Either the article is terrible or this a mere promise by Intel to be eventually better than AMD’s current offering. As I write this, https://github.com/intel/xess is still on version 2.1.0.
I personally don’t count multi-frame generation. That’s not just adding (fake) frames, but also real latency. I don’t care if you like it or not. People who don’t know what they are doing think this gives them more frames per second.
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
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.)
Wait, what puts it ahead of AMD? FSR4 is damn good and works on the 6k series and up.
So far nothing. The article doesn’t link to XeSS 3 because that thing doesn’t seem to be released.
Yeah… That’s what I thought… No benchmarks etc. Still competition is good but yeah FSR RS is still due soon.
Multi frame generation is such a garbage feature. Intel would get more value shaming nvidia than from developing their own.
Isn’t Intel working with Nvidia now?
That’s an excellent point
Either the article is terrible or this a mere promise by Intel to be eventually better than AMD’s current offering. As I write this, https://github.com/intel/xess is still on version 2.1.0.
I personally don’t count multi-frame generation. That’s not just adding (fake) frames, but also real latency. I don’t care if you like it or not. People who don’t know what they are doing think this gives them more frames per second.