Need for Speed Unbound: FSR 2.1 vs. DLSS 2 vs. DLSS 3 Comparison

[maxus24]

Need for Speed Unbound is out now, with support for NVIDIA's DLSS Super Resolution (DLSS 2.4), NVIDIA's DLSS Frame Generation (also known as DLSS 3) and AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.1 (FSR 2.1). In this mini-review we take a look, comparing the image quality and performance gains offered by these technologies.

Show full review

 

[Jomale]

Sorry, for me a little bit of difference is noticeable, but not one is really better than the other. But the other car's drive-style/behavior looks to me obvious unrealistic.

 

[Space Lynx]

I just don't understand the point of FSR and DLSS when they give you an extra 5 fps max over Native.

I just don't get it at all, why even bother. Hell, for that matter, if the teams actually worked on optimizing the game better instead of working on DLSS and FSR, they could probably get those same frames that way.

 

[Chane]

What CPU is being used? Would be good to know since it appears to be the bottleneck here.

 

[Pixsik]

I just don't understand the point of FSR and DLSS when they give you an extra 5 fps max over Native.

I just don't get it at all, why even bother. Hell, for that matter, if the teams actually worked on optimizing the game better instead of working on DLSS and FSR, they could probably get those same frames that way.

The performance increase will depend on the GPU and CPU. On high end GPU you will get into CPU bottleneck and you won't get any extra performance when enabling DLSS or FSR.

On RTX 3060 with Ryzen 7 5800X3D I'm getting 87 FPS Average at 1080p Ultra without DLSS, with DLSS Quality I'm getting 105 FPS, that's about 20% FPS increace.

What CPU is being used? Would be good to know since it appears to be the bottleneck here.

Intel Core i7-10700F, according to YouTube video description, which will definitely cause CPU bottleneck at 1440p with RTX 4080

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I just don't understand the point of FSR and DLSS when they give you an extra 5 fps max over Native.

I just don't get it at all, why even bother. Hell, for that matter, if the teams actually worked on optimizing the game better instead of working on DLSS and FSR, they could probably get those same frames that way.

That would require more time actually making a good game and less time shoving in microtransactions. When the plugins exist, the lazy route is oh so tempting.

 

[Space Lynx]

That would require more time actually making a good game and less time shoving in microtransactions. When the plugins exist, the lazy route is oh so tempting.

I don't hate on the actual game makers for this, its the fucking publisher corporate shill shareholders with their nearsightedness, which ironically, never ends up well for them in the long term.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I don't hate on the actual game makers for this, its the fucking publisher corporate shill shareholders with their nearsightedness, which ironically, never ends up well for them in the long term.

Developers are just as much at fault, both for selling out to publishers and for making so many blatant mistakes in their games. Demands from publishers are one thing, but when the game is nigh unplayable but the store works perfectly, that shows where the dev's time and energy went. Oddly, it is never the other way around.

Greed infects everyone, not just publishers, and developers seem to go out of their way to make modern games grindfests to support their stores, with so many missing features and so little content it must be done on purpose, because I refuse to admit that devs can be that dumb as to have forgotten every lesson earned since the 90s.

 

[AnarchoPrimitiv]

The thing I don't like about DLSS, the frame generation feature being the most egregious example, is that it is obfuscating where the hardware ends and the software begins for the consumer and therefore makes it that much more difficult to accurately compare products for a purchasing decision. I understand that we're going to see more and more of this unfortunately, and it feels likes it's been primarily pushed by Nvidia (something being pushed by Nvidia that's bad for consumers, who'd a thunk it?), since it's all about profit and software manipulation is easier for extracting more FPS than hardware innovation, but still....I don't like it.

Especially when the waters become even muddier due to minor or even subjective differences in image quality between FSR and DLSS. If you think about it, the ability to compare GPUs and framerates is implicitly predicated upon the assumption that a "frame" generated by an Nvidia card and an AMD card are an identical value, a known quantity, like the Unit of Measure price at the grocery store that let's you compare the price per unit of measurement between two food items, but because of software manipulation and especially frame generation, can we truly assume that anymore? Because I think we're entering an Era where all frames are NOT created equally.

 

[Vayra86]

their nearsightedness, which ironically, never ends up well for them in the long term.

No? Somehow the top 3% beg to differ
Plus everyone else not on the bottom of a food chain

The entire problem and reason this bullshit persists is because it does end up well for individuals in the long term. An industry, who cares? The things that suffer in the long term are common sense, ethics, a constantly escalating 'norm' and diving deeper into the rabbit hole we're all in, because climbing out is just too painful by now.

Self fulfilling prophecy. Humanity.

On topic, look at how people applaud DLSS today, and you have your confirmation right there. It represents demand and market share, much the same as FSR, so having such technology is a 'norm' now, and consensus has moved towards 'must be there'. I do agree though on that one; but that only applies to the hardware agnostic approach, not DLSS. The vast majority though is not sensible to that difference.

That's Nvidia's marketing in a nutshell right there. It never ends up well for its buyers in the long term

 

[Space Lynx]

No? Somehow the top 3% beg to differ
Plus everyone else not on the bottom of a food chain

The entire problem and reason this bullshit persists is because it does end up well for individuals in the long term. An industry, who cares? The things that suffer in the long term are common sense, ethics, a constantly escalating 'norm' and diving deeper into the rabbit hole we're all in, because climbing out is just too painful by now.

Self fulfilling prophecy. Humanity.

the top 3% don't run game companies... lol

they run oil, social media, etc.

 

[Vayra86]

the top 3% don't run game companies... lol

they run oil, social media, etc.

I'll concede that and expand to the top 10% same difference

Still means 90% is losing

 

[Space Lynx]

I'll concede that and expand to the top 10% same difference

Still means 90% is losing

I still disagree, many game companies have gone under by going too hardcore into greed/micro transactions. Take Elden Ring for example, goty, best seller in history. no short term greed ruined it, and it came out on top this year.

that is direct proof.

 

[Vayra86]

I still disagree, many game companies have gone under by going too hardcore into greed/micro transactions. Take Elden Ring for example, goty, best seller in history. no short term greed ruined it, and it came out on top this year.

that is direct proof.

I get what you're saying, have game companies gone under by going too hardcore into greed/mtx though, or did they just not have a product that was worth buying into.

I mean, there are absolutely metric tonnes of examples of greedy MTX ridden shitholes that run well.

Elden Ring is for example a game that directly fills a niche and the company behind it even invented that niche all of its own, carved out its own piece of market. Elden Ring is like a culmination of popular concepts in one good marriage.

At the same time, a game like FIFA runs on MTX just fine, year in year out.

 

[r3ptil3]

DLSS 3.0 is crazy...

This game is extremely CPU limited, but with DLSS 3.0 you can see how much higher the GPU will loaded.

 

[Vayra86]

DLSS 3.0 is crazy...

This game is extremely CPU limited, but with DLSS 3.0 you can see how much higher the GPU will loaded.

A CPU limited racing game though, EA did achieve something there. WTF

It doesn't look great either My mind is blown on this release honestly. 104 fps up there in the article, there's nothing happening on screen and it looks like GTA 4 or something.

 

[nguyen]

very nice comparison.
I'm have been playing this game since day 1 and it has zero shader compilation stutter, which is quite rare these days.

Game look very nice at night with lots of SSR, at day it look quite bland though.

 

[Legacy-ZA]

the top 3% don't run game companies... lol

they run oil, social media, etc.

Ehehehehe,

No, boxes within boxes, within boxes, within boxes, but it's all owned by the same people driving the world into the dirt.

 

[pavle]

Just use native with TAA and none of the various marketing gimmics GPU companies use to hide they aren't able to produce the true next generation GPU (speed wise).
DLSS looks aliased and FSR looks blurry.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I still disagree, many game companies have gone under by going too hardcore into greed/micro transactions. Take Elden Ring for example, goty, best seller in history. no short term greed ruined it, and it came out on top this year.

that is direct proof.

Counterpoint: EA, activision, etc have printed a mint for YEARS by turning their game into virtual pots of greed, and CoD is still one of the best selling games of the year.

 

[xorbe]

Wow wccftech review did not praise the game play, too grindy?

 

[Bjorn_Of_Iceland]

The bloom effect on the car glint seems to be missing on FSR, as opposed to native or DLSS. I reckon other effects are culled as well