-
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.
Minecraft Ray Tracing Benchmarked | RX 6800 Series And RTX 30 Series
- Thread starter Wrinkly
- Start date
Very dishonest video since Minecraft RTX is made by Nvidia and the guy who made the video knows it. But he is on a mission to prove that the 6000 series and especially 6800xt is useless. 
There are plugins with software RT for Minecraft and i think you can get better results running software RT on AMD 6000 series than running hw acceleration on Nvidia build. Of course the card will have trouble running on Nvidia code and no one really knows how big is the performance loss vs an AMD optimized version.
I don't think that AMD RT performance is better than Nvidia but i think it is way better than these tech gurus want us to believe. Right now they are promoting Nvidia.
There are plugins with software RT for Minecraft and i think you can get better results running software RT on AMD 6000 series than running hw acceleration on Nvidia build. Of course the card will have trouble running on Nvidia code and no one really knows how big is the performance loss vs an AMD optimized version.
I don't think that AMD RT performance is better than Nvidia but i think it is way better than these tech gurus want us to believe. Right now they are promoting Nvidia.
I thought the 6800xt was as well, but this looks a bit worse. And of course, no DLSS for AMD.
Very dishonest video since Minecraft RTX is made by Nvidia and the guy who made the video knows it. But he is on a mission to prove that the 6000 series and especially 6800xt is useless.
Minecraft RTX is just using DXR for RT. This is just an example of fully path traced rendering.
I don't think that plugin is doing full path tracing. It's been optimised for cubes otherwise we would see it injected as a renderer in to many other titles.
really? Hard to tell since they don't run a 2080ti in that video.
oh no.. alllll those games with DLSS... oh wait..
The only reason those cards get any meaningful perf is because of DLSS in minecraft. If that's a game you heavily play, then Nvidia seems like a good purchase. I don't play it, but my daughter does. How many adults are really playing minecraft to warrant buying 500+ card for their kid?
Last edited:
It will be nice if people will start to think for themselves instead of repeating " is just DXR" over and over.
Any software can be optimized. Let's say i have a 4 core CPU and you have a 3 core CPU.
I can make a program that can use 4 cores every cycle. So i can calculate a frame every 5 milliseconds.
You will not be only 25% slower because you will need 2 cycles for each frame.You will be 50% slower.
But if we write the same program to only use 3 cores, then your performance will be almost equal with mine.
We see games where 3090 is behind 6800xt even at 4k ( Valhalla for example ). And we see programs where Intel is still ahead of AMD. And these are old technologies where a faster CPU/GPU can cut the costs of bad optimization through brute force.
Ray tracing is new technology. And what we see in games like Minecraft or Control is optimization for Nvidia vs brute force for AMD. Of course the performance on AMD will look bad. But if you optimize the games for RDNA2, then the performance will be much better. I don't think it will beat Nvidia in this generation but it will be much better.
Look at Cyberpunk. How can they give Nvidia Ray Tracing and not give ray tracing to AMD if it is just DXR? Not to mention that PS5 and X box consoles are also left behind, they will get ray tracing later next year. The simple thing that Cyberpunk has announced that Nvidia will get Ray Tracing now and AMD will get it later, tells you that it is not just DXR.
This version of Minecraft uses DXR to build a scene using path tracing. That means no optimisation such as SSR. The idea is to provide a scene without optimisation. Sure, AMD could improve their performance by rendering half or quarter resolution as we have seen in DF's Spiderman analysis, but that defeats the point when comparing RT performance.
I'm sure AMD will be able to use RT at launch, but won't due to such poor performance hurting sales. They will need to do half or quarter resolution RT to keep the FPS acceptable.
Hence my comment -
The only way they are going to do better when the gap is so big is by lowering image quality.
really? Hard to tell since they don't run a 2080ti in that video.
oh no.. alllll those games with DLSS... oh wait..
The only reason those cards get any meaningful perf is because of DLSS in minecraft. If that's a game you heavily play, then Nvidia seems like a good purchase. I don't play it, but my daughter does. How many adults are really playing minecraft to warrant buying 500+ card for their kid?
You do realise AMD is attempting some form of DLSS without dedicated hardware? It's not Minecraft that is important here, but the ability to render a path traced scene at playable frame rates. Don't worry too much, people also have a problem understanding what Quake 2 RTX is doing.
First if you want to be mean then you should understand that Nvidia is also rendering the game at a lower resolution because it is unable to give you 4k - 60fps RT even on a stupid game like Minecraft. And it costs much more than the whole PS5 so there is no reason to be proud about owning such a videocard.
Of course the consoles will lower the resolution when the scene is crowded but the videocard in the console costs less than $200. The level of performance in Spiderman is great and the game looks amazing and an example about how optimization can make a game run great on a much weaker videocard than those on high end PC's.
Microsoft will release their own version of Minecraft on XboxX and you will see it does much better than 6800 is doing now on PC,even if the videocard on the xboxx is a cut down version of Big Navi. Maybe then you will understand what optimization means.
Of course the consoles will lower the resolution when the scene is crowded but the videocard in the console costs less than $200. The level of performance in Spiderman is great and the game looks amazing and an example about how optimization can make a game run great on a much weaker videocard than those on high end PC's.
Microsoft will release their own version of Minecraft on XboxX and you will see it does much better than 6800 is doing now on PC,even if the videocard on the xboxx is a cut down version of Big Navi. Maybe then you will understand what optimization means.
Yes, I am aware. But again, DLSS needs massive driver optimisations, and is only in a handful of games. I prefer consistent graphical fidelity personally. DLSS perf mode looks crap as soon as you move and then take a moment when stopped to reset itself to looking pretty for example. DLSS has always been sold as 'it goes faster/more perf'. hell no. It doesn't give you more performance, it gives you LESS. But that's what a good marketing department does, skews the truth.
First, thanks for the slight on my ability to comprehend. I'm sure you're such a magnificent brain surrounded by a limited body, who knows how far you could have gone in life.
Second, yes, it is minecraft that is important here. You decided to link a video that doesn't even use cards that we know are on the same level of RT performance. If people are buying an AMD card, they aren't buying it for RT, and if they are, they are making a mistake.
Last edited:
I'm quite impressed by the performance Quake 2 RTX manages without DLSS even - with DLSS it would be possible to eliminate a lot more of the noise compromises while keeping OK performance.
I have to say after using Ray Tracing on my 3080 in both CoD games and Watchdogs Legions i promptly turned it off.
Its just not worth the penalty for what you gain, in fast paced games you never ever notice it either.
Still not convinced its some super wonderful must have tech. DLSS is decent, but its a crutch for Ray tracing to support with, without DLSS Ray Tracing is even worse.
Of course AMD Ray Tracing is rubbish, this is their first attempt and they dont have a DLSS crutch yet.
Anyone lording it over an AMD owner because they have an Nvidia 3080 or 3090 etc and thinking Ray Tracing is the be all and end all is a complete buffoon.
I can almost garauntee if they are using Ray Tracing its with DLSS enabled so they arent even running in a native resolution either.
And you cannot use DLSS as a stick to beat AMD with as they as of yet dont have an answer to it. Once they have their version then its fair game.
Until then stop preaching on like Ray Tracing is tge next best thing because right now, no, its not.
Its just not worth the penalty for what you gain, in fast paced games you never ever notice it either.
Still not convinced its some super wonderful must have tech. DLSS is decent, but its a crutch for Ray tracing to support with, without DLSS Ray Tracing is even worse.
Of course AMD Ray Tracing is rubbish, this is their first attempt and they dont have a DLSS crutch yet.
Anyone lording it over an AMD owner because they have an Nvidia 3080 or 3090 etc and thinking Ray Tracing is the be all and end all is a complete buffoon.
I can almost garauntee if they are using Ray Tracing its with DLSS enabled so they arent even running in a native resolution either.
And you cannot use DLSS as a stick to beat AMD with as they as of yet dont have an answer to it. Once they have their version then its fair game.
Until then stop preaching on like Ray Tracing is tge next best thing because right now, no, its not.
Why is everyone moaning BUt NvIdIA HaS DlsS
Without DLSS the Nvidia cards are still way ahead and playable at all res.
And to be fair most titles with DLSS it looks no different from native unless I go up close to my screen and try my hardest to pick details. I'm not jumping in the bUt iTs n0T naTiVe 4k , if it looks good, runs good that's the main issue.
wh0 cArEs aBoUt RaY tRaCInG !??;? Well it's a really good effect and increasingly popular, it's on consoles as well so.... Go figure
Without DLSS the Nvidia cards are still way ahead and playable at all res.
And to be fair most titles with DLSS it looks no different from native unless I go up close to my screen and try my hardest to pick details. I'm not jumping in the bUt iTs n0T naTiVe 4k , if it looks good, runs good that's the main issue.
wh0 cArEs aBoUt RaY tRaCInG !??;? Well it's a really good effect and increasingly popular, it's on consoles as well so.... Go figure
There are hundreds of thousands of Minecraft videos posted on Youtube if not more. There are very few that compare next gen cards (Ampere/RDNA2) ability to render via path tracing. The only other title that I know of doing this is Quake 2 RTX, which I have yet to see an RDNA2 card running. The guy himself states that it was the most requested comparison. You may want to keep your head in the sand, but many buying or even just interested in next gen tech are interested in this type of video. Remember this is the graphics card section within a mostly hardware related forum. A place where people come to make sure they are not making a bad purchasing decision.
The 6800XT is worse than the 2080ti for RT, it is just faster than the 2080ti in rasterization which hided dome of the performance drop.
In something lile Minecraft with a heavy RT load and easy rasterization we can see the true RT differences. The 6800XT is more like a 2070.
My head isn't in the sand. I don't particularly care about RT right now. I think Nvidia taking on RT with their own implementation is impressive, but they haven't managed yet enough developers to adopt it yet. So far, it's mainly a gimmick. The simple fact that to get heavy RT playable requires upscaling to be enabled should already tell you enough.
IMO there is coming a time when either we have to go full RT, or RT features become an integral part of the GPU. Sustaining two entirely different sections of the GPU is not feasible long term.
But if you want to promote a product you will make statements like that. Like for example if someone gets paid to promote AMD he will tell you that he received thousands of messages asking him to test which card is better at 1080p gaming or 1440p or which card can overclock more, or which card can run Valhalla better.
It is just a claim. It does not mean it is true. And again, he knows and they all know that AMD cards will have problems running older titles with RT. Because they were all made to get the best from Nvidia hardware and Nvidia was involved in implementing RT in those games.
The video showed a very playable 1440p 60+ FPS without upscaling. Roughly the same FPS at 1440p that is available within Quake 2 RTX. I'm no pro gamer, so 1440p/60 is perfect and has the added bonus of such cards staying very cool and quiet.
AMD, Intel and Nvidia are all working towards chiplets, which should allow a smooth translation while keeping costs down.