proton-ge-custom VS FidelityFX-FSR

Have you tried the GE fork?

https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom

- KDE/wayland

> That said, these things work flawlessly on the Deck.

Likely due to running into these graphics driver -> WM and similar compatibility issues and fixing them. The other performance improvements from kernel changes probably don't hurt either.

0: Requires unreleased proton-ge build: https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom/pull/104...

Have you tried a custom runner? I have it up and running for years now without any issues: https://github.com/GloriousEggroll/proton-ge-custom

Also DLSS has pretty strict requirements in advertising, requiring nvidia logo & adverts on splash screens and give nvidia any rights to use your app in their own advertising. [0] It's certainly not "free". A completely night and day difference to FSR, which just uses MIT [1]

Lots of people online seem to believe both are "free", so the only reason why you wouldn't implement one is some back room deal. But in my experience, just getting everyone into the same room to sign off on things like that is hard.

[0] https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/blob/main/LICENSE.txt

[1] https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/FidelityFX-FSR/blob/maste...

"IT doesn't work that way. DLSS may be a click in some Unreal Games, but custom engines? Yeah, no. You need to modify the code to implement it, which is PROHIBITED by the license Nvidia has you accept when you accept their SDK terms: https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/blob/main/LICENSE.txt DLSS is not FOSS (Free and Open Source) like FSR. For comparison, FSR's license that lets you do whatever the hell you need to get it functioning in the game or improve performance: https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/FidelityFX-FSR/blob/master/license.txt Blame Nvidia for devs not wanting to touch non-free code and enter a legal agreement where they may be litigated down the line...for implementing a technology that SELLS Nvidia GPUs. It's literally like me threatening to sue you for bringing customers to my business. Again, blame Nvidia. By the way, they are also the one that sold you the feature, so let them be the one to implement it. I keep hearing Nvidia is a "god tier software company" but can't implement DLSS on the driver side? Somehow I don't buy it, especially when they release game-ready drivers anyway. And before someone brings up the BS argument it needs game data, anyone can find those memory addresses to get to the engine or they can ask. Considering they are Nvidia, don't think any game dev will keep silent about it or how to interface with their game if there are driver issues. EDIT: Also just so you know, XeSS is also under a similarly stupid license as DLSS XeSS License: https://github.com/intel/xess/blob/main/licenses/LICENSE.pdf Keep in mind this nugget from Intel's license: "No reverse engineering, decompilation, or disassembly..." Only issue is that games need to be DECOMPILED when DEBUGGED! "

FSR 1.0 is a simpler, open source implementation, isn't it?

Same Unity release had also included FSR (which are open-source shaders: one, two)

It’s also only part of FSR. If the point your trying to make is that FSR is just fancy lanzcos, it’s not. You can see for yourself if you’re able to read C code: https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/FidelityFX-FSR

I'd recommend using AMD's FSR1 instead for this. It's designed for games so it should run very fast and looks reasonably good (using Lanczos).

High quality upsampling is a shader to upscale lower render scale images into your native display resolution, for the implementation see: https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/FidelityFX-FSR

It goes one further too because FSR is open source so if you wanted (and knew what you were doing) you could go and look yourself https://github.com/GPUOpen-Effects/FidelityFX-FSR

Here's a rather concise explanation. And again, the source is available.

FSR source code is available on Github, so is much better documented FSR2.0.