|
Craptacular! posted:I thought original DLSS was discovered to not be using the tensor cores for anything, causing us all to wonder why there were there adding to the cost. DLSS 1.0 did use the tensors. The only DLSS implementation that didn't was Control's original unique DLSS implementation.
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 10:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 04:38 |
|
|
Can a 650W PSU handle a GTX 1080 and a GTX 670? I want to slot the later in and have it join the former in folding work units from Folding@Home.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 15:51
|
|
|
OhFunny posted:Can a 650W PSU handle a GTX 1080 and a GTX 670? I want to slot the later in and have it join the former in folding work units from Folding@Home. Probably yes, but barely. You're talking 180W nominal with spiked up to ~250W for the 1080 (assuming it's not overclocked any) and another 170W for the 670. A normal non-OC'ed "rest of the system" number is usually ~200W under load, so you're brushing up against that PSU's limits already. If you were thinking about OC'ing anything, you'd be almost certainly over. If you paused F@H before you launched a game, or if you only plan on playing Indy titles or whatever that don't tax the 1080, you'd be ok. But if you want serious gaming while F@H is running, I'd get a ~800W PSU.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 16:12
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I thought original DLSS was discovered to not be using the tensor cores for anything, causing us all to wonder why there were there adding to the cost. e:f,b
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
Pretty sure the assertion was that is was all marketing bs and the tensor cores didn't seem to be taxed by DLSS running, but I don't know whether that's true or not.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 18:41
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:DLSS 1.0 did use the tensors. The only DLSS implementation that didn't was Control's original unique DLSS implementation. and lest there be any doubt, control with the dlss 2.0 update is lighting up the tensor cores  that spike wasn't there when i originally tested it
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:35
|
|
|
DLSS 2.0 is only on RTX cards, right?
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:36
|
|
|
Yes. A comment I posted on Reddit: Played a little tonight, (Control) it’s way better than the first iteration. Putting all settings to max (2080s 3440x1440p 100hz) nets you around 50-60 FPS. All medium with maxed RTX is about ~70 FPS. Turn off one of the 5 RTX settings will net you a big boost, depending on which one you disable. You can also choose between 3 DLSS resolutions which is really cool. Big update is the visual clarity. 1.0 looked a bit blurry and washed out. It’s very hard to tell the difference in 2.0. Big game changer IMO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 19:49
|
|
|
Aw beans. Another plus for when I finally upgrade, then.
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2020 23:12
|
|
|
DLSS in Mechwarrior 5 is really good too, it was just added with a new patch a few days ago.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 00:10
|
|
|
But is it significantly better than the FidelityFX ripoff that Nvidia hastily ported over when it was clear that what AMD was doing killed DLSS 1.0 without the need for any special hardware?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 03:29
|
|
|
SwissArmyDruid posted:But is it significantly better than the FidelityFX ripoff that Nvidia hastily ported over when it was clear that what AMD was doing killed DLSS 1.0 without the need for any special hardware? DLSS 2.0 is absolutely legit and pretty much every review site I've seen, plus my own experience with Control, has it as a real game changer. It's 50% more FPS without having to sacrifice IQ, unlike DLSS 1.0 or FidelityFX which absolutely traded IQ for performance. DLSS 2.0 can actually increase IQ by adding detail that doesn't exist at native because of the training it does at much higher resolutions, this is something mentioned in every review I've see so far as well. It's not 100% perfect and you can find instances where DLSS 2.0 can make some things look worse, but overall IQ is the same or better. I've tried it out on Control on my desktop with a 2080 Ti running at 3440x1440 and I can't tell the difference between DLSS 2.0 and native, other than the massive increase in performance. I can now do 3440x1440 at around 70 FPS with all settings max, including raytracing, using the highest quality DLSS setting. On my gaming laptop with a 2070 running at 1080p, DLSS 2.0 is actually a straight up IQ improvement over native IMO. This is in large part due to 1080p looking naturally blurry in Control because like most games now, it uses TAA for AA and TAA really needs high resolution to counter the blur it induces. But DLSS 2.0 solves that while increasing performance, something like FidelityFX could fix the IQ of TAA with sharpening but it wouldn't also increase my FPS.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 08:23
|
|
|
Is there a lineup of games receiving DLSS 2.0 support in the near future? I'm very pleased with the results in Control.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 08:45
|
|
|
exquisite tea posted:Is there a lineup of games receiving DLSS 2.0 support in the near future? I'm very pleased with the results in Control. I don't think so, but from the sound of things, it shouldn't be hard to support in games that use TAA. The one game NV probably wants to have support more than anything else right now is Cyberpunk, it would be a huge coup de gras to be able to claim equivalent NV GPU's are 50% faster in that game due to DLSS 2.0.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 09:08
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Probably yes, but barely. You're talking 180W nominal with spiked up to ~250W for the 1080 (assuming it's not overclocked any) and another 170W for the 670. A normal non-OC'ed "rest of the system" number is usually ~200W under load, so you're brushing up against that PSU's limits already. If you were thinking about OC'ing anything, you'd be almost certainly over. Thanks for the info. I wasn't planning to game on the GTX 1080, but have it run FAH WUs as well. Which is what it's doing now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 10:07
|
|
|
Beautiful Ninja posted:I don't think so, but from the sound of things, it shouldn't be hard to support in games that use TAA. I'm curious, what are the similarities between DLSS 2.0 and TAA? I've seen people make comments like this before, but I'm not sure how they're related.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:08
|
|
|
Ganondork posted:I'm curious, what are the similarities between DLSS 2.0 and TAA? I've seen people make comments like this before, but I'm not sure how they're related. It's something to do with the motion vectors used to make TAA work. Basically, if your game supports TAA, apparently Nvidia can use the information that TAA uses to train DLSS. Per-object motion blur is also supposed to use the same kind of information.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:19
|
|
|
Is that information used per-user, or does it have to get uploaded to Nvidia's AI hive mind for them to update DLSS 2.0 later on?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:24
|
|
|
Ganondork posted:I'm curious, what are the similarities between DLSS 2.0 and TAA? I've seen people make comments like this before, but I'm not sure how they're related. https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/nvidia-dlss-2-0-a-big-leap-in-ai-rendering/ The way NV describes it sounds a lot like TAA/TAAU - they're using temporal feedback to incrementally build up detail over multiple frames, using motion vectors to compensate for object motion, and applying a subpixel jitter to the camera each frame to force unique samples into the algorithm even if the camera and/or objects aren't actually moving. That's standard TAA stuff, the difference is that DLSS 2.0 is using neural network magic to blend the frames together instead of the usual hand-crafted algorithms. The approach to sharpening also sounds like it's inspired by FidelityFX CAS, except with AI. CAS adaptively varies the amount of sharpening at each pixel based on the local contrast, while DLSS 2.0 adaptively varies the sharpening at each pixel based on what the black box neural network decides will look best. Who knows how it decides on that value but it works pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:26
|
|
|
How much is AI simply a buzzword, in this case?
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:30
|
|
|
GRINDCORE MEGGIDO posted:How much is AI simply a buzzword, in this case? 100%, just like it almost always is. It's not "intelligent" in any meaningful sense, it's just a pretty standard neural network being applied to a specific problem set to optimize results. Your GPU is not going to gain sentience out of this, but being able to run the NN in hardware like this means it's actually fast enough to be useful.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:36
|
|
|
It's more about mimicking certain features of the human brain than (re)creating straight up sentience. I miss when AI just referred to pathfinding and making enemies take cover and use flanks in games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:44
|
|
|
ufarn posted:It's more about mimicking certain features of the human brain than (re)creating straight up sentience. I miss when AI just referred to pathfinding and making enemies take cover and use flanks in games. Well, yeah, obviously there's a lot of space south of straight up sentience--that was mostly sarcasm on my part. Normally, though, "AI" when used seriously is intended to convey that the system is producing non-trivial novel solutions to a problem; systems inventing new langues to communicate with each other are good examples, as is the nifty system that figured out how to use a long trace on its system board as a radio antenna. DLSS isn't doing that, it's just using a NN to dynamically adjust weightings and implementation details for the algorithms NVidia cooked up (as far as what I've gathered from what they've released so far).
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 15:59
|
|
|
DrDork posted:100%, just like it almost always is. It's not "intelligent" in any meaningful sense, it's just a pretty standard neural network being applied to a specific problem set to optimize results. Your GPU is not going to gain sentience out of this, but being able to run the NN in hardware like this means it's actually fast enough to be useful. If you're using a neural network to build the output, it's AI. AI doesn't mean sentience, it means you are letting your software make decisions, not programatically deciding them. So AI is accurate in this case. You can't use a neural net to make decisions and then say AI is 100% a buzzword.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 17:04
|
|
|
Ud prefer if people used Machine Learning, rather than AI. But Machine Learning doesnt get big investor bucks
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 17:46
|
|
|
Rigged Death Trap posted:Ud prefer if people used Machine Learning, rather than AI. Machine Learning is a subset of AI. Deep learning (which this is, according to NVidia) is a subset of machine learning, and definitely gets big investor bucks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 17:53
|
|
|
My CPU is a neural net processor; a learning computer.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 17:57
|
|
|
If anything, ML gets more money than honest AI, because ML is much easier to apply to existing problem sets and produce useful results. Doing image recognition, content filtering, etc., is all a lot easier to build a business case around than trying to explain why some of the more esoteric areas of AI is worth R&D dollars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 18:28
|
|
|
DLSS 2.0 is incredible. This is a giant, giant deal. I don't know what else to say. I'm flabbergasted that they actually made it work.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
The reports of DLSS 2.0 make me sad, since it looks like after years of hair follicle physics and extraneous sparkle effects that you'd be happy turning off, we've reached a point where major games are going to offer a drastically pronounced improvement when played with a partnered graphics card. Somebody's got to buy Radeon cards for the sake of the rest of us, guys. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 21:05
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:The reports of DLSS 2.0 make me sad, since it looks like after years of hair follicle physics and extraneous sparkle effects that you'd be happy turning off, we've reached a point where major games are going to offer a drastically pronounced improvement when played with a partnered graphics card. yeah i bet on radeon and the drivers sucked rear end for 4mo nvidia all the way baybee lets see RTX 3000 asap
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 21:49
|
|
|
Sounds like DLSS 2.0 is what most of us expected DLSS 1.0 to be. Pretty cool. Wonder if they can even squeeze out some additional power efficiency in mobile chipsets by rendering at a lower resolution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:10
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:Somebody's got to buy Radeon cards for the sake of the rest of us, guys. Well, AMD/Radeon has survived on mid-tier parts for...how long now? So unless the 3000-series trickles tensor cores down into whatever they'll call the replacements for the 1660/1650 parts, Radeons will still have a market. But yeah, if they can't come up with an AMD-analogue and DLSS continues to improve, they can pretty much say goodbye to even wishing they could compete above the xx70 level.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
It was on amd hardware that convincing checkerboarding and upscaling was first conceived was it not I'm sure amd is working on their own solutions to making lower resolutions look better, they did put out a drastically better alternative to dlss 1.0 in short time and I would be surprised if they left it at that. dlss 2.0 still has to work on a per-game basis, if amd can make one that works across the board yet is only in the ball-park (much like what they did to compete with dlss 1.0), that's all they need imo. Zedsdeadbaby fucked around with this message at 22:38 on Mar 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:36
|
|
|
DrDork posted:Well, AMD/Radeon has survived on mid-tier parts for...how long now? So unless the 3000-series trickles tensor cores down into whatever they'll call the replacements for the 1660/1650 parts, Radeons will still have a market. It seems like the lower tier cards would be where DLSS would be most useful? If you're on a high end card and saying "this tweak lets me run at ultra settings instead of high", that doesn't seem like an accomplishment when those settings are barelyvisible and require a quality tradeoff in other respects. For xx70, DLSS might simply be a way to get the game to run at your desired frames period.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:37
|
|
|
Man this makes me want a 2060 Super...
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:52
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:It seems like the lower tier cards would be where DLSS would be most useful? If you're on a high end card and saying "this tweak lets me run at ultra settings instead of high", that doesn't seem like an accomplishment when those settings are barelyvisible and require a quality tradeoff in other respects. For xx70, DLSS might simply be a way to get the game to run at your desired frames period. Well, some of these performance increases are on the order of 50%, which is pretty significant regardless of how you want to frame it: sure, in some cases that might be roughly going from High to Ultra, but certainly at 4k there are a ton of games that even at moderate settings are very hard to push >60 FPS, and even a 2080Ti can't do 144+ in many situations. Drop down the stack to a 2070 and you're already turning things down to Medium or less to hit 60. A 50% increase there is huge. You're right that it'd be even more meaningful further down the stack, but NVidia didn't include tensor cores that far down. It'll be interesting to see if they repeat the same segmentation with the next series, or if they try to really stick it to AMD by pushing them out across the full lineup.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:54
|
|
|
Zedsdeadbaby posted:dlss 2.0 still has to work on a per-game basis, if amd can make one that works across the board yet is only in the ball-park (much like what they did to compete with dlss 1.0), that's all they need imo. The difficulty is, something that works across the board is limited to simple ReShade-like filters. That's good enough to add extra sharpening like they did with CAS but not sufficient to bolt on a high quality upscaler Temporal integration is the backbone of all the quality upscalers in modern games (not just DLSS) and there's no practical way to pull that off without cooperation from the engine
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 22:55
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:The reports of DLSS 2.0 make me sad, since it looks like after years of hair follicle physics and extraneous sparkle effects that you'd be happy turning off, we've reached a point where major games are going to offer a drastically pronounced improvement when played with a partnered graphics card. I like AMD cards for Radeon Chill and VSR
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 23:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 04:38 |
|
|
I'm wanting to upgrade to Windows 10 and I'm currently weighing up some upgrades on my system too as I dread having to reformat a second time should I want to do it in a few months. I'm currently running one of those Core 2 Duos that everyone loved back in the day (9600k or something?) which I assume is getting long in the tooth by now along with GTX970. How much of a performance bump will I get out of 1650 Super or a 1660 Super? I really can't afford anything more and just wondering if there is a ton of upside with those options or whether I'm just better off sticking with my current GPU and waiting a while for price drops on something better. This is currently a gaming rig running 1440p on one of those overclocked 96hz Korean monitors.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2020 23:51
|
|
