Balanced is bad in this game, so you're really playing with a gimped version. Quality is ok, but still nothing to write home about. Even on quality, go near a puddle and compare with/without DLSS and you will notice DLSS cannot resolve reflections properly and is significantly blurrier than native.I think this is without DLSS. On my 3080fe with Ultra preset + RT Ultra + DLSS Balance I get 60fps on my 4k60hz monitor. I have played about 3hrs yesterday and lowest I saw was around 55. I haven't tried it without DLSS off.
1. No1. Is Ray Tracing even implemented in a huge amount of games?
2. An fps player like me who enjoys high frames would probably just turn this off
3. does ray tracing make THAT MUCH of an impact visually?
2. Yes
3. It depends and it's also subjective. I would say in something like Minecraft RTX or Control, it's a proper showcase technology. On the other hand, in BF V, in WD:L etc it's kinda meh. It does what it says on the tin, but not worth enabling imo.
Because DLSS gimps the image significantly and in particular in relation to RT. It cannot resolve reflections properly. So why would I compare a blurry image with native? It makes no sense. And I don't see how a 49 fps average WITH DLSS on is a boon either?Why ignore the DLSS charts?
4K has always been more Epeen than a smart choice. Now the arguement is people will be using 4k TVs, but then they sit 2+ meters from the screen. Run it at a sensible resolution such as 1440p. Very playable.
Personally I would have preferred a drop in raster performance and more of the die be devoted to RT.
I actually do use a 4K TV as a display and sit about 1.5m away from it, it's definitely worth it 99% of the time. Sometimes you can get away with 1800p just as well (KCD) or 1440p (FH4).