Oh, no no, I did not say or imply that. I was concerned about FSR 1 and the difference to the other upscalers. And the difference between the second new mode of FSR 4 that is not available on any other. So even if you have DLSS or FSR 3, you can only use the Temporal variant of FSR 4, not its ML-based variant (if I understand it correctly). At least that is what I said, so its probably true (self irony).

Thanks my bad. I should have looked up before commenting. I personally still don’t count Mixtape to be a real game (or good game), compared to the alternatives that were available.

If it never had even FSR1 support, how is it able to work at all?

I did not say this, where do you get that? I explained that FSR 1 is different from all other upsalers, it is not comparable to all of the other methods. FSR 1 is like a Photoshop filter, while the other methods have builtin data from game. You cannot add a Temporal Upscaler to a game that does not have any. You cannot use OptiScaler on a game that does not have any upscaling at all, it needs DLSS 2 or higher, or FSR 2 or higher, or XeSS, because those have the training data using Ai with the game builtin. You cannot use OptiScaler without any of these, or with FSR 1.

What exactly am I wrong about?

So only an Australian game can win the award?

What exactly do you mean? Any link? As explained. FSR 2, 3 and 4 needs training data from the game. It is possible to swap DLSS out with FSR variants, because DLSS has the training data already. But you cannot have FSR 2, 3 and 4 on all games like FSR 1. And FSR 4 also has to modes as it seems, one classical Temporal like 2 and 3 that runs on relatively older hardware too, and the new ML-based variant that requires the new cores on RX 9000 hardware.

If you use Optiscaler, then I think what happens is that you swap the DLSS implementation with FSR 4 Temporal variant out. I searched the web a bit and found this: https://github.com/optiscaler/OptiScaler

OptiScaler is a tool that lets you replace upscalers in games that already support DLSS2+ / FSR2+ / XeSS

Enables usage of XeSS, FSR2, FSR3, FSR4 2 (officially, RDNA4 and RDNA3 dGPUs only) and DLSS in (temporal) upscaler-enabled games

So what part I was wrong about exactly?

Edit: I get it now. Only Australian games are eligible for the Award. I leave my comment up.

Lol. No shade on someone liking a game I don’t like, but I personally do not count Mixtape as a “real” game. Also look what other games were released in 2026:

• Mewgenics
• Mina the Hollower
• Trails in the Sky 2nd Chapter
• Resident Evil Requiem
• Pragmata
• Forza Horizon 6
• Big Walk

Just picked a few “random” titles, there is something for everyone. Out of all these games, Mixtape was the best.

having separate websites/apps for different types of content is the simpler and more elegant choice.

It is also the UNIX philosophy. :-) Each tool should do one job, and do it well. But make the tools able to speak to each other, so you can combine them. In best case they implement using Activity Pub, https://activitypub.rocks/ ; it’s open, decentralized, and a W3C standard, and can federate with other such implementations. And I sound like an advertisement apparently.

Maybe the community adds the OS-level support unofficially

No, this is not possible. FSR 1 is an algorithm that works on the output image, like a Photoshop filter. That means HUD elements can’t be distinguished from the actual game world in example. Since FSR 2 (and upwards) its different. It needs to be integrated into the game, understanding what it does and compare multiple images. It is Ai based and requires training from the game itself. That’s why you don’t get system level integration for DLSS too. So that is out of question.

FSR4 would benefit from specialized hardware cores used to accelerate Ai based workload. Looking at AMDs site: https://www.amd.com/en/products/graphics/technologies/fidelityfx/super-resolution.html

(Sorry for screenshot, couldn’t copy-paste easily.) REdstone is FSR 4 here. The RX 7000 graphics cards here can only use Upscaling. So I would expect any older generation of (and weaker) hardware like Steam Deck should also only be able to use Upscaling, not the full set of features. And because these graphics cards and older hardware do not have the hardware cores to accelerate Ai based workload, they should require more power and latency. Just my assumption here.

The table shows 3 types of upscaling: Spatioal, Temporal and ML-Based. Spatial is without Ai, and the game does not require any support, it’s like a Photoshop effect after the image is created (simply speaking). Temporal is more complex, taking multiple images from the game with builtin support from the game to produce better results. This doesn’t necessarily require Ai, but AMD decided to combine Temporal with their FSR 2 and FSR 3 with Ai based logic. Now I do not understand why ML-Based Upscaling is not available to FSR 2 and FSR 3. Maybe this requires special hardware that is only available on the new RX 9000 cards… Ah yes, I was right: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radeon_RX_9000_series#FSR_4

FidelityFX Super Resolution 4 (FSR 4) is AMD’s first machine-learning upscaling solution that is able to leverage the second-generation AI accelerator cores in the RDNA 4 architecture.[14] AMD stated that due to requiring hardware acceleration, FSR 4 was limited to the Radeon RX 9000 series.

That means, the FSR 4 version that could be available on Steam Deck is not the same upscaler used on these cards. So we get a FSR 3 styled upscaler (Temporal) only and I wonder how much better it is, if any, and how much more power it draws. I think its important to make this distinction.

They only use animal names. Sadly, Seven is not an animal.

Why not use Gummiboot instead? It’s now called Systemd-boot, but the name is giving false impressions of being integrated into Systemd. In fact, one can install and use Systemd-boot without Systemd at all. It’s a very slim and basic bootloader without complicated code and features. It’s the default on EndeavourOS and I use it as my default since years.

, but this comment sounds exactly like the bots on Reddit

I thought it sounds like Keanu Reeves. ^^

An alternative to this kind power users who want control and learn everything, would be EndeavourOS instead CachyOS. I wouldn’t recommend anyone starting with bare Archlinux, but depending on the person it could be the right choice, but its hard to know who the person is you recommend it.

It depends what the person wants to do, how “learning Linux” is interpreted and what it is installed on.

If someone is technically versed, likes commandline, wants to have the newest software and complete control and learn how Linux works, then something like EndeavourOS might be the right choice. If the focus is GUI tools only, maybe a laptop just to browse the web a bit and learn slowly what “this thing Linux” is all about, then something like Linux Mint or Ubuntu might be a good starting point, or even Fedora KDE. Is the person going to play games mostly, is experimenting a lot and wants to tap into the wild west of Linux, maybe Bazzite with its immutable concept.

There are a few more distributions I could recommend, for certain use cases. There is no single operating system that fits best for everyone.

Once you know who it is, its actually easy to identify the person.

I am voices38.

The point of self-documenting is, that if you need to explain it in a comment, you probably should update the code to make it readable by its own. This is not meant to be the only way going forward. It’s just to have this in mind and try to do it whenever an opportunity you see. More a thumb of rule thing, rather than hard reality.

Here is an article In defence of swap: common misconceptions by Chris Down from 2018. It has a “tl;dr” section with 7 points, if you just want have a quick look.

I setup a swap file instead a partition, it’s just more flexible, but same concept. The swappiness settings cat /proc/sys/vm/swappiness is at “60” with a total size of 64 GiB on a very fast NVME SSD. If this was a slow HDD, then any writes and reads would be much more noticeably slow. I had it disabled in the past too and didn’t notice any difference. The only difference to me would be, if the system RAM fills up, then the system could freeze and maybe crash. Or the system will unload applications to make room, and it could hit randomly an important app. Imagine a program has a memory leak.

To me the compression sounds like it would increase RAM (virtually speaking), without hitting performance too much. Otherwise it would use the SSD and io is generally much slower than RAM operations (and compression, decompression in memory only if its fast like this one). When I understand the benefit correctly.

Thanks that is a bit more enlightening. I’ll read the given link and other source today, to get more into. Especially if it helps avoiding writes to SSD, as I got burned very hard from wearing down SSD (it was a software bug that lead to it). I guess the performance difference and the amount it saves from SSD rewrites shouldn’t be too much to be worried about, but it bugged me so much that I will take this into consideration nonetheless.

Guess I learned something new today. :-)