Dynamic upscaling is a serious part in trendy video games and the most recent and best graphics playing cards, however there are totally different modes and fashions to select from. Intel’s Xe Super Sampling (XeSS), Nvidia’s Deep Learning Super Sampling (DLSS), and AMD’s Fidelity FX Super Sampling (FSR) all do issues in their very own manner and aren’t all the time the identical in efficiency, visible high quality, recreation assist, and {hardware} assist.

Although there’s an argument to be made for simply turning on no matter your {hardware} and video games assist, when you’ve got the selection between them or are contemplating totally different graphics playing cards based mostly on their XeSS, DLSS, and FSR assist, it’s essential to know the variations between them. Here’s a key breakdown of those supersampling algorithms and which one is perhaps the perfect match for you.

Image high quality

In normal, DLSS leads the pack in picture high quality because of its AI strategy, but it surely’s not the clear chief anymore due to FSR 2.0. The unique implementation of FSR was fairly mediocre, however the brand new 2.0 replace places it on practically equal footing with DLSS. We actually like FSR 2.0 for its {hardware} assist, because it has labored on practically each GPU made inside the previous 5 years.

XeSS is slightly totally different. Unlike DLSS and FSR, there’s not one definitive model. Instead, there’s an Intel Arc unique model of XeSS that takes benefit of the XMX cores on Arc GPUs, and in addition a vendor-agnostic model of XeSS that’s like FSR as a result of it doesn’t require any AI {hardware}.

So, the place does XeSS slot in? Well, the AI-powered model is considerably behind DLSS and FSR 2.0 when it comes to picture high quality, which is principally the identical place FSR 1.0 occupied: not horrible, however not wonderful, both. When we in contrast the Performance modes of XeSS and DLSS in Shadow of the Tomb Raider, we discovered that DLSS had superior high quality typically. We haven’t but examined XeSS towards FSR 2.0, however the conclusion would in all probability be related, as FSR 2.0 is normally simply pretty much as good as DLSS.

For detailed photographs, take a look at our Shadow of the Tomb Raider XeSS Performance comparability (click on, drag, resize).

Higher high quality modes of XeSS aren’t all that a lot better, both. In this shot from Hitman 3, you’ll be able to see that in each single mode, the foliage is all the time blurrier in comparison with the scene in native decision. For the efficiency beneficial properties (which we’ll focus on in a second), the tradeoff in picture high quality isn’t spectacular.

For detailed photographs, take a look at our Hitman 3 XeSS comparability (click on, drag, resize).

We anticipated XeSS to be extra similar to DLSS because of its utilization of AI {hardware}, however this clearly isn’t the case. At the identical time, FSR 2.0 proves that AI {hardware} isn’t even essential to make an excellent upscaler (although FSR 2.0 isn’t with out its issues). Intel’s strategy to upscaling appears to be in a really awkward center floor between AMD and Nvidia as a result of there’s a model that makes use of AI {hardware} like DLSS and a model that’s for GPUs with out AI {hardware} that works like FSR.

Both DLSS and FSR had unhealthy begins, although, so there’s no motive to imagine XeSS can’t ultimately turn out to be good. Hopefully, XeSS 2.0 will put Intel on equal footing with its opponents as soon as individuals begin shopping for the brand new Arc GPUs.

Performance

Since Nvidia GPUs assist XeSS, FSR, and DLSS, they’re the perfect playing cards to match efficiency between every upscaler (minus the AI-powered model of XeSS for Intel Arc). In our Intel Arc A770 and A750 evaluate, we examined the RTX 3060 in Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Hitman 3 utilizing all obtainable high quality modes for XeSS and DLSS, and the outcomes are fairly conclusive.

In Shadow of the Tomb Raider, XeSS was in a position to enhance efficiency by as much as 43% by using the Performance mode, however DLSS was in a position to get a 67% body price improve with its personal Performance mode. In Ultra Performance mode, DLSS was in a position to double the body price, a a lot bigger enchancment than XeSS was in a position to ship. When you take into account the picture high quality distinction between every upscaler’s Performance mode (which we confirmed within the earlier part), DLSS is the clear winner.

It’s an analogous story in Hitman 3. The margins listed below are principally the identical as in Tomb Raider apart from DLSS’s Ultra Performance mode, which couldn’t double the body price. Even with out Ultra Performance, although, DLSS continues to be the clear winner relating to efficiency.

We also needs to be aware that DLSS stands to get even quicker with the upcoming 3.0 model, which brings AI-generated frames into play. Nvidia guarantees large efficiency beneficial properties with DLSS 3, however recreation assist shall be restricted for some time, and picture high quality takes a noticeable hit from our testing with the RTX 4090. DLSS 3 isn’t an existential risk to XeSS for the time being, but it surely’s not nice for Intel to be missing a function that is perhaps extra helpful sooner or later.

As for FSR 2.0, normally, it’s about on par with DLSS’s efficiency, so whereas we haven’t examined it immediately towards XeSS, it’s fairly doubtless we’d see FSR within the lead and XeSS considerably behind, as we do with XeSS versus DLSS. FSR doesn’t have AI-generated frames like DLSS 3, nonetheless, and it’s not clear how AMD will bridge this hole sooner or later since its GPUs haven’t any AI {hardware}, a minimum of for now.

Still, FSR 2.0 was adequate at launch that we began to contemplate whether or not DLSS was even essential anymore. DLSS 3 may change that should you can afford an RTX 4000 collection graphics card, however contemplating most can’t, that will go away FSR because the upscaling king long-term.

Game assist

DLSS is the oldest of the three upscaling applied sciences, and unsurprisingly, it helps probably the most video games. It’s obtainable in dozens of titles, together with Cyberpunk 2077, Marvel’s Avengers, and Outriders, and Nvidia is continually including assist for brand spanking new video games. It is tiered, nonetheless, with the best variety of video games supporting DLSS 1 and a couple of, with DLSS 3 assist nonetheless restricted for now.

FSR is far newer, however that hasn’t held it again from rising an spectacular listing of supported titles. At the time of publication, the heavy hitters are God of War, Deathloop, and Red Dead Redemption II. FSR 2.0 assist can also be deliberate for Hitman 3, Microsoft Flight Simulator, and upcoming video games like Forspoken and Uncharted‘s PC port.

Generally talking, if a recreation has FSR, it’ll have DLSS, and vice versa, although older titles that got here out earlier than DLSS will usually solely have DLSS. It looks like we’ll see an analogous pattern with XeSS, as a number of video games which have XeSS or will assist it within the close to future even have DLSS and FSR 2.0. For instance, each of the video games we examined for picture high quality assist (Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Hitman 3) assist DLSS and XeSS.

Hardware assist

The largest distinction between DLSS, FSR, and XeSS is {hardware} assist — and it might be the distinction that defines which is the perfect upscaling possibility. DLSS requires an Nvidia RTX graphics card. Not solely is the function restricted to Nvidia {hardware}, but it surely’s additionally restricted to the most recent generations of Nvidia {hardware}: particularly, you want a minimum of an RTX 2000 card to make use of DLSS in any respect and an RTX 4000 to make use of DLSS 3.

That’s as a result of DLSS requires the Tensor cores on current Nvidia graphics playing cards, which deal with the AI calculations. FSR doesn’t use AI, so it doesn’t require any explicit {hardware}. The power of FSR isn’t that loads of video games assist it or that it has higher picture high quality in comparison with DLSS, as a result of it has neither of these; it’s that anybody can use it.

Outside of graphics playing cards from AMD and Nvidia, FSR additionally works on built-in graphics, APUs, and graphics playing cards which might be older than a few generations. There’s a top quality trade-off, however most avid gamers don’t have a current Nvidia graphics card. The majority of individuals are nonetheless utilizing older GPUs, an AMD card, or built-in graphics.

XeSS has a pleasant compromise between the 2. Like DLSS, XeSS makes use of devoted cores — known as XMX cores on Intel graphics playing cards — to deal with the AI calculations. XeSS requires these cores to work, so the complete model of XeSS will solely work on Intel graphics playing cards. But Intel is making two variations.

This is one thing we wished to see out of DLSS. Essentially, Intel is providing builders two totally different variations of XeSS: one which requires the devoted XMX cores and one other that’s a general-purpose answer for a “wide range of hardware.” In concept, it’s the perfect of DLSS and FSR mashed up into one, however there’s one clear drawback: Two variations imply twice the work for builders if XeSS is troublesome to implement, so it’s potential that builders received’t undertake it as extensively into their video games.

A tough begin for participant three

DLSS leads the pack in high quality and recreation assist. If it labored throughout a number of generations of graphics playing cards from totally different manufacturers, it will make FSR out of date. Instead, FSR is filling the void that DLSS can’t fill by providing related picture high quality and efficiency boosts to a greater diversity of playing cards. It’s a traditional closed-source versus open-source battle, and it’s troublesome for both answer to make the opposite out of date when each has distinct benefits and drawbacks.

XeSS tries to one-up each DLSS and FSR by combining the perfect issues about each: DLSS’s picture high quality powered by AI {hardware} and FSR’s huge compatibility. Unfortunately, the visible constancy and efficiency beneficial properties aren’t in XeSS’s favor. At the second, XeSS merely serves no goal for Nvidia customers as a result of DLSS is solely higher; as for AMD and Intel customers, XeSS is just interesting if FSR 2.0 isn’t an possibility.

A future model of XeSS may change issues, or quite, a future model of XeSS wants to alter issues. We noticed it with DLSS and FSR: the second model really made the function price utilizing. XeSS is in the very same place, and hopefully, Intel will be capable to replicate Nvidia’s and AMD’s progress.

Editors’ Recommendations