As you already know from our reviews, these cards do not offer great value right now.
But the question or even just blanket statement we keep seeing pop up relates to DLSS.
And of course, the AI processing element of DLSS is only possible thanks to Turing’s tensor cores.
The differences in quality range anywhere from very hard to spot, to quite noticeable on a 4K display.
Of course, DLSS vs 4K TAA is the stock standard comparison Nvidia suggests.
It’s especially bad on the character’s hair and grass.
I’m not the biggest fan of TAA in most games, but it is possible to get right.
But in this particular game, TAA… well it sucks, to be honest.
After all, we already have quality tweaks for a whole range of other effects.
But I don’t think the FFXV demo is great for judging that exact quality reduction for most games.
There is one very nice thing to highlight: 4K DLSS is far superior to a native 1440p presentation.
As you might recall, DLSS is upscaling from 1440p to try and imitate 4K.
Even applying a sharpening filter using ReShade to try and…
The other demo we can currently test DLSS in is Epic’s Infiltrator.
However native 4K is that bit sharper, so I wouldn’t call the two images completely comparable.
This is perhaps the most interesting comparison we’ll see.
And here’s the fun part.
Closing Remarks
There are a few interesting takeaways here from this early look at DLSS.
But let’s first start with the limitations.
So what we’re seeing here could be better DLSS image quality than in a real game output.
It’s also a pretty small sample size.
And while Infiltrator isn’t as limited in that regard, it’s not an actual game.
I’d have loved to pit DLSS up against better anti-aliasing techniques but it just wasn’t possible.
That is, if real-world in-game implementations of DLSS are similar to what we saw in Infiltrator.
One less reason to upgrade to an RTX graphics card before we take a real look at ray tracing.
