AMD FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 Heads to 16 More Games
Let the FSR 2.0 invasion begin!
AMD released a new blog post earlier this morning sharing further details surrounding the FidelityFX Super Resolution 2.0 (FSR 2.0) adoption rate by video game titles and game developers. According to AMD, 16 new titles will gain FSR 2.0 support soon, including big hitters such as Hitman 3 and Microsoft Flight Simulator.
FSR 2.0 adoption by game development studios is also looking good, with 19 more game studios supporting AMD's upscaling technology. These firms include ACME Game Studio, Arkane Lyon, Asobo Studio, CCP Games, GIANTS Software, IO Interactive, Luminous Productions, Luoxigu Network, Obsidian Entertainment, Perfect World Games (developer of Perfect World and Swordsman), Reflection/Bandai Namco, Respawn Entertainment, rct.ai, Santa Monica Studio, Souleve/Netmarble F&C, Striking Distance Studios, Tag Studio, Thunder Fire, and Wonder People.
As a result, we should see many more new games and current games featuring AMD's new upscaling technology as time progresses. So the future is looking bright for FSR.
With the addition of 16 more titles receiving FSR 2.0 support, video game adoption of version 2.0 has grown to 19 games in all so far. Upcoming titles include Abyss World, Asterigos, Delysium, EVE Online, Forspoken, Grounded, Hitman 3, Microsoft Flight Simulator, NiShuiHan, Overprime, Perfect World Remake, Rescue Party: Live!, Super People, Swordsman Remake, The Callisto Protocol, and Unknown 9: Awakening. This is on top of the three titles already supporting FSR 2.0, including God of War, Death loop, and Farming Simulator 22.
Surprisingly, AMD also announced that FSR 1.0 support is increasing simultaneously. With seven more titles now supporting version 1.0, including Arma Reforger, Assassin's Creed Valhalla, Dolmen, Hitman 3, Raji: An Ancient Epic Enhanced Edition, Sniper Elite 5, The Elder Scrolls Online, and V Rising.
This might seem strange, considering FSR 2.0 is already out in the wild. However, FSR 1.0's more basic upscaling technique is far less demanding on GPU hardware. In addition, game implementation requirements for version 1.0 are also less demanding on game developers. These two facts can make FSR 1.0 more appealing than FSR 2.0. But, there's nothing to stop developers from adding 1.0 and 2.0 into a single game.
Official AMD FSR 2.0 Benchmarks - God of War & Farming Simulator 22
In the blog post, AMD also shared new benchmarks of FSR 2.0 running on God of War and Farming Simulator 22. For testing, AMD used two of its new "6x50 XT" series GPUs, including the Radeon RX 6950 XT and RX 6750 XT paired to a Ryzen 7 5800X3D CPU and 3600MHz DDR4 memory.
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and in-depth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Technically, the 6650 XT is listed in the testing suite; however, AMD accidentally duplicated slides of the 6750 XT twice in Farming Simulator 22, so we don't know how the 6650 XT performs until AMD fixes the editing error.
In God of War at 4K Ultra settings, the RX 6950 XT showed gains of up to 45% with the various FSR 2.0 presets. At native resolution, average frame rates were in the mid-60s. With FSR 2.0 Quality, the average frame rate increased the most at 83 FPS. However, in Balanced and Performance mode, performance starts to drop off a bit, with balanced hitting 90 FPS and performance hitting 96 FPS, respectively.
With the RX 6750 XT, we see the same behavior in God of War in the same settings but with a significantly reduced frame rate, which is expected. Frame rates at native resolution are not great, with average FPS hitting the low 40s. But Quality mode mostly fixes that frame rate jumping up to 54 FPS on average. The balanced mode is only slightly better at 58 FPS. Performance mode is the only FSR option that gets the 6750 XT above 60 FPS with a 63 FPS average.
For a more in-depth review of FSR 2.0 in God of War, check out our coverage here.
Farming Simulator 22 sees a much more linear result for FSR 2.0, with FPS increasing uniformly across all three quality presets. With the RX 6750 XT, frame rates at native resolution are already quite good at 107 FPS on average. But, they do get a lot better with FSR 2.0 enabled. In quality mode, frame rates increase to 124 FPS on average, in balanced it goes up to 135 FPS, and in performance mode, average frame rates go up to their highest at 146.
Again, AMD, unfortunately, made an editing error in its post and duplicated slides of the RX 6750 XT, so we don't have results of the RX 6650 XT in Farming Simulator 22 at this time. However, AMD does say FSR 2.0 boosts performance by up to 1.4x at 4K in Farming Simulator 22 with the 6650 XT. So, expect similar frame rate increases with AMD's lower-end RDNA2 GPU, as was the case with the RX 6750 XT results.
Aaron Klotz is a contributing writer for Tom’s Hardware, covering news related to computer hardware such as CPUs, and graphics cards.
-
KananX Good to see, I want FSR to be at least as good as DLSS so I can switch easily to Radeon if I wanted in the future.Reply -
Neilbob ReplyKananX said:Good to see, I want FSR to be at least as good as DLSS so I can switch easily to Radeon if I wanted in the future.
When the only way you can really tell any difference is by freeze-framing and zooming in, I'd say it's already pretty much as good.
Uptake is obviously still behind DLSS, but it seems a no-brainer that FSR would be implemented whenever possible. Companies that don't are probably receiving other 'special benefits' :) -
KananX Reply
Yes I was mainly talking about availability in games, I’m aware that FSR 2.0 is pretty comparable to DLSS now. Maybe should have worded it differently.Neilbob said:When the only way you can really tell any difference is by freeze-framing and zooming in, I'd say it's already pretty much as good.
Uptake is obviously still behind DLSS, but it seems a no-brainer that FSR would be implemented whenever possible. Companies that don't are probably receiving other 'special benefits' :) -
AgentBirdnest That's awesome news!! I love how upscaling has become such a heated competition over the last couple of years. Each brand's technique looks great. I usually can't tell the difference at higher settings, but even on medium settings, I'm not picky about sacrificing a teeny bit of fidelity for a smoother framerate and the ability to extend the usefulness of my video card.Reply
I have an RTX card, so it doesn't personally matter to me if a game uses DLSS or FSR - but I'm rooting hard for the latter because I want everyone to be able to upscale. I wonder if Nvidia will eventually drop exclusivity for DLSS (if that's possible?) if FSR gains more and more steam. -
renz496 ReplyNeilbob said:When the only way you can really tell any difference is by freeze-framing and zooming in, I'd say it's already pretty much as good.
Uptake is obviously still behind DLSS, but it seems a no-brainer that FSR would be implemented whenever possible. Companies that don't are probably receiving other 'special benefits' :)
It was the other way around actually. Like it or not FSR still being associated with AMD. implementing FSR still promoting AMD itself. Some company did not want to do that unless they get paid because for them there is no way for them to do "free marketing" for other company. One such example was the FSR implementation on FC6. we know FSR SDK also available for console. In wccftech interview with Ubi they ask Ubi if the console version will also going to implement FSR. Ubi said FSR is exclusive to the pc version of the game because the partnership between Ubi and AMD is for the pc version of the game. The most ideal way to go with this upscaling tech is for it to be integrated directly into 3D API so game developer are not involved in the marketing war between IHV. but sometimes integrating the features inside standard 3D API like D3D or Vulkan also a sure way to kill the tech like what happen with DX12 mGPU. -
renz496 ReplyAgentBirdnest said:That's awesome news!! I love how upscaling has become such a heated competition over the last couple of years. Each brand's technique looks great. I usually can't tell the difference at higher settings, but even on medium settings, I'm not picky about sacrificing a teeny bit of fidelity for a smoother framerate and the ability to extend the usefulness of my video card.
I have an RTX card, so it doesn't personally matter to me if a game uses DLSS or FSR - but I'm rooting hard for the latter because I want everyone to be able to upscale. I wonder if Nvidia will eventually drop exclusivity for DLSS (if that's possible?) if FSR gains more and more steam.
Nvidia can do it but if they do AMD GPU will still not be able to run it. It might be able to run on intel gpu though. Because the idea of DLSS is to make tensor core more useful in gaming workload. Yes DLSS can run on shaders but that is something that nvidia have no interest to pursue unlike what intel want to do with XeSS. -
SyCoREAPER ReplyNeilbob said:When the only way you can really tell any difference is by freeze-framing and zooming in, I'd say it's already pretty much as good.
Uptake is obviously still behind DLSS, but it seems a no-brainer that FSR would be implemented whenever possible. Companies that don't are probably receiving other 'special benefits' :)
My stance exactly and the same goes for cellphone cameras, unless it looks straight up bad, or doesn't perform, it's a win no matter which is superior on paper.
I give AMD props for making the tech available to Nvidia cards and the FSR2.0 comes to consoles, we will really see it take off.