The small but subtle differences in upscaling
Let’s start with a classic example. A static image with details in the foreground as well as in the background. The whole thing in a closed room! So we start very gently and increase our speed at the back. This time, FSR 1.0 is allowed to make a start in comparison to the native resolution. Again, only the best/worst case comparison!
2160p native vs. FSR 1.0 – detailed comparison
In the middle, you basically search in vain for the error in the image. In contrast, the performance mode is significantly worse than the native image. But we already know that! Which I could still live with.
2160p native vs. FSR 2.0 – detailed comparison
My personal opinion: FSR 2.0 quality looks better than the native image. Look closely at the lettering on the mural, you can see a subtle (if small) difference. FSR 2.0 performance is on par with the native 2160p image for me here, what do you think?
2160p native vs. DLSS – detailed comparison
In the scene, I’m not so sure if DLSS is really better than FSR 2.0 here? Only a direct comparison can help here!
DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 vs. FSR 1.0 – detailed comparison (quality)
Find the error! I don’t see any difference here… The brass-colored ring around the lamp gets a recognizable structure with FSR 2.0. Whether that’s the way it’s supposed to be now, you can’t really say with certainty. You can also only see it when you zoom into the image. For me, there is no winner here!
DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 vs. FSR 1.0 – detailed comparison (performance)
Here, too, one can basically only say that FSR 1.0 clearly has to take a back seat to FSR 2.0 and DLSS! DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 (performance), that’s where it gets really difficult! We need another scene…
2160p native vs. DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 (quality)
It is interesting that FSR 2.0 can keep up very well with DLSS. The only difference is the lower roof decoration. It gets lost in a funny way!
2160p native vs. DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 (performance)
Now you can say with confidence that DLSS is better here. But it would also be embarrassing if NVIDIA – with a lead of almost 4 years – is immediately eclipsed by AMD with the first temporal upscaling. The only illogical thing is that the lower roof ornamentation is now displayed better, but everything at the top is worse. You do not have to understand!
2160p native vs. FSR 2.0 vs. FSR 1.0 (performance)
However, it is also a fact that AMD can clearly set itself apart from FSR 1.0 with FSR 2.0. Here the differences are already really huge! The fact that you haven’t quite caught up to DLSS yet is something I can easily cope with. The end user can definitely rely on FSR 2.0 here – without much loss of quality – in 4K. The difference between performance and native resolution is usually only visible at all under strong magnification. You really have to give AMD credit for that!
Here are two more videos from the initial scene (test run), where you can see the typical shimmer from the re-sharpening. Which is even natively visible here!
2160p native vs. DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 (performance)
DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 vs. FSR 1.0 (performance)
So, now everyone can make up their own mind! With that, I’ll close the 2160p chapter and we’ll now look at the whole thing in 1440p. One page further please!
- 1 - Einführung und Testsystem
- 2 - Probleme im Spiel Deathloop
- 3 - Qualitätsvergleich in 2160p - Motion
- 4 - Qualitätsvergleich in 2160p - Details
- 5 - Qualitätsvergleich in 1440p - Motion
- 6 - Qualitätsvergleich in 1440p - Details
- 7 - Qualitätsvergleich in 1080p - Motion
- 8 - Qualitätsvergleich in 1080p - Details
- 9 - Zusammenfassung und Fazit
29 Antworten
Kommentar
Lade neue Kommentare
Urgestein
Moderator
Urgestein
Mitglied
Moderator
1
Urgestein
Moderator
Veteran
Urgestein
Moderator
Urgestein
Mitglied
Moderator
Veteran
Moderator
Veteran
Mitglied
Mitglied
Alle Kommentare lesen unter igor´sLAB Community →