the ratio of image quality and performance to their personal taste.
Click to expand...
A slight problem with that is that FSR seem to be most usable only when outputting to 4K - something which makes such applications nigh impossible.
It is better than using just lower resolution though.
 
DegustatoR said:
A slight problem with that is that FSR seem to be most usable only when outputting to 4K - something which makes such applications nigh impossible.
It is better than using just lower resolution though.
Click to expand...
Thus, making it another option.
Probably (and that's just my assumption), people not spending a lot of money on their graphics card are neither spoiled enough nor keen to expect enthusiast-level quality and performance from a 100-EUR-card. For those, it's an improvement - even if they use a GeForce card. DLSS is a high-end-only technique.
 
CarstenS said:
Thus, making it another option.
Probably (and that's just my assumption), people not spending a lot of money on their graphics card are neither spoiled enough nor keen to expect enthusiast-level quality and performance from a 100-EUR-card. For those, it's an improvement - even if they use a GeForce card. DLSS is a high-end-only technique.
Click to expand...

This is true. But along the same lines you can argue those same people would be equally happy with regular monitor or GPU upscaling. FSRs value proposition is that it looks better than that so presumably people do care about quality. Even the people with $100 GPUs.
 
Grand Theft Auto 5 Modded To Support AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution
AMD released FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) on June 22nd with support for just 7 games with support for a further 12 games coming soon. The FidelityFX Super Resolution technology is now available in Grand Theft Auto 5 via a mod created by NarutoUA. The mod replaces the game's internal upscaler which means that FSR profiles can be selected by changing the Frame Scaling Mode found in Advanced Graphics Settings. AMD has promised to make the FSR technology open-source however this is yet to have happened so the modder used a precompiled DLL from a game with native FSR support. You can find a comparison video showing the mod here. The source code for the mod has been uploaded to GitHub where it can be reviewed and manually compiled.
 
Davros said:
Grand Theft Auto 5 Modded To Support AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution
AMD released FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR) on June 22nd with support for just 7 games with support for a further 12 games coming soon. The FidelityFX Super Resolution technology is now available in Grand Theft Auto 5 via a mod created by NarutoUA. The mod replaces the game's internal upscaler which means that FSR profiles can be selected by changing the Frame Scaling Mode found in Advanced Graphics Settings. AMD has promised to make the FSR technology open-source however this is yet to have happened so the modder used a precompiled DLL from a game with native FSR support. You can find a comparison video showing the mod here. The source code for the mod has been uploaded to GitHub where it can be reviewed and manually compiled.
Click to expand...

Would be interesting to see some comparison shots between the native scaler and FSR.
 
pjbliverpool said:
Would be interesting to see some comparison shots between the native scaler and FSR.
Click to expand...
it already exists, and was made by the author of the youtube's video. Judge by yourself (this is copied/pasted from the author's video description on youtube)

Original upscaler VS FSR upscaler: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15394
Native VS FSR #1: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15427
Native VS FSR #2: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15428
 
Cyan said:
it already exists, and was made by the author of the youtube's video. Judge by yourself (this is copied/pasted from the author's video description on youtube)

Original upscaler VS FSR upscaler: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15394
Native VS FSR #1: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15427
Native VS FSR #2: https://screenshotcomparison.com/comparison/15428
Click to expand...

I think only the first link is working properly, but it seems he put the 3 comparisons in the first link.
Regardless, the difference is pretty big. Is this made using Ultra Quality, i.e. rendering at 1080p and then upscaling to 1440p?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Cyan
Microsoft's Auto SR: Universal AI upscaling discussion.
Replies
7
Views
2K
Janne Kylliö
J
B
DLSS versus FSR, again, neither being PSSR *spawn
2 3
Replies
41
Views
4K
homerdog
homerdog
Unknown Soldier
3DMark AMD FSR Feature Test
Replies
1
Views
1K
Putas
P
BRiT
Intel XeSS anti-aliasing discussion
9 10 11
Replies
200
Views
36K
Shifty Geezer
Shifty Geezer
M
Proposed upscaling technique - render vectors to pixels, convert to vectors, upscale and re-raster *spawn
2 3
Replies
43
Views
4K
JoeJ
J
Back
Top