What do gamers actually think about Ray-Tracing?

[mrk]

Intel just recently announced its FG can be used by all cards so this now changes things somewhat as you can swap out Intel dll files in games unlike AMD's approach that requires devs to patch the game.

Microsoft's universal upscaler/fg support in Windows isn't going to happen the same way everyone imagined it seems last I read so these methods will remain in place for some time yet I guess.

 

[Firegod]

Intel just recently announced its FG can be used by all cards so this now changes things somewhat as you can swap out Intel dll files in games unlike AMD's approach that requires devs to patch the game.

Microsoft's universal upscaler/fg support in Windows isn't going to happen the same way everyone imagined it seems last I read so these methods will remain in place for some time yet I guess.

Wonder if it will have the same performance hit when not on an Intel card? Kind of like XeSS. I used that originally in Cyberpunk as it was better than FSR for IQ.

 

[degen]

Never cared for it with my 3080 but now I have a 5080 and can run at decent FPS I like it

 

[Firegod]

Never cared for it with my 3080 but now I have a 5080 and can run at decent FPS I like it

I asked AI what it thought the adoption rate might be based on stock levels, pricing data and user sentiment. It guessed the following:

Segment	Estimated Share	Notes
RTX 5080/5090	~2–3%	High price, low availability
Other RTX 5000 Series (5060–5070)	~20–25%	More accessible models
Previous Gen (4000, 3000 Series)	~55–60%	Large existing base; still widely used
AMD GPUs	~15–20%	Strong budget and mid-range competition

So if only 2-3% can get the full fat RT experience, I can see why most people turn it off. Currently it only really is enjoyable for a select few who are mad enough to drop £1-2k on a GPU. See what AMD pull out the bag 2026 with UDNA. Might make it a more affordable luxury and help drive competition and lower prices for us all.

 

[tommybhoy]

Intel just recently announced its FG can be used by all cards so this now changes things somewhat as you can swap out Intel dll files in games unlike AMD's approach that requires devs to patch the game.

Been able to swap dll files since 3.1 without dev support.

DLSS Swapper supports DLSS, FSR3.1*/4 and XESS for quite some time now.

 

[mrk]

Does that include FSR frame gen though, my comment was accounting for the full suite not just upscaling.

 

[humbug]

Yes but is it the same RT performance to the equivalent RTX card?

in RT it sits between a 5070 and a 5070 Ti, the closest card equivalent is a 4070 Ti Super, they are the same.

In raster its equal to a 5070 Ti.

The 9070 XT is about 10% slower in RT vs Raster than the 5070 Ti.

Currently the 9070 XT starts at £599.99
The 5070 starts at £479.99
With the 5070 Ti Starting at £719.99

Personally i think the 9070 XT is about £40 over priced, the 5070 Ti is about £80 over priced, the 5070 actually is not bad but also more comparable to the 9070 which starts at £499.99, which is not bad but also not great, like the 5070.

 

[humbug]

I asked AI what it thought the adoption rate might be based on stock levels, pricing data and user sentiment. It guessed the following:

Segment	Estimated Share	Notes
RTX 5080/5090	~2–3%	High price, low availability
Other RTX 5000 Series (5060–5070)	~20–25%	More accessible models
Previous Gen (4000, 3000 Series)	~55–60%	Large existing base; still widely used
AMD GPUs	~15–20%	Strong budget and mid-range competition

So if only 2-3% can get the full fat RT experience, I can see why most people turn it off. Currently it only really is enjoyable for a select few who are mad enough to drop £1-2k on a GPU. See what AMD pull out the bag 2026 with UDNA. Might make it a more affordable luxury and help drive competition and lower prices for us all.

The thing about these few games that are so bad in RT, not all of them are most infact aren't, but the few that are are so damaging to the whole thing, tech jurnoes like to use specifically those to say how bad AMD's RT is, ignoring Nvidia performance in these is also bad enough to render those games unplayable for anything but £1000+ GPU's. The truth is that is what people actually see.

For the click bait messaging the RT overton window for a lot of normies is RT = Bad, it isn't, i don't believe it is but every time RT is polled the answer by the majority is its all bad i'm not interested.

Its just one of many examples as to how we are so self destructive, people don't reach for the overall RT performance chart's because they think those charts are invalid, or they don't send the desired message, instead they reach for the Wokong and Cyberpunk slides ignoring the other 15 games....

You want people to stop complaining about RT? Don't show it in its worst light constantly....

 

[Calin Banc]

I asked AI what it thought the adoption rate might be based on stock levels, pricing data and user sentiment. It guessed the following:

Segment	Estimated Share	Notes
RTX 5080/5090	~2–3%	High price, low availability
Other RTX 5000 Series (5060–5070)	~20–25%	More accessible models
Previous Gen (4000, 3000 Series)	~55–60%	Large existing base; still widely used
AMD GPUs	~15–20%	Strong budget and mid-range competition

So if only 2-3% can get the full fat RT experience, I can see why most people turn it off. Currently it only really is enjoyable for a select few who are mad enough to drop £1-2k on a GPU. See what AMD pull out the bag 2026 with UDNA. Might make it a more affordable luxury and help drive competition and lower prices for us all.

Why do you think full fat RT experience is only available on those cards? And why it has to be all or nothing? People either play full detail or low detail in raster?

 

[Firegod]

Why do you think full fat RT experience is only available on those cards? And why it has to be all or nothing? People either play full detail or low detail in raster?

Why do I think, specifically to do with full RT, is it only available on those cards? Because it is. Humbug has just said the same. Full RT degrades FPS on lesser cards and, as mrk has mentioned, in UE5 games you can't turn it off. Degen has also just said now that they have a 5080 they can finally use RT and get a decent FPS. A card which costs near or around £1k which falls into the 2-3% segment. I'm not saying you can't tune it in most titles, like you say, low RT, but we're talking about the full fat RT experience.

 

[Calin Banc]

I think going by modern classification it really should have been an RTX4070/RTX4070TI class at around £550 to £650.Going by Fermi era it would be a 60TI but those days are long gone.

It would also meant the RTX4070 we got would have been a RTX4060 or RTX4060TI at below £400. The RTX3060TI was about 40% faster than an RTX2060 Super and the RTX4070 would have been just over 40% faster than an RTX3060TI.

The 80 series should be reserved for cards made from the largest gaming chip IMHO.

Unfortunately both companies seem to be quite happy with the rebranding.

So that will be around $850? Seems more reasonable. Giving the 5080 around $1000, then it isn't that far off anymore...

Why do I think, specifically to do with full RT, is it only available on those cards? Because it is. Humbug has just said the same. Full RT degrades FPS on lesser cards and, as mrk has mentioned, in UE5 games you can't turn it off. Degen has also just said now that they have a 5080 they can finally use RT and get a decent FPS. A card which costs near or around £1k which falls into the 2-3% segment. I'm not saying you can't tune it in most titles, like you say, low RT, but we're talking about the full fat RT experience.

At 4k (downsampled to a normal 1080p screen, so probably some performance lost there), I'm getting about 85fps without FG and 134fps with FG, with DLSS, on a rtx 4080. That's path tracing on the game's benchmark. I'd guess something like a 4070ti/Super will still pull it off with a base fps around 50-60fps.

Alan Wake 2 is around 60 fps +/- in the woods and above that in the City / Interiors - that's with the latest update that adds things.

HL2 Remix is above 60fps.

Wukong I haven't tried yet.

Let's take the 5060ti 16GB

Palit GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Infinity 3 16 GB Review

Priced at NVIDIA MSRP of $430, the Palit GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB Infinity 3 is a cost-effective choice if you're looking for a model that doesn't break the bank. Palit didn't compromise on the cooling solution, our review confirms: it runs cool and at quiet noise levels.

www.techpowerup.com

So about 39fps at 1080, 26fps at 1440p

For some reason, in this test is only 23fps at 1440p https://www.techpowerup.com/review/palit-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-infinity-3-16-gb/38.html
But still, you can see it scales well with DLSS. In that Cyberpunk with RT it goes picks up 2x+ the performance from DLAA to Performance. Even so, it should get into 50fps at 1440p + FG on top...

Using just for RT effects of different kinds, should be faster...

I'd say is pretty good for around $430, wouldn't you agree?

LE: As per ChatGPT, RTX4080 Super + 4080 + 4090 + 5080 + 5090... consulting steam survery, that's 6.08% combined. 4K users are well below that at 4.49%. But take it with a pinch of salt, I haven't checked the numbers myself. There should be plenty of cards out there to support these features.

 

[humbug]

So that will be around $850? Seems more reasonable. Giving the 5080 around $1000, then it isn't that far off anymore...


At 4k (downsampled to a normal 1080p screen, so probably some performance lost there), I'm getting about 85fps without FG and 134fps with FG, with DLSS, on a rtx 4080. That's path tracing on the game's benchmark. I'd guess something like a 4070ti/Super will still pull it off with a base fps around 50-60fps.

Alan Wake 2 is around 60 fps +/- in the woods and above that in the City / Interiors - that's with the latest update that adds things.

HL2 Remix is above 60fps.

Wukong I haven't tried yet.

Let's take the 5060ti 16GB

Palit GeForce RTX 5060 Ti Infinity 3 16 GB Review

Priced at NVIDIA MSRP of $430, the Palit GeForce RTX 5060 Ti 16 GB Infinity 3 is a cost-effective choice if you're looking for a model that doesn't break the bank. Palit didn't compromise on the cooling solution, our review confirms: it runs cool and at quiet noise levels.

www.techpowerup.com

So about 39fps at 1080, 26fps at 1440p

For some reason, in this test is only 23fps at 1440p https://www.techpowerup.com/review/palit-geforce-rtx-5060-ti-infinity-3-16-gb/38.html
But still, you can see it scales well with DLSS. In that Cyberpunk with RT it goes picks up 2x+ the performance from DLAA to Performance. Even so, it should get into 50fps at 1440p + FG on top...

Using just for RT effects of different kinds, should be faster...

I'd say is pretty good for around $430, wouldn't you agree?

LE: As per ChatGPT, RTX4080 Super + 4080 + 4090 + 5080 + 5090... consulting steam survery, that's 6.08% combined. 4K users are well below that at 4.49%. But take it with a pinch of salt, I haven't checked the numbers myself. There should be plenty of cards out there to support these features.

I wouldn't, its 15% better than the card its replaced and for £500 the 9070 is 32% faster. A difference of high 30's to low 50's.

Alan Wake 2 1080P Path Tracing.

 

[Calin Banc]

I wouldn't, its 15% better than the card its replaced and for £500 the 9070 is 32% faster. A difference of high 30's to low 50's.

Alan Wake 2 1080P Path Tracing.

I meant the general performance, not a card in particular. Plus, I prefere DLSS since it tends to be better at lower, more aggressive presets, than FSR and have a wider adoption (still true?). Plus Ray Reconstruction.

If people want path tracing at $250... that's wishful thinking.

LE: in wukong the 9070 loses to the 5060ti.

 

[degen]

Why do I think, specifically to do with full RT, is it only available on those cards? Because it is. Humbug has just said the same. Full RT degrades FPS on lesser cards and, as mrk has mentioned, in UE5 games you can't turn it off. Degen has also just said now that they have a 5080 they can finally use RT and get a decent FPS. A card which costs near or around £1k which falls into the 2-3% segment. I'm not saying you can't tune it in most titles, like you say, low RT, but we're talking about the full fat RT experience.

I mean my 3080 would have done 1080p but I haven't played at 1080p for over 10 years. I think the thing is if you are using RT it needs to be everything on so it looks noticeably better than raster, otherwise what's the point.

So as you say it's unfortunately on 2 to 3% who get to use it 'properly'.

 

[Calin Banc]

I mean my 3080 would have done 1080p but I haven't played at 1080p for over 10 years. I think the thing is if you are using RT it needs to be everything on so it looks noticeably better than raster, otherwise what's the point.

So as you say it's unfortunately on 2 to 3% who get to use it 'properly'.

Reflections can be done easier and are obviously/noticeably better than what raster can produce.

Metro, GTA, should both run decent on that 3080.

 

[humbug]

I meant the general performance, not a card in particular. Plus, I prefere DLSS since it tends to be better at lower, more aggressive presets, than FSR and have a wider adoption (still true?). Plus Ray Reconstruction.

If people want path tracing at $250... that's wishful thinking.

LE: in wukong the 9070 loses to the 5060ti.

For general performance its completely garbage, its near the same money as my previous gen AMD card and 16% slower, but it has DLSS right? so its worth paying way too much for an underperforming card....

 

[Calin Banc]

For general performance its completely garbage, its near the same money as my previous gen AMD card and 16% slower, but it has DLSS right? so its worth paying way too much for an underperforming card....

Comparing to prices at my local store from where I buy, the 9070 has about the same price difference as the performance from 5060ti 16GB.
9060 is a bit cheaper, but is also slower.

The comparison is between the cheapest models available. So on current gen, why is AMD better?

Compared to previous models it may suck, but is also about the same manufacturing process, so I'm not surprised. Upgrade to something faster or don't at all.

 

[humbug]

Comparing to prices at my local store from where I buy, the 9070 has about the same price difference as the performance from 5060ti 16GB.
9060 is a bit cheaper, but is also slower.

The comparison is between the cheapest models available. So on current gen, why is AMD better?

Compared to previous models it may suck, but is also about the same manufacturing process, so I'm not surprised. Upgrade to something faster or don't at all.

We are in the UK, not the US, we don't buy GPU's from the US so i'm just not going to debate you on that basis. This is a UK forum with UK people looking to buy UK GPU's. Currently the 9070 starts at £500 with the 5060 Ti 16GB starting at £400.

For being 25% more expensive its 50% faster in raster and 44% faster in RT at 1440P. Either way you're getting more FPS for your money, a lot more, the difference in performance is huge.....

As for the 9060 XT 16GB it starts at £330, the 5060 Ti 16GB for £400 is 5% faster in raster and 5% faster in RT at 1440P, the price difference is 21%.

The days where Nvidia have a huge advantage in RT are gone. So now its all about 4X Frame Gen, something i have too and i don't need games to support it, not that i ever use it...

Contains the 9060 XT 16GB, the 5060 Ti 16GB and the 9070.

Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT Pulse OC 16 GB Review - An Excellent Choice

The Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB sells close to MSRP, yet it features a factory overclock and higher power limit. In our testing, its cooler remained whisper-quiet even at full load. Interestingly, this model uses Samsung memory, whereas all other cards we've tested so far use Hynix.

www.techpowerup.com

If my budget was £500 or less it would be the 9070, if its £400 or less it would be the 9060 XT 16GB, it in my view is actually in a difference price bracket, its in the £300 to £350 bracket. Yes the 9070 is also in a different price bracket to the 5060 Ti 16GB, i agree, its also exploiting the £400 to £450 price bracket in which AMD are missing in action, a bit of an oversight on their part.

I think the 9070 for the level of performance you're getting £500 is not bad, its about the same price as the RX 7800 XT was and its about 30% faster in raster and 50% faster in RT, its about what to expect from a generational upgrade, well if you're not looking at Nvidia, sorry but true....

The 5060 Ti 16GB is not a good GPU, it doesn't have great performance in raster or RT and its a bit pricy for that... for £350? Yeah, that would be fine, it would be a better buy than the 9060 XT 16GB. Its slower than my previous gen card, Jesus.... How can anyone think this is a good GPU to blow £400 or more on?

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The Wukong devs call it Nvidia Raytracing IIRC in the Chinese version,so it has no optimisations for AMD or Intel cards. But we could go through other way with COD,which is one of the most played games and also has more optimisations for AMD.

But why bother with a £380 to £400 RTX5060TI 16GB for those games when you can get an RTX5070 from £460 to £490?

The reality is the RTX5060TI 16GB is poorly priced as the RX9060XT 16GB has been £300 to £320 frequently in the last few weeks.

For a person on a budget, building a new system that extra saving should be used for a better CPU,more RAM,storage,etc.

The RX9070XT 8GB is £230 to £240,has a full speed 16X PCI-E connection and is cheaper than most RTX5060 cards. In most games it will beat an RTX5060 whilst being to maintain more of its performance on older systems due to a full speed PCI-E connection.

The B580 12GB is £240 and B570 10GB is below £200.The RTX5050 is below £220 if you want something more compact or lower power.

 

[Calin Banc]

We are in the UK, not the US, we don't buy GPU's from the US so i'm just not going to debate you on that basis. This is a UK forum with UK people looking to buy UK GPU's. Currently the 9070 starts at £500 with the 5060 Ti 16GB starting at £400.

For being 25% more expensive its 50% faster in raster and 44% faster in RT at 1440P. Either way you're getting more FPS for your money, a lot more, the difference in performance is huge.....

As for the 9060 XT 16GB it starts at £330, the 5060 Ti 16GB for £400 is 5% faster in raster and 5% faster in RT at 1440P, the price difference is 21%.

The days where Nvidia have a huge advantage in RT are gone. So now its all about 4X Frame Gen, something i have too and i don't need games to support it, not that i ever use it...

Contains the 9060 XT 16GB, the 5060 Ti 16GB and the 9070.

Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT Pulse OC 16 GB Review - An Excellent Choice

The Sapphire Radeon RX 9060 XT 16 GB sells close to MSRP, yet it features a factory overclock and higher power limit. In our testing, its cooler remained whisper-quiet even at full load. Interestingly, this model uses Samsung memory, whereas all other cards we've tested so far use Hynix.

www.techpowerup.com

If my budget was £500 or less it would be the 9070, if its £400 or less it would be the 9060 XT 16GB, it in my view is actually in a difference price bracket, its in the £300 to £350 bracket. Yes the 9070 is also in a different price bracket to the 5060 Ti 16GB, i agree, its also exploiting the £400 to £450 price bracket in which AMD are missing in action, a bit of an oversight on their part.

I think the 9070 for the level of performance you're getting £500 is not bad, its about the same price as the RX 7800 XT was and its about 30% faster in raster and 50% faster in RT, its about what to expect from a generational upgrade, well if you're not looking at Nvidia, sorry but true....

The 5060 Ti 16GB is not a good GPU, it doesn't have great performance in raster or RT and its a bit pricy for that... for £350? Yeah, that would be fine, it would be a better buy than the 9060 XT 16GB. Its slower than my previous gen card, Jesus.... How can anyone think this is a good GPU to blow £400 or more on?

I'm from Eastern Europe, not US. We're talking here about the industry of gaming (and somewhat related, GPU) at a global level, not local, not with local deals on cards. That's something else.
The difference between the cards in MSRP and what I see in my store is relatively low (few percentages).

From overclockers:

- cheapest 9060xt in stoc is 360 pounds https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...rx-9060-xt-16gb-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc
- cheapest 9070 in stoc is 500 https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...-radeon-rx-9070-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc
- cheapest 9070xt in stoc is 620 pounds https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...deon-rx-9070-xt-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc

*******

- cheapest 5060ti 16gb is 400 pounds https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...tx-5060-ti-16gb-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc
- cheapest 5070 is 470 pounds https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...eforce-rtx-5070-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc
- cheapest 5070ti is 680 pounds https://www.overclockers.co.uk/pc-c...rce-rtx-5070-ti-graphics-cards?sort=price_asc


Now, with the FSR 3.0 or whatever it is in Cyberpunk, downsampled from 1440p, DLSS Performance is 81fps vs FSR Quality 60 fps. FSR also looks worse...
Moreover, AMD lacks some of the new features that will come with the next revision of DX.

Relative Raster: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-radeon-rx-9070-steel-legend-oc/33.html
Relative RT: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-radeon-rx-9070-steel-legend-oc/35.html
Relative PT: https://www.techpowerup.com/review/asrock-radeon-rx-9070-steel-legend-oc/36.html

Based on that, I'll personally save up at least until 5070ti level and get that one.

IF AMD would keep up in terms of upscalers with nvidia, even an old 6900xt would be able to run something like AW2 RT@60FPS, 1440p with a Performance settings.

In path tracing, at 1440p, same game, 3080 would be needed, maybe a 5060ti with frame gen.

So yeah, considering how well it scales with DLSS and potential FG, a 5060ti should provide a decent experience with "Full RT" even at 1440p. Well, with the exception of wukong where the FG has to do the heavy lifting or look into a 5070.

Anyway, each to their own.