Tuesday, February 17th 2026

Blind Testing Shows Gamers Prefer NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 Over Native Resolution Rendering and AMD FSR 4

ComputerBase conducted a massive online blind test, allowing thousands of gamers to vote on their preferred game video output. The options included NVIDIA's latest Deep Learning Super Sampling 4.5, AMD's FSR Upscaling AI with FSR 4 on Radeon RX 9000 series GPUs, and native resolution rendering without AI upscaling. Interestingly, DLSS 4.5 received the highest percentage of votes, winning in every scenario. ComputerBase tested various games like Anno 117, ARC Raiders, Cyberpunk 2077, Horizon Forbidden West, Satisfactory, and The Last of Us Part II. Only in Cyberpunk 2077 did gamers almost equally prefer native resolution rendering, but DLSS 4.5 still came out on top with a slight edge.

Initially, the ComputerBase team conducted the comparison using videos labeled only with options like 1/2/3/4, without revealing which rendering method was used, to ensure a fully blind test. After two weeks of testing and thousands of votes, the results showed a significant preference for NVIDIA's latest DLSS 4.5 technology. This conclusion highlights that NVIDIA's newest technology is now so refined that its video output offers superior visual appeal. DLSS 4.5 uses a second-generation Transformer model trained on a much larger dataset of video games, with five times the computational investment of the first DLSS 4 Transformer upscaler. It utilizes the FP8 data format, allowing for more processing with minimal precision loss. The new algorithm is more context-aware, and NVIDIA confirmed that the input for upscaling is used more intelligently, resulting in much more detailed and precise video output.
Out of all the games tested, AMD's latest ML-based video technologies, now part of the AMD "Redstone" package, fully support Cyberpunk 2077 and ARC Raiders with AMD's current best rendering techniques. Interestingly, in neither scenario have gamers overwhelmingly preferred the "Redstone" package, as in both cases, gamers felt better off with native resolution rendering. Although AMD's upscaling may not be the most visually appealing, it does provide a good enough FPS boost for gamers. However, NVIDIA's DLSS 4.5 continues to dominate, and the second-generation Transformer model powering it is the real differentiating factor for the vast majority.
Source: ComputerBase
Add your own comment

173 Comments on Blind Testing Shows Gamers Prefer NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 Over Native Resolution Rendering and AMD FSR 4

#2
jesdals
Considering difference in amount of Nvidia users ctr AMD - it could not be any different - why Perfer a non Nvidia setting as a Nvidia user - but lets hope that All 3 keep optimating for GPUs
Posted on Reply
#3
LastDudeALive
jesdalsConsidering difference in amount of Nvidia users ctr AMD - it could not be any different - why Perfer a non Nvidia setting as a Nvidia user - but lets hope that All 3 keep optimating for GPUs
It was a blind survey. They were just given "option 1, option 2, option 3, option 4" and asked which one had the best image quality.
Posted on Reply
#4
jesdals
LastDudeALiveIt was a blind survey. They were just given "option 1, option 2, option 3, option 4" and asked which one had the best image quality.
If I conduct a blind survey amongst redhaired people - it wouldnt be supprising if there wasnt that many with brown hair
Posted on Reply
#5
HOkay
I assume this is comparing Ultra Quality modes for DLSS & FSR? Ah I should really go check out the source article shouldn't I. I love this sort of testing though, it's always interesting! Next test should be how much more would you pay for A vs B vs C.
jesdalsIf I conduct a blind survey amongst redhaired people - it wouldnt be supprising if there wasnt that many with brown hair
The participants didn't know which was which when voting. Are you suggesting that people having Nvidia GPUs somehow makes them prefer the look of DLSS in a blind test?
Posted on Reply
#6
LastDudeALive
HOkayI assume this is comparing Ultra Quality modes for DLSS & FSR? Ah I should really go check out the source article shouldn't I. I love this sort of testing though, it's always interesting! Next test should be how much more would you pay for A vs B vs C.


The participants didn't know which was which when voting. Are you suggesting that people having Nvidia GPUs somehow makes them prefer the look of DLSS in a blind test?
Article says it was DLSS and FSR "Quality" preset, and then native with TAA. There was also an option for "can't tell the difference." Also relevant, the options were videos, not stills. So you're not just pixel-peeping for upscaling artifacts, you're also examining temporal stability, ghosting, etc. And it was done with ICAT, not YouTube videos, so absolutely no compression.
Posted on Reply
#8
lambda
DLSS being better than current release of FSR4 is believable.

DLSS > native is something I've heard before (maybe it was Digital Foundry who covered it first for Control) but never really cared about.

I personally stick to native resolution. I don't have the option to use DLSS or even FSR4 for that matter (let's not make this an Nv vs AMD thread).
Posted on Reply
#9
HOkay
LastDudeALiveArticle says it was DLSS and FSR "Quality" preset, and then native with TAA. There was also an option for "can't tell the difference." Also relevant, the options were videos, not stills. So you're not just pixel-peeping for upscaling artifacts, you're also examining temporal stability, ghosting, etc. And it was done with ICAT, not YouTube videos, so absolutely no compression.
Yes I just went to take a look, really well designed test by the looks, no notes! I'm going to have a look at them all myself when I'm next at my PC!
Posted on Reply
#10
shuffy_losys
lambdaDLSS > native is something I've heard before (maybe it was Digital Foundry who covered it first for Control) but never really cared about.
I think it was their Wolfenstein: The Young Blood video. The part I remember about this was they had native with DLSS side by side and there was a radar scope in the distance that was better filled out in the DLSS version than the native version.
Posted on Reply
#11
Urbklr
LastDudeALiveAnd it was done with ICAT, not YouTube videos, so absolutely no compression.
It was compressed, just not as badly as Youtube. DLSS has real advantages in movement, and this testing really highlights that I think.
Posted on Reply
#12
RejZoR
I mean, I can't "prefer" DLSS when I have Radeon. So, that's kind of a stupid comparison. neither can Intel ARC users. I generally prefer FSR because it's just faster than XeSS and with FSR4, quality is so good I'd have to be nitpicking in still images that are zoomed in to really tell a difference, making the comparison irrelevant. Sure, DLSS 4.5 is technically superior, but a) it's irrelevant if you don't have GeForce b) it doesn't really matter since I'm fine with FSR4. Hell, I'm generally fine with FSR3 even though it's inferior on paper. It still does the job.
Posted on Reply
#13
Selaya
taa is a crime against humanity, no wonder native lost out. a fair comparison against dlss would be native-dlaa, not this taa garbage
Posted on Reply
#14
evernessince
LastDudeALiveIt was a blind survey. They were just given "option 1, option 2, option 3, option 4" and asked which one had the best image quality.
There's no such thing as a blind study with AI upscaling. Each creates an output that is identifiable to the model used specifically. People may notice the quirks of a given model and thus introduce bias. How likely that is would depend on the participants. If it's PC gamers I'd say a pretty decent chance one of them notices. Regardless, the mere chance of this happening means it's not really blind.

In addition, people tend to prefer over-sharpened images as well. Of which DLSS 4.5 / 4.0 is in most cases.

DLSS is better but this study is basically worthless outside of being troll-bait.
Posted on Reply
#15
HOkay
RejZoRI mean, I can't "prefer" DLSS when I have Radeon. So, that's kind of a stupid comparison. neither can Intel ARC users. I generally prefer FSR because it's just faster than XeSS and with FSR4, quality is so good I'd have to be nitpicking in still images that are zoomed in to really tell a difference, making the comparison irrelevant. Sure, DLSS 4.5 is technically superior, but a) it's irrelevant if you don't have GeForce b) it doesn't really matter since I'm fine with FSR4. Hell, I'm generally fine with FSR3 even though it's inferior on paper. It still does the job.
Don't you want to know which is best to help inform future purchasing decisions? As you say, if any of them meet your personal "good enough" yard stick then for you it doesn't matter, but other people have different yard sticks.
For me personally I recently cashed out a little & went 4090 --> 5080 --> 9070XT, with a 32" 4k 144Hz monitor. So I'm using upscaling in most things now, & yeah, for me FSR4 at the higher quality settings is generally "fine" for me too.
Posted on Reply
#16
Hecate91
Yep, this study is pretty much troll & fanboy bait.
There is no blind study because each upscaling algorithm will put out a different result, and it would a real blind test if people were asked to actually play games without knowing what upscaling model is being used. I personally wouldn't trust a video alone to make a decision on what is better, as a video clip can be used to highlight artifacts or graphical errors. DLSS is technically better, but I'd have a difficult time telling while playing a game, not stopping a video to stare at every pixel.
Posted on Reply
#17
Sithaer
evernessinceIn addition, people tend to prefer over-sharpened images as well. Of which DLSS 4.5 / 4.0 is in most cases.
Personally I've liked slightly over sharpened images even before AI/Upscaling was a thing. 'Using filters or mods for example'
Currently I prefer/use DLSS 4.5 in most of the games that I play with preset L + tweaked sharpness option in each game as long as it has an option for it and to me this is much better/pleasant to look at than native.
Posted on Reply
#18
RejZoR
HOkayDon't you want to know which is best to help inform future purchasing decisions? As you say, if any of them meet your personal "good enough" yard stick then for you it doesn't matter, but other people have different yard sticks.
For me personally I recently cashed out a little & went 4090 --> 5080 --> 9070XT, with a 32" 4k 144Hz monitor. So I'm using upscaling in most things now, & yeah, for me FSR4 at the higher quality settings is generally "fine" for me too.
I don't care if DLSS is the best thing under the sun when their products are insanely priced, unobtainable and promoted by annoying asshole CEO with his stupid leather jacket F up entire industry? Yeah, no thanks. I like tech, but I'm also petty and I'll sometimes go out of my way to apply my principles. It's also reason why I bought Radeon this time after years of owning GeForce cards.
Posted on Reply
#19
evernessince
HOkayAre you suggesting that people having Nvidia GPUs somehow makes them prefer the look of DLSS in a blind test?
"prefer" would be the wrong word. It merely opens the door for biases, which can include any number of things. Also, this study isn't truly blind if participants can identify the difference between DLSS, FSR, ect. I'm not sure it is possible to run a blind study of any AI upscaler.
lambdaDLSS being better than current release of FSR4 is believable.

DLSS > native is something I've heard before (maybe it was Digital Foundry who covered it first for Control) but never really cared about.

I personally stick to native resolution. I don't have the option to use DLSS or even FSR4 for that matter (let's not make this an Nv vs AMD thread).
To be fair, native in modern games is often with low quality temporal effects (like CP2077 has temporal AA) so it's really misleading. It's more "do you prefer native with forced temporal smear or Nvidia"? Surely it's no coincidence that temporal smear become common around the same time as DLSS came to "save the day". A problem was invented and then "fixed", if you purchase a very expensive GPU.
Posted on Reply
#20
mechtech
freeagentThis should be interesting.

The most interesting part

"Blind Testing Shows Gamers Prefer NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 Over Native Resolution Rendering......................without AI upscaling"
Posted on Reply
#21
Onasi
Of course people would prefer DLSS. It’s the best out of current temporal methods. I don’t think anyone has ever disputed that, except for truly deranged. Now, as pointed out, tris is as much of an endorsement for DLSS as an indictment of how truly bad the stock TAA/TSR implementations are for the most part, but the die was cast a long time ago and we are going to be living in the TAA world for the foreseeable future, so might as well make the most of it. We aren’t going back to forward rendering with MSAA, that’s for sure.
Posted on Reply
#22
LastDudeALive
Selayataa is a crime against humanity, no wonder native lost out. a fair comparison against dlss would be native-dlaa, not this taa garbage
Maybe DLAA should have been another option, but the most relevant part of this is a direct, blind comparison between the latest and greatest upscaling models from AMD and Nvidia. DLAA would be less relevant, because it has the exact same strengths as DLSS, it's the same algorithm. It also wouldn't really be as interesting a study to have 2 Nvidia options vs 1 AMD option. TAA is also relevant as it's the best AA method that's available without ML tools. It's what games would have looked like without the development of DLSS. So despite all of the complaining about upscaling and fake frames and Ngreedia, people still prefer AI-assisted images to the best non-AI option available.
evernessinceThere's no such thing as a blind study with AI upscaling. Each creates an output that is identifiable to the model used specifically. People may notice the quirks of a given model and thus introduce bias.

In addition, people tend to prefer over-sharpened images as well. Of which DLSS 4.5 / 4.0 is in most cases.

DLSS is better but this study is basically worthless outside of being troll-bait.
So, to be clear, you think that thousands of people have consciously identified the minute artifacts of the brand-new DLSS algorithm, went to the survey, carefully examined each video, identified which one was likely DLSS, and voted for that option to intentionally throw off the study? Take off your tinfoil hat and go touch some grass, man.
Hecate91Yep, this study is pretty much troll & fanboy bait.
There is no blind study because each upscaling algorithm will put out a different result, and it would a real blind test if people were asked to actually play games without knowing what upscaling model is being used. I personally wouldn't trust a video alone to make a decision on what is better, as a video clip can be used to highlight artifacts or graphical errors. DLSS is technically better, but I'd have a difficult time telling while playing a game, not stopping a video to stare at every pixel.
This is such a weird response. Yes, the upscaling algorithms put out different results, that's why they're asking people which one is the best. And no, having people to play the games directly is not at all relevant to this specific survey, people don't have to be the ones physically playing the game to examine the quality of 3 different 4k videos.
Posted on Reply
#24
wolf
Better Than Native
DLSS is the real Finewine.

Predictable outcome even from a completely blind test so that no brand bias can be applied, only bias for which image looked better. Hopefully comparisons and publicity like this keeps Intel and AMD pushing to catch Nvidia, and keeps Nvidia pushing to stay ahead.

In the end, we all win.
Posted on Reply
#25
soupinator
I doubt anyone's surprised that DLSS is the overwhelming winner here. What surprises me though is that FSR 4 did so poorly. Other comparisons I've seen really made FSR 4 look like it should have done better.
evernessinceThere's no such thing as a blind study with AI upscaling. Each creates an output that is identifiable to the model used specifically. People may notice the quirks of a given model and thus introduce bias. How likely that is would depend on the participants. If it's PC gamers I'd say a pretty decent chance one of them notices. Regardless, the mere chance of this happening means it's not really blind.

In addition, people tend to prefer over-sharpened images as well. Of which DLSS 4.5 / 4.0 is in most cases.

DLSS is better but this study is basically worthless outside of being troll-bait.
No, DLSS 4 is not oversharpened in most cases. That generally only happens when additional sharpening filters are being used by the game. Unfortunately sometimes those are unable to be disabled by the end user - and this is a problem on its own regardless of upscaling.

Plus, how many people do you really think can identify upscalers based on specific quirks or artifacts produced? And is that really going to cause them to preferentially pick that upscaler when they recognize a drawback of it? You're really stretching it trying to discredit this survey.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 14th, 2026 06:39 CST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts