Red Dead Redemption 2: DLSS vs. FSR 2.0 Comparison

[maxus24]

Red Dead Redemption 2 has recently been updated with support for AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 (FSR 2.0) and the implementation of NVIDIA's Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS) has been improved, too. In this mini-review, we take a look and compare the image quality and performance offered by FSR 2.0 and DLSS.

Show full review

 

[outpt]

biggest difference i noticed is in cloud formation. other than that i don"t see that much, but i just got my 3080 today.

 

[phanbuey]

I find that DLSS in this game doesn't work that well - huge reduction in image sharpness and IQ for almost no FPS gain. 3080 with tweaked settings and no dlss has no issues at 90FPS average at 4k though.

 

[oxrufiioxo]

I find that DLSS in this game doesn't work that well - huge reduction in image sharpness and IQ for almost no FPS gain. 3080 with tweaked settings and no dlss has no issues at 90FPS average at 4k though.

Same, this is one of the worst implementations of 2.X

 

[Denver]

Perhaps the "FSR 2.1" that AMD announced will reduce these graphical issues

 

[mama]

The background looks far better with FSR.

 

[Bruno_O]

DLSS blurry as always

 

[ExplodingCaps]

DLSS blurry as always

In this game, yes. The dlss implementation in this game is a bit of a mess. But in control or cyberpunk 2077 for example, it's quite good, compared to dlss 1.0, it's miles away. But in rdr2, I prefer fsr 2.0 tho.

 

[Bruno_O]

In this game, yes. The dlss implementation in this game is a bit of a mess. But in control or cyberpunk 2077 for example, it's quite good, compared to dlss 1.0, it's miles away. But in rdr2, I prefer fsr 2.0 tho.

Any comparison I look between FSR 2 vs DLSS 2, the latter is always blurred to my eyes, may as well drop to 1080p and have more fps

 

[Makaveli]

Is it me or is one side abit brigher with vibrant colours and the other abit muted?

 

[Punkenjoy]

Is it me or is one side abit brigher with vibrant colours and the other abit muted?

If i recall, this is a game very hard to get the same time of the day to get exact same results.

 

[GunShot]

Apparently, R* is not in continued discussions with AMD/NVIDIA's upsampling teams frequently because why would R* release FSR2.0 for RDR2 today but FSR2.1 was released yesterday?!

 

[Makaveli]

Apparently, R* is not in continued discussions with AMD/NVIDIA's upsampling teams frequently because why would R* release FSR2.0 for RDR2 today but FSR2.1 was released yesterday?!

Its not the end of the world I would assume that should be a very quick update if the game has 2.0 already.

 

[Hyderz]

i checked with the native resolution and amd fsr color reproduction is somewhat closer to original and dlss is more brighter.
In terms of visual quality, dlss is still slightly sharper

 

[1d10t]

I'm abandoning this game due to horrible TAA implementation and "forced" blur, even weirdly enough Playstation 4 got same hazy image, like everything under a thin veil, but I enjoyed playing it in console rather than in PC. At the time my 5700XT vomiting rainbow puke with MSAA set 4X, and though RIS make anything bit sharper, I don't quite comfortable playing it ~ 50fps @UWQHD.
I might revisit this game again, but if I remember chore and side quest,... ugh.

 

[Vayra86]

Watching these comparisons I get much less interested in the technology to be honest.

Its like the more these technologies get refined (ahem)... the more they start to deviate from the real color information. Look at the differences in the first shot: Nvidia DLSS has a dark foreground and bright cloud/background of the scene, AMD FSR is the polar opposite. DLSS has 'thinner lines' where heavy aliasing would occur (power line is a great example) while FSR has much better definition of shadows in the background and a fatter line on heavy aliasing, something that can also be spotted on the more distant building facades.

The true picture is probably somewhere in between both implementations, color wise likely leaning more towards the DLSS version, albeit more stable and less blurry in places.

I'm struggling to see improvement over native, rather, its just 'different', but absolutely warped from the intention the developer had, making it... IMHO... a worthless technology. Its cheating, and apparently not true reproduction. How far will the trickery go to achieve a few more frames? The implementation here is absolutely not good for green or red.

 

[ratirt]

When I looked at the 4k picture the DLSS and FSR offered way more details. FSR was even better than DLSS when zoomed especially at the back scene where the trees are and the the last two buildings.
The difference in details is huge between Native and DLLS/FSR. FSR has a problem with the power lines for instance. Kinda Achilles heel.

 

[ET3D]

Look at the differences in the first shot: Nvidia DLSS has a dark foreground and bright cloud/background of the scene, AMD FSR is the polar opposite.

As Punkenjoy said, this is game where it's hard to get the same exact image. Different lighting in the game causes the result to look different. Granted some of the changes (such as thickness of lines) could be attributed to the upscaling algorithms, but most of the colour difference is likely down to the game itself.

 

[GunShot]

Its not the end of the world I would assume that should be a very quick update if the game has 2.0 already.

Yeah. One would assume that but... we're talking about R*, though.

Remember how looooooong it took for R* to address its poor implementation of DLSS sharpening, etc.?

 

[Sybaris_Caesar]

With realistic lighting engine comes realistic headache matching the lighting for comparison. These are all real photos that look like shitty game graphics for example:

So I wouldn’t waste my time trying to compare between DLSS and FSR. Unless specified by reviewer that there's graphical artifacts both perform similarly at this point. And if one performs poorly compared to other, it's developer side.

Ultimately I think in the future DLSS is gonna get silent death like G-sync.

 

[Punkenjoy]

Ultimately I think in the future DLSS is gonna get silent death like G-sync.

Or maybe they will open it, we never know. There is also the chance that in the future DX and vulkan have an open solution (using machine learning or not) in their API. I think it's where it will go to be honest.

 

[Vayra86]

With realistic lighting engine comes realistic headache matching the lighting for comparison. These are all real photos that look like shitty game graphics for example:

So I wouldn’t waste my time trying to compare between DLSS and FSR. Unless specified by reviewer that there's graphical artifacts both perform similarly at this point. And if one performs poorly compared to other, it's developer side.

Ultimately I think in the future DLSS is gonna get silent death like G-sync.

Before FSR, DLSS would also cause subtle changes in color. Its not illogical either, the missing color info gets interpolated basically, so you get the approximate, but not the true result.

Its a fine line these technologies are treading. Definitely still not matured yet. Dont get me wrong, if implementation is easy and cheap for devs Im all for it being pushed further.

 

[Mysteoa]

It's interesting to me how in FSR the power lines get thicker than native, even more compared to DLS.

 

[Dyatlov A]

In video from moving horse looks everything better on Nvidia, while on standing picture AMD seemed better or the colors at least.

 

[BiggieShady]

It's interesting to me how in FSR the power lines get thicker than native, even more compared to DLS.

Funny how people rarely notice it, but fattening of the long thin high contrast features (power cables are great example), to me, seems to be part of FSR from the beginning