10 comments

  • dtf 55 minutes ago
    Seems quite similar to this repository?

    https://github.com/aloshdenny/open-dlss

    • beefsack 24 minutes ago
      The maanHimself repository appears to be 35 hours older than the aloshdenny one based on `created_at` from the GitHub API. maanHimself's `pushed_at` predates aloshdenny's `created_at` too.

      That doesn't guarantee maanHimself is the original author, but it's looking likely.

    • godbox 42 minutes ago
      Same exact commits at the same time as well, but different repository names and authors. What the hell?
      • _ache_ 36 minutes ago
        From the LICENSE

        Copyright (c) 2026 maan

        So... Either alooshdenny stole the commits, or it's an alias for maan.

        • esperent 17 minutes ago
          It's not stolen. It's MIT licensed and the attribution is still there.
    • vindex10 44 minutes ago
      bit-exact against the original )

      just unsure who's original ))

      • hiimkeks 8 minutes ago
        It's Dragostea Din Tei all over again
  • tim-projects 1 hour ago
    Jensen : Nobody needs to code anymore...

    Programmer: OpenDLSS...

    Jensen : Wait. Not like that! (╯°□°)╯︵┻━┻

    • rvz 1 hour ago
      But I thought Nvidia “loves open source” (they don’t) and they are now a supporter for open source and open weight models by acquiring Huggingface? (They don’t actually care)

      But the line is drawn when it involves CUDA and any part of their closed source compilers (nvcc).

      There are obvious reasons why they are closed source, but it’s becoming pointless since Deepseek have open sourced their AI compiler and compute libraries with DeepGEMM and eventually they will catch up.

      • literalAardvark 23 minutes ago
        They certainly do _care_. Embrace, extend, extinguish.
      • lucrbvi 1 hour ago
        They only care because open-weight helps to drive the GPU business notably thanks to inference providers (Baseten, Together, Mistral, ...).

        At least their support helps the open-weight ecosystem.

      • pjmlp 59 minutes ago
        Depends on which open source you are talking about, like every single company contributing to FOSS.

        They care when the agendas align, and they don't when they won't.

  • Lerc 1 hour ago
    I'm rather surprised that it doesn't take the z-buffer as an input. I would have thought that would have provided useful information, it's one of the more useful forms of contolnet.
    • rcarmo 56 minutes ago
      The official one seems to do, as well as other info from the engine (I think remember their mentioning LOD/UV map hints in one of the public demos, or articles, a few months back--or it might have been an Unreal Engine podcast)
    • strangecasts 52 minutes ago
      I think this is mainly so it can use the existing hooks for DLSS upscaling without requiring changes to the renderer, AMD is working on a comparable method which uses adapter networks to slot normals and material properties from the renderer into the diffusion model: https://gpuopen.com/learn/temporally-stable-generative-illum...
    • avaer 1 hour ago
      Even relatively small RGB -> depth models are pretty good. Which kind of implies depth is well encoded in the RGB, and adding depth would not really reduce entropy, while costing bandwidth.
  • Pantera87 12 minutes ago
    So that means AMD implementation is on the horizon?
  • TheJCDenton 1 hour ago
    > bit-exact against the original

    What kind of sorcery is this ? Very impressive work !

    • kouteiheika 28 minutes ago
      If done by a human, yes.

      Nowadays it takes one well written prompt to a frontier LLM to produce something like this.

      • lukan 5 minutes ago
        That would be still impressive, even though more distributed among the AI builders and all those nameless code contributers etc.
    • Tade0 42 minutes ago
      The load-bearing kind.

      LLMs are really good at deobfuscating or even decompiling code.

  • binsquare 21 minutes ago
    At what point does this neural rendering take away the human touch on the art styles?
  • flohofwoe 1 hour ago
    Almost 8ms on 1080p resolution seems extremely expensive, does the original also eat into the rendering budget as much?
    • LaurensBER 1 hour ago
      Yes, see the numbers below. In most games, it's basically unusable if you want to play on 60 FPS or above unless you have a 5090.

      The current implementation is more of a tech demo than a practical way to play games (+ officially it's available in 1 game). It's _fast enough_ to make some impressive YouTube videos but you most likely won't want to play anything with it yet.

      Nvidia has stated that they're still working on improving the performance. No doubt future hardware generations will also include further hardware optimisations.

      The potential for this kind of technology is pretty awesome, especially given that people have also found ways to add this to emulators.

      • techpression 19 minutes ago
        I really hope they do, but the market for gaming cards is looking mighty bleak right about now. 5090 is up over 80% since November last I checked and my 5080 is up 50%. NVIDIA removing all mentions of gaming in their financials doesn’t bode well either, and from a fiduciary standpoint it would be negligent to sacrifice any capacity for higher-margin AI chips to make gaming cards.

        Again, I hope I’m wrong and we see new cards summer/autumn 2027, but I would not bet my savings on it.

      • GaggiX 56 minutes ago
        Modders have added the ability to use the upscaler after DLSS 5, personally I don't know how sound this method is but the quality is pretty good, and allows to play games with DLSS 5 at 4k 60FPS with something that is not a 5090.
    • strangecasts 47 minutes ago
      Worth remembering it is running a single-step diffusion model working in pixel space to generate each frame, it's a technical feat in itself that people are even using the words "frames per second"
    • MYEUHD 1 hour ago
      Yes the original is very expensive. It depends on the resolution and the GPU used:

      RTX 5060: 9.9 ms at 1080p

      RTX 5070: 10.2 ms at 1440p

      RTX 5080: 13.7 ms at 2160p

      RTX 5090: 8.2 ms at 2160p

      Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3EfLjmdG29Q&t=600

    • robinduckett 1 hour ago
      The original does tend to reduce the FPS by half or more
    • vrighter 32 minutes ago
      probably, going by the reported massive performance hits
  • Borealid 1 hour ago
    Am I the only one who feels a sense of disinterest in a project where the main README is LLM-generated? Does the author not have time to write what they did and how it's used?
    • MadameMinty 1 hour ago
      I'm more upset about it being factually wrong, e.g. both mentions of "git-ignored" are absurd (why would you mention it if it's not in the repo?) and wrong (they are in the repo).
      • vincnetas 1 hour ago
        I notice this, that AI likes to write about things that are not in there. Like i review AI generated output, notice unnecessary things, and asks AI to remove that. So AI removes that and adds that "this and that, that was used or described like this, was removed because bla bla bla" to the document.

        I think its somehow needs to talk (write) about the things that are in the context and removal is there so AI predicts that it should be there.

        • MadameMinty 1 hour ago
          Yeah, I call it bugfix storytelling. Once upon a time this class far far away had this red hooded method...

          Especially egregious if both adding and removing the thing happens in one commit. Git should be telling the story, and if it can't then there _is_ no story!

        • stuaxo 1 hour ago
          AI writing is just bad, this things is really noticable - but even in READMEs they look superficially OK until you read them.

          AI probably should not be writing docs, commit logs or comments.

    • fwlr 1 hour ago
      If you think about it, actually the author did write what they did (nothing), and also how it’s used (it isn’t).
      • gnud 1 hour ago
        Seems like the owner of the github repo claims copyright, though. Since they provide a license.
    • pjmlp 56 minutes ago
      "Am I the only one who feels a sense of disinterest in a project where the code is LLM-generated? Does the author not have time to code the project?"

      This is how I feel about every single project announcement on HN recently, they are already bragging about models all over the place, why shouldn't they go full way down being replaced by the Borg?

    • VMG 44 minutes ago
      Slop is a new language and you will learn it read it
    • ChrisRR 1 hour ago
      I'm fine with it
    • rvz 1 hour ago
      If the README is >90% AI generated and it is as long as a novel, I am not going to read it and will assume that the author did not read or write it either.

      Unfortunately it is slop, beyond the comprehension of the author unless they are experienced with DLSS internals to explain it in depth.

  • franticgecko3 1 hour ago
    How useful is this without weights?

    Isn't the mote that Nvidia has is they work with studios to generate the training data from the game, then they ship a model per game?

    Or is my knowledge outdated here and they're just using a single generalised model?

    • strangecasts 1 hour ago
      I assume this is meant to run with the weights people extracted from the latest NBA game, where it was first trialled.

      > Isn't the mote that Nvidia has is they work with studios to generate the training data from the game, then they ship a model per game?

      That was true for the very first version of DLSS, from DLSS 2 on the models have been universal - the per-game adjustments are done on the inference end by changing the effect intensity or masking out objects

      They have a technical report on the neural rendering part of DLSS 5 which goes into it: https://research.nvidia.com/labs/adlr/files/DLSS5_Report.pdf

    • Pifpafpouf 1 hour ago
      They used to ship one model per game but now there is a single model, however they still do minor updates to it presumably to fine-tune it on new games
    • GaggiX 1 hour ago
      >they ship a model per game?

      They don't. Only DLSS 1 was trained specifically per each game.

    • chii 1 hour ago
      > they ship a model per game?

      there's no way that's true!?

      • literalAardvark 18 minutes ago
        It used to be in dlss1. I think it's completely been put to pasture now though, it's way too much work and can't really cover some of the main things people actually want to use dlss5 on, for instance Morrowind.
  • cubefox 32 minutes ago
    > It takes one rendered frame (a low dynamic range proxy of it, three lanes of Gaussian noise, the previous frame's output reprojected, and five conditioning scalars) and produces four f32 channels per pixel: an RGB residual and one temporal-blend logit.

    > The temporal path is implemented, but in the demo: the network's history input lanes and its per-pixel blend logit drive a reprojected feedback loop (docs/frame.md). The dlss5vk tool runs single frames with no history, which is what the reference captures were made with.

    From this I assume the network uses the (via motion vectors) reprojected previous frame in order to increase temporal stability, i.e. similarity over adjacent frames. But this isn't strictly necessary, and apart from it, DLSS 5 is a pure post-process filter. So you could apply it to an old animated CGI movie like Final Fantasy (2001) [1]. Which should make it look significantly more realistic, at the cost of some flicker or other temporal instability.

    One could also apply it to still images, like old renders from Tomb Raider [2], where temporal stability is not a factor. The difference to conventional text-to-image models with a "make it photorealistic" prompt would be that DLSS 5 strongly adheres to the underlying geometry.

    1: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0173840/

    2: https://www.tombraiderchronicles.com/images/artwork-high-res...