Anonymous edits have been disabled on the wiki. If you want to contribute please login or create an account.
Warning for game developers: PCGamingWiki staff members will only ever reach out to you using the official press@pcgamingwiki.com mail address.
Be aware of scammers claiming to be representatives or affiliates of PCGamingWiki who promise a PCGW page for a game key.
Nvidia's marketing term "DLSS 3" is irrelvant and should be forgotten. DLSS Super Resolution (aka the upscaling tech of DLSS) has reached v3.1.x and "DLSS 3" no longer refers or suggests that frame generation is being used in a game. A game that uses DLSS v3.1.x or newer is fully capable of not having frame generation as a result.
Our upscaling row deals with the super resolution part — not frame generation part. The version of the frame generation DLL files (still quite low at like v1.0.3 or something) is also irrelevant.
Edit: DLSS v3.0 (or "DLSS 3") have also been removed as an acceptable value in PCGW's upscaling field.
The game is using DLSS v3.1.1 Super Resolution SDK and DLSS v1.0.3 Frame Generation SDK.
"DLSS 3.1" is not a thing.
There's only "DLSS 3" - which is a marketing package containing DLSS SR, FG and Reflex SDKs. All three have their own versions which aren't at all related to the marketing name of "DLSS 3" tech.
It is a bit confusing.
No, you have DLSS 2.x that is the Super Resolution part and DLSS 3.x is the Frame Generation part. I know it is majorly confusing, sorry, Nvidia has caused this.
No. Frame Generation has its own versioning and Super Resolution SDK version is 3.1.1 at the moment.
I've checked a couple of other games with DLSS 3 support, and this seems like a common issue which should be fixed before it has become too widespread.
My suggestion here would be to use something like "DLSS 3.0 (SR 3.1.1, FG 1.0.3)"? If we want to provide such details - these SDK versions will change with patches and with DLSS SR own OTA updates which is the main feature of SDK 3.1.
It may be better to just use DLSS 3.0 - although I'm not sure that this is a correct name either as all Nvidia materials on it call it "DLSS 3", not "3.0".
Only now DLSS 3.1 is mentioned indeed. See https://discord.com/channels/165183350913499136/326048443040530432/1077644303570051112
Frame Generation is not tracked for DLSS, the Super Resolution (aka upscaling) is - as it's the main target of using DLSS.
NVIDIA calls it "DLSS 3" as it's the easiest to market.
As for the technicalities, DLSS 3.0 never existed, but 3.1 does, as shown here: https://github.com/NVIDIA/DLSS/releases/tag/v3.1.0
Not sure why FG isn't a target for using DLSS suddenly - you can use it with native res for a "free" performance boost and the IQ impact is arguably even less noticeable than from using SR.
DLSS 3.1 doesn't exist either. There's DLSS Super Resolution SDK v3.1 (your link is for that) but this isn't the same as "DLSS 3.1" - which presumably would be an upgrade over "DLSS 3" as a whole, not just a new version of SR SDK.
I'm not even sure that there will be DLSS 3.1 tbh as at this point Nvidia seems content on providing upgrades to DLSS 3 components (SR, FG, Reflex) without bumping the DLSS 3 package version at all. I expect DLSS 3 to be just DLSS 3 and then maybe there will appear DLSS 4 or something.
Reflex is not a DLSS component. DLSS is Super Resolution at heart, with Frame Generation being an ***addition***.
@Dgrdsv still thanks for bringing the issue at the beginning to my attention as it made me realize that adding 2.x version to the game page was a mistake and that the DLSS version number should indeed be 3.1 :)
I'd still suggest rethinking this for all titles with DLSS 3 support at least. It is very possible that SR SDK will reach v4 or even higher prior to there actually appearing "DLSS 4". Using either generic "DLSS 3" moniker or going with something like "DLSS 3 (3.1.1/1.0.3)" seems a lot more robust for the future.