Also in the article (and in fact, core to the point being made):
There are a couple of catches, though. For one, it only works on Nvidia GeForce RTX 4000-series GPUs, such as the GeForce RTX 4070. Secondly, using it requires a game to support it, or for a modder to unofficially add support to a game.
What’s more, while Nvidia’s DLSS tech is a closed eco system that only runs on Nvidia RTX GPUs, AMD has made FSR 3 open source, a strategy that AMD thinks Nvidia will have to emulate at some point.
FSR running on hardware from any manufacturer is a huge boon. DLSS is impressive, but I’m not about to lock myself into a manufacturer ecosystem, and especially not one like nvidia.
They’re just not wasting resources working on it because it’s not remotely comparable to DLSS. The quality isn’t comparable and the resource use isn’t comparable (because the entire point of DLSS is that Nvidia added separate hardware to do a far better, far more efficient job at it). Why would they go back and add something that’s just doing a worse job copying their tech?
No, they could not. AMD cards don’t have any of the hardware to execute the same or similar operations. Executing the same code without tensor cores to accelerate them would tank performance, which is the entire reason you get less performance gain for far worse image quality with FSR in the first place.
The literal only thing AMD’s hardware is competitive at is raw traditional raster performance, because Nvidia has better designs that leverage hardware features to accelerate portions of the ray tracing and upscaling workloads much more efficiently.
AMD is trying to copy hardware features with software, and it’s not comparable.
Also in the article (and in fact, core to the point being made):
FSR running on hardware from any manufacturer is a huge boon. DLSS is impressive, but I’m not about to lock myself into a manufacturer ecosystem, and especially not one like nvidia.
FSR has always been open source
Nvidia just refuses to use it
It’s not like they’re blocking their cards from running it.
They’re not replacing DLSS with it because it’s a huge downgrade.
Fsr 1 Nvidia would have to make work
FSR 2 AMD made work but Nvidia would have to allow it
FSR 3 Nvidia no longer has a choice
Nvidia doesn’t care.
They’re just not wasting resources working on it because it’s not remotely comparable to DLSS. The quality isn’t comparable and the resource use isn’t comparable (because the entire point of DLSS is that Nvidia added separate hardware to do a far better, far more efficient job at it). Why would they go back and add something that’s just doing a worse job copying their tech?
Since it is open source they could push their optimizations upstream and having both companies working on a uniform solution is better for everyone
(I guess not better for Nvidia’s monopoly since they have worse cards)
No, they could not. AMD cards don’t have any of the hardware to execute the same or similar operations. Executing the same code without tensor cores to accelerate them would tank performance, which is the entire reason you get less performance gain for far worse image quality with FSR in the first place.
The literal only thing AMD’s hardware is competitive at is raw traditional raster performance, because Nvidia has better designs that leverage hardware features to accelerate portions of the ray tracing and upscaling workloads much more efficiently.
AMD is trying to copy hardware features with software, and it’s not comparable.