GameGPU reported that FSR 4.1.2 came close to DLSS 4.5 on geometry and text in its Cyberpunk 2077 patch 2.5 Performance-mode comparison, while DLSS retained more fine surface detail. The comparison’s ray-traced scenes also used different denoising methods, so their reflection results reflect more than the upscalers alone.
What GameGPU compared
GameGPU compared AMD FSR 4.1.2 with NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 using Transformer Model 2 in Cyberpunk 2077 patch 2.5. Both ran in Performance mode, which renders at a lower resolution and scales the image up. For its 4K example, the comparison used a 1920×1080 internal resolution and a 3840×2160 output.
Geometry and text versus surface detail
GameGPU reported similar clarity for ordinary geometry, parking-garage bars, markings, street signs, foliage, distant structures, small text, and fine lines. Its reported difference emerged in textures: DLSS preserved more detail in skin, fabric, asphalt, stone, and distant architecture, while FSR smoothed some of those surfaces more.
| Image detail | AMD FSR 4.1.2 | NVIDIA DLSS 4.5 |
| Geometry, signs, and text | Similar clarity in the reported scenes | Similar clarity in the reported scenes |
| Skin, fabric, and other surface textures | Some textures appeared smoother | More fine surface detail was retained |
| Ray-traced reflections and lighting | Standard game-engine denoising | Ray Reconstruction enabled |
Ray Reconstruction is NVIDIA’s denoising technology for ray-traced effects. In GameGPU’s comparison, it was enabled with DLSS, while FSR used the game engine’s standard denoising. That difference matters when judging reflections and lighting: those results compare different rendering paths, not just two upscalers.
A separate 4K video from Testing Games shows FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5 side by side in Quality and Performance modes. It offers another visual comparison, distinct from GameGPU’s patch 2.5 report.
FSR 3.1 versus FSR 4 is a separate comparison
PCGamesN reported a different result in its Cyberpunk 2077 patch 2.3 test on an RX 9070 XT: FSR 4 reconstructed fine details such as fences, wire mesh, and foliage more cleanly than FSR 3.1. The reported frame rates were close, with FSR 3.1 slightly higher in both cited results.
| Resolution | FSR 3.1 | FSR 4 | Test conditions |
| 1080p | 131 FPS | 128 FPS | RX 9070 XT; Quality mode and ultra ray tracing |
| 1440p | 92 FPS | 90 FPS | RX 9070 XT; patch 2.3 |
The 1080p figures are for Quality mode with ultra ray tracing. Notebookcheck separately summarized another Quality-mode comparison in which FSR 3 ran about 10–15 FPS faster, while some metal poles and bushes flickered. These are separate reports, not results from GameGPU’s FSR-versus-DLSS comparison.
Path-tracing frame rates vary by graphics card
GameGPU’s separate maximum-settings path-tracing benchmark used Performance mode. At 1440p, it reported averages of 64 FPS on the RX 9070 XT and 61 FPS on the RTX 4070. At 4K, it reported 70 FPS on the RTX 4090, 92 FPS on the RTX 5090, and 34 FPS on the RX 9070 XT, with a 30 FPS minimum for that last card. GameGPU used an average of 60 FPS as its comfort threshold for this benchmark.
These are results for different graphics cards, not a same-card comparison of FSR against DLSS. They describe how those cards performed in the path-tracing test, rather than isolating the frame-rate difference between the upscalers.
