Soldato
GPUScore: Breaking Limit | GPUScore
www.gpuscore.com
-
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.
***The Official Ray Tracing Thread - Read the First Post before posting***
- Thread starter Armageus
- Start date
www.gpuscore.com
There's a new ray tracing benchmark in town and it paints an all-too-familiar picture of today's GPUs
No prizes for guessing which vendor handles ray tracing the best.
Man of Honour
Caporegime
Caporegime
PCGamer article.
The only AMD GPU other than the RX 6750XT they put for that line was the RX 7800XT. And they say that because....
RX 7800 XT: 19
RTX 4070: 22 (+15%)
eh... its like they are just printing this stuff now for clicks because people like to have their preconceptions validated, the 4070 was always a more expensive GPU, the RX 7800 XT was and is more a 4060 Ti 16GB competitor and even in RT the RX 7800 XT is generally as good if not better.
There are plenty of valid reason to be critical of AMD, just doing it because its popular to do so, especially when your own numbers don't back up your immature click farming headlines is just narcissistic.
Nvidia already have close to zero competition, if this populist crap keeps going it will be absolute zero, this lazy bad take journalism is destructive to competition, no one wins because of it, other than a handful of lazy jurnoes incapable of critical thinking.
The only AMD GPU other than the RX 6750XT they put for that line was the RX 7800XT. And they say that because....
RX 7800 XT: 19
RTX 4070: 22 (+15%)
eh... its like they are just printing this stuff now for clicks because people like to have their preconceptions validated, the 4070 was always a more expensive GPU, the RX 7800 XT was and is more a 4060 Ti 16GB competitor and even in RT the RX 7800 XT is generally as good if not better.
There are plenty of valid reason to be critical of AMD, just doing it because its popular to do so, especially when your own numbers don't back up your immature click farming headlines is just narcissistic.
Nvidia already have close to zero competition, if this populist crap keeps going it will be absolute zero, this lazy bad take journalism is destructive to competition, no one wins because of it, other than a handful of lazy jurnoes incapable of critical thinking.
Last edited:
So I've always said I don't care much for ray tracing... Then while playing DOOM Eternal I saw my reflection in a wall and had to double take because I was sure the game didn't have player reflections... Checked my settings and RT was on! Turned it off and everything was so... Bland. I think I may be converting to the pro-RT gang.
Man of Honour
DOWN
WITH
SCREENSPACE!
WITH
SCREENSPACE!
Associate
All stock, happy with that score.
4090 ~ 4K
Vulkan
Ultra
Score 5912
4090 ~ 4K
Vulkan
Ultra
Score 5912
Man of Honour
Interesting, basiclaly the same score, yet wildly different CPU/RAM specs - Just goes to show that CPU/system doesn't matter all that much when it comes to RT rendering:
System comparison:
Your score:
My score:
Associate
Especially in this bench which is a great thing as it's just a pure GPU benchmark as it doesn't seem to care much about the rest of the system.
RT looks pretty bad in this thought tbf, wasn't impressed. Happy with normal raster though, my XTX does well and with tweaks is roughly 15% faster than stock;
Surprised at nvidias raster perf too, either amd need to do more work with UE 5 or nvidia are just simply better for UE 5.
RT reminds me of dogma 2, people including myself initially thought a bit meh but when you see side by side comparisons, it immediately jumps out how much better RT is, raster looks like a typical raster game where it is a childrens pop up book with trees etc. not actually looking like part of the world and just simply stuck in the ground.
Certainly not the best, certainly not the worst but a welcome improvement none the less.
Of course, people could say that is because devs put no time/effort into raster effects but as has been stated a fair few times before, this is how things are going now, raster is becoming less of a focus for devs because as evidenced, RT effects are far quicker to implement for devs.
Reminds me of people always choosing the more contrasty visuals over the brightened ones when they had a console war.
Only now they use RT to give a more contrasty look.
I dunno, just bang up the contrast and lower the brightness, better yet do HDR on an OLED.
Only now they use RT to give a more contrasty look.
I dunno, just bang up the contrast and lower the brightness, better yet do HDR on an OLED.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,800
I def think there's more to be had from RDNA3, we've seen how impressive it can be in raster when optimised for.
This is an interesting article.
www.pcgamer.com
I was obsessed with real-time ray tracing in Cyberpunk 2077, until playing it on an older laptop delivered a sorely needed slap to the face
The allure of pretty graphics, like the dark side of the Force, can be very powerful
This is an interesting article.
I was obsessed with real-time ray tracing in Cyberpunk 2077, until playing it on an older laptop delivered a sorely needed slap to the face
The allure of pretty graphics, like the dark side of the Force, can be very powerful
And if required, we can also adapt to 30 FPS too, right?
Not sure you read it properly.And if required, we can also adapt to 30 FPS too, right?
No I read just fine thanks.
You posted an article which basically is saying the guy has gone back to no rt and been able to play just fine and enjoy the game:
That's great but it's the exact same argument that people use when justifying the console experience and lower fps. As @mrk said himself, people can enjoy both higher visuals and the gameplay, higher visuals like higher refresh rate etc. all add to the immersiveness and enjoyment of a game. I played cp 2077 first time round on my vega 56 with no rt and loved it, then got the 3080 and played with RT, loved it just the same but enjoyed it even more because of the visuals then overdrive arrived and I took out the geforce now sub for the 4080 and was blown away and still loved the gameplay.
So why can't you accept their opinion?
I could sell my 7900 XT tomorrow and easily get £600 and in one week put money down for an RTX 4080, but to me it's not worth it, the visual changes are mediocre at best.
I'm not sure what else will get through to you and MrK's heads.
It's not like I have not experienced Nvidia's suite my friend, the 3070 did a decent job of RT for what it was, it's just meh.
Last edited: