Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2 | Warzone 2.0: FSR 2.1 vs. DLSS Comparison

[wheresmycar]

Revisiting these images for comparison, i kinda agree with Vya Domus. FSR is doing a better job in preserving or outlining finer details in images whereas DLSS seems a little washed. I had to magnify the images for a clearer representation and the difference in clarity is huge.

Anyway to me it doesn't matter... the quality of game play and immersion takes over rather than sight seeing visual feasts (

 

[tfdsaf]

Call me crazy but DLSS looks atrocious! Don't you guys see the grass? Check out that building in the distance, check out the dirt on the left in the pic. It looks low resolution and bland, while the FDR textures looks much better across the board! Playing the game may produce more shimmering with FSR, but in terms of texture quality, shadow quality, etc... FSR wins by a big margin!

 

[OneMoar]

you people need to accually play the game instend of bench-racing a static screenshot
because everybody saying fsr looks better is objectively WRONG

@maxus24 did you verify that the internal engine resolution slider isn't reverting to 50% between tests?
cod does this a lot particuarlly when toggling dlss/fsr on/off or offen for a reason I can't identify

 

[oxrufiioxo]

you people need to accually play the game instend of bench-racing a static screenshot
because everybody saying fsr looks better is objectively WRONG

@maxus24 did you verify that the internal engine resolution slider isn't reverting to 50% between tests?
cod does this a lot particuarlly when toggling dlss/fsr on/off or offen for a reason I can't identify

Yeah, FSR looks like shit even at 4k in motion when actually playing the game that isn't anything new its terrible in RE4 and GOW as well and almost every other game I've tried it in. It's good for people who need the performance and don't have any other choice but that's about it.

 

[Not4ce]

I am saying FSR here is clearly better at preserving high frequency detail compared to DLLS, with that being said other than looking for typical haloing artifacts I don't have any objective measure for how over sharpened or not an image is, do you ?

Of course it may be the case that AMD has some magical sharpening filter that also adds detail, in which case, props to them.

So this "higher frequency" in textures you're referring to, as I have said before and as did @Chomiq is CAS

Here's a screenshot for reference, you'll see the right side image looks like it has "added depth"/"higher frequency". Nothing is added, it's just the cas sharpening giving it the appearance of fidelity in still images

Here's a screenshot from your own original post as well

The very sharp and nice looking bricks and sharper edges compared to DLSS you mentioned? That's all CAS

I use CAS every now and then, specially if a game is very soft like RDR2, but you should note this changes heavily in motion.

Cas in motion can smear and it doesn't look as sharp as the "still image" examples you see.This is why image quality in motion is a lot more important than static screenshots which don't tell the full story

If you've tested DLSS and FSR2 in person, and prefer FSR, more power to you

But DLSS still handles motion a lot better, does not have disocclution fizzling, and tends to provide a more stable image, especially at lower resolutions (like 1080p)

 

[westk]

Please test the latest version of DLSS (3.1.11)

 

[raddeon]

"All tests were made using a GeForce RTX 3060 GPU"
Well, there is youre problem.
Test DLSS on Nvida and FSR on AMD, dont trust that nvida will make FSR look as good as possible.