3 ms·

Loved reading this! What a fantastic dive into the update, and the visualizations are easy to grasp (also the VRAM ones reminded me of original Doom corridors).

Loved reading this! What a fantastic dive into the update, and the visualizations are easy to grasp (also the VRAM ones reminded me of original Doom corridors). Generally impressed with XeSS given the lack of real world execution from Intel on this front, compared to the likes of DLSS v1. Also a great overview of the general state of ray tracing, I feel similarly in that some might be placing far too much emphasis on Nvidia's perspective: that raytracing the holy grail of gaming right now, when we are forced to give up quite a lot for playable experiences.

Dalewyn 3y ago
I'm surprised XeSS is seeing adoption at all, given Intel ARC's stillborn state of affairs. Now granted, Intel ARC is facing a chicken-egg problem so it needs someone to adopt XeSS first to hopefully drive customer sales, but even as an Intel fanboi I would tell any gamedev that adopting ARC is a waste of time and resources right now.
- Hamuko 3y ago
  Doesn't XeSS work on non-Intel GPUs as well?
  - terafo 3y ago
    Yes, though it doesn't give much performance and you are better off using FSR2/other non-AI techniques like TSR.
  - paulmd 3y ago
    Non-Xe cards go through a different path with much lower quality. Worse than FSR2, maybe on par with FSR1 iirc.
- eek2121 3y ago
  ARC is hardly stillborn. This may surprise you, but Intel has no issue moving GPUs. They are targeting low->mid end, which is an unpopular segment for hardcore gamers, but it is actually the largest segment. The whole reason they didn't kill ARC to begin with is the volume + margin. Arc isn't profitable overall due to development costs, and margins aren't great, but on a per unit cost Intel is making money. Similar situation to when AMD started getting hot and heavy into console development.
  - geraldwhen 3y ago
    Source? I don’t know anyone who would recommend Intel. There are plenty of better AMD and Nvidia cards in all of intels price points.
    - onli 3y ago
      That's not true anymore :) The ARC A750 sits between the Radeon RX 6600 and 6650 XT. The 6600 is a bit cheaper, but significantly slower. The 6650 XT is faster, but also more expensive. When (and if) Intel improves the driver more it will definitely be the better deal. Nvidia has no card in this price segment that is remotely worth considering. So while the initial reviews were negative, the ARC A750 does get recommended as an option now. But: One has to be okay with the fact that picking the ARC is a bit of a gamble, needs a processor/platform that supports resizable bar, and under Linux the card is slower than the 6600 even with rBar. So there are definitely reasons to get the AMD cards instead, but the A750 is absolutely worth considering by now. Sources: The GN revisit, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-6sHUNBxVg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-6sHUNBxVg ; my benchmark collection, https://www.pc-kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/gpu/compare?ids%5B%5D=Radeon+RX+6650+XT&ids%5B%5D=Intel+Arc+A750&ids%5B%5D=Radeon+RX+6600 https://www.pc-kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/gpu/compare?ids%...
      - ummonk 3y ago
        Yeah I checked benchmarks for the A750 when speccing out a budget gaming computer for a friend in India, and the A750 handily beats out competitor cards at that price point.
      - girvo 3y ago
        Also, the A750 or A770 handily destroy the RX 6600/6650 in path tracing! They are much more capable cards, just held back by nascent drivers, sadly.
    - goosedragons 3y ago
      Is there a better new card for $120 than the A380? It's better than the GeForce 1630 which is more expensive. I guess maybe one of those sketch Chinese brand Radeon 580s? Are those even new?
- waboremo 3y ago
  Very true, and this is likely why most adoption is coming from Intel's partners, or studios with enough resources to do things such as implement XeSS, DLSS, and FSR for fans/testing after the fact. They are mostly currently benefitting from the "why not" aspect, where those larger teams already tasked with implementing DLSS3 are encouraged to also add FSR2 and XeSS. For everyone else, they're likely going to rely on the engine to provide support due to the timelines required to implement all 3 forms. Of which I believe it's why FSR2 adoption has been slower than expected. Engines like Unity only natively offer FSR1.0 and DLSS. Unreal being the only outlier here with plugins for all 3 options. So really, in a way we can sort of see how FSR2 and XeSS benefit from each other's existence rather than having DLSS leave both completely behind purely due to market pressure.

Dalewyn 3y ago

I'm surprised XeSS is seeing adoption at all, given Intel ARC's stillborn state of affairs. Now granted, Intel ARC is facing a chicken-egg problem so it needs someone to adopt XeSS first to hopefully drive customer sales, but even as an Intel fanboi I would tell any gamedev that adopting ARC is a waste of time and resources right now.

Hamuko 3y ago
Doesn't XeSS work on non-Intel GPUs as well?
- terafo 3y ago
  Yes, though it doesn't give much performance and you are better off using FSR2/other non-AI techniques like TSR.
- paulmd 3y ago
  Non-Xe cards go through a different path with much lower quality. Worse than FSR2, maybe on par with FSR1 iirc.
eek2121 3y ago
ARC is hardly stillborn. This may surprise you, but Intel has no issue moving GPUs. They are targeting low->mid end, which is an unpopular segment for hardcore gamers, but it is actually the largest segment. The whole reason they didn't kill ARC to begin with is the volume + margin. Arc isn't profitable overall due to development costs, and margins aren't great, but on a per unit cost Intel is making money. Similar situation to when AMD started getting hot and heavy into console development.
- geraldwhen 3y ago
  Source? I don’t know anyone who would recommend Intel. There are plenty of better AMD and Nvidia cards in all of intels price points.
  - onli 3y ago
    That's not true anymore :) The ARC A750 sits between the Radeon RX 6600 and 6650 XT. The 6600 is a bit cheaper, but significantly slower. The 6650 XT is faster, but also more expensive. When (and if) Intel improves the driver more it will definitely be the better deal. Nvidia has no card in this price segment that is remotely worth considering. So while the initial reviews were negative, the ARC A750 does get recommended as an option now. But: One has to be okay with the fact that picking the ARC is a bit of a gamble, needs a processor/platform that supports resizable bar, and under Linux the card is slower than the 6600 even with rBar. So there are definitely reasons to get the AMD cards instead, but the A750 is absolutely worth considering by now. Sources: The GN revisit, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-6sHUNBxVg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-6sHUNBxVg ; my benchmark collection, https://www.pc-kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/gpu/compare?ids%5B%5D=Radeon+RX+6650+XT&ids%5B%5D=Intel+Arc+A750&ids%5B%5D=Radeon+RX+6600 https://www.pc-kombo.com/us/benchmark/games/gpu/compare?ids%...
    - ummonk 3y ago
      Yeah I checked benchmarks for the A750 when speccing out a budget gaming computer for a friend in India, and the A750 handily beats out competitor cards at that price point.
    - girvo 3y ago
      Also, the A750 or A770 handily destroy the RX 6600/6650 in path tracing! They are much more capable cards, just held back by nascent drivers, sadly.
  - goosedragons 3y ago
    Is there a better new card for $120 than the A380? It's better than the GeForce 1630 which is more expensive. I guess maybe one of those sketch Chinese brand Radeon 580s? Are those even new?
waboremo 3y ago
Very true, and this is likely why most adoption is coming from Intel's partners, or studios with enough resources to do things such as implement XeSS, DLSS, and FSR for fans/testing after the fact. They are mostly currently benefitting from the "why not" aspect, where those larger teams already tasked with implementing DLSS3 are encouraged to also add FSR2 and XeSS. For everyone else, they're likely going to rely on the engine to provide support due to the timelines required to implement all 3 forms. Of which I believe it's why FSR2 adoption has been slower than expected. Engines like Unity only natively offer FSR1.0 and DLSS. Unreal being the only outlier here with plugins for all 3 options. So really, in a way we can sort of see how FSR2 and XeSS benefit from each other's existence rather than having DLSS leave both completely behind purely due to market pressure.