• 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.

What do gamers actually think about Ray-Tracing?

tommybhoy said:
With the amount of Nv users jumping onto RDNA4, they'll finally be able to turn RT'ing on at a playable fps...
Click to expand...

TBF once 1.2 is in games we'll probably be able sell our 9070 cards and buy a UDNA one for the price of a 5080 anyway. Let's not start pretending top notch RT/path tracing is playable on all Nvidia cards all of a sudden. It's only been the top 4/5 cards that have done it well,
 
Last edited:
It seems distinctly unimpressive to me.

I realise there are better and worse implementations, but from the games I've seen it's very much a game of 'spot the difference' in still images, and not something you'd really notice during gameplay.

In itself, not a deal breaker. But then you have to remember the massive performance hit, and for what?

Some people have said that it might make things easier for debs in future if they can rely on RT always being available, cutting time spent baking in lighting. No idea if this is true, but clearly only the top GPUs right now can even attempt RT, so that's for some future time.
 
SuperElectric said:
I bought Cyberpunk for the first time just over a month ago, never played it before on any platform.

It's easy to forget that it's actually a game and not just a tech demo/benchmark ;) . I'm having a lot of fun, not sure why I've not played it sooner.

On the 5080, I played with regular RT, and on the 5090, I play with path tracing. It's been a great experience so far, obviously the lighting is amazing, the game looks pretty good. My only complaint in terms of visuals are nothing to do with RT, the pop in/out of vehicles in the distance is very noticeable and distracting. Also, NPC's occasionally walking in mid-air :rolleyes:

Is it worth paying extra for? I would say yes. However, before DLSS4/FSR4, I would have said no.
Click to expand...
I got that to test my 9070xt. At 4k RT ultra fsr4, I'm not sure it's doing much more than native without RT. I'll try running around in native to see. Path tracing definitely looks better from what I've seen in videos. As an aside, it's about time it had driver support for FSR 4 rather than messing about with optiscaler
 
Last edited:
stuartharrison said:
I got that to test my 9070xt. At 4k RT ultra fsr4, I'm not sure it's doing much more than native without RT. I'll try running around in native to see. Path tracing definitely looks better from what I've seen in videos. As an aside, it's about time it had driver support for FSR 4 rather than messing about with optiscaler
Click to expand...

what CPU

RT as a massive impact of FPS so to be getting native FPS with RT thats good even with FSR on depending on the FSR setting
 
Last edited:
did doom actually list hardware raytracing under minimum requirements?
would be interesting how it pans out, but i really like how the guys at id push for bleeding edge even if it means a potential hit on sales
this is perhaps the beginning of RT as a default lighting model, hope its as performant as legacy methods
 
Last edited:
tried it in lots of games now and really do not care one way or the other about it in spiderman the game runs well with it of or on

but turned it off while playing I could not notice the difference unless I stopped and started at something

In Doom its just Nvidia planned obsolescence anything else you hear is just propaganda to further this
 
Imagine if the industry stood blind and didn't move with the tech just because "most" people don't have or like RT.
 
mrk said:
Imagine if the industry stood blind and didn't move with the tech just because "most" people don't have or like RT.
Click to expand...
I imagine that and it looks better. No paying for RT you don't want. Devs don't have to think about it. Games perform better. List goes on.
Flip the question around - I can't think of a single benefit of RT atm.
 
mrk said:
Imagine if the industry stood blind and didn't move with the tech just because "most" people don't have or like RT.
Click to expand...

It’s certainly been interesting to hear DF and developers speak out recently about how much time RT saves in development and the 100s GB storage too.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mrk
throwaway4372 said:
I imagine that and it looks better. No paying for RT you don't want. Devs don't have to think about it. Games perform better. List goes on.
Flip the question around - I can't think of a single benefit of RT atm.
Click to expand...
It does not look better, that's the whole point. RT makes things look better not raster, and saves on dev time. You're not paying for RT you don't want either, the price of the game would be the same regardless, so that angle doesn't fly here where we can critically think a bit better as opposed to facebook/reddit etc.
 
Last edited:
throwaway4372 said:
I imagine that and it looks better. No paying for RT you don't want. Devs don't have to think about it. Games perform better. List goes on.
Flip the question around - I can't think of a single benefit of RT atm.
Click to expand...

Popcorn-Homer.gif
 
ICDP said:
The number of times I have seen the steam concurrent players used as a metric for success is mind boggling.
Click to expand...

It’s bizarre, there are so many reasons the peak count may be different. Especially for a game that is now £70 vs £10 or less for a month, along with other big titles on Gamepass recently like oblivion and expedition 33 that’ll draw people to the platform.
 
throwaway4372 said:
I imagine that and it looks better. No paying for RT you don't want. Devs don't have to think about it. Games perform better. List goes on.
Flip the question around - I can't think of a single benefit of RT atm.
Click to expand...
games look better, easier to develop for and smaller install sizes.

ray tracing has been the "goal" for years and years. yes it's true it's a massive hit on performance. it was certainly not really ready in the 2000 series.
the 3000 series it was usable but a significant hit, but every generation it will get less of a hit (I remember when anti aliasing was similar).
from next gen I expect it will just be a brainless turn it on and don't worry about it

even much older games are changed dramatically like quake just by adding ray tracing
 
Last edited:
bigmike20vt said:
and smaller install sizes
Click to expand...

In my opinion in the longer run devs will trade the space they'd have reserved for baked lighting data, etc. for higher quality assets, which will also help to improve visual quality. There are already games where they've downgraded the quality of non-ray traced lighting as a trade off for higher quality assets where they game is really intended to be played with ray tracing and older lighting techniques are there as a fall back really.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom