How well does AMD's FSR 4 upscaling perform compared to Nvidia's latest DLSS 4.5? Is AMD still relatively close to Nvidia in image quality, has FSR 4 fallen further behind, or does it perhaps have strengths in certain situations? That's what we'll be exploring in today's review across a wide range of examples at 4K and 1440p.
We've already looked at how DLSS 4.5 improves upon DLSS 4 in a previous review, focusing specifically on the new Preset M compared to the old Preset K. The second-gen transformer model is generally an improvement, especially when it comes to disocclusion artifacts, ghosting, and foliage quality. However, there are some trade-offs – several artifacts have actually worsened with DLSS 4.5, and there's also a performance hit when using the new model, particularly on older GPUs.
Meanwhile, AMD's upscaler has not been updated substantially since the launch of FSR 4 in March 2025. AMD somewhat confusingly renamed FSR 4 to "FSR Upscaling" in their Redstone release late last year. Since this label could apply to multiple FSR versions, we'll continue referring to it as FSR 4 here for clarity, as we're testing the latest ML-powered version. The Redstone release did introduce new features such as ML-based frame generation and ray regeneration, but the FSR 4 model itself did not receive any upgrades.
So today's comparison is fairly straightforward: Nvidia's latest upscaling model, which has been recently updated, versus AMD's latest model, which remains unchanged from last year. Let's begin with image quality...
Image Quality, Textures
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
FSR 4, like DLSS 4 and DLSS 4.5, does not suffer from TAA blur – the clarity of the image is similar both when stationary and in motion across all three technologies. However, we've noticed with DLSS 4.5 that the overall presentation is sharper than DLSS 4, which sometimes (though not always) makes the game look better.
When we bring FSR 4 into the mix (all using the 4K Performance mode in this example), DLSS 4.5 becomes even sharper by comparison. In general, FSR 4 isn't as sharp as DLSS 4, producing a softer image, so naturally it also falls behind DLSS 4.5 in this regard. The FSR 4 image is certainly usable, but in many games it's noticeable during real-time gameplay just how much sharper DLSS 4.5 looks on a 4K monitor.
Because sharpness remains fairly consistent across FSR 4's different modes, we can't simply switch to Quality mode and expect it to produce cleaner or sharper textures than DLSS 4.5 running Performance mode. This is simply the inherent look of each upscaler.
That softer presentation does come with some benefits. In certain titles, FSR 4 is the least likely to produce grain or pixelation, instead delivering a smoother reconstruction of fine detail. We can see this clearly in Horizon Zero Dawn when pausing to examine grass detail. DLSS 4.5 in Performance mode shows noticeable pixelation, while FSR 4 is smoother in the same mode, despite being less sharp overall.
There's also the issue of DLSS 4.5 producing more texture artifacts in some situations. We previously observed in this Cyberpunk 2077 example that DLSS 4.5 introduced moiré patterns on the ground that were not present in DLSS 4. FSR 4 is also not especially prone to moiré, so in this case DLSS 4.5 can actually look worse in motion than FSR 4, despite its sharper presentation. Fewer motion artifacts are more valuable than slightly sharper textures. That said, FSR 4 still doesn't match DLSS 4 Preset K, so Nvidia GPU owners could simply revert to DLSS 4 if Preset M's artifacts are distracting.
In Mafia: The Old Country, however, we found that both FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5 struggled to keep wood textures stable, while DLSS 4 Preset K was clearly the best, all using Performance mode. FSR 4 can sometimes be more resilient to these artifacts than DLSS 4.5, but not consistently.
Stability
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Fine detail stability has always been FSR 4's weakest area. It is the upscaler most prone to shimmering and sizzling artifacts, and it occasionally shows odd behavior where Quality mode is actually less stable than Balanced. DLSS 4.5, meanwhile, is more of a stability sidegrade compared to DLSS 4, which makes the matchup with FSR 4 more interesting. Sometimes DLSS 4.5 improves stability and pulls further ahead, but other times it regresses, making the image look closer on par or occasionally worse than FSR 4.
Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart is a straightforward case where DLSS 4 and DLSS 4.5 are clearly more stable than FSR 4. The two DLSS presets trade blows depending on the scene and resolution, but across both 4K Performance and 1440p Balanced modes, DLSS provides superior stability overall.
In Mafia: The Old Country, the results are less clear. None of these upscalers perform particularly well in 4K Performance mode, but FSR 4 isn't dramatically worse than the others. It shows flicker similar to DLSS 4.5 and fine-line aliasing similar to DLSS 4, so while FSR 4 ends up slightly behind, DLSS isn't performing miracles here. In the lighthouse test from the same scene, DLSS 4.5 does look more stable around the fence, but for wires and rope details, all three upscalers struggle.
Running the same scene at 1440p Balanced changes things somewhat. Here, FSR 4 actually appears more stable than DLSS 4.5 in our view. Flicker is more noticeable in Preset M than with FSR 4, and while FSR 4 still isn't quite as stable as DLSS 4 Preset K, it remains very usable.
In Cyberpunk 2077 at 4K Performance mode, there are three elements worth focusing on: the curved metal stairs around the cylindrical vat, the low power lines in front of the building, and the railing on top of the distant vats. This is where each technique trades strengths within the same frame. DLSS 4.5 handles the stairs best, while FSR 4 looks the most garbled. The power lines, however, are clearest and most stable with FSR 4, even in Performance mode. The railing is once again strongest in DLSS 4.5, with FSR 4 and DLSS 4 Preset K trading places behind it.
At 1440p Balanced, the same pattern continues. DLSS 4.5 generally has the fewest stability issues across the run, while FSR 4 shows more problem areas overall. Still, since the DLSS 4.5 upgrade, it's no longer always accurate to claim that every game will look less stable with FSR 4 in every respect.
This also means that FSR 4 Quality mode sometimes aligns more closely with DLSS 4 or 4.5 Performance mode, with DLSS often delivering similar stability at a lower internal render resolution. In games like Ratchet & Clank, we may need to increase FSR 4 to Quality mode to approach DLSS output. But in other cases – such as Mafia's boat scene – FSR 4 Quality can look better than DLSS Performance, because render resolution becomes more important for that type of fine detail.
Overall, though, DLSS remains the more stable solution, whether using Preset K or Preset M depending on the title. Typically there is about a one- to two-tier advantage in stability, meaning DLSS Balanced or Performance can often match the stability of FSR 4 Quality. However, this varies significantly from game to game, and it's not as simple as lining up FSR 4 Quality against DLSS 4.5 Performance and declaring them "equal."
Disocclusion
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
One of the strengths we previously found with FSR 4 was how it handled disocclusion. In most scenarios, FSR 4 produced fewer disocclusion artifacts than DLSS 4, and this was especially noticeable at lower internal resolutions such as 4K Performance mode. With less sizzling around third-person characters in motion, FSR 4 was often the better choice for third-person games, though it also produced fewer artifacts around weapons in first-person titles.
DLSS 4.5 significantly improves disocclusion to the point where, in examples like this from The Last of Us Part I, DLSS 4.5 and FSR 4 now trade blows. The level of sizzling is greatly reduced in DLSS 4.5, while DLSS 4 is clearly the worst of the three. Whether DLSS 4.5 or FSR 4 looks better depends on what you prefer. DLSS 4.5 tends to reveal sharper and more detailed backgrounds when disocclusion occurs, whereas FSR 4 is softer and sometimes blurrier. That softer look, however, can do a better job of masking disocclusion sizzle, which is that brief period of lower-quality reconstruction as the transition happens.
Here's another example from Mafia: The Old Country, where we'd say FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5 are broadly similar at 4K Performance mode in how they handle this artifact. In titles where disocclusion occurs frequently like this, you'll want to use DLSS 4.5 on an Nvidia GPU, or FSR 4 on AMD.
Ghosting
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Along with disocclusion, DLSS 4.5 also significantly reduces ghosting. We went through many examples looking for ghosting in either DLSS 4 Preset K or FSR 4, and in cases where either of those technologies showed ghosting, DLSS 4.5 Preset M was much less likely to do so. For example, in Cyberpunk 2077 with these street lights, FSR 4 had some of the worst ghosting across a variety of modes and resolutions, and DLSS 4.5 cleans this up considerably.
In this scene, DLSS 4 is prone to ghosting along the carpet as Ratchet moves, and this is fully eliminated in both DLSS 4.5 and FSR 4. In Horizon Zero Dawn, particles appeared quite streaky across this wooden bridge using DLSS Preset K, but this is minimized in DLSS 4.5 and largely improved in FSR 4 as well, even though all are running Performance mode at 4K. FSR 4 is generally less sharp overall, but in terms of ghosting specifically, it performs well here.
Then we get to examples like Mafia: The Old Country. As Enzo turns around, DLSS 4 leaves behind a noticeable ghost trail, which is significantly reduced in FSR 4 and completely eliminated with DLSS 4.5. Looking closely, FSR 4 still shows extremely faint trailing, so DLSS 4.5 is very slightly better in this case.
Of course, as we showed in the previous review, DLSS 4.5 is not able to fully eliminate ghosting, as seen in this Mafia example. However, in situations where DLSS 4.5 does produce ghosting, the same artifact is also present in FSR 4, usually to a greater extent. Across all the examples we examined, DLSS 4.5 was typically the best at reducing or eliminating ghosting.
Hair Quality
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
FSR 4 trades blows with DLSS 4.5 in hair quality depending on the game and implementation. With improved disocclusion handling in DLSS 4.5, hair often looks cleaner and less sizzled than with DLSS 4. However, FSR 4 hair rendering is generally quite smooth, and while it may lack some of the fine detail that DLSS 4.5 can preserve, it can also appear more stable and less grainy.
Take this example from The Last of Us. FSR 4 does not reconstruct as much detail, but that can actually result in less aliasing in hair at 4K Performance mode. Aliasing is reduced going from DLSS 4 to DLSS 4.5, but it isn't necessarily better than how FSR 4 handles it here. We saw something similar in Mafia, where both FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5 clearly look better than DLSS 4, but the softer presentation of FSR 4 can appear more natural and less artifact-prone.
There are some exceptions. At 1440p using Balanced mode, we tended to find FSR 4 hair a bit lacking in detail, and the overall softness starts to become a drawback relative to DLSS 4.5. In Horizon Zero Dawn, we also found Aloy's hair to look better in DLSS 4.5 overall. This style of hair and animation simply works better with how DLSS 4.5 resolves fine detail, and it does not suffer from as much aliasing here as in the other examples.
Particles
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Particle quality is an interesting category because different aspects of particles are handled better by each upscaler. For example, DLSS 4.5 shows the least particle ghosting, as seen in this Ratchet & Clank scene, and it typically produces the sharpest particles as well.
Occasionally, that extra sharpness can introduce aliasing along particle edges. In comparison, the softer look of FSR 4 tends to reduce aliasing, though at the expense of clarity and sometimes increased ghosting. DLSS 4 in this scene sits somewhere in between.
In this Mafia example at 4K Performance mode, FSR 4 is more prone to particle flicker in bright elements compared to DLSS 4.5, which produces the most stable particles, followed closely by DLSS 4. What's especially interesting is that when lowering the render resolution to 1440p Balanced, DLSS 4 Preset K struggles significantly. It fails to reconstruct particles at the correct size, leading to dimmed elements and heavy flicker. FSR 4 does a much better job of reconstructing the particles properly, though it still exhibits some flicker. DLSS 4.5 strikes the best overall balance between accurate particle reconstruction and reduced instability.
However, in this snow scene from Horizon Zero Dawn, DLSS 4.5 Preset M struggles with grain and pixelation in the background behind the snow. FSR 4 handles this situation better, and while the snow itself is arguably higher quality in DLSS 4.5, we think the overall FSR 4 image is more pleasing due to fewer visible artifacts. Because of these trade-offs, it's difficult to declare a single upscaler as best for particles overall, since each has strengths and weaknesses depending on the scene.
Transparency
In previous comparisons of DLSS 4 and FSR 4, we found transparency quality to be quite similar between the two. The same largely applies to DLSS 4.5, as transparencies have not been significantly improved in this latest version.
DLSS 4.5 can look slightly better in certain cases, but for the most part all three upscalers handle transparent elements well. At lower render resolutions, we also see similar types of artifacts across all three.
Foliage
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Foliage quality is one of the areas that improved the most with DLSS 4.5, and this often puts it ahead of FSR 4. Not always, but in many games the difference is clearly noticeable. In Star Wars Outlaws, for example, when focusing on trees swaying in the wind, the FSR 4 image is reasonably stable, but it achieves this through some blurring and smearing, especially around lower branches that overlap. DLSS 4.5 at 4K Performance mode avoids that smearing and also reconstructs finer detail more effectively, particularly in the thin leafless branches at the tips of trees.
The results in Mafia: The Old Country are especially interesting. FSR 4 is more stable than DLSS 4 Preset K, removing much of the flickering seen around branch detail inside the trees. However, closer inspection shows that FSR 4 achieves this stability by smearing a lot of fine detail. The image becomes smoother in motion, but clarity is reduced. DLSS 4.5, on the other hand, delivers both strong stability and better retained detail, making it clearly superior to FSR 4 in both 4K Performance and 1440p Balanced modes.
In some titles like The Last of Us, we saw very little difference in tree quality between DLSS 4 and DLSS 4.5. In both cases, though, the presentation was sharper and clearer than FSR 4. That's not to say FSR 4 looks bad here, but the latest versions of DLSS push foliage quality to a higher level overall.
Grass is a different story, and whether FSR 4 or DLSS 4.5 looks better often depends on the game. In Mafia, focusing on grass, DLSS 4 Preset K is particularly problematic in Performance mode, producing grass that looks pixelated and grainy in motion. FSR 4 is much more stable, but largely because fine detail is being smoothed out and blurred. It looks better than DLSS 4, but that improvement comes from reducing detail rather than preserving it.
When comparing to DLSS 4.5, we wouldn't say it reaches native-level quality, but it is far more stable than DLSS 4 while still retaining details that are smeared away in FSR 4.
In Horizon Zero Dawn, DLSS 4.5 appears sharper and more detailed than FSR 4, but that sharpness can lead to grain and an overly sharpened look in some situations. FSR 4 is smoother and less detailed, so it doesn't always appear as high-resolution in motion. However, when examining individual frames, FSR 4 sometimes shows noticeably less pixelation than DLSS 4.5.
Toward the end of this run, we actually think DLSS 4 Preset K looks the best, which is something we absolutely couldn't say in Mafia. This highlights how heavily these results can vary from game to game.
Fences
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Fence quality is undoubtedly superior with DLSS 4.5 compared to FSR 4. In this Cyberpunk 2077 example, we're looking at 4K Performance mode across all techniques. Thanks to significant improvements in disocclusion, DLSS 4.5 tends to look better than DLSS 4, despite some artifact issues still present in all three. FSR 4, however, appears noticeably blurrier and fails to properly reconstruct the fine fence details.
The same holds true in the Spider-Man 2 fence test, especially when viewing overlapping fence patterns. FSR 4 isn't too far behind DLSS 4 Preset K, but Preset M is much clearer in Performance mode, with better definition, particularly on the foreground fence. To achieve a similar level of clarity with FSR 4, you need to step up to Quality mode, which can trade blows with DLSS 4.5 Performance at 4K depending on the scene.
Lighting Quality
For a better representation of image quality comparisons, check out the HUB video below:
Lastly, let's look at lighting quality. This is an area where we found DLSS 4.5 improves upon DLSS 4, due to changes in Nvidia's tone mapping process. DLSS 4.5 now performs upscaling in linear space before tone mapping occurs, rather than in logarithmic space after tone mapping. This leads to better lighting reconstruction, typically presenting as brighter and more accurate highlights.
What's interesting is that FSR 4 appears to already be operating in the same way that DLSS 4.5 now does, so in scenes where we saw improved lighting with DLSS 4.5, FSR 4 looks largely similar. A neon sign in Cyberpunk 2077 is noticeably more vibrant in both FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5 compared to DLSS 4, and the same applies to bright particles and highlight detail across other examples.
It also means we see similar flickering artifacts around some bright elements in both FSR 4 and DLSS 4.5, which is notable because these artifacts are not present in DLSS 4 Preset K.
This is something we didn't really notice when comparing DLSS 4 to FSR 4 previously, since it only becomes obvious in scenes with intense highlight brightness. It's possible Nvidia observed that FSR 4 was already working this way and decided to implement a similar approach with DLSS 4.5.
Performance
No upscaler comparison would be complete without discussing performance. We've left this until the end because performance results here are not especially surprising, particularly if you've already seen our previous comparisons of DLSS 4 vs FSR 4, and DLSS 4 vs DLSS 4.5.
In short, FSR 4 performs very similarly to DLSS 4 Preset K on comparable modern hardware. This means the performance gap between DLSS 4.5 and FSR 4 is similar to the gap between DLSS 4.5 and DLSS 4.
For example, in Cyberpunk 2077 we tested using the Ultra Ray Tracing preset on the RTX 5070 Ti and RX 9070 XT. At 4K Performance mode, DLSS 4 was 157% faster than native TAA, DLSS 4.5 was 128% faster, and FSR 4 was 179% faster. At 1440p, FSR 4 delivered a very similar uplift to DLSS 4.
In Mafia: The Old Country, DLSS 4 Quality provided 63% more performance than native, DLSS 4.5 offered 50% more, and FSR 4 delivered 67% more at 4K. At 1440p, FSR 4 ran slightly better on the RX 9070 XT than DLSS 4 did on the RTX 5070 Ti.
The Horizon Zero Dawn Remastered results tell a similar story. With performance broadly in line with DLSS 4, the overall outcome is that DLSS 4.5 is usually about half a tier to a full tier slower than FSR 4.
In the worst cases, DLSS 4.5 Performance can deliver results closer to FSR 4 Balanced, though most of the time it remains slightly faster than FSR 4 Balanced on equivalent Radeon hardware. In general, this makes matching equivalent modes, such as Performance vs Performance, the most appropriate comparison.
This is why much of this article focused on same-mode testing. We primarily used Performance at 4K and Balanced at 1440p because these configurations work especially well with the latest generation of upscalers.
What We Learned
So there you have it: that's how DLSS 4.5 compares to FSR 4 at both 4K and 1440p resolutions. In our previous review looking at DLSS 4.5 versus DLSS 4, we said that while DLSS 4.5 does introduce some image quality regressions, it generally looks better overall and is the configuration we'd prefer to use, especially in Performance mode. Since DLSS 4 was already delivering better image quality than FSR 4, it's no surprise that DLSS 4.5 also comes out ahead, and the gap has widened somewhat with this latest release.
Since DLSS 4 was already delivering better image quality than FSR 4, it's no surprise that DLSS 4.5 also comes out ahead, and the gap has widened somewhat with this latest release.
When we break things down into specific areas, DLSS 4.5 is able to pull further ahead of FSR 4 in many situations. Sharpness and fine detail are typically improved, especially in areas like foliage and fences, and the stability and clarity of pixel-level detail at low render resolutions, such as Performance mode, is also stronger.
In some games, FSR 4's output is softer, which can be beneficial when DLSS 4.5 appears overly sharp. However, most of the time we'd say DLSS 4.5 Preset M gives the impression of the game running at a higher resolution, particularly in motion.
In other cases, DLSS 4.5 addresses major weaknesses and now delivers an experience similar to or better than FSR 4. Disocclusion is a key example, as it was a real weakness of DLSS 4 Preset K and a relative strength of FSR 4. With DLSS 4.5, disocclusion performance is now much closer to FSR 4 while still delivering higher detail overall. This benefits elements like hair and overlapping geometry, which look noticeably improved. Nvidia has also reduced ghosting significantly, making DLSS 4.5 less likely to show that artifact compared to FSR 4.
Also see: DLSS vs FSR vs XeSS Support Across 650+ Games
Some aspects of DLSS 4.5 are more of a sidegrade relative to DLSS 4, such as overall stability, but DLSS was already starting from a higher baseline than FSR 4. Stability remains one of FSR 4's biggest weaknesses, particularly at lower render resolutions. And while DLSS 4.5 can occasionally regress compared to DLSS 4, it typically still stays ahead of FSR 4. There are situations where DLSS 4.5 is less stable than FSR 4, but GeForce owners can usually maintain an advantage by reverting to DLSS 4 Preset K when needed. We didn't really find examples where FSR 4 surpassed both Preset M and Preset K overall.
What's interesting, though, is that while DLSS 4.5 is generally superior, there are still instances where FSR 4 looks better. One example is in games where DLSS 4.5 appears overly sharp. FSR 4's softer presentation may be preferable in those cases, though GeForce owners can often address this simply by switching back to Preset K. Another advantage for FSR 4 is that DLSS 4.5 can sometimes appear pixelated or grainy, particularly in heavy particle effects or certain grass implementations. FSR 4's smoother, less detailed reconstruction can help avoid that pixelation, making the overall image cleaner in those scenarios.
That said, we wouldn't go so far as to claim DLSS 4.5 delivers magic levels of upscaling that's multiple quality tiers better than FSR 4...
As we've said throughout this article, if we had to choose one overall, DLSS 4.5 typically delivers noticeably better image quality, especially in practical configurations like 4K Performance and 1440p Balanced. Nvidia remains in the lead when it comes to upscaling quality, and even with the higher performance cost of DLSS 4.5, they've managed to push further ahead of FSR 4 than before.
That said, we wouldn't go so far as to claim DLSS 4.5 delivers magic levels of upscaling that's multiple quality tiers better than FSR 4. Can DLSS 4.5 Performance mode look better than FSR 4 Quality mode? Yes, in some games, in some scenes, when assessing specific artefacts or elements. Foliage would be one example of that. But it's not universally true. It's easy to find cases where FSR 4 Quality looks less grainy than DLSS 4.5 Performance, or where higher render resolution still provides an advantage. Ultimately, render resolution still matters, and the higher you can run it, the better the results tend to be.
We do think AMD needs to continue working toward a next-generation version of FSR Upscaling. There are several areas where FSR can improve, including stability, ghosting, and fine detail preservation at lower modes.
If AMD doesn't continue evolving the model, it will likely fall further behind Nvidia over time. Fortunately, FSR 4 is already a very usable upscaler, so these aren't urgent fixes, but we'd like to see AMD push image quality further, especially now that driver-level updates make ongoing improvement possible.
In the meantime, GeForce remains the best for upscaling image quality, and in our view, paying a small premium for access to DLSS is still worth it.