You're worrying about things you cant control. It's not healthy.
-
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.
You're worrying about things you cant control. It's not healthy.
Video looks really good, love the leaves swirling on the floor. RT was far more apparent in Nvidia's demo, but then I expect it to be. How apparent is it to you when running the game with and without? Really interested in seeing what performance increase DLSS brings. Does DLSS bring any increase in graphic fidelity over other AA options?
There's a lot of these sorts of flourishes throughout the game. The whole environment in every single level feels alive.
That totally depends on the level so it's difficult to give you a firm answer. Weirdly one of the levels that had barely any reflections at all ended up making the biggest graphical impact for me.
The level had a huge amount of wet rocks, which without RT looked way over saturated and completely unrealistic.
The second RT is turned on the whole environment transforms, ill get some screenshots up in a moment.
In the FFXV demo I get around a 35-40% increase.
I think so yes, but it's subjective. Technically DLSS renders internally at a slightly lower resolution in order to get the performance boost, then uses AI, trained to replicate a super high 8K+ version of image to upscale it back up to 4K.
I suspect if you took screenshots and compared with a magnifying glass you would see a tiny loss of fidelity or detail in some areas, but I honestly can't notice it.
In fact, I think the image it produces looks more natural and less CGI-like than native 4K.
But anyway, that aside, transparent areas like hair is miles better with DLSS than any other form of AA. It really is night and day.
Anyway, i'll get those screenshots up.
Yeah we can
A £1,000 graphics card??? LOADS to moan about. That price is ridiculous. £800 maxObviously heavy reflections in puddles and mirrors are where you really get to see RTX at work. But there's definitely improvements elsewhere.
This doesn't translate all that well to static screenshots, but below you can see how much more natural the 'wet' effect on the rocks look with RTX on.
Note, you'll need to blow them up to full resolution to make the comparison.
RTX on:
RTX off:
In game, the non RXT version looks unrealistically shiny and that shininess is static, whereas with RTX on it feels more natural, organic and alive as you move.
EDIT: Comparing the screenshots alone it's really hard to see how much better it looks, sorry. I think it's just one of those things you have to see in person, in motion as you play.
This doesn't translate all that well to static screenshots, but below you can see how much more natural the 'wet' effect on the rocks look with RTX on.
Note, you'll need to blow them up to full resolution to make the comparison.
RTX on:
RTX off:
In game, the non RXT version looks unrealistically shiny and that shininess is static, whereas with RTX on it feels more natural, organic and alive as you move.
EDIT: Comparing the screenshots alone it's really hard to see how much better it looks, sorry. I think it's just one of those things you have to see in person, in motion as you play.
Last edited:
It's only because you're special.
Fixed.
Lol
Great minds
Taking the anti rtx protests to the street
Wow
I'm impressed, I did not realise you got out much.
Obviously heavy reflections in puddles and mirrors are where you really get to see RTX at work. But there's definitely improvements elsewhere.
This doesn't translate all that well to static screenshots, but below you can see how much more natural the 'wet' effect on the rocks look with RTX on.
Note, you'll need to blow them up to full resolution to make the comparison.
RTX on:
RTX off:
In game, the non RXT version looks unrealistically shiny and that shininess is static, whereas with RTX on it feels more natural, organic and alive as you move.
EDIT: Comparing the screenshots alone it's really hard to see how much better it looks, sorry. I think it's just one of those things you have to see in person, in motion as you play.
Its a shame you never took those screenies with FPS counter on
What is the lowest FPS you have seen...Brave enough to do a video killing the FPS ? RTX on then go back to the same place and do RTX off....
with RTX off the videos I have seen out the 2080ti and 1080ti within around 7 fps of each other.
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,719
- Location
- Scotland
Yeah we can
This thread is getting very bored nothing to see there.
When GTX 980 Ti was launched back in 2015 with £659 for the cheapest reference cards to £800 for custom cards, people was happy to pay twice the price of GTX 970. Titan Xp Jedi Order cards cost £1149 and Titan V cost £2800 a year ago so nobody moan about these prices. I don't know why you moaned about RTX 2080 Ti FE which is CHEAPER than Titan Xp Jedi Order.
I have to admitted I am really surprised on Nvidia reddit many people were happy to pay over a grand upgraded to RTX 2080 Ti from GTX 670, 970, GTX 1070 etc. since GTX 980 Ti I guess people wanted to pay more to get maximum performance with all graphics settings maxed out and didnt wanted to see huge performance hit.
I remembered read posts about Fury X price, AMD owners moaned about £659 price matched GTX 980 Ti which they cant afforded it.
Last edited:
Its a shame you never took those screenies with FPS counter on
Not an issue, I’ll get back to you on Monday. Weekends are unfortunately for me, my fiancées. I won’t see my computer over the weekend, sorry.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 8 Jul 2003
- Posts
- 30,063
- Location
- In a house
Obviously heavy reflections in puddles and mirrors are where you really get to see RTX at work. But there's definitely improvements elsewhere.
This doesn't translate all that well to static screenshots, but below you can see how much more natural the 'wet' effect on the rocks look with RTX on.
Note, you'll need to blow them up to full resolution to make the comparison.
RTX on:
RTX off:
In game, the non RXT version looks unrealistically shiny and that shininess is static, whereas with RTX on it feels more natural, organic and alive as you move.
EDIT: Comparing the screenshots alone it's really hard to see how much better it looks, sorry. I think it's just one of those things you have to see in person, in motion as you play.
Those shots the right way around ?, as the RTX Off: looks better to me, the light from the sky shining on the rocks, and the gun, the rocks looking shiny, as wet, and the sky reflecting on them, as its ******* down, where as RTX On:, the rocks don't look wet at all, or have any light from the sky reflecting off of em, and the gun looks flat as a fart.
Last edited:
You should sli your fiancées
Yes, you need to see them in motion. With RTX on the light on the rocks fluctuates with the edges as you move. Its hard to describe but it looks very realistic and natural.
With RTX off, there’s a lot more light but it’s completely static.
Sorry, it’s very hard to describe, but I’m certain that seeing it in person would change your perception. I realised how it doesn’t translate to static images the second I had posted them.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 28 Sep 2014
- Posts
- 3,719
- Location
- Scotland
Absolutely!!!
RTX 2070 cost less than £500 can run Battlefield V at 1080p with DXR Ultra playable.
Damn you have a girlfriend aswell as an RTX
I fail at life
Trust me, it’s not all it’s cracked up to be
Lol.Fixed