DLSS 1.0 was better than FSR 1.0 and on par with FSR 2.0.
Value of Hardware Unboxed benchmarking *spawn
- Thread starter Phantom88
- Start date
I don’t think it’s reasonable or practical to expect people to stop discussing HUB reviews as long as HUB keeps publishing reviews. They are one of the bigger review outfits so can’t exactly just be ignored. They offer a unique combination of strong opinions and opaque methodology that will inevitably spark controversy.
Nowhere near the same, both are shit but different. FSR 2.x is closer to DLSS 2.x and XeSS than DLSS 1.0 quality wise, but they're all still crap that shouldn't be needed.
--
From another thread since it rather belongs here.
Err, reviewers deciding for themselves how they conduct their reviews is somehow a problem?
This crap can't fit under fanboy or corporate shill umbrellas anymore, that's just absurd beyond belief.
Of course manufacturer always has the right to decide who they supply and who they don't, but not supplying reviewer because they don't do practically carbon copy reviews from company's review guide and instead do review based on their audiences interests tells a lot about the company and it's confidence in their products.
DLSS is the worst thing to happen to the industry since forever and perfectly shows the hypocrisy in people. Same people are promoting RT because "it renders correctly" instead of "rasterized hacks and fakes" and without drawing a breath between promote DLSS which is literally about faking the picture and even worse, faking whole frames in case of DLSS3.
Be all you want for whatever you want but at least be consistent with it, instead of this hypocritical crap
DavidGraham
Veteran
DLSS enables higher quality ray tracing effects at decent fps for a tiny reduction in image quality in some cases, it even offers better IQ in several cases too, this is called progress. A tiny step backwards for 3 or 4 steps forward. This is how we advance PC graphics.
What's not progress however, is staying with the same subpar 4K native resolution which is not a true native ground 4K and already suffers from its own visual bugs and artifacts, while doing the same cheap raster tricks which got us nowhere in terms of progress, and which confined us to PC games being a carbon copy of consoles in terms of visuals.
Last edited:
Jeez we've really stepped through the looking glass now.
And how anyone is unable to see that counting AMD's best performing game in the average twice with simply different non-RT settings while only counting the non-RT version of Cyberpunk (which performs better for AMD) once at 1440p on $1000+ GPU's is artificially inflating the AMD position here is completely beyond me. And that's without considering all of the other suspect choices of a similar nature.
DLSS 1 was on par with basic monitor upscaling. FSR 2 is clearly superior.
neckthrough
Regular
Trading off sample rate (and sample approximation) for modeling fidelity is not hypocrisy, it's just a tradeoff. One that is very very consciously thought about during game and hardware development. The tradeoff simply did not make sense before fixed-function RT hardware, but that's no longer the case because RT/DLSS is approximately iso-performance with no-RT/no-DLSS and I would take the former any day.
DLSS has given us a knob to dial spatial (and now temporal) sampling rate, and redirect as much GPU hardware budget towards fidelity as the developer or user want. In the past we could drop resolution and fps but the sample loss led to a precipitous decline in experience, especially with the nature of our sample-and-hold displays. DLSS smooths that out, and we have a much gentler fall off in perceived quality vs. sample rate. I would argue that it's one of the best things to happen to the industry since programmable shaders. I *may* even rate it over hardware RT, simply because it was an unexpected surprise while RT was inevitable.
davis.anthony
Veteran
Value is in the eye of the viewer, if they deem the information HUB is providing is of value then it is.
If you don't see value in what they offer then don't watch them.
Pointless thread is pointless.
If you don't see value in what they offer then don't watch them.
Pointless thread is pointless.
DegustatoR
Legend
Yes but there's still an issue of HUB spreading their FUD well beyond HUB itself.
Just beceause you believe it's FUD doesn't make it FUD. Ignore it if you don't have solid arguments against it (your preferences aren't solid arguments), but that badmouthing is just pathetic.
DegustatoR
Legend
It is FUD.
Steve is still insisting on his theory of Nv h/w having higher CPU usage in D3D12 due to "s/w scheduling" for example.
And this crap is then being copy pasted all over the internet.
Subtlesnake
Regular
DLSS 1.0 used spatial upscaling, resulting in hallucinated detail, while FSR 2.0 uses temporal upscaling to approach DLSS 2.0 quality in static scenes.
Last edited:
DavidGraham
Veteran
He admits his fanbase that always influences his decisions are mostly AMD fanboys, I just don't know why he would stoop so low to destroy his credibility by appealing to them. He doesn't have to. He can be semi neutral while also presenting facts without the need to twist the truth.
This was in response to:
DegustatoR
Legend
That's Steve being sarcastic.
The issue isn't in who influences his benchmarking decisions or how "edgy" (anti-RT, DLSS is bad, etc.) he is trying to be in his conclusions (this stuff brings in views after all) but in how often these conclusions end up being blatantly wrong in the first place - and are eventually being used by others as a proof of something which isn't there.
In the end outlets like Hardware unboxed are just the Boomer generation of tech "journalists". No real need for progression, accepting what exists today and not what could be possible tomorrow. They are an anti consumer channel hating everything which has made the next gen patch of The Witcher 3 possible.
Subtlesnake
Regular
It looks like that video is in Performance rather than Quality mode? I agree DLSS 2.0 is much better in Performance mode.
I have zero idea who these people are or if they are reliable or not, but...
There's a tendency these days describe anyone who uses something as a 'fan'. We see it with games where devs reach out to their 'fans' to apologise for their buggy mess. Chances are people who sunk money on buggy games aren't at all fans of that mess! Most owners are just owners. It's actually pretty rare to get a real fan. Most readers of HUB are probably just readers, not fans, with only a small subset being unreasonably enamoured with the site.
A non-sarcastic response would have been, "There's a tiny number of people who are genuine fans of me who probably are AMD fanboys because of a Discord comment. The vast majority of the readership don't care either way."
You've misread that. He qualifies the 'fanbase' as those who watch just for him, as three people. Everyone else who watches he does not consider a fan or loyal to him or his comments/views.
There's a tendency these days describe anyone who uses something as a 'fan'. We see it with games where devs reach out to their 'fans' to apologise for their buggy mess. Chances are people who sunk money on buggy games aren't at all fans of that mess! Most owners are just owners. It's actually pretty rare to get a real fan. Most readers of HUB are probably just readers, not fans, with only a small subset being unreasonably enamoured with the site.
A non-sarcastic response would have been, "There's a tiny number of people who are genuine fans of me who probably are AMD fanboys because of a Discord comment. The vast majority of the readership don't care either way."
davis.anthony
Veteran
FSR2 in this game is a really bad implementation.
I tried it out of curiosity and it was so bad compared to DLSS.
davis.anthony
Veteran
It's not FUD.
Their performance numbers and frame rate data is solid and perfectly usable by people to gauge performance of a certain GPU in a specific game and then to make a choice based on that data.
If you don't like what games and modes they test that's your problem.
If the data you need is not in their video then you look at another video or online article.