Discussion Nvidia Blackwell in Q1-2025

Page 68 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ajsdkflsdjfio

Member
Nov 20, 2024
171
117
76
Clearly, HUB reviewer on average sees RT being beneficial to IQ, while also seeing DLSS on average being a net zero to image quality, meaning DLSS + RT should be better than Native + no RT in most scenarios image quality wise.
BTW:
Nvidia Sponsored games vs AMD Sponsored games

Not to discount AMD though, since ray-tracing is still pretty irrelevant as a whole, at least to me, since it has a massive performance penalty for anything besides a 4090 or 50 series card. But I just wanted to mention this to say that with the proper implementation, ray-tracing can be an excellent tool for improving game visuals and immersiveness. Nvidia definitely tries to push things like ray-tracing and upscaling/MFG so that they can compare their cards to competitors (and their own previous products) using metrics they themselves invented and have a headstart in, but it is true at the same time that their technology is useful and beneficial to consumers and also exciting.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
6,956
15,590
136
Yes, at some point when you extend your personal ideas to try and invalidate something that objectively most other people enjoy, you are in fact in the wrong. Unless you'd like to argue that the majority of consumers would be benefited by not using upscaling technologies and making it the "norm". Even by your own admission, you use FSR meaning that in some scenarios upscaling is worth the IQ hit for extra performance, meaning it is in fact beneficial. Just because you can spot more artifacts in upscaled gameplay does not validate the idea that upscaling is somehow useless and a detriment to consumers.
For the third time: objective criticism of upscalers does not equal dismissing upscalers. Stop trying to pigeonhole this direction on both my arguments and that twitter thread you're offended with. It's not as black and white as you're trying to paint it.

Also, if you're so certain about FSR 3 meeting the needs of most consumers, then what is the point of spending resources on more advanced upscalers like DLSS, XeSS, and now FSR 4? Who's gonna notice the difference if the average consumer, which you seemingly embody by the power of your own decision, cannot tell the difference? Why are they making them better if not to eliminate something consumers can obviously notice?

Nvidia chose to market their new line of products based on the new DLSS and the new FG, actual performance wasn't even detailed properly. They essentially asked us to judge Blackwell by these two technologies. They published videos and marketing materials for them. So now we discuss them, with good and bad. The same will happen with RDNA4, as I expect FSR4 will be a big part of their marketing effort.

Plus there are games where ray-tracing revolutionizes the look of games like in cyberpunk, contrary to your idea that ray-tracing should NEVER be turned on for people who aren't nitpicking every single frame.
So you do enjoy putting words in people's mouths, I see. You get instantly offended when it feels like someone is "falsifying your own personal experience", but putting words in other people's moths... not a problem there. Even if they didn't say it, they probably thought about it, right? /s

Did you play Cyberpunk with RT enabled and disabled? The first thing I did when I upgraded my video card (after the Covid crazyness) was to turn on RT in Cyberpunk, a game I had played extensively with raster only. I was expecting to get blown away. I had to take screenshots to compare the visuals, because I could not tell the difference after going to the menus back and forth to change the settings. Sure I could have looked for a scene full of reflections to instantly tell RT was there, but in most other scenes the lighting was not obviously better, it was just different. (read my reply to SiliconFly below to find out why)

You can see the same problem in the video I posted. The person doing the blind test cannot tell the diference in motion, he has to stop the recording and analyze details in each frame. Also, he can't tell the difference between High and Medium preset, not immediately anyway.

Does that make RT useless? Ofc not, it's still the future, but it does show that if we judge a tech based solely on personal perception in the present, then we might as well give up on progress. You want me to admit most people can't tell if FSR Quality is enabled, but also want me to believe that most people will care if RT is used for Global Illumination or not. Somehow the average consumer cannot detect ghosting and shimering artifacts but will see the difference in shadow gradients. I disagree, they can either see both or care for none.

How about we agree that consumers get increasingly more educated as time passes by, and they will gradually care more about both upscaler and RT quality? You know, the way we increasingly cared more about colors, resolution, frame pacing, higher refresh rates and VRR. The things the average consumer takes for granted today.

Games that leverage the full power of RT, tend to have distinct visuals.
And yet the games that leverage the full power of RT are few and far between, whereas games that blend RT and traditional raster techniques are the norm.

For example, did you know the "Psycho" RT profile in Cyberpunk had plenty of raster lighting still baked in? We found out about it when Nvidia showcased the Overdrive Mode. Imagine that, distinct visuals with plenty of raster lights, or even better visuals with hardware requiremetns that crush all but one GPU in existence.
 

coercitiv

Diamond Member
Jan 24, 2014
6,956
15,590
136
Even ignoring AMD performance, I am getting Thermi vibes from this.
Why is that? Given the node and the performance, I don't get the same troubling vibes. We're unlikely to see efficiency improvements, but unlikely to see problems either. Let's hope the power connector can take it

I did like the small PCBs though, I want to see more of that in the future.
 

ajsdkflsdjfio

Member
Nov 20, 2024
171
117
76
For the third time: objective criticism of upscalers does not equal dismissing upscalers. Stop trying to pigeonhole this direction on both my arguments and that twitter thread you're offended with. It's not as black and white as you're trying to paint it.

This quote that I originally pointed out is in the SAME thread criticizing Nvidia DLSS4 and is directly referring to it here. He literally dismisses the use of upscaling technologies and their "horrible" smoothing artifacts in flagship graphics here(the 5080 in DF with smoothing artifacts he noticed), then he likens upscaling in consumer graphics cards to motion smoothing artifacts in a Movie Threatre, and implies that it being unacceptable in a 40 foot IMAX threatre somehow makes it unacceptable in PC gaming. This combined with the one-sided criticism of DLSS4 and his clearly negative attitude towards upscaling and it's future is more than just objective criticism and is quite literally dismissing upscalers.

Edit: I'm just going to stop responding to you after this post. I never intended to start any argument and simply wished to state that DLSS is a useful tool for most consumers, IDK why you keep trying to argue with me on the finer points regarding this idea, when ultimately you seem to agree with the same idea. Regarding the criticism I pointed out, if you read all his comments following the artifact images, and his responses to other comments, I think most people would come off with the idea that he's being one-sidedly negative towards DLSS.

I tried to point out that there is no need to crap all over Nvidia DLSS since it's still useful to many consumers at the end of the day, and you literally responded by saying crapping on DLSS is justified since Nvidia deceptively upsells their DLSS technologies (paraphrase).

I also tried pointing out that the comparison between pre-rendered movie CGI and PC consumer graphics is nonsensical, and that the use of upscaling in one does not equate to the use of upscaling in another. You also seem to find offense at this idea and try to call me out for not understanding the state of AAA game development requirements(completely unrelated to anything we were talking about BTW), when I literally directly addressed that fact in my original post.

If you still find cause to argue with me then IDK what to say.
 
Last edited:

Racan

Golden Member
Sep 22, 2012
1,199
2,201
136

SFF PCs were the driver for this design but it remains to be seen if it’s better than the old FE design in most SFF cases.

In this example the 5090 FE would push the hot air through the CPU heatsink:



It would be better to give up air cooling and use a side mounted AIO in this situation. But many including myself prefer the simplicity and reliability of air cooling.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
15,634
6,111
136
Why is that? Given the node and the performance, I don't get the same troubling vibes.

I suspect what happened was that when they saw they were badly missing the performance targets (and then some)... they delayed the 5080 and 5090 to now instead of several months ago to come up with a marketing solution. That ended up being ripping off Lossless Scaling.

Maybe the issue won't be so bad in mobile.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,653
6,109
136
I mean all I'm getting from that thread is that DLSS4 isn't artifact free, but it's still superior to DLSS 3 in pretty visible ways. I don't get why he's crapping on it so hard though as a general product. Isn't DLSS4 and even DLSS3 good enough for most people,

If the last company he worked for was AMD, and even on some FSR related tech, you could see him slagging the competition when he gets the opportunity.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,653
6,109
136
The issue is about Smart TV motion smoothing which leads to terrible experience. First thing I do on TVs is turn that crap off. It's also known as the soap opera effect as it makes that 200 mio hollywood movies look like soap operas. And in essence that smoothing is nothing else than fake frames.

But I agree that I see value in simple upscaling. But running old hardware that doesn0t support any of these techs, do fsr or dlss even have a option that is just upscaling (without rt)?

A bit of a tangent, but I hate that analogy, and really it's total nonsense.

Do we complain 60 FPS sports broadcast have "Soap Opera Effect". If we could get it, we would prefer even 120 FPS for sports.

Actual Soap Operas look like garbage because they have horrible production values. You could pretty much look at a still image capture from a Soap Opera and guess it's probably from a soap opera.

I keep hoping that HFR will break through for Movies as well, so we can have decent panning shots without excess blur or judder. I find it hilarious that gamers chasing HFR for gaming, turn their nose up at faster than 24 FPS for Video because 24 FPS was good enough for grandpa, so it's good enough for them. I'm baffled to see people praising blur and judder as the one true way to shoot a movie.

Unfortunately one of the first to take a crack at a mainstream movie at higher frame rate was Peter Jacksons Hobbit trilogy, which looks like crap because of it's full of shoddy effects/CGI, not HFR. But people blame the HFR.

/rant
 
Reactions: CakeMonster

MrTeal

Diamond Member
Dec 7, 2003
3,749
2,142
136
SFF PCs were the driver for this design but it remains to be seen if it’s better than the old FE design in most SFF cases.

In this example the 5090 FE would push the hot air through the CPU heatsink:


It would be better to give up air cooling and use a side mounted AIO in this situation. But many including myself prefer the simplicity and reliability of air cooling.
I don't think we'll see any really out there FE waterblocks, but I hope we do see some aftermarket longer PCIe daughterboards so we can do direct vertical mounts without an adapter.
 

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,653
6,109
136

Tup3x

Golden Member
Dec 31, 2016
1,180
1,249
136
There show problems with MFG in DF video. Ofc DF said it's nice etc
Of course there are issues if you pixel peep - I would be absolutely shocked if all those fake frames would be comparable to original. The footage was running at 50% speed, less noticeable during actual gameplay. Even if the image quality was perfect, you probably wouldn't be happy because extra latency.

At least the frame pacing is good. In any case I'd need to experience this myself. I'm not that latency sensitive (I always used to use triple buffered v-sync before adaptive sync was a thing, I can't stand tearing at all) but I prefer image quality over frame rate. For desktop use I'd prefer at least 240 Hz although 165 Hz is pretty nice. 60 Hz scrolling makes me sick.
 

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,575
755
136
There are AI based interpolation technologies for video now as well, not integrated in TV's yet AFAIK, but you can try RIFE in SVP on PC, its noticeably better than the old way that has existed for 10 years +. I like higher frame rate video as a concept, and I usually enable interpolation, but I have a baseline for quality that I'm willing to accept. And I really hate when someone does the interpolation for me, like pre-processing on Youtube or offering a processed file for download. I want to do it myself to be in control of quality and artifacts. But for video its a sound concept, and since latency is not an issue, you can throw a lot of processing at it. What I don't like (so far) is the quality of AI upscaling of video. As opposed to interpolation it creates (to me) more ugly artifacts. Maybe it can improve in the future if you train a model on the whole video, and it can fill in details knowing what they look like from having seen those details in other parts of the video. But that's probably something we're not close to for years.

But when it comes to games, I prefer upscaling to interpolation (again, so far). I'm rooting for DLSS4 to be as good as it possibly can of course, but DLSS2 upscaling is the only one that has proven itself to me, and that is with a good enough input resolution and of course having game data like vectors to work with.
 

Hitman928

Diamond Member
Apr 15, 2012
6,524
11,808
136
View attachment 114564
This quote that I originally pointed out is in the SAME thread criticizing Nvidia DLSS4 and is directly referring to it here. He literally dismisses the use of upscaling technologies and their "horrible" smoothing artifacts in flagship graphics here(the 5080 in DF with smoothing artifacts he noticed), then he likens upscaling in consumer graphics cards to motion smoothing artifacts in a Movie Threatre, and implies that it being unacceptable in a 40 foot IMAX threatre somehow makes it unacceptable in PC gaming. This combined with the one-sided criticism of DLSS4 and his clearly negative attitude towards upscaling and it's future is more than just objective criticism and is quite literally dismissing upscalers.

Edit: I'm just going to stop responding to you after this post. I never intended to start any argument and simply wished to state that DLSS is a useful tool for most consumers, IDK why you keep trying to argue with me on the finer points regarding this idea, when ultimately you seem to agree with the same idea. Regarding the criticism I pointed out, if you read all his comments following the artifact images, and his responses to other comments, I think most people would come off with the idea that he's being one-sidedly negative towards DLSS.

I tried to point out that there is no need to crap all over Nvidia DLSS since it's still useful to many consumers at the end of the day, and you literally responded by saying crapping on DLSS is justified since Nvidia deceptively upsells their DLSS technologies (paraphrase).

I also tried pointing out that the comparison between pre-rendered movie CGI and PC consumer graphics is nonsensical, and that the use of upscaling in one does not equate to the use of upscaling in another. You also seem to find offense at this idea and try to call me out for not understanding the state of AAA game development requirements(completely unrelated to anything we were talking about BTW), when I literally directly addressed that fact in my original post.

If you still find cause to argue with me then IDK what to say.

He is comparing motion smoothing in movies to the multi-frame generation, not to the upscaling. It's a very apt comparison.

A bit of a tangent, but I hate that analogy, and really it's total nonsense.

Do we complain 60 FPS sports broadcast have "Soap Opera Effect". If we could get it, we would prefer even 120 FPS for sports.

No one wants this if it's "smoothed" frames and not the actual frame rate.

Actual Soap Operas look like garbage because they have horrible production values. You could pretty much look at a still image capture from a Soap Opera and guess it's probably from a soap opera.

I keep hoping that HFR will break through for Movies as well, so we can have decent panning shots without excess blur or judder. I find it hilarious that gamers chasing HFR for gaming, turn their nose up at faster than 24 FPS for Video because 24 FPS was good enough for grandpa, so it's good enough for them. I'm baffled to see people praising blur and judder as the one true way to shoot a movie.

Unfortunately one of the first to take a crack at a mainstream movie at higher frame rate was Peter Jacksons Hobbit trilogy, which looks like crap because of it's full of shoddy effects/CGI, not HFR. But people blame the HFR.

/rant

The HFR made the CGI stick out as especially bad, but I didn't like it in general, even during non-CGI scenes. It could just be that I've been trained my whole life to watch movies without it, but it was a bit jarring to watch in the theater. It made me feel like I was watching actors on a set, rather than in a different world.
 
Reactions: Elfear

Heartbreaker

Diamond Member
Apr 3, 2006
4,653
6,109
136
Of course there are issues if you pixel peep - I would be absolutely shocked if all those fake frames would be comparable to original. The footage was running at 50% speed, less noticeable during actual gameplay. Even if the image quality was perfect, you probably wouldn't be happy because extra latency.

I'm usually not close to spotting motion artifacts as the people at DF or HWUB, and even I notice plenty of motion artifacts in that DF footage. All those hanging lantern things were getting on my nerves as they flickered so often. Sure it was 50% speed, but I feel confident there are more artifacts going on than usual, and more than I would be happy with.

IMO the issue is not that any of them are new, but now with the majority of frames being fake, those artifacts will stand out more.

I only have one game (Witcher 3) that I'm aware of that has FG, and when I tested it I did catch some edge breakup artifacts. I might try it again when I get more into the game.


At least the frame pacing is good.

Here I think NVidia is claiming a lot of credit for something borderline comes from free when you have 3:1 fake frames.

If you use two known frames, to interpolate 3 fake ones between. It's trivial to just space them evenly over that interval, and that is automatically going to look like fantastic frame pacing, All spikes will shrink to a fraction of their size.
 

SiliconFly

Golden Member
Mar 10, 2023
1,925
1,280
96
If you use two known frames, to interpolate 3 fake ones between. ...
Nope. It predicts. No interpolating 3 frames in-between. Transformers don't work that way. Giving it two frames as input to predict in-betweens, instead of just giving it one frame as input to predict forward, is just a very inefficient way of using transformers.
 

gdansk

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2011
3,768
6,017
136
Nope. It predicts. No interpolating 3 frames in-between. Transformers don't work that way. Giving two frames as input to predict in-betweens, instead of giving just one frame as input to predict forward, is just a very inefficient way of using transformers.
No matter how many times you repeat this it doesn't match the available latency evidence. Maybe Nvidia is sandbagging and hiding true DLSS4 MFG until launch. But that seems like a bad decision if true.
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |