Quoting: ScottCarammell...

You still have to have Steam running, that's why people like GOG. My point is that running GOG Galaxy once to validate the DLC isn't really any different than running the installers themselves, you have to go through their website to get them. It's digital rights management either way, the difference is that GOG's isn't persistent, whether with the installers or with Galaxy.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

No, it's meant for getting Windows games to run on Android. It uses FEX for ARM compatibility.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

That's a very narrow interpretation. If that was truly the intention then they wouldn't require you to log in to their site to access the installers, they'd just email you a direct link.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

If you consider that DRM then having to log in to their website to download it would be DRM. At some point any digital product you buy is gated behind a service you don't control. The difference to Steam is that you only have to do it once, just like downloading the offline installers.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

You can't really compare a console with a set launch date, a marketing campaign and explicit game releases tied to that campaign to linux distros just continuing to exist.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Nvidia didn't start supporting Adaptive Sync until 2019, so it's unlikely but you could try it easily enough by disabling G-Sync (assuming your monitor's OSD gives you the option).

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Apart from the handful of G-Sync module displays (G-Sync Ultimate) all G-Sync compatible displays are wrappers around VESA's adaptive sync just like Freesync.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

As far as I understand it you have the beta driver which update as many times as they have a non-stable driver, the stable driver (sometimes), and the new feature driver which is based on the last stable driver but with new features. Those features don't get introduced into the beta drivers until the next major version number (or maybe the next stable version, it's hard to follow🤔).
So it's an odd way of naming things but the feature branch can update in between beta drivers, so it's not a strictly linear progression.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

That actually sounds like DLSS 1.0 where the model was trained on each game. If they let developers train the model on their own ground-truth, I wouldn't really have a problem with this, but who knows how much computational power that would require.

View this comment - View article - View full comments

Quoting: alka.setzerNvidia explicitly said that they were running two 5090, one for rendering the other for DLSS 5 processing so that they could maintain fluid fps on the demos. They also said they had DLSS 5 running in a single card on the lab (didn't said which, could be a rtx 6090). DLSS 5 is supposed to come out on Q4.

That still doesn't really answer it. As I said before, the performance issue could be the result of changes that are needed conflicting with other aspects of the pipeline. DLSS runs on the tensor cores, so running it on a second card means the tensor cores on the primary card are doing nothing, unless they're actually running the upscaling/frame gen split off from this stuff because of conflicts/bugs.
If they've only just gotten it working on a single card in lab settings (the 60 series isn't coming until the end of 2027 at the earliest, so it's not that) to me that would indicate something besides raw computational cost or they'd never be able to get it out by Q4 for anything except a 5090.
My guess is there are either bugs that cause it to interfere with upscaling or they just haven't been able to get the newer model to fit in the cache of the tensor cores.

View this comment - View article - View full comments