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
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.
173 Comments on Blind Testing Shows Gamers Prefer NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 Over Native Resolution Rendering and AMD FSR 4
#getaroom
you are about 98% in agreement..
I use DLSS and DLAA and things look fantastic.
It's amazing tech if you can get the game to support it. Just wish some of my older games could run it. Or there was some patch to make it work.Same here 4k120hz with DLAA and DLSS is like wow jaw dropping wow.
Im running a MSI EXPERT 5080 GTX.
I have compared 4K DLAA vs 8K (DSR4x) DLSS.Performance before, they look the same in 4K video, but I have only used DLSS3 and the Performance mode tend to have more ghosting than DLAA in motion so it was not a good idea at all, no idea how DLSS4/4.5 Performance would fare.
Still baffles me people are against upscaling just because it's upscaling, with zero consideration to the quality and framerate.
Still it's more a reflection of how the gaming industry and hardware industry isn't improving much in a half decade than a problem with the Technologies. I'm still surprised there isn't any RT/PT games that blow rasterized games out if the water 3/4 of a decade later. The best examples still rely heavily on rasterization.
People are also in general tired of anything related to AI and what it's doing to gaming hardware affordability. I mean even before the rampacolypse Nvidia offered an 80 class GPU that was 10-15% better than it's predecessor at launch over 2 years later which is less of an uplift than the refreshed 4070 super had over the 4070....
I don't think it's constructive or insightful to not engage with the actual content of the article whatsoever, and proclaim "blind people prefer to use shitty upscaling tech". Clearly, upscaling isn't shitty, certainly not the options used in this comparison, we've come a long way from the days of DLSS/FSR 1.0 (which can still have a place mind you, well FSR1/NIS anyway), and the utility to gamers is eminent.
Searching my game library I finally found Shadow of the Tomb Raiders has SMAA4x, comparing it to DLAA 4.5 is night and day
DLAA 4.5 vs SMAA4x
With how much difference between the 2, DLSS.Q should be a league above SMAA4x as well
I love new technologies but only when the hardware at a base is fantastic, not when it feel more like they're a crutch for lack of hardware improvements and optimization in games.
I'm not blind to the fact that small hardware improvements is likely the future and gamers don't really matter, but nobody can convince me Nvidia couldn't have done better if they weren't so focused on AI on current generation hardware. Instead here is more interpolation and slightly better upscaling but not always.I don't understand the SMAA thing either in every game I can remember it in it isn't that great i remember in Crysis 3 it doing a terrible job and it being a shimmer fest.
I'd prefer to see it with depth of field disable against the DLSS 4.5.
DLAA 4.5 vs SMAA4x
According the dev, SMAA4x is just SMAA + MSAA 4x, IMO it looks worse than SMAA T2x which is SMAA + TAA. Using DLAA in this game makes it look like a remastered version LOL
I do recall one other game Deux ex Mankind Divided showing issue with the RTX 4090 on MSAAx8 at 4K might be a similar issue. Where is just over doing the processing.
I'm 1080p & I can't get to run in DSR right now.
You can try the Custom DSR Tool
www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=593534
I turned of bloom & film grain.
I get far objects flickering on DLSS quality, but with no AA on, I get shimmering on foliage mostly.
I have to install the Nvidia application, but last time I did it kept disabling/removing my Nvidia control panel.
The app didn't get rid of NVCP for me.. Well worth trying to force at a bare minimum preset K if not M or L to see what 4.5 can do.
Because the RT resolution in game is tied to the render resolution, using upscaling will make all the RT shadows flicker like crazy, forcing DLAA will fix it.
I tried 1080p and every AA looks rough LOL, perhaps DSR can boost image quality further than DLAA can
As for performance, you can see the gpu load - a bit higher at 8k.Video recordings will always be compressed and look worse than what is shown on the screen. And seeing what is actually shown on the screen is simple - just fit the screenshots to your screen... so fullscreen and 100% zoom for 4k, 50% zoom for 8k.
The differences in clarity and detail are still VERY noticable. You're in severe need of glasses if you can't see her armor is alot more detailed on the 8k image.
The only relevant question in this regard is whether it improves gameplay for you.
I'll say right now, for most people it doesn't matter jack shit beyond a certain point. Good is good, is enough, and more is generally just wasted. This applies to almost anything you can tie a number to, like framerate, refresh rate, even things like pixel responsiveness has diminishing returns, or even worse, counterproductive effects at a certain point.
A good example of counterproductive effects is render resolution in competitive gaming - or even just having all settings on max and how this negatively affects a competitive edge, because you have to process more info.
Sure, the average walmart pc buyer probably doesn't notice... they probably don't notice that they don't have vrr turned on either... does that mean that you shouldn't care about having vrr turned on? Get lost with those strawman arguments...
1080p was already a pretty decent landing place. 4K is 4x that resolution. Now you're telling us 8K is a must have because detail.