Resident Evil 8 performance

[LoadsaMoney]

@Grim5

AMD on the left, Nvidia on the right.

 

[Tommy_Here]

Is that maxed out settings including raytracing?

Nope excluding ray tracing, just watched a 1080 Ti on youtube go into mid 40's maxed out so low 50's is to be expected with the 10% better performance on the Titan.. like I say a few tweaked settings nets you 60+fps at all times..

 

[Wrinkly]

Its a shame stuff like flames dont cause flickering shadows or reflections on things, would have made it so much cooler, yet its static.

Expect a lot of graphical quality missing from AMD sponsored titles as they just don't have the hardware for it yet.

 

[Dontrocktheboat]

AMD on the left, Nvidia on the right.

someone had to say it didnt they

 

[shankly1985]

Expect a lot of graphical quality missing from AMD sponsored titles as they just don't have the hardware for it yet.

???

It's a design choice from the developers nothing to do with AMD.

So you saying AMD can't do flickering flames?

 

[Wrinkly]

???

It's a design choice from the developers nothing to do with AMD.

So you saying AMD can't do flickering flames?

I'm saying AMD is still a generation behind and doesn't have the hardware to do a fully ray traced scene at playable frame rates. This has been highlighted with various benchmarks and games already.

You should also have noticed by now that people buying AMD are also saying they don't care about raytracing.

 

[henson0115]

I'm saying AMD is still a generation behind and doesn't have the hardware to do a fully ray traced scene at playable frame rates. This has been highlighted with various benchmarks and games already.

You should also have noticed by now that people buying AMD are also saying they don't care about raytracing.

Just curious if you feel the same about the 2080ti?

 

[Grim5]

It may not have DLSS, but it doesn't render native 4k either - it's using checkerboarding. I'm just kinda (pleasantly) surprised that the PS5 is this weak against this generation of GPUs.

It's a couple things

1) The RE engine is just that damn good that it's able to take full advantage of modern architecture. Does this game use Vulkun? It's got the performance of a game that uses Vulkun
2) The PS5 isn't very good at Ray Tracing, it only meets the bare minimum spec for Ray Tracing gaming.

I'm sure the PS5 could do higher than 60fps with Ray Tracing off but the game doesn't have that option - it's capped to 60, but when Ray Tracing is on it cannot even hold 60fps and drops to the mid sometimes low 50s. Compare that to a RTX3080 which are doing 4k 100fps+

 

[shankly1985]

I'm saying AMD is still a generation behind and doesn't have the hardware to do a fully ray traced scene at playable frame rates. This has been highlighted with various benchmarks and games already.

You should also have noticed by now that people buying AMD are also saying they don't care about raytracing.

Nether does Nvidia though. The main reason DLSS was introduced was to help with poor ray tracing performance.

What games right now taking performance out the question does AMD struggle with ray tracing? Far as I know all the RT nvidia can do so can AMD be it performance difference.

So all people buy AMD dont care about RT? Did you just pick that out of the fin air? Few OCUK posted doesn't = all AMD user base. I for one care a lot about RT and can see the good stuff it adds, Control being my fav RT game to date! and plays very well on the 6800XT sure at down scaled 1080p and so would Nvidia if DLSS wasn't a thing.

 

[SkeeterUK]

Personally i reckon its just cos amds new cards are just that and new, i think time is needed to unlock the rt performance out of these new cards and for amd to optimise them accelerator things in em. Give a year to optimise the drivers and by that time amds dlss compared thing to come out and i reckon it should enable reasonable gaming with rt titles by then. So my judgement on rt and amd is just give it time.

 

[willhub]

Nether does Nvidia though. The main reason DLSS was introduced was to help with poor ray tracing performance.

What games right now taking performance out the question does AMD struggle with ray tracing? Far as I know all the RT nvidia can do so can AMD be it performance difference.

So all people buy AMD dont care about RT? Did you just pick that out of the fin air? Few OCUK posted doesn't = all AMD user base. I for one care a lot about RT and can see the good stuff it adds, Control being my fav RT game to date! and plays very well on the 6800XT sure at down scaled 1080p and so would Nvidia if DLSS wasn't a thing.

It's well known Nvidia has stronger ray tracing performance and DLSS further helps performance by allowing higher frame rate with internally downscaling the resolution with negligible difference to the image quality thanks to the tensor cores.

 

[VincentHanna]

Personally i reckon its just cos amds new cards are just that and new, i think time is needed to unlock the rt performance out of these new cards and for amd to optimise them accelerator things in em. Give a year to optimise the drivers and by that time amds dlss compared thing to come out and i reckon it should enable reasonable gaming with rt titles by then. So my judgement on rt and amd is just give it time.

A year?

By then Nvidia 4000 series GPUs will have moved on Ray Tracing performance even more.

 

[JediFragger]

Just curious if you feel the same about the 2080ti?

Well tbf the 2080Ti *is* a generation behind so he'd prob feel the same way

 

[shankly1985]

It's well known Nvidia has stronger ray tracing performance and DLSS further helps performance by allowing higher frame rate with internally downscaling the resolution with negligible difference to the image quality thanks to the tensor cores.

RX 6000 series is going up against a 2nd generation RT GPU its going to loose. What AMD did this time though is what everyone kept saying before that Nvidia is too far ahead AMD wont catch them well that didn't age well. AMD came out with a GPU that performance without RT is even or better and here the killer doing it by less power! RDNA can scale very well RDNA 1 vs RDNA 2 is a massive uplift.

A year?

By then Nvidia 4000 series GPUs will have moved on Ray Tracing performance even more.

Like above time and time again it was posted on here AMD will not be able to catch Nvidia.

 

[Wrinkly]

Nether does Nvidia though. The main reason DLSS was introduced was to help with poor ray tracing performance.

What games right now taking performance out the question does AMD struggle with ray tracing? Far as I know all the RT nvidia can do so can AMD be it performance difference.

So all people buy AMD dont care about RT? Did you just pick that out of the fin air? Few OCUK posted doesn't = all AMD user base. I for one care a lot about RT and can see the good stuff it adds, Control being my fav RT game to date! and plays very well on the 6800XT sure at down scaled 1080p and so would Nvidia if DLSS wasn't a thing.

I have no problem running with RT on using a 3080 in an ancient Ivy Bridge system e.g. Quake 2 RTX at 1440p 60+FPS, which does not use DLSS. Look at the benchmarks. A couple of good examples of Ampere's dominance over RDNA2 would be CP2077, which AMD held back drivers for as it would have hurt sales, and The Medium. Control is a bad example as it was written for Turing levels of performance. Even Jensen joked about now (Ampere) being safe to upgrade from Pascal as Turing was a disappointment.

I also suggest you read up on DLSS and what it was originally designed for though it's also a very welcome addition to enable much higher frame rates with RT.

It was suggested before release that RDNA2 RT was going to be bad. AMD hid from questions regarding RT. So either AMD GPU owners didn't care for RT as many have said or they just didn't do their homework.

Just curious if you feel the same about the 2080ti?

Yep, I skipped Turing due to it's poor RT. DLSS 1.0 didn't help at all as it was also garbage.

 

[Grim5]

Now this is curious

resident evil load times from menu to in game

Xbox series x: 5 seconds
Ps5: 1.5 seconds
Stadia: 9 seconds
My PC: 1.3 seconds

I'm using a Samsung 980 Pro

but pc doesn't yet have direct storage so why

1) is my PC loading the game faster than any console
2) why is the Xbox so slow compared to ps5 and pc?

 

[willhub]

I have no problem running with RT on using a 3080 in an ancient Ivy Bridge system e.g. Quake 2 RTX at 1440p 60+FPS, which does not use DLSS. Look at the benchmarks. A couple of good examples of Ampere's dominance over RDNA2 would be CP2077, which AMD held back drivers for as it would have hurt sales, and The Medium. Control is a bad example as it was written for Turing levels of performance. Even Jensen joked about now (Ampere) being safe to upgrade from Pascal as Turing was a disappointment.

I also suggest you read up on DLSS and what it was originally designed for though it's also a very welcome addition to enable much higher frame rates with RT.

It was suggested before release that RDNA2 RT was going to be bad. AMD hid from questions regarding RT. So either AMD GPU owners didn't care for RT as many have said or they just didn't do their homework.



Yep, I skipped Turing due to it's poor RT. DLSS 1.0 didn't help at all as it was also garbage.

It doesn't really matter who is on 1st or 2nd generation when it comes to performance consideration. If you want to use RT and DLSS you won't go and buy AMD because "oh well I like AMD they're on their 1st gen and Nvidia is on their 2nd so I'll give AMD credit and buy their product"

 

[shankly1985]

Now this is curious

resident evil load times from menu to in game

Xbox series x: 5 seconds
Ps5: 1.5 seconds
Stadia: 9 seconds
My PC: 1.3 seconds

I'm using a Samsung 980 Pro

but pc doesn't yet have direct storage so why

1) is my PC loading the game faster than any console
2) why is the Xbox so slow compared to ps5 and pc?

So slow, how slow? 5 seconds sir its unbelievable that I must wait 5 seconds

 

[LoadsaMoney]

someone had to say it didnt they

 

[no_1_dave]

So all people buy AMD don't care about RT?

I think he was referring to the fact that RT has such a big performance hit on AMD hardware that if somebody was really interested in using RT to the max in games that support it they would likely choose an Nvidia card. There have been numerous posts by people purchasing AMD cards saying they made their choice because they're not fussed about RT.

Personally i reckon its just cos amds new cards are just that and new, i think time is needed to unlock the rt performance out of these new cards and for amd to optimise them accelerator things in em. Give a year to optimise the drivers and by that time amds dlss compared thing to come out and i reckon it should enable reasonable gaming with rt titles by then. So my judgement on rt and amd is just give it time.

Hate to disappoint you but that's not the case. No amount of optimising drivers will bridge the large performance gap. AMD focused on rasterization this gen and that's what the 6000 gives, good rasterization performance.

RX 6000 series is going up against a 2nd generation RT GPU its going to loose. What AMD did this time though is what everyone kept saying before that Nvidia is too far ahead AMD wont catch them well that didn't age well. AMD came out with a GPU that performance without RT is even or better and here the killer doing it by less power! RDNA can scale very well RDNA 1 vs RDNA 2 is a massive uplift.

The posts you are replying to are discussing the RT performance, not what the 6000 series achieved (which I admit, is staggering from where they were before). Also, the whole power argument is laughable, there's like 30-40w between the 3080/6800XT and Nvidia has all those Tensor cores to power. When you drop down a level to 3070/6800 AMD use more power even with no Tensor cores. Applaud AMD and give them credit where it's due, but the power issue is barely anything and only at 1 performance level.