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

Bill Turnip · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:23

From DSO gaming - "On the other hand, the RTX3080 can offer a smooth gaming experience at Native 1080p/Max Settings/No Ray Tracing, provided you have a G-Sync monitor. With DLSS 3.5 Quality, you can also get a smooth experience at 1440p/Max Settings/No Ray Tracing. With Ray Tracing or Path Tracing, you won’t be able to come close to 60fps, even with DLSS 3.5 Quality at 1080p."

So as long as you turn it all down, with a G-sync monitor, at 1080p, it's pretty good. One bit I misunderstood was DLSS 3.5, I thought that was only available on 4xxx cards?

I'd be interested to know what numbers they would get on a 3090.

Grim5 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:28

Remedy oversold their system requirements being demanding

The game runs a bit better than indicated by Remedy and yes you can even play it on a gtx1000 even though it supposedly shouldn't work but does

Nexus18 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:30

Bill Turnip said:
From DSO gaming - "On the other hand, the RTX3080 can offer a smooth gaming experience at Native 1080p/Max Settings/No Ray Tracing, provided you have a G-Sync monitor. With DLSS 3.5 Quality, you can also get a smooth experience at 1440p/Max Settings/No Ray Tracing. With Ray Tracing or Path Tracing, you won’t be able to come close to 60fps, even with DLSS 3.5 Quality at 1080p."

So as long as you turn it all down, with a G-sync monitor, at 1080p, it's pretty good. One bit I misunderstood was DLSS 3.5, I thought that was only available on 4xxx cards?

I'd be interested to know what numbers they would get on a 3090.

I would like to think a gpu costing an extra £750 would run at least twice as good and whilst it probably will due to having more vram, I imagine it will barely be pushing above 30 FPS.

My target would be at least 50 FPS for this game.

Grim5 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:32

The most hilarious thing from the benchmarks is that to play the game at 4k you need 16gb vram, none of those allocated but not needed crap this game actually needs it and it's worth it the visuals are actually next gen

Bill Turnip · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:33

Nexus18 said:
My target would be at least 50 FPS for this game

This is a depressing target!

Grim5 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:35

4k with dlss quality maxed settings and path tracing on (frame generationn OFF), the 4090 runs this like smooth butter the frame rate in some areas will even go over 100fps

Nexus18 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:38

Grim5 said:
The most hilarious thing from the benchmarks is that to play the game at 4k you need 16gb vram, none of those allocated but not needed crap this game actually needs it and it's worth it the visuals are actually next gen

Yup it's great to see hardware actually being pushed and for a worthy visual experience.

Bill Turnip said:
This is a depressing target!

Sadly the way with pretty much all games released this year

It's not a fast paced shooter/action game though so 50 FPS be bearable with gsync

Grim5 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:44

As sad as some may be for their performance on PC just be happy it's better than the PS5. The console has two options, 1200p 30fps or 870p 50fps, it does not run on max graphics and it does not have ray tracing or path tracing available

It looks like the ps5 is using about High possibly medium settings but not Ultra, digital foundry willl need to confirm

Alan Wake 2 PS5 Console Port Offers Solid Visuals, but Native Res is Low and RT is Missed

Alan Wake 2 will give even the highest-end PCs a workout, so how's it measure up on current-gen consoles? Get the PS5 rundown.

wccftech.com

Dicehunter · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:44

Grim5 said:
4k with dlss quality maxed settings and path tracing on (frame generationn OFF), the 4090 runs this like smooth butter the frame rate in some areas will even go over 100fps

In the review above did they just choose the most demanding area to get their 30FPS ?

RavenXXX2 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:51

Grim5 said:
The most hilarious thing from the benchmarks is that to play the game at 4k you need 16gb vram, none of those allocated but not needed crap this game actually needs it and it's worth it the visuals are actually next gen

If you don't use DLSS the yes it uses more vram but then a 4090 is sub 30 FPS so non one is doing that. With DLSS quality it's around 12GB.

Grim5 said:
4k with dlss quality maxed settings and path tracing on (frame generationn OFF), the 4090 runs this like smooth butter the frame rate in some areas will even go over 100fps

And in some areas it's well under 60 FPS.

Nexus18 · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:52

Roll on 50xx :cry:

gpuerrilla · 26 Oct 2023 at 20:59

Purgatory said:
31fps is over 3x 9fps... name a generation that has lost as much performance overnight and their lower range cards beat their so called top gaming card at the time. See the problem now ? Remember these words Planned Obsolescence... Even the 2080ti with 1GB extra is now over 50% faster than the 3080 10GB.

Not a problem mate, solution is to rent. Not getting your money this way.. oh wait

Bill Turnip said:
Actually, it is pretty shocking for GPUs that are 3 years old....

stooeh · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:13

RavenXXX2 said:
If you don't use DLSS the yes it uses more vram but then a 4090 is sub 30 FPS so non one is doing that. With DLSS quality it's around 12GB.

And in some areas it's well under 60 FPS.

Oof, sub 60 FPS with DLSS performance at 2160p on 4090

BRB chucking 4080 in the bin...

mrk · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:33

Bill Turnip said:
Actually, it is pretty shocking for GPUs that are 3 years old....

Path tracing was a thing of dreams 3 years ago. The pacing at which the 40 series has come out and demolished path tracing with frame gen, ray reconstruction and the iterative DLSS improvements is quite remarkable really.

If you told anyone 3 years ago that today you'd be playing path traced games at over 100fps they'd spit their VRAM in your face

Again, I repeat the comment from the other day, who actually cares if upscaling/fake frames are used? Legitimately the technology has moved massively, if frame gen was force enabled by default with no setting to see it's actually on, then nobody would know the difference, Cyberpunk is the exception due to the tech preview nature of version 1 of path tracing/ray reconstruction, AW2 has v2 of the tech as evidenced by the fact that you can RR with normal RT now in it whereas you cannot in Cyberpunk.

If it looks good and runs good, that is all that matters at the end of it all.

Bill Turnip · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:40

mrk said:
Again, I repeat the comment from the other day, who actually cares if upscaling/fake frames are used?

Not me. Quite happy for frame generating tech to be used, provided that latency is not an issue in play. Only way to know is experiencing and I haven't, but if the base framerate is high, then go for it.

tommybhoy · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:44

Purgatory said:
Imagine having a 3080 10GB and seeing a 12GB 3060 and 5 year old gpu the 2080ti 11GB beating it massively...and an AMD 6700XT.. @1440P...

OOF

mrk · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:50

That oof is not far off from Cyberpunk anyway, and TPU don't enable FG for their oof graph. It's over double the fps with FG enabled :cool:

RavenXXX2 · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:51

It's not double FPS, how many more times.

mrk · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:52

It is double the fps^

Nexus18 · 26 Oct 2023 at 21:52

mrk said:
That oof is not far off from Cyberpunk anyway, and TPU don't enable FG for their oof graph. It's over double the fps with FG enabled

TPU will be the only valid source to go by now

AW 2 looks genuinely stunning though :cool:

Going to be so hard to benchmark and do comparisons now since amd don't have anything to compete with ray reconstruction that adds considerably better iq and slightly better perf.