DLSS support for IL-2?

[RossMarBow]

nVidya owners gonna be taking a dosage of cope when they realise its time to upgrade again but they never used their rtx tensor physx whatever marketing nonsense nVidia invents for the next gen
FSR is the future because everyone can run it.

[BlitzPig_EL]

At the current pricing structure my 2070 Super is going to be in my machine for a very long time.  I'm not planning any upgrading in the foreseeable future. 

[[F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly]

4 hours ago, brahguevara said:

nVidya owners gonna be taking a dosage of cope when they realise its time to upgrade again but they never used their rtx tensor physx whatever marketing nonsense nVidia invents for the next gen
FSR is the future because everyone can run it.

 

I do use it, I like it when it's there for me to use. DLSS is great and imo still better then any AMD FSR implementation, and being able to play raytraced games fluently is great.

 

But if the devs had to choose between FSR and DLSS, I'd rather they'd go with FSR since it's available to everyone.

Edited May 14, 2022 by [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly

[Ribbon]

6 hours ago, [F.Circus]MoerasGrizzly said:

 

I do use it, I like it when it's there for me to use. DLSS is great and imo still better then any AMD FSR implementation, and being able to play raytraced games fluently is great.

 

But if the devs had to choose between FSR and DLSS, I'd rather they'd go with FSR since it's available to everyone.

Same here, dlss and ray tracing did sweeten up Cyberpunk for me to it's full glory....and it did a huge difference, graphics and performance wise.

But as you said whatever works for everybody should be choosed!

[Asgar]

5 hours ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

But as you said whatever works for everybody should be choosed!

Whatever works best should be chosen. Especially when more than 80% of the community are running Nvidia GPUs (no implying DLSS is better, just saying that if better it should be chosen since a huge part of the players are able to use it)

Edited May 15, 2022 by Asgar

[Cravis]

 

1 hour ago, Asgar said:

Especially when more than 80% of the community are running Nvidia GPUs

 

But just a Nvidia GPU is not enough, it needs to be 2000 or 3000 series Nvidia GPU. A lot of people still run 1000 series GPU and they won't be able to use DLSS either.

And what happens a few years down the line when Intel has competitive GPUs? 

 

That said when you implement DLSS implementing FSR2.0 is fast and easy. AMD estimates FSR2.0 can implemented in a render pipeline set up for DLSS in about 3 days of work. For future titles there is really no reason at all why it should feature DLSS but not FSR2.0 unless Nvidia as usual pays the devs to hurt consumer and the competitor.

 

6 hours ago, =VARP=Ribbon said:

Cyberpunk

 

CDPR still plans to release their story DLC next year and supposedly a sizable chunk of people still work on fixes and updates so I hope someone finds the time to get FSR2.0 in there. FSR1.0 was disappointing in Cyberpunk.

[ICDP]

1 hour ago, Asgar said:

Whatever works best should be chosen. Especially when more than 80% of the community are running Nvidia GPUs (no implying DLSS is better, just saying that if better it should be chosen since a huge part of the players are able to use it)

 

You keep confusing total percentage of Nvidia market share with total number of RTX 2xx0 and 3xx0 owners.  Maybe 25% of PC gamers will have a GPU that can utilise DLSS while closer to all of them can use FSR 2.0 as it is open source.

 

A significant majority of IL2 community will be using older GPUs and would benefit greatly from an open source solution.  DLSS is not it, no matter how many times you try to convince yourself that it is.

Edited May 15, 2022 by ICDP

[Asgar]

6 minutes ago, ICDP said:

 

You keep confusing total percentage of Nvidia market share with total number of RTX 2xx0 and 3xx0 owners.  Maybe 25% of PC gamers will have a GPU that can utilise DLSS while closer to all of them can use FSR 2.0 as it is open source.

 

A significant majority of IL2 community will be using older GPUs and would benefit greatly from an open source solution.  DLSS is not it, no matter how many times you try to convince yourself that it is.

I‘m not confusing anything. People who uses Nvidia already are more likely to buy another Nvidia card rather than switching to AMD since they offer no benefit over Nvidia cards. A good percentage of people use old cards yes. But they’re more likely to get an RTX card than anything else. Plus the people who need upscaling most, VR players are pretty much guaranteed to have a decent card, e.g. RTX2000 series or better

[ICDP]

 

You are implying that 80% of the community had Nvidia GPU and are able to use DLSS.  I must hand it to you on a vague half truth preceding a statement that is a misrepresentation of that half truth.  Are you a politician by chance?

5 hours ago, Asgar said:

Whatever works best should be chosen. Especially when more than 80% of the community are running Nvidia GPUs (no implying DLSS is better, just saying that if better it should be chosen since a huge part of the players are able to use it)

 

Your statement is not open to any other interpretation.  You are incorrectly implying that 80% of the current IL2 community ARE able to use DLSS right now.  The majority of buyers of this sim DO NOT run 2xx0 or 3xx0 GPUs and an even smaller number run VR.

 

Using your own logic.  Steam Survey indicates ~25% of GPU owners have 2xx0 or 3xx0 GPUs.  So three quarters of PC gamers do not have access to DLSS.

 

Lets look at your claims and do the math.

80% of IL2 community are running Nvidia GPUs.

Steam Survey indicates 75% of Nvidia GPUs are unable to use DLSS

 

Of the total 100% of IL2 community

20% are not on Nvidia (your claim)

Of the 80% who use Nvidia, three quarters cannot utilise DLSS.  Three quarters of 80 = 60

 

20 + 60 = 80%

 

So 80% of the community are actually unable to utilise DLSS in any way shape or fashion.  If we go by your own logic then DLSS is a not worth the effort.

 

I know from experience this is a small team working very hard to keep this sim relevant for ALL of their customer.  Devoting time to implement a proprietary system that only a minority can utilise is not a good use of that resource.

Edited May 15, 2022 by ICDP

[cellinsky]

On 5/12/2022 at 6:03 PM, So_ein_Feuerball said:

Which sims actually feature DLSS? And FSR 2.0 is only implemented in a single game that's most definitely not a sim ?

 

I'm not counterarguing  your upscaling argument, I'm just saying that unless we actually see the result,

it's a bit premature to dismiss the technology outright.

Assetto Corsa Competitione. If its considered a sim, is up to you

Edited May 15, 2022 by cellinsky

[Cravis]

ACC is an unreal engine game as such it has easy access to a temporal scaler.

I would very much consider it a simulation... much more so than GT or Forza.

 

Honestly I doubt we will see the likes of DLSS or FSR in IL2. The reality is that the engine is pretty old and probably needs a lot of work to get a temporal scaler in it. Likewise because it is pretty old the hardware requirements are rather mild and modern GPUs already handle the game with ease at 4k.

The new 4000 series Nvidia GPU and 7000 series AMD GPUs are rumoured to double their computing power to 100 tflop. Nvidia aims October for release while AMD probably needs until November.

 

The first flight simulator to add a temporal scaler will be Microsoft Flight Simulator. The update for Dx12 and Nv DLSS2.+ and AMD FSR2.0 is scheduled for July 2022.

 

As for combat sims I would expect Eagle Dynamics with DCS world to be faster than 1C, DCS also has higher requirements giving temporal scaler more use.

[Voyager]

I can say from trying it on Forza Horizons 5, that DLSS does impact distance detail, even at the highest settings. It will impact spotting full stop.

 

However what does provide a big lift, without impacting spotting is foveated rendering. Having the center of the image rendering at native, and then progressively increasing the FSR level toward the edges does significantly reduce render times for minimal quality and spotting impact. And it's fine in both NIC and FSR 1.0

 

There will be some work to get it all working well, but if the devs are going to pursue an image scaling solution, that seems to be the one most compatible with the requirements of visual flight rules flight simulation.