Crytek demo DXR on Vega 56

[humbug]

So, I've just seen some demos of metro exodus running at 1080p with full high raytracing on a 1660 GTX card with no RTX cores, running at 30fps. So does that mean we can all go head over heels for RTX now or is it only great when its running on AMD hardware at 1080p at 30fps?

4K, not 1080P

 

[Grim5]

the crytek demo was 1080p 30fps, not 4k Crytek has already admitted it and in quote said the only cards that will run that demo at 4k would something with hardware ray tracing like RTX cores

 

[andybird123]

Also just seen BFV running at 60fps on a 1660ti with High raytracing @ 1080p, but obviously thats rubbish as it represents a 20fps cost, where as crytek have apparently invented raytracing that costs 0fps to run.

 

[shankly1985]

Also just seen BFV running at 60fps on a 1660ti with High raytracing @ 1080p, but obviously thats rubbish as it represents a 20fps cost, where as crytek have apparently invented raytracing that costs 0fps to run.

While this is open for debate if the video was actually 4k or 1080p. Think its best we just wait and see. The write up from crytek only talks about reflection resolution not screen resolution.

Anyway you can not compare RTX ray tracing from battlefield to this they are two completely different approaches to achieving a simpler goal.

 

[humbug]

While this is open for debate if the video was actually 4k or 1080p. Think its best we just wait and see. The write up from crytek only talks about reflection resolution not screen resolution.

Anyway you can not compare RTX ray tracing from battlefield to this they are two completely different approaches to achieving a simpler goal.

 

[andybird123]

While this is open for debate if the video was actually 4k or 1080p. Think its best we just wait and see. The write up from crytek only talks about reflection resolution not screen resolution.

So what is the 1440p in reference to? That seems pretty obvious to be the screen resolution.
Its pretty central to the whole conversation. If the demo was running at 1080p screen with 1080p raytracing then raytracing is costing around 30fps, if it was running at 4K screen with 1080p raytracing @ 30fps then raytracing is basically free at 4K/1080p, but then costs 20fps at 1440p/720p, which makes no sense.

Otherwise, if we take the 1080p and the 1440p to be purely in reference to the raytracing resolution then calling it a "reduction" equally makes no sense, as does saying that rendering the raytracing at a higher resolution increases performance to 40+fps.

 

[humbug]

So what is the 1440p in reference to? That seems pretty obvious to be the screen resolution.
Its pretty central to the whole conversation. If the demo was running at 1080p screen with 1080p raytracing then raytracing is costing around 30fps, if it was running at 4K screen with 1080p raytracing @ 30fps then raytracing is basically free at 4K/1080p, but then costs 20fps at 1440p/720p, which makes no sense.

Otherwise, if we take the 1080p and the 1440p to be purely in reference to the raytracing resolution then calling it a "reduction" equally makes no sense, as does saying that rendering the raytracing at a higher resolution increases performance to 40+fps.

What is it with people going round an argument, waiting a while and then starting the same argument again as if they haven't already made that argument.

what's the point? this is exactly the same argument you've already made and have the answers to, refer to those answers.

 

[andybird123]

What is it with people going round an argument, waiting a while and then starting the same argument again as if they haven't already made that argument.

what's the point? this is exactly the same argument you've already made and have the answers to, refer to those answers.

because the answers given make no sense, hence why I've referenced the answers in my post - a youtube video isn't an answer when the write up from crytek totally contradicts what people claim the youtube video shows, and when taken in context the write up from crytek basically shows that their raytracing tech eats up about the same amount of performance as RTX on non-RTX cards, so whilst its great that AMD have a version of DXR that works on their cards coming, its not as fantastical as some are making out, it just means that yes as was stated really early on, DXR is a microsoft thing and will be able to run on both AMD and Nvidia cards, at a cost.

 

[humbug]

because the answers given make no sense, hence why I've referenced the answers in my post - a youtube video isn't an answer when the write up from crytek totally contradicts what people claim the youtube video shows

I think your account has multiple users.

 

[nashathedog]

Real time ray-tracing put to test on a real project with NVIDIA Quadro RTX | Webinar | Unreal Engine

 

[Poneros]

https://wccftech.com/neon-noir-crye...le-now/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

 

[shankly1985]

Quite impressive if you ask me 1080p over 60fps
And if I was to say it looks better than what I have seen from RTX games lol

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Quite impressive if you ask me 1080p over 60fps
And if I was to say it looks better than what I have seen from RTX games lol

Demo's are one thing real games is another, good to see the demo is out and can been looked at interdependently , I hope DF do a video, The wccftech benchmarks don't look pretty for pretty for AMD, maybe there is some driver work to do.

 

[humbug]

Demo's are one thing real games is another, good to see the demo is out and can been looked at interdependently , I hope DF do a video, The wccftech benchmarks don't look pretty for pretty for AMD, maybe there is some driver work to do.

Its an advanced version of Screen Space Reflections, which despite what people think it IS Ray Tracing, its simply that the Ray's are culled to the camera and viewing angle, this method used to introduce graphical artefacts and would sometimes reflect stuff that it shouldn't, but like most technologies they continue to be developed and improved over time, Crytek having developed this technology for more than half a decade at this point have got it looking as good as RTX but with only half the performance penalty. That's what you are seeing.

Crytek have also been developing Ray Traced Global illumination for just as long, again its as good but far more efficient than RTX.

This is an example of it being used in Cryengine 3, actually a 4 year old engine. this game is not a billboard for RTX so its not in your face obvious reflections but rather realistic reflections like you would get in the real world, like wet concrete or ashfelt.

 

[KillBoY_UK]

Its an advanced version of Screen Space Reflections, which despite what people think it IS Ray Tracing, its simply that the Ray's are culled to the camera and viewing angle, this method used to introduce graphical artefacts and would sometimes reflect stuff that it shouldn't, but like most technologies they continue to be developed and improved over time, Crytek having developed this technology for more than half a decade at this point have got it looking as good as RTX but with only half the performance penalty. That's what you are seeing.

Crytek have also been developing Ray Traced Global illumination for just as long, again its as good but far more efficient than RTX.

This is an example of it being used in Cryengine 3, actually a 4 year old engine. this game is not a billboard for RTX so its not in your face obvious reflections but rather realistic reflections like you would get in the real world, like wet concrete or ashfelt.

There is much more to RT/DXR/RTX than just reflections though...

 

[humbug]

There is much more to RT/DXR/RTX than just reflections though...

Yeah Raytraced lighting, "Global Illumination"

https://docs.cryengine.com/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=25535599

This GI solution is based on voxel ray tracing and provides the following effects:

Dynamic indirect light bounce from static and most of dynamic objects.
Large scale AO and indirect shadows from static geometry (vegetation, brushes and terrain).
Works without pre-baking and does not require manual setup of many bounce lights or light volumes.

How It Works

• First we prepare voxel representation of the scene geometry (at run-time, on CPU, asynchronously and incrementally).
• Every frame on GPU we trace thousands of rays through the voxels (and shadow maps) in order to gather occlusion and indirect lighting.

 

[willhub]

Will RTX be more efficient or I wonder if the tensor cores in the RTX cards will be able to be utilised for other ray tracing? Seems a bit of a flop if going forward RTX is dead and the tensor cores are just destined to be left unsued.

 

[humbug]

Will RTX be more efficient or I wonder if the tensor cores in the RTX cards will be able to be utilised for other ray tracing? Seems a bit of a flop if going forward RTX is dead and the tensor cores are just destined to be left unsued.

Crudely Brute Force existing technology through dedicated hardware solutions, PhysX is an older example of this, it justifies large expensive GPU's, its completely unnecessary, Nvidia could have developed existing solutions to do the same thing. But then you wouldn't need the expensive hardware.

 

[bru]

Here is the benchmark runs that wccftec did as listed on the link in the YouTube vid's comments.

 

[humbug]

Here is the benchmark runs that wccftec did as listed on the link in the YouTube vid's comments.

39 to 57 for me is a lot more appealing than 5 to 10.