The video reviews a blind test by ComputerBase comparing native 4K, DLSS 4.5, and FSR4 upscaling, highlighting DLSS 4.5’s superior image quality but noting ambiguities in testing settings and the subjective nature of visual preferences. It praises the innovative, interactive testing approach and calls for more detailed future comparisons, while discussing the complexities of assessing upscaling technologies and the potential of frame generation tools.
The video discusses the ongoing debate about the best upscaling technology for gaming visuals, focusing on a recent blind test conducted by ComputerBase. This test compared native 4K rendering with DLSS 4.5 and FSR4, both upscaling from 1440p in quality modes. The results showed DLSS 4.5 significantly outperforming both FSR4 and native resolution in image quality, which aligns with previous observations about DLSS’s superiority. However, there is some ambiguity regarding the exact settings used for DLSS 4.5 in the test, as it typically activates only in performance modes rather than quality mode.
Alex, a fluent German speaker and knowledgeable on upscaling, comments on the methodology and results. He notes the preference-based nature of the test, which focused on the best image rather than ranking the upscalers. Alex suggests that while DLSS 4.5 leads in clarity and lack of ghosting, the performance of FSR4 varies depending on the game, sometimes approaching native quality or even outperforming DLSS in specific scenarios. He expresses interest in seeing a more detailed ranking of the upscalers in future tests.
The video highlights the impressive presentation of the ComputerBase test, which includes side-by-side video comparisons with zoom and repeat functionality. These videos are large files but allow viewers to closely examine the differences in image quality between native resolution, DLSS 4.5, and FSR4. The hosts praise the thoroughness and innovation of this testing approach, noting how it provides a more tangible and interactive way to assess upscaling performance than static screenshots.
There is also a discussion about the subjective nature of image quality assessment. The human eye and brain weigh factors like clarity, ghosting, and image stability differently, which can lead to varying opinions on which upscaler is best. The hosts mention that in some cases, traditional 4K TAA might appear more stable despite ghosting artifacts, illustrating how personal preferences and weighting of visual factors influence conclusions about image quality.
Finally, the video touches on the technical tools used in the testing process, possibly including OKAT, a software for image quality evaluation. The hosts express enthusiasm for future testing of frame generation technologies, though they acknowledge the challenges in demonstrating such features due to high refresh rate requirements. Overall, the video commends ComputerBase for their meticulous and innovative approach to upscaling comparison, providing valuable insights into the strengths and weaknesses of current upscaling technologies.