Pretty saucy review, right there.
While ofc the performance claims are overblown, they always are (from both companies).
What I find fascinating is calling this 'feature parity'. For DSR, yes, but for video...no,no,no...no.
Have you seen nvidia's video options? Even before this they...uh...need some work comparatively. This further cements AMD as leading in that area.
IMHO, the most useful part of this review is stating the certain scaling enhancement is like MADVR and lower levels of jinc (I'm going to guess not 3 taps). That's good to know, and very helpful. Thanks Bta.
While it would certainly we welcome if it were better than what is available, it's important to understand not everyone that launches a video also launches a freaking literal suite of crap with it (madvr, ffdshow, lav, reclock, svp, etc etc), nor should it be a requirement to get decent quality regardless of their monitor or the video. I think they deserve a lot of credit for this, and hope they move forward with improving the features. Ain't nothing wrong if they can attempt to add more taps in scaling or work towards a good interpolation algorithm harnessing gpu compute (especially if they keep power/clocks in check). SVP and MadVR can both be VERY resource intensive (can any current consumer cpu run even 1080p svp at 120hz full quality?) if you crank them to high quality settings, the former only really worth it if you do so (and why many people think interpolation sucks...it does if not done really well, which is largely the case). If AMD can continue to tackle that issue, personally, I would find that a very compelling reason to use their products. Even as it sits, some of these features may be very helpful to those that don't go all the way setting up the aforementioned programs and filters...which is probably most people.
