-
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
Probably because some areas of the game were specifically made to show off rt effects due to nvidia sponsorship. More of a tech demo in a fashion.
Maybe, but there is still the persistent narrative put out by some that RT is a fad and will just go away, so no point paying extra for it.
Its not going anywhere and its use will increase at an exponential rate over the next few years.
It is certainly not a fad, but I do agree quite a bit with the sentiment that there is no point paying extra for it (enthusiasts with the budget aside).
The 3080/90 will be outperformed in RT by affordable mid range cards in a few years as the hardware/tech develops and is used more extensively.
I'm of the opinion that RT won't be super mainstream until mid/low end cards can handle it well. For now we'll see some RT within AAA games using it to show off the tech.
Man of Honour
RT does very little for me and I also think it is vastly over rated for gaming (Genius of NVidia marketing).
As a feature I find it is nowhere near as good as something like PhysX which in itself is not that great and no one even talks about it on forums.
10 mins into a game how many serious gamers would even be taking any notice of what RT is doing or would they be a lot more interested in the gameplay itself?
As a feature I find it is nowhere near as good as something like PhysX which in itself is not that great and no one even talks about it on forums.
10 mins into a game how many serious gamers would even be taking any notice of what RT is doing or would they be a lot more interested in the gameplay itself?
It will be like a little like the old VHS>DVD transition in the late 90's/early 00's. Side by side comparison you can tell there are differences and improvements, but just enjoying the film you don't notice or care much.
Having said that once you were used to the higher IQ, it was quite a stark difference going back even then let alone what it would be now.
CP 2077 is very well regarded for its rasterization methods and there are a few areas where you would be hard pressed to notice the difference tbh. Main aspect of cp 2077 where I notice RTs benefits is when driving throughout the city with the reflections and light bouncing/illuminating of other objects without any of the light bleed you would get with rasterization nor having reflections just gradually disappear.
One game I would love to have RT in is ark as the developers for that have done an awful job with SSR especially when you're used to RT reflections, the issues with SSR become even more jarring:
It's even worse in motion. This is where if developers are lazy, don't have the time or whatever reason, rasterization can just look beyond awful and immersion breaking.
Hopefully ark 2 will have some good RT effects, I think the first game was sponsored by nvidia.
The only games I would rate for being incredibly good and matching/surpassing even most RT titles would be RDR 2. Metro games are also very good and have always been regarded as having great lighting, shadows etc. but even the exodus enhanced version shows just how bad that really is.
I think avatar from ubi/massive and their snowdrop engine in that avatar/pandora world is going to show just what RT is really capable of achieving.
Physx did nothing for me. Sure the effects were quite nice in batman games but there is no reason why the developers couldn't have achieved the same without locking it behind nvidia (unless like rasterization lighting, shadows etc. it also required a lot of effort and time from developers, rroff could probably answer that?), not to mention the hit to perf. was even worse than RT especially when you consider that it only affected one or 2 objects/items, that and things like the smoke looked overly done to the point it didn't even look realistic then.
If we're talking about titles with limited RT or/and titles where RT doesn't show of well like f1, re village then I properly wouldn't care nor notice but things like riftbreaker, control, cp 2077 and metro ee etc. it definitely adds a lot to the gameplay/immersion so much that I even completed control and metro ee as RT added a lot of atmosphere to them, which made them more immersive and kept me wanting to play and see more of the game world.
The annoying thing is 4a enhanced have shown what can be achieved if you do RT properly with regards to things like light bounces and so on, it makes a massive difference and when implemented properly, the performance is even better than rasterization version and the rasterization + half baked RT version.
Would agree with this, 4060/4070 should match/provide 3090 levels of RT for £400-550 so I think 50xx series is when we'll see a massive shift in peoples interest and uptake in games, especially if AMD can match/beat nvidia in RT.
I really do not think RT should be what is focused on right now. Instead I would rather have a big advance in brand agnostic physics that is gameplay altering together with a big push in extremely smart/human like NPCs/AI. Raster effects looks good enough to me when done right but it's always some silly physics or AI that pulls me out of the immersion.
Rasterisation uses static light and shadow maps which are pre-baked using raytracing. Everything looks nice, but you can't knock that bowl of fruit off the table no matter how many grenades you throw. Real time raytracing solves this thus allows a far more dynamic world, resulting in better physics.
I'll add that AI will also be helping speed raytracing at some time in the near future and of course will help with NPCs -
Last edited:
Associate
I'd be interested to know the age brackets of the results, I wonder if RT is a thing older gamers (40+) are adopting. What about the younger gamers on here (under 25s) ?
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Nov 2018
- Posts
- 2,743
I don't think it's age related. More financial related. 3080 and 3090 gamers will be adopting. Lower end gamers aren't adopting because they can't afford it.
A more accurate poll would be
Yes
No
Not yet but in the next 20 years
I can't afford it, otherwise I would
Last edited:
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Nov 2015
- Posts
- 108
What's not to like about RT (ignoring the current performance cost)? Getting rid of immersion breaking artefacts that are present with SSR is worth it on it's own. Environments feel more grounded too when RT GI is used (Metro is a great example) versus previous methods.
In a couple of GPU generations I suspect it will be old hat and we won't be discussing it's performance anymore, as was the case with other graphics technologies in the past.
In a couple of GPU generations I suspect it will be old hat and we won't be discussing it's performance anymore, as was the case with other graphics technologies in the past.
Caporegime
Define cherry picked? Also, there are a good amount of comparisons on youtube showing RT performance comparisons, including from digital foundry when they do their RT in depth analysis videos. Essentially if it is just limited RT effects, amd holds up quite well but when you get various effects or/and higher resolution/more complex RT effects thrown in then amd buckles by quite a bit. Think this article from pcgamershardware (a fan favourite on this forum) summed it up quite well:
Raytracing-Showcase getestet: Ampere deklassiert Turing und RDNA 2 - ein Blick in die Zukunft?
Der Raytracing-Benchmark ART-Mark streckt selbst eine Geforce RTX 3090 und Radeon RX 6900 XT nieder - Zeit für einen genauen Blick und Benchmarks.www.pcgameshardware.de
Although given that in games, turing seems to still match rdna 2, not sure how accurate that really is for "real world usage"
Was it confirmed that it was nvidias fault or/and the game developers fault or an issue on amds end?
I can't really recall of people mentioning crashing etc., I just recall of cp 2077 not having RT enabled for months on AMDs end due to amd needing to work on it i.e. it wasn't cdprs choice, I could be wrong on that though @Wrinkly
Not sure why you keep only referencing to control, yes control is a title with a fair bit of RT but there are several other better titles for RT.
If you want "fair" then metro ee is actually the best one here even if sponsored by nvidia given that 4a enhanced said themselves, a lot more can be done for amds RT perf. when it is implemented better hence why it RT runs pretty well on RDNA 2 (with furworks off), iirc, even on RDNA 2, it runs better than the rasterization/RT hybrid version, could be wrong though:
True, might be best to continue this in this thread instead:
Do you care for Ray Tracing "now"?
Raytracing looks very nice but so does Ultra settings. For the last 20 years I've been using medium and high settings. I can see that Ultra looks very nice but I would rather buy a cheaper GPU. It's the same with Raytracing. Yes it's very nice but I'll go without and save the money. I think...forums.overclockers.co.uk
Instead of just cherry picking one or two games and with it trying to establish that as a yard stick why don't we avrage a much larger selection of games, something that has both Nvidia and AMD sponsored titles.
We don't take one Nvidia sponsored game and use it for AMD's rasterisation performance yard stick so why do that with RT performance?
Ray Tracing does look great but it's annoying having to tweak settings when you see dips here and there. Even for those on the 3080/3090. The tech probably needs another 2 years. It's actually more annoying that HDR looks absolutely stunning on a 4k TV on the girlfriends PS5. I wish more PC monitors had really good HDR support instead.
So basically you're agreeing with me then.....
Decent article that, however, they are missing a lot of RT games where nvidia does see more of a gain over amd, just to name a few:
- chernobylite
- dl 2
- cp 2077
- the ascent
- control
- watch dogs legion
- ghostrunner
- bright memory infinite
- sword and fairy 7
And there are a whole bunch of other ones you could add, not to mention if you add the path tracing classics like quake, doom, mario, serious sam.
Their list:
But I think if you look at the big picture where people will also be using FSR or DLSS, the 3070 will still come out quite a bit better for 2 reasons:
- DLSS gains more performance than FSR 1 in RT scenarios as we have seen in a few comparisons now, bang4buck showed this of well, time will tell if FSR 2 can achieve the same perf gain as dlss
- DLSS is available in certain games where FSR is not
Get yourself a nice OLED display for the pc, problem solved
Caporegime
@Nexus18 yes.
Soldato
Peoples votes on this are probably just as much down to the types of games they play. I imagine people that tend to play more single player, story based games will tend to appreciate RT more than those playing less graphically dependant games (such as online FPS games).
Very true, I voted yes. I gave up on MMO FPS due to it being more about what you spent rather than good sportsmanship. I did play WoT for a while and even then had everything maxed, but I did notice that others would turn down graphics to the bare minimum simply to gain an advantage.
- Status