By Plasma Go To Post864p for Alan Wake on a £700 machine lol.
that's the internal resolution.
the real question is how pssr makes it look on your display.
Aren't these from a file not the actual machine itself?
people making definitive judgements based on snippets of 5 second video footage for each game...
Quality analysis.
people making definitive judgements based on snippets of 5 second video footage for each game...
Quality analysis.
By bud Go To Postthat's the internal resolution.Sure but even with PSSR shouldn't the extra graphical power allow them to push the base resolution to more than the amateur PS5?
the real question is how pssr makes it look on your display.
By Dazenheimer Go To PostAren't these from a file not the actual machine itself?
people making definitive judgements based on snippets of 5 second video footage for each game…
The DF grift continues.
They've been given a 65GB video of PS5 Pro footage. They are not new to this.
By Laboured Go To PostThey've been given a 65GB video of PS5 Pro footage. They are not new to this.They received the 4K 60 version of the Cerny Sermon, the snippets of the games shown (outside of Ratchet) were too short to be worthy of conclusive analysis.
By Dazenheimer Go To PostThey received the 4K 60 version of the Cerny Sermon, the snippets of the games shown (outside of Ratchet) were too short to be worthy of conclusive analysis.
Well, you're wrong - it is long enough. You would only need 1 second of footage to draw these conclusions.
DLSS 4K Performance is 1080p internal and because it's a 4X upscale it usually provides good results visually with the least compromises.
Edit: If they were targeting a 1440p display this would seem to be equivalent to DLSS Balanced settings, maybe lower internal, something between 2K Performance and Balanced for this PSSR method.
But for 4K output some of these internal resolutions are nearing Ultra Performance which is v noticeable on DLSS
Edit: If they were targeting a 1440p display this would seem to be equivalent to DLSS Balanced settings, maybe lower internal, something between 2K Performance and Balanced for this PSSR method.
But for 4K output some of these internal resolutions are nearing Ultra Performance which is v noticeable on DLSS
By Laboured Go To PostFrom DFI’m out.
By Laboured Go To PostFrom DF:Dragon's Dogma at 60 sounds really nice!
I doubt I'm gonna play it again though unless they release an expansion or something
By Plasma Go To PostSure but even with PSSR shouldn't the extra graphical power allow them to push the base resolution to more than the amateur PS5?But isn’t that redundant? I dunno tech and someone can explain to me if I am wrong but isn’t the point of these ai scalers to get the internal res as low as possible where it still looks clear on the monitor/tv and use the horsepower elsewhere?
By jjasper Go To PostBut isn’t that redundant? I dunno tech and someone can explain to me if I am wrong but Isn’t the point of these ai scalers to get the internal res as low as possible where it still looks clear on the monitor/tv and use the horsepower elsewhere?You are correct. It's not being used by developers to increase framerates, but to add more and/or better effects while maintaining the same image quality and framerate.
e: however, the higher the base framerate, the better image quality these upscalers give, simply because they operate on a temporal basis and more frames in a shorter time allows for better stability and fewer artifacts.
By jjasper Go To PostBut isn’t that redundant? I dunno tech and someone can explain to me if I am wrong but isn’t the point of these ai scalers to get the internal res as low as possible where it still looks clear on the monitor/tv and use the horsepower elsewhere?what Jazzy said.
The internal resolution becomes moot if you are using an AI upscaler - something that is easier to test with more definitive results when you have the hardware to hand.
By inky Go To PostDLSS 4K Performance is 1080p internal and because it's a 4X upscale it usually provides good results visually with the least compromises.
If they are targeting a 1440p output this seem to be equivalent to DLSS Balanced settings, maybe lower internal, something between 2K Perf and Balanced for this PSSR method.
For 4K output some of these internal resolutions are nearing Ultra Performance which is v noticeable on DLSS
1440p output is Quality setting for 4K. Balance is 2227x1253p. I'd have expected the Pro to be push more Performance / Balance type resolutions for the most part.
By Dazenheimer Go To Postwhat Jazzy said.I wouldn't go quite that far. Too low of an internal resolution and the results are going to look bad; not enough information to upscale from. It is extremely useful to know the internal resolution and the scaling factor (performance/balanced/quality/etc. are shorthand for the scaling factor).
The internal resolution becomes moot if you are using an AI upscaler - something that is easier to test with more definitive results when you have the hardware to hand.
e: as a potentially relevant example, a Switch 2 using DLSS to upscale a 480p internal resolution to 4k is going to look nasty
By Laboured Go To Post1440p output is Quality setting for 4K. Balance is 2227x1253p. I'd have expected the Pro to be push more Performance / Balance type resolutions for the most part.Yeah, I meant DLSS Balanced for a 1440p target resolution, not 4K (I know consoles go for 4K, but I was just talking DLSS equivalents from someone on a 1440p display, I should've made that clearer).
I did already edit the post above to note that for 4K, these internal targets are really closer to Ultra Performance.
Yeah you need enough internal resolution to upscale from. If it’s too low, too many visual artefacts are introduced from the upscaler having to “guess” at what its reconstructing.
Generally with DLSS, 1440p internal to 4K output presents a near native image with much better AA. 1080p internal to 4K output shows noticeable artefacts in many scenarios, and overall looks a lot softer.
Going lower, I.e. 720p to 4K, it’s a visual mess.
Generally with DLSS, 1440p internal to 4K output presents a near native image with much better AA. 1080p internal to 4K output shows noticeable artefacts in many scenarios, and overall looks a lot softer.
Going lower, I.e. 720p to 4K, it’s a visual mess.
By Jazzy Jambalaya Go To PostI wouldn't go quite that far. Too low of an internal resolution and the results are going to look bad; not enough information to upscale from. It is extremely useful to know the internal resolution and the scaling factor (performance/balanced/quality/etc. are shorthand for the scaling factor).Of course, there is reasonable limits but that goes without saying. Even DF themselves aren't sure what the AW2 res is for definite, which is why I find there takes to be speculative at best.
e: as a potentially relevant example, a Switch 2 using DLSS to upscale a 480p internal resolution to 4k is going to look nasty
By Dazenheimer Go To PostThe internal resolution becomes moot if you are using an AI upscaler .
Didn't realize pisser was that good. 💀
Compared to Daz, DF really are overrated and not as knowledgeable as you they portray.
By s y brev Go To PostNot the dlss worshippers being mad at upscaling 😆How are people still console fanboys after a certain age haha
By FootbalIFan Go To PostHow are people still console fanboys after a certain age hahaI like to believe we all do ironically on this website.
The fanboy wars on Twitter make 2007 Gamefaqs message boards look positively civil in comparison.
Devs will push for performance/ultra performance equivalent for PS5 Pro at an average.
There's us, who will push for as much fidelity as we can, and there's most devs, that from what we've seen doesnt really give a shit about a few artifacts/dithering that you get from upscaling as long as the framerate is as high as they can get.
Alan Wake 2 ran on 842p on performance mode for PS5/XSX. I guess if things kept as it is, they just think the image quality is good enough to keep it at that resolution while amping up RT and other stuff.
There's us, who will push for as much fidelity as we can, and there's most devs, that from what we've seen doesnt really give a shit about a few artifacts/dithering that you get from upscaling as long as the framerate is as high as they can get.
Alan Wake 2 ran on 842p on performance mode for PS5/XSX. I guess if things kept as it is, they just think the image quality is good enough to keep it at that resolution while amping up RT and other stuff.
By Dazenheimer Go To PostAren't these from a file not the actual machine itself?
people making definitive judgements based on snippets of 5 second video footage for each game…
The DF grift continues.
By Dazenheimer Go To Postwhat Jazzy said.
The internal resolution becomes moot if you are using an AI upscaler - something that is easier to test with more definitive results when you have the hardware to hand.
help
I agree with “Image quality matters more than resolution”
A native 4K with lower graphical fidelity and standard TAA will look worse overall than good upscaling from say, 1440p with increased graphical fidelity.
All this hinges on how well PiSSR reconstructs from lower resolutions.
A native 4K with lower graphical fidelity and standard TAA will look worse overall than good upscaling from say, 1440p with increased graphical fidelity.
All this hinges on how well PiSSR reconstructs from lower resolutions.
Yeah whatever jiggery pokery they were using to make it look good obviously worked. Think the only complaint people had was shadows cast by the trees or something, can't say I ever noticed it though.
I wonder if any devs will try to add a 80-90fps mode on the Professional, much like some have started adding the 40fps option. Around 90fps is where games start feeling truly amazing on OLED, both in terms of smoothness / motion clarity and responsiveness.
Wish I could experience them again with fresh eyes.
By C4-621 Go To PostTo my untrained pleb eyes Alan Wake 2 was already mindblowingly gorgeous lolAlan Wake 2 and Cyberpunk with path tracing and HDR on OLED have been an almost religious experience for me.
Wish I could experience them again with fresh eyes.
Worst case scenario is devs just use PSSR on 60fps modes and call it a day, with PSSR being underwhelming. But hopefully that's not the case..
By Dark PhaZe Go To PostWorst case scenario is devs just use PSSR on 60fps modes and call it a day, with PSSR being underwhelming. But hopefully that's not the case..No, worst case is devs using it to hit 30 fps and we get a whole bunch of ghosting, shimmering, and overly soft image as a result.
By Crusher Go To PostPath tracing mega overrated.What are we doing in this thread?! 💀
By Jazzy Jambalaya Go To PostNo, worst case is devs using it to hit 30 fps and we get a whole bunch of ghosting, shimmering, and overly soft image as a result.The 3/4 of people use performance stat needs to be posted in every developers office
By Laboured Go To PostActually good things are bad.Isn't this what lawyering is all about?
Based on our testing, Alan Wake 2 runs at 864p internal resolution on PlayStation 5 Pro in the 60fps clip, while the equivalent base PS5 mode operates at 847p. Firstly, we can safely assume that in transitioning from FSR 2 upscaling to PSSR, we will see a substantial quality upgrade. However, perhaps more important is to consider what Remedy will be doing with the Pro's extra resources in increasing quality elsewhere because obviously, the extra GPU horsepower in the Big Three is going to be used for features that Remedy prefers over simply increasing resolution. This is basic commonsense.
Shocking that they have to say this out loud.
By Willkiller Go To PostWhat are we doing in this thread?! 💀People without eyes being allowed to post
The Steam Deck made me confident about dropping Windows for gaming on my PC. I lose some things, but it's nice not to have the OS shove ads in my face all the time.
By Jazzy Jambalaya Go To PostThe Steam Deck made me confident about dropping Windows for gaming on my PC. I lose some things, but it's nice not to have the OS shove ads in my face all the time.I'm still furious that I had to download network drivers on another computer to complete the Windows setup for my nephew's PC build a year or two ago.
I'm not even sure he would've been able to figure it out on his own. The only reason I knew what to do is because this bullshit has been around for decades.