NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Ask about motion blur reduction in gaming monitors. Includes ULMB (Ultra Low Motion Blur), NVIDIA LightBoost, ASUS ELMB, BenQ/Zowie DyAc, Turbo240, ToastyX Strobelight, etc.
User avatar
jorimt
Posts: 2481
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 10:44
Location: USA

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by jorimt » 29 Sep 2022, 10:02

RonsonPL wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 08:27
Man. We all, me included, wait for proper GPU-accelerated frame interpolation since many years. I do want that. But making it incompatible with v-sync is just horrible, horrible news.
I only have one thing to add on this subject; it has to start somewhere, and Nvidia has started it. If the first gen (of anything) doesn't meet your expectation, wait and wait some more for further iteration.

I myself will watch it's progress, but I probably won't be using it until it matures (I don't use current-gen DLSS when I can help it either; I prefer the lossless, brute force approach whenever possible).
(jorimt: /jor-uhm-tee/)
Author: Blur Busters "G-SYNC 101" Series

Displays: ASUS PG27AQN, LG 48CX VR: Beyond, Quest 3, Reverb G2, Index OS: Windows 11 Pro Case: Fractal Design Torrent PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-1000 MB: ASUS Z790 Hero CPU: Intel i9-13900k w/Noctua NH-U12A GPU: GIGABYTE RTX 4090 GAMING OC RAM: 32GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 DDR5 6400MHz CL32 SSDs: 2TB WD_BLACK SN850 (OS), 4TB WD_BLACK SN850X (Games) Keyboards: Wooting 60HE, Logitech G915 TKL Mice: Razer Viper Mini SE, Razer Viper 8kHz Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Katana V2 (speakers/amp/DAC), AFUL Performer 8 (IEMs)

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 29 Sep 2022, 10:44

Haste wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 02:26
The quality of this forum really went downhill since last time I checked.
A huge milestone has been achieved with dlss3. Luddites are the last thing I would have expected here.
The Ph.D and geeks should focus on the Laboratory forums, which remain excellently high quality.
Scroll a bit further down and only explore those.

Yes, DLSS3 is a huge milestone. Big fan of frame rate amplification technologies.

(As a nod to other readers, yes, spatial quality results need to get better yes, though -- but I like seeing the technical improvements towards improving temporal quality matters. Getting concurrent spatial and temporal quality is really tough)
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

RonsonPL
Posts: 122
Joined: 26 Aug 2014, 07:12

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by RonsonPL » 29 Sep 2022, 13:26

jorimt wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 10:02
I prefer the lossless, brute force approach whenever possible).
I agree in terms of "lossless" but with current CPUs, we barely reach 120fps in current games. That's before the river takes us all with it, and pushes onto obstacles like Unreal Engine 5, ray-tracing etc.
At current pace, we're moving like 3-5% forward per year. 1000fps may not be achievable in my lifetime, so I would gladly get the minimal loss when interpolating 150fps to 1000fps rather than seeing the dark age continue for another decade, causing damage like the plague of games without motion blur = OFF switch, 60 or 120fps framerate caps, mandatory TAA or other.





Ay, Chief, I consider myself a geek :D a total geek in terms of motion clarity, but there are no sections dedicated for motion clarity and other topics there are way above my head.
On the other hand, I don't think anyone should complain about this subforum "quality". Don't like it? Can do it better? Then create threads and post replies, instead of complaining. That's what I'd tell that guy, instead of what sounds like "yeah, those people are dumb, come over to our Laboratory section, we're all smart people there" (even if it's true to some degree ;) )
Barely anyone posts here :(

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 29 Sep 2022, 14:12

RonsonPL wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 13:26
jorimt wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 10:02
I prefer the lossless, brute force approach whenever possible).
I agree in terms of "lossless" but with current CPUs, we barely reach 120fps in current games. That's before the river takes us all with it, and pushes onto obstacles like Unreal Engine 5, ray-tracing etc.
At current pace, we're moving like 3-5% forward per year. 1000fps may not be achievable in my lifetime, so I would gladly get the minimal loss when interpolating 150fps to 1000fps rather than seeing the dark age continue for another decade, causing damage like the plague of games without motion blur = OFF switch, 60 or 120fps framerate caps, mandatory TAA or other.

Ay, Chief, I consider myself a geek :D a total geek in terms of motion clarity, but there are no sections dedicated for motion clarity and other topics there are way above my head.
On the other hand, I don't think anyone should complain about this subforum "quality". Don't like it? Can do it better? Then create threads and post replies, instead of complaining. That's what I'd tell that guy, instead of what sounds like "yeah, those people are dumb, come over to our Laboratory section, we're all smart people there" (even if it's true to some degree ;) )
Barely anyone posts here :(
I know Haste well from his past posts, and the Area51 forums are up his alley...
That was his first post since 2020 and I can relate to the quality change.

But forums are what forums are and all forums went downhill during the pandemic as many people went online during lockdown.
As blur busting becomes more mainstream, we have a bigger continuum of dissenting opinions.

I hate to lose favourite historical forum members like Haste because the general forums are getting diluted.

So I am simply guiding him to a different room in Blur Busters based on my familiarity of his past posts -- he probably visited for the first time in 2 years and then only briefly glanced at certain forums and frowned. I'm simply revealing a different area of Blur Busters.

I may create 1 or 2 more Laboratory forums specific to various methods of blur busting, since there is the blurless sample and hold method nowadays. That wasn't an option in 2014 when refresh rates was only 144Hz or less, but now we have 500Hz LCDs and soon 240Hz OLEDs, both of which produces a really good strobeless method of motion blur reduction. Getting ~2ms MPRT strobelessly is nowadays just about achievable -- the persistence of 2012's LightBoost!
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

User avatar
jorimt
Posts: 2481
Joined: 04 Nov 2016, 10:44
Location: USA

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by jorimt » 29 Sep 2022, 14:21

RonsonPL wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 13:26
I agree in terms of "lossless" but with current CPUs, we barely reach 120fps in current games. That's before the river takes us all with it, and pushes onto obstacles like Unreal Engine 5, ray-tracing etc.
From what I've seen and experienced with UE5, it's likely going to be a blurry, stuttery, over-processed (albeit somewhat pretty) mess at first. But that's how tech innovations tend to always go; one step forward, two steps back.

The process is often painfully slow and incremental, but for those innovations to eventually reach the oft unrealistic expectations and wildest imaginings of the mainstream audience, it usually means there first has to be enough early adoption to fund what typically appears to be a very compromised, incomplete, overpriced, and generally frustrating first few generations of product.

It happens with displays, game consoles, PCs, VR, game engines, rendering techniques, you name it, but as much as we'd like, nothing can start at the finish line.
Chief Blur Buster wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 14:12
But forums are what forums are and all forums went downhill during the pandemic as many people went online during lockdown.
Yup.
(jorimt: /jor-uhm-tee/)
Author: Blur Busters "G-SYNC 101" Series

Displays: ASUS PG27AQN, LG 48CX VR: Beyond, Quest 3, Reverb G2, Index OS: Windows 11 Pro Case: Fractal Design Torrent PSU: Seasonic PRIME TX-1000 MB: ASUS Z790 Hero CPU: Intel i9-13900k w/Noctua NH-U12A GPU: GIGABYTE RTX 4090 GAMING OC RAM: 32GB G.SKILL Trident Z5 DDR5 6400MHz CL32 SSDs: 2TB WD_BLACK SN850 (OS), 4TB WD_BLACK SN850X (Games) Keyboards: Wooting 60HE, Logitech G915 TKL Mice: Razer Viper Mini SE, Razer Viper 8kHz Sound: Creative Sound Blaster Katana V2 (speakers/amp/DAC), AFUL Performer 8 (IEMs)

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by thatoneguy » 29 Sep 2022, 15:08

silikone wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 08:23


So as I begin watching, I am immediately presented with a complete non-sequitur.

Yes, he said seems, because most of the games they analyze don't have behind-the-scenes information, so they can only infer based on visual studies, studies they can perform exactly because of preexisting knowledge of how game rendering works, not a lack of.
Light probes are ubiquitous and have some telltale characteristics.

Guess what, he was completely right.
https://history.siggraph.org/wp-content ... art-II.pdf

A combination of light-mapping and probes.
They don't know what they're talking about. They are only speculating at best, yet they paint themselves as technical experts.
If they were technical experts they wouldn't need behind-the-scenes information.
They got fooled by checkerboard rendering and thought it was native 4K.

I regularly watch DF's videos and put their weekly podcast to have some background noise and despite John frequently bitching about the motion clarity in LCDs he still doesn't even understand how motion/persistence works despite Mark's very easily understandable explanations for like a decade now.
This is also the same guy who thought that the new TMNT game was impressive despite it being a pixel art game that slowed down when played on 6-player co-op on Switch which should have never happened.
phpBB [video]


Face it, the only thing of value that comes from DF is their frame-counter analysis. Beyond that they are full of shit 90% of the time.
Last edited by thatoneguy on 29 Sep 2022, 15:09, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Chief Blur Buster
Site Admin
Posts: 11647
Joined: 05 Dec 2013, 15:44
Location: Toronto / Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Contact:

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by Chief Blur Buster » 29 Sep 2022, 15:09

jorimt wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 14:21
RonsonPL wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 13:26
I agree in terms of "lossless" but with current CPUs, we barely reach 120fps in current games. That's before the river takes us all with it, and pushes onto obstacles like Unreal Engine 5, ray-tracing etc.
From what I've seen and experienced with UE5, it's likely going to be a blurry, stuttery, over-processed (albeit somewhat pretty) mess at first. But that's how tech innovations tend to always go; one step forward, two steps back.
UE5 and high resolutions gives stunning spatial quality, at the great expensive of temporal quality.

Concurrently combining good spatial quality with good temporal quality is quite a tall order -- but Blur Busters slog on with the Holy Grail of bright HDR blurless sample-and-hold.

8K 1000fps+ 1000Hz+ OLED UE5 FTW! :D
Head of Blur Busters - BlurBusters.com | TestUFO.com | Follow @BlurBusters on Twitter

Image
Forum Rules wrote:  1. Rule #1: Be Nice. This is published forum rule #1. Even To Newbies & People You Disagree With!
  2. Please report rule violations If you see a post that violates forum rules, then report the post.
  3. ALWAYS respect indie testers here. See how indies are bootstrapping Blur Busters research!

silikone
Posts: 57
Joined: 02 Aug 2014, 12:27

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by silikone » 29 Sep 2022, 15:47

thatoneguy wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 15:08

They don't know what they're talking about. They are only speculating at best, yet they paint themselves as technical experts.
If they were technical experts they wouldn't need behind-the-scenes information.
Don't you realize how self-refuting this is? If you don't have insider information or dissection tools at hand, you are at best speculating, no matter how much of an expert you are.
That document was presented in August, the analysis was put forth in June, ergo, using their expertise, they correctly classified the technology in the game. This specific criticism thus falls completely flat on its face.

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by thatoneguy » 29 Sep 2022, 15:59

silikone wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 08:36

I recall the game being talked about was Quake, which was in fact designed for 320x200
Uh, excuse me?
Quake being designed for 320x200?
Have you even played Quake?
It most certainly wasn't designed for 320x200. The textures are far too crisp for that.
It was always designed with 640x480 and higher in mind and when the Voodoo cards soon after they could run it at that resolution at about 30fps.

I'm guessing you're confusing it with Doom and you're talking out of your ass.

thatoneguy
Posts: 181
Joined: 06 Aug 2015, 17:16

Re: NVIDIA introduces DLSS3, interpolates frames, but is not v-sync compatible.

Post by thatoneguy » 29 Sep 2022, 16:02

silikone wrote:
29 Sep 2022, 15:47

Don't you realize how self-refuting this is? If you don't have insider information or dissection tools at hand, you are at best speculating, no matter how much of an expert you are.
That document was presented in August, the analysis was put forth in June, ergo, using their expertise, they correctly classified the technology in the game. This specific criticism thus falls completely flat on its face.
Unlike Digital Foundry, I do not claim to be a technical expert so a big nope to your argument.
Even a monkey can get a thing right once or twice. DF has way more goofs than hits.
The only thing they have "expertise" in is to make fools out of their audience.

Post Reply