already in development DLSS is now free

[Marco Schaap]

15 hours ago, Headwarp said:

 

Disagree..anything that increases my performance to image quality ratio is a holy grail for VR in DCS. The next thing can be the Ark of the Covenant.  Enabling MSAA 2x drops me from like 80fps on Caucasus in VR to 60, with random spikes down into the 40's using native res in the Index.   Disabling MSAA lets me run around the same map getting 80fps @80hz, with some spikes into the 70's.   DLSS replaces an anti-aliasing method that we've known causes a massive fps hit when combined with deferred rendering, which is one of the rendering methods FSR and DLSS were advertised as being useful for.  

It's not about an "FPS BOOST" it's about not sacrificing FPS for MSAA.  Or the alternative gaining performance by sacrificing a crisp image that isn't jaggy and shimmering.    "just upping the resolution" doesn't make up for a lack of anti-aliasing and is also limited by hardware.   MSAA 2x at lower resolutions still looks better, but performs worse.  DLSS doesn't come with the performance hit.   Whether you like it or not and proprietary or not for people who have a 20 series nvidia card or higher it provides a much better alternative to MSAA than FXAA.  In VR particularly, I'll take every performance boost I can get.  running at half the refresh rate is a crutch that comes with its own visual artifacts.  This is putting the anti-aliasing on hardware that is currently not in use within DCSW.   I mean if you don't want to use it that's cool but anybody with a 20 series nVidia card on into the future could potentially benefit from DLSS implementation.   It might not matter to me as much if I were still playing on a pancake.. it did when I was running a 980TI @ 3440x1440 back when deferred rendering became the only rendering method supported by ED staff.  Without msaa that was pretty shimmery.  

Personally, I don't see why one would bother arguing against this.    It's an optional feature.  Options make more room for more people to enjoy the experience something like DCS might offer.   It's like the people that tried to argue against supporting wide screen monitors in online gaming because they didn't want to spend money on one themselves and labeled it "unfair."   The people who had them loved them and started buying games that supported the hardware available to their customer base.  Eventually 1080p became a standard.  I have more and more games featuring DLSS and FSR is even starting to pop up in them.  

 

 

I think you're missing the point, but hey have it your way 

[Dragon1-1]

Remember that multicore is supposedly already working in a dev build, so DCS might soon stop being as CPU-limited as it currently is. As such, improvements that take the load off the GPU would likely help, though of course how much would depend on the particular machine.

[Headwarp]

5 hours ago, Marco Schaap said:

I think you're missing the point, but hey have it your way 

and I feel like you are.   Right now MSAA is a performance hit.  DLSS provides an anti-aliasing solution without the performance hit to people who own a newer nvidia gpu.  What aren't you getting there? 

That happens regardless of any hardware bottleneck, because by using DLSS in place of MSAA you're eliminating the performance hit we expect from MSAA. Anti-aliasing is now on the Tensor cores.    Nothing but a potential benefit for those of us trying to squeeze every frame out of our VR rigs while trying to balance that with a crisp image. Throw that concept in with every new nvidia GPU coming in the future having built in support for the feature, why ignore it?  They are one of TWO major GPU manufacturers, and leaders of the industry for a reason.    MSAA might still look a little better.. but DLSS 2.0 is far better than what we have without it.   It's like a darned if I do or darned if I don't situation with MSAA and has been for some time now.  You're welcome to disagree with that,  but frankly if there's an option out there that doesn't equate to a trade off between framerate and shimmering scenery.. I've been waiting years for that in DCS, personally.  Like.. I can live with the image quality I get with MSAA 2x, even at lower resolutions.   But since a certain patch I can't live with the performance with it on.   I've had to learn to live with the image quality with it off.  Can't say I'm satisfied with that result.    

More than any new module, I'd love to see improvements to performance given the range of current hardware.  .    Looking forward to Vulkan and hopeful it can make more efficient use of our hardware in DCS, and even then I'd still be encouraging the ED team to look into DLSS as an anti-aliasing solution.   If people also want FSR by all means.. hook that up too if possible.  

Edited December 31, 2021 by Headwarp

[[zcd]dARKtROOPER]

DLSS is awesome, I have used it in a lot of games now. Especially in VR it’s amazing, you get some AA/AF like effects, lots of flickering stuff stops and, in most cases, it sums up to just look a lot better and it increases FPS, in some cases dramatically - not using it is pure nonsense!

So, if we get the optimized multicore, Vulcan implementation (most of my 16/32 cores a bored in DCS) and they use the DLSS Support of Vulcan down that road, that will truly boost performance and most likely open options for optimizing graphics fruther and still have smooth FPS on all maps and altitudes.

Edited January 28, 2022 by [zcd]dARKtROOPER

[Mad_Shell]

Better wait for Intel's XeSS imo. That seems quite promising, and contrary to DLSS will be available for GPU of all brands.

[[zcd]dARKtROOPER]

There is always vendor specific tuning in AAA Games for many reasons - I don’t see any point in not using features provided if they boost Quality and FPS and are free to use, as the NVidia and AMD features do.  Also, DLSS is quite adapted so it’s not a niche extension anymore.  I know – it’s more of a philosophical debate then a technical one to many, just like many get scared if people ask for VR support. If it makes better quality and fps and is not too much hassle to implement, well then do it – if its more cores, more VRAM or precision with 64bit or proven extension.  Besides I doubt that our debate here does anything – engineers will evaluate do ability, cost and effect and that’s it.

[Wali763]

I dont want DLSS.

It might be great, but its only for one group and cutting out another. Which btw is probably intentional from Nvidia.

Id prefer things like FSR (2.0), that are open to everyone. Even if DLSS is better.

Maybe, if AMD and Intel can gain considerablly more market-share, this discussion could be over soon anyway. 

Edited April 5, 2022 by Wali763

[YoYo]

Hi Guys, what about DLSS?

Still no for DCS, and ahead is DLSS3 !!!

I have it in MSFS and its a very good boost! Pls add it to DCS (DLSS 2 and 3). 

Why we have to wait so long for this feature?

[BIGNEWY]

3 minutes ago, YoYo said:

Hi Guys, what about DLSS?

Still no for DCS, and ahead is DLSS3 !!!

I have it in MSFS and its a very good boost! Pls add it to DCS (DLSS 2 and 3). 

Why we have to wait so long for this feature?

DLSS has been requested but I have no news to share. The team is very busy with multithreading. 

[dutchili]

Yeah, multi-threading !

More benefits that DLSS given where we are now.

[YoYo]

2 hours ago, dutchili said:

Yeah, multi-threading !

More benefits that DLSS given where we are now.

It could be too of course. Vulcan (as second engine for DCS) perhaps is on "hold on" position but now better is to have multi threading and DLSS 2 nad 3 I suppose. Fingers crossed for any improvements :).

Edited October 12, 2022 by YoYo

[Rikus]

DCS need a super high end hardware to run in VR, and with that pssss

We need DLSS!!!

[SkateZilla]

1. ED wont do proprietary GPU Tech
2. DLSS 3.0 on the RTX 4000 Series doesn't work in VR,

DLSS 3.0 inserts fake frames, increasing frame latency, which is bad for VR.
DLSS 2.0 Uses a Tensor Cores to Super Sample Lower Resolution Images, considering VR is about clarity, I'd advise against it.

You can do that by reducing the Px Density slider in the VR Options.

Know the tech before you demand it.

[twistking]

55 minutes ago, SkateZilla said:

1. ED wont do proprietary GPU Tech
2. DLSS 3.0 on the RTX 4000 Series doesn't work in VR,

DLSS 3.0 inserts fake frames, increasing frame latency, which is bad for VR.
DLSS 2.0 Uses a Tensor Cores to Super Sample Lower Resolution Images, considering VR is about clarity, I'd advise against it.

You can do that by reducing the Px Density slider in the VR Options.

Know the tech before you demand it.

ED already said, that they would investigate DLSS. So from my understanding it's not ruled out completely even if it's proprietary tech. I'm all for it, but i also understand the big drawback of it being vendor-locked...

I agree with your statement about DLSS 3.0. It's not supported for VR anyway and even if it would be, it does come with it's own bucket of issues.

DLSS 2.0 however would probably work well for DCS as it can improve clarity compared to native res rendering for games that suffer from aliasing and lack high-end anti-aliasing solutions. DCS absolutely qualifies for a game that struggles with aliasing, as it does not support high-end temporal AA.
I'm quite sure that DLSS would bring tangible benefits for owners of Nvidia cards. Imho the only strong argument against DLSS is that it's vendor-locked.

Edited October 13, 2022 by twistking

[SkateZilla]

On 10/12/2022 at 8:51 AM, YoYo said:

It could be too of course. Vulcan (as second engine for DCS) perhaps is on "hold on" position but now better is to have multi threading and DLSS 2 nad 3 I suppose. Fingers crossed for any improvements :).

 

There's no point adding it to an EoL GFX Engine, the time and finances used to develop it for a GFX on it's way out can be better used on the incoming graphics engine.

 

[SkateZilla]

Requested vs Confirmed, 2 different things.

[draconus]

ED puts money and work into DLSS.

AMD users: Wtf ED?!

NV users: Wow! The fps! Less shimmering! Wait? Why is my cockpit so blurry? No, thanks. DLSS off.

[edmuss]

Isn't the DLSS 3 basically reprojection for non-VR?

[SkateZilla]

6 minutes ago, edmuss said:

Isn't the DLSS 3 basically reprojection for non-VR?

Uses the AI Learning Profile to Take one frame, and move the pixels without having to re-render a frame, then insert it into the display pipeline,

as stated numerous times, FPS with DLSS 3.0 is pure marketing, the Engine is adding pixel shifted frames to the display pipeline, not rendering them, 

Look at the non-dlss 3.0 numbers, the render/raster performance of the RTX4 Series is about 10-15% better at 20-30% price increase over RTX3, and that 10-15% performance can be made smaller with under volting and/or overclocking and tweaking the voltage profile for max boost. the price gap on the other hand will only get bigger as RTX3 gets cheaper and RTX4 prices go up due to demand and cost overruns in development,

Notice hardly any of the slides show non DLSS3.0 Games..

Lets see how that works with buildings zipping by or in FPS where the position of another player is mis-represented.

you'll also get micro-movements, as the AI fills the FPS with shifted pixels then realized they were shifted the wrong way and moves them back.

[edmuss]

Roughly the same end result (synthetic frames to give a false framerate with the potential of associated artifacts from guessed frames being injected) but a different mechanism to achieve it

[Rikus]

On 10/13/2022 at 5:52 PM, SkateZilla said:

DLSS 3.0 inserts fake frames, increasing frame latency, which is bad for VR.
DLSS 2.0 Uses a Tensor Cores to Super Sample Lower Resolution Images, considering VR is about clarity, I'd advise against it.

 

You can still use DLSS 2 (the good one) instead DLSS 3

[twistking]

I've done some reading on DLSS for VR and it seems to work really great, effectively doubling FPS without degrading the image quality noticeably. If you think about it, it makes sense that it works particularly good in VR: It has double the information to work with compared to pancake/2d.
I think DLSS could effectively "solve" high resolution VR headsets for Nvidia users. Of course CPU bottlenecks would still apply for the moment.
It sucks that it's vendor locked, but ED could maybe also implement AMD's and Intel's upscalers to offer something for everyone... (to be fair, i doubt that AMD's upscaler would work that well in DCS. It can produce pleasant image, but does so while not reconstructing finer details, so gives a less detailed image, which might hurt spotting in DCS)

Edited October 18, 2022 by twistking

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

27 minutes ago, twistking said:

I've done some reading on DLSS for VR and it seems to work really great, effectively doubling FPS without degrading the image quality noticeably. If you think about it, it makes sense that it works particularly good in VR: It has double the information to work with compared to pancake/2d.

It´s brilliant technology getting better and better, i´ve used it in a wide range of games and it´s really really good. The gains however won´t be quite as massive without noticeable loss in quality, but still it´s not a horrible tradeoff for the boost you get. Using ie. "quality" setting will give a very nice boost with minimal image loss, but certainly not doubling the fps. The AMD equivalent isn´t quite as good unfortunately.

[twistking]

1 hour ago, Tenebrae Aeternae said:

It´s brilliant technology getting better and better, i´ve used it in a wide range of games and it´s really really good. The gains however won´t be quite as massive without noticeable loss in quality, but still it´s not a horrible tradeoff for the boost you get. Using ie. "quality" setting will give a very nice boost with minimal image loss, but certainly not doubling the fps. The AMD equivalent isn´t quite as good unfortunately.

You are talking 2d though, aren't you? From my understanding VR DLSS brings higher FPS gains comapred to pancake DLSS, because there is double the amount of pixels to save on. It's basically double DLSS with benefits.

[Tenebrae Aeternae]

7 minutes ago, twistking said:

You are talking 2d though, aren't you? From my understanding VR DLSS brings higher FPS gains comapred to pancake DLSS, because there is double the amount of pixels to save on. It's basically double DLSS with benefits.

Yeah talking about 2d, but thinking it logically, it will downscale it and upscale it in proportion.. so also the downscaled resolution in VR is much higher than in 2d. Otherwise it would look horrible.

Edited October 18, 2022 by Tenebrae Aeternae