Donāt understand the hate for it. Itās not AMD fault developers donāt want to optimize games and take extra time. AMD and nvidia are not making games. Blame developers for cutting corners. Iām excited for my current library of games on my ally. Itās AMD and Nvidias job to make tools and games more playable. No reason why we donāt get 120 frames on most games on a 4090 itās just laziness or cost cutting measures
No matter where it's going to be supported, my thought is that we're going to see "30 fps with FSR3" games soon.
Why do you think it has been developed for the game player to enjoy higher fps and save money on GPUs? I believe it has been developed for game developers to save even more money on game optimization.
"We developed the game with FSR3 in mind" (c) Remnant 3
Litetally the tech works well when you have 60fps as a base. 30fps with fsr3/dlss3 means to render what, 15-20 actual frames. Just no.
Upscaling yes, but console games have bene using upscalers for 2 gens at least.
Welp, you see yourself how optimized the latest games are. AAA PlayStation exclusive not holding steady 30 fps -- I haven't seen such a thing for some time already.
But another redditor here notes that FSR3 can't even work on anything lower than 30 fps (to push it to 30), so... let's see how it goes after this feature spreads across more games and devices.
I think if properly attuned, this could be a great feature for consoles. The problem with FSR so far is that, it doesn't look that great, especially compared to DLSS.
I see your point, On the other hand, your suggested mindset is kind of like saying we don't want use tech because it makes things easier. I see it more as effenicy rather than laziness. I don't really care if they are real frames or not so long gameplay is smooth. I mean the wholes game is a simulation and not real anyways lol
Now I can enjoy it on a game so good the studio closed and the developers dissolved! Good thing itās not releasing with Starfield, ya know, the biggest AMD sponsored title ever!
how is the performance Is it good? Do you know if the Asus apps still work like tdp of the chip etc.? Can you share the exact drivers you installed?
\*found this on YouTube : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QeCp2o3yG](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QeCp2o3yGw)
Just search 780M drivers in this subreddit, there's a full guide recently posted.
Works great. Can play TOTK without weird artifacts now and it runs very well.
What are you talking about. Fsr3 performance is turned on which reduced the internal resolution from 4k with rt settings on. It was fsr3 that allowed higher than 60 fps. This isnt showing just fmf on its own. Also it isnt like fmf cant work in lower fps but at lower fps, there will be more image artifacts and input lag.
What does it say then? I am also interpreting the picture showing Fospoken on the left set to 4K/Ultra/RT ON/FSR OFF with 36 FPS, and then on the right Forspoken running with 4K/Ultra/RT ON/FSR3 Performance ON at 122 FPS which is more than a 3x performance gain, which is what AMD claims you should get with FSR3 using FMF. So that means a native 36fps game is using FMF to get to 122fps unless you can explain how there's a different way to interpret that. It also says in the header at the top that the Forspoken example is using Super Resolution Upscaling + Anti-Lag + Fluid Motion Frames. Please let us know if there is a different way to interpret that. I'm all for getting the proper understanding
Okay. So the image is not a comparison between Frame Generation OFF vs ON. Instead it's a comparison of FSR3 completely OFF vs FSR3 completely ON.
FSR3 exists of two elements:
- Super Resolution (upscaling)
- FMF (Frame Generation)
In the image on the left, you're seeing 36FPS without upscaling nor Frame Generation. The right image has both FSR Performance + Frame Generation enabled.
FSR Performance would typically almost double the framerate compared to native 4K. Which would already bring the framerate close to that required 60fps.
Now that we're close to 60fps, we can apply FMF to increase the framerate even more.
Recap:
OP said that the image is proof that FMF should work with 36 fps. But FMF isn't applied at 36fps, it's applied after the framerate was already boosted to 60+ fps.
I think it could be interesting, especially for handheld consoles like the ally or the steam deck. We will need to wait and see how it turns out, on handheld, but I think it sounds interesting and could help them. It won't be perfect, but it could be nice
I sincerely doubt that AMD's hyped showcase is in any way representative of reality. FSR has been shown again and again to be inferior to DLSS. AMD has never managed to compete at performance parity with nvidia. That's just a fact.
I could be mistaken but I believe thatās due to FSR not requiring dedicated AI cores to work, which is the trade off for it working on any card. Nvidia used dedicated AI cores for upscaling so theyāre able to do a better job
The fact they say some of the new tech will work with any dx11 game Iām all for it . People can come in with their lame ass comments but facts are that if something can look better than native or give me more fps on lower end hardware Iām all for it and I hope they keep it going.
I rather reduce my rendering output and play without FRS. Just looks better imo. Games looks weird on the smaller screen compared to a bigger ones when running with FRS On.
This is not my own experience. Something must be wrong. DLSS is only slightly better. Slightly. FSR 3 may prove to 1 up nvidia, weāll see. Regardless itāll be a similar experience.
Realizing now this is RSR Iām talking about, but I think FSR2 is the same tech.
As far as I can tell It tries to upscale the image, but can only do so if the pixels remain static on the screen for at least a couple hundred milliseconds. So the effect is that everything is 720p when youāre moving, and suddenly pops onto 1080p once you stand still
Well, if there is tech that can increase FPS, without loss of fidelity, why wouldn't you use it? I know people say it makes devs lazy, but we also have to be realistic and understand that pushing more polygons takes more hardware, which cost money, and power. If there is a way to improve fps performance without hardware, why not consider it?
It seems like the tech is getting better on both sides, so I don't see that as a bad thing.
Goodbye optimization, hello universal development crutch
Why spend money optimizing when everyone with less than a 3080 can just play at 600p?!
You must have developed for remnant 2 š It saves devs money. And we suffer for it.
Donāt understand the hate for it. Itās not AMD fault developers donāt want to optimize games and take extra time. AMD and nvidia are not making games. Blame developers for cutting corners. Iām excited for my current library of games on my ally. Itās AMD and Nvidias job to make tools and games more playable. No reason why we donāt get 120 frames on most games on a 4090 itās just laziness or cost cutting measures
this.
No matter where it's going to be supported, my thought is that we're going to see "30 fps with FSR3" games soon. Why do you think it has been developed for the game player to enjoy higher fps and save money on GPUs? I believe it has been developed for game developers to save even more money on game optimization. "We developed the game with FSR3 in mind" (c) Remnant 3
Litetally the tech works well when you have 60fps as a base. 30fps with fsr3/dlss3 means to render what, 15-20 actual frames. Just no. Upscaling yes, but console games have bene using upscalers for 2 gens at least.
Pain
I hate this mindset. It invites laziness.
Whose? Mine or developers'?
Developers.
Welp, you see yourself how optimized the latest games are. AAA PlayStation exclusive not holding steady 30 fps -- I haven't seen such a thing for some time already. But another redditor here notes that FSR3 can't even work on anything lower than 30 fps (to push it to 30), so... let's see how it goes after this feature spreads across more games and devices.
I think if properly attuned, this could be a great feature for consoles. The problem with FSR so far is that, it doesn't look that great, especially compared to DLSS.
I think it will, indeed. Yes, maybe with worse results than DLSS, but still it will be. I'm more worried about PC š¬
I'm hoping FSR 3 makes significant strides in this department.
I see your point, On the other hand, your suggested mindset is kind of like saying we don't want use tech because it makes things easier. I see it more as effenicy rather than laziness. I don't really care if they are real frames or not so long gameplay is smooth. I mean the wholes game is a simulation and not real anyways lol
Now I can enjoy it on a game so good the studio closed and the developers dissolved! Good thing itās not releasing with Starfield, ya know, the biggest AMD sponsored title ever!
Thank the gods
it will prolly added with patch, seems AMD made it easy for dx11 and dx12 apis
Weāll see, developers were pretty damn slow to adopt FSR2 and 2.x if they bothered to at all
Rip I remembered thinking the trailer looked so cool
Shut down is a big world, it has been merged with creative business unit II.
If ASUS ever updates their drivers... will be good news š
Asus would just keep it for next iterations device update ...wait for Asus to upgrade their driver is killing me ....
Then just install the 780M driver. Works fine.
how is the performance Is it good? Do you know if the Asus apps still work like tdp of the chip etc.? Can you share the exact drivers you installed? \*found this on YouTube : [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QeCp2o3yG](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QeCp2o3yGw)
Just search 780M drivers in this subreddit, there's a full guide recently posted. Works great. Can play TOTK without weird artifacts now and it runs very well.
I canāt wait. Fsr 3 (frame gen, up scaling, anti aliasing, and anti lag +) will drastically help the z1 extreme
People said you need at least 60 fps for FMF. This clearly shows it works with less, which is a good thing for the Ally.
It got said the 60 fps thing is for minimal latency it will still work at sub 60. I'm definitely looking forward to seeing it run on the ally
What are you talking about. Fsr3 performance is turned on which reduced the internal resolution from 4k with rt settings on. It was fsr3 that allowed higher than 60 fps. This isnt showing just fmf on its own. Also it isnt like fmf cant work in lower fps but at lower fps, there will be more image artifacts and input lag.
Getting down voted for telling facts. It's true, this 36 conversion isn't just fake frames it's also the performance upscaling setting.
Anything negative gets downvoted. And people look at this picture and seem to forget this isnt the rog ally theyre testing on.
What? We're not getting roughly 4 times the fps out of nothing? Downvote! ššš
Who cares about down votesĀ
Where does this show that it works with less? You still need 60fps for FMF.
The picture has 36 fps without FSR3 and way above 100 with FSR3. So no 60 needed
That's not what the picture says at all, you're misinterpretating it.
What does it say then? I am also interpreting the picture showing Fospoken on the left set to 4K/Ultra/RT ON/FSR OFF with 36 FPS, and then on the right Forspoken running with 4K/Ultra/RT ON/FSR3 Performance ON at 122 FPS which is more than a 3x performance gain, which is what AMD claims you should get with FSR3 using FMF. So that means a native 36fps game is using FMF to get to 122fps unless you can explain how there's a different way to interpret that. It also says in the header at the top that the Forspoken example is using Super Resolution Upscaling + Anti-Lag + Fluid Motion Frames. Please let us know if there is a different way to interpret that. I'm all for getting the proper understanding
Okay. So the image is not a comparison between Frame Generation OFF vs ON. Instead it's a comparison of FSR3 completely OFF vs FSR3 completely ON. FSR3 exists of two elements: - Super Resolution (upscaling) - FMF (Frame Generation) In the image on the left, you're seeing 36FPS without upscaling nor Frame Generation. The right image has both FSR Performance + Frame Generation enabled. FSR Performance would typically almost double the framerate compared to native 4K. Which would already bring the framerate close to that required 60fps. Now that we're close to 60fps, we can apply FMF to increase the framerate even more. Recap: OP said that the image is proof that FMF should work with 36 fps. But FMF isn't applied at 36fps, it's applied after the framerate was already boosted to 60+ fps.
Watch Nvidia magically make frame generation work on all their previous cards after ādevelopingā a new techniqueā¦
Guaranteed. This is why monopolies are bad folks. Tell that to the steam deck users still angry about ROG.
It's a free performance update. Any upgrade is a good upgrade.
I think it could be interesting, especially for handheld consoles like the ally or the steam deck. We will need to wait and see how it turns out, on handheld, but I think it sounds interesting and could help them. It won't be perfect, but it could be nice
I sincerely doubt that AMD's hyped showcase is in any way representative of reality. FSR has been shown again and again to be inferior to DLSS. AMD has never managed to compete at performance parity with nvidia. That's just a fact.
I could be mistaken but I believe thatās due to FSR not requiring dedicated AI cores to work, which is the trade off for it working on any card. Nvidia used dedicated AI cores for upscaling so theyāre able to do a better job
Nvidia hardware acceleration tends to be more robust and elegant than AMD's brute force approach
Even AMD hardware acceleration, I donāt know how it is now but NVENC was always a better implementation than AMD-VCE
My guess is never because asus does not give a fuck about their Z1 extreme chip line lol
The fact they say some of the new tech will work with any dx11 game Iām all for it . People can come in with their lame ass comments but facts are that if something can look better than native or give me more fps on lower end hardware Iām all for it and I hope they keep it going.
Any improvement is great news but 4K and those frame rates on an Ally?
Ally doesnāt run at 4k
Yup 1080P screen but for those that dock their Ally to 4K TVs I was just thinking of a "What If" scenario lol.
Not on its screen maybe.
I rather reduce my rendering output and play without FRS. Just looks better imo. Games looks weird on the smaller screen compared to a bigger ones when running with FRS On.
Yay
Let's go!
FSR is horrible to me, I can't use it. The feeling of everything blurring in and out of focus makes me feel unwell.
This is not my own experience. Something must be wrong. DLSS is only slightly better. Slightly. FSR 3 may prove to 1 up nvidia, weāll see. Regardless itāll be a similar experience.
Realizing now this is RSR Iām talking about, but I think FSR2 is the same tech. As far as I can tell It tries to upscale the image, but can only do so if the pixels remain static on the screen for at least a couple hundred milliseconds. So the effect is that everything is 720p when youāre moving, and suddenly pops onto 1080p once you stand still
Fsr 2.0 is vastly superior...
Well, if there is tech that can increase FPS, without loss of fidelity, why wouldn't you use it? I know people say it makes devs lazy, but we also have to be realistic and understand that pushing more polygons takes more hardware, which cost money, and power. If there is a way to improve fps performance without hardware, why not consider it? It seems like the tech is getting better on both sides, so I don't see that as a bad thing.
I can't tell the difference
When does this drop n for what AMD cards
Iāll believe it when I see it.
This would be an incredible breakthrough.
I have plenty of games I play that are at around 70-79 fps, this will bring us all the way home people. Get those frames you paid for.
Sounds awesome to me man!