They certainly aren't an indication of RTX beating ray tracing anyhow...
-
Competitor rules
Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.
AMD Navi 23 ‘NVIDIA Killer’ GPU Rumored to Support Hardware Ray Tracing, Coming Next Year
- Thread starter Gregster
- Start date
- Status
They certainly aren't an indication of RTX beating ray tracing anyhow...
@Calin ah, gotcha. I'll reserve judgement until the final game is released. The omissions could be part of early development, or could be an optimisation choice. Personally I think the visual quality of the reflections is good, and if the devs can maintain that quality by not rendering reflections of objects that disappear behind explosion effects for half a second then I'd say that was a good trade off.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
It will be good enough,and they will also look at using the GPU power saved to do other effects. So globally the games will look quite nice,hence why consoles with limited processing power can make nice looking games. Its about balancing the effects you use,to benefit the whole scene.
The problem with PC,since most of these games are console ports,they need to crank up some effect to "sell" the PC version,and its much easier to just turn something up instead of bothering with bigger changes.
On PC they will just crank up the RT effects to the max,and then something else will suffer. I still remember,the same with tessellation - there was more obssession with tessellation based effects,but then you would walk past something and see pop-in and low resolution textures,etc.
No, a 36 CU APU delivering better RT than everything below a 2080 Super is no indication of RDNA 2 getting right up in Ampere's face at all...
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Yeah, he says at the start, 4K120 with RT!!!
, then further on, it wasn't 4k, it was upscaled, it wasn't 120fps, and the RT was very basic, and a low res 
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
Yeah, he says at the start, 4k120 with RT!!!
So basically the same with PC?? I thought we all loved upscaling now on PC,and that we totally didn't criticise consoles for doing it before!
I do find it quite interesting PC owners feel threatened by consoles which will cost less than an RTX2080 on its own.
I wonder how a £600 PC will do with RT in January 2021? Even a £1000 PC?
So 4K120 with RT on by January 2021?
No, a 36 CU APU delivering better RT than everything below a 2080 Super is no indication of RDNA 2 getting right up in Ampere's face at all...
You don't understand - a £600 GPU might do it better than a £450 console,so consoles are dooooooooooooooooooooooooomed.
OFC,ignoring the rest of the PC since all PC gamers have a top end PC,to just plug the GPU in,which is totally at least 8 cores,has PCI-E 4.0 SSDs,etc.
Last edited:
No, a 36 CU APU delivering better RT than everything below a 2080 Super is no indication of RDNA 2 getting right up in Ampere's face at all...
The example you gave is a performance over quality optimised implementation with missing features - hardly a good comparison.
So basically the same with PC?? I thought we all loved upscaling now on PC,and that we totally didn't criticise consoles for doing it before!
I made this exact point on the "fed up of dlss or whatever" thread a few times... Upscaling was "bad" and "cheating" ... then nVidia does it and suddenly it's the best thing since sliced bread... It's so.... I'd say "odd" to see, but given the tendencies of brand loyalists, it's totally not that unexpected.
And maybe if RTX implementations did the same then Turing wouldn't absolutely tank FPS into the toilet.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
Exactly. Look at how even the RTX2060 and RTX2070 doing crap tier RT effects was fabulous,but a £400~£600 console which is probably faster and with some optimisation is probably better overall,now is "crap". Crap because it might do 4K120 upscaled with some RT effects on a pre-launch game. Yet,how many PCs under £1000 can do 4K120 with some RT effects. So on purpose understate the entry level bar for PC,and overstate the entry level bar for console to brand it "doooooooooooooooooooooooooomed" or "fail". Also this is just for the PS5,which is apparently the cheaper of the two consoles. The XBox Series X has even more GPU power to hand.
Then on purpose ignore that to get a 8 core CPU,16GB of RAM,a PCI-E 4.0,SSD,etc will cost at least £500~£600 on its own right now,and you have to add the cost of the GPU,windows OS,etc. So even if the RTX3060/RX6600XT were technically equal(or a bit better) than an XBox Series X,you are probably looking at least at £1000~£1200 if you build your own PC. If OTH like many gamers,buy a prebuilt it will be more that.
The fact is the rises in PC GPU prices,and the fact performance improvements per generation are very hit and miss means,the cost and performance of mainstream GPUs is what is really holding back the PC.
If anything they should be wishing the consoles are really powerful and produce nice looking games,as that will force AMD/Nvidia to price their GPUs better.
Soldato
- Joined
- 21 Jul 2005
- Posts
- 21,107
- Location
- Officially least sunny location -Ronskistats
Like I also said on that thread @Howling it was being championed so I left it as the new garlic bread meme. Its not revolutionary, its exactly that, cheating. If your gonna charge me more £££ year on year for faster 'better' cards, then dont beguile me with software cons to make it run 'better' as the hardware isnt up to scratch yet.
The goal with RTX ultimately is to move on from performance over quality optimised implementations of GI features, etc. that do a full featured implementation rather than missing objects or only rendering from screen space, etc.
Wow what a dig at AMD
Nvidias issue is console gaming offers now the deal with games for gaming with AMD hardware.
At a pricepoint that simply is resonable.
Ray tracing is a gimmick as far.
It will take 10 years before we have engines and enough people that develop for games and hardware enough to push this trough the market.
dx12 ultimate took MS 10 years to get there so now that will take more time.
My games which I play wont have ray tracing and I wont buy cards on RT due to one day they might as then we have new generation cards out anyway or a more powerful console.
Nvidia is trying to drum up how much better ray tracing is but it tanks your fps.
the transistors could been used for more speed instead.
AMD now support RT so we have the developers implementing some RT along the way.
As we seen with Unreal engine 5 that we need software more than hardware.
Where are the game engines that will run this at more than below acceptable frames?
as far we have a upcoming engine like unreal 5 but as we seen dx12 have failed to deliver as developers wont design for a minority.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
Wow what a dig at AMD
Don't worry Ampere users will be joining them soon! It might be called the 500W club!!
We saw the UE5 engine demo,and that didn't actually use any RT AFAIK,and it look amazing!
Nvidia pushing RT with Turing was more for the professional VFX market to render special effects. Gamers just got the castoffs they didn't want.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Don't worry Ampere users will be joining them soon! It might be called the 500W club!!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 9 Nov 2009
- Posts
- 25,769
- Location
- Planet Earth
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 10,023
- Location
- M28
Did someone AMD? Hot??? Don't make me post the videoooooooooooooooo!!!
Which one? This one
Shouldn't laugh as I had a 290X, was a super card, albeit FrankenAIO'd.
CoD was mentioned by someone else.
R&Clank reflections are bad because of the RT low-resolution - just like Gran Turismo 7 (game rendering at 4k while RT reflections are 1080p, jaggy low-res mess due to performance issues).
Also because there's quite a few things that aren't included in those reflections (again perf reasons), like ratchet not reflecting on clank at any point, many objects (destructibles), portals, effects missing from RT reflections.
No one mentioned mirror-like and unrealistic reflections, just the low-res and missing things from reflections.
Soldato
- Joined
- 1 May 2013
- Posts
- 10,023
- Location
- M28
End of the day you will only notice low res RT if it's on a static feature that is in view such as a car interior in GT7 whereas in R&C you will only notice if you pause and pixel peep since is a fluid, fast-moving game.
- Status