this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2026
102 points (95.5% liked)

PC Gaming

14246 readers
326 users here now

For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki

Rules:

  1. Be Respectful.
  2. No Spam or Porn.
  3. No Advertising.
  4. No Memes.
  5. No Tech Support.
  6. No questions about buying/building computers.
  7. No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
  8. No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
  9. No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
  10. Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Uh huh...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] cerebralhawks@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, then I'm either thinking of an older DLSS, or something else entirely.

BBC ran an article with a bit more to it, showing the same Resident Evil image with/without DLSS 5, and it looked more different than I expected it to. So nah, I'm not gonna defend this.

[โ€“] MentalEdge@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

Yeah. Previous generations of DLSS were about achieving the same result with less.

DLSS 5 is about "improving" what was previously the end result, even in cases where DLSS wouldn't have been needed in the first place.

Nvidia is claiming it achieves "hollywood movie cgi" fidelity.

In practice it looks like the result is just not pleasant.