really getting fed up with the posts stating RTX/DLSS does not work this gen

bru · 17 Apr 2020 at 20:48

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
It still looks **** though. If I need to have blocky looking games which look 20 to 30 years out of date at best(Minecraft and Quake 2),to just experience path tracing,I would rather play the original Crysis game again.

I can wait another few years TBH!

You might not have to wait that long.

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 17 Apr 2020 at 20:53

bru said:
You might not have to wait that long.

From what I gather it will probably be something closer to what is being done with RTX titles - the biggest improvement will be better CPU performance,as the original Crysis was very CPU bound(!). However,a lot of the noise about Quake2 and Minecraft is the level at which this is being done and how wondrous it is - only problem Quake2 and Minecraft look a bit crap,even though technically its fantastic,I can't get excited about them.

bru · 17 Apr 2020 at 21:00

So will it be August 7 or August 14 for release day. Of course Crytek will probably miss that trick.

Grim5 · 17 Apr 2020 at 21:05

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
From what I gather it will probably be something closer to what is being done with RTX titles - the biggest improvement will be better CPU performance,as the original Crysis was very CPU bound(!). However,a lot of the noise about Quake2 and Minecraft is the level at which this is being done and how wondrous it is - only problem Quake2 and Minecraft look a bit crap,even though technically its fantastic,I can't get excited about them.

Cryteks proprietary hardware agnostic ray tracing, which still "runs significantly faster on Nvidia thanks to RTX cores" - that's Cryteks words, not mine

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 18 Apr 2020 at 00:29

Grim5 said:
Cryteks proprietary hardware agnostic ray tracing, which still "runs significantly faster on Nvidia thanks to RTX cores" - that's Cryteks words, not mine

I didn't see anything regarding Nvidia specifically in their own releases so must have missed it:
https://twitter.com/Crytek/status/1250847710607028225
https://www.crysis.com/
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2020-04-16-crysis-remastered-revealed-coming-to-nintendo-switch

“Crysis Remastered will feature the original game’s single-player campaign alongside high-quality textures, an HD texture pack, improved art assets, temporal anti-aliasing, SSDO, SVOGI, state-of-the-art depth fields, new light settings, motion blur, parallax occlusion mapping, and particle effects (where applicable). Further additions like volumetric fog and shafts of light, software-based ray tracing, and screen space reflections deliver a major visual upgrade to this classic FPS experience.”

"Crysis Remastered brings new graphic features, high-quality textures, and the CRYENGINE's native hardware - and API-agnostic ray tracing solution for PC, PlayStation, Xbox, and - for the very first time - Nintendo Switch."

Also I think you must have quoted the wrong person,as I have no clue what that has to do with what I was telling Bru.

The PS4,XBox One and Switch never got the original Crysis,and the remaster means a better threaded CryEngine version which is needed due to the weak CPU cores on the current generation. A lot of people don't seem to realise that Crysis was mostly CPU and VRAM limited. DF covered this in detail. I really doubt the remastered Crysis game will be fully pathtraced though - probably its going to be some degree of the shadows and lighting like in Metro:Exodus,as it is being released for the current generation consoles also.DF also covered the Crytek RT demo too,in detail - Crytek ran it on a Vega 56. It uses voxel based RT for certain things and clever tricks for other stuff.

This doesn't change the fact the big noise about Quake 2 and Minecraft RT,is that it it implements RT to a much greater level than other RTX games(path tracing),and why the press is gushing over it.

The fact is both games are blocky and still look rubbish,because the art style and character models look utter crap. Quake 2 was made in the era of Pentium and K6 CPUs,and when hardware accelerated 3D was a new fangled technology,and could only push a limited number of polygons at any one time as many people still were using software rendering. It was soon superceded in every way by games such as Unreal and Unreal Tournament. Minecraft was made by one guy in Java,so had no budget for any sort of proper character models,or basically graphics,so went with basic graphics.

So no amount of polishing them is going to make me gush at those two games,irrespective of the technical aspects under them. Its like electrifying a 50 year old Mini and saying its an achievement.

3t3P · 18 Apr 2020 at 02:10

Crysis remaster YES! Where do I sign.

Grim5 · 18 Apr 2020 at 13:26

Hardware unboxed has started using DLSS 2.0 in titles that support it for hardware reviews on the basis that there is no good reason not to use DLSS 2.0 when its available. Good on them, I think they are the first mainstream reviewers to do so.

Scougar · 18 Apr 2020 at 19:01

So we are no longer comparing apples to apples..facepalm.

Also.. so.. what is it.. 4 games? Only 1 of which i will play. Wow... DLSS 2 is such a killer feature... Not. If it was game agnostic...great.

Poneros · 21 Apr 2020 at 12:14

oweneades · 21 Apr 2020 at 16:24

Scougar said:
So we are no longer comparing apples to apples..facepalm.

Also.. so.. what is it.. 4 games? Only 1 of which i will play. Wow... DLSS 2 is such a killer feature... Not. If it was game agnostic...great.

Should be noted that the HUB review (at least in the video) first showed the overall results without DLSS, and then did a section talking about DLSS before updating the graphs as shown above. From memory the overall difference went from 7 to 9% thanks to the two games improving their existing gap.

DanF · 21 Apr 2020 at 16:52

Will it be possible for AMD to offer a similar tech or implement an OS version of DLSS. It'll make ray traced games much more realistic for next gen cards.

opethdisciple · 21 Apr 2020 at 18:11

DanF said:
Will it be possible for AMD to offer a similar tech or implement an OS version of DLSS. It'll make ray traced games much more realistic for next gen cards.

Generally what Nvidia does AMD follows suit if the market and application demands are there.

However DLSS is using AI and I imagine cloud computing to do it so AMD would have to invest a lot of money to get their own version of the technology.

LoadsaMoney · 21 Apr 2020 at 19:23

We don't know if AMD will need a DLSS yet, they may be able to run DXR without a massive hit like Nvidia

BigBANGtheory · 21 Apr 2020 at 19:41

Grim5 said:
Hardware unboxed has started using DLSS 2.0 in titles that support it for hardware reviews on the basis that there is no good reason not to use DLSS 2.0 when its available. Good on them, I think they are the first mainstream reviewers to do so.

I think having a DLSS 2 test as part of the review is fair to see what a new owner might achieve BUT it also has to be spelt out in black and white that the results only apply to titles supporting the tech and not across the board. Personally I have no intention of going anywhere near Minecraft RTX but I appreciate others will therefore it should be included just give appropriate weight. If DLSS worked on all DX11+ games then that would be different but it doesn’t so context is crucial here.

Grim5 · 21 Apr 2020 at 21:22

opethdisciple said:
Generally what Nvidia does AMD follows suit if the market and application demands are there.

However DLSS is using AI and I imagine cloud computing to do it so AMD would have to invest a lot of money to get their own version of the technology.

Yeah that's right. AMD used to be in the position where they didn't mind making market leading features like back in 2009 they were the first with tesselation. But these days they don't want to invest too much unless they know for sure the demand is there - so in essence they wait for Nvidia to test the market before they jump in.

Nvidia showed that Ray Tracing is viable and now AMD is following suite.

They've showed that DLSS is game changing and I can gaurantee AMD will try to follow suit.

Nvidia also showed that mesh shading works and now AMD is following suite

Grim5 · 21 Apr 2020 at 21:25

LoadsaMoney said:
We don't know if AMD will need a DLSS yet, they may be able to run DXR without a massive hit like Nvidia

Irrelevant though, cause DLSS can be used with Ray Tracing off unless of course you also think AMD doesn't need the extra raster performance.

As for AMDs Ray Tracing performance, all we know is that for the Xbox Series X which is basically a Navi 2 6700/6700xt the performance hit is massive with what we've seen so far. So good luck with the pipe dream

Scougar · 22 Apr 2020 at 02:49

oweneades said:
Should be noted that the HUB review (at least in the video) first showed the overall results without DLSS, and then did a section talking about DLSS before updating the graphs as shown above. From memory the overall difference went from 7 to 9% thanks to the two games improving their existing gap.

Thank you for the extra info

Curlyriff · 22 Apr 2020 at 03:04

BigBANGtheory said:
I think having a DLSS 2 test as part of the review is fair to see what a new owner might achieve BUT it also has to be spelt out in black and white that the results only apply to titles supporting the tech and not across the board. Personally I have no intention of going anywhere near Minecraft RTX but I appreciate others will therefore it should be included just give appropriate weight. If DLSS worked on all DX11+ games then that would be different but it doesn’t so context is crucial here.

Lucky that's exactly what they have done then with lots of explanation and graphs and overviews in their last 3 or videos which compared the 5700xt to stuff, the DLSS 2.0 and also an update to how well the 1080ti stacks to current options.

Was good to see and really showed the numbers well at the price point options.

My view on DLSS, it will be worth it and good news longer term if AMD can support it too otherwise not too bothered. Just because I feel open source or cross brand features needs to be the way forward. Especially as this would also help consoles significantly too which means greater adoption.

It's a good system and great to see what it can do to get excellent frames. There are still some drawbacks and from what I've seen its not a 100% match for true resolution but for most games would be good compromise.

Poneros · 22 Apr 2020 at 10:24

After spending some more time with The Division 2, I'm now convinced their solution is even better than DLSS. Which means that going forward that's the sort of approach we'll see more of since it's gpu-agnostic & doesn't require vendor involvement. At least for Ubi that's for sure what we'll see, but Unreal is heavy on that as well, just not as successful yet. So I really wouldn't worry too much about DLSS, it's just gonna be another marginal & abandoned Nvidia feature like so many of their Gameworks. Still have yet to see a DLSS title which didn't already have a dozen Nvidia engineers working alongside the game devs (Amid Evil might end up being the only one).

LoadsaMoney · 22 Apr 2020 at 10:40

Grim5 said:
Irrelevant though, cause DLSS can be used with Ray Tracing off

Yes it can be, but its main purpose, is to be used with RT.