Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 30,899
Double the pleasure double the price!!!
-
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 RT Related Games, Benchmarks, Software, Etc Thread.
- Thread starter Kaapstad
- Start date
- Status
Won't be a problem for you. All you have to do is take a break from your annual ayahuasca retreat to Peru
Caporegime
Won't be a problem for you. All you have to do is take a break from your annual ayahuasca retreat to Peru
Me and Jensen have met in the 6th dimension, he told me it's all going to be okay.
Must admit, it is a lot more playable than I was expecting tbh, gsync + qd-oled and reflex makes it feel smooth/responsive
Also just to confirm that path tracing is indeed working outside of photo mode on a 3080 @Calin Banc
Below screenshot is with just ray tracing
Last edited:
But HU (and not only) definitely do point issues with DLSS, as per their very recent video comparing DLSS and FSR2. Tim did very good job pointing out lots of issues with DLSS (and many more with FSR). He pretty much says 4k Quality is good enough (but not perfect), however anything below that is just not good, too many compromises. And both upscaling methods do introduce temporal instability and artefacts. Even DLSS 3 still has horrible ghosting in some games (like the new dead space). It's improving over time but it's far from perfect.See I'm very picky when it comes to temporal stability and ghosting and I just don't see any new severe game breaking issues that aren't already there or usually worse in a native representation especially if using TAA and a poor TAA implementation at that.... Heck I was the only one to point out the severe ghosting/trailing in days gone native+TAA, which was actually pretty damn awful and worse than any dlss ghosting in the past but narrative and all that
What I do notice though is that say for example a game running natively at 30/40 fps but when using dlss performance to bring me to 90/100+ fps, guess which one is far more enjoyable experience? Sure I could lower settings across the board and run native but then I am going to notice the loss in overall graphical fidelity..... The biggest problem is if DLSS was so bad, why aren't the reviewers like HUB, oc3d, computerbase, pcgamershardware, TPU, DF, gamernexus etc. pointing out all the issues? Why do they often also state "better than native"..... I would classify them as being "trained nerds" given they slow footage down, zoom in 400x to show differences.
I have a 4k 55 where I sit 6/7 feet back from hence why performance mode looks fantastic but even when about 4 feet from it, it still looks very good, with my 3440x1440 monitor, I'm about 2 feet from it and dlss quality often looks better "overall" than native as there is less shimmering, less aliasing/jaggies and so on, the simple matter is that dlss is just a far better AA than any other AA method hence why if often looks better than native "overall", I have done videos comparing this before as people say "oh, it's just a poor implementation of TAA, we need MSAA, SMAA etc.", well low and behold, they look even worse and are immersion breaking:
FG, all I have seen are good reports from "gamers" (once the severe latency issues revolving around vsync, fps caps was fixed), main point with FG which everyone agrees on is that you need at least 50-60 fps as your baseline to get a good experience, sure you will be adding latency but you will be gaining more fluid motion and increased motion clarity, pick your poison.
Raster vs path/ray tracing is pretty subjective, some prefer raster, which is ok but at the end of day, raster is dated/old, it's on its way out whether people like it or not. There is a misconception with raster being better suited to light artists etc. too iirc something around making it easier for them to create environments, this has been debunked many times by people who work in the industry, ray tracing methods provide a whole new world and offer more control for them to tune a game world to their vision. The problem is developers who shoehorn in RT on top of raster, the best example of lighting is still metro EE, portal RTX and maybe now CP 2077 when path tracing arrives but I'll check that out for myself to see what is what.
If you want good AA go for dlaa when available - that's the proper way of doing it, not dlss. Of course, it's not available everywhere yet.
Still, facing low FPS or DLSS there's no choice really - FPS wins. It doesn't mean there's no quality loss - that's where FPS increase is coming from.
Agreed regarding bolting on top PT/RT - it just doesn't look right and often cause issues. I'm sure if game was made from ground up with PT in mind it would look right. But as it's evident even from your own experience - it has issues. I suspect if Nvidia didn't pay for this thing, Devs wouldn't even bother adding it, especially that this is the last time they use this engine in their games. Lumen etc. in the future ones.
Last edited:
Of course there are issues with upscaling tech. but the pros outweigh the cons as they have all pointed out.
Problem again with using anything but DLSS now is DLAA doesn't provide the performance boost thus settings have to be reduced further which in return results in a worse image "overall". I have tried every AA method in a variety of games and they all have considerably worse IQ "overall" such as shown in the videos above i.e. SMAA and MSAA being regarded as the best but some prefer a sharp image over a slightly soft one, personally not for me as any kind of sharpening is nasty in motion especially when there are temporal stability issues, it's why I don't use FSR even when dlss isn't present.
Also, Tim didn't update the games to use the latest dlss versions or rather 2.5.1 and above which is where huge IQ advancements especially for presets lower than quality came in and often, the latest version isn't always the best i.e. as above with cp, 2.5.1 provides less ghosting/issues than 3.1.1
Last edited:
More doesn't always mean better and they are almost never short of headcount as is. They will simply fire extra artists and cash the difference. You won't see any difference in development, this is totally irrelevant for consumers.
Most users will never ever update dlss libraries. For as long as it's not official way, it's pretty much very niche, which is why they did it - as that's how most players will experience it. I always update libraries, but I've noticed some games detect that and replace with original one on start (e.g. CoD but not only). It's not without risks.
Last edited:
It's literally 1 file to copy and paste, anyone on the likes of these forums or in the know will do it or better yet use dlss swapper for an easier/less faff way.
Of course for MP games, you wouldn't want to do it due to potential bans.
Soldato
20 fps at best on a 4090 @ 4k without dlss performance mode. Then its playable (1080p upscaled). Thats from GN.
Soldato
Digitial Shilleries doing what they do best - slating AMD and saying NVidia are the best thing ever, with the new fake frames tech.
Caporegime
I tried the update on my lowly RTX3060TI. Ran it at 1080p with pathtracing on using DLSS Ultra preset. I got a sub cinematic 20~30FPS. Switched off the pathtracing,RT lighting and just kept the RT shadows and RT reflections on,and got around 40FPS at 1440p. The pathtracing did look a bit better,but it's not really worth the performance hit IMHO. Also,the RT shadows and reflections seemed the most noticeable effects compared to fully rasterised settings. This is why I remember I just switched on RT reflections and switched all the other RT effects off.
Also VRAM was really on the edge too when pathtracing was on! The RTX4060TI 8GB is going to be great!
Also VRAM was really on the edge too when pathtracing was on! The RTX4060TI 8GB is going to be great!
Last edited:
I tried the update on my lowly RTX3060TI. Ran it at 1080p with pathtracing on using DLSS Ultra preset. I got a sub cinematic 20~30FPS. Switched off the pathtracing,RT lighting and just kept the RT shadows and RT reflections on,and got around 40FPS at 1440p. The pathtracing did look a bit better,but it's not really worth the performance hit IMHO. Also,the RT shadows and reflections seemed the most noticeable effects compared to fully rasterised settings.
Also VRAM was really on the edge too!
Upgrade to a RX 6800 and try again. With all that extra vram you may get more fps
Caporegime
When I was running the built-in benchmark it went past 8GB VRAM in areas,and the FPS also hit a lovely 20FPS!Upgrade to a RX 6800 and try again. With all that extra vram you may get more fps
I ran it just with the RT reflections on and I get 50~60FPS,so I think as that is the most noticeable effect in the game I will stick with it for the DLC. Trying to use DLSS at lower resolutions makes the image noticeably softer. I already notice it slightly at qHD compared to native,but it's tolerable.
But it makes me think the RTX4060TI will all that extra RT grunt will clutch defeat from the jaws of victory with only 8GB.
Last edited:
Caporegime
Did a few more "tests". I tried the scene DF likes to use(it really is taxing) and a place where I do notice RT lighting when its on. VRAM usage did seem better in the areas I did my quick test,unlike the benchmark but I would need to go to different areas to check. At qHD with full pathtracing,I get a super sub cinematic 14FPS.
With RT Pyscho.34FPS and 1.2GB less VRAM usage.
Reflections and Shadows(max). 44FPS and similar VRAM usage to the Psycho setting.
With Reflections only. 50FPS but VRAM usage went up 600MB.
imgur.com
The pathtracing image does look a bit lighter overall compared to RT psycho but not sure it is worth the huge performance hit. It's far more of a performance hit than going from RT reflections to RT psycho with an RTX3060TI. But whatever said and done it is still a very pretty game even without much RT - it simply adds icing to the cake.
With RT Pyscho.34FPS and 1.2GB less VRAM usage.
Reflections and Shadows(max). 44FPS and similar VRAM usage to the Psycho setting.
With Reflections only. 50FPS but VRAM usage went up 600MB.
imgur.com
Discover the magic of the internet at Imgur, a community powered entertainment destination. Lift your spirits with funny jokes, trending memes, entertaining gifs, inspiring stories, viral videos, and so much more from users.
imgur.com
The pathtracing image does look a bit lighter overall compared to RT psycho but not sure it is worth the huge performance hit. It's far more of a performance hit than going from RT reflections to RT psycho with an RTX3060TI. But whatever said and done it is still a very pretty game even without much RT - it simply adds icing to the cake.
Last edited:
- Status