Remij

No it's not.. lmao You're just taking this hard because you think the thread is about AMD vs Nvidia... when it's really about DXR fallback vs DXR..

Nobody is begging the question... it's a simple matter of knowing how it currently performs through the compute cores vs Nvidia's RTX DXR layer. You know... it's a relevant point of interest for many people who are curious as to how large of a difference it would be.

The fallback layer was created for a reason, wasn't it? This is the results... deal with it.

Ok then

^grow up loser

324fps vs ...10fps Also, now DXR is integrated into the latest UE4 build.

Right... only Sony will succeed...

They have money. We'll find out just how serious they are soon enough. Apparently Amazon has been building up some dev studios and they're working on some pretty high quality stuff. Not little mid-small sized studios either.. New IP could be exciting...

EXPAND AZA... EXPAND.....

Amazing.. that fucking medley is just edit: I just noticed the FF1 cover poster she has OMFG

Yes they do prove my point. Your arguing a strawman you created dude.

What... did you think the comparison ends with one game, or one set of screens? It's hilarious how much TAA quality can vary between games...and even scenes within games... and yet you're here acting like that wont be the case for DLSS rofl... And yes.. I'll keep posting pics which prove my point. Just like Nvidia will keep improving the technology. Keep raging on about something that nobody ever said would be the case... which is that it would look better than native.

No, this shot represents a stress test for the technology.. the foliage and noise from it is precisely what is hard for DLSS to keep up with, while maintaining sharpness and clarity. Yes.. there's a tiny bit of difference... In many cases the foliage actually looks better and sharper on the DLSS image. Yes.. you were right, the top is native and 2nd is DLSS. To truly see any appreciable difference in fullscreen, which couldn't just be attributed to change of the shadows and lighting from the dynamic TOD... you have to zoom in. This is even less so while playing. An

The imposed limitations are stupid, for sure. I don't agree with RT needing to be enabled to enable DLSS. I've never defended that... only explained why it's likely the case. When I told you that, I told you what it looked like in Port Royale... in fact.. I showed you. This was an implementation that was extremely bad just a few days ago, and is now extremely comparable. I'm not always trying to be combative with you fucks. Since I can't test 1080p DLSS vs 1440p, I'd like YOU to post a couple screenshots showing what you say you are seeing. I'm not def

Eh, 1080p DLSS and 1440p DLSS were always going to be more noticeably blurry. It works best at higher resolutions.. everyone knows that. So which is which?

They'll have to be careful how they present everything, that's for sure. Not simply to placate the main Xbox gamers, but to minimize confusion on both sides. They better have things clearly laid out and presented as well as limitations and expectations clearly expressed. It's a lot of shit going on all at once possibly... and is compounded if they're actually talking about their next gen system specs and everything as well. I'm not sure any company could really navigate all of this without causing some confusion... It's going to be a strange and yet intere

And the REAL funny shit here... is that it's right there with the Xbox One X for input lag....

I never said that. I said that a 30fps game with a 60fps stream is more responsive than a 30fps game with a 30fps stream. It's hilarious how you're trying to find something wrong with what I said... which was that Google's platform streams at 60fps... you know... when Aza asked what google's service was capable of.

Thanks for reminding me there's also a difference in display latency... and the methods in which they are recording the latency. That makes your PSNow comparison with Google's stream even more irrelevant than it was before

It does stream at 60fps.. not 30 like you thought A 60fps stream has less lag than a 30fps stream.. it's more responsive I always said STREAM, never said anything about the fps of the game... googles service is capable of 60fps.. They are.. you're trying to make comparisons against each other using difference sources.. It's hilarious how dumb as fuck you are

Yes, your incompetence does This is equivalent to your IPC comments... you'll eventually realize how wrong you were and hope nobody ever brings it up again

Imagine how bad they'd be at a 30fps stream like you thought Google's was

Different games... Different servers... Different clients... Different locations... Whoops... you just made yourself look like more of an idiot. Show me a comparison of latency in Killzone running at 30fps on a 30fps stream vs Killzone at 30fps on a 60fps stream... from the same person Idiot