Disclaimer: Couldn’t get his article to display on Xcancel, it’s within that discussion, open at own risk.

I thought it important to engage with the shilling coming from the obvious places:

For the arguments: “Developer control vs black box”

If the developer control was as extensive as Ryan wants to make believe, for the debut of the technology, the best AAA funded devs only muster a slopification exercise? Sounds like there are levers but these levers are useless. There’s supposedly masking but already on his first example, even though the man’s face looks more “realistic” it comprimised the occlusion and illumination of the entire scene. Furthermore, the contrast on the plant is completely obliterated!

Then the intensity argument: Why does grace look like C. Noem if there’s intensity control? Also, why not show the non path traced version that doesn’t suffer from texture blurring and detail loss from the PT denoiser? Why is this so amateurishly presented, shit, ambient occlusion is completely obliterated in the assassin’s creed shadows example. It looks oversharpened and downright horrible. Same thing with Virgil in the Formerly known as FIFA game. Jesus, as his face becomes more detailed the surrounding material and environmental lighting is obliterated. It’s far worse than ENB or some custom LUT.

And finally, for the ad hominem, because the POS deserves it:

Ryan Shrout was caught with his pants down double dipping on Intel, getting paid to write “whitepapers” while reviewing intel products without disclosure (credit AdoredTV who caught the corruption). He then left pcper to work at Intel and has since been kicked out as when the money tap closes, parasites are the first to be shown the exit door of corporations. Note the dates of the scandal vs the hire.

In sum, Ryan is shilling for the latest anti-consumer tech from NVIDIA as is his habit, much like Digital Foundry, that had a massive exclusive promotional video before gargling on Jensen’s DLSS5AIJIZZ.

edited for clarity