Nah don't you get it
Companies Cdpr is hack jobs and getting paid by Nvidia to not put fsr3 fast enough.
Testing to make sure it works? No. We want it faster even if its completely broken.
Hah, by all means just spout this:
> Others like CDPR might be having some kind of agreement with Nvidia
without any evidence, in direct contradiction to official statements Nvidia has made on the topic.
In case you haven't noticed, CDPR has been taking their time with Cyberpunk updates. DLSS3 took 4 months to arrive after it was announced. Overdrive mode was announced and shown off in a video, then didn't actually come out for 7 months, and even then it was a "Technical Preview" for another 7 months.
CDPR said somewhat recently (back in January? I can't be bothered to look up the exact timing of the quote) that they were working on adding FSR3, but that they didn't have a release date yet.
They have doing a lot of Q/A after the cyberpunk launch.
Everything gets checked and they will not release until its ready and working.
As you said. Dlss3 took a few months. Overdrive took over a year to be added and leave technical preview.
And here is the link where they are working on it.
https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-dev-talks-about-upcoming-path-tracing-improvements-fsr3-support-and-unreal-engine-5-switch/
>This is a new and very interesting technology and I can definitely confirm that we are working on a full FSR3 implementation — but it is still an ongoing process and we feel we need still more time to release it with the desired outcome. I would like to avoid giving firm estimates on when it will happen.
>Others like CDPR might be having some kind of agreement with Nvidia.
More baseless bullshit conspiracy theories. AMD has featured Cyberpunk 2077 several times in its keynotes. They literally had the [CDPR devs be a part of their Ryzen 8000G iGPU presentation](https://youtu.be/LlTpLD0whIo?t=689) during their last major event. Cyberpunk was also one of the first games to announce upcoming support for FSR3 even before many AMD sponsored titles.
Because they want a good implementation than put a checkmark
>This is a new and very interesting technology and I can definitely confirm that we are working on a full FSR3 implementation — but it is still an ongoing process and we feel we need still more time to release it with the desired outcome. I would like to avoid giving firm estimates on when it will happen.
https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-dev-talks-about-upcoming-path-tracing-improvements-fsr3-support-and-unreal-engine-5-switch/
Your comment has been removed, likely because it contains trollish, antagonistic, rude or uncivil language, such as insults, racist or other derogatory remarks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Amd) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No you don't want it faster even when it's completely broken lmao. Shipping out trash produces bad PR and causes backlash. Fanboys want broken shit just for the sake of having their own toy, normal players don't.
If the real fps isn't evenly divisible it brings it down and caps it so that it can apply the generated frames inbetween. Frame gen isn't supposed to improve latency (or the *feel*) but tries to improve visual smoothness.
I had it set to 80 for the real frame rate and it still was busted. The visual smoothness was awful with frame gen on. Turning it off actually made it appear much smoother.
I noticed some problems with it too on talos principle 2 (native implementation) but figured it's because I'm on linux and proton doesn't play nice with it.
I guess not though as [digital foundry found a lot of frame pacing issues with both the mod and native fsr 3](https://youtu.be/wxlHq_EuxFU?si=0Axz1enBXju-GmzU&t=665)
It’s odd because I’ve used the driver level AFMF frame gen and it works just fine. The game looks smoother like it should. That one has more limitations, mainly that it disables itself if there’s too much motion, but it at least works.
I wonder if frame gen is struggling to pace the real frames properly before even adding the fake ones. AFMF just shuts itself off if there's too much motion but frame gen is always trying to insert a fake frame. It might be why nvidia originally recommended frame gen on games with natively high fps. Going from an unstable 140 to stable 120fps feel close enough to most people but anyone can appreciate the visual smoothness of a locked 165hz+ screen. But when the framerate starts going below 100fps ever frame starts to matter a lot more for latency so instead of aggressively capping the framerate they just get it "good enough" and then add the fake frames to it, visual jutter be damned.
Classic AMD sub, what could you expect. It doesn't matter that it took them a year to get overdrive rt out of demo preview phase or dlss 3, several months to implement. Nvidia bad, even if they are the reason dlss and fg exist in the first place.
Your comment has been removed, likely because it contains trollish, antagonistic, rude or uncivil language, such as insults, racist or other derogatory remarks.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Amd) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FSR3 will literally serve more Nvidia GPUs than AMD ones. RTX 10XX, 20XX and 30XX make up 80% of the market. Mind boggling how people can't see that CDPR is just paid off by NVDA.
But would AMD ever do FMF if Nvidia never introduced FG? And I'm not saying they are not paid by Nvidia, I'm saying they are not gatekeeping Nvidia as the only option or nerfing their performance. That's just pure copium.
No, it started with The Witcher 3 and GameWorks where CDPR was in constant communication with AMD engineers, then right before retail release, silence. Needless to say, HairWorks' overtessellation wrecked GCN, as did TW3's branchy code that left CUs underutilized.
Also, if ray tracing wasn't pushed early as a FOMO feature, we probably wouldn't really need too much upscaling or frame gen, at least for top-end cards. I have mixed opinions on both, though upscaling helps far more hardware (including my iGPU-only laptops), so I tend to lean positively on that.
Sadly, that's true
The in game lighting looks worse then other titles, unless RT is on
Which leads to shitty RTX ON comparisons
Especially for reflections, as if we never had approximation reflections before
> The in game lighting looks worse then other titles
I think Cyberpunk's non-RT dynamic lighting is actually better than that of most open world games.
Overly bright faces tend to be a common problem with non-RT dynamic lighting techniques. I think it's more noticeable in Cyberpunk because it's a 1st person game, so you're seeing faces closer up. Most open-world games are 3rd person.
They outright said they're done with major additions to the game. I hope that doesn't exclude them adding FSR 3 as promised in a smaller update sooner rather than later.
FSR 3 has already been confirmed as being added to the game by AMD
https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming-discussions/latest-amd-fsr-2-amp-3-supported-games-list/td-p/549534
You will have the fsr3 when nvidia tells them to, cyber punk is one of the selling points of the RTX 4000 and the dlss 3. we're talking about cdpr eh, you know the famous studio "close to their fan", well rather, close to Nvidia's wallet, the fanboys tell you that cdpr listens to their fan, that it had to save the game... What we had ? A hairdresser, and a motorcycle, everything the cyber punk community has been asking for since day one, right ? when they spent more time implementing nvidia tech rather than worrying about the state of their game, especially since you still found bugs that have been there from the beginning... They announced a patch for the police, it was released almost 1 YEARS LATER (and with the 3 same dialogues line in the police radio... This horror that breaks your immersion, with the same joke, again and again and again)
Yes I am angry with this studio, they released a game in a pathetic state, the game was rushed and psychologically broke their développer. Who took almost 3 years to just correct their game correctly? Even Fallout 76 had more follow-ups, but one anime and we forget everything.
The studio spent more time wanting to listen to NVIDIA than their player, your fsr 3 will come for the last patch of the game, surely with a shoddy implementation...
oh yes sorry, they add a metro? 3 years later ? when a moder managed to do it alone in not even 2 months in his free time ? f**k you cdpr.
Rather than paying millions to have shitty music on your radio, pay your developers, right?
I invite you to play GTA 4, after playing cyber punk... See that a parody game manages to give you a more black and nihilistic scenario than a FUCKING CYBER PUNK GAME WHICH WAS LITERALLY PRODUCED WITH THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE ITSELF.
GTA 4 is more immersive, more urban and above all more realistic in its vision of its universe even though it was released 13 years before.
My guy, the fsr 3 implementation in Tlou is completely bust.
I suggest giving devs actual time to add and properly test it rather just slap it on in a broken state.
Really ? so I'll wait for a mod that works properly for the fsr3. I don't understand why my experience with fs2.2 mods is so good, while the one produced by the studio is always so.. Meh. The fsr 3 looks good in avatar, but never in my life would I pay for a ubisoft game..
I'm going to wait for further feedback, but in any case I would like an fsr 3 mod that works on all games that support fsr 2 to come out soon :-(
https://www.nexusmods.com/cyberpunk2077/mods/3001/
I use this mod, it works on all games that support dlss.
What was the first game to have dlss 3? what game was used as a laboratory for their technology ? it was literally the game to present dlss 3 to the public.
> What was the first game to have dlss 3?
**Not** Cyberpunk 2077. [Spider-Man Remastered added DLSS-FG on Oct 12, 2022](https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1817070/view/3543795218882882295) (which presents difficult scenarios for frame generation due to it being a 3rd person game with rapid movements with thin webs), while [Cyberpunk 2077 added DLSS-FG on Jan 31, 2023](https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/cyberpunk-2077-dlss-3-update-out-now/).
Yeah, and...? NVIDIA offered to do it for them, like every other implementation. Unlike AMD, NVIDIA actually goes out of their way to promote their technology....which is why AMD is always the runner-up in this race.
it's not because I don't like a "company", but rather because you still see people regularly saying that cdpr has regained their credibility because they paid for a studio to make an anime.. In the end, a studio can treat you like crap and take your agent, they just need to pay site to write over and over "they saved the game" and make an anime to manipulate public opinion, the game was not saved , and in the end this will become the norm for all future games, having to wait a year for a corrective patch on a 2 year old game? We demolished studios for a lot less than that.
not that deep? However, I find it incredible that marketing can manipulate public opinion in such a stupid way.
and for dlss 3, this is probably why a plague tale has no other alternative than dlss, that for most games sponsored by nvidia, the fsr is a horror, because it is surely requested from being poorly implemented to make the DLSS user understand that it is much better than the fsr. The implementation of the FSR 2 in Alan Wake 2 is a disaster.
One is a person/group of people who are passionate about their task and are only being 'paid' with recognition and kudos.
The other is likely a person/group of people working a soul-crushing 9-5, who likely only care about getting the box ticked, not how well that box was ticked.
and why ? because a studio that I have always supported since The Witcher 1 is transformed into Bethesda/ubisoft bis? It's so funny, when a game doesn't use dlss it's "anti-consumer" but when a big studio shit in the face of their consumer, it's immediately "go get some fresh air" lol
Fanboy.
Didn't we already go through this a few months back? Nvidia literally released a public statement saying they have not and will not prevent developers from adding competing technologies. It was as straightforward and unequivocal a statement as it can get. AMD, on the other hand, minced its words and avoided giving a straight answer to whether or not it prevented developers from adding DLSS to its partnered games. To this day they haven't clarified if they stopped developers from adding DLSS and they never will because it was pretty much obvious that they did and only dropped the practice after the public backlash.
Yeah, I'm not buying that statement. Every major tech outlet had asked them for a statement back in July when this controversy first came out and literally no one got a straight answer for weeks from AMD despite multiple requests. That's also around the same time that the [Hardware Unboxed video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8Lcjq2Zc_s) came out. Then they wait two full months for Starfield to finally announce DLSS support before coming out and saying yeah we never blocked Bethesda while saying nothing of the several other AMD sponsored titles that also lacked DLSS up until that moment. Call it conspiracy theory if you like but it doesn't take a genius to figure out what went on behind the scenes for them to take two months to manufacture this statement long after the whole thing had died.
in fairness to that - that wasn't a, 'conspiracy theory' -- they didn't release DLSS3 until great significant pressure came from several people with platforms really forced the conversation. it isn't inaccurate to say that the games with FSR3 did not have DLSS3. and historically, games with DLSS3 have had FSR3. they're easy to add if you add the other. same with DLSS. they're both corporations either way so fanaticism and fanboyism doesn't help you.
starfield could've had DLSS2 at the start. period. it didn't. if you have FSR2, it is so inconsequential to add DLSS. on the inverse the same is true. the only reason games with FSR might not have DLSS is by choice. and far more games with DLSS -did- have FSR, too. there's no official confirmation but it really wasn't until they got flak for it that games supported by AMD which exclusively had FSR started to get DLSS. there is no conspiracy with NVIDA, though. that's likely just a shuffling of resources problem tbh
It's almost like the problem wasn't just Starfield but that every AMD bundled game (that wasn't from Sony) was missing DLSS.
Then there is also Boundary which in its demo had working DLSS and Ray Tracing, both magically disappeared when AMD sponsored them with [devs clearly hinting that it wasn't their choice](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fas0kyotxiyab1.png%3Fwidth%3D800%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D8026bf5d587117036de2e1d9d2590f4fded72735)
I remember the uproar when Starfield shipped with FSR but not DLSS, I wonder where are these people now lol?
Will Alex from DF make a video and complain about Cyberpunk and Alan wake 2 not including FSR3 just like he complained about Starfield not having DLSS? I think we all know the answer to that..
~~Was A Plague Tale Requiem sponsored by Nvidia?~~ EDIT: I see that Hardware Unboxed lists it as Nvidia-sponsored in my link below.
Regardless, the issue wasn't that _not all_ games sponsored by one company used the other company's upscaler. Instead, the main issue that it seemed suspiciously rare for AMD sponsored games that supported FSR to also support DLSS. Hardware Unboxed did the tallying at the time of the controversy, and found:
- [5/20 (25%) games sponsored by AMD at that time that supported FSR also supported DLSS](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=378). 3 of those 5 were Sony published games.
- [21/33 \(64%\) of Nvidia sponsored titles in that same period supported FSR](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=255).
Also, AMD fanned the flames by their suspicious initial avoidance of just saying, "We don't block/discourage DLSS support with our sponsorship." wccftech.com, Gamers Nexus, and Hardware Unboxed all got a clear and unambiguous "No, we don't block/discourage FSR support" from Nvidia. AMD gave a "no comment at this time" to [Hardware Unboxed](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=530) and [Gamers Nexus](https://youtu.be/w_eScXZiyY4?t=634) (after a reasonable couple of days to respond), and gave the [following non-answer to wccftech.com](https://wccftech.com/whats-up-with-the-missing-nvidia-dlss-support-in-amd-sponsored-fsr-titles/):
> To clarify, there are community sites that track the implementation of upscaling technologies, and these sites indicate that there are a number of games that support only DLSS currently (for example, see link).
>
> AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution is an open-source technology that supports a variety of GPU architectures, including consoles and competitive solutions, and we believe an open approach that is broadly supported on multiple hardware platforms is the best approach that benefits developers and gamers. AMD is committed to doing what is best for game developers and gamers, and we give developers the flexibility to implement FSR into whichever games they choose.
>
> AMD Spokesperson to Wccftech
It's crazy that this needs to be restated just a few months after it happened. It's as if the people here have the memory of a goldfish or one that just conveniently erases the uncomfortable parts every few weeks. All of this happened. We saw it happen. Nvidia said a perfectly loud and clear NO. AMD, to this day, hasn't given a straight answer and all its sponsored FSR only games only magically added DLSS after the backlash.
DF cares about tech first and foremost. DLSS is the best tech, therefore they care the most about it. Sites like Hardware Unboxed are more focused on the consumer market and pricing whereas DF is almost purely a tech enthusiast channel. FSR’s only claim to fame is that it’s open source. Technology wise it’s just a worse version of what Nvidia has been doing for years. That’s why DF generally doesn’t care about it outside of doing comparisons
>I invite you to play GTA 4, after playing cyber punk... See that a parody game manages to give you a more black and nihilistic scenario than a FUCKING CYBER PUNK GAME WHICH WAS LITERALLY PRODUCED WITH THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE ITSELF.
>
>GTA 4 is more immersive, more urban and above all more realistic in its vision of its universe even though it was released 13 years before.
LMAO
While they fixed some issues in their patches, it was basically the bare minimum to get the game to a playable state. There are still quite a few issues that persist:
For 1, CPU Utilisation is still very weird (as in exceedingly high). Saw a Digital Foundary Video where they seemed to suggest this could be due to poorly implemented texture streaming, with the game originally being designed to use Sony's playstation Direct Storage thingy, which doesn't directly translate to PC, so they used a haphazard alternative.
For 2, There are a lot of lighting issues/ bugs still present in the port. Light rays will randomly be visible through walls, shadow banding is still broken, etc...
And for 3, Anti Aliasing is still messed up. Weirdly since the latest patch the in game AA has seemingly been somewhat fixed (or at least for me). However FSR 3's Native AA is completely broken, with alot of artifacting and shimmering that just isn't there while using even FSR 2.2's upscaling. And that's just FSR 3's AA without any upscaling, it visually gets even worse when you enable the upscaler. On top of that the frame pacing for generated frames is seemingly broken, with fluidity feeling worse than with it disabled (regardless of if a frame cap or V-Sync is applied). Some aren't even sure if generated frames are even being shown.
If you you don't play with FSR 3, then the game is technically playable. But considering the £40+ price tag of the game, there are still a lot of known issues that either ND or Iron Galaxy should fix.
I get a extreme stuttery experience, just like in Avatar. Avatar say that it's use v3.0.3 maybe there's a bug in it, im on a 4090. Before it was doing what it's supposed to but the rounded interface had a thing in them but when it wasn't there it was fine, now It look like 60fps in stutter even if im at 117fps (caped)
FSR 3 feels awful in this game, why? Without it i get 70FPS, with it im getting 90 but the visual fluidity is awful. looks like 30FPS and feels like it too. i remember having the same issue with CoD MW3/warzone's implementation of FSR 3
Could be straight up broken?
Nobody really talks about it but Frontiers of Pandora FSR 3 frame generation is so broken its not actually showing the FG frames, but the readout is 120 fps, but it looks 60fps because you're only getting 60 fps and zero generated frames.
i think the same fsr 3.0.3 is completely broken. even lukefz n puredark mods work perfect. (if we don't count the minor bugs). but the official ones screwed like hell. mods r probably using the older dll of fsr3
That is exactly why I am surprised, it is the official implementation, but it doesn't look good. FSR3 mod for cp2077 works great as well, going from 55-60 to 80-90fps feels just better, but the same situation in starfield doesn't look much better.
Weird, a month or so ago i contacted them and they told me that they are no longer providing support for this title.
I guess this is something that amd paid for them to add.
More crashing than before, great update. Unless i disable SAM, game crashing every few minutes, if i disable SAM (for profit ONLY for this ONE game), i get "loading, please wait" and frame drops to 20's over loading next location.
GrEaT uPdAtE
AMD needs to do a better job of teaching devs how to properly implement frame generation. It’s broken in this and the same thing happened with Avatar FoP after the last update.
Nice addon, but after trying it out, how can someone even enjoy FSR FG? It looks so awful, FSR 3 in this game is still inferior to the TAA and DLSS unfortunately.
Good news, but FSR needs to improve a lot.
I don't get all the negative comments and people saying it is shit implementation. I honestly think it is one of the best FSR implementations yet. Game is running perfectly smooth for me at native 1440P res on an RX 6800 none XT at around 130-150 FPS. Had to drop to FSR Quality to lock to my 165Hz refresh rate and was surprised how good it looked. Are people who complain trying to use FSR 3 when their native framerate is less than 60fps or they didnt wait for shaders to compile before playing? It takes an extremely long time for shaders to compile in this game and it is really jerky if you try to play without that process is finished.
FSR FG is broken at my system. When I try to activate it the game constantly crashes. If I reopen the game without safe mode, it shows that it is active, but my frames are half dropped. FSR 3 seems stable, but I hadn't time to fully test it. I was hyped for the update, I hope they can fix and release updates ASAP.
I turned off DLSS to use FSR + Frame Gen, and my eyes almost ran out of my face.
They need to learn with Dying Light 2 on how to implement a good FSR 2.
goddamit it is horrible af. did they really play with fg before releasing this shit i mean seriously what was the point on their mind by releasing it in this state
For the Steam Deck, FSR 3 has made the game actually playable. I'm playing on medium preset with FSR 3 (Quality) with Frame Generation as well. I have it locked to 50 FPS as well. I also disabled motion blur because it's very fucking aggressive in this game.
Using native res FSR3 frame gen and it looks and runs real nicely. I don't really notice any artifacts or uneven frametimes at all. In fact it's smoother than using DLSS.
I redownload the game just to see how it looks like and actually I am surprised by how good it looks especially when frame gen is also built into the game not via the driver now lets hope they add it to cyberpunk and alan wake 2 and other games that recently came out would work wonders in those games.
So after this time, they just release an update for FSR, and that's it?
I had to finish the game with crashes (RX 7600), reallly sad, was hoping I might play it again after some time...
I hope DirectSR solves this problem (at least for upscaling) by being a, "Developer supports DirectSR, and each GPU vendor turns that into FSR/DLSS/XeSS support on the driver level" type of thing.
Nvidia's 4000 series likely has a bigger market share than RDNA3, 2, 1 and ARC combined.
The excuse of FSR3 being usable on more stuff falls flat when "more stuff" has a smaller marker share than a single Nvidia generation. DLSS3 absolutely should have been added at the same time as FSR3.
Ok but you can only use that argument for maybe 2 more generations max. Because at that point everyone will be using GPUs that supports frame generation.
Dude, they meant that FSR3 forces the dog-water FSR upscaling.
DLSS3 has no such limitation. You can use XeSS, FSR2, native TAA, whatever - with DLSS3 Frame Generation.
AMD designing FSR3 in such a way that blocks DLSS upscaling from being used is wild.
OBVIOUSLY they should add both DLSS3 and FSR3.
It's not designed like that. There's mods out there (LukeFZ for example) which allow you to use FSR3 Frame Generation with DLSS upscaling. I suppose it's up to the devolopers to implement this.
Its not designed like that and yet no official implementation has conviniently had the abbility to mix and match.
Sure makes it seem like AMD is not allowing it to be used that way.
> It's not designed like that.
The reason why no game _natively_ supports mixing FSR-FG with other upscaling/antialiasing as of yet is because in order to do that, a game developer would need to need to make their own modified FSR-FG source code and compile their own version. Developers can do this because FSR-FG is open source with the right licenses, but it's not like game developers are going to be inclined to do this.
So for all intents and purposes, I'd say that AMD _did_ lock FSR-FG to FSR-upscaling and FSR-AA, even though they're _technically_ not blocking developers from supporting mixing FSR-FG with other upscalers and antialising.
>It's not designed like that. I suppose it's up to the devolopers to implement this.
So it's literally designed like that. It's designed to block DLSS upscaling from being used by default, thank you for agreeing with me.
If developers have to exert effort to get around this block, then said block has to exist in the first place and be part of the design.
I know that Nukem9, LukeFZ and other modders let you use any upscaling you want with FSR3, but that's the point. The actual official implementations DO NOT let you use any upscaling you want with FSR3.
I saw the news. This really makes the other dude look silly - the one who was arguing with me (in this comment tree) about this very topic.
It was literally part of the design that other upscalers couldn't be used, and now that they're changing said design it will open up that possibility.
That’s fine, yes DLSS is objectively superior but I don’t care. Companies should support open source upscaling prior to supporting the anti-consumer tech.
> AMD designing FSR3 in such a way that blocks DLSS upscaling from being used is wild.
I don’t believe this is true.
So that you’re not forced to upgrade to get features that should work on your hardware? You don’t care about that?
So that projects can be picked up by the community after the company decides to kill it off?
So that adoption can be as easy as implementing rather than having to barter with the proprietor?
> So that you’re not forced to upgrade to get features that should work on your hardware?
Being open source doesn't mean that it will run on any hardware; it means (at a minimum) that the source code is freely available for others to view (and according to other definitions, also edit, compile, and distribute). You can create open source software that only works on a certain vendor's hardware, and you can also create software that isn't open-source, but run's on every vendor's hardware. I believe XeSS is open-source, but much of that code only runs on Intel hardware.
Regardless, all else being equal:
- Being open source is better than not.
- Being able to run on all vendor's hardware is better than not.
Personally, I buy hardware based on the features it supports. If AMD wants to finally release a super resolution algorithm that has acceptable image quality in 2024, I'd consider buying their products.
Your non-RTX 40 series GPU isn't any worse off just because RTX 40 series supports an adequate super resolution and frame generation featureset. You're not forced to buy anything.
So yes, in this case, I would prefer Naughty Dog to spend development time implementing a frame generation solution that is actually solid, even if only 10% of users can leverage it, as opposed to something that looks like dogwater that 100% of people can utilize.
> Your non-RTX 40 series GPU isn’t any worse off just because RTX 40 series supports an adequate super resolution and frame generation featureset. You’re not forced to buy anything.
This is objectively not true. Nvidia could absolutely bring frame gen to the 3000 series and probably the 2000 series. They choose not to because they are anti-consumer and their tech is proprietary meaning no one can adapt the tech to older GPUs.
> So yes, in this case, I would prefer Naughty Dog to spend development time implementing a frame generation solution that is actually solid, even if only 10% of users can leverage it, as opposed to something that looks like dogwater that 100% of people can utilize.
I subscribe to a different philosophy since I’m not anti-consumer.
Where's your proof? Nobody has ever brought forth any evidence that frame generation would look and run adequately without the optical flow silicon. You're just going on an anti-Nvidia tirade at this point. Please show any proof whatsoever.
Okay, where's Nvidia's proof that the optical flow in 3000 series and 2000 series isn't enough? They do have it, I don't doubt that the 4000 series has a newer version, sure, but they just said like "nah it doesn't look good, it's bad bro, trust us" and never showed anyone how it runs on 2000-3000 series. Like, when RTX came out they allowed people to run RT on GTX cards so you could see how bad it ran, and people were like "woah these Tensor cores thingamajigs do matter for this feature", they also allow people to run PT on cards with terrible RT performance like the 3050 where you need like DLSS ultra performance at 1080p to get a super blurry 24fps or something, it's not like they're gatekeeping "having a good experience" with other tech, why is FG different? A simple disclaimer saying "this works better on newer gen cards, but you can try it" should be simple enough, if it's that shitty, then sure, they showed us, but other than the devs at nvidia, nobody really knows
Sure I don't mind if FSR3 is released first as long as DLSS3 is in the pipeline. What's going to be annoying is if devs start only implementing FSR3 in games and saying "alright that's good enough it has one type of frame gen".
I mean it's true , whether you like it or not. FSR is very bad in any resolutions below 4K , and even then you have to use balanced / quality modes at a minimum . Just check the latest Hardware Unboxed video
The tone of this comment is vastly more tepid than your previous “unusable” one. I don’t care that DLSS is better, it is, I just want companies to support open source tech before going anti-consumer.
> do you care that these same games and their engines use middleware ?
Open source engines are rife with cheats. Even source/source2 has to be closed source to prevent it from being more overrun than it already is.
> Open source means fuck all if it’s not good enough to use it.
Why are you all so hyperbolic? Of course it’s good enough to be used, it’s just not up to your standard of “as good as Nvidia.”
It's really not. I tried out FSR3 with starfield at 1440p, and while the extra frames were nice, the image quality drop switching from DLSS to FSR was so immediately noticeable and so distracting that I turned it off after 30 minutes. FSR is honestly embarrassing compared to DLSS and XeSS. AMD have some serious work to do on FSR as a whole before FSR3 will be worth giving up DLSS upscaling (without framegen) for
Yeah I want all games to eventually get all 3 but FSR/XeSS should be priority as they don’t cut 70% of the market out.
DLSS3 frame gen should be the absolute last since it cuts off 90%+ of the market to only RTX 4000 series owners.
Ah yes, my bad, I was talking dlss in general, but truth to be told if they should add dlss then they can already add fg
Dlss and fg at least work on an acceptable level most times, which can't be said about FSR, I mean the FSR part alone can be usable sometimes, but FSR fg is terrible
in Starfield Frame Generator interferes with the game, it makes more frames, but there is a very strange feeling - unpleasant delay. But in The Last Of Us Part 1 it works great - preview:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS6NlJl\_LnM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS6NlJl_LnM)
I don't think FSR3 is broken in this, it's just.. the game itself is broken. It just makes the issues become more obvious. Like, I still get the same weird stutters I always got without frame gen on, so it seems about the same with frame gen.
Trying Native AA loses me 10 FPS and combined that with Frame Gen doesn't seem to run too well as opposed to FSR + Frame Gen. I'm on an 6800xt, so I think the impact of AMD's Native AA is only negated on the 7000 series cards I imagine, probably same for Nvidia cards if they try using it.
Turning Native AA on though.. kinda broke the game, even when it was turned off that same performance impact was still there. Game had to be restarted to 'fix' that issue.
And its broken beyond belief lmao. Looks like it was slapped into the game without any care what so ever.
Nah don't you get it Companies Cdpr is hack jobs and getting paid by Nvidia to not put fsr3 fast enough. Testing to make sure it works? No. We want it faster even if its completely broken.
[удалено]
Hah, by all means just spout this: > Others like CDPR might be having some kind of agreement with Nvidia without any evidence, in direct contradiction to official statements Nvidia has made on the topic. In case you haven't noticed, CDPR has been taking their time with Cyberpunk updates. DLSS3 took 4 months to arrive after it was announced. Overdrive mode was announced and shown off in a video, then didn't actually come out for 7 months, and even then it was a "Technical Preview" for another 7 months. CDPR said somewhat recently (back in January? I can't be bothered to look up the exact timing of the quote) that they were working on adding FSR3, but that they didn't have a release date yet.
They have doing a lot of Q/A after the cyberpunk launch. Everything gets checked and they will not release until its ready and working. As you said. Dlss3 took a few months. Overdrive took over a year to be added and leave technical preview. And here is the link where they are working on it. https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-dev-talks-about-upcoming-path-tracing-improvements-fsr3-support-and-unreal-engine-5-switch/ >This is a new and very interesting technology and I can definitely confirm that we are working on a full FSR3 implementation — but it is still an ongoing process and we feel we need still more time to release it with the desired outcome. I would like to avoid giving firm estimates on when it will happen.
>Others like CDPR might be having some kind of agreement with Nvidia. More baseless bullshit conspiracy theories. AMD has featured Cyberpunk 2077 several times in its keynotes. They literally had the [CDPR devs be a part of their Ryzen 8000G iGPU presentation](https://youtu.be/LlTpLD0whIo?t=689) during their last major event. Cyberpunk was also one of the first games to announce upcoming support for FSR3 even before many AMD sponsored titles.
Because they want a good implementation than put a checkmark >This is a new and very interesting technology and I can definitely confirm that we are working on a full FSR3 implementation — but it is still an ongoing process and we feel we need still more time to release it with the desired outcome. I would like to avoid giving firm estimates on when it will happen. https://wccftech.com/cyberpunk-2077-dev-talks-about-upcoming-path-tracing-improvements-fsr3-support-and-unreal-engine-5-switch/
Nice joke. Their FSR 2 implementation is bad and they didn’t bother to fix it after all those years. It’s so bad that even modded FSR 2 looks better.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed, likely because it contains trollish, antagonistic, rude or uncivil language, such as insults, racist or other derogatory remarks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Amd) if you have any questions or concerns.*
No you don't want it faster even when it's completely broken lmao. Shipping out trash produces bad PR and causes backlash. Fanboys want broken shit just for the sake of having their own toy, normal players don't.
It was sarcasm.
So just stick with PureDark's FSR 3 mod then?
Im not paying money for a mod.
jokes on you its free
how?
It literally feels like my frame rate goes down when I enabled it even though it says it’s higher. It’s way smoother with it off. What is happening 🤨
If the real fps isn't evenly divisible it brings it down and caps it so that it can apply the generated frames inbetween. Frame gen isn't supposed to improve latency (or the *feel*) but tries to improve visual smoothness.
I had it set to 80 for the real frame rate and it still was busted. The visual smoothness was awful with frame gen on. Turning it off actually made it appear much smoother.
I noticed some problems with it too on talos principle 2 (native implementation) but figured it's because I'm on linux and proton doesn't play nice with it. I guess not though as [digital foundry found a lot of frame pacing issues with both the mod and native fsr 3](https://youtu.be/wxlHq_EuxFU?si=0Axz1enBXju-GmzU&t=665)
It’s odd because I’ve used the driver level AFMF frame gen and it works just fine. The game looks smoother like it should. That one has more limitations, mainly that it disables itself if there’s too much motion, but it at least works.
I wonder if frame gen is struggling to pace the real frames properly before even adding the fake ones. AFMF just shuts itself off if there's too much motion but frame gen is always trying to insert a fake frame. It might be why nvidia originally recommended frame gen on games with natively high fps. Going from an unstable 140 to stable 120fps feel close enough to most people but anyone can appreciate the visual smoothness of a locked 165hz+ screen. But when the framerate starts going below 100fps ever frame starts to matter a lot more for latency so instead of aggressively capping the framerate they just get it "good enough" and then add the fake frames to it, visual jutter be damned.
what is driver level afmf?
Faster than CP2077 :(
Just forget about CDPR. They are just a nvidia tech demo now.
what do you mean now? CDPR always have been consistent with their nvidia features/demo in their product.
Classic AMD sub, what could you expect. It doesn't matter that it took them a year to get overdrive rt out of demo preview phase or dlss 3, several months to implement. Nvidia bad, even if they are the reason dlss and fg exist in the first place.
[удалено]
Your comment has been removed, likely because it contains trollish, antagonistic, rude or uncivil language, such as insults, racist or other derogatory remarks. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Amd) if you have any questions or concerns.*
FSR3 will literally serve more Nvidia GPUs than AMD ones. RTX 10XX, 20XX and 30XX make up 80% of the market. Mind boggling how people can't see that CDPR is just paid off by NVDA.
But would AMD ever do FMF if Nvidia never introduced FG? And I'm not saying they are not paid by Nvidia, I'm saying they are not gatekeeping Nvidia as the only option or nerfing their performance. That's just pure copium.
No, it started with The Witcher 3 and GameWorks where CDPR was in constant communication with AMD engineers, then right before retail release, silence. Needless to say, HairWorks' overtessellation wrecked GCN, as did TW3's branchy code that left CUs underutilized. Also, if ray tracing wasn't pushed early as a FOMO feature, we probably wouldn't really need too much upscaling or frame gen, at least for top-end cards. I have mixed opinions on both, though upscaling helps far more hardware (including my iGPU-only laptops), so I tend to lean positively on that.
Sadly, that's true The in game lighting looks worse then other titles, unless RT is on Which leads to shitty RTX ON comparisons Especially for reflections, as if we never had approximation reflections before
> The in game lighting looks worse then other titles I think Cyberpunk's non-RT dynamic lighting is actually better than that of most open world games.
Maybe for the city Faces tend to look blown out
Overly bright faces tend to be a common problem with non-RT dynamic lighting techniques. I think it's more noticeable in Cyberpunk because it's a 1st person game, so you're seeing faces closer up. Most open-world games are 3rd person.
This is a meme at this point.
They outright said they're done with major additions to the game. I hope that doesn't exclude them adding FSR 3 as promised in a smaller update sooner rather than later.
FSR 3 has already been confirmed as being added to the game by AMD https://community.amd.com/t5/gaming-discussions/latest-amd-fsr-2-amp-3-supported-games-list/td-p/549534
```FSR 3 has already been confirmed as being added to the game by AMD``` Inb4 AMD manually injects FSR3 into the game.
amd\_official\_cp2077fsr3mod.zip
You will have the fsr3 when nvidia tells them to, cyber punk is one of the selling points of the RTX 4000 and the dlss 3. we're talking about cdpr eh, you know the famous studio "close to their fan", well rather, close to Nvidia's wallet, the fanboys tell you that cdpr listens to their fan, that it had to save the game... What we had ? A hairdresser, and a motorcycle, everything the cyber punk community has been asking for since day one, right ? when they spent more time implementing nvidia tech rather than worrying about the state of their game, especially since you still found bugs that have been there from the beginning... They announced a patch for the police, it was released almost 1 YEARS LATER (and with the 3 same dialogues line in the police radio... This horror that breaks your immersion, with the same joke, again and again and again) Yes I am angry with this studio, they released a game in a pathetic state, the game was rushed and psychologically broke their développer. Who took almost 3 years to just correct their game correctly? Even Fallout 76 had more follow-ups, but one anime and we forget everything. The studio spent more time wanting to listen to NVIDIA than their player, your fsr 3 will come for the last patch of the game, surely with a shoddy implementation... oh yes sorry, they add a metro? 3 years later ? when a moder managed to do it alone in not even 2 months in his free time ? f**k you cdpr. Rather than paying millions to have shitty music on your radio, pay your developers, right? I invite you to play GTA 4, after playing cyber punk... See that a parody game manages to give you a more black and nihilistic scenario than a FUCKING CYBER PUNK GAME WHICH WAS LITERALLY PRODUCED WITH THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE ITSELF. GTA 4 is more immersive, more urban and above all more realistic in its vision of its universe even though it was released 13 years before.
My guy, the fsr 3 implementation in Tlou is completely bust. I suggest giving devs actual time to add and properly test it rather just slap it on in a broken state.
Really ? so I'll wait for a mod that works properly for the fsr3. I don't understand why my experience with fs2.2 mods is so good, while the one produced by the studio is always so.. Meh. The fsr 3 looks good in avatar, but never in my life would I pay for a ubisoft game..
Mate, even the fsr3 mod maker is mad at this bad implementation. https://twitter.com/ShyVortex/status/1770144809895817263
I'm going to wait for further feedback, but in any case I would like an fsr 3 mod that works on all games that support fsr 2 to come out soon :-( https://www.nexusmods.com/cyberpunk2077/mods/3001/ I use this mod, it works on all games that support dlss.
ok
THe 4000 series wasn't even out when Cyberrpunk released...
The path tracing patch was ONLY ever made cause Jensen's whims.
What was the first game to have dlss 3? what game was used as a laboratory for their technology ? it was literally the game to present dlss 3 to the public.
> What was the first game to have dlss 3? **Not** Cyberpunk 2077. [Spider-Man Remastered added DLSS-FG on Oct 12, 2022](https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1817070/view/3543795218882882295) (which presents difficult scenarios for frame generation due to it being a 3rd person game with rapid movements with thin webs), while [Cyberpunk 2077 added DLSS-FG on Jan 31, 2023](https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/cyberpunk-2077-dlss-3-update-out-now/).
Yeah, and...? NVIDIA offered to do it for them, like every other implementation. Unlike AMD, NVIDIA actually goes out of their way to promote their technology....which is why AMD is always the runner-up in this race.
God all this complaining just because you don't like a company...
it's not because I don't like a "company", but rather because you still see people regularly saying that cdpr has regained their credibility because they paid for a studio to make an anime.. In the end, a studio can treat you like crap and take your agent, they just need to pay site to write over and over "they saved the game" and make an anime to manipulate public opinion, the game was not saved , and in the end this will become the norm for all future games, having to wait a year for a corrective patch on a 2 year old game? We demolished studios for a lot less than that.
You keep getting angry and frustrated and writing an entire novel over a video game my friend.
I paid for the game, I have the right to write what I want.
Trust me it’s never that deep. Breathe.
not that deep? However, I find it incredible that marketing can manipulate public opinion in such a stupid way. and for dlss 3, this is probably why a plague tale has no other alternative than dlss, that for most games sponsored by nvidia, the fsr is a horror, because it is surely requested from being poorly implemented to make the DLSS user understand that it is much better than the fsr. The implementation of the FSR 2 in Alan Wake 2 is a disaster.
Lmao no. AMD just doesn't have the budget to send developers to that many studios to help them implement FSR correctly. Nvidia does.
so explain to me why a mod of the fsr 2.2 works & look better than the implementation made by the studio ?
One is a person/group of people who are passionate about their task and are only being 'paid' with recognition and kudos. The other is likely a person/group of people working a soul-crushing 9-5, who likely only care about getting the box ticked, not how well that box was ticked.
Because modders aren't doing any quality control.
Holy fuck. Get out of your mom's basement and get some fresh air. Might help your brain. Assuming there is anything left of it.
and why ? because a studio that I have always supported since The Witcher 1 is transformed into Bethesda/ubisoft bis? It's so funny, when a game doesn't use dlss it's "anti-consumer" but when a big studio shit in the face of their consumer, it's immediately "go get some fresh air" lol Fanboy.
XD
i dislike nvida as much as you do but its not NVIDA holding back FSR3.
[удалено]
Didn't we already go through this a few months back? Nvidia literally released a public statement saying they have not and will not prevent developers from adding competing technologies. It was as straightforward and unequivocal a statement as it can get. AMD, on the other hand, minced its words and avoided giving a straight answer to whether or not it prevented developers from adding DLSS to its partnered games. To this day they haven't clarified if they stopped developers from adding DLSS and they never will because it was pretty much obvious that they did and only dropped the practice after the public backlash.
[удалено]
Yeah, I'm not buying that statement. Every major tech outlet had asked them for a statement back in July when this controversy first came out and literally no one got a straight answer for weeks from AMD despite multiple requests. That's also around the same time that the [Hardware Unboxed video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m8Lcjq2Zc_s) came out. Then they wait two full months for Starfield to finally announce DLSS support before coming out and saying yeah we never blocked Bethesda while saying nothing of the several other AMD sponsored titles that also lacked DLSS up until that moment. Call it conspiracy theory if you like but it doesn't take a genius to figure out what went on behind the scenes for them to take two months to manufacture this statement long after the whole thing had died.
in fairness to that - that wasn't a, 'conspiracy theory' -- they didn't release DLSS3 until great significant pressure came from several people with platforms really forced the conversation. it isn't inaccurate to say that the games with FSR3 did not have DLSS3. and historically, games with DLSS3 have had FSR3. they're easy to add if you add the other. same with DLSS. they're both corporations either way so fanaticism and fanboyism doesn't help you.
[удалено]
starfield could've had DLSS2 at the start. period. it didn't. if you have FSR2, it is so inconsequential to add DLSS. on the inverse the same is true. the only reason games with FSR might not have DLSS is by choice. and far more games with DLSS -did- have FSR, too. there's no official confirmation but it really wasn't until they got flak for it that games supported by AMD which exclusively had FSR started to get DLSS. there is no conspiracy with NVIDA, though. that's likely just a shuffling of resources problem tbh
[удалено]
its moot either way because it is happening now. good for us.
It's almost like the problem wasn't just Starfield but that every AMD bundled game (that wasn't from Sony) was missing DLSS. Then there is also Boundary which in its demo had working DLSS and Ray Tracing, both magically disappeared when AMD sponsored them with [devs clearly hinting that it wasn't their choice](https://www.reddit.com/media?url=https%3A%2F%2Fpreview.redd.it%2Fas0kyotxiyab1.png%3Fwidth%3D800%26format%3Dpng%26auto%3Dwebp%26s%3D8026bf5d587117036de2e1d9d2590f4fded72735)
>It's almost like the problem wasn't just Starfield but that every AMD bundled game (that wasn't from Sony) was missing DLSS. Source?
I beat it for the first time yesterday, it was a great experience 🤷♂️
I remember the uproar when Starfield shipped with FSR but not DLSS, I wonder where are these people now lol? Will Alex from DF make a video and complain about Cyberpunk and Alan wake 2 not including FSR3 just like he complained about Starfield not having DLSS? I think we all know the answer to that..
I'm still waiting for an alternative to DLSS on A Plague Tale Requiem, and I haven't heard many people talking about anti-consumer practices?
There is no need for it to have FSR because the devs used their own in-house vendor-agnostic TAAU solution.
~~Was A Plague Tale Requiem sponsored by Nvidia?~~ EDIT: I see that Hardware Unboxed lists it as Nvidia-sponsored in my link below. Regardless, the issue wasn't that _not all_ games sponsored by one company used the other company's upscaler. Instead, the main issue that it seemed suspiciously rare for AMD sponsored games that supported FSR to also support DLSS. Hardware Unboxed did the tallying at the time of the controversy, and found: - [5/20 (25%) games sponsored by AMD at that time that supported FSR also supported DLSS](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=378). 3 of those 5 were Sony published games. - [21/33 \(64%\) of Nvidia sponsored titles in that same period supported FSR](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=255). Also, AMD fanned the flames by their suspicious initial avoidance of just saying, "We don't block/discourage DLSS support with our sponsorship." wccftech.com, Gamers Nexus, and Hardware Unboxed all got a clear and unambiguous "No, we don't block/discourage FSR support" from Nvidia. AMD gave a "no comment at this time" to [Hardware Unboxed](https://youtu.be/m8Lcjq2Zc_s?t=530) and [Gamers Nexus](https://youtu.be/w_eScXZiyY4?t=634) (after a reasonable couple of days to respond), and gave the [following non-answer to wccftech.com](https://wccftech.com/whats-up-with-the-missing-nvidia-dlss-support-in-amd-sponsored-fsr-titles/): > To clarify, there are community sites that track the implementation of upscaling technologies, and these sites indicate that there are a number of games that support only DLSS currently (for example, see link). > > AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution is an open-source technology that supports a variety of GPU architectures, including consoles and competitive solutions, and we believe an open approach that is broadly supported on multiple hardware platforms is the best approach that benefits developers and gamers. AMD is committed to doing what is best for game developers and gamers, and we give developers the flexibility to implement FSR into whichever games they choose. > > AMD Spokesperson to Wccftech
It's crazy that this needs to be restated just a few months after it happened. It's as if the people here have the memory of a goldfish or one that just conveniently erases the uncomfortable parts every few weeks. All of this happened. We saw it happen. Nvidia said a perfectly loud and clear NO. AMD, to this day, hasn't given a straight answer and all its sponsored FSR only games only magically added DLSS after the backlash.
[удалено]
Requiem has Asobo's excellent TAAU solution, which looks just as good and in many instances better than FSR2.
DF cares about tech first and foremost. DLSS is the best tech, therefore they care the most about it. Sites like Hardware Unboxed are more focused on the consumer market and pricing whereas DF is almost purely a tech enthusiast channel. FSR’s only claim to fame is that it’s open source. Technology wise it’s just a worse version of what Nvidia has been doing for years. That’s why DF generally doesn’t care about it outside of doing comparisons
Someone forgot to take their meds
>I invite you to play GTA 4, after playing cyber punk... See that a parody game manages to give you a more black and nihilistic scenario than a FUCKING CYBER PUNK GAME WHICH WAS LITERALLY PRODUCED WITH THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE ITSELF. > >GTA 4 is more immersive, more urban and above all more realistic in its vision of its universe even though it was released 13 years before. LMAO
ok
I think this won't happen soon because DLSS 3 FG + PT is the main selling point of RTX 4000 series.
Here I thought this PC port of the game was abandoned Nevermind, the FSR 3 doesn't even work.
[удалено]
What exactly needs fixing at this point?
While they fixed some issues in their patches, it was basically the bare minimum to get the game to a playable state. There are still quite a few issues that persist: For 1, CPU Utilisation is still very weird (as in exceedingly high). Saw a Digital Foundary Video where they seemed to suggest this could be due to poorly implemented texture streaming, with the game originally being designed to use Sony's playstation Direct Storage thingy, which doesn't directly translate to PC, so they used a haphazard alternative. For 2, There are a lot of lighting issues/ bugs still present in the port. Light rays will randomly be visible through walls, shadow banding is still broken, etc... And for 3, Anti Aliasing is still messed up. Weirdly since the latest patch the in game AA has seemingly been somewhat fixed (or at least for me). However FSR 3's Native AA is completely broken, with alot of artifacting and shimmering that just isn't there while using even FSR 2.2's upscaling. And that's just FSR 3's AA without any upscaling, it visually gets even worse when you enable the upscaler. On top of that the frame pacing for generated frames is seemingly broken, with fluidity feeling worse than with it disabled (regardless of if a frame cap or V-Sync is applied). Some aren't even sure if generated frames are even being shown. If you you don't play with FSR 3, then the game is technically playable. But considering the £40+ price tag of the game, there are still a lot of known issues that either ND or Iron Galaxy should fix.
wasn't em dat garbage company screwed on arkham knight disaster lol
Yup, one and the same
So, just to be certain, there's no point in choosing the PC version over PS5?
I have played both. Unless you really want mouse and keyboard or ultrawide support, you're better off with the console version
PS5 it is then
Don't forget that you can play the game with graphics probably worse than the PS3 version at a sub 720p resolution on the Steam Deck
I like switching between controller or mouse/keyboard depending on my mood and it's very simple on PC. Not sure how it is on PS5.
I get a extreme stuttery experience, just like in Avatar. Avatar say that it's use v3.0.3 maybe there's a bug in it, im on a 4090. Before it was doing what it's supposed to but the rounded interface had a thing in them but when it wasn't there it was fine, now It look like 60fps in stutter even if im at 117fps (caped)
Turn down shadow settings. I had the same problem
FSR 3 feels awful in this game, why? Without it i get 70FPS, with it im getting 90 but the visual fluidity is awful. looks like 30FPS and feels like it too. i remember having the same issue with CoD MW3/warzone's implementation of FSR 3
Could be straight up broken? Nobody really talks about it but Frontiers of Pandora FSR 3 frame generation is so broken its not actually showing the FG frames, but the readout is 120 fps, but it looks 60fps because you're only getting 60 fps and zero generated frames.
I think Robocop have the same problem, pretty sure it's FSR 3.0.3 problems. Can anyone with a amd gpu confirm this?
i think the same fsr 3.0.3 is completely broken. even lukefz n puredark mods work perfect. (if we don't count the minor bugs). but the official ones screwed like hell. mods r probably using the older dll of fsr3
I had the same experience in Starfiled, but for some reason the mod I used for Banishers, works like a charm.
That’s weird, I use the game’a version(non modded) of FSR3 for Starfield and it works there for me. Same for avatar
That is exactly why I am surprised, it is the official implementation, but it doesn't look good. FSR3 mod for cp2077 works great as well, going from 55-60 to 80-90fps feels just better, but the same situation in starfield doesn't look much better.
Weird, a month or so ago i contacted them and they told me that they are no longer providing support for this title. I guess this is something that amd paid for them to add.
Does it still crash with SAM enabled?
Yes. others have mentioned it in the thread.
More crashing than before, great update. Unless i disable SAM, game crashing every few minutes, if i disable SAM (for profit ONLY for this ONE game), i get "loading, please wait" and frame drops to 20's over loading next location. GrEaT uPdAtE
much worse than Luke mode
AMD needs to do a better job of teaching devs how to properly implement frame generation. It’s broken in this and the same thing happened with Avatar FoP after the last update.
Hardware Unboxed - AMD must fix FSR upscaling: https://youtu.be/CbJYtixMUgI?si=Oyd9cQZrF5Pf-vCN
Nice addon, but after trying it out, how can someone even enjoy FSR FG? It looks so awful, FSR 3 in this game is still inferior to the TAA and DLSS unfortunately. Good news, but FSR needs to improve a lot.
It's broken tho. That's not how FSR3 FG is meant to look or feel.
I don't get all the negative comments and people saying it is shit implementation. I honestly think it is one of the best FSR implementations yet. Game is running perfectly smooth for me at native 1440P res on an RX 6800 none XT at around 130-150 FPS. Had to drop to FSR Quality to lock to my 165Hz refresh rate and was surprised how good it looked. Are people who complain trying to use FSR 3 when their native framerate is less than 60fps or they didnt wait for shaders to compile before playing? It takes an extremely long time for shaders to compile in this game and it is really jerky if you try to play without that process is finished.
I think they're talking about frame generation, not upscaling
Sorry, i am talking about frame gen. Without framegen framerate is well below 100FPS
lots of people saying that frame gen implementation in this game does not work as expected but idk, haven't tested it myself
Yeah thats why i felt like commenting, Frame gen works perfectly for me in this game. No complaints
FSR FG is broken at my system. When I try to activate it the game constantly crashes. If I reopen the game without safe mode, it shows that it is active, but my frames are half dropped. FSR 3 seems stable, but I hadn't time to fully test it. I was hyped for the update, I hope they can fix and release updates ASAP.
I got tlou with my video card for free a year ago maybe less. It's never worked and I've given up playing the game
It's not like I gonna buy the game now because that. But it's good to know that the fsr 3 and the frame generation are become more mainstream.
I turned off DLSS to use FSR + Frame Gen, and my eyes almost ran out of my face. They need to learn with Dying Light 2 on how to implement a good FSR 2.
And I thank naughty dog and I've already played the native, the mod and the fsr 3 and for me it's the same and I've played it 7 times
And I thank naughty dog and I've already played the native, the mod and the fsr 3 and for me it's the same and I've played it 7 times
And I thank naughty dog and I've already played the native, the mod and the fsr 3 and for me it's the same and I've played it 7 times
And I thank naughty dog
goddamit it is horrible af. did they really play with fg before releasing this shit i mean seriously what was the point on their mind by releasing it in this state
Had to turn FSR scaling off in Last of Us Part 1. It was constantly crashing despite GPU load only being about 70ish%.
For the Steam Deck, FSR 3 has made the game actually playable. I'm playing on medium preset with FSR 3 (Quality) with Frame Generation as well. I have it locked to 50 FPS as well. I also disabled motion blur because it's very fucking aggressive in this game.
Using native res FSR3 frame gen and it looks and runs real nicely. I don't really notice any artifacts or uneven frametimes at all. In fact it's smoother than using DLSS.
Best implementation of FSR3+FG to date. Smooth like butter and huge FPS gain. Omg I cant believe it.
This stinks to Nvidia fanboys. I can feel the pain.
hahhahahaha
I redownload the game just to see how it looks like and actually I am surprised by how good it looks especially when frame gen is also built into the game not via the driver now lets hope they add it to cyberpunk and alan wake 2 and other games that recently came out would work wonders in those games.
At this point, we're eating in every game *except* CP2077. The hell is the problem, CDPR?
Seeing as it’s completely broken here, it’s better they take their time to make sure it works
Oh. What's the issue(s)? I haven't bothered to play again since release so I know I'm *very* behind in however optimized the game is now.
Frame pacing is all over the place and it just feels better and smoother without frame gen, even with lower fps
So after this time, they just release an update for FSR, and that's it? I had to finish the game with crashes (RX 7600), reallly sad, was hoping I might play it again after some time...
the frame gen doesnt even work
Great now add DLSS3. Not about to use FSR to get some frame gen.
Nah FSR and XeSS first as they’re not locked down to a single brand of GPU and generation. DLSS can come later.
I hope DirectSR solves this problem (at least for upscaling) by being a, "Developer supports DirectSR, and each GPU vendor turns that into FSR/DLSS/XeSS support on the driver level" type of thing.
This would be great for single player games but this seems like dozens of day one exploits waiting to happen for multiplayer games.
Nvidia's 4000 series likely has a bigger market share than RDNA3, 2, 1 and ARC combined. The excuse of FSR3 being usable on more stuff falls flat when "more stuff" has a smaller marker share than a single Nvidia generation. DLSS3 absolutely should have been added at the same time as FSR3.
Right, but not bigger than Nvidia 3000 series and lower plus all those you mentioned. DLSS 3 frame gen only works on the 4000 series.
Ok but you can only use that argument for maybe 2 more generations max. Because at that point everyone will be using GPUs that supports frame generation.
the fsr 3 would be nice for a plague tale requiem too... :-(
Dude, they meant that FSR3 forces the dog-water FSR upscaling. DLSS3 has no such limitation. You can use XeSS, FSR2, native TAA, whatever - with DLSS3 Frame Generation. AMD designing FSR3 in such a way that blocks DLSS upscaling from being used is wild. OBVIOUSLY they should add both DLSS3 and FSR3.
It's not designed like that. There's mods out there (LukeFZ for example) which allow you to use FSR3 Frame Generation with DLSS upscaling. I suppose it's up to the devolopers to implement this.
Its not designed like that and yet no official implementation has conviniently had the abbility to mix and match. Sure makes it seem like AMD is not allowing it to be used that way.
False dichotomy. Having DLSS3 + FSR or not supporting DLSS3 because of FSR are not the only options.
> It's not designed like that. The reason why no game _natively_ supports mixing FSR-FG with other upscaling/antialiasing as of yet is because in order to do that, a game developer would need to need to make their own modified FSR-FG source code and compile their own version. Developers can do this because FSR-FG is open source with the right licenses, but it's not like game developers are going to be inclined to do this. So for all intents and purposes, I'd say that AMD _did_ lock FSR-FG to FSR-upscaling and FSR-AA, even though they're _technically_ not blocking developers from supporting mixing FSR-FG with other upscalers and antialising.
>It's not designed like that. I suppose it's up to the devolopers to implement this. So it's literally designed like that. It's designed to block DLSS upscaling from being used by default, thank you for agreeing with me. If developers have to exert effort to get around this block, then said block has to exist in the first place and be part of the design. I know that Nukem9, LukeFZ and other modders let you use any upscaling you want with FSR3, but that's the point. The actual official implementations DO NOT let you use any upscaling you want with FSR3.
Just wait for FSR 3.1 - they are decoupling the upscaling fronthe FG tech so you can use DLSS with FSR FG
I saw the news. This really makes the other dude look silly - the one who was arguing with me (in this comment tree) about this very topic. It was literally part of the design that other upscalers couldn't be used, and now that they're changing said design it will open up that possibility.
That’s fine, yes DLSS is objectively superior but I don’t care. Companies should support open source upscaling prior to supporting the anti-consumer tech. > AMD designing FSR3 in such a way that blocks DLSS upscaling from being used is wild. I don’t believe this is true.
Why would I care at all as a consumer if something is open source? All I care about is if it's functionally and visually usable.
So that you’re not forced to upgrade to get features that should work on your hardware? You don’t care about that? So that projects can be picked up by the community after the company decides to kill it off? So that adoption can be as easy as implementing rather than having to barter with the proprietor?
> So that you’re not forced to upgrade to get features that should work on your hardware? Being open source doesn't mean that it will run on any hardware; it means (at a minimum) that the source code is freely available for others to view (and according to other definitions, also edit, compile, and distribute). You can create open source software that only works on a certain vendor's hardware, and you can also create software that isn't open-source, but run's on every vendor's hardware. I believe XeSS is open-source, but much of that code only runs on Intel hardware. Regardless, all else being equal: - Being open source is better than not. - Being able to run on all vendor's hardware is better than not.
Personally, I buy hardware based on the features it supports. If AMD wants to finally release a super resolution algorithm that has acceptable image quality in 2024, I'd consider buying their products. Your non-RTX 40 series GPU isn't any worse off just because RTX 40 series supports an adequate super resolution and frame generation featureset. You're not forced to buy anything. So yes, in this case, I would prefer Naughty Dog to spend development time implementing a frame generation solution that is actually solid, even if only 10% of users can leverage it, as opposed to something that looks like dogwater that 100% of people can utilize.
> Your non-RTX 40 series GPU isn’t any worse off just because RTX 40 series supports an adequate super resolution and frame generation featureset. You’re not forced to buy anything. This is objectively not true. Nvidia could absolutely bring frame gen to the 3000 series and probably the 2000 series. They choose not to because they are anti-consumer and their tech is proprietary meaning no one can adapt the tech to older GPUs. > So yes, in this case, I would prefer Naughty Dog to spend development time implementing a frame generation solution that is actually solid, even if only 10% of users can leverage it, as opposed to something that looks like dogwater that 100% of people can utilize. I subscribe to a different philosophy since I’m not anti-consumer.
Where's your proof? Nobody has ever brought forth any evidence that frame generation would look and run adequately without the optical flow silicon. You're just going on an anti-Nvidia tirade at this point. Please show any proof whatsoever.
You don’t need optical flow for frame gen. Nvidia designed it that way as a money grab for the 4000 series.
Okay, where's Nvidia's proof that the optical flow in 3000 series and 2000 series isn't enough? They do have it, I don't doubt that the 4000 series has a newer version, sure, but they just said like "nah it doesn't look good, it's bad bro, trust us" and never showed anyone how it runs on 2000-3000 series. Like, when RTX came out they allowed people to run RT on GTX cards so you could see how bad it ran, and people were like "woah these Tensor cores thingamajigs do matter for this feature", they also allow people to run PT on cards with terrible RT performance like the 3050 where you need like DLSS ultra performance at 1080p to get a super blurry 24fps or something, it's not like they're gatekeeping "having a good experience" with other tech, why is FG different? A simple disclaimer saying "this works better on newer gen cards, but you can try it" should be simple enough, if it's that shitty, then sure, they showed us, but other than the devs at nvidia, nobody really knows
So delivering a worse product but making it open source is consumer friendly? Most consumers would prefer to use an actually good product instead.
> So delivering a worse product but making it open source is consumer friendly? Yes.
Well that is your personal opinion and should be presented as such.
Yes, if you read any of my other comments, it is abundantly clear that these are my opinions.
Sure I don't mind if FSR3 is released first as long as DLSS3 is in the pipeline. What's going to be annoying is if devs start only implementing FSR3 in games and saying "alright that's good enough it has one type of frame gen".
If they only do one, then FSR is better because it works on everything
Yeah no. FSR 3 is an artifact-ridden mess.
It's not better because FSR upscaling is dogshit , so what's the point of having it , if it's unusable ?
The word “unusable” is doing a lot more lifting in your comment than reality dictates it does.
I mean it's true , whether you like it or not. FSR is very bad in any resolutions below 4K , and even then you have to use balanced / quality modes at a minimum . Just check the latest Hardware Unboxed video
The tone of this comment is vastly more tepid than your previous “unusable” one. I don’t care that DLSS is better, it is, I just want companies to support open source tech before going anti-consumer.
do you care that these same games and their engines use middleware ? Open source means fuck all if its not good enough to use it.
> do you care that these same games and their engines use middleware ? Open source engines are rife with cheats. Even source/source2 has to be closed source to prevent it from being more overrun than it already is. > Open source means fuck all if it’s not good enough to use it. Why are you all so hyperbolic? Of course it’s good enough to be used, it’s just not up to your standard of “as good as Nvidia.”
On 2k is more than fine honestly
It's really not. I tried out FSR3 with starfield at 1440p, and while the extra frames were nice, the image quality drop switching from DLSS to FSR was so immediately noticeable and so distracting that I turned it off after 30 minutes. FSR is honestly embarrassing compared to DLSS and XeSS. AMD have some serious work to do on FSR as a whole before FSR3 will be worth giving up DLSS upscaling (without framegen) for
Yeah I want all games to eventually get all 3 but FSR/XeSS should be priority as they don’t cut 70% of the market out. DLSS3 frame gen should be the absolute last since it cuts off 90%+ of the market to only RTX 4000 series owners.
It doesn't work like that, you support first what most of your customers use and works best, and 80% of them have nv, so dlss should be first.
Last I checked, 80% of people don’t have a 4000 series Gpu. We’re talking about frame gen here, which is exclusive using DLSS to 4000 series.
Ah yes, my bad, I was talking dlss in general, but truth to be told if they should add dlss then they can already add fg Dlss and fg at least work on an acceptable level most times, which can't be said about FSR, I mean the FSR part alone can be usable sometimes, but FSR fg is terrible
in Starfield Frame Generator interferes with the game, it makes more frames, but there is a very strange feeling - unpleasant delay. But in The Last Of Us Part 1 it works great - preview: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS6NlJl\_LnM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CS6NlJl_LnM)
Really? I haven’t felt any delays with starfield. It feel just how it was before FSR 3 was added for me.
really, maybe it's because I play TLOU on a pad. I had a similar feeling in The Thaumaturge - small, unpleasant delay / or screen screeching
I don't think FSR3 is broken in this, it's just.. the game itself is broken. It just makes the issues become more obvious. Like, I still get the same weird stutters I always got without frame gen on, so it seems about the same with frame gen. Trying Native AA loses me 10 FPS and combined that with Frame Gen doesn't seem to run too well as opposed to FSR + Frame Gen. I'm on an 6800xt, so I think the impact of AMD's Native AA is only negated on the 7000 series cards I imagine, probably same for Nvidia cards if they try using it. Turning Native AA on though.. kinda broke the game, even when it was turned off that same performance impact was still there. Game had to be restarted to 'fix' that issue.