really getting fed up with the posts stating RTX/DLSS does not work this gen

[shankly1985]

For a moment there, I thought that room had suffered a burst water main.

It sure is over done, isn't realistic at all.
This is where Ray tracing needs to get right don't over blow up an already good realistic image.
It just needs to add to it, for example shadows screen spaced lose the shadow based on the camera Ray tracing can fix that.
That for me is good enough, shadows on games are already good quality.

 

[Rroff]

It sure is over done, isn't realistic at all.
This is where Ray tracing needs to get right don't over blow up an already good realistic image.
It just needs to add to it, for example shadows screen spaced lose the shadow based on the camera Ray tracing can fix that.
That for me is good enough, shadows on games are already good quality.

It is actually realistic for the surface type but not realistic in terms of what you'd see in a room but I'm currently limited to the stock materials in Quake 2 which are mostly industrial looking and there isn't anything close to the medium gloss wooden floor in the scene I referenced to make that.

 

[Safetytrousers]

I still feel this generation is not worthwhile for anyone actually wanting ray tracing without compromise. £1200 is a lot to spend on a handful of games in which the majority can't get 60fps.

You can get 60fps with a 2080ti at 4k, and if you were to use one at 1440p you would have solid 60fps with ray tracing in all supported games.
It is the cards lower down the range, that are less money than a 2080ti (which can be had for a little less than £1000), that may struggle if you push up the resolution.
I certainly wouldn't buy a RTX card just for the sake of RTX. But the GPUs don't only do that and they have that nice extra.

 

[Sargatanas2511]

You can get 60fps with a 2080ti at 4k, and if you were to use one at 1440p you would have solid 60fps with ray tracing in all supported games.
It is the cards lower down the range, that are less money than a 2080ti (which can be had for a little less than £1000), that may struggle if you push up the resolution.
I certainly wouldn't buy a RTX card just for the sake of RTX. But the GPUs don't only do that and they have that nice extra.

For £1200 I don't want 60fps at 1440p regardless of 'new tech'. It's far too much for that kind of performance. 60fps at 1440p even on the 2080Ti doesn't seem like a given either, more of a good example than the average.

 

[ICDP]

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

 

[TNA]

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

There are many here who do. Lol.

The only ones I believe are the ones who say they are gaming on a big tv and sit far away personally.

 

[Hades]

Is RTX the future? Very probably.

Is it a nice thing to have on a card now? Well it's better than not having it. But everything has a trade off. Cards with RTX cost a lot more than a similar card without one (e.g. 2070S vs 5700XT). So the question is whether the current gen of RTX is worth the extra cost. To me it isn't. It looks a little bit nicer but not something I am prepared to pay significantly more.

 

[DarrenM343]

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

I don't notice it tbh but haven't tried exodus with DLSS off. I remember there was a big difference in BFV DLSS on vs off but not tried it recently. Thing is, unless people are comparing it they just won't notice. It doesn't look blurry IMO, but it probably does if you directly compare on vs off and most probably wont do that so the higher FPS is probably more important (trade off without too much loss)
I game at 1440P and just use the NV recommended settings mostly.
Also said this before but I find some games blurry anyway, even without RT and DLSS (Far Cry new dawn beign one).
In an ideal world RT will get massive boosts in performance over the next few gens and DLSS will probably not be needed.

 

[Skynet5]

You are not me playing Shadow of the Tomb Raider at 4k with ray tracing 60fps at max settings.
That is just one thing so far, but already it was a point.

I'm not sure of your point. But as long as you're happy that's good.

 

[HRL]

In an ideal world RT will get massive boosts in performance over the next few gens and DLSS will probably not be needed.

As long as we don’t need chips like these, we might even be able to afford them.

 

[sunshinewelly]

haters are gonna hate.

that looks incredible. would a 2080 play it ?

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

Have you played it with the update as its quite clear from the recent updated comparisons that metro with dlss is not blurry.

 

[sunshinewelly]

haters are gonna hate.

that looks incredible. would a 2080 play it ?

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

Have you played it with the update as its quite clear from the recent updated comparisons that metro with dlss is not blurry.

These guys must be lying then as well as others online

https://hothardware.com/reviews/metro?page=3

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Started Exodus proper now, with the RT on, looks great in the train depot with Yermak, and it runs great too, 3440x1440, Ultra Settings, RTX on High, really brings the game to life, looks so much better than it did on my 64.

 

[pp111]

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

Absolutely. There is no doubt that DLSS is blurred. When I saw it I really wondered to myself what the point of it is? I mean it's a one click way to achieve a great framerate for a game but I can't see it has a future. 4K monitors are relatively new compared to 1K monitors, yet we are just about at a point where GPU's can drive a 4K monitor at what I consider to be a minimum acceptable speed ( 60 fps ). It won't be long before even cheap cards can run them at that rate. So why do we even need DLSS? I mean it would be great if DLSS was high quality, but it's not. In picture quality terms it effectively turns your 4K monitor in to a 2K monitor at the click of a button! Handy but people aren't going to want to use it if they can get away without using it.

I am sure that Ray Tracing is the future, but DLSS? I am not so sure.

 

[RBImGuy]

I have a 2080 and DLSS is Shadow of the Tomb Raider and in Metro Exodus is a blurred quite considerably. I game at 4K and if anyone claims DLSS looks just as sharp as native are deluding themselves.

The AI approach dont work so well and is overhyped by the CEO.
AMD took a different approach with the image sharpening and works better than the AI hyped one.
so much for skynet

 

[bru]

The AI approach dont work so well and is overhyped by the CEO.
AMD took a different approach with the image sharpening and works better than the AI hyped one.
so much for skynet

You do realise that they do completely different things even if the end result is similar.
NVIDIA also do the sharpening filter thing and AMD will soon be doing the deep learning thing as well.

 

[Grim5]

There are many here who do. Lol.

The only ones I believe are the ones who say they are gaming on a big tv and sit far away personally.

Yes

I mentioned already that whether I use nvidia dlss or amd cas sharpening I can’t tell any difference- it’s because I game on a tv and sit further away than I would on a desktop.

That’s why I love games that give you a resolution scale option - I can easily drop it to 85% and it looks just like 100% for me - it means gaming on a TV is less resource intensive than a desktop

 

[Rofflay]

You do realise that they do completely different things even if the end result is similar.
NVIDIA also do the sharpening filter thing and AMD will soon be doing the deep learning thing as well.

Deep learning is best used to restore or enhance older games i think what they are doing is wrong it could be put to use for video could it not?

When used to restore older stuff it brings great results much like integer scaling both could have worked well for the current mini revival of retro games. By the time they do enough deep learning people are done with the game and you can not start deep learning textures until the game releases. So how can that EVER work in reality?


I think Nvidia knew the rascals... But sell them one DLSS core anyways!

 

[sunshinewelly]

Yes

I mentioned already that whether I use nvidia dlss or amd cas sharpening I can’t tell any difference- it’s because I game on a tv and sit further away than I would on a desktop.

That’s why I love games that give you a resolution scale option - I can easily drop it to 85% and it looks just like 100% for me - it means gaming on a TV is less resource intensive than a desktop

same here - pc gaming on a 75 inch 4K TV is much more immersive than sitting in front of a monitor (thats another discussion thread right there). DLSS for my set up is brilliant. No change in image quality and a big improvement in FPS

 

[LoadsaMoney]

Is RTX the future? Very probably.

Is it a nice thing to have on a card now? Well it's better than not having it. But everything has a trade off. Cards with RTX cost a lot more than a similar card without one (e.g. 2070S vs 5700XT).

You can get custom 2070 Supers, for £480, some custom LAVIs, are £500.