Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
Are you sitting at a PC? Remember most console gamers sit 4-6 feet from their display.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Ninty files patent for DLSS 2.0 proprietary 4K technology
- Thread starter Marty-McFly
- Start date
- Hype
carlosrox
Banned
You can like both but still prioritize gameplay, it's not that hard to understand.
Not sure why people think they're making a point when they say shit like this.
Real gamers can play old games or games that don't run perfectly with the best graphics just as fine as they can play the newest, most high tech stuff.
I love high end console and PC gaming but also love playing NES and PS1 games.
Any self respecting gamer would say the same.
Last edited:
Polygonal_Sprite
Gold Member
It’s not standard upscaling it’s AI based image reconstruction which in some cases ends up with more detail than a normal native image. You could run Mario Kart 8 Deluxe at 540p native then use DLSS to reconstruct it up to 1080p and it would result in a crisper image than the current game running at native 1080p (which also has no anti aliasing) meaning all the available compute power left over from only running it at 540p native could be used to increase graphical fidelity or in other cases vastly improve performance in GPU limited games.
StateofMajora
Banned
It absolutely wouldn't be as crisp as native 1080p. More crisp is definitely not the way to describe that scenario.
It would have fewer jaggies, but be softer with sharpening artifacts and ghosting, even if it could still look good.
Mario kart 8 just needs 16x AF and some smaa 1x and it would look hugely better. This is the kind of game nintendo definitely wouldn't be running with 540p dlss ; their games look best with sharp pixels.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
If it's mobile I don't see it being DLSS.
I want a new Nintendo home console this time around.
I want a new Nintendo home console this time around.
Ol'Scratch
Member
nvm
Last edited:
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
"Ekshually", DLSS does increase detail. Ghosting is a mostly solved issue (or at least, a mostly in-progress being-solved issue) with the new versions, sharpening artifacts are rare. It can an will be (more) crisp if properly tuned. Mario Kart will benefit much more from DLSS than any form of antialiasing because it needs performance to run smoothly, even if it is one of the best optimized games on the system at the moment.
Nvidia have specifically added DLSS support to their ARM chips like Tegra recently, and even the now-old Xavier NX is a DLSS-capable chip with its 48 Tensor cores. I did some back-of-the-napkin math and it's got more or less barely enough TOPS for upscaling 1080p to 4K at 30fps.
StateofMajora
Banned
There can be more in surface detail with dlss, or it could look worse. And could occlude details like particles.
But in terms of image sharpness, you’re mistaken. Don’t confuse death stranding looking sharper with dlss as a point of reference; it’s because the default taa it uses destroys sharpness. A native 4k without taa is sharper than 4k dlss.
Mario kart 8 is a bad example gor wanting better image quality; it’s already flawless 60fps and 1080p. Your proposed 540p dlss would be inferior.
Last edited:
10101
Gold Member
I had a read through the patent last night, interesting stuff.
Reading this lil snippet and other references to tensor cores in the patent suggests that they “may” well want to use this with tech other than NVIDIA. Tensor cores are obviously are great fit though so probably unlikely they will change vendors, but looks like they are at least trying to cover all bases and ensure this algorithm can be used elsewhere if they see fit.
I’m looking forward to seeing whatever implementation they decide to use
Buggy Loop
Member
What? It’s the opposite, mobile has a lot to gain in power efficiency if AI upscaling saves a ton of brute force required for resolution
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
I don't see DLSS used as in they will go with a alternative.
Ryu Kaiba
Member
It never even was about "gAmEplAy OvEr GrAPhIcz" Nintendo just prioritized affordability. Fools act like Nintendo is out there campaigning 480p as better than 4k or something. If they have a partner that's granting them the tech to have substantially better visuals at a low price what's in your head that makes you think "tHeY'RE goNNa rEJecT ThAt tHeY pReFer lOw reZ"
Hobbygaming
has been asked to post in 'Grounded' mode.
supernova8
Banned
From a BCP perspective, they are going to want their own solution so that they're not tied to NVIDIA, because if they go with DLSS as their only option NVIDIA could choose to jack up prices for the next product and be like "hey if you want DLSS to make your games run at 4K, pay for it bitch".
Could also be that NVIDIA would want "backstage" access to the game code for Nintendo IP to make it all work and Nintendo doesn't like that (but I have no idea how DLSS works as an implementation so don't want to bite off more than I can chew with that line of speculation).
Last edited:
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
I think it's more likely to be that Nintendo wants direct access to the tech so they can modify it at will to suit their needs. I.e. if adapting DLSS for use with the Switch, or specific Switch games, requires significant changes, Nintendo doesn't want to 'wait on' Nvidia, doesn't want to rely on a 3rd party for a fundamental tech component of their product.
Obviously they also want control of it for the eventual end of the partnership with Nvidia, but I think the 'direct access to tech' thing is a more likely immediate reason.
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
Nintendo can basically launch a 2 anytime they want, the tech they need is effectively off-the-shelf at the moment. The Xavier NX was available in late 2019, so a theoretical Tegra chip built on that would be a good fit for Nintendo's hardware strategy, and wouldn't strain Nvidia. And it's at least triple the raw hardware power of the Tegra X1 in the Switch, and it has Tensor cores on top of that for that new ARM-based DLSS branch Nvidia rolled out.
So it's not hardware that we're waiting on, it's Nintendo figuring out when the "right time" to release a successor is.
GymWolf
Member
Don't you you think that they are gonna wait 1-2 years to see if the oled\current model can still sell gangbuster?!
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
That's what I meant by "waiting for the right time". If they see that OLED is tanking thanks to Valve rolling out an actually capable handheld with a decent price and "setting the bar" for hardware expectations, they might accelerate the rollout of the successor. And if OLED still sells well, we might not see a successor for another year at least.
ZywyPL
Banned
I think Switch and Deck target a completely different audience, meaning they can co-exist not interfering each others sales. But at some point the market will get saturated with Switch, and Nintendo will have to come up with a successor, and the question is - is higher resolution what will push current Switch owners to get a new hardware? Let's be honest, the only people who want a Switch Pro/4K are the people who aren't interested in Switch at all and Nintendo's library, while those who do already have one for years, and don't care about games being 720p. I think Switch made Nintendo kind of stuck in the corner, the those concept is too successful, so they can either bet on something completely new that might fail hard like WiiU did, or just keep evolving Switch with specs upgrades, which I honestly don't think their audience cares about, especially when the games will be the same.
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
Higher resolution is not the point of DLSS.
Well okay, no, I suppose it is, but it wouldn't be here. Because resolution is just one end of the rope. Pull the other way, and you have better performance for the same resolution. Or better detail at same resolution and performance. Or better battery life at same resolution, detail, and performance. It's a weird 4-ended rope.
ZywyPL
Banned
But again - do Nintendo's games really need it? Does their audience needs it, cares about it? I think all those 6yo kids who play Pokemon, Mario etc. and their parents couldn't care less, the older audience who's into Zelda and Metroid, sure, would use a bit of more complex visuals, but the majority of their market, not at all, if anything, they'd prefer the Switch to be as cheap as possible.
MagnesG
Banned
Are you implying that using DLSS tech could mean a big hike on price despite what it can offers?
Mister Wolf
Member
Would a Switch using Xavier NX be superior than what's in the Steam Deck not counting the access to DLSS?
Sean Mirrsen
Banned
No, most certainly, no. The specs for the Jetson XNX are a bit confusing in regards to raw performance (because as-is it's more of an automotive AI unit, unlike a theoretical Tegra SoC built on it), but its CPU tops out at 1.9GHz in dual-core mode (1.4 in quad- or six-core), and the GPU can push maybe one TFLOP of performance compared to like 1.6 in the Deck. It's still about three times the power of the Switch though, before DLSS.
A better match for the Deck's 'Van Gogh' APU would be something like the Nvidia Orin SoC, but very little definite specs are known of it, and what is known will almost definitely not be what goes into a hypothetical Switch 2, as it would be hella expensive and needs like 25W to run.
Similar threads
- Locked