| ▲ | flohofwoe 5 hours ago |
| Almost 8ms on 1080p resolution seems extremely expensive, does the original also eat into the rendering budget as much? |
|
| ▲ | LaurensBER 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| Yes, see the numbers below. In most games, it's basically unusable if you want to play on 60 FPS or above unless you have a 5090. The current implementation is more of a tech demo than a practical way to play games (+ officially it's available in 1 game). It's _fast enough_ to make some impressive YouTube videos but you most likely won't want to play anything with it yet. Nvidia has stated that they're still working on improving the performance. No doubt future hardware generations will also include further hardware optimisations. The potential for this kind of technology is pretty awesome, especially given that people have also found ways to add this to emulators. |
| |
| ▲ | techpression 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I really hope they do, but the market for gaming cards is looking mighty bleak right about now. 5090 is up over 80% since November last I checked and my 5080 is up 50%.
NVIDIA removing all mentions of gaming in their financials doesn’t bode well either, and from a fiduciary standpoint it would be negligent to sacrifice any capacity for higher-margin AI chips to make gaming cards. Again, I hope I’m wrong and we see new cards summer/autumn 2027, but I would not bet my savings on it. | | |
| ▲ | KPGv2 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > from a fiduciary standpoint it would be negligent to sacrifice any capacity for higher-margin AI chips to make gaming cards Corporations do not have a fiduciary duty to seek maximal profits. This is a myth. They are given wide latitude to decide what's in the best interests of the shareholders. Keeping a less-profitable offering alive just in case the current big offering doesn't pan out in the long term would easily be defensible in court. It wouldn't even be a challenge. Courts are loathe to question the judgment of directors and executives. The reasoning is obvious: why in the world would a judge have better knowledge of how to run a company than the people whose jobs are to run the company? | | |
| ▲ | techpression 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | You are correct, I should’ve used financial not fiduciary. They make more money selling AI hardware than gaming and it’s a zero-risk transfer because if AI collapses gamers will not “vote with their wallets” and not buy a new card from NVIDIA, and they know it.
And I don’t even disagree with them here, if you can make 10-100x more money doing less work, why wouldn’t you? |
|
| |
| ▲ | GaggiX 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Modders have added the ability to use the upscaler after DLSS 5, personally I don't know how sound this method is but the quality is pretty good, and allows to play games with DLSS 5 at 4k 60FPS with something that is not a 5090. |
|
|
| ▲ | strangecasts 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Worth remembering it is running a single-step diffusion model working in pixel space to generate each frame, it's a technical feat in itself that people are even using the words "frames per second" |
|
| ▲ | MYEUHD 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Yes the original is very expensive. It depends on the resolution and the GPU used: RTX 5060: 9.9 ms at 1080p RTX 5070: 10.2 ms at 1440p RTX 5080: 13.7 ms at 2160p RTX 5090: 8.2 ms at 2160p Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EfLjmdG29Q&t=600 |
| |
| ▲ | t0bia_s 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | RTX 5070, 9.6 ms with NR of Optiscaler in Stalker 2. It's payable and I enjoy new visual. Especially shadows and faces are incredibly detailed and precise. Landscapes not so much. |
|
|
| ▲ | robinduckett 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The original does tend to reduce the FPS by half or more |
|
| ▲ | vrighter 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| probably, going by the reported massive performance hits |
