The RT Related Games, Benchmarks, Software, Etc Thread.

[Bill Turnip]

(until time of selling and as shown with previous halo flagships, you lose far more money come next gen mid/high end release e.g. 3090 for what £500-600 now? lol......)

Im not questioning your decision, I don't actually dislike it, but you are still compromising with 4080 performance as opposed to 4090. I'm just trying to flesh out the value argument. So going from 1399 to 600 is a loss of around 800, whereas a 3 year rental is about 900, leaving 100 for electric. It's pretty similar value wise, except you own hardware at the en and not reliant on a third party.

so I don't consider this being a cost on top of geforce now.

It is an additional cost though. As you said, it's not worth it without quality Internet, so you have to include the associated cost. It's the difference between geforce ultimate costing 18 pounds per month and 18 pounds more per month.

As you also point out, you are limited by the games available, but that situation is improving... That sounds a bit like the fine wine argument you keep mocking

There's definitely pros and cons, and again if the renting works then fantastic, but I'm not seeing it as the most wonderful thing in the world. And shelling out a load of money to play a game with an RT effect which I could just as easily play without? I find it easier to make the argument that the cost of entry for RT is just too high at the moment. I said a couple of years ago it isn't ready for mainstream, and I still don't think we're there yet. Closer absolutely, and there is a future for it but it needs widespread adoption with more affordable gpus, not specialist rental options to switch on an effect.

 

[TNA]

It depends entirely on the game scene for pc, if games continue to release in the utter **** state they are (regardless of RT, look at cities skylines lmao) then I just don't see the point investing £££/££££ if those gpus are going to be ******** the bed as I simply would refuse to play games released in such a poor state thus not get any enjoyment from said hardware nor return for my money (until time of selling and as shown with previous halo flagships, you lose far more money come next gen mid/high end release e.g. 3090 for what £500-600 now? lol......). I honestly wouldn't be buying any current gen gpu with the way things are right now, this is where geforce now ultimate is nice, I'm not having to invest any serious money in to it and I will always have 1GB fibre internet regardless (it's used for far more than just streaming gaming, besides, I have seen people reporting ultimate runs great for them on lesser connections too so 1GB fibre isn't exactly required) so I don't consider this being a cost on top of geforce now.

Don't forget, I won't be paying every month, only time I'll take out a month or 2 is when there are games to play which wouldn't run as well on the 3080 i.e. path tracing only titles for the moment of which there are only 2 upcoming ones I'm interested in and that's AW 2 and HL 2 remix (which is still a long way of).

Basically, much like turing with the **** selection of RT games and dlss 1, I don't consider current gen GPUs costing £££/££££ to be worthy of purchasing unless things change for the better as happened with ampere and the improved RT games selection (as well as the RT effects) and dlss 2. Frame gen is a great tech. but as evidenced, you need a good base fps of 60 to experience the best from it, this is where I'm hoping 50xx will take a huge leap.

I think most people's worry is if things start to head in this direction, hence the pushback now.

I agree that it is a tool to use right now for the odd game our current GPU's can't handle while waiting for the 5000 series. But would not go any further than that myself.

As much as I understand and even agree with what you are saying. There still is something about having ones own hardware. I get a lot of fun from buying new hardware, installing it, running some benchmarks etc.

What's that saying? Real men have fabs?

Well in this case I say real men pack hardware!

 

[Nexus18]

Im not questioning your decision, I don't actually dislike it, but you are still compromising with 4080 performance as opposed to 4090. I'm just trying to flesh out the value argument. So going from 1399 to 600 is a loss of around 800, whereas a 3 year rental is about 900, leaving 100 for electric. It's pretty similar value wise, except you own hardware at the en and not reliant on a third party.

It is an additional cost though. As you said, it's not worth it without quality Internet, so you have to include the associated cost. It's the difference between geforce ultimate costing 18 pounds per month and 18 pounds more per month.

As you also point out, you are limited by the games available, but that situation is improving... That sounds a bit like the fine wine argument you keep mocking

There's definitely pros and cons, and again if the renting works then fantastic, but I'm not seeing it as the most wonderful thing in the world. And shelling out a load of money to play a game with an RT effect which I could just as easily play without? I find it easier to make the argument that the cost of entry for RT is just too high at the moment. I said a couple of years ago it isn't ready for mainstream, and I still don't think we're there yet. Closer absolutely, and there is a future for it but it needs widespread adoption with more affordable gpus, not specialist rental options to switch on an effect.

Who said I would be renting it for 3 years though? It will only be used for those extreme demanding games (and even the ones like cities, I wouldn't bother with even if I had access to geforce now thus I wouldn't be paying for the ultimate tier to play such poorly optimised titles)

If there were say 15+ games which ran how they should for stunning visuals i.e. 15 games like cp 2077 path tracing, I would then invest in a 4080/4090 but as per my turing comparison, we aren't at that stage to justify the ££££ outlay. If people enjoy spending ££££ to get 10 fps at 4k in a raster game (with upscaling), more power to them (quite literally they need more power)

I have already been paying for 1GB fibre for the past couple of years regardless of geforce now so for me it is not an additional cost in anyway at all, if I upgraded my internet to accommodate geforce now then yes it would be an extra cost but it's not and as I said, there are people with much lesser connections than mine reporting a good experience so this isn't necessarily an accurate statement on your end but I can't comment on that experience as I don't have a lesser internet, however, with wireless on my smartphone, the experience seemed pretty good to me (you can adjust settings to suit your connection too where as I have it whacked to max)

Not really fine wine is it if nvidia have to deal with contracts etc. to get games added though is it? As in, it's not the tech holding back this. Again, it's an area that needs improved (have I ever stated the game library was perfect or not an issue?) but again, I only need geforce now for the extreme demanding titles i.e. path tracing which again, as of right now is only 1 game and future consists of 2 games (1 of which is a long way of) thus it's not a con for me at this moment.

It seems you have skimmed posts too as I haven't state any differently here:

Why wouldn't you buy a game because it has RT?

I can't remember the last game I played which didn't have RT in it now tbh (only thing would be old games from years ago)

I get the argument about it being only for the folks with good hardware (although, that's more down to downright **** optimisation by the devs more often than not as proven by 4as enhanced metro and the fact that even games without any RT these days are running just as bad, if not worse than games with RT......) but what I find downright bizarre is how people seem to be against progression in visuals, is it just because nvidia are leading here? Or/and that nvidia have done a good job with their marketing to make people think that RT is a nvidia only thing really?

Yes both nvidia and amd need to be providing better RT performance at the lower to med end but devs also need to be doing a better job of implementing it and a large part of this is that devs need to change up their workflows to focus more on RT from the start rather than nailing it on at the end on top of raster otherwise results will never be as good as what 4a enhanced achieved with metro ee. CDPR have done an incredible job with path tracing in cp 2077 given the scale of the game compared to things like portal rtx and so on.

So far I'm still waiting on where it makes financial sense to spend £££/££££ to experience the one game I wanted to play "maxed out @ 90+ fps"...... Sure I could just reduce settings and play cp 2077 with normal ray tracing at a good fps but it isn't path tracing and nowhere near as good visually.

I think most people's worry is if things start to head in this direction, hence the pushback now.

I agree that it is a tool to use right now for the odd game our current GPU's can't handle while waiting for the 5000 series. But would not go any further than that myself.

As much as I understand and even agree with what you are saying. There still is something about having ones own hardware. I get a lot of fun from buying new hardware, installing it, running some benchmarks etc.

What's that saying? Real men have fabs?

Well in this case I say real men pack hardware!

Well you know my stance, go whinge to amd to start competing

I'll happily save myself the ££££ now to put towards the real upgrade

 

[TNA]

Well you know my stance,

go whinge to amd to start competing

Falls on death ears unfortunately. I gave up.

I'll happily save myself the ££££ now to put towards the real upgrade

Agreed.

Unless you are referring to a new GeForce Now package that has a 4090 Ti or something?

 

[Bill Turnip]

So far I'm still waiting on where it makes financial sense to spend £££/££££ to experience the one game I wanted to play "maxed out @ 90+ fps"...... Sure I could just reduce settings and play cp 2077 with normal ray tracing at a good fps but it isn't path tracing and nowhere near as good visually.

It doesn't. I completely agree with you. But for me, it doesn't make sense when I have hardware that runs a game without RT to pay for switching on an effect. To each their own, again I'm not questioning the decision you made for the reason you made it. A one off treat to play a game at high level? Fine, I'm on board.

Internet costs are still a thing. If you are able to discount the saving in electricity, but not include Internet cost (on which the service is dependent) when comparing values, that's man maths. A PC still requires electricity to be on, just reduced.

But having to pay for a service to get a top level experience (RT, frame gen) I'm questioning the value decision OVERALL. Paying for hardware for most games, then paying more to play at a high level? It just shows how mainstream hardware is not ready for RT. Save the money by not paying the rental at all, put it towards the hardware further down the line.

People can spend their money how they want, but having nothing to show for it at the end isn't usually a great way forward.

 

[Nexus18]

Falls on death ears unfortunately. I gave up.



Agreed.

Unless you are referring to a new GeForce Now package that has a 4090 Ti or something?

Tbh I would happily pay £25 for a 4090 package, I can hear the outcry already

Wouldn't be surprised though come 50xx release, ultimate tier gets this gpu too along with an increase in price.

It doesn't. I completely agree with you. But for me, it doesn't make sense when I have hardware that runs a game without RT to pay for switching on an effect. To each their own, again I'm not questioning the decision you made for the reason you made it. A one off treat to play a game at high level? Fine, I'm on board.

Internet costs are still a thing. If you are able to discount the saving in electricity, but not include Internet cost (on which the service is dependent) when comparing values, that's man maths. A PC still requires electricity to be on, just reduced.

But having to pay for a service to get a top level experience (RT, frame gen) I'm questioning the value decision OVERALL. Paying for hardware for most games, then paying more to play at a high level? It just shows how mainstream hardware is not ready for RT. Save the money by not paying the rental at all, put it towards the hardware further down the line.

People can spend their money how they want, but having nothing to show for it at the end isn't usually a great way forward.

Well yeah obviously if you don't care for path tracing then it makes no sense but if you do care for this then what's the alternative? Pay ££££, which as covered and agreed upon, no thanks.

How are internet costs a thing if you'll be paying for internet regardless of using geforce now though?

And it could be argued, hardware is ready for mainstream RT as proven by likes of metro ee and now Spiderman 2 on the ps 5 (no option to disable RT) but Devs aren't willing to do the full switch over yet.

I generally agree with that last statement but there is also making poor investment choices and just like Turing, based on the current situation, paying ££££ is a poor investment imo. Again, if I were going to be paying 3 years worth of geforce now, you would have a point as that is a significant amount but I'm not nor do I intend to be paying for 3 years worth of geforce now.

 

[Bill Turnip]

How are internet costs a thing if you'll be paying for internet regardless of using geforce now though?

And it could be argued, hardware is ready for mainstream RT as proven by likes of metro ee and now Spiderman 2 on the ps 5 (no option to disable RT) but Devs aren't willing to do the full switch over yet.

Internet costs are thing when considering the rental/hardware argument, as it is a requirement of geforce now. It's entirely possible to use hardware gpu without the internet, and certainly a much lower speed is actually required. If you're already paying for it I get it, just an additional rental to pay, but I always fear the "Just an additional..." though.

Mainstream RT isn't there until it's operating well on mainstream GPUs, and if it takes a 4080 to give a good experience, that's around £1k and not mainstream.

If mainstream RT is ready, then surely the argument is get a PS5?

 

[Nexus18]

Internet costs are thing when considering the rental/hardware argument, as it is a requirement of geforce now. It's entirely possible to use hardware gpu without the internet, and certainly a much lower speed is actually required. If you're already paying for it I get it, just an additional rental to pay, but I always fear the "Just an additional..." though.

Mainstream RT isn't there until it's operating well on mainstream GPUs, and if it takes a 4080 to give a good experience, that's around £1k and not mainstream.

If mainstream RT is ready, then surely the argument is get a PS5?

I would say having decent internet is a basic living requirement nowadays.

And what about the majority of games that require an internet connection to play now? Not to mention games which are online?

We have proof that RT only is operating well on consoles and lower end pc GPUs though through the showcase of metro ee and now Spiderman 2 (console only ATM), just because Devs are doing a **** job does not mean that's the fault of said hardware, we have seen what hardware is capable of when RT is done right so there's no excuses here for Devs doing a **** poor job. Given recent games like starfield, cities etc. which are running even worse than games with RT, what's the excuse here for those titles? Maybe using the same logic, we can then say that GPU hardware isn't enough for plain old raster either?

 

[Bill Turnip]

I would say having decent internet is a basic living requirement nowadays.

And what about the majority of games that require an internet connection to play now? Not to mention games which are online?

Internet? I'd probably agree. Decent? Totally subjective, people will have different levels of internet, and it's likely that most people here will have higher levels than the wider population.

Again with games needing an internet connection, they do not require a high speed of internet, just a base level of connection. Steam has an offline mode, the vast majority of games will operate in this. Online games are a different matter which I'd agree with though.

Maybe using the same logic, we can then say that GPU hardware isn't enough for plain old raster either?

But it is mainstream. And raster levels are much more granular, even the lowest level of RT can have a real impact on GPUS, and this lowest level is often not really worth bothering with. You're right, it will take a developer to build RT from the ground up which isn't happening bar a few edge cases. Again, not mainstream.

 

[Nexus18]

Internet? I'd probably agree. Decent? Totally subjective, people will have different levels of internet, and it's likely that most people here will have higher levels than the wider population.

Again with games needing an internet connection, they do not require a high speed of internet, just a base level of connection. Steam has an offline mode, the vast majority of games will operate in this. Online games are a different matter which I'd agree with though.

But it is mainstream. And raster levels are much more granular, even the lowest level of RT can have a real impact on GPUS, and this lowest level is often not really worth bothering with. You're right, it will take a developer to build RT from the ground up which isn't happening bar a few edge cases. Again, not mainstream.

Well as stated some games nowadays require an always on connection so if your internet goes here, well there goes your game too. Of course no one wants to have this method of dependency on internet but it's not like the internet is some new thing that a niche select of people have access to, most services I use are reliant on having decent internet.

That didn't really answer the question, the answer is the Devs are the problem and are what is holding back good performance and not just when it comes to ray tracing but as evidenced now also games without ray tracing, I personally find it laughable that games without ray tracing are running worse than games with ray and even path tracing, there's just no excuses here to have the best hardware ******** the bed as shown.

 

[Bill Turnip]

That didn't really answer the question, the answer is the Devs are the problem and are what is holding back good performance and not just when it comes to ray tracing but as evidenced now also games without ray tracing, I personally find it laughable that games without ray tracing are running worse than games with ray and even path tracing, there's just no excuses here to have the best hardware ******** the bed as shown.

The excuse for those titles is that RT is not mainstream, which is why devs aren't catering for it properly yet. Why would they? Sure if there is a workflow advantage (not disputing it, don't know enough about it) then great, but to what end? Putting out a product which won't work well on the majority of gpus?

It's a balance between pushing technology and making money at the end of the day. The technology has to be there to make it profitable, and for the purposes of this point, let's say this gen is. The schedules for games based on RT will have a hefty lead time as people learn to use it properly - I expect this to change moving forwards, and it's being trickled in, but it's not a complete sea change yet, so not mainstream.

If it was better for devs and game companies, why do they not do it?

 

[K1LaW8tt5]

Spoiler

ah Bill don't mention the workflow advantages, prepare for metro ee slides

 

[Nexus18]

The excuse for those titles is that RT is not mainstream, which is why devs aren't catering for it properly yet. Why would they? Sure if there is a workflow advantage (not disputing it, don't know enough about it) then great, but to what end? Putting out a product which won't work well on the majority of gpus?

It's a balance between pushing technology and making money at the end of the day. The technology has to be there to make it profitable, and for the purposes of this point, let's say this gen is. The schedules for games based on RT will have a hefty lead time as people learn to use it properly - I expect this to change moving forwards, and it's being trickled in, but it's not a complete sea change yet, so not mainstream.

If it was better for devs and game companies, why do they not do it?

I haven't said it is mainstream right now? I have said that the hardware we have and with the right implementation, it 100% could be mainstream across the board as proven.

Well based on my experience working in the development industry, the first and primary reason why devs and publishers don't want to fully switch over is because it requires them changing their workflow and becoming accustomed to new methods/tools (which is a big task in itself thus means more time and more money and would be basically a no go this if you are already half way through the projects road map) and more than likely nothing to actually do with the hardware as we have seen it is 100% possible to get ray tracing only to work at acceptable fps and settings, that and devs need to drop legacy hardware which has no RT support i.e. old gen consoles (which is gradually happening anyway). As 4a enhanced stated, you don't realise the true benefits until you fully embrace ray tracing tools and only then do you really reap the rewards of time saved thus money saved as well as simplifying the whole process of developing a game. The initial leap to new tech is always the biggest hurdle.

This is exactly what I predicted all the way back with the evolution of ray tracing, it would be gradual on the top implementation to having the raster effects getting less attention and starting to look significantly worse (look at games like darktide and ratchet and clank where in some spots, SSR are basically missing) to the end game of where RT will no longer be able to be disabled to the point it won't even be listed as "ray tracing" in game options anymore and will simply consume the existing graphical options selection, much like what has happened with other graphical effects in the past. I imagine we'll start to see more titles having RT only but the real catalyst will be with the next gen consoles (which is what I have said all along)

ah Bill don't mention the workflow advantages, prepare for metro ee slides

Well it's factual evidence and not just by 4a enhanced but everywhere ray tracing is used and not just the gaming industry but the film industry too.

It's just a natural evolution in next gen visuals that will benefit everyone.

 

[Bill Turnip]

I haven't said it is mainstream right now? I have said that the hardware we have and with the right implementation, it 100% could be mainstream across the board as proven.

You may have done, but I'm not claiming you did, it's me that said it's not mainstream.

With current hardware etcetera, it could be mainstream? No idea, I just know it isn't. Developers need to see the benefit, and the current lack of totally RT games (such as Metro enhanced) is actually a bit surprising given the potential benefits. It's been a few years now.

 

[TheRealDeal]

Was just having a wee thought to myself. This is the gpu forum, i think we now need "The jimmies ruffled downloadable gpu forum".

 

[gpuerrilla]

It is an additional cost though. As you said, it's not worth it without quality Internet, so you have to include the associated cost. It's the difference between geforce ultimate costing 18 pounds per month and 18 pounds more per month.

Think its £20 a month now Bill. Upping from 1st Nov.

 

[Nexus18]

You may have done, but I'm not claiming you did, it's me that said it's not mainstream.

With current hardware etcetera, it could be mainstream? No idea, I just know it isn't. Developers need to see the benefit, and the current lack of totally RT games (such as Metro enhanced) is actually a bit surprising given the potential benefits. It's been a few years now.

No idea? Does metro ee and spiderman 2 not prove it can be done from a hardware pov? These prove it can be done.

Developers know the benefits as has been outlined but it's simply not realistic to expect developers half way through the road map to start from scratch and do a proper implementation.

Games development can take years, as in up to 7 years.

 

[Bill Turnip]

Does metro ee and spiderman 2 not prove it can be done from a hardware pov? These prove it can be done.

I wanted to answer that question

 

[TheRealDeal]

No idea? Does metro ee and spiderman 2 not prove it can be done from a hardware pov? These prove it can be done.

Developers know the benefits as has been outlined but it's simply not realistic to expect developers half way through the road map to start from scratch and do a proper implementation.

Games development can take years, as in up to 7 years.

It does indeed so developers need to use the power on hand but most are to lazy. PC has plenty of horsepower but brute force is the PC way.

 

[tommybhoy]

RT'ing has just hit Console mainstream, but that was Sony funded and coded by Insomniac for Sony's AMD apu powered PS5.

Doubt SP2 intro level would run on my old 3070@1440p, 4K not a chance, because PC is no where near PS5 for memory management.

I don't know how industry works with sharing coding between devs, but on lesser budgets alone maybe it'll take other devs longer to produce console Rt'ing, it's maybe cheaper to stick to what you know/budget etc but hopefully RT'ing done right is integrated quickly.

PC is years behind console for Rt'ing, entry to market alone PS5+ SM £569, open the box, connect it to TV with provide HDMI and that's it, console, controller, game, done.

Before I get but get second hand, games cheaper, PS+ etc etc, it's cheaper to entry/

PC RT'ing becomes mainstream when future versions of 7600/4060 type gpus running 5600X 3800X(don't know intel equivalents)type cpus can run balanced but good RT'ing @4K.

But doubt we'll get that as Nv's next round of gpus will have more demanding RT/PT'ing, the faster the gpu, RT/PT effects will scale up to fit, which is the way it's always been with tech advances with AMD/Nv.