quadro obviously, dude they barely mention gaming in presentations anyomore. & DLSS is inherently junk because it's post process theres barely scene information there beyond rudimentary motion vectors they have papers admitting it's rudimentary too.
DLSS isn't junk. Why? Because it works. That's all that matters. The result (at 'quality' setting) looks barely worse than native resolution. You really have to know what you're looking for (except in some pathological edge cases where it produces shit). DLSS is nice because it frees up performance in weaker cards to use on higher resolution or stuff like RTX. Do more with fewer pixels? Yes, please.
The future of gaming GPUs isn't more pixels. It's better pixels. Yes, game developers have become exceptionally good at using all sorts of rasterizer hacks and artwork trickery to fake some of the shit that raytracing does and the hacks work reasonably well - but there is only so much you can do with that.
I'm simply not interested yet another GPU generation pushing more pixels. What for? So we can play at 8k resolution with 360 FPS while still looking at the same old pre-baked lights and screen space reflections?
I don't like nVidia. Their pricing policy is atrocious and they're too fucking stingy with the VRAM. I'm still glad that they're at least trying to meaningfully advance real-time graphics for video games and DLSS is a way to make that feasable on GPUs with a lower price points than the absolute high end. For the time being. Maybe a few GPU generations down the road we won't need it anymore.
