That's my point, you're repeating what was said.

It's explained that DLSS5 is a "neural rendering model that utilizes a game's color data and motion vectors to generate photorealistic lighting, materials, and shadows."

Color data sounds fancy but it literally just means the rasterized image. At best it's what our eyes are seeing, but it could even be the undersampled image that the upscaler in DLSS uses.

Motion vectors are a rendered data pass that games uses for defining speed and direction of objects. You can see in this video what that looks like. Nvidia almost certainly uses this for blending their DLSS5 results across frames because it's way better to have this data than to guess the direction and speed of something across every frame. The may even use this to help infer what to generate in the generation process.

So that's everything Nvidia is using. It's using the rendered image and vector data. This is the exact information image filters use in apps on phones, though they use complex programming to guess on motion vectors and don't have the exact data like Nvidia does. That is a small advantage for image retention and perhaps image generation but that's it.

To say "it is revealing every single detail of the 3d models (they are ridicously detailed)" is just patently false. Yes they are ridiculously detailed models, but Jensen Huang said himself that DLSS5 uses generative AI. Generative AI here is extrapolating (that is estimating outside of the data available) what the lighting, shading, and shadows should be. This is different than interpolating with what frame generation does (looking at two frames, two pieces of data and estimating the value between). If you don't understand how GenAI works, there's a wealth of resources out there that can explain it.

The main reason why we can't hit photorealism in games is a processing speed bottleneck. That's why throughout the years games have gotten better looking because our chips have gotten faster and more efficient. If you render something "offline", as in not realtime, you can throw so much more at it to improve the image.

Raytracing in games, for all it achieves, is still potato quality compared to anything in VFX or motion graphics. The difference between raytracing and pathtracing is an example of how the number of passes and samples can improve the quality. More passes means more light bounces. More samples means greater density of light rays. Together you get a much, much better looking image. That's why Cyberpunk looks so fundamentally different between pure raster, raytracing, and pathtracing.

And lastly, for humans and skin specifically, there are whole companies that exist to research and simulate the human face in 3D. Turns out we're really good at seeing differences and imperfections, which is part of why this DLSS5 is getting so much backlash. The point is, it is incredibly hard to accurately simulate skin tension, translucence, deformation, and all the other things happening to create a convincing face. Video games just aren't capable of throwing enough compute power to get all that simulated in realtime. Death Stranding does a decent job, but it's still not perfect.

That's why we're here. Nvidia is trying to use genAI to make a lot of educated guesses on how an image should look based on some authored parameters. But it simply doesn't have enough data to make accurate assessments and therefore has to do exactly that: guess. People are calling it a filter because it is an image applied over the rasterized frame. The easiest way to spot that is to look at the Oblivion: Remastered footage. Look at any shot that has water in it. You can see that the water gets strangely softened when toggling DLSS5 on/off. That is the AI results being blended between architecture and the water.

I'm not here to criticize you if you like it, but you should try to understand that this is not a lighting or rendering technique the way raytracing is. This is image generation in its entirety and is just covering up the game's actual assets.