11 hours ago, pjs37 said:

I don't know if we would get DLSS I would love to see it but given its a NVidia technology I don't think they would implement it.  As for RT I don't know if they would want to but maybe like FSX it will be an experimental mode...

How does that make sense? That's like saying "why would MSFS work on Nvidia cards as it's not their technology".

 

6 hours ago, Glenn Fitzpatrick said:

All true. Particularly in 3D areas and customised airports.

Though there are also large areas of generic trees and water and those generic buildings generated where there is no 3D map so there is still some stuff DLSS might be able to work with.

Not true at all. DLSS 2.0 is a generalized network that works across all games and it does not need application specific training.

42 minutes ago, Evros said:

Not true at all. DLSS 2.0 is a generalized network that works across all games and it does not need application specific training.

You're right. I wasn't up to speed with what had changed with 2.0.

8 hours ago, Evros said:

How does that make sense? That's like saying "why would MSFS work on Nvidia cards as it's not their technology".

Historically they have consistently shown that they won't do that.  MS owns DirectX if it gets integrated into DirectX MAYBE but who knows how long that would take and they have not suggested they would.  Ray Tracing is being integrated into DirectX and that is the version AMD will be using so we are more likely to see that first.  Also bear in mind Xbox uses AMD parts not nVidia so even less reason for them to support that.  MS Works with nVidia cards in as far as however nVidia Cards implement MS DirectX systems.

1 hour ago, pjs37 said:

Historically they have consistently shown that they won't do that.  MS owns DirectX if it gets integrated into DirectX MAYBE but who knows how long that would take and they have not suggested they would.  Ray Tracing is being integrated into DirectX and that is the version AMD will be using so we are more likely to see that first.  Also bear in mind Xbox uses AMD parts not nVidia so even less reason for them to support that.  MS Works with nVidia cards in as far as however nVidia Cards implement MS DirectX systems.

I can't recall any historical reason why MS wouldn't implement DLSS into one of it's titles. They don't have any standting feuds with Nvidia. I might be wrong, though, so feel free to correct me if you have any actual information. Also, I think you are a bit misinformed about ray tracing. Nvidia is tapping into DXR, which is DirectX 12 API extension and originally developed (by Microsoft) for Nvidia's Volta architecture. It's not something that Nvidia does exclusively on driver level. AMD can and will use that same insertion point for their version of ray tracing on PC. So basically Nvidia supports Microsoft's DXR by having their hardware interface with the API, not the other way around.

Edited September 27, 20205 yr by Evros

4 minutes ago, Evros said:

I can't recall any historical reason why MS wouldn't implement DLSS into one of it's titles. They don't have any standting feuds with Nvidia. I might be wrong, though, so feel free to correct me if you have any actual information. Also, I think you are a bit misinformed about ray tracing. Nvidia is tapping into DXR, which is DirectX 12 API extension and originally developed (by Microsoft) for Nvidia's Volta architecture. It's not something that Nvidia does exclusively on driver level. AMD can and will use that same insertion point for their version of ray tracing on PC.

Yeah most likely confused on the RT stuff; I just knew ray tracing was implemented into DirectX which like you said is how AMD will be using it this upcoming generation and in the Xbox series wasn't familiar if it was nVidia came up with it first and then opened it to DirectX or what have you.  I just know somehow Volta was involved at some part so I will defer to you on that.

As for DLSS its not really a feud thing.  DirectX is more or less neutral ground for the GPU vendors.  MS controls it anything that goes in there can be used by AMD, nVidia, or Intel they can't really be like 'We are going to implement DLSS and shut out AMD; our Xbox hardware vendor' or be like "Well MSFS runs ok on most PC's but runs even better on GeForce GPU's then any other vendor" Its one thing for hardware to run MSFS faster because the hardware itself is better designed or just runs faster across the board by sheer computing power its completely another for it to run better on one brand of GPU's because they implement a feature ONLY that vendor can provide.

MS general way to do things is if a vendor makes something that they want to implement it needs to be shared across the board.  So when Windows 8 implemented SSE2 it was only after AMD was able to start licensing it from Intel to do so.  When AMD made their 64 bit extension Intel has to license that 64 bit extension and not use the one they made (though there was a special data center of Windows XP that ran on Itanium but data centers is a completely different model)

For MS its in their best interest to have feature parity across their vendor partners.  Ultimately for MS their games are ways to if anything showcase their API and what it can do.  It seems counter-intuitive to implement things that not every GPU in their system can do. It is why we don't get vendor specific Antialiasing into MS games on PC, PhysX, Hairworks, etc. I don't think its really about feuds and more just wanting to stay neutral across their various partners.  If I was AMD and nVidia DLSS was implemented in a MS title and made my cards look worse for it I would be word not allowed off especially if I am your partner for your console these games are also coming to.

17 hours ago, JacquesBrel said:

Not that I'm an expert on the nitty-gritty details of DLSS

 

17 hours ago, JacquesBrel said:

deep learning algorithm has to be trained

Everyone who's seen Terminator is an expert on learning computers....

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=neuonet+learning+computer+terminator+video&docid=608052182581119296&mid=1415BE50BA87617DFFDB1415BE50BA87617DFFDB&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

In the future they refer to it as Skynet. 🙂

Rumor has it Arnold's CPU is running on DX12

 

Edited September 27, 20205 yr by Steve Dra

5 minutes ago, Steve Dra said:

 

Everyone who's seen Terminator is an expert on learning computers....

https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=neuonet+learning+computer+terminator+video&docid=608052182581119296&mid=1415BE50BA87617DFFDB1415BE50BA87617DFFDB&view=detail&FORM=VIRE

In the future they refer to it as Skynet. 🙂

Rumor has it Arnold's CPU is running on DX12

 

I knew it.  MSFS is secretly going to be the downfall of humanity and usher in the Machines vs Human war.

1 minute ago, pjs37 said:

I knew it.  MSFS is secretly going to be the downfall of humanity and usher in the Machines vs Human war.

Pfffft......old news.   Right now Skynet is testing the viability of XXX vs XXX wars by injecting random MSFS haters into the forum threads to see how the humans react to them.  Once they have enough data, Skynet will start its plan to take over the world from us, using the very tactics we give them in these forums!  In the movies, you are seeing the eventuality of the P3d vs Xplane Vs MSFS wars Skynet is fueling here. 🙂

In fact, one of the deleted scenes in the last movie (well...the one where the original Terminator is referred to as "Pops").....The kid, right before skynet goes live, is playing P3D V8 and asks his Dad if he can try MSFS2033...to which he says "OMG>>>All these sim choices are going to be the end of humanity!!!!"

You know, it's a real pity that no one builds a video card where one can add more VRAM. Imagine how it would be to have say, 32GB VRAM!

10 minutes ago, n4gix said:

You know, it's a real pity that no one builds a video card where one can add more VRAM. Imagine how it would be to have say, 32GB VRAM!

Isn't this why directStorage is being developed? The new consoles are pretty much using nvme drives for this very purpose. It's not as quick as dedicated vram but it enables the GPU direct access to vast amounts of reasonable rapid (by comparison) storage.

Edited September 27, 20205 yr by viz

42 minutes ago, pjs37 said:

As for DLSS its not really a feud thing.  DirectX is more or less neutral ground for the GPU vendors.  MS controls it anything that goes in there can be used by AMD, nVidia, or Intel they can't really be like 'We are going to implement DLSS and shut out AMD; our Xbox hardware vendor' or be like "Well MSFS runs ok on most PC's but runs even better on GeForce GPU's then any other vendor" Its one thing for hardware to run MSFS faster because the hardware itself is better designed or just runs faster across the board by sheer computing power its completely another for it to run better on one brand of GPU's because they implement a feature ONLY that vendor can provide.

MS general way to do things is if a vendor makes something that they want to implement it needs to be shared across the board.  So when Windows 8 implemented SSE2 it was only after AMD was able to start licensing it from Intel to do so.  When AMD made their 64 bit extension Intel has to license that 64 bit extension and not use the one they made (though there was a special data center of Windows XP that ran on Itanium but data centers is a completely different model)

For MS its in their best interest to have feature parity across their vendor partners.  Ultimately for MS their games are ways to if anything showcase their API and what it can do.  It seems counter-intuitive to implement things that not every GPU in their system can do. It is why we don't get vendor specific Antialiasing into MS games on PC, PhysX, Hairworks, etc. I don't think its really about feuds and more just wanting to stay neutral across their various partners.  If I was AMD and nVidia DLSS was implemented in a MS title and made my cards look worse for it I would be word not allowed off especially if I am your partner for your console these games are also coming to.

You know what, you could very well be right on this one. I just find it to be rather unfair to certain company that develops new methods, just to be denied by developers for a sake of keeping a level playing field. That kind of policy encourages stagnation instead of progression.

Lots of game developers have used exclusive technologies from both team red and green and I have yet seen that some majority groups have been offended that their technology of choice was not used. Especially when other party doesn't have anything competing to bring to the table.

I better start shopping for that 32G VRAM 3090 card!

 

Can somebody give me $5k quick!

5 minutes ago, Evros said:

You know what, you could very well be right on this one. I just find it to be rather unfair to certain company that develops new methods, just to be denied by developers for a sake of keeping a level playing field. That kind of policy encourages stagnation instead of progression.

Lots of game developers have used exclusive technologies from both team red and green and I have yet seen that some majority groups have been offended that their technology of choice was not used. Especially when other party doesn't have anything competing to bring to the table.

lol look up the Hairworks Witcher 3 Controversy its the only reason I even considered this angle really.  While I agree to a degree these things can be a boon to the user (DLSS especially because its really just a fancy downscaling process in its most simple form) I have also been on the flipside of having gone with one thing and be shut out of features because of it

12 minutes ago, pjs37 said:

lol look up the Hairworks Witcher 3 Controversy its the only reason I even considered this angle really.  While I agree to a degree these things can be a boon to the user (DLSS especially because its really just a fancy downscaling process in its most simple form) I have also been on the flipside of having gone with one thing and be shut out of features because of it

I stand corrected. But this is the world we live in - you can't please everyone. Especially when proprietary assets like GameWorks and GPUOpen are involved.

I still hope that MSFS and many others will implement DLSS. That could only inspire AMD to counter their proposal and continue to drive innovation. And if it doesn't then no one can be mad because as I stated before, you have to bring competitive technology to table to make an argument that developer A is biased to manufacturer B.

1 minute ago, Evros said:

I stand corrected. But this is the world we live in - you can't please everyone. Especially when proprietary assets like GameWorks and GPUOpen are involved.

I still hope that MSFS and many others will implement DLSS. That could only inspire AMD to counter their proposal and continue to drive innovation. And if it doesn't then no one can be mad because as I stated before, you have to bring competitive technology to table to make an argument that developer A is biased to manufacturer B.

Oh definitely.  If something is good enough it gets expanded if there is demand. Look at G-Sync that started the whole trend of adaptive V-Sync!