Latency comparisons between the same gaming using the DLSS 2 path on Ampere and the DLSS 3 path on Ada will be interesting. Especially in equivalently powerful GPU's like the 4080 12GB vs the 3090Ti.
Where did you find this out?
Not sold on this until we see input lag tests. The tech is obviously impressive though, just not sure how beneficial it’s going to be for games.
There's no input improvement in animations, possibly not in camera movement either but don't know there. It just takes current motion vectors and "moves all the pixels to what it expects the next frame to look like" while hoping the way it's moving things forward is actually correct, so expect more of those weird TAA upscaler visual artifacts as well. Technically you can sample the next controller input for camera and, kinda hope maybe you can figure that out at least, but it doesn't necessarily work well so expect more artifacts if they added that.
Either way I expect AMD and Intel to follow on quickly to keep up with the Joneses whether it works well or not. What's disappointing is Nvidia locking it to the new generation of cards, there's nothing special there, why are you screwing over your own customers?
I suspect that Reflex became a part of DLSS3 SDK for a reason.Technically you can sample the next controller input for camera and, kinda hope maybe you can figure that out at least, but it doesn't necessarily work well so expect more artifacts if they added that.
So they can use DLSS 2.0 vs DLSS 3.0 in their graphs and claim 4x improvement to justify the stupid prices of course
Although it’s possible the new frame generation requires some hardware acceleration that’s not possible in Ampere/Turing. The way they obfuscate the data on perf doesn’t look good at all though, but it’s typical Nvidia.
Any DLSS3 game is a DLSS2 game by default, Ada just enables Frame Generation on top of DLSS2, which NVIDIA calls DLSS3.I wonder when Nvidia will start requiring developers to only support DLSS3 instead of both.
The new HW optical flow accelerator is needed for DLSS3:What's disappointing is Nvidia locking it to the new generation of cards, there's nothing special there, why are you screwing over your own customers?
Any DLSS3 game is a DLSS2 game by default, Ada just enables Frame Generation on top of DLSS2, which NVIDIA calls DLSS3.
They clearly stated it needs the more capable Optical Flow hardware in Ada.Although it’s possible the new frame generation requires some hardware acceleration that’s not possible in Ampere/Turing.
It is entirely separate from the motion vectors needed for DLSS2, the link mentions that it's better for effects while motion vectors are better for geometry. Though it might not be as good without them, like the TAA implemented in one of the reshade shaders that tried to work without them but ended up just blurring the image in most cases.
edit: from the Ada thread, it should be quite good even as a standalone.
Indeed, why all the high quality offline frame generation models have not been ported to games yet because it's so easy and doesn't require any performance, judging by some comments) Anybody can do this!What's disappointing is Nvidia locking it to the new generation of cards, there's nothing special there, why are you screwing over your own customers?
Look at it this way, it's on average a little over twice as bad as turning on vsync.Of course 1 frame will be more than 0, but in my experience 0 has never been worth it due to performance hit and unstable framerate.
Nah, you needed the buffering with vsync anyway. The real issue is that in situations where the additional frames will make the most difference is when the frame rate is fairly low, and it won't be doing anything to help responsiveness. Shady as hell to offer benchmarks like that too. If AMD can offer good RT perf, they get my business.Look at it this way, it's on average a little over twice as bad as turning on vsync.