Skip to main content

Why Is AMD's FidelityFX Super Resolution Taking So Long To Develop?

AMD FidelityFX
(Image credit: YouTube)

AMD has kept its new DLSS competitor, FidelityFX Super Resolution, under wraps for some time now. That makes us wonder what's going on with the technology and when it will actually see the light of day. Fortunately, LinusTechTips received some insider knowledge from AMD as to why the supersampling tech is taking so long to develop.

Apparently, AMD wants FidelityFX Super Resolution to have some polish to it before release. AMD also wants it to be fully operational on all its graphics cards and RDNA-based consoles like the PS5 and Xbox Series X, at launch. The alternative would be slowly rolling out the technology, one platform at a time (assuming each platform proves capable).

It's vague as to when we might expect it. AMD could release the tech alongside the newly announced RX 6700 XT, or AMD might be waiting for its entire RDNA2 lineup to be released before launching. We just don't know. Plus, AMD needs to make it work with its recently teased RX 6000M mobile GPUs.

AMD also wants to make Super Resolution GPU agnostic, just like other FidelityFX libraries. That potentially means supporting many generations of GPUs, including Nvidia and possibly even Intel options. If AMD limited support for Super Resolution to RDNA2 based products, without getting it to work on first gen RX 5000 series, it would certainly draw flak. Getting it to work well on Vega integrated graphics and older GCN products like the RX 400 and 500 series GPUs meanwhile would make for a more compelling options for game developers.

Not only does it need to work on a variety of architectures, but it needs to look good and perform well. Simple resolution upscaling is easy, but it also causes a loss of visual quality. Doing all of this requires a lot of time, naturally. We do know AMD is actively working on FidelityFX Super Resolution. Hopefully, the DLSS alternative will work well and come out sooner rather than later.

  • Kamen Rider Blade
    I honestly would rather AMD take their time to get it right on the first release then do a half assed implementation.
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    Sometimes having a half-assed implementation but committing to improve it and showing it is better than adding delays with the excuse of "we're making it better."

    Until you ship a product, you have no product.
    Reply
  • funguseater
    hotaru.hino said:
    Sometimes having a half-assed implementation but committing to improve it and showing it is better than adding delays with the excuse of "we're making it better."

    Until you ship a product, you have no product.

    Tell that to CDPR ;)
    Reply
  • hotaru.hino
    funguseater said:
    Tell that to CDPR ;)
    I mean sure, you can find plenty of examples where shipping something half-assed wasn't all that great in the end, but there are examples of ho-hum implementations that with time grew better. Such as:
    The original iPhone (though I suppose this counts more as a family of products than the product itself)
    AMD's GCN (if you want to believe it "ages like fine wine")
    The Xbox 360 (half-assed in that the hardware was poorly designed) and funnily enough the PS3
    The Xbox One in a way
    AMD's Bulldozer, though only if you compare it to Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge
    I could make a case for Windows Vista, since Windows 7 is the most beloved Windows OS and it's just Vista SP2 with a better task bar.
    Final Fantasy XIVAgain, until you ship a product, you have no product.
    Reply
  • TimmyP777
    Lol talk about shooting yourselves in the foot. This is obviously AMD lacking in the RnD for this and a cover up. If they had something to show they would have to compete, instead of appearing essentially worthless.
    Reply
  • Makaveli
    TimmyP777 said:
    Lol talk about shooting yourselves in the foot. This is obviously AMD lacking in the RnD for this and a cover up. If they had something to show they would have to compete, instead of appearing essentially worthless.

    And you know this because you work for AMD right?
    Reply
  • TimmyP777
    Makaveli said:
    And you know this because you work for AMD right?

    25 years of seeing AMD do the same things over and over and over again. Its not that hard. AMD has no answer, that is why they have nothing. It is virtually common sense. You think they wanted to take that beating by Nvidia?
    Reply
  • everettfsargent
    TimmyP777 said:
    25 years of seeing AMD do the same things over and over and over again. Its not that hard. AMD has no answer, that is why they have nothing. It is virtually common sense. You think they wanted to take that beating by Nvidia?

    Like Intel doing seven generations at 14nm! The i9-11900 CPU could eat ~400W at maximum OC's. Intel goes from 18-core HEDT to 8-core something or other. That is not treading water but drowning badly.
    Reply
  • Makaveli
    TimmyP777 said:
    25 years of seeing AMD do the same things over and over and over again. Its not that hard. AMD has no answer, that is why they have nothing. It is virtually common sense. You think they wanted to take that beating by Nvidia?

    So in other words you got nothing....
    Reply
  • chronium
    You're missing the obvious answer it took years for Nvidia to train it's AI to develop DLSS it's going to take AMD awhile to catch up since it's not a fast process.
    Reply