New Beta app from Nvidia to enable RTX HDR in all games

[SharpeXB]

I have as much faith in fake HDR as I have in fake pixels from DLSS

[okopanja]

8 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I have as much faith in fake HDR as I have in fake pixels from DLSS

Just try night with lights turned on... But I guess its simply a acceptable limitation.

[SharpeXB]

4 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Just try night with lights turned on... But I guess it’s simply an acceptable limitation.

If it’s done well HDR looks fantastic. I don’t have too much hope for Auto HDR or this Nvidia thing though. DCS should just go for the real deal. It’s not really so easy though because every image you see on the screen would have to be mastered in HDR including stuff like maps on the kneeboard and such. 
Night scenes are where DCS shows its age honestly… no so great. 

[okopanja]

2 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

If it’s done well HDR looks fantastic. I don’t have too much hope for Auto HDR or this Nvidia thing though. DCS should just go for the real deal. It’s not really so easy though because every image you see on the screen would have to be mastered in HDR including stuff like maps on the kneeboard and such. 
Night scenes are where DCS shows its age honestly… no so great. 

I always wonder why afterburner disappears much sooner than a modest street light.

We know for a fact that it should be visible from 10s of km. To paraphrase F-18 pilot: "once you see the afterburner plumes of Mig-25 in the distance, there is very little doubt on what that might be" (book is not with me)

[kksnowbear]

26 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

I have as much faith in fake HDR as I have in fake pixels from DLSS

An absolute misrepresentation of the technology, if there ever was one.  The pixels, I can assure you, are quite real (of course).  The technology incorporates machine-learned "guesses"...and that's not any more 'fake' than the exact same thing your brain and eyes do with what you 'see'.  This is why the saying exists that someone's 'eyes are playing tricks'.

Either way, there is interpolation based upon what is there.  Same - same.

Never mind which way is better, the technology is an absolute game-changer - literally.  People who can afford 4090's have zero objective way to judge this, but the gain on lesser systems - without substantial adverse effect - is remarkable.  And that's the intent.  It works, it works well, and it's catching on.

Edited March 13, 2024 by kksnowbear

[SharpeXB]

1 minute ago, kksnowbear said:

The pixels, I can assure you, are quite real (of course)

They’re generated by upscaling, ie they aren’t real native pixels. They look like

DLSS isn’t supersampling, it’s upscaling. The opposite of supersampling. They shoulda called it DLUS but somehow that just doesn’t sound sexy…

[SharpeXB]

11 minutes ago, okopanja said:

I always wonder why afterburner disappears much sooner than a modest street light.

We know for a fact that it should be visible from 10s of km. To paraphrase F-18 pilot: "once you see the afterburner plumes of Mig-25 in the distance, there is very little doubt on what that might be" (book is not with me)

It’s not just the distance it’s the quality. DCS doesn’t have too many real light sources it seems, I know they’ve been improving that. I’m not a computer graphics expert but something is lacking here. The shadows and lights in DCS I think are just painted on textures. They have added some new stuff recently but it’s still quite dated. Honestly there are probably better things to work on than HDR. 

[kksnowbear]

I know very well what it is and how it works; exactly as I described, and exactly the way your brain and eyes do the same thing.

"They look like sh*t" is 100% subjective opinion, and from someone who's running a system that is not in any way the intended target for the technology.

Plenty of people are amazed by the tech and what it's capable of.  As I said, it's growing. Fast. And with good reason.

Not everyone can afford top end equipment, and it's perfectly capable, legitimate, and very good at what it's designed to do.

Edited March 13, 2024 by kksnowbear

[Hiob]

I certainly don't agree with Sharpe, that DLSS looks bad (far from it tbh.). In fact, I can hardly tell the difference between running native 4K and DLSS quality with sharpening - except of course for the boost in fps.

However, having a 4090 doesn't disqualify you from benefiting or using DLSS. Why should it. You can easily bring a 4090 far south of 100fps with the right settings and when your aim is 120 Hz (which for a couple of reason certainly is a golden place to be), DLSS can help with that without sacrificing any settings.

Quite the opposite if I may add. Since DLSS works the better the higher the fps, I would argue that you get best possible results from a 4090.

This is why I am so confused, that Sharpe is so salty about it. Yes - in the early days/early implementation of DLSS, there were quality issues - but now.... I certainly find the results impressive.

[kksnowbear]

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

I certainly don't agree with Sharpe, that DLSS looks bad (far from it tbh.). In fact, I can hardly tell the difference between running native 4K and DLSS quality with sharpening - except of course for the boost in fps.

However, having a 4090 doesn't disqualify you from benefiting or using DLSS. Why should it. You can easily bring a 4090 far south of 100fps with the right settings and when your aim is 120 Hz (which for a couple of reason certainly is a golden place to be), DLSS can help with that without sacrificing any settings.

Quite the opposite if I may add. Since DLSS works the better the higher the fps, I would argue that you get best possible results from a 4090.

This is why I am so confused, that Sharpe is so salty about it. Yes - in the early days/early implementation of DLSS, there were quality issues - but now.... I certainly find the results impressive.

Maybe what I'm saying isn't clear; let me try again:  I'm not at all saying that you can't use DLSS at 4k, nor that it won't work or whatever.

What I'm saying is that a 4090 at 4k res is not the "showcase" situation which technology like DLSS (or AMD equivalents FSR and RSR) are focused on.  Pretty sure the tech came about as a way to allow higher frame rates at a given resolution, even on lesser GPUs.

For instance, yes have a 4k monitor, but rendering at lesser res to lower the workload while still getting the 'pixel sharpness' of the 4k resolution display/panel.  Works great/been there/done that.

All those points you make about 4k are perfectly valid - what I'm saying is that these technologies are more impressive by far for what they can do on lower-end hardware which is more readily available/affordable than the (far fewer) people who can already afford a 4090/4k arrangement.  For every one person running a 4090 at 4k who could already get very good performance regardless, the technologies now make it possible for 100 or 1000 to get similar levels of performance without necessarily paying the same price (though I would absolutely maintain it's not without compromise).

Or:

4090 (already very good and thus don't 'need' DLSS tech to perform well)

<lower-end GPUS> (which were struggling at performance in certain circumstances, but can now approach double their performance)

I think, of the two cases, the latter has far more to gain, where the former was fine even without DLSS.

I think the 'saltiness' which you observed yourself (as in not me) is due to a related-but-different cause.  Among other things, it (further) diminishes the validity of simple FPS numbers being proportional to cost of the hardware.

Edited March 13, 2024 by kksnowbear

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, kksnowbear said:

They look like sh*t" is 100% subjective opinion

The consensus I see here from many people is that DLSS results in blurriness which is especially noticeable on the MFDs and instruments. You have to then make up for that with the sharpness setting. There are so many posts where people report all these problems from enabling it and then going into a settings tailspin trying to fix things. VR looks blurry anyways so it’s likely those players just can’t see the difference or really need the boost. I’ll take it back a bit and say for me it doesn’t look super awful in this game but it’s still perceivable as upscaling. It adds just a touch of softness and lowers the contrast just a bit. I’m running a really high frame rate though and that gives the AI more to work with, I understand it gets worse at lower FPS. 
In the other big civy sim it looks downright awful. I can’t see why anyone would enable it there but that’s a different game.
There’s nothing really wrong with DLSS other than the hype train promoting the idea that it has no downside. It’s a graphic setting like any other. Balancing quality and performance. It’s not a magic bullet. 

1 hour ago, Hiob said:

However, having a 4090 doesn't disqualify you from benefiting or using DLSS

I can’t see using DLSS with a 4090. That can run the game at 120 FPS or more in 4K on all the highest settings without it. The low frame rate situations in this game are likely CPU limited and DLSS does nothing for you there. I can try DLSS on and off in GPU heavy stuff like the Sinai free flight and I’m pegged at my max of 120 regardless. So enabling it makes no sense. 

[kksnowbear]

There are far more people who find tech like DLSS/FSR/RSR beneficial, and the vast majority consider the gains outweigh the drawbacks.  This 'level of approval' is also consistent with/reflected in the growing implementations throughout the industry.

This isn't (and shouldn't be turned into) a specific commentary on a per-sim basis.  But, if that's the angle, well then all I can say is ED chose to do it for some reason.  Proof of the pudding, as it were.

And I really don't know where you got the idea about a "hype train promoting the idea that it has no downside"...but no one who knows anything about it has ever remotely tried to claim that.  If they claimed that, it's a dead giveaway they don't know cr*p about it.  It's a compromise - but a damn good one for many people who cannot afford to spend thousands on a GPU but still want to get substantially improved frame rates.

The choice re: quality sacrifice is, once again, entirely subjective and a matter of individual opinion.  As always, what's 'worth it' depends entirely on personal perspective.

Edited March 13, 2024 by kksnowbear

[speed-of-heat]

so far off topic ... 

 

[SharpeXB]

12 minutes ago, kksnowbear said:

And I really don't know where you got the idea about a "hype train promoting the idea that it has no downside"

I see that a lot here Aside from that there’s really nothing wrong with DLSS, it’s just another graphic setting with all that entails. 

6 minutes ago, speed-of-heat said:

so far off topic ...

Yes it is, my bad for bringing it up. If I had a point it’s that genuine colors and resolutions are better than faux ones. I’d rather see genuine HDR here.

[BIGNEWY]

folks we have the off topic rule so people dont hijack threads and change the topic completely. 

Please discuss the new NVIDIA app here

thanks

[okopanja]

For new the new APP (RTX 2070 Super) does not offer possibility to override the HDR setting in DCS.

Other than that it is missing:

- streaming

- auto-overclocking feature

I will likely revert to nvidia expirience.

[Biggus]

13 hours ago, Hiob said:

Looks just brighter and over-saturated. I mean, this is the main menu still.

I should have said this was with stock settings.  I don't actually use those settings because yes, it's over-saturated to hell.  But with a bit of tweaking, it's not so bad.  It does not work very well on cloudy nights though.

 

Edited March 13, 2024 by Biggus

[dresoccer4]

guys, OP here, I think I got it to work. The missing link was the requirement to enable the Nvidia App overlay. This is not enabled by default so I had to go do that.

It's still a little wonky and I can't adjust HDR sliders in-game for some reason. But I do really like the way it looks. Note I'm using RTX HDR and not the RTX Dynamic Vibrance (which gives it that bright wonky colors).

Highly recommend!

Edited March 15, 2024 by dresoccer4

[Hiob]

1 hour ago, dresoccer4 said:

guys, OP here, I think I got it to work. The missing link was the requirement to enable the Nvidia App overlay. This is not enabled by default so I had to go do that.

It's still a little wonky and I can't adjust HDR sliders in-game for some reason. But I do really like the way it looks. Note I'm using RTX HDR and not the RTX Dynamic Vibrance (which gives it that bright wonky colors).

Highly recommend!

 

Nice. Can you post comparison screens? (Does it capture the effects in a screen shot?)

I'm still hesitant to let go of my trusted lean (geforce experience free) Nvidia Driver in favor of a clumsy app though......  (Never touch a running system and so on.... kind of burned my fingers in the past)

[dresoccer4]

just got it to work and honestly it look AMAZING. wish i could post a screenshot, but it's very good HDR and makes the sim look even more realistic. highly recommend

[VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants]

Just got the latest v10.0.0.535. I have no HDR in 2D

And no HDR in the NVIDIA app either

Any help appreciated.

Edited May 3, 2024 by VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants

[dresoccer4]

14 hours ago, VR Flight Guy in PJ Pants said:

Just got the latest v10.0.0.535. I have no HDR in 2D

And no HDR in the NVIDIA app either

Any help appreciated.

 

 

 

Windows is saying you don't have an HDR monitor