-
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.
Poll: Do you care for Ray Tracing "now"?
- Thread starter Nexus18
- Start date
- Status
Associate
It's physics. Do you like to have realistic gravity in games ?
Associate
Yes, a million times yes, however I'm talking about offline, non-realtime raytracing as used for 3D rendered animation and visual effects.
Real time raytracing for games can be amazing, but it is still in it's infancy, and the preformance hit for it can be punishing. Over time cards will improve. I remember when things like aniosotropic filtering in games had a massive performance hit, but now it's barely noticed on modern cards.
Real time raytracing for games can be amazing, but it is still in it's infancy, and the preformance hit for it can be punishing. Over time cards will improve. I remember when things like aniosotropic filtering in games had a massive performance hit, but now it's barely noticed on modern cards.
For you maybe, but each to their own.
I'm very much looking forward to playing Chernobylite this weekend.
Associate
Associate
oh, so it's a competition!I remember when enabling shadows killed performance
I remember when SLI stood for Scan Line Interleave, and you could connect two Voodoo 2 cards in SLI, in passthrough to your 2D graphics card, to give a massive 800x600 resolution of hardware accellerated 3D goodness!
And games were programmed seperatly to use them, so you had seperate Glide .exe versions of games.
GL Quake was a thing of beauty!
But you try and tell the young people today that... and they won't believe ya'.
Associate
- Joined
- 4 Oct 2017
- Posts
- 1,216
That's my view at the minute too.
There's too much of a hit and for me minimal difference visually unless you're stood starring at a static image and enabling and disabling settings.
The lack of power has just encouraged upscaling technologies like DLSS.
Associate
At the moment no
In the future when a mid range gpu can handle it yes.
In the future when a mid range gpu can handle it yes.
Associate
oh, so it's a competition!
I remember when SLI stood for Scan Line Interleave, and you could connect two Voodoo 2 cards in SLI, in passthrough to your 2D graphics card, to give a massive 800x600 resolution of hardware accellerated 3D goodness!
And games were programmed seperatly to use them, so you had seperate Glide .exe versions of games.
GL Quake was a thing of beauty!
But you try and tell the young people today that... and they won't believe ya'.
Hehehe I had a vodoo2 myself.. the lighting and shadows that thing could produce were "unreal".
SLI, yes I remember the tec vaguely but didn't use it myself, didn't you have the option of each GPU producing a frame at a time or half a frame each in sync (alternate scan lines) ?
GL quake.. takes me back to my LAN at work days.. it really is amazing where we are today with graphics and connectivity, image growing up with this ! No wonder they're a bunch of ungrateful little turds
Last edited:
Caporegime
I wouldn't say that i don't care about it at all but right now it costs too much money to be a viable option.
That would catch ignorance of the subject more than where we are currently.
Associate
DLSS is a genuinely good technology though and is needed even with ray tracing disabled.
Associate
It's a nice to have but not something I'm willing to pay a premium for. Looking forward to when it's a standard instead of a marketing strategy.
Poll added (nice that we can finally add it ourselves!)
I use it whenever I can.
+1
I use it whenever I can.
This. I've been using Ray-Tracing in Octane render etc for years. It's a part of my daily workflow.
The early-stage methods we see in games ? It's mostly still a good way to destroy performance for a minor image quality gain. I see it as just another graphics checkbox to be judged on it's performance vs visual impact. In most games, the impact is minimal & the performance hit woeful.
The advantages are mostly to be found on the artist side, with quicker, more intuitive real-world lighting setup.
Given time, all the benefits will come to gamers, but I don't see any need to chase them with my money, they'll drop into my lap as they mature in the natural upgrade cycle.
TLDR:
Now: Meh
Later: Sure
Agreed. DLSS, FSR, XESS, Unreal's TSR etc are all useful tools in the toolbox that help out gamers from low to mid to high end & can be ignored if you don't care for them. They are all welcome imo
If I were being pedantic, 'No' is redundant - Everyone that answers 'No' will fit in either 'Not yet but in the future' or 'Never will care for it'. Wheras 'Yes' means, yes, right now.
Soldato
Its like HDR to me I can take it or leave it.
It will only become a thing when no matter what card you have the RT in games is created exactly the same way without any performance loss and no longer will we get the school yard my card does RT better than yours type discussions or look AMD can't RT and its missing the subtle brown reflection of that mans hair in the car windscreen as his head goes flying through it.
It will only become a thing when no matter what card you have the RT in games is created exactly the same way without any performance loss and no longer will we get the school yard my card does RT better than yours type discussions or look AMD can't RT and its missing the subtle brown reflection of that mans hair in the car windscreen as his head goes flying through it.
- Status