On the positive side and to give some hope, “The Medium” is an exclusivity for Microsoft XBox series and for Windows through MS Store, which handle pretty well DLSS and RTX. It’s made by studio Bloober Team. So nothing prevent this to happen IMHO.
1 Like
Ray Tracing, I can see coming to the XBox. DLSS, no. That will not happen. Ever. The hardware used for DSLL is only found in nVidia GPUs. And besides, The Medium is not made by Microsoft. Microsoft are never going to put technologies in their games that their own hardware can’t use knowingly showing the shortcomings of the hardware in their machines.
Now, AMD does have something up their sleeve in the form of DirectML Super Sampling. It’s basically their answer to DLSS. Their current gen GPUs (and presumably the XBox GPU) have the hardware. It’s just not implemented at a software level as of yet. It will likely come at some time down the road in the form of a driver update. Expect it to perform more like DLSS 1.0 in the RTX 2000 series, which was not that great.
1 Like
So this is what wrong decisions leads to?
For me there are exact two options:
Option one: Implement DLSS, now.
Option two: Pinch the ■■■ cheeks together at AMD and develop a usable alternative.
There is none: the NVidia DLSS technology is using the video card tensor cores. This is silicon* designed and meant for helping AI computations which is otherwise doing nothing and lying there in your GPU. In enabling DLSS you instantly add more GPU power to computing the frame because this is like adding a new video card to help supporting the computations done by the main video card.
Conversely, I’m not sure there is any silicon left dormant for other uses in the AMD cards, therefore, any AMD alternative would be using the silicon already used for something else, and the cost/benefit ratio might vary greatly from title to title and pre/post resolutions scenarios.
*by silicon, I mean actual transistors.
1 Like
Option 1 will never happen. Ever. Under any circumstance. They will never include tech in the PC version that’s not available on XBox.
I don’t think most people are thinking this DLSS thing through. Unless you’re running a low end RTX2000 series or better GPU with a top-tier CPU (I’m talking 10th Gen Intel or Ryzen 5000 series), DLSS will do NOTHING for performance. The majority of users are CPU bound. Alleviating GPU workload isn’t going to change that. The CPU is what’s limiting frame rates. And whether you run at 1080p low or 4K ultra, your performance is still going to ■■■■. The only people that would benefit from DLSS is folks running top tier gaming rigs with the best CPU and GPU.
Unless you’re part of that small percentage seeing themselves as CPU bound, DLSS will do nothing.
2 Likes
Sorry if I get emotional on this subject.
I’m not sure if microsoft/Asobo can ignore the majority of their users in the long run. Nvidia rules PC-graphics now and will probably do for the near future. dlss is a cutting edge technology that brings notably performance boost. And who is preventing the developers from improving CPU usage to enable the necessary headroom?
I am aware of the whole drama surrounding the implementation in to the xbox and the agony of having to squeeze this program into it, an almost impossible task. If they can do this, you’ll be able to run the game almost in the vram of your actual GPU!
Precisely for this reason microsoft has to show consideration for their PC power users, mostly nvidia users, for better or worse. These are the users that will bring the sim forward, not that xbox kids with their 2 minute attention span. Or this sim will end up like “project cars”.
just my 2 cents …
P.S. I have tried the AMD experiment and I am healed. Never ever again. I give a ■■■■ for some shiny benchmarks but everything for a stable system.
P.P.S. I came randomly over this a few days ago: Why Are Airlines Refusing 787s From Charleston S.C. Plant? Boeing Announces 4Th 787 Defect In A Row - YouTube Everything is said from 1.45m.
DLSS will do nothing if GPU bound? Oh please the point is to be GPU bound and seriously anyone with an rtx card benefits from DLSS. So folks running top tier rigs will benefit from DLSS? That’s a false narrative.Us with high resolution monitors it will certainly be a must have feature when Asobo starts squeezing more visuals.
What I do not see is it helping out this CPU bound game atm!
1 Like
My bad. I meant CPU bound. That was a typo on the final sentence. Going back to fix it.
Unless you’re running a top tier CPU and GPU combination at 4+K Ultra, you’re placing your wishes at the wrong place, because DLSS won’t help alleviate CPU bottleneck the majority of users are experiencing. My 2080 is rarely more than 50% used as it is without DLSS. The only
other people seeing GPU bottleneck on lower tier system is people with 2-3 generation old GPUs that DLSS isn’t supported on anyway. And DLSS on RTX2000 series cards isn’t even that great looking. DLSS 2.0 on RTX3000 series though. Now that’s something.
What the sim needs is better CPU optimization. That doesn’t require fancy pie in the sky tech to make happen.
Or we need to upgrade to current generation CPUs so we aren’t CPU bound and can use our current GPUs (assuming RTX2000 or better) to their full potential.
1 Like
DLSS will even be more prevalent in the near future in many games, especially in VR, now that DLSS 2.1 (VR) is now a standard plugin in Unreal Engine 4:
Despite FS2020 is an Xbox game (AMD), I can’t see why they couldn’t drop support for DLSS 2.1 for NVidia simmers.
2 Likes
Let’s hope so!
As a reminder, DLSS doesn’t improve performance – it improves visual quality of upscaling when you’re using render scaling to improve performance.
You can do render scaling today, and see how much it will improve your performance at 50% or 70% of native resolution.
If you’re like me, you’ll find that it does improve performance somewhat, but not as dramatically as you would hope because the simulation often remains limited by the main thread on the CPU.
You may find that the visual quality of the existing scaling isn’t good enough for you to make the trade-off for performance, and that is the use case for DLSS: to improve the scaling quality so more people feel comfortable using a lower render scaling value.
Personally I find 70% looks fine on a 4K screen with the current scaling, and sometimes I’ll even run it down to 50% to balance between resolution and the additional CPU and GPU costs of switching between High-End and Ultra.
I would enjoy DLSS being an additional option to sharpen up the scaling, but I don’t believe it would dramatically change my experience. In particular, if lowering the render scaling doesn’t improve your performance now, adding DLSS later will make no difference.
1 Like
It might be the case and it might be highly dependent on how adding DLSS fits into the general renderer architecture. However, you’re also making an assumption here, which is scaling with DLSS or scaling with the CAS Shader (what’s in use right now) is in any case taking the same amount of resources.
In effect, when using DLSS you’re actually using dedicated silicon (transistors) which are doing nothing otherwise, whereas when using the CAS Shader, you’re using the same CU you’re using for rendering.
DLSS is not just “scaling” like the CAS Shader, it is “creating” new pixels which didn’t exist before so that it looks like it was natively rendered at a higher resolution and this is done with dedicated silicon which is not contributing to the rest of the rendering. You’re really adding up both visuals and performance in using DLSS.
Now I agree with you TAA70 in 4K is already really good looking, but in VR it is catastrophic with EFIS because FS2020 is rendering EFIS based on the game render resolution (in your example 70% of 4K) not the post-processing resolution (in your example 100% of 4K) and this shows a lot:
[BUG/FEATURE] EFIS Screens Problems and Solutions for higher legibility
4 Likes
However, you’re also making an assumption here, which is scaling with DLSS or scaling with the CAS Shader (what’s in use right now) is in any case taking the same amount of resources.
In effect, when using DLSS you’re actually using dedicated silicon (transistors) which are doing nothing otherwise, whereas when using the CAS Shader, you’re using the same CU you’re using for rendering.
True! It’s possible that DLSS will actually be slightly faster than letting the TAA antialiasing do the scale-up because it’s using dedicated silicon and could potentially proceed in parallel with rendering of the next frame or such…
1 Like
Sorry for late reply but just browsing random threads on perf…
Wondered why you think this?
DLSS is implemented in a decent handful of (major) titles that are also out on Xbox. Minecraft being a major example (that is also a Microsoft title). Fortnite, Cyberpunk, COD, Battlefield…
I get that it might not be a priority for them if both platforms can’t benefit but I don’t think you can say never ever?
Also in a slightly different vein there’s also DirectML which admittedly I just learnt about but it looks promising… Microsoft Eying DirectML as DLSS alternative on Xbox (guru3d.com) // Microsoft’s DirectML is the next-generation game-changer that nobody’s talking about | OC3D News (overclock3d.net)
Except the article is saying the same as I’ve written above:
Especially DLSS v2.0 offers significant performance improvements. NVIDIA however is utilized dedicated hardware or DLSS through the Tensor cores, whereas AMD would need to run it over the compute engine.
In this case, the actual CAS Shader does the job as well and probably in taking less resources than DirectML.
The value proposition to me of DLSS is not just rendering as-if 4K from a 1K image, it is doing so with silicon which does nothing otherwise. In other words, you get not only higher res picture with lower GPU use (1K render instead of 4K), but you also therefore free GPU CU which you can use to enhance the rendering (more pixel Shader effects per pixel).
Now honestly it is really possible NVidia drivers implement the DirectML API via their existing DLSS technology in which case it would be indeed a huge win.
2 Likes
DLSS 2.0 is huge. Pretty much free performance if left in quality settings, it’d help MSFS SO MUCH!
1 Like
Gotcha. Overlooked that one! Apologies.
It would! Let’s see what happens…
1 Like
Sorry, but this is cross platform development in a nutshell. I’ve cited numerous times how both Microsoft, and Sony put pressure on Ubisoft to ensure that the PC version of Watch Dogs did not upstage the console versions. They wanted parity across platforms, and because they could not bring the console version up, they brought the PC version down. The vertical slice they gave at E3, and elsewhere looked far superior to what was available at release. Then someone discovered the things they had intentionally gimped were left behind, and just needed to be switched back on.
You may remember during one of the Q&A’s that they said themselves that the intention was to ensure there was a unifying experience, my words, across the two platforms. Sadly, the PC platform will almost certainly suffer because of that directive from on high.
It pains me to see an otherwise great sim being slipped into a console shaped straight jacket, inch by inch.
‘Unifying experience’ doesn’t necessarily mean that perf enhancing features can’t be implemented surely?
Like I said in my previous post, when they took on Minecraft they’ve been ‘unifying’ that, yet that was still one of the first titles to get DLSS and ray tracing support…
Yes I fully realize that frequently developing for console can hamper development but surely it’s probably better to draw comparisons to how MS are approaching thier own IP’s rather than comparing to Ubisoft who have basically always been developing for console first.
All we’re doing is speculating at the moment. We don’t really know what their plans are because nobody has ever taken a sim to console before.
1 Like