DLSS 2.0 is the future brehs, and it uses tensor cores, which AMD doesn't have. Nvidia basically runs a game through it's super computers using A.I. to learn how to upscale the game in lower resolutions. So when you enable DLSS 2.0 you get 4K or better quality while only processing half or less the power needed to render the image. This allows for much better ray tracing performance as well as higher refresh rates.
I've been playing Death Stranding with DLSS 2.0 on PC at 4K 120 fps and it looks better than native 4k, which struggles to hit 60fps. I switched back and forth and noticed muddy images and jagged edges compared to the DLSS version.
If next gen consoles had went with nvidia they probably could have added an extra three years to the life of the consoles and provided a true next gen feel right from the start. Plus DLSS already improved drastically from 1.9 to 2.0, so by the time they get to 3.0, who knows how much better it'll be.
NVIDIA's DLSS 2.0 tech could make your £300 graphics card perform like a £700 one
https://developer.nvidia.com/dlss
I've been playing Death Stranding with DLSS 2.0 on PC at 4K 120 fps and it looks better than native 4k, which struggles to hit 60fps. I switched back and forth and noticed muddy images and jagged edges compared to the DLSS version.
If next gen consoles had went with nvidia they probably could have added an extra three years to the life of the consoles and provided a true next gen feel right from the start. Plus DLSS already improved drastically from 1.9 to 2.0, so by the time they get to 3.0, who knows how much better it'll be.
NVIDIA's DLSS 2.0 tech could make your £300 graphics card perform like a £700 one
https://developer.nvidia.com/dlss
. If possible 4K would be easy
that R9 290 was the truth. The console makers don't care because most of the players care more about bells and whistles than 60+ FPS 
which is their prerogative. I'm surprised they're even starting to embrace Variable Refresh Rate
