• 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

TNA said:
Now let’s see what AMD have to bring to the table.

Do you think it will be better RT performance?
Click to expand...

No. not in its overall sense it will be behind in some way shape or form (compared to nvidia's method - they have had more time to throw at it).

Wha is going for it is the method will be same as consoles, and if they can do a hybrid mix to achieve similar results, the dGPU will be able to beat it should devs do it right. So it will be able to raytrace, jury is out though.
 
Th0nt said:
No. not in its overall sense it will be behind in some way shape or form (compared to nvidia's method - they have had more time to throw at it).

Wha is going for it is the method will be same as consoles, and if they can do a hybrid mix to achieve similar results, the dGPU will be able to beat it should devs do it right. So it will be able to raytrace, jury is out though.
Click to expand...

Agreed, the console collaboration makes it much more difficult to judge where AMD are.
 
Grim5 said:
Thats overclocked high end 2080ti's on water vs probably stock (or mild oc) air cooled 3090's at this point. I'd give it a bit more time before you use the Port Royal thread because the 3090 scores will improve when people put them under water and we get high power limit cards.

edit: Yeah the top 2080ti score there is a water cooled Kingpin card and that 11k is freaking massive, thats 22% greater than my 2080ti which is overclocked and air cooled. An 11k 2080ti is not representative of the average 2080ti's owner score, its way above it.

So maybe wait until we see the score for a water cooled kingpin 3090.

As you can see in the Guru3d reviews, when the 2080ti and 3090 are both stock there is a 75% difference.

And as per my other explanation, even though the 3090 may be able to produce 4x pixels compared to Turing in a fully path traced tech demo - it will never translate like that into games because there is a lot of other things going on for the GPU to render. These differences become larger the more of the visuals are ray traced.
Click to expand...

The one thing the Ampere reviews are telling us is the cards are not great at overclocking so that 35% performance gap on Ray Tracing is not going to get much bigger.

If the difference was 75% like you keep saying the 3090 would be getting pretty close to my RTX Titan SLI score which was done on standard air cooled cards with a stock bios and zero mods.

https://www.3dmark.com/compare/pr/343506/pr/111010

It is not even close.

Ray Tracing has improved with Ampere but it is still a long way short of what is needed.
 
Kaapstad said:
Ray Tracing has improved with Ampere but it is still a long way short of what is needed.
Click to expand...

Similar to my opinion on it:
Th0nt said:
Now we have the 30 series testing done, it would appear Ampere has fallen a bit short. Like you mention it should be there next gen, just disappointing they were not honest but if Jensen didnt beguile you it would be another Turing flop (Turing - mainly overpriced, people could have stomached the RTX if prices were lower) so they need to shift the units again this gen, albeit power hungry too.
Click to expand...
 
I've just been having a play with recently updated DLSS 2 Port Royal RT test in 3DMark. The results are visually impressive. This could give the cards great longevity in non-RT titles. Nvidia better hope that RT gains wide adoption as otherwise there may be little incentive to upgrade to newer models when DLSS gan give you such a boost in traditional rasterisation.

4K Native 25.54
4K DLSS 2 Performance (1080p) 65.28
4K DLSS 2 Quality (1440p) 48.51
 
The problem I have with this vendor specific implementation is that it puts a big burden on developers. What happens when AMD come out with their own ray tracing super sampling techniques? Does that mean developers have to support two new technologies just so gamers on all types of hardware can play?

DLSS 2.0 is amazing true enough but I can't help but feeling all this vendor specific stuff is bad for end users in the end. Same sort of thing with GSYNC.... People with GSYNC monitors for example are basically stuck with NVidia cards. Again I admit GSYNC is very good but.... it's still a compromise on choice.
 
Precisely that. Its not good for anyone particularly consumers. So what can happen now is if AMD/Intel use a method that doesnt require much work from devs and is on every game, it will just turn DLSS into the next physx overnight.
 
Lithium said:
The problem I have with this vendor specific implementation is that it puts a big burden on developers. What happens when AMD come out with their own ray tracing super sampling techniques? Does that mean developers have to support two new technologies just so gamers on all types of hardware can play?

DLSS 2.0 is amazing true enough but I can't help but feeling all this vendor specific stuff is bad for end users in the end. Same sort of thing with GSYNC.... People with GSYNC monitors for example are basically stuck with NVidia cards. Again I admit GSYNC is very good but.... it's still a compromise on choice.
Click to expand...
Hopefully, like GSYNC, we'll end up with a vendor agnostic solution that works well enough. In the meantime I'm glad Nvidia is pushing the industry forwards.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom