this post was submitted on 10 Jan 2025
18 points (87.5% liked)
PC Gaming
8877 readers
606 users here now
For PC gaming news and discussion. PCGamingWiki
Rules:
- Be Respectful.
- No Spam or Porn.
- No Advertising.
- No Memes.
- No Tech Support.
- No questions about buying/building computers.
- No game suggestions, friend requests, surveys, or begging.
- No Let's Plays, streams, highlight reels/montages, random videos or shorts.
- No off-topic posts/comments, within reason.
- Use the original source, no clickbait titles, no duplicates. (Submissions should be from the original source if possible, unless from paywalled or non-english sources. If the title is clickbait or lacks context you may lightly edit the title.)
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
yeah.... no.
Uh, yeah..
they could use that power to actuall render the game. Not fake it.
So rasterised vector graphics are 'real' to you and DLSS is 'fake'. How very technical of you...
one calculates what the pixel's color should be. That's the actual color that that pixel should be. The real one.
The other one doesn't try to calculate it and makes an educated guess. That by definition is "not rendering the pixel".
It has nothing to do with how realistic it looks. And yes, having written both software raytracers and rasterizers, I am technical about this stuff a bit more than just calling vulkan and having it do its magic. I actually dived in all the way
Both are data computations of a fictional scene... what difference does it make?!
one computes the scene, the other literally tries to guess it.
One looks like shit when fast movement is involved. That's the difference.