Why are the VSR supported resolutions so limited?
It's actually kind of impressive there isn't any support for anyone wandering out of the 1080p,1440p/16:9 world, what if I'm using a 1440p 32:9 monitor and I want to VSR 2160p?
I'm using an older CRT monitor for gaming as a second monitor, it's 4:3 and can do 2048x1536, great stuff. Before, I used DSR to downscale 3072x2304 (2.25x) and had great results, the image was noticeably sharper, it's actually a great use for this feature. Now? Now I can't even enable VSR no matter what resolution I set my monitor to. I guess that VRAM upgrade won't matter much after all.
Oh well, maybe I'm being unreasonable and using an MST hub to display something is a crazy unrealistic scenario never envisioned by any AMD software engineer and that's my issue here...
Okay then, I guess I'll try on my other monitor, it's 1080p and set up in portrait so I can quickly read documents and have Discord on the side while gaming... This isn't a crazy use case, lots of people have portrait monitors. Well, VSR doesn't work on it either because it's 9:16. Same resolution and aspect ratio, just on the other side...
Why is it that this feature is so limited compared to Nvidia's offering? Why would it be limited in the first place? If I'm able to display a given resolution what is actually preventing me from displaying, say, 2.25x this resolution, other than the maximum resolution supported?
How can I manifest to AMD that this is a useful feature that is currently outclassed by its competing alternative, simply because of the seemingly arbitrary limited range of resolutions supported?
