• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

FSR 4 Made to Run on RDNA 3 Radeon RX 7000 GPU, Image Quality Gained but Not Performance

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,895 (7.37/day)
Location
Dublin, Ireland
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard Gigabyte B550 AORUS Elite V2
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 16GB DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4070 Ti EX
Storage Samsung 990 1TB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
AMD FSR 4 sees the introduction of a new AI ML-based upscaler replacing the shader-based one on FSR 3, which greatly improves image quality at every performance tier. The new technology, however, is exclusive to Radeon RX 9000 series GPUs powered by RDNA 4. This is because the AI ML model is designed for the newer high-throughput data formats that the AI accelerators of RDNA 4 GPUs can accelerate, which cuts out the older Radeon RX 7000 series GPUs based on RDNA 3, even the top RX 7900 XTX. The good news is that the modding community is making efforts to get FSR 4 to work on RDNA 3 GPUs. The bad news, however, is that while FSR 4 on RDNA 3 shows a marked improvement in image quality, there is a drop in performance.

Virtual-Cobbler-9930, a game modder, discovered a method to get FSR 4 to work in games such as "Cyberpunk 2077," a title which didn't even see an official implementation of FSR 3.1. For games to support FSR 4 through patches, it's generally expected of them to have FSR 3.1 support. Virtual-Cobbler-9930 found a way to inject FSR using a tool called OptiScaler, so the FSR 3.1 requirement is no longer necessary. By using a command called "WMMA_RDNA3_WORKAROUND," it is possible to activate FSR 4. It's worth noting, though, that the ML-based upscaler of FSR 4 will begin to bear down heavily on an RDNA 3 GPU, which lacks support for many of the high-throughput data sets that RDNA 4 GPUs do. This was confirmed in the "Cyberpunk 2077" test run, where performance was shown dropping from 85 FPS down to 56 FPS using the in-game benchmark tool; while offering image quality improvements. The source link below shows how Virtual-Cobbler-9930 got FSR 4 to work on "Cyberpunk 2077" in depth.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source
 
As I understood Virtual-Cobbler is, that there is a small performance improvement in Cyberpunk 2077 on 4K resolution. Here he compares it with native resolution. According to this he got a 25% improvement, which might not be that high but still impressive. As owner of a 7900 GRE I am looking forward to see further developments and the text MESA releases.
 
We were waiting for that..
 
Read the article:

No. Read the original source on Reddit, there’s a performance loss when comparing FSR 3, not versus native. Just look at native vs FSR 4.


1750260323810.png


FSR4 36fps vs 46fps FSR3.1>
1750260479525.png
 
No. Read the original source on Reddit, there’s a performance loss when comparing FSR 3, not versus native. Just look at native vs FSR 4.


View attachment 404202

FSR4 36fps vs 46fps FSR3.1>
View attachment 404203
So much numbers... I'm glad I changed my overlay without all that.. but I do get some people like to see how much every core does in certain scenario's
 
IMO the modder did a great job at making it work, but the interesting comparison isn't FSR3 Quality vs. FSR4 Quality.

It should be FSR3 Quality vs. FSR4 Performance, as the latter should have similar or slightly lower image quality but be better at avoiding temporal artifacts.

If FSR4 Performance pushes the same frametimes as FSR3 Quality, there's a good chance many people would prefer the first.
 
I mean, even FSR4 on RX 9070 XT loses some performance compared to FSR3. It's probably just slightly bigger performance drop on RDNA3 than it is on RDNA4.

Would be nice if AMD released FSR4 for everyone. Giving game devs more reasons to support FSR4 more because it's all about market share and currently, AMD is in no position to demand exclusivity to be honest. I mean, FSR4 would give performance improvement over native either way, on RDNA3 or RDNA4. And improving visual quality would basically make FSR3 and older entirely obsolete.

There are games where I use FSR for other reasons that are not performance related. Like for example Overwatch 2. It only supports atrocious, outdated ancient FSR 2.2, but I rather use that over native with horrible edge aliasing because its antialiasing sucks so badly. So I rather see some pixels in motion than shimmering stairstep edges.

On top of that, NVIDIA's DLSS also loses performance between CNN and Transformer models. And they support Transformer on all older RTX cards, but with some performance loss. AMD should just do the same.
 
So to pose the idiots question.

I wonder, if running FSR4 and upscaling could give you a visually similar image at a better framerate than native.
 
I wonder, if running FSR4 and upscaling could give you a visually similar image at a better framerate than native.
Depends on your definition of the word, "similar."

For some eyes, it's easily achievable at 1440p + FSR4 Performance. Some people can't even stand FSR4 Quality at 4K. Use it yourself and let yourself know what you personally can live with. Experience differs from game to game, keep that in mind.

All in all, FSR4 running that okay on RDNA3 proves AMD were wrong all along. Wasn't worth it to gatekeep this tech whatsoever.
 
Depends on your definition of the word, "similar."

For some eyes, it's easily achievable at 1440p + FSR4 Performance. Some people can't even stand FSR4 Quality at 4K. Use it yourself and let yourself know what you personally can live with. Experience differs from game to game, keep that in mind.

All in all, FSR4 running that okay on RDNA3 proves AMD were wrong all along. Wasn't worth it to gatekeep this tech whatsoever.

I'm going with an average eyeball test, so not a night and day obvious difference. I think I am wondering based on whether FSR4 has gotten better than native upscaling and rendering engines have in some cases.

I can't do it yet, stuck on 6000 series GPU for now.

I hope for argument sake that in a given scenario (making up numbers to suit) 1440p @ 60 fps native translates to 1080p FSR4 upscaled to 1440p at more than 60 fps and yields visually similar experiences. I'd call that a win.

I'm sure if and when it leaves linux for windows that the HUB boys will be on it.
 
AMD drivers teams need to get FSR4 in some capacity released for 7900 series owners. Better visuals, with same fps or better is good enough!
 
Depends on your definition of the word, "similar."

For some eyes, it's easily achievable at 1440p + FSR4 Performance. Some people can't even stand FSR4 Quality at 4K. Use it yourself and let yourself know what you personally can live with. Experience differs from game to game, keep that in mind.

All in all, FSR4 running that okay on RDNA3 proves AMD were wrong all along. Wasn't worth it to gatekeep this tech whatsoever.
Maybe they could've gotten it running on NVIDIA's tensor cores? Maybe Intel cards could've used it, too?
 
Maybe they could've gotten it running on NVIDIA's tensor cores? Maybe Intel cards could've used it, too?
Reminds me that XeSS is doing very well on Cyberpunk 2077 with my Arc A770. TMK, Intel didn't lock XeSS to just their GPUs. But, it may have a big slowdown on Radeon and GeForce. I don't remember testing XeSS on my RX 6750 XT or others.
 
Reminds me that XeSS is doing very well on Cyberpunk 2077 with my Arc A770. TMK, Intel didn't lock XeSS to just their GPUs.
Correct, other GPUs use the DP4a pathway for it at a little worse quality. I also think cards that support INT8 well enough would theoretically be able to run the regular version of it too.
 
So its still faster than native, pretty misleading headline then.
 
So its still faster than native*, pretty misleading headline then.

* - on the compute throughput beast that is the 7900XTX. Depending on target resolution, this might not be the case for the slower RDNA3 cards or iGPUs.
 
This is a hack thrown together in a hurry to check if it could work out. The proof of concept is out, now it has to be properly developed. I'd save whatever opinion I had about the performance until then.
 
Maybe they could've gotten it running on NVIDIA's tensor cores? Maybe Intel cards could've used it, too?
I was wondering the same thing and even started the thread on TPU some months back but all I got was "AMD said it can't run on anything but RDNA4," implying I can't read. Some members told it's a dumb idea. Some just were left puzzled.

'twas meant to be an enthusiast community, not "hey you can't do that full stop" community.
 
I was wondering the same thing and even started the thread on TPU some months back but all I got was "AMD said it can't run on anything but RDNA4," implying I can't read. Some members told it's a dumb idea. Some just were left puzzled.

'twas meant to be an enthusiast community, not "hey you can't do that full stop" community.
Would have to go the XESS route and make a less demanding version for older cards. RDNA 4 cards are the only ones with dedicated matrix cores.
 
Would have to go the XESS route and make a less demanding version for older cards. RDNA 4 cards are the only ones with dedicated matrix cores.
IMHO literally ANYTHING is better than what they did.
 
IMHO literally ANYTHING is better than what they did.
We're not disagreeing with each other here. I'm hoping for Intel to improve XESS further, myself. Now that FSR 4 is here and better but only available for RDNA 4 Intel's the only one who makes things cross-platform and good.
 
Back
Top