AMD FSR Review! Not bad..

fbm051h89

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
46

tomshardware.com/news/amd-fidelityfx-super-resolution-fsr-tested

Reviews of AMD's FSR implementation. I have to say its not bad. Of course, its not as good as DLSS but its not that far away. FSR is also alot simpler than DLSS. Its basically upscaling of a lower resolution image and then sharpen it. So, this means literally all GPU can support, even Intel iGPU.

Looking at GTX1060's performance, I am not sure if slower cards will really benefit from it.
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
If you look at the review from Gamers' Nexus, FSR was tested with the Vega8 on the Ryzen 7 5700G. Results are pretty good even for the APU.
 

NightRaven49

Senior Member
Joined
May 17, 2019
Messages
1,548
Reaction score
59
If you look at the review from Gamers' Nexus, FSR was tested with the Vega8 on the Ryzen 7 5700G. Results are pretty good even for the APU.
have to keep in mind that gn tested at 1080p, which many other reviewers said that fsr at 1080p even at ultra quality was noticeably worse than native 1080p. but then again, still better than letting the monitor do the upscaling from 720p or lower.
 

Gaminator

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
7,586
Reaction score
163
DF's review, IF you can call it that, was in my opinion skewed. He'd talked a lot about PQ and was very critical (zooming in 3x to compared PQ, where a normal gamer who simply wants to squeeze the most out of his aging AMD/nVidia GTX cards would not care too much). No, I don't think FSR is comparable with DLSS 2.0 especially at upscaled lower res, but the 4K upscaled at Ultra Quality and Quality setting that Hardware Unboxed reviewed is acceptable, they'd stated that Balanced and below preset is too much of a sacrifice in PQ.

I did watch the video review, and I find Quality Preset to be acceptable, Balanced was a tad blurry so Quality and Ultra Quality for me. I didn't expect FSR to be good, so the result sort of surprised me, and it's a free uplift in gaming performance for those wishing to hit their target framerate in the games they play with their aging hardware. My GTX 1080 is hooked up to a 4K TV, will try to get EGS launcher to work (it's FUBAR'ed right now as I can't even launch it) and when I do, first game I'll download on it is Godfall which I'd just purchased. I will buy RE Village once FSR has been implemented for it, though I don't think my RX 6900 XT needs it, it's more for my VEGA64 and GTX 1080.
 

robolee

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
10,529
Reaction score
84
FSR cannot rival DLSS 2.0 as of now but it's somewhere between DLSS 1 and 2. Granted it's AMD 1st try on it wait for 2nd gen :D
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
DF's review, IF you can call it that, was in my opinion skewed. He'd talked a lot about PQ and was very critical (zooming in 3x to compared PQ, where a normal gamer who simply wants to squeeze the most out of his aging AMD/nVidia GTX cards would not care too much). No, I don't think FSR is comparable with DLSS 2.0 especially at upscaled lower res, but the 4K upscaled at Ultra Quality and Quality setting that Hardware Unboxed reviewed is acceptable, they'd stated that Balanced and below preset is too much of a sacrifice in PQ.

I did watch the video review, and I find Quality Preset to be acceptable, Balanced was a tad blurry so Quality and Ultra Quality for me. I didn't expect FSR to be good, so the result sort of surprised me, and it's a free uplift in gaming performance for those wishing to hit their target framerate in the games they play with their aging hardware. My GTX 1080 is hooked up to a 4K TV, will try to get EGS launcher to work (it's FUBAR'ed right now as I can't even launch it) and when I do, first game I'll download on it is Godfall which I'd just purchased. I will buy RE Village once FSR has been implemented for it, though I don't think my RX 6900 XT needs it, it's more for my VEGA64 and GTX 1080.
The reason for the poor results is because they are pixel peeping which is not how people sees things. In fact most reviews out there are positive and fair because visually without overdoing on zooming, they can't really tell significant differences between native and ultra quality settings. Nobody will take a magnifying glass in game to scrutinize every single image on screen. At the end of the day, reviewers are still human, and will also have their bias.

In any case, whatever the result, both AMD and Nvidia users can rejoice. In games with no DLSS, FSR may be a good alternative for Nvidia users.
 
Last edited:

yusoffb01

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Jun 17, 2008
Messages
13,568
Reaction score
87
they should compare at 100% and not zoom 500% because thats now how you will see the final image. A free 30% fps boost for high quality and 100% boost for performance quality sounds good
 

Yongkit

Senior Member
Deluxe Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
191
I must say that I am very impressed by this FSR implementation in Godfall tested with my 3080 (y)

I tested it using 4k resolution through my 2k monitor using nvidia control panel DSR x2 and RT enabled.

Game Bencemarks = Average with Ray Trace enabled:

without FSR = 38.9

With FSR (Quality mode) = 87.5


Also i tested by playing the games without FSR (average 70~90fps)

Godfall - 4k no FRS (2).jpg


play the games with FSR Quality mode (average 110~130fps)

Godfall - 4k with FRS (2).jpg

there are total approx. min 30~40 fps increased in the game performance for this title.

It truly rival DLSS in terms of upscaling gaming performance for this game even though this game is without DLSS available.

I am very excited to see if a game which really have both DLSS & FSR feature available for better comparison.

:love:
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
they should compare at 100% and not zoom 500% because thats now how you will see the final image. A free 30% fps boost for high quality and 100% boost for performance quality sounds good
That's why too much pixel peeping spoils the review. While it is factual that when zoomed in a lot, the image may not look as good, but that is not how anyone will view the image when gaming. It is just not practical. And to be honest, when something is not running at native resolution, I am expecting some blurriness when doing some extreme zooming to compare. It almost feels like the reviewer at DF was thinking since I can't see much issue with the image, so let's zoom until we see something and call it out as lower in quality...
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
I must say that I am very impressed by this FSR implementation in Godfall tested with my 3080 (y)

I tested it using 4k resolution through my 2k monitor using nvidia control panel DSR x2 and RT enabled.

Game Bencemarks = Average with Ray Trace enabled:

without FSR = 38.9

With FSR (Quality mode) = 87.5


Also i tested by playing the games without FSR (average 70~90fps)

View attachment 29085


play the games with FSR Quality mode (average 110~130fps)

View attachment 29086

there are total approx. min 30~40 fps increased in the game performance for this title.

It truly rival DLSS in terms of upscaling gaming performance for this game even though this game is without DLSS available.

I am very excited to see if a game which really have both DLSS & FSR feature available for better comparison.

:love:
I think this is a great feature for AMD and Nvidia users. Not every game will come with DLSS, and that's where FSR may fill that gap. Image wise, it is certainly better than expected, though the number of titles to compare is still very limited. Again, if AMD's FSR deliver 80% of what DLSS can do when it comes to image quality, I would consider that a win. FSR as compared to DLSS is a more crude approach, but the beauty is that you don't need special hardware to perform the upscaling.
 

fbm051h89

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
46
FSR cannot rival DLSS 2.0 as of now but it's somewhere between DLSS 1 and 2. Granted it's AMD 1st try on it wait for 2nd gen :D

I have to say its quite impossible for AMD to match DLSS. Its due to difference in technology. FSR is relying on spatial upscaling technology and then sharpen it. DLSS on the other hand is away more sophisticated approach. Nvidia now does the training of AI with its own supercomputer to determine how to generate an image close to a reference 16K image (way higher resolution than 4K). That is why we could sometimes seen even better image even sharper than native!!
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
I have to say its quite impossible for AMD to match DLSS. Its due to difference in technology. FSR is relying on spatial upscaling technology and then sharpen it. DLSS on the other hand is away more sophisticated approach. Nvidia now does the training of AI with its own supercomputer to determine how to generate an image close to a reference 16K image (way higher resolution than 4K). That is why we could sometimes seen even better image even sharper than native!!
While its great, I feel Nvidia is kind of taking DLSS the wrong way. In my opinion, DLSS or any upscaling technology is really to claw back performance when you need it. Image quality is of course still very important, but again, unless you are pixel peeping, it will be hard pressed to noticed significant differences for most people. Especially so when you do not have another screen to do a side by side comparison.
 

Yongkit

Senior Member
Deluxe Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2015
Messages
1,817
Reaction score
191
I have to say its quite impossible for AMD to match DLSS. Its due to difference in technology. FSR is relying on spatial upscaling technology and then sharpen it. DLSS on the other hand is away more sophisticated approach. Nvidia now does the training of AI with its own supercomputer to determine how to generate an image close to a reference 16K image (way higher resolution than 4K). That is why we could sometimes seen even better image even sharper than native!!

care to share your personal experience which game you noticed the DLSS was best implemented?

since FSR is also available for RTX series, any games you have as per the initial list to experience it personally?
 

Gaminator

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
7,586
Reaction score
163
I tried Godfall on my HTPC rig - i7 4770K/2x 8GB RAM/Leadtek GTX 1080 Hurricane OC + 466.63 driver - it actually allowed me to run the game upscaled to 4K. Framerate was around 40fps - 60fps and the game was quite playable. I set display res to 4K, FSR at Quality, other setting to 'Epic' and I gotta tell you, I was surprised it looked pretty good and honestly I'm tickled pink that my trusty old GTX 1080 can actually run a game upscaled to 4K.

Gonna try it next on my i7 3960X/Vega 64 Red Devil rig later.....
 

LiLAsN

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
2,285
Reaction score
83
FSR sadly looks to be worst than Temporal Anti-Aliasing (TAA) Upsampling. It doesn't look anywhere close. It only targets edges while leaving the texture looking so blurry. For this 1.0 version, just skip it and use TAA Upsampling instead if you can't have DLSS.

The difference between FSR Ultra Quality and TAA Upsampling was night and day. TAA Upsampling is the clear winner.

On my 4K TV, even FSR Ultra Quality was noticeably different. But it is acceptable. Anything lower was a no-no.

But if I do not want to sacrifice 4K with a lower looking image, then DLSS is the way to go followed by TAA Upsampling and PS5's checkerboarded implementation.

FSR was that bad. But hopefully with reiterations, it will be useful for both AMD and Nvidia users.

That was what I can see from the videos shown by Digital Foundry, LinusTechTips and Gamer's Nexus.
 
Last edited:

Gaminator

Supremacy Member
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
7,586
Reaction score
163
Guess all of us AMD user fall into what you call 'poor man' upscaling category, Plebs can't fight against allmighty nVidia DLSS.🤪

It's a free upgrade in higher res performance, and that's more important to us Plebs who can't afford or refuse to get RTX cards I guess. Not all of us would freeze a scene and zoom in 3x just to see the difference, I'm not anal that way. As long as I get playable framerate and 'good enough' image quality, that's all most of us non-RTX owners need.

As stated, I played it on a GTX 1080 (that nVidia does not bother to help uplift performance of, like the rest of the non-RTX cards) on my 4K TV and it was pretty fun. FSR at 'Quality' preset gave me good enough image quality and playable framerate was proof enough for me that FSR can enhance the gaming experience at higher res, I find myself enjoying and getting immersed in the game.

Edit - Now, the only snag for me is, Godfall crashed with my RX VEGA64 oddly enough, what's that about? I don't think I'd be using FSR for my RX 6900 XT simply because it's more than capable to run Godfall natively at 3840x1080.
 
Last edited:

TrueBeliever_jh

Honorary Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
106,628
Reaction score
1,890
Another thing that is important is that both ps5 and Xbox series are using amd chip, so console game devs will most likely be using fsr for upscaling to 4K naturally. pc ports will most likely be fsr ready as well.
 

fbm051h89

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2020
Messages
1,143
Reaction score
46
Guess all of us AMD user fall into what you call 'poor man' upscaling category, Plebs can't fight against allmighty nVidia DLSS.🤪

It's a free upgrade in higher res performance, and that's more important to us Plebs who can't afford or refuse to get RTX cards I guess. Not all of us would freeze a scene and zoom in 3x just to see the difference, I'm not anal that way. As long as I get playable framerate and 'good enough' image quality, that's all most of us non-RTX owners need.

As stated, I played it on a GTX 1080 (that nVidia does not bother to help uplift performance of, like the rest of the non-RTX cards) on my 4K TV and it was pretty fun. FSR at 'Quality' preset gave me good enough image quality and playable framerate was proof enough for me that FSR can enhance the gaming experience at higher res, I find myself enjoying and getting immersed in the game.

Edit - Now, the only snag for me is, Godfall crashed with my RX VEGA64 oddly enough, what's that about? I don't think I'd be using FSR for my RX 6900 XT simply because it's more than capable to run Godfall natively at 3840x1080.

I wouldnt call it 'poor man' upscaling. It is actually quite well done. Its a very simple but elegant solution. I believe it can be improved by improving the spatial upscaling part but this may incur additional processing time which will cause frame rates to drop.

Of course, there is no way to compete against DLSS. Nvidia has a super computer and 16k resolution reference image to train the AI till its close to perfect.
 

watzup_ken

Arch-Supremacy Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2003
Messages
23,481
Reaction score
506
Guess all of us AMD user fall into what you call 'poor man' upscaling category, Plebs can't fight against allmighty nVidia DLSS.🤪

It's a free upgrade in higher res performance, and that's more important to us Plebs who can't afford or refuse to get RTX cards I guess. Not all of us would freeze a scene and zoom in 3x just to see the difference, I'm not anal that way. As long as I get playable framerate and 'good enough' image quality, that's all most of us non-RTX owners need.

As stated, I played it on a GTX 1080 (that nVidia does not bother to help uplift performance of, like the rest of the non-RTX cards) on my 4K TV and it was pretty fun. FSR at 'Quality' preset gave me good enough image quality and playable framerate was proof enough for me that FSR can enhance the gaming experience at higher res, I find myself enjoying and getting immersed in the game.

Edit - Now, the only snag for me is, Godfall crashed with my RX VEGA64 oddly enough, what's that about? I don't think I'd be using FSR for my RX 6900 XT simply because it's more than capable to run Godfall natively at 3840x1080.
Poor man? No. It is an inclusive solution, and really not expected to compete head to head with DLSS 2.0. Clearly both technology have its strength and weaknesses. DLSS is very image quality focused, but it only benefit cards fitted with Tensor cores. So a lot of low end or older cards are left out in the cold. I can imagine the technology is also more difficult to implement, since some developers have come up to say it took them a day or 2 to implement FSR even though it is at a per game implementation level.

From an FSR point, the ease of implementation and a wide range of hardware support makes it a great solution. People who can own the latest and greatest card may not find this useful since you can always get the best card out in the market without having to resort to upscaling tricks. But for the vast majority of people using mid/ lower end cards at least have the ability to play some games at higher framerates. This may even benefit the likes of people buying lower end Ampere cards in games where DLSS is not supported. So I feel a compromise in visual is a good trade off. At Ultra Quality/ High quality settings, the lost in visual is still within an acceptable range at least from what we can see with the current list of games that supports it.
 
Important Forum Advisory Note
This forum is moderated by volunteer moderators who will react only to members' feedback on posts. Moderators are not employees or representatives of HWZ. Forum members and moderators are responsible for their own posts.

Please refer to our Terms of Service for more information.
Top