You absolutely can render a game like CP2077 using the Quake 2 RTX renderer, which is a fully path traced approach, and get playable performance, that isn't to say there won't be some compromises as I've mentioned specular noise isn't in an ideal place yet. Sure you won't get the fidelity of a fully offline renderer but it will be good enough for game usage.
-
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.
Cyberpunk 2077 Ultra performance
- Thread starter g67575
- Start date
You absolutely can render a game like CP2077 using the Quake 2 RTX renderer, which is a fully path traced approach, and get playable performance, that isn't to say there won't be some compromises as I've mentioned specular noise isn't in an ideal place yet. Sure you won't get the fidelity of a fully offline renderer but it will be good enough for game usage.
Not in real time, resolution increases would be end of days. Cyberpunk 2077 uses hybrid rendering which is 100% what they should have used. They just invented a method to use lots of RT lights. https://research.nvidia.com/publication/2020-07_Spatiotemporal-reservoir-resampling https://news.developer.nvidia.com/rendering-millions-of-dynamics-lights-in-realtime/ Real time RT does not work the way we think it does.
The topic of path tracing has been covered over and over on the web. https://www.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/98y8a6/how_rtx_is_different_from_the_raytracing_that_is/
DX12u DXR is a very limited version of RT, that is used to improve the image quality of raster rendering. RT Reflections are a good example.
Absolutely you can - sure you aren't going to get the fidelity of the videos you keep banding about but it is perfectly possible to use the path tracer in Quake 2 to render something as complex as Cyberpunk 2077 with viable performance.
What you aren't appreciating is that a lot of the overhead is already there in the performance in Quake 2 maps just the features are hardly being used - there isn't really a way to go half-way on it and gain back performance so you lose a lot less when you increase the complexity over the stock maps.
They don't render like V-Ray they use complex methods to reduce computation (far more than offline renderers) and denoise the low spp renders they get as an output. Its the only way DXR can get real time performance. As resolution increases it hits hard performance wise. Thus nvidia use DLSS to reconstruct the high resolution output image from a lower resolution input data.
https://docs.unrealengine.com/en-US/RenderingAndGraphics/RayTracing/index.html
Last edited:
But I'm not talking about the UE4 implementation here - the Quake 2 RTX implementation doesn't even use DLSS otherwise my screenshots from 4K above would be more like 70-80 FPS.
RT On
RT Off
Both are horrible but with RT on the white paint is no longer visible.
The game is hobbled with stuff like this throughout the game. This is why RT isn't that important.
And did he purposely disable ambient occlusion and self shadowing just to see it on RT? Because it's noticeably missing in the RT OFF screenshot.
The white painted road markings are very much visable in both shots. The dark gray road patch in shadow is also very much visible in both images. I had a look on google, but it's hard to find a good comparisson. Look how much darker the bright yellow road marking is in direct shadow.
It feels a little odd when I have to post a picture of a shadow. Perhaps it serves to demonstrate how over time we have got used to poor IQ in games.
Last edited:
There is no reason to argue, that RT shadow looks pretty bad. You can find hundreds of pictures that show the non RT shadow is more realistic like this one or this one ( well the non rt shadow looks bad too but the effect on that white marking is closer to reality ).The white painted road markings are very much visable in both shots. The dark gray road patch in shadow is also very much visible in both images. I had a look on google, but it's hard to find a good comparisson. Look how much darker the bright yellow road marking is in direct shadow.
It feels a little odd when I have to post a picture of a shadow. Perhaps it serves to demonstrate how over time we have got used to poor IQ in games.
It's not such a big deal really as Rroff posted another picture where the RT shadow looks better. The thing is, depending where you look, it seems like the devs did sometimes a pretty good job with the graphics in both RT and non RT version, and sometimes a pretty bad job in both versions.
I've said many times that people viewing screen shots don't understand the environment. Are you saying the shadow in the photo looks bad or the orignal screen shot that I posted? If so what do you mean by bad? Perhaps you prefer the artistic/fantasy over realistic?
Your original screenshot looks bad. It is not even close to this picture you posted. And this one is the shadow on yellow paint, i gave you two examples of how it looks on white paint ( this one or this one ). Don't want to hotlink them but you can click on the link and look at them yourself. And you can find hundreds on Google.
It's not such a big deal really but that shadow is not realistic. It is not even artistic.
They are doing some cheap and nasty things with the shadows from characters, etc. and they aren't really using ray tracing for them - just some quick sampling as a guide which is probably why they are so varied depending on how accurately the samples match the scene. In some places you can see the halo artefacts from contact hardening really badly which means they are just using imposters projected into the scene and not actual ray tracing shadows.
Look here how a normal shadow looks in a sunny day:
And some clips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNXAVw6k8l8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzzmivf50E8
But again, not a big deal. It is expected for a game to cut some corners, it is bad when it cuts too many corners but it is praised for being "realistic".
Your original screenshot looks bad. It is not even close to this picture you posted. And this one is the shadow on yellow paint, i gave you two examples of how it looks on white paint ( this one or this one ). Don't want to hotlink them but you can click on the link and look at them yourself. And you can find hundreds on Google.
It's not such a big deal really but that shadow is not realistic. It is not even artistic.
What do you mean looks bad? Your talking about white paint, while the area under discussion, the material used to fill a pot hole, has no white paint. I demonstraded with an actual photo just how shadow can behave as I feel you are running off in favour of artistic/fantasy. Are you saying the photo is not realistic also? Finding the same lighting conditions withing google was tricky. I spent ~10 minutes before I found the one posted.
Look here how a normal shadow looks in a sunny day:
And some clips:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNXAVw6k8l8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jzzmivf50E8
But again, not a big deal. It is expected for a game to cut some corners, it is bad when it cuts too many corners but it is praised for being "realistic".
Look at the length of shadow, that is nothing like the original scene. You are also comparing white reflective road markings with pothole filler.
Something else you need to take into consideration is cloud cover as cloud scatters light with the result you have more ambiet light. The photo I posted would have been taken on a clear day, hence sharp and well defined shadow.
Forgetting all the reflections, I'm surprised how much is changed within the image with RT.
On
Off
On looks more realistic to me, off looks like any other scene from a game.
Last edited:
I am done talking if you think that is a realistic shadow then good for you. Even your stock picture is more close to the non RT version, anyone can compare them:
https://imgsli.com/MzU1NjI
You can still see the yellow on that picture, you won't see any white on your original post. You see something was there that is darkened by the shadow but you don't see any white.
But that is enough, if you are happy then good for you.
Now who wants to hear some BS, should watch the DF review about how much RT does in CP vs traditional rasterization, should watch this review from min 4:50
Probably 80% of what they show can be done with traditional rasterization and probably 50% is not even ray traced.
https://imgsli.com/MzU1NjI
You can still see the yellow on that picture, you won't see any white on your original post. You see something was there that is darkened by the shadow but you don't see any white.
But that is enough, if you are happy then good for you.
Now who wants to hear some BS, should watch the DF review about how much RT does in CP vs traditional rasterization, should watch this review from min 4:50
Probably 80% of what they show can be done with traditional rasterization and probably 50% is not even ray traced.
I am done talking if you think that is a realistic shadow then good for you. Even your stock picture is more close to the non RT version, anyone can compare them:
https://imgsli.com/MzU1NjI
You can still see the yellow on that picture, you won't see any white on your original post. You see something was there that is darkened by the shadow but you don't see any white.
But that is enough, if you are happy then good for you.
Now who wants to hear some BS, should watch the DF review about how much RT does in CP vs traditional rasterization, should watch this review from min 4:50
Probably 80% of what they show can be done with traditional rasterization and probably 50% is not even ray traced.
WTF? There is no white in the shadow, it's very rough dirty grey non reflective pothole filler. You can clearly see it within the RT version. I posted a photo as you seem to have become detached from reality. The photo shows a road surface with smooth bright yellow reflective paint losing almost as much luminance as the the very rough dirty grey non reflective pothole filler when placed in direct shadow, even though it's at a greater distance from the source of the shadow.
In the DF vidoe that you linked he even goes to length to explain the lighting of a bench ~2mins and how using traditional rasterisation leaves teh bench looking as though it's floating due to light bleed. This is a nice example of far darker areas such as the underside of the bench which is still being lit to some extent by ambient light. This is the problem I've been describing from the start with traditional methods looking like carboard cut outs being dropped into a scene rather than the RT version where there is a sense of the bench being part of the scene.
Last edited:
Sadly very little is taking advantage of ray tracing for its strengths in the game and mostly just to patch over the holes where traditional techniques fall down without actually building on top of those traditional techniques to do something better.
The reflections are the closest to actual use of ray tracing and they are just using a simplified version of the scene at something like 70% resolution with many effects and some objects omitted. The indirect lighting seems to use some small number of rays to sample how it should look then fills in with traditional techniques and the shadows for anything dynamic seems to be projected shadows not ray traced at all with maybe some modification using a small amount of ray traced sampling as a guide.
EDIT: Something I found amusing MS, CDPR and nVidia made a big deal about how ray tracing via DX12 baked in for Windows 7 doesn't support the features, etc. needed and it won't work - someone I think slipped up as with the latest patch it works fine on Windows 7 - bet it quietly gets patched back out again later while still keeping up the facade that you need Windows 10 and DX12u for it.
Don't forget that some people are using crap displays or at the very least poor calibrated ones.
Maybe they are not using DXR in the game then
Maybe they are not using DXR in the game then
I haven't checked for indirect lighting yet but definitely ray traced reflections are working in Windows 7 and it allows me to enable all the options for ray tracing.
Unfortunately because it uses DX12 for Windows 7 I can't check framerate in 7 but feels around 30-40 FPS with everything on ultra - doesn't support DLSS in 7.