Did those other 9 frames you enjoyed that second look as shiny?Don't be hating on Quake 2 now
-
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.
really getting fed up with the posts stating RTX/DLSS does not work this gen
- Thread starter sunshinewelly
- Start date
Caporegime
Metro
- Joined
- 3 Nov 2010
- Posts
- 742
ultimately nvidea cant please everyone. For me RTX this current gen is a nice bonus. Of course it will improve overtime but i am happy to be an early adopter. It certainly adds to metro exodus. Users experiences will vary and those who demand high frame rates will probably fall in the hate camp. For me however who has been gaming since the days of the atari 2600 high frame rates are not a high priority. My set up on a 4 k tv will only allow me to game at a maximum of 60fs anyway and in most single player games i play there is not a whole difference in experience playing at 45 fps to 60 fps. I am the type of gamer who does not knock on game mode on my TV as i dont worry about lag and for me the best experience is the quality of the image rather than fps. I have done the DLSS test on a couple of my mates now and not one has been able to see a difference in metro with dlss on or off. I have not tried in on other games but for metro its no longer an issue. my understanding is that DLSS will also improve over time - it has on metro anyway
Did those other 9 frames you enjoyed that second look as shiny?
I was referencing the image here https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/posts/32958573 to see how far the RTX implementation in Quake 2 could go - the stock RTX materials lack a floor anything close to the one in the image as it is all industrial stuff so I had a choice of using a plain colour which didn't really show it off, something silly like diamond pattern floor plates or faking up something that vaguely looked like marble :s (I don't currently have working knowledge of what it takes to import custom materials into Quake 2 RTX).
EDIT: That isn't actually 10 FPS BTW the framerate counter gets buggy when you are around 10 FPS - it was more like 7 FPS - on a 1070 can't really get anything close to usable framerates above 720p and realistically have to drop back to like 800x600 to get playable framerates.
Last edited:
Don't be hating on Quake 2 now
For a moment there, I thought that room had suffered a burst water main.
Doesn't look anything like as good with a texture that approximates carpet though :s and at a resolution where a 1070 gets anything close to a framerate...
But given that is with all the geometry and material limits of a 25 year old engine despite having RTX slapped over the top and Turing cards are approx. 6x faster personally I see a lot more potential than a lot of people are moaning about.
Last edited:
Yeah, I think everyone sees the potential, it's just that it's still a long way from being prime-time with reasonable frame-rates.
I've not seen anything so far that would make me jump from my 1080Ti, tbh. Unless the next gen. consoles have heavyweight ray-tracing support - unlikely - I don't think we'll see anything major for at least another 5 years, as software devs simply won't see adding anything beyond a few simple RT effects as being worthwhile.
A lot of people are talking its potential down though - with the typical developer slowness to adopt this kind of stuff and even more lack of experience with it than some other tech developments it probably will take awhile but the potential is there a lot more than people allow for.
Soldato
This reminds me of mantle though. I played a few titles that utilised it and it was a nice performance gain compared to without it for those using AMD cards. The naysayers said it was useless and only runs on such few games that it was a waste of time.. hence my reference to this.
Mantle like DX12 and Vulkan though was ultimately a misunderstanding of what the average game developer actually wants, ray tracing techniques ultimately is the future of rendering and one way or another it is coming eventually.
Soldato
Yeah but you catch my drift. It ultimately led to better API's but the initial hardware that could benefit from it was too early (and the devs didnt get much time to make many games to use it), which in this case now is RTX.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2008
- Posts
- 6,014
Me too.
It's definitely very early in stage of the technology but was the right time to release it. Imagine it like an ecosystem that can mature together, the software side (drivers and DirectX etc), game development, hardware. If NV left it a few gens we wouldn't be getting the best out of it then either. The HW would be more advanced but software side would be lagging. Game develops can say "hey, what about this?" or "if you gave us this option it would make a big difference" or whatever and NV can make it so. NVidia are not game developers so putting RT out there and getting feedback to help improve it/evolve it is the aim.
For NVidia's it was perfect timing. Still way ahead of the competition on raw performance even with gen 1 of RT onboard.
The quake 2 picture above looks good until you look at the top-right
While I don;t think RT is a few generations too early to give us a taster, it'll hopefully be massively more advanced in a few gens and that will happen partly thanks to getting RT out there a few gens previously and getting the whole ecosystem evolving together.
Don't be hating on Quake 2 now
haters are gonna hate.
that looks incredible. would a 2080 play it ?
Soldato
It does, but what's the point in it other than to just look at? I mean it's running at 10fps.
People would have accepted the release of RTX and DLSS as exciting new stuff had NVIDIA not bumped up the prices of their GPU's at the same time. Whether intended or not people now associate RTX and DLSS with the price increases and have written them off as "not worth it". It's a shame really, but there you go. NVIDIA being stupid.
It doesn't look so good close up hah being still a 25 year old engine but a 2080 would get a lot more than 10 FPS - it has 8 gigaray theoretical performance versus something like 0.6-0.7 for a 1070 though the actual performance jump in Quake 2 RTX is less than 8x.
Associate
You are not me playing Shadow of the Tomb Raider at 4k with ray tracing 60fps at max settings.
That is just one thing so far, but already it was a point.
Soldato
I still feel this generation is not worthwhile for anyone actually wanting ray tracing without compromise. £1200 is a lot to spend on a handful of games in which the majority can't get 60fps.
Its a very good point, if the price increase hadn't happened like it did, then the moaning about RTX and DLSS, would be much less.
It's the old 50% extra free only cost twice the price, so not really free at all. Well you get what I mean.