• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Death Stranding Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

W1zzard

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
May 14, 2004
Messages
28,834 (3.74/day)
Processor Ryzen 7 5700X
Memory 48 GB
Video Card(s) RTX 4080
Storage 2x HDD RAID 1, 3x M.2 NVMe
Display(s) 30" 2560x1600 + 19" 1280x1024
Software Windows 10 64-bit
Death Stranding is one of the most successful titles on the PlayStation. This week, Kojima has released it for PC. We took a detailed look at the graphics that this port can deliver and tested it on 27 graphics cards at three resolutions. DLSS comparison images are included, too.

Show full review
 
Thank you for your work Wizzard, excellent work as usual.
 
You're not alone.
 
I'm looking at dlss closeups and I'm blown away how much more detailed it is than taa.
all those small details are just so much more defined
dvta.jpg

when playing control dlss 2.0 I had this overwhelming feeling that IQ is something I never saw before.now I know why.
look at this screenshot in dlss quality vs taa mode


I'm checking out more comparisons on computerbase.this is friggin insane.look how clearly you can see the pattern on the fence in dlss mode

compbase.jpg


 
Last edited:
Thanks for your honesty. I agree with you. I played this game less than 1 hour, so Steam gave me back my money.
I really didn't like this first hour of gameplay and i didn't want to go further and take the risk to waste 60 euros.
 
Thanks for your honesty. I agree with you. I played this game less than 1 hour, so Steam gave me back my money.
I really didn't like this first hour of gameplay and i didn't want to go further and take the risk to waste 60 euros.
No way you can see a substantial part of the game in the first 2 hours. And you’re not missing much. I would have refunded too
 
I just realized you can zoom in on the DLSS screenshots. Damn nice performance improvements and amazing details for sure.
check this out.

they have fidelityfx too.
ffx.jpg


just DL them in hq and compare

dlss is by far the most detailed and crisp
native loses some fine detail upon close inspection and looks less crisp
fidelityfx loses even more detail and is blurry
 
There are huge differencies in frame rates in your review vs one on guru3d?
 
fidelityfx is trash, and that CAS crap. If I wanna play at lower resolution I can turn it down myself. Gimmicks.
from computerbase,quoting

DLSS offers a better picture than the native resolution
Even if Death Stranding does not support ray tracing, it currently offers the best implementation of DLSS 2.0 (test) . Nvidia's AI upscaling, which is only available on GeForce RTX, delivers a better image than the native resolution in the quality setting without generating annoying graphic errors. There is also a decent performance boost.

AMD's FidelityFX, which is also integrated in the game, brings a comparable FPS gain, but cannot keep up with the quality of DLSS. Should DLSS 2.0 perform similarly well in other games - be it with or without ray tracing - AMD will have to react in order to remain competitive. It remains to be seen how the technology and its implementation in games will develop in the short, medium and long term.

Image smoothness is minimal to significantly better with DLSS than with the native resolution, as far as the entire image is concerned. This applies to both low and high resolutions. In addition, the graphics are sharper with DLSS than with TAA, which does not catch the eye, but is particularly noticeable when it comes to writing. The observations made so far relate to the DLSS Quality setting, which is preferable to the native resolution with the results shown.


Unlike DLSS 2.0, FidelityFX works regardless of the manufacturer on an AMD and an Nvidia graphics card. The end result delivers decent results, but looks consistently worse than the native resolution. The geometry in particular is less smoothed, which visibly increases the restlessness in the image. In addition, the graphics become minimally blurred, which can be changed by sharpening more, but the graphics flicker accordingly even more afterwards.
 
There are huge differencies in frame rates in your review vs one on guru3d?
definitely different test scene, did they use the latest drivers?
 
There are huge differencies in frame rates in your review vs one on guru3d?
can't see any except for pascal doing better on g3d

both tpu and computerbase show it doing worse
 
Bleh I wasn't interested in this game to start with an Wizz's review just confirmed it as a no buy from me but thanks for the great and honest review Wiz
 
I honestly couldn't see the appeal either. Environment does like fairly impressive, however.
 
I'm looking at dlss closeups and I'm blown away how much more detailed it is than taa.
all those small details are just so much more defined

when playing control dlss 2.0 I had this overwhelming feeling that IQ is something I never saw before.now I know why.
look at this screenshot in dlss quality vs taa mode


I'm checking out more comparisons on computerbase.this is friggin insane.look how clearly you can see the pattern on the fence in dlss mode

View attachment 162363

Are we looking at the same things? You can see laddering in the full res native pic but it's super crisp; the DLSS one is smooth as butter but looks buttery, too.
 
Are we looking at the same things? You can see laddering in the full res native pic but it's super crisp; the DLSS one is smooth as butter but looks buttery, too.
you mean the part to the right of the picture ?
which one do you think is dlss ?
dlss is the crisper one.

I honestly couldn't see the appeal either. Environment does like fairly impressive, however.
but look at indoor areas and it's like the game has no ambient occlusion at all
 
DLSS should be added to the performance section
it's insane


watch this video from the beginning,but especially at around 5:30-6.00
dlss performance at 1080p vs native with taa

it's almost like the lower the resolution the more you gain on dlss being trained on super high quality images.and watch a few moments later,8:00-9:00,flickering is gone on dlss

10:00 - 11:00 for fidelityfx+taa+sharpenning vs dlss.it's not even a contest.
 
Last edited:
DLSS is looking great, i might finally upgrade from 1080ti. thanks for the benchmark.
wait for rtx3000

I hope they keep working on it.If this is what 1st gen turing can do,delivering more detailed picture than native with huge peerformance gains,then imagine what happens with better cards and better support.

I wish presets were free to choose tho.Nothing seems like an obstacle and current segmentation is artificial.Only at 4K I can choose dlss to upscale from 1080-1440p.at QHD I'm stuck with 960p.I wanna be able to upscale from 1080p image at 1440p.

internalresolution.jpg
 
Last edited:
definitely different test scene, did they use the latest drivers?
They used the latest ones for 5700xt... but even with 20.7.1 all radeons have higher fps..?
 
DLSS2.0 makes this game better on nvidia anyway.

RTX 2060 Super can play this game 60+fps on 4K DLSS quality mode

DLSS is looking great, i might finally upgrade from 1080ti. thanks for the benchmark.

I would not recommend upgrading just for DLSS2.0 because not many games support DLSS2

I would wait for RTX 3080. Turing is not worthy upgrade over 1080ti
 
DLSS2.0 makes this game better on nvidia anyway.

RTX 2060 Super can play this game 60+fps on 4K DLSS quality mode
acc. to computerbase even with a stock 2060 you'll average over 60
 
Back
Top