Ray Tracing

[pc-guy]

AMD already got super sampling. Just not as good as DLSS 2.0 atm. but I suspect with driver updates it will get better and better.

much like nvidia DLSS 1.0 on rtx 20. It was pretty useless at the start and then got a bit better with driver updates and game support.

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Some of you don't seem to appreciate all the current RT games are made with Turing in mind. Once more and more multiplatform games with RT are made,it will mean all those games will have to be coded with the RT method AMD is using,and it should improve relative to Nvidia,even if Nvidia is still faster overall. For example RDNA2 is developed for inline RT(DXR1.1),so we need to wait and see in the 12 months how actual RT performance pans out.

Also,I remember when Fermi was ahead in tessellation you had all these threads about it,which glossed over all the other weaknesses it has. Yet,when tessellation was really being pushed years later,Fermi didn't do so well either.

Even HUB mentioned that only a handful of games using RT,whereas 100s of games don't. So much of the current market is still made up of GPUs which can't do RT or can't do it that well.For example most of the current GPU market is under RTX2080/GTX1080TI in rasterised performance,and certainly under RTX2080 level in RT performance. Hardware enthusiasts are still stuck in an echo chamber - most of the market does not even have Turing GPUs,let alone anything around RTX2080 level and above. This is why all the desperate rush to get RX6800/RX6800XT/RTX3070/RTX3080 is rather amusing - its like suddenly no game will run on older or slower GPUs in the next 12 months.

It will only be when we have RDNA3 and the Turing successor with another bump up in RT performance that we might see more useful usage of RT,as opposed to a few extra shiny settings in the Ultra submenu.Yes,you will get the occasional big "tech demo" game,but that does not define most of the market in what you ACTUALLY need.

 

[pc-guy]

Some of you don't seem to appreciate all the current RT games are made with Turing in mind. Once more and more multiplatform games with RT are made,it will mean all those games will have to be coded with the RT method AMD is using,and it should improve relative to Nvidia,even if Nvidia is still faster overall. For example RDNA2 is developed for inline RT(DXR1.1),so we need to wait and see in the 12 months how actual RT performance pans out.

Also,I remember when Fermi was ahead in tessellation you had all these threads about it,which glossed over all the other weaknesses it has. Yet,when tessellation was really being pushed years later,Fermi didn't do so well either.


Even HUB mentioned that only a handful of games using RT,whereas 100s of games don't. So much of the current market is still made up of GPUs which can't do RT or can't do it that well.For example most of the current GPU market is under RTX2080/GTX1080TI in rasterised performance,and certainly under RTX2080 level in RT performance. Hardware enthusiasts are still stuck in an echo chamber - most of the market does not even have Turing GPUs,let alone anything around RTX2080 level and above.

It will only be when we have RDNA3 and the Turing successor with another bump up in RT performance that we might see more useful usage of RT,as opposed to a few extra shiny settings in the Ultra submenu.

totally.

 

[shankly1985]

Some of you don't seem to appreciate all the current RT games are made with Turing in mind. Once more and more multiplatform games with RT are made,it will mean all those games will have to be coded with the RT method AMD is using,and it should improve relative to Nvidia,even if Nvidia is still faster overall. For example RDNA2 is developed for inline RT(DXR1.1),so we need to wait and see in the 12 months how actual RT performance pans out.

Also,I remember when Fermi was ahead in tessellation you had all these threads about it,which glossed over all the other weaknesses it has. Yet,when tessellation was really being pushed years later,Fermi didn't do so well either.


Even HUB mentioned that only a handful of games using RT,whereas 100s of games don't. So much of the current market is still made up of GPUs which can't do RT or can't do it that well.For example most of the current GPU market is under RTX2080/GTX1080TI in rasterised performance,and certainly under RTX2080 level in RT performance. Hardware enthusiasts are still stuck in an echo chamber - most of the market does not even have Turing GPUs,let alone anything around RTX2080 level and above.

It will only be when we have RDNA3 and the Turing successor with another bump up in RT performance that we might see more useful usage of RT,as opposed to a few extra shiny settings in the Ultra submenu.

Plus the fact RDNA 2 first Gen Ray tracing is actually better than Nvidia first gen RT.

That is what people need to understand here before jumping on this too soon only to look silly in a year time. Game support will come that is a given.

 

[pc-guy]

Plus the fact RDNA 2 first Gen Ray tracing is actually better than Nvidia first gen RT.

That is what people need to understand here before jumping on this too soon only to look silly in a year time. Game support will come that is a given.

Ignoring the fact RT is a bit of gimmick currently.

AMD RT performance will be much much improved over the next 12 month without hardware improvements just simply because they got a hold on gaming development for consoles and PC. You can see that in the RT performance in Dirt5.

to use RT as a sole metric to make buying decision on nvidia and amd hardware is indeed foolhardy.

 

[Wrinkly]

What’s the 1% low on that. Probably 40fps

UR2 without RT what performance we getting on RTX 3080 to drop down this this level?

who is still playing UR2 anyway? I can appreciate the novelty in providing RT to old games but what’s the point of it?

RT in these new games are horrific. That’s the true metric of playable or not playable. To get ever 60fps you need 3090. You are talking about 50-60% performance hit on RT. That’s unacceptable as a feature.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review?page=6

Quake 2 RTX is 43-76 FPS, which I have no issue playing at. I use a 1080Ti with VSync at 1440p/60Hz, cool and quiet. I'm not a pro gamer

What is UR2? I guess the point of adding RT to old games is to prove RT is playable at 1440p, today. Some of us older gamers loved these old games. I guess you never got to play on older PCs?

 

[pc-guy]

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2020-nvidia-geforce-rtx-3080-review?page=6

Quake 2 RTX is 43-76 FPS, which I have no issue playing at. I use a 1080Ti with VSync at 1440p/60Hz, cool and quiet. I'm not a pro gamer

What is UR2? I guess the point of adding RT to old games is to prove RT is playable at 1440p, today. Some of us older gamers loved these old games. I guess you never got to play on older PCs?

my first proper game on pc was doom and c&c back in 95. Before that I literally watched pixels move on screen as games. I am a lot older than you think but I don’t like going back to those games and add stupid gimmick effects. I like old games because they were THE game at the time. I don’t hold nostalgic value to games. If I like them I play them. Something better come along they get superseded that’s fine by me.

loved unreal tournament hated UR2 never got on with it.

adding RT to those games is fine - good technical demonstration. Doesn’t do anything to show case the future does it.

 

[Wrinkly]

It will only be when we have RDNA3 and the Turing successor with another bump up in RT performance that we might see more useful usage of RT,as opposed to a few extra shiny settings in the Ultra submenu.Yes,you will get the occasional big "tech demo" game,but that does not define most of the market in what you ACTUALLY need.

We have Turing's successor, it's called Ampere

 

[Wrinkly]

adding RT to those games is fine - good technical demonstration. Doesn’t do anything to show case the future does it.

Well Minecraft RTX is very playable now with Ampere. Wouldn't you rather have Control with full dynamic shadows than the make do effects currently found? What about a RTX version of the classic Theif? I know I'd like the next Elder Scrolls game to offer full path tracing at least.

 

[pc-guy]

Well Minecraft RTX is very playable now with Ampere. Wouldn't you rather have Control with full dynamic shadows than the make do effects currently found? What about a RTX version of the classic Theif? I know I'd like the next Elder Scrolls game to offer full path tracing at least.

Does it matter to most of the people mine craft has rt?

Again what you like to play is one thing. What millions of people wants to play games is another. It is fine if you believe you are happy with the current RT on older games being playable.

but the current generation GPU metric and the last gen emphasis is still strongly on
Max setting high frame rate 1080p (rtx 20 gen) and 1440p (currently gen) with 4K 60 (currently gen).

now why are we accepting these metric to be lower for RT all of the sudden when the compatible games are less than the fingers on one hand when there are millions of titles out here.

 

[Grim5]

Plus the fact RDNA 2 first Gen Ray tracing is actually better than Nvidia first gen RT.

It is? I don't see it

 

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

totally.

I do think enthusiast forums do seem to think everyone is on the latest and greatest hardware!

Plus the fact RDNA 2 first Gen Ray tracing is actually better than Nvidia first gen RT.

That is what people need to understand here before jumping on this too soon only to look silly in a year time. Game support will come that is a given.

All the current RT games will have been developed on Nvidia hardware as it was the only game in town. Now AMD has its own hardware,developers will need to work on it too. I do think Nvidia will be ahead,but AMD should in theory get a bigger improvement as Nvidia and developers have already done a degree of the legwork with Turing.

We have Turing's successor, it's called Ampere

I meant Ampere!

 

[Rroff]

One of the problems with ray tracing currently is that developers can't just bin off support for traditional rendering due to the limited number of people with suitable hardware and complex implementations of rasterisation techniques will have things faked up in a way that is incompatible with a full ray tracing implementation and almost no developer will want to maintain two branches of their game one being a best effort rasterisation and one a best effort ray tracing due to the effort involved.

Current games that use some ray traced techniques have all the performance impact of advanced rasterisation then additionally ~60% of the overhead of a full path tracing implementation just to do some token ray traced features which generally poorly reflect what ray tracing can do both in terms of performance and visually. But at the end of the day to fully path trace a game to the quality Quake 2 RTX can do without compromises in terms of visual noise, etc. requires 60 FPS at 2-4x the ray counts that Quake 2 RTX uses (and more would be better).

 

[Grim5]

One of the problems with ray tracing currently is that developers can't just bin off support for traditional rendering due to the limited number of people with suitable hardware and complex implementations of rasterisation techniques will have things faked up in a way that is incompatible with a full ray tracing implementation and almost no developer will want to maintain two branches of their game one being a best effort rasterisation and one a best effort ray tracing due to the effort involved.

That part you're right about. Its not exclusive to nvidia, just devs being lazy - on of the new AMD ray tracing sponsored titles got a demo video 2 days ago and the Ray Tracing off video was literally just Shadows = OFF, not Ray Tracing = OFF but Shadows = OFF. In that game if you don't have ray tracing on you just don't get any shadows

 

[chris85oc]

What the hell are you smoking?

AMD has release a GPU with Ray tracing support working on past games that was built and optimised for Nvidia! That is all! New games built with RDNA2 and Ray tracing will perform much better! That is a fact!

So I guess that leave DLSS? Well AMD will in time release there own version. It will just take a little longer that is all.

it’s not a fact. You just made it up. What you actually meant to say is that AMD prtnered raytracing games wont use intensive RT like GI, only shadows here and there and maybe the occasional reflections. Full scene RT no chance, they choke.

Also its funny how everyone keeps harping up Superresolution. Have you seen it yet? No. Do you know when it’s coming? No. Have you seen how it stacks up against the 2 year advantage of DLSS has in ML? No. Yet you keep mentioning it. You were also the first ones to **** on DLSS, but i bet that when SR comes out and its worse, you’ll still praise it and the tune will change, like always with fanboys.

 

[The Old School Gamer]

Yeah it's a real shame about AMD's weaker RT performance.
It's the only thing really holding these cards back.

 

[Rroff]

This is just for fun so don't take anything in the screenshot too seriously as I'm just experimenting so lots of improvements that can be done, there are some significant geometry engine limitations (irrelevant to ray tracing) in the Quake 2 engine and I'm no artist but the path tracer in Quake 2 RTX is fully capable of complex modern scenes without any real performance difference to rendering the stock Quake 2 maps and a lot more rendering features present.

Though this is what it looks like to get 30FPS on my GTX1070 LOL

People hugely underestimate the potential even right now if a modern game was developed using path tracing exclusively from the ground up - though as before there are still compromises - you really need 60 FPS with 2-4x the ray count used here to reduce things like noise artefacts to a more acceptable level.

Hopefully will have my 3070 soon so I can grab a bit of video/show framerate on newer GPUs.

 

[shankly1985]

It is? I don't see it

Well done picking out one single game that is clearly broken for amd GPUs.

 

[Rroff]

Think it will be awhile before we see true numbers for 6000 series ray tracing anyhow - the drivers several reviewers are using aren't correctly rendering ray traced effects anyhow in several titles resulting in incorrect performance both high and low and/or crashes or stuff refusing to start with certain settings.

 

[Chuk_Chuk]

To that I say Red Dead Redemption 2. To paraphrase Digital Foundry, a love letter to next gen.

Consoles are still way behind.

It is interesting that you didn't answer any of the question i asked, but instead made up questions and then responded to it.


But best of all it seems you managed to prove that rasterization hasn't hit a "plateau" that you alluded to in the first post. Good Job