Poll: Do you care for Ray Tracing "now"?

[BigBANGtheory]

I'm kinda interested in Ray Tracing once Rasterization and Upscaling is taken into account.

I'm certainly not prioritising RT over Raster

 

[CuriousTomCat]

I hate the idea of a monopoly occurring because every gamer buys the same brand because of a must have feature.

I'd rather miss out to stop that happening to be honest. Even though it's a nice feature.

 

[Nexus18]

I hate the idea of a monopoly occurring because every gamer buys the same brand because of a must have feature.

I'd rather miss out to stop that happening to be honest. Even though it's a nice feature.

It's not a unique feature to just Nvidia though. As shown amd can enable and make use of it too, they just don't have the hardware/perf. matching ampere. If anything supporting/buying into the brand that does it better would force amd to concentrate more on it.

 

[Wrinkly]

I hate the idea of a monopoly occurring because every gamer buys the same brand because of a must have feature.

I'd rather miss out to stop that happening to be honest. Even though it's a nice feature.

PC gaming raytracing is supported either by Microsoft's DXR (Direct X Raytracing) or The Khronos Group's Vulkan APIs. All vendors, without restriction, can support these APIs. People are buying Nvidia due to both features and performance, while AMD have been focusing more on console/mobile. Competition should sort the market out especially with Intel entering thus I can't see any form of monopoly forming.

 

[BigBANGtheory]

PC gaming raytracing is supported either by Microsoft's DXR (Direct X Raytracing) or The Khronos Group's Vulkan APIs. All vendors, without restriction, can support these APIs. People are buying Nvidia due to both features and performance, while AMD have been focusing more on console/mobile. Competition should sort the market out especially with Intel entering thus I can't see any form of monopoly forming.

Nvidia has a monopoly on discrete desktop GPUs right now and is exploiting it to the max, frankly I'm amazed they've not fallen foul of any regulators yet

 

[Wrinkly]

Nvidia has a monopoly on discrete desktop GPUs right now and is exploiting it to the max, frankly I'm amazed they've not fallen foul of any regulators yet

I think they are too busy chasing AMD's console monopoly

Joking aside, what makes you think Nvidia has a monopoly?

 

[AMB73]

Not as much as i thought. Jumped on a 2080ti at launch and proceeded to wait a further year for any RT implementation other than the odd demo. Not sure this had much of an impact as i was hyped for anything with RT in the early days but now i am much more, not moving away, just not swayed quite as much as i was.

To be honest, I've been in the land of Elden Ring for so long I've forgotten what an optimised RT game looks like.....Does ER even have RT????

 

[CuriousTomCat]

Joking aside, what makes you think Nvidia has a monopoly?

As of 23 July 2021, Nvidia has 83% while AMD has a tiny 17%.

Can't you see how bad that is? It's a good job AMD's GPU division is getting cashflow from the CPU division because there is no way on earth a sole GPU maker could recover from that. Nvidias market share would reach 100%.

That was close to happening to Intel when AMD were heading for bankruptcy. Luckily there were just enough of us still buying AMD CPUs + console sales to keep them afloat and rise from the ashes.

I'm going to continue buying AMD GPUs because I'm against any company with too much of the market. I want competition. I'll buy Intel GPUs as well while they're behind.

 

[Tute]

No, can't say I care. It's existence doesn't make a bad game good nor does it's absence make a good game bad. It's nice to have, but I don't base any graphics card or game buying decision on it.

In fact, most ray traced games have the problem of being "triple A" video game tripe anyway, most could have done with the RT development time being spent elsewhere.

 

[Wrinkly]

As of 23 July 2021, Nvidia has 83% while AMD has a tiny 17%.

Can't you see how bad that is? It's a good job AMD's GPU division is getting cashflow from the CPU division because there is no way on earth a sole GPU maker could recover from that. Nvidias market share would reach 100%.

That was close to happening to Intel when AMD were heading for bankruptcy. Luckily there were just enough of us still buying AMD CPUs + console sales to keep them afloat and rise from the ashes.

I'm going to continue buying AMD GPUs because I'm against any company with too much of the market. I want competition. I'll buy Intel GPUs as well while they're behind.

Supporting poor products is not going to help competition. Don't get me wrong, AMD make great console/mobile parts, but slapping such parts on a PCIe card and calling job done is anything but positive with the result being the market share that you mention. AMD need to break out of that console/mobile mindset where as a consumer you have no option.

This round, with RDNA2, AMD knew from the start that they were not going to compete in raytracing or AI SS yet still priced cards on par with Nvidia. By looking at console requirements Nvidia knew they had nothing to fear with Ampere and so chose to make even greater profits by dropping a node.

 

[tommybhoy]

Can't you see how bad that is?

Nope!

Nv didn't trip their way to 83%, they got the market to desire them all the way to 83%-that doesn't fall in your lap, it's hard hard work.

Look what's happened to @Nexus18, been on AMD(positively) for years went Nv-absolutely loving it.

That's AMD's job to get nexus back, so far they haven't got me back and I've been away much longer, that monopoly is on AMD not us.

 

[Bill Turnip]

^^^ pretty much this. AMD have to better Nvidia at the same price point to swing that share. I have an nvidia card and love it, though I'm brand agnostic, I'd have just as happily got an AMD card.

In a boxing title fight, a draw means the champ retains their title. I'm impressed with RDNA 2 and would gladly have one, but they haven't bettered the 3000 series, they're more or less on par.

The Ray tracing is not quite though, and while I wouldn't have bought a card purely for that, I think it does have a good effect on presentation.

 

[Yaayuh!]

Not yet, I still don’t think it’s worth the performance hit.

 

[Wrinkly]

^^^ pretty much this. AMD have to better Nvidia at the same price point to swing that share. I have an nvidia card and love it, though I'm brand agnostic, I'd have just as happily got an AMD card.

In a boxing title fight, a draw means the champ retains their title. I'm impressed with RDNA 2 and would gladly have one, but they haven't bettered the 3000 series, they're more or less on par.

The Ray tracing is not quite though, and while I wouldn't have bought a card purely for that, I think it does have a good effect on presentation.

Having skipped Turing due to its awful performance, I did upgrade to Ampere just for raytracing and have had a great time with it. From Quake2 RTX to CP2077 and Dying Light 2, plus all of the lesser known titles. Even when using a decade old PC, which only goes to show the impact of a high performance GPU on modern titles.

This idea that it's not there yet makes as much sense as turning off antistropic filtering due to x16 being 'not quite there yet' or just not bothing with AA as again 'it's not quite there yet'. Yet we don't because even though these two technologies 'aren't quite there yet', the improvement to image quality/stability is superb. Go back and look at the CP2077 thread where you will find people complaining that the non RT version doesn't look good just to promote RT AKA irony.

Again, RDNA2 is up to 50% slower than Ampere with raytracing workloads, while also not forgetting, ~18 months on from launch, AMD is still to produce an alternative to DLSS. How the hell you manage to come up with a draw beggers belief. The question should be, would you buy a card for around the same money that lacks modern features, while performing roughly the same in legacy workloads? I can accept that some people will answer yes to that in the misinformed beleif that it will help competition, but stepping back a little it should be obviouse that all that does is reward a company for milking the less informed. Come up with the excuse that none of the games you play today use RT, yet how can you possibly know what you will play tomorrow?

 

[CuriousTomCat]

Nope!

Nv didn't trip their way to 83%, they got the market to desire them all the way to 83%-that doesn't fall in your lap, it's hard hard work.

Look what's happened to @Nexus18, been on AMD(positively) for years went Nv-absolutely loving it.

That's AMD's job to get nexus back, so far they haven't got me back and I've been away much longer, that monopoly is on AMD not us.

Surely monopoly leads to stagnation? That's what I'm afraid of. If innovation and progress were not effected in any way then I'd switch to buying Nvidia because it wouldn't matter if they had 100% market share.

Remember when Intel stopped innovating. Tiny 4% improvements each generation. That would still be happening now. The i7 would have 4 cores. Yes it was AMDs fault that was happening but it's us who suffers. It's us I care about. Luckily AMD had enough R&D to fight back and we only have their loyal customers to thank for that.

That will happen to Nvidia if they had no competition. The 4090 would be 5% faster than the previous gen if they had no competition. I don't want that to happen. We need competition, innovation, and excitement. For that to happen, enough need to buy from competition.

 

[TNA]

As of 23 July 2021, Nvidia has 83% while AMD has a tiny 17%.

Can't you see how bad that is? It's a good job AMD's GPU division is getting cashflow from the CPU division because there is no way on earth a sole GPU maker could recover from that. Nvidias market share would reach 100%.

That was close to happening to Intel when AMD were heading for bankruptcy. Luckily there were just enough of us still buying AMD CPUs + console sales to keep them afloat and rise from the ashes.

I'm going to continue buying AMD GPUs because I'm against any company with too much of the market. I want competition. I'll buy Intel GPUs as well while they're behind.

I used to think like this in the past, but the older I get the less I give a **** to be honest. When you look at the rate how fast time goes you realise you don’t have much time left (still in my thirties btw). Why should I give a **** about a company and be loyal when it does not work both ways? Rather be loyal to my wallet and myself and get what I fancy.

To be fair to my old self, back then AMD may not have had the performance crown or mindshare, but they would have 90-95% the performance of Nvidia but charge quite a bit less for it relatively. The choice was made easy and yes I would think it is good going AMD to help balance market share. Back then there was also just rasta performance only, not much to differentiate other than drivers which people kept saying nvidia was better, but I did not buy that as everything just worked fine for me.

I have no issues going back to AMD. But they will need to price their products much better for starters. This we are a premium brand crap has put me right off due to the silly prices. I doubt they will be pricing their next gen products any better either. As long as nvidia do the same as this time and I can buy a 4070/80 FE at msrp then that is more than likely what I will be doing.

 

[Bill Turnip]

AMD is still to produce an alternative to DLSS. How the hell you manage to come up with a draw beggers belief.

Do they not have FSR which achieves much the same thing? I appreciate the consensus is that it's not quite on the same level, but they have got an alternative.

I come up with a draw in so far as as much as people talk about it, DLSS is not in everything, certainly not legacy games as it didn't exist then. For me, I'd have been happy with either, hence draw

Come up with the excuse that none of the games you play today use RT, yet how can you possibly know what you will play tomorrow?

I have no idea what I'll play tomorrow. Ray tracing may or may not be a part of it, but as of right now, its a great feature, not a game maker. I do know what I'm playing today though, and on the whole (not completely) either brand is fine.

Ray tracing will be good. Its not essential right now as it needs to develop, like any tech.

 

[Nexus18]

Nvidia has a monopoly on discrete desktop GPUs right now and is exploiting it to the max, frankly I'm amazed they've not fallen foul of any regulators yet

As pointed out above, it is very much amds fault, the thing that sits with me the most is looking back at the e3/ces or whatever live shows they were, where amd spent most of the show talking about their partnerships across every industry/sector then spent like 1 minute, if that on the pc gaming space, meanwhile nvidia spent their whole show focussed solely on pc gaming, safe to say "at the time", the pc gaming space was very much not amds focus hence why there was sweet f all stock on rdna 2 release as they were supplying 80% of their chips to consoles. Given amd don't have consoles to think about/supply now, I'm expecting them to come out swinging for RDNA 3.

Not as much as i thought. Jumped on a 2080ti at launch and proceeded to wait a further year for any RT implementation other than the odd demo. Not sure this had much of an impact as i was hyped for anything with RT in the early days but now i am much more, not moving away, just not swayed quite as much as i was.

To be honest, I've been in the land of Elden Ring for so long I've forgotten what an optimised RT game looks like.....Does ER even have RT????

Apparently it is in the works.

No, can't say I care. It's existence doesn't make a bad game good nor does it's absence make a good game bad. It's nice to have, but I don't base any graphics card or game buying decision on it.

In fact, most ray traced games have the problem of being "triple A" video game tripe anyway, most could have done with the RT development time being spent elsewhere.

That is largely what RT sets out to achieve, to save developers a **** load of time, obviously they will have developers working on their own things though so the guy responsible for lighting/graphical stuff will not be working on gameplay/balances/core game side of things unless they're the equivalent to a full stack dev....

Nope!

Nv didn't trip their way to 83%, they got the market to desire them all the way to 83%-that doesn't fall in your lap, it's hard hard work.

Look what's happened to @Nexus18, been on AMD(positively) for years went Nv-absolutely loving it.

That's AMD's job to get nexus back, so far they haven't got me back and I've been away much longer, that monopoly is on AMD not us.

Exactly.

I prefer AMD on the whole but until amd can at least match nvidia on 2 fronts that I very much care for now (RT and DLSS), I won't be going back.

Do they not have FSR which achieves much the same thing? I appreciate the consensus is that it's not quite on the same level, but they have got an alternative.

I come up with a draw in so far as as much as people talk about it, DLSS is not in everything, certainly not legacy games as it didn't exist then. For me, I'd have been happy with either, hence draw


I have no idea what I'll play tomorrow. Ray tracing may or may not be a part of it, but as of right now, its a great feature, not a game maker. I do know what I'm playing today though, and on the whole (not completely) either brand is fine.

Ray tracing will be good. Its not essential right now as it needs to develop, like any tech.

FSR 2 is the true competitor to dlss and is only coming out tomorrow.

FSR 1 in my experience was not great, certainly not for anything less than 4k and UQ preset, so much I chose not to use it in the games I played with it, re village, rfitbreaker, fc 6 (at 1440) and obviously if given the choice, I chose dlss in other games.

If FSR 2 still can't achieve the same gain in perf. as dlss in RT workloads, which is pretty substantial at times especially since you need all the perf. you can get in things like dl 2, cp 2077, fsr 2 will still fall short. Hopefully FSR 2 is based on TSR and not TAAU or/and amd have made improvements to whatever one they're using.....

 

[pastymuncher]

Despite having a gpu that is capable of it I don't think I actually have any games that support Ray Tracing. I don't use DLSS either.

 

[ChocAndGray]

Not yet, I still don’t think it’s worth the performance hit.

Exactly.

Still nothing that looks remotely good with ray tracing aside from the tech demos.