Nvidia Ultra Performance DLSS - Is 8K Gaming Viable on the Most Demanding Games? 

4K is normalized gotta have something new to try and sell you

Yeah its infuriating

@@noahdejesus5601 actually in regards to gaming and adopting tv screens it hasn't yet.

@@noahdejesus5601 normalized? not really, unless i am a caveman for using a 1080p @ 144 hz monitor. i see nothing wrong with it, and 1440p is still viable.

its the world of tech

Physics & interactive world are CPU driven, not GPU.

@@codethis2875 It really depends on kind of physics we are talking about, GPU is much better at handling particle based physics and physics simulators written to operate on GPU's usually operate more than 10x faster than CPU verions. Particle based physics include stuff like cloth, liquid, soft body physics and similar stuff. Basically things that change shape. Interactive environments means no static lightning, that means we need to focus on dynamic lightning calculations such as ray tracing.

@@Navhkrin I think one way we could start this off, is by using teardowns voxel physics in minecraft, look at the video on minecraft with voxel physics, if we could do that in real time, it could be a start. For example, let's say you hit a dirt block with your pickaxe, small voxel cubes will scatter about, I don't know if this already exists though. EDIT: Search minecraft with realistic voxel destruction.

Good thing, because we're not getting 8K. We're getting 1440p or 2160p or whatever, upscaled to 8K. Which means it's not 8K, it's whatever lower resolution it started at. While upscaling techniques have their place, I'm sick of all these lies about resolution. Tell me the native resolution or don't speak.

Absolutely this 👍🏻 8k LOL..yeah it's a joke and shouldent even be worth talking about! But annyway, still extremely interesting, to see how out of this world Good nViidas tech are! Love DLSS 2 in Control.nVidia making magic once again 💪🏽

Absolutely...the clarity and power of 8k over 4k is best experienced on a device that cant go beyond 480p

Haha! I nearly typed the exact same thing until I read your comment.

Ditto 😳😆

Shit..... You too?

Where's the cam?! 😨

Maximum Resolution

I thought he burped.

Maximum kays

*D U M M Y T H I C C*

I was watching this lying on my bed and now my pillow is wet.

extremely underrated comment (as of now)

and then have the phone on mute for 12 years

@@teekanne15 Except for the one business meeting where you accidentally touched the volume buttons

Exactly! And even at the “decent” fps , in some games you have to compromise with settings

"High fps"

Totally agree with you and others on that score. We JUST got the hardware on a consumer level to run 4K at higher frame rate on average like, yesterday and 5 minutes later DF is talking about 8K. I'm like "dude, can we just get off it and enjoy what we have now FFS?" Besides, with so many great developments in current gen gaming, fall releases and the early next gen releases, why not continue to focus on that for a bit before the onslaught of AMD coverage comes in and then the 3080/3070/3060 coverage leads us right back to...."sigh" more 4K/8K coverage.

libatako Yes exactly. I wouldn’t even say 4k gaming is perfect yet. We just finally achieved a reasonable competitive 4k gaming experience.

People are happy so chill man. We just like interesting videos from DF

Imagine how many mines could be on screen.

But are the mine explosions Raytraced?

@@dayko. dont forget ot was also optimised for 4k on a jaguar cpu

You can run most current-gen games at 8k/30 (console fps) and previous-gen games at 8k/60 native on a 3090 even without DLSS

AI Upscaling works, maybe it's not ideal in all cases, but given the choice you're almost always better off using a higher output resolution. The big problem is we need 8K120hz displays to really complete the package.

They aren't pushing 8k. It's just a tech demo. "Hey look what we can do and eventually you can too"

Especially when you consider the non linear increases in pixel counts... it's just stupid

With AI Upscaling you only need a 1440p source to take advantage of an 8K display. Once they have competent 4K to 8K upscaling for movies people are going to eat it up. The weird thing is that Nvidia is the first to really do high quality AI Upscaling when the TV makers have been advertising it for years already.

@@budthecyborg4575 the whole point of this video was to show that 1440p to 8K (ultra performance DLSS) was just too much for the AI upscaling, no? Maybe 4k to 8k is better.

Yep, agreed. HDR and other effects should absolutely be standard before 8k is.

I'm not sure about the FHD part with DLSS in Ultra Performance mode. It _is_ surprising how well the AI reconstructs data from such a low input res, but I would never use it and always prefer 1080p native - you're already at a low res and then further introducing artifacts, while you could run 1080p easily natively with a non-expensive and surely needed upgrade? But I would also not like to use a FHD monitor anymore, since I got used to 1440p.

Nowt wrong with 1080p, fine resolution. :)

Except now you can run those games at 720p and they'll still look as good. And voila, fps boost 👍

@@jimbo1531 yep 720P 60 FPS still looks pretty good.

I think the 2060 Super was picked because it's close in specs to the PlayStation 5 (a good point for direct comparison) and because it has more VRAM. I too hope the 2060 is used more often, as I could see it easily outperforming the Xbox Series X with help from DLSS.

@@bearpuns5910 True. I think the 2060 is a great comparison for the Xbox Series S without DLSS, especially in terms of VRAM but you are right with DLSS it should outperform a Xbox Series X especially with Raytracing turned on.

@@bearpuns5910 What's the point of comparing a PC gpu to a console? do you want them to test HD 6700 from 7 years ago because it is the same design PS4 uses? it makes no sense, it isn't even the same architecture.

@@codethis2875 It makes some sense when that GPU is still supported through drivers, works well with current APIs, and generally has a fair shot. PC GPUs have a shorter shelf life than console GPUs, as the shift to new APIs, lower VRAM, and loss of driver support from the manufacturer can make 2013 (or earlier) graphics cards suffer in newer games (see virtually any DX-12 or Vulkan game). So yes, I think for the first half of this console generation, the 2060 Super is comparable.

@@bearpuns5910 The fk are you talking about? both console use RDNA 2 which we have no information about. new APIs? PS doesn't use them. they have their own development software stack with low level access to every component. You can't compare PC to consoles. there are two different things.

There are actually ais very similar to dlss that can do the enhance cliche pretty well 2 minute papers has a few videos showing them.

Ehh i would say 720p is minimal for dlss less than is just blurry mess i really hope PS5/XSX can implement Dlss so we can finally get 4k/60 ray tracing

@@ForceInEvHorizon they can't just implement it as it needs tensor cores

@@samsunghandy this was 8 months ago and now I'm just waiting for both Sony and Xbox release their first game using fsr 2.0

It really caught me off guard, but he's not wrong.

It's the technical term tbh.

OH BABY I LOVE EM THICCCC

That's official terminology.

@@HueyTheDoctor "Richard, I'm trying to install a new GPU to my Test Bench, but it's Dummy Thicc and it can't fit in" -Alex Battaglia, probably.

Yep. VR is dead. The most success VR machine was PS VR and that was more of a nice Experiment than a full VR experience (really really blurry and controllers are just ok). So far no new console is trying to push VR and a revolution with the current wave of VR tech didn’t happen so things look incredibly bleak for VR. I guess it will go the way of motion controls

@@bingobongo1615 wrong, VR time is just not come yet. It's a different way of playing and can not be emulated on a flat screen. But for now yes, VR is dead. Let's wait another 5 years

vr is too much of a pain. Why make videos of how VR performs when .0001% of people have even tried it and even less own a headset? Nobody would watch.

VR has been dead for several years now. Welcome back from underneath the rock you've been living under.

Wait until you can put a i9/3090 into your glasses, then it will be still relevant.

More like 188 inch tv's. Even on a 100 inch tv you would have to sit mere inches away to even see the difference

This comment. I mean why do people need 8k anyway at current tv sizes?

30k $

@@noahflare6825 exactly. 8K is a complete waste of GPU power, and the different from 4K will be miniscule, if at all visible. It's just a gimmick to make something seem better than it actually is.

@@asavage3907 yes, tv manufacturers are pushing it so they can keep on selling tvs at premium prices. I agree it is all a waste of gpu power for something that does not bring much over 4k. It is all marketing at this point, because a lot of people have more money than sense.

Why 1440p 60fps?

I wouldn’t settle for less 4K at 60fps if I was going to spend that much on a gaming card, otherwise what real advantage does it give you over a 5700XT or similar?

@@blair5475 with RT on 1440p is the nice sweet spot for a good FPS, at least for my Pc build.

I want a remake so bad

I can't imagine what the menus look like at 8k. Could you even hit the buttons?

There is also a Freedom fighters music in the background

Upgrade to 1440p at least

"perfectly fine with my 1080 monitor" Only because you're too stubborn to think about upgrading, the same as someone using a horse and cart long after cars became ubiquitous.

@@budthecyborg4575 well I'd be ok with upgrading I just don't have the money. 1440 would be a good middle ground. 4k is just hard to run unless you have a monster pc rig.

@@romxxii That's not a bad idea. I might just have to do that.

@@UwUPancake One of the most important things to happen in the next few years will be the proliferation of 4K120hz TVs and monitors. LG is doing a decent job of adding 4K120hz to their OLED line, but we really need the Chinese LCD makers to adopt 4K120 as a near universal standard. Then hopefully if the TV market makes 4K120 standard we should see that spill over into the Monitor market.

1080p is the most common and widely used gaming resolution, so you are fine. Very few gamers use 4K, it is why Xbox Series S exists.

1440p 144hz is all we need

@@dis6wood My laptop has 1080p, but 240hz

Best liars I must say

8k is for sub 50cm viewdistance or +5m display

That reads to me like you're implicitly saying the cause is still the scaling factor, though indirectly through DLSS's temporal resampling technique. Given how on general CPUs the memory maps from GPUs via an IO like call in the code - I'm injecting NVidia GPU memory models based on fuzzy C++ knowledge of like 2-3 years ago - I wouldn't be surprised if the inferior temporal resampling and smaller neural network is a hardware limitation due to the massive number of CUDA cores and how trying to map hundreds of thousands of threads and their memory stacks would directly limit the overall output of the GPU. You would probably have to use an NvLink based CPU architecture like POWER to not run into these issues. -- would be interested to do some more research

@@georganatoly6646 What i meant (and i presume alex meant) is that 9x is not a power of 2 and thus results in poor upscaling. Using a smaller net will improve performance for sure as you can easily parallelize with the huge amount of pixels. Maybe they just don't rely on 9 frames to reconstruct the image but only four like the performance mode and the AI tries to hallucinate new samples, because the more past frames you use the slower the DLSS pass is

I have no idea what you just said but it sounded good

@@Chocapic_13 lol I got that the concern was 9 is not divisible by 2. My point was DLSS 2.1 might be intentionally hindering itself disproportionately to DLSS 2.0 given the limitations of current cpu architectures and their lack of parity in massive multi-(co)processing contexts like what the 3090 presents.

@@georganatoly6646 The CPU has nothing to do, all the data is already available on the gpu memory

Only people that cant afford things like this say things like that

black fish I can afford one, it’s a waste of money(for gamers). You’re paying 2x for such a small increase in performance, it’s not for gamers.

@sad shape I paid 3.5k off Ebay actually, worth every penny. I don't even need a washing machine and I can do the grocery shopping next month.

I just came to see how many autistics will miss the joke and already seeing a couple

@@SirKakalaCh Exactly. It can be a fun pastime, but can also make one worried for the future of humanity. I try to focus on the former.

I came from the future bro say one thing RTX 4090

It's not even possible in 5years. 4k has been available for a looong while and it's still not giving stable 60fps at ultra in some games. It's really sad.

Esuard Leder i agree tbh Im happy where we are.

@Esuard Leder We haven't hit the visual limit. The visual limit at "normal" distances is probably 8kish on a decent sized screen, but as I understand it, for actual visual detail limits that's closer to the 16k mark. The human eye is better than you think it is. I'm more interested to see what we push for once we've got 16k in the bag, as then we've got a set resolution to work with (I'm sure some will try to push farther but at that point unless you're on a mega-screen or something you will be hard-pressed to notice) for decades, assuming there's no paradigm shift in the way screens function.

@@theothersideofthecoin3125 bad optimization of course, games like Quantum Break can't run at solid 60 FPS on 4k max settings due that

8k needs to be left for movie viewing . Nvidia loves killing their current product line just to push their next big thing . Just remember , they said they weren't abandoning SLI and mocked consoles for fake 4k , then they push their technology that does that ...

Ray tracing in control at 240fps+ plus haha Il give it a try once I eventually get my 3080 sent to me

RTX 20XX*

I can see it being useful in a Switch Pro or a Switch 2 if it uses graphics architecture like Turing or Ampere

@jesus barrera Considering they've been developing an Ampere based Tegra for smart vehicles and the Switch has been extremely successful for both companies involved, I very much doubt they aren't developing a Turing or Ampere based Tegra made (in secret) specifically for Switch 2 at least

@@dustblowingman is there even a cpu that can put out 240fps in control? Color me surprised if there is. Resolution is basically 100% gpu load, so low Res doesn't rly lighten CPU load does it.

It would entirely depend on screen size and proximity to the screen. Hence 1080p60 can still look phenomenal on a phone screen.

I've been begging for 4K monitors since I got my first 1600x1200 monitor in 2001 and was still disappointed with the pixel density. 4K120fps definitely should become the new high end standard for gaming. The subject of motion clarity is important, the more pixels you have the more valuable high framerates become. 4K30 is almost pointless, during average gameplay each frame is skipping across many pixels and 30fps motion blur will ruin clarity. Likewise 720p 120fps is kind of pointless because each frame is mostly updating the same lines over and over. I would say 4K120 is the perfect balance of resolution and framerate, but checkerboarding can work spectacularly well (you maintain full line detection on both Horizontal and Vertical axis), so in my opinion most games should target Checkerboard 4K120fps.

@@budthecyborg4575 | Sure thing that would help but nothing is further away than 4K120 at high details 😏. So to maintain the graphic fidelity, Character, object ans animation quality as wel as physical effects ... 1080/1440p with 60+FPS (120 at optimal) is the gold standard. And 4K actually is for strategy games, there it makes much more sense. But that aspect is intirely skipped by DF by now. Sadly 😢.

@@paulmann8210 Most of the graphical effects people say they want instead of 4K resolution are CPU bound not GPU, specifically physics, there are a limited number of things you can do in GPU physics but that is the most CPU dependent feature in games. Animations are usually CPU limited. Model quality, again, is usually CPU limited, though with UE5 that could be changing, they say they have very little CPU cost on their infinitely scaling geometry detail, but that demo ran at 1440p on PS5 and they said they were aiming for 60fps, and the system is highly scalable even able to run on Mobile, the same UE5 demo on Series X should hit 4K with only a minimal adjustments to detail. One of the reasons we need 8K is things like using Iron Sights in shooters. People still aren't nearly as accurate in games as we are in real life. You need a properly tuned 8000DPI mouse and at least a 4K screen to even begin to try and pull off the shots people do consistently in real life. Not that we need "Native 8K" across the entire screen, I'm really only concerned with the center 25% of the image. Same goes for Racing games, I want the horizon and apex of the track always rendered at maximum resolution, partly due to aesthetics, but like the iron sights in a military sim, when you're racing you spend most of your time staring intently at the horizon and become intently aware of all the jaggies. For all I care they could render the outside border of the screen at 1/4 resolution in every game and save huge GPU resources while also giving an 8K rendered sweet spot in the middle (even on a 4K panel Super Sampling does improve image quality).

No

DLSS for all TAA game won't happen, that is simply BS spreaded by a RU-vidr who has zero knowledge about how DLSS works.

@@dampflokfreund source was moores law is dead. Idk if he's right or wrong. But yeah, it seems pretty hard to create some universal anti aliasing+upscaling since every game has its own fine tuned version.

It more reminds me of Nintendo's early promises with the Wii saying how it would look the same as XB360 and PS3 games (lol) but running at non-HD resolutions.

@@dampflokfreund Theoretically you could apply the AI of DLSS to the accumulation buffer of TAA for detail gain in an image reconstruction, what's impossible about that?

@@dampflokfreund Depends what Nvidia wants to do, as to get DLSS you need to send them the source files, so a lot of games don't want to, and even if they all did Nvidia wouldn't have the manpower to do such a thing, if they make DLSS2.1 open source when DLSS3 comes out, it could happen, and if they make 1.0 OS too, while 2.1 is out.

DF talked about it in a previous video, that specific artifact is actually caused by the game not passing motion vectors for those particles to the DLSS algorithm. Apparently it needs motion vectors to reconstruct the image properly. It's a problem with the game, not DLSS - Kojima studios could fix it in a patch.

2 years later and HOLY SHIT WTF MF NVIDIA DOIN AI RAY TRACING AND DLSS 3.5 ALMOST LOOKS NATIVE. lmao

Seems like a decent solution, as long as you're happy with the result I'll just say: more power to you!

@@MLWJ1993 Cheers. I think it's a nice option to have, though I do wonder how long I'll be using it if I plan to move to a 3070 in the next year - the performance mode is already a huge boost to performance with excellent image quality. But ultra-performance, in edge cases, certainly breathes some new life into the 20 series (2060-2080 at least) - never thought I'd be able to get this kind of performance in Control with acceptable IQ. Amazing how this technology is improving.

@Nik C Looking at steam, at least 5.

lmao, maybe cheap monitors are 10 years out, the gpus are practically already here though.

@@xXJeReMiAhXx99 I don't think so.^^ $1500 for a GPU that barely does 30fps (keep in mind the lows) is surely not practically here, more like theoretically starts to get possible. I think UHD ("4K") got described as possible with the GTX 980 Ti, which managed to achieve about 40 fps in games back then. And that GPU didn't cost $1500, but more like ~$700 I think.

@@dennisjungbauer4467 sure, it's not completely mainstream or cheap but nonetheless doable in tons of games and that's on amd's 6000s series as well which go as cheap as sub $600(which isnt cheap at all imo still but it's not 1.5k)

Damm, im in the 1.2% then lol

@@MrEditsCinema Good for you

Only game I play in 4K is Civ 6. Gears 4 ran well at 4K, too.

1080p at 144hz is still the sweet spot, 4k is for console kids that like 30fps games.

Sony didnt pay them unlike MS

Probably not a lot to talk about. "Yep thats a big ass heatsink"

@@hugoboss917 I know right. I noticed how biased is DF towards Xbox cause when Xbox releases some news they post a video about it on the same day but when PS5 does release news they take days to even make a video about it. MS clearly is paying all these tech RU-vidrs to say good things about Xbox but it doesn't matter cause Playstation at the end of the day is the console with the better games and it will sell more than Xbox like always. Xbox in Europe and Asia market is basically dead anyway lol

@@coolsteve1342 yes, though sony's technical design seemed more unique

@@hugoboss917 apart from liquid metal instead of thermal paste can't see anything unique. I'd say the series X is pretty unique with the split board design

You do know that china hates japan right like why are you supporting xbox so hard. Do you have one?

@@reenachauriya4931 WTF, are you on drugs bro. What does me saying that they have Falconeer a 8k 60 fps gave with them, have to do with what you said.

@@LogicalError007 lol I'm not your bro . Can you not read. and you have multiple comments supporting xbox and the falconeer thing is something Ive not even heard of so you were probably watching alot of xbox news. My question is why xbox ,do you have one ? Or you just an idiot who decided to support it just so you have something to do and feel good about. Nda is also usually followed but nowadays I guess everything just gets leaked and or is leaked. And I'm just seeing way too many Indians supporting xbox for no apparent reason. So I just wanted to know what's up. Like people here have more ps4s than xbox.

@@reenachauriya4931 I'm not a fanboi, sissy. Calm down. I have PC and I don't have "multiple" comments supporting Xbox. I've comments that speak facts. According to you, I shouldn't speak facts and correct someone! Falconeer is a real thing, I don't follow only Xbox news. I follow gaming and tech news and these things pop up. And since it's coming to Xbox therefore, it will be coming to PC. I'm just excited to see a game which promises stuff like this. Why you even asking like I've done something wrong? Either you're triggered or you have periods going on, sis. And you and your friends having PS4 doesn't mean that others cannot like it own Xbox.

@@LogicalError007 ooohh so edgy. So what pc do you have? And do you buy games or pirate them because it doesent matter who you're supporting when you pirate. And like why do you need 8k ,you need an 8k screen first you idiot. And you should look at your comments more. You tell your mother she's a psfanboi and on her periods too when she tells you to stop commenting for xbox and do something useful.

Hi there Lilio - I just readded a higher bitrate 8K file and also a 4K downsample file to the patreon. The original file is actually quite high bitrate in its own right, it is just that much of the file size and lower average bitrate comes from all the still camera high percentage zooms: which easily compress and reduce file size.

Digital Foundry thank you so much! I really do appreciate it!!

Embargo da ms impedindo ?

Well done.....you win the interwebs :)

It can't run 8K. stop spreading Nvidia's nonsense.

@@codethis2875 Think you replied to the wrong comment; he said nothing about running at "8K" resolution. Otherwise I'm agreeing with the sentiment.

@@codethis2875 It can't run 8k native, but dlss makes the difference

9 times more then what my 2070 says it gets for sure :P

Wtf are you talking about? I’m so tired of hearing people like you. Once you do 4K hdr 60 gaming....anything less is trash

4k isnt pointless at all and 1440p is very underwhelming once you go 4k, even on a 27" monitor. Obviously HDR helps as well.

@Robertino Tanos Try playing in 4k on a good display and then compare it with a 1440p-display and see for yourself.

The weird thing is we watched 2k movies on 50 foot screens for years and thought they were fine but still, I way prefer games in 4k

The amount of absolute retardness in the comments here are mind-boggling. 1. Of course a game will look problematic on a 2160p 4K screen if you are running it at 1440p. 1440p and 2160p are not pixel-perfect to each other. 2. GTA V is a lame example, it's an old game that doesn't utilize proper TAA, while pretty much every modern game does and it's something that is extremely effective at removing aliasing at 1440p and beyond. Also, you can enable MSAA and/or TXAA at 1440p, which won't have that much of a performance hit as switching to 4K yet will result in a very clear image. 3. There are barely any 4K 27" monitors, let alone 4K gaming monitors, because on PC it's absolutely pointless. 1440p at 27" 16:9 or 1440p at 34" 21:9 already gives you more than enough clarity in deferred rendered games that utilize TAA and/or image reconstruction (like checkerboard, interlaced mode, or DLSS).

It is a trained neural network

A neural network trained for the image of a specific game is used for upscaling. A neural network could of course always be described as a very complex algorithm.

No comments? No one can answer this? No nvidia software engineers in the comments? My take is it's semantics. AI as we know it is not inherently Intelligent. Its just marketing buzz. AI should only be used for machines ment to pass a turing test. The test is faulty anyway as it's not terrible difficult for an AI to pass the test but we still wouldn't consider them a true AI

Simple, 720p is upscaled to a much higher resolution while having better image quality (usually) because AI (tensor cores and dlss neural net programming) does guesswork for the missing pixels, which results in more fps when compared to brute forcing 4k/8k res using raw gpu horsepower alone

AI = machine learning in this and most contexts. It’s a technique made by training a bot with buckets of data as opposed to via a human-written and understandable algorithm which is enough to be labeled “AI” as far as most people are concerned.

And how shit they will play.Most AAA games this gen are so basic they almost on par with mobile games.

Terence Caron 1440p with DLSS looks like the way to go, why tank performance for a higher native resolution with limited benefit?

Your comment makes no sense. The reason is that same comment was posted when we had same videos about 4k resolutions many years ago when it was 100% crap and shit. Same fucking comment. So yes, 8k is shit now, but in 4-5 years from now - TV's and new GPU's will improve. You have to start somewhere.

8K will be very important for VR.

Terence Caron 8k will definitely have it’s place in the future. Right now for gaming it’s unrealistic. But I can see it being useful watching movies on a 70-80inch TV when everything is 8k.

@@DevonHensley211 Well, true. BUT the comments exist because of benefits not being that obvious/wanted despite needing to pay a big premium. As soon as things go mainstream and are available for "normal" prices that consumers are willing to pay for or even the tech before would cost, you surely take the better thing, with the slight benefits. When buying a 50" TV and you know you're not getting much benefit from UHD in your situation, you'd still prefer to buy a UHD TV over a FHD one, as it just became very affordable (even putting aside other benefits such TVs usually offer). But if you need to pay four times the price for a slight benefit, you're not opting for it usually (as it was the case with the UHD TVs some years ago). Also, you need to know that there's a point of diminishing returns and "8K" (not sure if there's a correct term for it yet) will most likely have exactly that problem over UHD, at least for monitors when talking about PC gaming. 8K displays are completely useless for quite some time to come, the use of 8K resolution would rather be via 2x DSR on a UHD display IMO. Prices would need to get really low for those displays or they would need to have more to offer than just the resolution uplift.

They can't. The "8K" is simply a lower mode of DLSS to upscale, it is worse than native 4K even.

@Rick Storm I understand exactly how DLSS works. And it is no magic, but in the end nothing else but a qualitative quite good upscaling. Don't fall for Nvidia's marketing.