Nvidia's DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 in 26 Games, Which Looks Better? - The Ultimate Analysis

Are you going to revisit this question with FSR3?

If it weren't for DLSS I would never buy another Nvidia card again.

neither; they both blurry vs native

Since it's basically established that comparing like-with-like settings DLSS always beats out FSR2, especially at lower resolutions, I'd be curious to see how far that advantage takes it. Like, a comparison among multiple games of how FSR2 Performance mode compares with DLSS Ultra Performance mode. Or FSR2 Quality vs DLSS Performance.

question, does higher frame rates help with image artifacts compared to lower framerate?

It's kind of sad how the main focus nowadays, especially regarding GPUs, is all about DLSS/FSR upscaling technology talk. We get new games that barely look or sometimes even worse and run a lot poorer than games that were released prior, which look and run better without having to rely on these upscaling technologies. A game like Starfield doesn't offer anything special visually to justify the huge performance cost and hardware requirements.

while fsr wolud gain quite a bit from improvement on lower resolution upscaling, it also needs to be noted that players who are gaming at 1440p with performance mode, are probably using a really old card, and are not concerned as much about absolute perfect graphics. most new cards should be able to run 1440p with the fsr ultra quality settings, instead of quality.

I was able to watch only half of this video and came to the conclusion that all these differences between FSR / DLSS can only be seen on the 3rd 4th attempt with X3 video zoom. And all the advantages / disadvantages are sucked from the finger.
As a result: I will buy what will be cheaper with good performance.

I purchased the 12 gigabyte 4070 ti over the 16 gigabyte offerings from AMD. One of the compelling reasons is because of Nvidia's DLSS as I just jumped from playing on 1080p to 4k and I need as much fps as I can get 😮.

at the 6m:37s mark you mentioned something interesting, which is what I always wondered previously, that 4k performance is better than 1440p quality! so I was previously wondering 7900xtx or 4090 for 3440x1440p UW OLED monitor. Now I am wondering should I just go 4K! however then I would need to wait until end of Q1 2024, as I would not be happy with anything less than the upcoming 27 / 32" oled 4k monitors. damn hard decisions

Pointless comparison. You should have compared fps not a software defined “quality”.

All NextGen games will use FSR on Console, because of how demanding games are becoming especially UE5.

you cant beat FSR, just like Gsync and Freesync opensource always wins.
the fact that Frame Generation in is exclusive to 4000 series, yet AMD is bringing support to all GPUs tell you all you need to know.

Why use upscaling when you can set the monitor as you want to 1440p or higher have rx 7900 xtx 24 gb

I tried fsr for a bit, and if you're looking for shimmering then you will find it, but if all I do is play the game then there are only 2 things that bothered me. If the game has a really good implementation of TAA, then fsr is a bit blurrier. This I noticed in Deep Rock Galactic, not so much Cyberpunk, and in DRG the textures aren't exactly necessary. The other thing is that fsr doesn't really know what to do with smoke of most kinds. Besides that no worthwhile complaints, dlss is better, but if amd has other features you want (like lots of vram) then fsr is fine for now. The real problem is that nvidia isn't done adding stuff like this new ray construction so fsr could fall behind more.

FSR seems to throw away temporal data a little too quick in cyberpunk for distant rails and wires as soon as they move, but this didn't bother me when actually playing. Sharpening at 100% makes the rails usually still visible, but still too thin, but I only noticed if I was looking for a problem.

Also, DRG has like really good TAA.

As someone who plays/played NFS Unbound; The version you used for FSR testing has been improved. In release, when going fast, the AA simply disables itself lol

Now, I am excited for DLSS since my new GPU is arriving tomorrow. Always saw DLSS as the much more usable solution for upscaling.

Crazy amount of testing from NVIDIA fanboy

Man, we are really getting the shaft by not having DLSS in Starfield, aren't we? :)

What do you all think: is FSR good enough that dlss is not a "must have"? imo the issues with fsr are still present in dlss but just not as often or as bad, and I would rather get a cheaper AMD gpu with more vram. Intel could easily take over with xess if they keep up good hardware, but I know intel can be sleezy and untrustworthy. Just look at the 14900k and how it's basically a slightly overclocked 13900k. I hope people know when to recognize this.

Is the dlss so good it advocates to buy 4080 instead of 7900 xtx to play in 4K?

I have a 3070... Is it weird that I find FSR to be clearer than DLSS on Warzone?

Please frs3 vs dlss 3 and dlss fg

except for the absolute best, the 3090 or 4090 if you can find and afford them, in any other case amds are always the way to go! in most regions of the world an amd card is less than half the price of the equivalent nvidia!
also the performance of an amd is way more consistent, nvidia cards after a while just start acting weird, and no amount of dlss or ray tracing could compensate that!

In my opinion nvidia works more on dlss cuz they dont actually put the money worth into there hardware from studying a lot of schematics from and and nvidia I can say amd does put more care into their hardware more then nvidia does so yes amd would not have as good of a dlss stand point cuz amd hard can handle abit better without FSR as I have tested both and researched the hardware and professional performance🤔

Dlss is better..but the free fsr win me

Greatly appreciated. Thanks for the effort to make this.

cant see adifference

When AC Valhallas in game AA upscaling is better then any game with those feature

For the majority of games at 4K I didn't see a difference between the two(Ignoring the labels).

DLSS looks more blurry, FSR looks sharper.

Ive never once been satisfied with FSR or the minor performance boost it gives. DLSS allows me to ray trace cyberpunk at 7640 x 1440.
DLSS is significantly better.

It must have taken years to learn how to move your mouth like that when you talk.

After watch this video in 4K 60 FPS. My conclusion is that for example I'm not use if you did the convinient AMD sharpening that add extra definition as if Nvidia has a similar tecnology. In another hand, sometimes they look the same. The different is like 1%. And some specific times, it's pretty noticeable in your video. But that in a normal gameplay, it's hard to realize about those issues specially in quality mode. Sometimes they are very evident, but again, depends if we focus in a specific area. What I may is that in the game I used FSR, I didn't felt I'm lossing big amount of quality or big amount of experience of my game. Also Nvidia games sponsored, they still works great with AMD. Since my last setting in cyberpunk in preset High quality, the game just works good and visuality is pretty great in 1080p. Also other games as Century age of ages or Dead island 2, both works well using their technologies and options.

Hi, my monitor is 1080p. My Internet can deal only with 1080p 60. I gonna download to watch to 4K 60 and previously I watched the whole video. Apparently it's true FSR it isn't better. Aside of that in my experience using FSR in 1080p, I didn't feel games are unplayable, they are still pretty. I didn't test DLSS, so I cannot judge much about it. I believe, even if it's worse FSR, it's fine, I'm able to enjoy games using AMD technologies. I knew about this when I choosed AMD vs Nvidia. I'm happy with my AMD GPU. ^^

Still I'll try to check to max quality video these tests.

And my opinion is in general that if it's possible I would run native. But in Cyberpunk 2077 for example, this games just it's fine using FSR. On the end, only when we put high attention to details we realize about differents.

I could have for free an Nvidia or an AMD GPU. Just, other details made me to decide AMD, even for future security because nvidia GPU weren't new, the Nvidia GPU my brother offered to me. But the AMD GPU was new.

some people say that DLSS is 50% or more better than FSR, they are crazy haha, the truth is that it is not that much, sometimes it looks almost the same in resolutions of 1440p or higher.

I am really wondering what comparisons between balanced modes, especially at 4k.

So, it is useless to buy AMD graphic cards according to DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 comparison where NVIDIA is best to get as it is most expensive? thank you. I will get a monitor for my new GPU (I will buy soon for my new PC) where I cannot decided which GPU should I get: NVIDIA or AMD? thank you.

Is there any support for mmorpg too to use DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2? thank you.

Would you make a 1080p comparison for DLSS 2 vs. AMD's FSR 2 too? thank you.

FSR looks awful. Like i'm playing a low bitrate game. I hate it.

As many have already stated, the ghosting and blurriness you see in some games when using DLSS is easily fixed by upgrading the DLSS DLL file to 2.5.1. Dead Space remake, for example. Updating to DLSS 2.5.1 completely removes the ghosting and blurred textures. It looks just as good as native resolution.

Hey wait... Did they even mention which GPU's they had this test running on?

I'm kinda confused on these tests. I'm assuming the results are being displayed on a 4k monitor? What are the initial render resolutions being used for the baseline? When you say lowering render resolution, to what level or percentage are they being lowered to? I also think screenshots with spotlight the specific artifact, ghosting, or shimmer effect will show better on video.

The problem I have with DLSS is that it's just flat out blurry on a 2560x1440 monitor using the DLSS Quality setting.
Also DLSS suffers pretty bad from the trailing edge of objects creating a noticeable ghosting effect.
So for faster moving games like MWII that also require a sharper image, FSR2.1 is just better.

Most games release with older fsr versions from my experience. That’s the main factor why dlss is better, it seems even earlier versions of both the dlss is better and fsr has caught up but I rarely play a title with fsr 2.0 or better.

There was no need to test in the same quality setting - the result is absolutely evident without test.
You should test DLSS 2 Balanced vs FSR 2 Quality, and DLSS 2 Performance vs FSR 2 Balanced.

The Problem is that they are both very good and you have to be picking them apart to notice which does not happen when you're playing aka (Real-World Scenarios) applies here so while DLSS is better do you need it? No because you're just not going to notice!!!

Don't really care how they look but Dlss always seems to get me more frames.

Guys, 1080p

I’m so glad I’ve got a 7900 XTX. I love FSR compared to DLS in cyberpunk. I never like using DLSS in cyberpunk because of the bad ghosting. Now I use FSR and everything is much better. Playing 4K with medium ray tracing at 80 to 90 FPS most of the time with this card. So thankful

I have been Nvidia fan boy for years over 15, and I’m finally glad I went team red. $1200 for a 4080 is ridiculous. I went with a 7900 XTX for 999 on new egg but was also eyeing up to 6950 XT for $630

Conclusion: DLSS looks better than FSR. I'm not surprised by this, as AMD's algorithm seems way less complex than NVIDIA's AI based solution.