AMD’s FSR 3 expertise made a shock debut earlier this month in two video games: Forspoken and Immortals of Aveum, and we’re prepared to provide you an early look of the expertise. There’s so much to cowl on this article together with a dialogue about body pacing, picture high quality and latency.
FidelityFX Super Resolution 3 (FSR 3, for brief) is AMD’s reply to Nvidia’s DLSS 3, which launched body era help for RTX 40 collection graphics playing cards a few yr in the past. The overarching idea is that between every usually rendered body, body era can create an interpolated body to enhance the smoothness of the sport’s presentation.
FSR 3 introduces body era that is just like DLSS 3 in its performance and objectives, with AMD beginning to roll out their tackle the expertise now after asserting it on November 2022.
The predominant distinction between FSR 3 body era and DLSS 3 body era at a floor stage is compatibility. DLSS 3 is unique to Nvidia’s RTX 40 graphics playing cards, with Nvidia claiming that solely their Ada Lovelace structure has the optical stream accelerator efficiency essential to drive body era.
FSR 3, alternatively, is on the market for all graphics playing cards, with official help for AMD’s Radeon 5000 collection and Nvidia’s RTX 20 collection and above. AMD is successfully claiming that they’ve an optical stream body interpolation system that’s performant sufficient to not require particular {hardware} accelerators, which definitely disrupts the GPU options race – offered it truly works effectively.
Recommended {hardware} for utilizing AMD FSR 3 with upscaling and body era
| AMD | Nvidia |
Supported: Recommended: | Supported: Recommended: |
With a few yr hole between the launch of the 2 applied sciences, at the moment there’s solely two video games with FSR 3 body era help, Forspoken and Immortals of Aveum. Enabling the function is so simple as turning on FSR 3 upscaling after which toggling body era within the sport’s settings.
A slide from AMD’s presentation on FSR 3 and Temporal Upscaling
Unlike with DLSS, FSR 3 body era requires using FSR 3 upscaling, so you might be tied to FSR if you wish to entry AMD’s body gen tech and it can’t be enabled with native rendering or DLSS upscaling.
FSR 3 additionally introduces a brand new native AA mode that applies the temporal anti-aliasing and sharpening part of FSR with out upscaling for these searching for higher picture high quality than what FSR often affords.
While FSR 3’s sport integration is so simple as a toggle, sadly it isn’t a expertise that “simply works.” And that is the place we have to begin speaking about FSR 3’s body pacing and configuration.
FSR 3 Frame Pacing Issues
FSR 3 works in another way relying on whether or not you might be utilizing variable refresh charge (VRR) expertise or not. It additionally works in another way relying on whether or not you might be gaming with VSync on or off. The precise configuration you might be utilizing drastically alters the ultimate FSR 3 output high quality and the best way it paces frames to your show. Let’s break all of it down.
Right now, all VSync off configurations in Forspoken and Immortals of Aveum are basically damaged with FSR 3. Frames will not be being paced accurately with VSync disabled, resulting in both a blurry or juddery presentation (or some mixture of each points).
This implies that in a VSync off state, FSR 3 supplies zero profit. While it does improve the body charge quantity you may see in an FPS counter, the precise visible presentation isn’t any completely different from utilizing FSR 3 off, and in some instances will be worse.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
In the video above is an instance of how VSync off with FSR 3 body era is pacing frames to the show. You’ll need to excuse the low high quality sluggish movement footage right here, we do not have a very nice 1000 FPS digital camera.
Both configurations are working at roughly 100 FPS with VSync off on a variable refresh charge show. However we aren’t getting a real 100 FPS output with body era enabled; as an alternative, relative to natively rendered 100 FPS, body era seems to be outputting frames at a a lot decrease charge. We consider with VSync off that FSR 3 is just not correctly pacing or displaying half of the frames to the purpose the place it makes little to no distinction in comparison with not utilizing body era and easily taking part in at a decrease body charge.
AMD tells us that VSync off in each launch titles is utilizing an older methodology for dealing with body era, older than the model described on their GPUOpen web site. We do not know why an outdated model of FSR 3 can be used to launch the expertise if a repair for VSync off is understood and carried out in newer code, however right here we’re.
FSR 3 body era additionally does not work correctly with any variable refresh charge configuration when gaming inside your monitor’s refresh charge vary. Normally when gaming with VRR enabled, your body charge and monitor’s refresh charge are synced to scale back judder and display screen tearing from any mismatch. FSR 3 breaks this performance.
When we view sluggish movement footage we will affirm that is the case. Without body era, a 100 FPS output is constantly paced to the show. With body era enabled, the monitor’s refresh charge counter stays largely at its most (on this case 160Hz) with the occasional dip to a decrease refresh charge, so the 100 FPS output is just not synchronized with the refresh charge. This causes body pacing judder, and as some frames are being proven on display screen for longer than in a VRR state, it will probably additionally result in elevated blur in some conditions.
However, after we evaluate this to DLSS 3, we will see that Nvidia’s body era expertise is accurately and precisely pacing frames and dealing simply high-quality with variable refresh charges, as you’ll anticipate for a 100 FPS output on a 160Hz monitor. This is true for FSR 3 whether or not you could have an Nvidia or AMD GPU.
This can be true in the event you use a body cap inside your monitor’s most refresh charge. Native rendering with a 120 FPS cap will change your VRR succesful monitor to run at 120Hz. With FSR 3 body era, capping to 120 FPS will nonetheless make your monitor run on the most refresh charge, on this case 160Hz, which is a mismatch that causes judder – though the body time output graph seems smoother. The solely time we noticed right body pacing was when body era was in a position to max out the monitor’s refresh charge.
In follow this limits the good thing about FSR 3. The bigger the hole in output body charge and monitor refresh charge, the extra juddery and unsightly the FSR 3 expertise is. While this does work higher than VSync off and the precise variety of delivered frames is increased than not utilizing body era, relying on how low the body charge is, FSR 3 can truly really feel much less easy, which defeats the entire objective of the expertise.
These points are minimized at increased body charges and a better hole to your monitor’s max refresh charge. In our configuration, for instance, something above 130 FPS on my 160 Hz monitor felt fairly good and seemed clearer than not utilizing body era and due to this fact taking part in at a decrease body charge. The preferrred expertise happens when working on the max refresh charge, however just a bit beneath that also labored effectively.
We discovered a small enchancment when disabling variable refresh charges and working at a hard and fast refresh with VSync on. My monitor’s refresh charge turned much less erratic, which helped tempo frames just a little higher, however in the end in case you are working FSR 3 beneath your monitor’s max refresh charge on this state, there may be nonetheless an opportunity of judder as we all know is the case for mounted refresh gaming. The similar applies as described earlier than, the place something above 130 FPS on my 160Hz monitor felt fairly good, however beneath that and particularly beneath 100 FPS the judder was very noticeable and never preferrred.
With such a robust give attention to VSync on gaming and maxing out your refresh charge, we consider AMD hasn’t examined variable refresh charge configurations adequately sufficient, and hasn’t optimized the expertise for what we would say is the commonest and fascinating configuration that embrace variable refresh charge.
In response, AMD tells us that FSR 3 was designed to be used with VSync on with the aim of maxing out your monitor’s refresh charge. They additionally informed us that they had body pacing working accurately with variable refresh charges of their labs, one thing we had been unable to copy on both Nvidia or AMD GPUs. My expertise appears to align with different folks testing FSR 3 body era.
With such a robust give attention to VSync on gaming and maxing out your refresh charge, we consider AMD hasn’t examined variable refresh charge configurations adequately sufficient, and hasn’t optimized the expertise for what we would say is the commonest and fascinating configuration that features variable refresh charge.
Pretty a lot each gaming monitor bought within the final 5-7 years helps it, so having to disable VRR or tune settings to max out your monitor’s refresh charge appears like an old-fashioned strategy in a world with widespread variable refresh, generally with very excessive max refreshes like 240Hz and even 540 Hz lately.
FSR 3 Image Quality vs DLSS 3
At this level it turns into apparent that FSR 3 does not run in addition to DLSS 3 in its present state because the latter does help variable refresh charges, VSync on, and VSync off. With DLSS 3 body era, you should use any configuration you want, activate the body era toggle and expertise correctly paced interpolated frames.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
With FSR 3 body era you must guarantee your output body charge is excessive sufficient, most likely disable variable refresh charges, and ensure VSync is on. That’s an excessive amount of fiddling round when the direct different and competitor expertise successfully “simply works.”
Now let’s speak in regards to the precise high quality of FSR 3 body era when utilized in a super configuration: maxing out your monitor’s refresh charge. The high quality of interpolated / generated frames might be the most important power of FSR 3 proper now and one facet that AMD have largely gotten proper.
The greatest win for FSR 3 body era is how FSR handles UI components. DLSS 3 struggles with this, and whereas it has improved since launch, there are nonetheless titles that do not have good dealing with of UI components, usually that includes garbled, distracting, terrible UI in movement. This was by far probably the most noticeable difficulty from Nvidia’s body era. With FSR 3, we did not spot any UI points testing Forspoken or Immortals of Aveum. Both video games with FSR 3 body era deal with the UI flawlessly, no garbling, no distracting points, which eliminates the most important artifact seen from this expertise.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
Even in a title like Immortals of Aveum which usually has good UI rendering from each FSR 3 and DLSS 3, FSR 3 has the sting. When we have a look at semi-transparent UI components, for instance, FSR 3 higher handles interpolation behind the transparency in movement in comparison with DLSS 3. This is as a result of FSR 3 has a mode for sport builders that totally decouples the UI loop from the body era loop. We suspect that is how most video games will deal with the UI with FSR 3, though AMD did point out there may be an possibility sport builders can use to place the UI via the interpolation move, one thing I hope is just not used if it creates vital artifacting.
Like with DLSS 3, it is arduous to identify any artifacts from the FSR 3 generated frames themselves when the ultimate output body charge is within the 100 to 120 FPS vary or increased – which generally corresponds to a local 60 FPS render charge or increased. While the problems are evident when slowing down the footage and inspecting body by body, having these decrease high quality frames interspersed with increased high quality frames considerably reduces their visibility and the way noticeable these artifacts are. The increased the body charge, the shorter every of those frames is being proven.
And just about identically to DLSS 3, FSR 3 body era falls aside when used at a low native render charge, particularly when taking 30-40 FPS and turning it into 60-70 FPS. This is just not a beneficial use case for body era, it simply does not work effectively, artifacts in movement are fairly noticeable and this considerably reduces visible high quality. Having a comparatively excessive output body charge is essential to making sure all body era tech works effectively.
Having a comparatively excessive output body charge is essential to making sure all body era tech works effectively.
When extra carefully assessing the standard of FSR 3 generated frames, we’d say their high quality is just not fairly pretty much as good as DLSS 3 generated frames, though in follow at a excessive sufficient body charge it is tough to inform the distinction.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
Typical ache factors for body era are any high-quality particulars, like wires or chains. When slowed down (as proven within the video) you may see that each second body has garbled chain element for each DLSS and FSR body era, though DLSS finally ends up much less garbled. Transparency results journey up body era, with FSR 3 once more trying a bit blurrier in its generated frames for this magical white impact.
Fast advanced movement could cause interpolation points as effectively. When altering your weapon in Aveum, each DLSS 3 and FSR 3 produce numerous garbling as every body struggles to take care of the fast modifications in movement. However on shut inspection the extent of garbling is larger on the FSR 3 aspect, although neither tech could possibly be described as producing prime quality frames on this state of affairs.
In many different conditions you may see comparable output from DLSS 3 and FSR 3 body era, at the least based mostly on the present pattern of 1 that we’ve got. For instance, easy movement like digital camera pans or translation usually works effectively, with each applied sciences counting on movement vectors to ship the identical stage of element as in ‘actual’ frames. More advanced textures and components like foliage can have points throughout easy movement, however we did not see a transparent winner for this between DLSS and FSR. We suspect like numerous different implementations of DLSS and FSR, that these high quality battles will fluctuate from sport to sport.
While artifacts will be arduous to identify with a excessive sufficient body charge, it is fairly clear throughout each FSR 3 video games that generated frames will not be equal to usually rendered frames in high quality. Using both DLSS or FSR with out body era ensures the least quantity of artifacting, however with body era on, it is uncommon to get the “good” generated body. When enabling FSR 3 you may have to simply accept that the ensuing picture high quality from every body is diminished to enhance the smoothness of the presentation, with a decrease high quality output in comparison with rendering the sport natively on the similar body charge.
But the most important difficulty with FSR 3 picture high quality is just not the generated frames themselves, it is the standard of FSR upscaling, which AMD tells us has solely obtained minor enhancements (if any) relative to FSR 2.2.
This implies that in a battle between FSR 3 and DLSS 3 body era, DLSS usually has noticeably superior picture high quality – and that is all the way down to DLSS having higher upscaled picture high quality, which is able to dictate the standard of the “actual” frames which might be proven and enter into the interpolation algorithm. So whereas the distinction in generated body high quality is not all that noticeable at a excessive body charge, the general distinction in picture high quality from upscaling definitely is.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
Even at a 4K decision, which we used for all picture high quality comparisons within the movies, in each Forspoken and Immortals of Aveum, DLSS upscaling is superior to FSR upscaling and that impacts the visible presentation for body era. In specific, DLSS has higher picture stability and fewer shimmering, in addition to often higher high-quality element reconstruction in movement.
Even when pitting DLSS Quality mode up towards FSR Native AA upscaling, DLSS Quality was higher in each titles evaluated, it merely has higher picture stability in movement which is noticeable as each video games are heavy on foliage and particle results. While we did not extensively take a look at this, we anticipate the hole to widen because it usually does when testing decrease render resolutions or decrease output resolutions.
This finally ends up because the defining distinction in picture high quality between the 2 strategies. As FSR 3 body era requires using FSR upscaling, you might be locked into utilizing that upscaling even when the next high quality expertise is on the market. In a face to face battle with DLSS 3 body era utilizing DLSS upscaling, FSR 3 has decrease general picture high quality due to this though we had been okay with the standard of FSR 3 generated frames. Until AMD can enhance the standard of their upscaling part, this hole between AMD and Nvidia tech will stay.
For a greater illustration of picture high quality comparisons, try the HUB video beneath:
The pressured use of FSR upscaling with FSR 3 body era additionally locks out doubtlessly superior mixtures. For instance, Nvidia RTX 30 collection homeowners would have a greater expertise utilizing DLSS upscaling with FSR body era, as they can not entry DLSS body era however can use DLSS upscaling.
We think about AMD does not wish to give Nvidia homeowners the very best expertise with FSR body era, therefore the explanation for locking it to FSR upscaling for function parity throughout Radeon and GeForce GPUs. But this does find yourself hurting Radeon homeowners, too, as a result of a sport like Forspoken seems higher with native TAA than utilizing FSR upscaling and even the FSR Native AA mode. Having entry to native rendering + body era, or DLSS + FSR body era, and even XeSS + FSR 3, can be preferrred.
FSR 3 Latency and Performance
Finally, let’s speak about latency and FPS output efficiency. On a Radeon RX 7900 XTX, FSR 3 is kind of efficient at growing the output FPS. When utilizing the Native AA mode within the scene we examined in Immortals of Aveum, we went from 43 FPS to 79 FPS, an 83% improve.
At the identical time, latency decreased on account of AMD’s built-in latency lowering tech that’s utilized when body era is enabled. So with FSR 3 on, we ended up seeing a 23ms drop to latency, noting that the muzzle flash we had been testing in Aveum is not instantaneous on mouse click on therefore the excessive general numbers.
Using Quality upscaling as an alternative, we noticed body era improve FPS from 71 to 122, a 72 % improve. Latency on this configuration dropped by 8ms. However the bottom latency mode right here was nonetheless rendering at the next native body charge, FSR with Performance mode upscaling delivered 91 FPS – decrease than FSR 3 Quality with body era – however it had round 10ms much less latency.
One fascinating discovery is that for appropriate Radeon GPUs, at the moment Anti-Lag+ does not affect latency to any vital diploma with FSR 3 enabled. While Anti-Lag+ does have a big effect for non body gen configurations, chopping FSR Quality mode latency by 33ms on the similar body charge, this does not apply to border era. AMD confirmed these findings, noting that proper now Anti-Lag+ is ineffective within the two FSR 3 launch titles and the driver-side function and its corresponding profiles for these video games wants extra work to correctly detect FSR 3 body era output.
On a GeForce RTX 4090, there was no latency enchancment between body era on or off. When utilizing FSR 3 Quality we noticed round 105ms of latency at 84 FPS within the scene examined, and with body era that improved to 140 FPS with 108ms of latency. The RTX 4090 did not profit fairly as a lot from FSR 3 body era because the Radeon 7900 XTX did, although the margins between them when it comes to proportion uplift weren’t large.
Lots of AMD’s advertising and marketing has targeted on FSR 3 offering each the next body charge and decrease latency than native rendering, that are the identical claims that Nvidia makes for DLSS 3 body era. However, what we have seen is that almost all of this latency profit is from additionally making use of upscaling, not from the body era part itself which does not enhance latency to the identical diploma as working at the next native render charge. We due to this fact find yourself with the identical state of affairs as DLSS body era, the place it does enhance the smoothness of the presentation, however does not really feel as responsive as true increased body charge gaming.
The actual kicker for FSR 3 latency is that Nvidia’s present DLSS 3 implementation delivers notably decrease latency on account of its full integration with Reflex. On a GeForce RTX 4090, Reflex supplies a stable latency enchancment: when utilizing DLSS Quality upscaling and no body era, Reflex itself reduces latency from 106 to 87ms. This is an analogous profit we noticed from Anti-Lag+ on the Radeon aspect, the place we went from 122 to 89ms of latency beneath comparable situations.
But as Reflex works and is at all times enabled with DLSS 3 body era, in our testing we noticed an output body charge of 125 FPS for 90ms of latency utilizing Quality upscaling. FSR 3, with out Reflex, delivered 140 FPS for 108ms of latency. So whereas FSR body era was in a position to improve the body charge by 67%, versus only a 42% improve for DLSS body era, DLSS ended up with 18ms decrease latency.
This is the place the shortage of compatibility for FSR 3 with Anti-Lag+ hurts. The RTX 4090 utilizing Nvidia body era tech and Reflex delivered 125 FPS and 90ms of latency. The RX 7900 XTX utilizing AMD body era tech and Anti-Lag+ delivered 124 FPS with 107ms of latency. In a greatest vs. greatest comparability that offers Nvidia the latency edge, till AMD can get Anti-Lag+ working successfully. And on condition that you should use Reflex on an Nvidia GPU alongside FSR 3, at the moment the bottom latency experiences with FSR 3 expertise will probably be on an Nvidia GPU the place that tech is built-in.
It’s not all dangerous information although. These efficiency figures do recommend that the optical stream move in FSR 3 has much less overhead than the optical stream move in DLSS 3, that means that FSR 3 delivers the next FPS increase from the identical base body charge. But till latency is equalized this does not end in a greater expertise from FSR – and will not till upscaling picture high quality is improved both.
Bottom Line
Overall, we aren’t impressed with what we have seen from AMD’s FSR 3 thus far. The function appears rushed, incomplete, and never totally prepared for prime time. There are too many incompatibilities and configuration points, which stand out badly in comparison with Nvidia’s DLSS 3, itself a function with points. The ensuing FSR 3 body era expertise is tough to suggest exterior a couple of area of interest use instances.
The similar form of caveats that we talked about with DLSS 3 additionally apply to FSR 3: to keep away from seen artifacts in generated frames, you may want a base body charge of at the least 60 FPS with a remaining output round 100 to 120 FPS. And on condition that body era doesn’t enhance latency, for that true excessive refresh charge expertise, you may need a base body charge of 100 to 120 FPS (with a remaining output above 200 FPS) for the responsiveness we usually affiliate with the very best gaming experiences.
This is why we refer to border era as a function that enhances the sport’s smoothness, reasonably than one thing that improves general efficiency – the advantages are totally visible in nature.
To be totally clear:
- If you are a gamer that does not have the GPU efficiency to hit 60+ base body charge targets, then body era – DLSS 3 or FSR 3 – is not going to ship an excellent expertise.
- If you are a gamer that’s solely taking part in at 60 FPS however desires to enhance that to a real excessive refresh charge expertise, body era is not correctly able to that.
- If you are a multiplayer gamer that particularly desires to extend body charges to entry decrease latencies and improve responsiveness to make you extra aggressive, body era is ineffective for that.
FSR 3 isn’t any higher than DLSS 3 at any of these points that, proper now, are elementary to border era. Where AMD stumbles is that they’ve taken a function that already has considerably restricted usability and restricted it additional. Not solely do you now want to fret about base body charge, however you may even have to make sure you’ve arrange VSync accurately and are pumping out sufficient frames to keep away from judder.
This is why we refer to border era as a function that enhances the sport’s smoothness, reasonably than one thing that improves general efficiency – the advantages are totally visible in nature.
You’ll need to be glad with sacrificing correct variable refresh charge performance – a function we strongly suggest each gamer makes use of – to entry body era. There are conditions the place that commerce off alone is just not price it, as FSR 3 will be much less easy than not utilizing it, defeating the entire objective of a expertise designed to enhance smoothness.
That’s to not say FSR 3 by no means works effectively.
If you could have a fairly excessive output body charge, and are working at or close to your monitor’s most refresh charge with VSync on, the FSR 3 body era expertise will be smoother and higher than not utilizing body era. But when we’ve got DLSS 3 body era that – to make use of an Nvidia-ism “simply works” with options like VRR – going backwards on compatibility with FSR 3 actually stands out.
AMD has clearly put numerous work into making certain the body era a part of the expertise works effectively, with quick and efficient interpolation. It has decrease overhead than DLSS 3 body era, it has zero points rendering UI that we have seen thus far, the final high quality of interpolated frames is suitable, and it really works throughout all graphics playing cards – no particular {hardware} required. That’s a win for FSR 3, and it is probably the most spectacular facet of what AMD has produced and does present a stable basis for enchancment.
But all that nice work that is been put into producing frames is let down by AMD’s inferior upscaling expertise, which you might be locked into utilizing with FSR 3 body era. The general picture high quality – factoring in generated frames and regular frames – is solely higher from DLSS 3 and that is largely all the way down to Nvidia’s upscaler. Without substantial enchancment to FSR upscaling, particularly at decrease resolutions, DLSS 3 will proceed to supply a greater general bundle than FSR 3.
FSR 3 can be let down on the latency entrance with its incompatibility with Anti-Lag+ in the meanwhile, that means that DLSS 3 on an Nvidia GPU delivers decrease latency on the similar output body charge than FSR 3 on an AMD GPU. The gulf widens for Radeon RX 6000 collection which might’t even use Anti-Lag+ in any respect, and homeowners of older Nvidia GPUs will probably be praying for Reflex in FSR 3 titles because the built-in latency lowering tech in FSR 3 is not overly efficient.
AMD says that a few of these points will probably be improved. They’re engaged on Anti-Lag+ compatibility, VSync off has been mounted in a more moderen model of FSR 3, they usually’re conscious of VRR compatibility points. But a few of these ought to have been resolved earlier than launch, so that everybody that turns it on is handled to an excellent expertise. Instead, it appears that evidently AMD rushed this out to make a September launch deadline, assuaging stress that was placed on themselves by asserting FSR 3 far too early.
We can solely consider FSR 3 on what’s in entrance of us proper now, which is integration into two video games with loads of points. If you should use FSR 3 to max out your monitor, we expect the expertise will probably be fairly good for you and we would most likely suggest giving it a attempt. If that is not doable, it is arduous to justify utilizing proper now.
And that is actually the current state of FSR 3. It is not overly aggressive with DLSS 3, and it does not do a lot to shut the function hole between AMD and Nvidia, even when we ignore the massive distinction within the variety of supported titles. If AMD can allocate assets to enhance FSR 3, it ought to be doable to get it to that stage we would like although. Solve the body pacing and VRR compatibility points, get it working with Anti-Lag+ and – maybe probably the most tough of all – enhance the standard of FSR upscaling and FSR 3 can be the gold customary for body era expertise given its low overhead and broad compatibility.
