I don't know
But I do not remember such artifacts with DLSS 2 even though I always turn it on
- Status
But I do not remember such artifacts with DLSS 2 even though I always turn it on
It introduces slight ghosting and certain artefacts with overlapping geometrie. Performances uses informations from 4 previous frames. It cant always hide the temporal aspect.
I think it has to do with optical flow frame generation
Artifacts appear on exactly one frame, the frame which was generated by dlss3
You can see for yourself. In YouTube, you can move the video one frame forward or backward (keys , and . on your keyboard). Timecode 1:33
davis.anthony
Veteran
I just watched the old RTX3000 reveal and even back then they stated 2x RT performance improvement over RTX2000 series.
I don't think we ever saw a 2x jump in the real world between the RTX2000/3000 series in gaming with RT enabled did we?
I don't think we ever saw a 2x jump in the real world between the RTX2000/3000 series in gaming with RT enabled did we?
Last edited:
Cool thx for the info about the one frame jump. I used it at this short benchmark part of the video:
4090: ~2 frames every 3 frames.
So in 4K with Psycho-RT settings looks like the 4090 is twice as fast.
davis.anthony
Veteran
I think there will be outliers like Q2RTX but even CP2077 at 1440p shows 3080ti is 62% faster than a 2080ti, which is still a huge performance uplift in its own right but still not 2x.
So I would assume in the average game that isn't fully path traced we might get around the same real world performance difference of a 60-70% increase.
Which again is a very healthy increase but not quite the 2x.
Last edited:
The 2x jump was really in benchmarks and games where raster rendering is not as heavy. For example Q2RTX, Minecraft RTX and Serious sam/Doom with RT
Serious Sam Ray Traced: Alter Haudegen wird zum neuen Grafikkarten-Killer - auch mit DLSS 2.4 und FSR 1.0
Auf dieser Seite geht es ans Eingemachte: Wie läuft Sam "Serious" Stone mit Raytracing und inwiefern helfen DLSS sowie FSR 1.0?
I'm pretty sure the claim was 3080 would be 2x as fast as 2080 (non-Ti). Ampere RT core was claimed to be 1.7x faster than Turing.
But please do link with timestamp if they claimed 2x perf over 2080 Ti.
That's a very interesting find and yes, it's very obvious when looking at the individual frames. The issue occurs in other scenes in the video too, not just that one.
Given that DLSS3 inserts 1 frame inbetween ever pair of rendered frames, thus exactly doubling the performance, the fact that we're are only seeing a 50% overall performance uplift over DLSS2 in that DF preview is interesting.
Either the work involved in creating that extra frame is quite heavy - on a 4090 - or they are doing more work on the upscale side of things (but as that should also be a lot faster on the 4090 I doubt it's that).
So if this is so heavy on a 4090 how much benefit are the 4080's going to get? And worse, is this even feasible further down the stack?
EDIT: it's worth noting that the benefits for CPU limited games could be immense. In some ways I'd say DLSS 3 is much more interesting for what it can do on the CPU side than on the GPU side. Especially given the capability of the current gen console CPU's.
Either the work involved in creating that extra frame is quite heavy - on a 4090 - or they are doing more work on the upscale side of things (but as that should also be a lot faster on the 4090 I doubt it's that).
So if this is so heavy on a 4090 how much benefit are the 4080's going to get? And worse, is this even feasible further down the stack?
EDIT: it's worth noting that the benefits for CPU limited games could be immense. In some ways I'd say DLSS 3 is much more interesting for what it can do on the CPU side than on the GPU side. Especially given the capability of the current gen console CPU's.
arandomguy
Veteran
The Ampere launch video was never specific in terms of what actual product they were comparing or even if they were doing that as opposed to some type of more specific abstract comparison (eg. SM to SM).
Instead the product page at launch used this more specific product comparison -
Introducing NVIDIA GeForce RTX 30 Series Graphics Cards
Experience games at stunning levels of detail, at high resolutions and framerates. And further accelerate and improve your experience with NVIDIA DLSS, NVIDIA Reflex, and other groundbreaking technologies that are coming to Fortnite, Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War, Cyberpunk 2077, Valorant...
www.nvidia.com
Even worse than the highlighted, look at the lower right corner grate, the 2nd beam from bottom decided to fall apart
It was very specifically the jump from the 2080 to 3080 that was claimed to be up to 2x but that was only in fully path traced games. Otherwise it was 60% faster or so.
Subtlesnake
Regular
arandomguy
Veteran
Oh, we're referring to different charts.
I was referring the one with actual individual break downs much earlier in the presentation (since these are much more verifiable) -
davis.anthony
Veteran
Where did I say they stated it was 2x jump over 2080ti?
I simply used the 2080ti vs 3080ti as they're both high end '80ti models.
Do you have a time stamp for 2080 vs 3080?
Subtlesnake
Regular
Well I took relative performance to include ray tracing performance, since they said "up to" 2x faster.
Edit:
It's in my post above.
Another interesting point from the DF preview is the DLSS 3 frame generation appears to be an additional option that can be activated in addition to and not instead of DLSS 2 on the 4090.
davis.anthony
Veteran
That's not we're talking about though, we're discussing the performance uplift in pure ray tracing loads, not all games in general.
And with RT performance they didn't specially compare two cards.
- Status
Similar threads
