@Starfox85 Actually, when it comes to the rendering of aging characters, it’s essentially a matter of settings. On some games, you can really push the sliders all the way without compromising their overall look, whereas on others, you can’t. There are also several different profiles. And besides, this technology is still in its very early stages. It will improve, that’s for sure. Finally, we shouldn’t forget that the DLSS 5 used across all the games so far has been optimized for NBA 2K27. That’s an important factor to keep in mind.
As for VR, I haven’t completely given up on this amazing technology. Let’s just say that I’m waiting for a significant breakthrough before coming back to it. And thank you as well. It’s genuinely nice to be able to have a calm and constructive discussion.
@Starfox85 I understand your enthusiasm for those first VR experiences. I had it myself 12 years ago now. And I too swore that I would never go back to flat-screen gaming for sim racing, for example.
Then time passed, and I gradually found myself using my PSVR2 less and less to play GT7, eventually preferring its flat-screen counterpart simply because it was more convenient and accessible. I’m not saying that I’m representative of everyone, but let’s just say that this has been my personal experience.
And frankly, VR is a different debate, even though I understand why you brought it up, since I used the word “revolution” to describe neural rendering in video games.
As for your question about DLSS 5, what makes me think this is a shift on the scale of the transition to 3D is simply the immediately visible result it brings to existing games. The increase in photorealism, for games that are obviously aiming for it, but not only that. I can very clearly imagine similar technology being used to improve animations in the near future.
The constraints are almost nonexistent for an immediate gain. The performance cost is only temporary. We can already see that Nvidia themselves reduced it by several factors, and then modders reduced it even further afterward… within just a few days.
As for the perfect showcase, obviously it doesn’t exist, but games like Uncharted 4 and Dragon Age: The Veilguard (which isn’t even photorealistic) absolutely stunned me with DLSS 5).
I suddenly felt as though, up until that point, I had simply been playing movie-based games, and that with DLSS 5 I was actually discovering them for the first time…
The list would be a long one if I had to name them all (I tested between 25 and 30 games). In 95% of cases, I was absolutely blown away by the visuals.
As it stands, I already found it incredibly impressive (and apparently so do many others, judging by the amount of buzz DLSS 5 is generating on YouTube), for example. And yet I’m perfectly aware that these are only the very beginnings, and that in a few years I might laugh at myself for having been so blown away by the visuals of these games. Two or three years at most… given how significant the progress is going to be.
@Starfox85 Ironically, I know VR particularly well. I even wrote a ton of articles about it a few years ago. In fact, I discovered the technique for using supersampling in VR on May 20, 2016, on a French website (I’m French). A technique that went around the world within a few days…
So yes, I know the subject. And in that sense, I understand what you’re saying. I could even say that I believed in it too, to some extent. But only to some extent.
I never thought VR would replace traditional screen-based gaming. I thought it would be complementary to it, for example. And I never really believed in room-scale either.
Having said that, we have to acknowledge that VR simply hasn’t taken off. I haven’t owned a VR headset for a good two years now, and I don’t miss it at all.
It’s a fantastic technology, but it comes with its fair share of (major) constraints.
DLSS 5 (or whatever future equivalent the competition comes up with) is something else entirely. I genuinely think that almost all future games will rely on this kind of technology. VR games included, of course.
Well, since you’re asking, from my point of view, when I first saw deepfakes (around 2018, if I remember correctly), I immediately thought that this technology, applied to video games, could potentially be the way forward.
When NVIDIA showed DLSS 5 six months ago, I was absolutely blown away by its possibilities, and even by the visual quality. I never thought the examples they showed represented the final experience, and I found myself thinking both, “They actually did it!” and, “This is a genuine revolution for gaming, on a scale we haven’t seen since the arrival of 3D.”
And at this point, after ten days of using it across a whole bunch of games, I’m just as convinced.
As far as the competition is concerned, unless they have an equivalent revolution hidden up their sleeve, I don’t see how they can avoid going down the same path. I wouldn’t give AMD and the others two years to come up with a DLSS 5 equivalent. Quite simply because rendering without this technology suddenly feels incredibly dated after just one week.
For example, I quickly abandoned all my non-exclusive PS5 games in favor of their PC versions (The Quarry, TLoU, etc.), hoping to test them with DLSS 5. Which I did. And for me, there’s simply no going back now, given how much the gap between these versions has widened.
@Darren1967 25 games tested here. Games that aren't even optimized for this. While it goes without saying that my performance has decreased, I haven't had any problems with almost all of them. Cyberpunk runs at 130fps with mods, path tracing, and DLSS 5, NBA 2K27 (optimized for this one) runs at around 230fps at 2160p... Forza Horizon 6 averages 130fps (I lowered the resolution to 1900p for this one).
Generally speaking, on the relatively rare games where I don't get at least 60fps in 4K with DLSS 5, scaling between 80 and 90% works perfectly (this is probably due to the 16GB of memory on my 5080). In short, it already works very well on a current GPU. I haven't noticed any latency issues either. It works on both Tekken 8 and racing games. It's undoubtedly superior, but not enough for me to notice the difference.
Frankly, DLSS 5 is enabled on these games forever. I'm not going back. Impossible.
I use upscaling through OptiScaler depending on the circumstances. Out of the 25 games I’ve tested with DLSS 5 so far, some can occasionally be too demanding to run at 60 fps (I always play in 4K with every graphics setting maxed out). But honestly, for one thing, that’s not the case with the majority of games, and for another, the difference remains fairly hard to notice as long as you don’t go beyond the 75–80% threshold. Meanwhile, the performance gain is immediately noticeable.
I should also mention that I’m absolutely blown away by DLSS 5’s results in general. I think it represents a massive leap forward in graphics, and I’ve had an incredible week testing all these games. I haven’t experienced anything like it since the transition from 2D to 3D when I was a teenager. And even then…
@Taggen1986 hat's great, Taggen1986. I hope you won't forget to test it.
Other than that, I've been using my VITURE Luma Pro glasses almost every day since January, and they are genuinely an excellent product. They're not the kind of gadget that ends up sitting in a drawer after a few weeks. They're incredibly practical, lightweight, comfortable to wear, and very easy to plug in for a quick gaming session.
The image quality is also really impressive. I'd say it feels like having a 1440p OLED display floating in front of you. As for the perceived screen size, that's obviously subjective. I have a dedicated home theater with a 110-inch screen viewed from 3.5 meters away, and I don't feel that the VITURE image looks larger than that. If anything, it feels a bit smaller. But it's still more than large enough, and most importantly, it doesn't cause eye strain.
The promise of a giant, high-quality virtual display is definitely delivered.
For what it's worth, if the Mobile Dock Mini solves the issue, I'll probably buy it specifically for portable use with the Switch 2, but I'll definitely keep my Pro Mobile Dock.
My Pro Dock is permanently connected to my Switch 2 dock. The image quality and overall convenience of the VITURE glasses are so good that I haven't even bothered connecting my Switch 2 to any of the many high-quality displays I own.
At home, my Switch 2 is used almost exclusively with the VITURE glasses.
When connected through HDMI via the official Switch 2 dock, Switch 2 games feel on a completely different level. Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, Mario Kart World, and many others are simply incredible on them.
I'm still amazed every time I stop and think about the fact that I'm getting this kind of experience from such a small setup: a giant OLED virtual display, great audio, and roughly PS4 Pro–level performance, all in a package weighing less than a kilogram.
It's one of those rare pieces of tech that genuinely feels a bit futuristic once you start using it every day.
I haven't mentioned it yet, but for watching videos, they're a real treat as well. HDR is missing, but honestly that's almost a minor detail considering how good the colors, contrast, and sharpness already are.
Another feature I really appreciate is the built-in diopter adjustment. I wear contact lenses during the day and glasses in the evening, so being able to adjust the diopters in just a couple of seconds depending on my needs is incredibly convenient.
Finally, I had to contact VITURE regarding an issue with a previous frame, and their customer service was absolutely outstanding. Fast response, excellent communication, and the problem was resolved almost immediately. Based on that experience alone, I'd give them 11 out of 10.
Honestly, I highly recommend these glasses to everyone.
Oh, and the audio is excellent too—at least on the Luma Pro and the Beast. The sound quality is surprisingly good and adds a lot to the overall experience.
@Taggen1986 I have no idea. I only own the VITURE Pro Mobile Dock, and I'd actually be very curious to know whether the Dock Mini fixes the issue. Do you have a source where I could check its power output in watts?
I’ve had the Viture Luma Pro and the Mobile Pro Dock since January 2026. It’s genuinely excellent hardware, and Viture is particularly attentive to customer feedback. Overall, I’ve had a very positive experience with them.
I mainly use my XR glasses with my Asus ROG Xbox Ally X, without needing the Mobile Pro Dock, but I also use them with my Switch 2. That said, I think it’s worth pointing out that the experience with the Switch 2 is somewhat mixed, and I’m surprised Digital Foundry didn’t mention it.
When I’m on the go, the Mobile Pro Dock doesn’t provide enough power to the Switch 2 to run Switch 2 games in docked mode without reducing their resolution. The image degradation is visible in every game I’ve tested, to varying degrees. In the case of Metroid Prime, for example, it’s essentially unusable. The game no longer runs at 120 fps and slows down significantly.
This is a well-known issue among users. The only workaround is to connect the Mobile Pro Dock via HDMI, and then everything works as expected—but of course, you lose the portability advantage.
For that reason, I rarely use my Viture glasses with the Switch 2 while mobile. These days, I use them almost exclusively with my Asus handheld.
That said, once again, it’s an excellent product overall, and the image quality is genuinely impressive. Playing Marvel Tokon on it is absolutely fantastic.
Comments 9
Re: Will AMD Deliver Its Own Take On DLSS 5?
@Starfox85 Actually, when it comes to the rendering of aging characters, it’s essentially a matter of settings. On some games, you can really push the sliders all the way without compromising their overall look, whereas on others, you can’t. There are also several different profiles.
And besides, this technology is still in its very early stages. It will improve, that’s for sure.
Finally, we shouldn’t forget that the DLSS 5 used across all the games so far has been optimized for NBA 2K27. That’s an important factor to keep in mind.
As for VR, I haven’t completely given up on this amazing technology. Let’s just say that I’m waiting for a significant breakthrough before coming back to it.
And thank you as well. It’s genuinely nice to be able to have a calm and constructive discussion.
Re: Will AMD Deliver Its Own Take On DLSS 5?
@Starfox85 I understand your enthusiasm for those first VR experiences. I had it myself 12 years ago now. And I too swore that I would never go back to flat-screen gaming for sim racing, for example.
Then time passed, and I gradually found myself using my PSVR2 less and less to play GT7, eventually preferring its flat-screen counterpart simply because it was more convenient and accessible. I’m not saying that I’m representative of everyone, but let’s just say that this has been my personal experience.
And frankly, VR is a different debate, even though I understand why you brought it up, since I used the word “revolution” to describe neural rendering in video games.
As for your question about DLSS 5, what makes me think this is a shift on the scale of the transition to 3D is simply the immediately visible result it brings to existing games. The increase in photorealism, for games that are obviously aiming for it, but not only that. I can very clearly imagine similar technology being used to improve animations in the near future.
The constraints are almost nonexistent for an immediate gain. The performance cost is only temporary. We can already see that Nvidia themselves reduced it by several factors, and then modders reduced it even further afterward… within just a few days.
As for the perfect showcase, obviously it doesn’t exist, but games like Uncharted 4 and Dragon Age: The Veilguard (which isn’t even photorealistic) absolutely stunned me with DLSS 5).
I suddenly felt as though, up until that point, I had simply been playing movie-based games, and that with DLSS 5 I was actually discovering them for the first time…
The list would be a long one if I had to name them all (I tested between 25 and 30 games). In 95% of cases, I was absolutely blown away by the visuals.
As it stands, I already found it incredibly impressive (and apparently so do many others, judging by the amount of buzz DLSS 5 is generating on YouTube), for example. And yet I’m perfectly aware that these are only the very beginnings, and that in a few years I might laugh at myself for having been so blown away by the visuals of these games. Two or three years at most… given how significant the progress is going to be.
Re: Will AMD Deliver Its Own Take On DLSS 5?
@Starfox85 Ironically, I know VR particularly well. I even wrote a ton of articles about it a few years ago. In fact, I discovered the technique for using supersampling in VR on May 20, 2016, on a French website (I’m French). A technique that went around the world within a few days…
So yes, I know the subject. And in that sense, I understand what you’re saying. I could even say that I believed in it too, to some extent. But only to some extent.
I never thought VR would replace traditional screen-based gaming. I thought it would be complementary to it, for example. And I never really believed in room-scale either.
Having said that, we have to acknowledge that VR simply hasn’t taken off. I haven’t owned a VR headset for a good two years now, and I don’t miss it at all.
It’s a fantastic technology, but it comes with its fair share of (major) constraints.
DLSS 5 (or whatever future equivalent the competition comes up with) is something else entirely. I genuinely think that almost all future games will rely on this kind of technology. VR games included, of course.
https://www.uploadvr.com/super-charge-oculus-rift/
https://www.etr.fr/actualite/3219-quot-doublez-quot-la-resolution-envoyee-a-l-oculus-rift-cv1-en-2-clics.html?
Re: Will AMD Deliver Its Own Take On DLSS 5?
Well, since you’re asking, from my point of view, when I first saw deepfakes (around 2018, if I remember correctly), I immediately thought that this technology, applied to video games, could potentially be the way forward.
When NVIDIA showed DLSS 5 six months ago, I was absolutely blown away by its possibilities, and even by the visual quality. I never thought the examples they showed represented the final experience, and I found myself thinking both, “They actually did it!” and, “This is a genuine revolution for gaming, on a scale we haven’t seen since the arrival of 3D.”
And at this point, after ten days of using it across a whole bunch of games, I’m just as convinced.
As far as the competition is concerned, unless they have an equivalent revolution hidden up their sleeve, I don’t see how they can avoid going down the same path. I wouldn’t give AMD and the others two years to come up with a DLSS 5 equivalent. Quite simply because rendering without this technology suddenly feels incredibly dated after just one week.
For example, I quickly abandoned all my non-exclusive PS5 games in favor of their PC versions (The Quarry, TLoU, etc.), hoping to test them with DLSS 5. Which I did. And for me, there’s simply no going back now, given how much the gap between these versions has widened.
Re: DLSS 5 Mod Shifts Load to Second GPU, Doubling Frame-Rates and Latency
@Darren1967 25 games tested here. Games that aren't even optimized for this. While it goes without saying that my performance has decreased, I haven't had any problems with almost all of them. Cyberpunk runs at 130fps with mods, path tracing, and DLSS 5, NBA 2K27 (optimized for this one) runs at around 230fps at 2160p... Forza Horizon 6 averages 130fps (I lowered the resolution to 1900p for this one).
Generally speaking, on the relatively rare games where I don't get at least 60fps in 4K with DLSS 5, scaling between 80 and 90% works perfectly (this is probably due to the 16GB of memory on my 5080). In short, it already works very well on a current GPU. I haven't noticed any latency issues either. It works on both Tekken 8 and racing games. It's undoubtedly superior, but not enough for me to notice the difference.
Frankly, DLSS 5 is enabled on these games forever. I'm not going back. Impossible.
Re: DLSS 5 Mod Shifts Load to Second GPU, Doubling Frame-Rates and Latency
I use upscaling through OptiScaler depending on the circumstances. Out of the 25 games I’ve tested with DLSS 5 so far, some can occasionally be too demanding to run at 60 fps (I always play in 4K with every graphics setting maxed out). But honestly, for one thing, that’s not the case with the majority of games, and for another, the difference remains fairly hard to notice as long as you don’t go beyond the 75–80% threshold. Meanwhile, the performance gain is immediately noticeable.
I should also mention that I’m absolutely blown away by DLSS 5’s results in general. I think it represents a massive leap forward in graphics, and I’ve had an incredible week testing all these games. I haven’t experienced anything like it since the transition from 2D to 3D when I was a teenager. And even then…
To me, this is a revolution.
RTX 5080.
Re: Viture Pro 2 and Beast XR Glasses: Switch 2 Docked Mode OLED Gaming On The Go
@Taggen1986 hat's great, Taggen1986. I hope you won't forget to test it.
Other than that, I've been using my VITURE Luma Pro glasses almost every day since January, and they are genuinely an excellent product. They're not the kind of gadget that ends up sitting in a drawer after a few weeks. They're incredibly practical, lightweight, comfortable to wear, and very easy to plug in for a quick gaming session.
The image quality is also really impressive. I'd say it feels like having a 1440p OLED display floating in front of you. As for the perceived screen size, that's obviously subjective. I have a dedicated home theater with a 110-inch screen viewed from 3.5 meters away, and I don't feel that the VITURE image looks larger than that. If anything, it feels a bit smaller. But it's still more than large enough, and most importantly, it doesn't cause eye strain.
The promise of a giant, high-quality virtual display is definitely delivered.
For what it's worth, if the Mobile Dock Mini solves the issue, I'll probably buy it specifically for portable use with the Switch 2, but I'll definitely keep my Pro Mobile Dock.
My Pro Dock is permanently connected to my Switch 2 dock. The image quality and overall convenience of the VITURE glasses are so good that I haven't even bothered connecting my Switch 2 to any of the many high-quality displays I own.
At home, my Switch 2 is used almost exclusively with the VITURE glasses.
When connected through HDMI via the official Switch 2 dock, Switch 2 games feel on a completely different level. Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom, Mario Kart World, and many others are simply incredible on them.
I'm still amazed every time I stop and think about the fact that I'm getting this kind of experience from such a small setup: a giant OLED virtual display, great audio, and roughly PS4 Pro–level performance, all in a package weighing less than a kilogram.
It's one of those rare pieces of tech that genuinely feels a bit futuristic once you start using it every day.
I haven't mentioned it yet, but for watching videos, they're a real treat as well. HDR is missing, but honestly that's almost a minor detail considering how good the colors, contrast, and sharpness already are.
Another feature I really appreciate is the built-in diopter adjustment. I wear contact lenses during the day and glasses in the evening, so being able to adjust the diopters in just a couple of seconds depending on my needs is incredibly convenient.
Finally, I had to contact VITURE regarding an issue with a previous frame, and their customer service was absolutely outstanding. Fast response, excellent communication, and the problem was resolved almost immediately. Based on that experience alone, I'd give them 11 out of 10.
Honestly, I highly recommend these glasses to everyone.
Oh, and the audio is excellent too—at least on the Luma Pro and the Beast. The sound quality is surprisingly good and adds a lot to the overall experience.
Re: Viture Pro 2 and Beast XR Glasses: Switch 2 Docked Mode OLED Gaming On The Go
@Taggen1986 I have no idea. I only own the VITURE Pro Mobile Dock, and I'd actually be very curious to know whether the Dock Mini fixes the issue. Do you have a source where I could check its power output in watts?
Re: Viture Pro 2 and Beast XR Glasses: Switch 2 Docked Mode OLED Gaming On The Go
I’ve had the Viture Luma Pro and the Mobile Pro Dock since January 2026. It’s genuinely excellent hardware, and Viture is particularly attentive to customer feedback. Overall, I’ve had a very positive experience with them.
I mainly use my XR glasses with my Asus ROG Xbox Ally X, without needing the Mobile Pro Dock, but I also use them with my Switch 2. That said, I think it’s worth pointing out that the experience with the Switch 2 is somewhat mixed, and I’m surprised Digital Foundry didn’t mention it.
When I’m on the go, the Mobile Pro Dock doesn’t provide enough power to the Switch 2 to run Switch 2 games in docked mode without reducing their resolution. The image degradation is visible in every game I’ve tested, to varying degrees. In the case of Metroid Prime, for example, it’s essentially unusable. The game no longer runs at 120 fps and slows down significantly.
This is a well-known issue among users. The only workaround is to connect the Mobile Pro Dock via HDMI, and then everything works as expected—but of course, you lose the portability advantage.
For that reason, I rarely use my Viture glasses with the Switch 2 while mobile. These days, I use them almost exclusively with my Asus handheld.
That said, once again, it’s an excellent product overall, and the image quality is genuinely impressive. Playing Marvel Tokon on it is absolutely fantastic.