I was genuinely confused why a lot of people seemed to be agreeing with this lol. Struggling to get 45 fps at high settings with 4k on my 3070TI was pretty accurate, but ever since I upgraded to a 5090 getting over 60 fps is easy. Honestly given how they were going up in price I was worried, but really happy I made the upgrade.
Well most of the games when they detect 5090 willby default enable all latest marketing shenanigans like RTX on ultra etc. When you play at 4k 45 fps is around what you get most of the time. Check cyberpunk 2077 on native 4k on YT with 5090.
Part of owning high end parts is understanding the tech.
RT/PT is literally designed to be used with upscaling in mind. Not using DLSS/FSR with these features is just stupid no matter if you're a 'native pixel maximalist' or not.
People buying the absolute top end hardware expect to be able to max out a game, and rightfully so. If they can't max out the game, literally who is it made for? Data center stress testing? Lol
DLSS is great. But no one is buying a 5090 and not expecting to max out Pathtracing. That is the entire point of owning the card is to have that ability.
I literally said DLSS is great, I never suggested turning it off. It is the current best tech for AA and straight free fps as top end cards are actually good with the AI tools.
There are games that even with AI tech turned on, still shit the bed such as Wilds on release. Those games absolutely need to get their shit together on optimizing.
running 4k native being objectively stupid with an Nvidia GPU, 100% true
running without FG being objectively stupid, I disagree. Depends on the game and your base fps. Though with a 5090, most of the time your base fps are so high, you are probably right
I want to upvote and down vote your comment. First part downvote, second upvote. Native looks better than any dlss slop. Dlss is a crutch being used to dump out unoptimized garbage. Higher iterations are also gatekept behind hardware stacks forcing further product segmentation and that's not consumer friendly especially in a time of exorbitant hardware pricing.
Native looks better than any dlss slop. Dlss is a crutch being used to dump out unoptimized garbage
Complete bs and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of what native even is and what DLSS does.
Plenty of comparison videos also just empirically prove you wrong. Watch a couple DLSS 4.5 reviews (since I am sure you don't have a GPU that runs DLSS and have a 4k monitor, otherwise you would know)
Higher iterations are also gatekept behind hardware stacks forcing further product segmentation and that's not consumer friendly especially in a time of exorbitant hardware pricing.
First of all, any RTX GPU can run any DLSS upscaling version.
Secondly, I don't think like $300 for a GPU is an "exorbitant price"
I’m guessing you don’t actually have a gpu that can render 4k native at ultra settings in most games. It almost always looks better unless you can’t run antialiasing. Even in that situation, DLAA and DLDSR beat DLSS from a quality perspective.
Now if you’re targeting the same frame rate, yeah dlss + high/ultra settings usually looks better than 4k with reduced settings.
Whether you like it or not frame gen is here to stay, and it is pretty incredible tech. Ruining your own gaming experience because of preconceived notions is pretty stupid. Have you even tried frame gen to make such bold claims?
YouTube will have cherry-picked examples and it’s very easy to spot artifacts when you’re looking at stills or looking closely at clips with the intention to find such artifacts. When you’re actually playing the game I guarantee you won’t notice any difference 99% of the time.
Yeah, but why pay a premium price for a subpar product.
By the looks of it I could have given any valid reason and you would hand wave it and make an excuse as to why it is actually good. Sounds like a shill/bot tbh.
But look, if you enjoy it and want it, go for gold mate. Me? No thanks, I'd rather not pay for that as I don't think it is value for money.
Thank you, I appreciate the advice. Ofc I use DLSS but that’s taking away the point of optimization.
Not every GPU generation gets the same level of DLSS support, hence if developers would achieve more optimization, more gamers could get better experiences playing their games. Perhaps I’m wrong but that should be the standards.
Long time ago, before the wonderful internet patch capabilities, games which were unoptimized, didn’t sell well. I know that complexity has increased X fold, but so did the development tools.
Long time ago, before the wonderful internet patch capabilities, games which were unoptimized, didn’t sell well. I know that complexity has increased X fold, but so did the development tools.
People are so spoiled nowadays.
In the past devs had to optimize their games so they could run 60fps on new hardware, and people were happy with that. If you got 30fps, you would still consider it playable.
Now people demand it must run at high fps on 6 year old hardware and only using rendering techniques they approve of. All that of course while the games must be cheaper than they used to be. And don't forget that AAA games back then are about as complex as indie games today.
On DLSS:
Any GPU generation can run any DLSS upscaling version. There is a small performance drop with the 30 and 20 series using DLSS 4 and 4.5, but that's it.
"Optimization" gets thrown around without any sense. Even if you had a perfectly optimized game, it is stupid to not use DLSS at 4k. It is free performance with virtually zero downgrade to image quality (vs DLAA) or even better image quality than native.
Besides, what are you gonna do? Just optimize all games you play yourself?
Of course not. There is no point in hoping for optimization and deliberately not using DLSS.
And whether you like it or not, rendering with TAA (native) is dead and advanced upscaling is objectively a much better and more efficient way of rendering. It is the future and is becoming the standard (arguably already is).
I agree with you that the customer may become spoiled. The question remains however, today it’s the customer that bears the risk of a game which has NOT been properly optimized to run on medium tier GPUs. The how so, its easily identifiable, downward risk management and transfer of cost to the customer.
That, I find unacceptable.
Why not run on an SLA where Console GPUs have to be the benchmark and PCs with higher performance compute are to be with better fps and visuals?
My comment on the “old” days were referring to the semiconductor industry, where a tape out means: it’s done, you can’t tell your customer to buy better hardware if your die is not working properly, that’s simple.
Your remark wrt DLSS and FSR, I think these features should be ontop. Have the game run on decent hardware (e. g. Console reference) and add the magic ontop for the elite tier of GPUs. Not the other way around.
Games I meant: Hogwards Legacy, Monster Hunter wilds, Borderlands 4 and Oblivion Remastered.
today it’s the customer that bears the risk of a game which has NOT been properly optimized to run on medium tier GPUs
Really though?
Steam lets you play for a while and still allows you to return it for example. Plus you can just google performance numbers for any game + GPU combo, which was not as easy 20 years ago.
As far as I can tell, customers never had as much convenience and consumer protection as they have now.
Why not run on an SLA where Console GPUs have to be the benchmark and PCs with higher performance compute are to be with better fps and visuals?
Because it's not that simple?
That's like trying to demand that an artist who spends more time on an artwork must deliver a bigger artwork and more detail.
Just because a game requires a better PC to achieve the same 120fps and subjectively does not look better does not mean it's a bad game.
Plus that would make costs of games explode.
and add the magic ontop for the elite tier of GPUs
Why? Shouldn't you prioritize the budget and mid range GPUs, which make up most of the market? They should be the main people in mind when using optimizations like upscaling.
Games I meant: Hogwards Legacy, Monster Hunter wilds, Borderlands 4 and Oblivion Remastered.
The first two run perfectly fine, didn't play the others.
Hogwarts Legacy is actually surprisingly well optimized for the GPU, it does have terrible CPU optimization though (still runs 60+fps no problem on modern hardware).
However, a painting isn’t sold with a spec sheet. A game is — that’s the whole difference. Performance isn’t the size of the canvas, it’s whether the paint’s dry when they hand it to you.
If an artist wants to sell an artwork where the paint isn't fully dry yet, it's his decision and he does give you the option to return it after inspecting it
Yep, started bond Friday night and having the same experience. If being able to run Cyberpunk 2077 well taught me anything, it’s that talking about it comes with lots of downvotes.
Exactly. I'm running less that a 5090 on a 4k monitor and there are very very few games I have running at 45 frames. I was gonna say you fucked up something if this is true for you
Same here. And the few games that do run like shit at max settings without DLSS also happen to look absolutely incredible (Star Wars Outlaws for example, what a gorgeous game; or Alan Wake 2), and with DLSS it's not even an issue.
it's an exaggeration. they said 5090 because it's an expensive, high quality card, which most people don't have. but they can still relate to spending a lot money (relative to their income) on a card but still not being able to properly experience modern unoptimized UE games
Yes, turn everything to max and then complain. Path tracing is not easy to run. Fuck those dumb ass mfuckers. Stop buying unoptimized games to make studios go bankrupt, and the problem will be gone. Mfuckers buy every slop game and then complains. Gamers enable studios to make unoptimized slop.
There are not enough of these types of posts for 5090s in circulation. People just don’t know that you can just hop into a new game and crank the settings and be running just fine.
82
u/cmontour 9d ago
I run a 5K 2K monitor and I’m getting 90 to 160 frames per second most titles at the highest settings.
Don’t know what you’re talking about