PC Ekspert Forum - View Single Post - Radeon Software Adrenalin Edition Graphic Driver Info Thread

The Exiled · 13.10.2025., 12:58

Citiraj:

Leaked FSR4 INT8 version runs on RDNA 2 and 3 with 9–13% lower performance, image quality below FSR4 FP8 but still above FSR 3.1

Citiraj:

ComputerBase conducted a deeper analysis of the leaked FSR 4 INT8 version, also known as the unofficial build for pre-RDNA 4 architectures. A quick recap: AMD accidentally released the full source code for its FSR 4 technology. This was unintentional, as AMD no longer plans to distribute full source code. However, the release included AI model weights which, on their own, were of little use to gamers. Modders later compiled complete DLL files that acted as drop-in replacements and worked as expected with games supporting previous versions of AMD’s upscaling technology. The INT8 version is considered unofficially compatible with RDNA 2 and RDNA 3, as these architectures lack hardware acceleration for FP8 (Floating Point 8-bit), the format used by Radeon RX 9000 series cards. As a result, both versions differ in performance and image quality. While most reports focused on frame rate impact, ComputerBase also examined image quality in detail.

ComputerBase found that the leaked INT8 (Integer 8-bit) version delivers a slightly less stable image than the official FP8 build for RDNA 4. Differences depend on the game and scene but are consistent enough to notice during motion. Fine details like fences, roofs, and vegetation tend to flicker more on RDNA 2 and RDNA 3. In motion, characters such as Aloy in Horizon Forbidden West show more artifacts, and foliage appears less stable. Overall, FSR 4 INT8 retains many of the algorithm’s advantages but lacks the smoothness and precision of FP8 rendering on RDNA 4. Performance varies by architecture. On average, FSR 4 INT8 reduces frame rates by about 9–13% on RDNA 3 (RX 7800 XT) and RDNA 2 (RX 6800 XT), while the official FP8 version on RDNA 4 (RX 9060 XT) shows only a 3–5%. The RX 9060 XT remains the most efficient, sometimes even outperforming FSR 3.1 by up to 17%.

Izvor: ComputerBase