I also like DLSS, but the OP is correct that it is a problem. Specifically it's a problem with understanding what are these cards capable of. Theoretically we would like to see separately performance with no upscaling at all, then separately with different levels of upscaling. Then we would be able to see easier what is the real performance boost of the hardware, and of the upscaler separately.

It's like BMW comparing new M5 model to the previous gen M5 model, while previous gen is on the regular 95 octane, and new gen is on some nitromethane boosted custom fuel. With no information how fast the new car is on a regular fuel.

I for one don't like the DLSS/TAA look at all. Between the lack of sharpness, motion blur and ghosting, I don't understand how people can look at that and consider it an upgrade. Let's not even get into the horror that is frame generation. They're a graphics downgrade that gives me a headache and I turn the likes of TAA and DLSS off in every game I can. I'm far from alone in this.

So why should we consider to buy a GPU at twice the price when it has barely improved rasterization performance? An artificially generation-locked feature anyone with good vision/perception despises isn't going to win us over.

We all know DLSS4 could be compatible with previous gens.

Nvidia has done that in the past already (see PhysX).

> What games without DLSS support could have done with a boost?

DCS World?