-
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 thread which sometimes talks about RDNA2
- Thread starter CAT-THE-FIFTH
- Start date
- Status
A strange excuse to constantly talk about how great nvidia are.That's because there's no GPUs for sale
What if AMD will never come in front? What if it will catch up and even do better ray tracing than Nvidia but by then all the reviewers will tell you that the greatest thing a videocard can do is another feature and Nvidia does that 2 times better than AMD?
What if this is the trick Nvidia is using to sell their cards? Add a feature ( like ray tracing ) and then sponsor a ton of games to heavily use that feature? And sponsor media to promote that feature? How can any other manufacturer catch up if by the time they catch up, Nvidia already moves to something else? (from example from heavy tessellation to heavy RT)?
Most of the people think Nvidia helps the industry with these tricks because the games are "more realistic" with the heavy RT. But in fact they are only interested to sell their new cards, they don't care how realistic the game looks or even if it becomes an industry standard. When AMD will be close in RT performance, they will move to the next thing. And heavy RT games won't be used in the next years outside Nvidia sponsored titles. They may never be created if the cost to performance is too big and there are other ways to make the game look " more realistic".
AMD, Intel and Nvidia all had input on Microsoft's DXR. Nvidia was first to market and is now on 2nd generation. AMD is dragging it's heals with poor performance in this area. That was AMD's choice. You can't blame Nvidia for AMD.
DLSS like processing is the future, be it real time in games as we have now or a combination including AI upscaling reducing delivery size and storage. Again, you can't blame Nvidia for AMD's lethargy. Indeed Nvidia handed Microsoft the DLSS model to be used in the DirectX family.
AMD 6000 series RT performance is good enough for every game that will come from consoles to PC in the next years and will use RT. It is not enough and it will never be enough for Nvidia sponsored titles. Even if the next AMD cards will be enough to play lets say Quake II or CP at 60 FPS/ 4k ultra, by then Nvidia will sponsor other titles with even more RT for their next gen cards.
And when they won't be able to use RT to sell their cards, they will come up with something else and make everyone think that is the ultimate feature and they have to buy Nvidia next gen cards.
Well it will be good for low-medium settings on PC. I don't know why you whine about Quake 2 RTX being Nvidia sponsored as 3DMark's RT benchmark is not, yet shows how far behind AMD is.
What's your point? are you here to collect a medal for Nvidia? they aren't your friend.
That's another bs legend, Nvidia never handed anything.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,252
What if AMD will never come in front? What if it will catch up and even do better ray tracing than Nvidia but by then all the reviewers will tell you that the greatest thing a videocard can do is another feature and Nvidia does that 2 times better than AMD?
What if this is the trick Nvidia is using to sell their cards? Add a feature ( like ray tracing ) and then sponsor a ton of games to heavily use that feature? And sponsor media to promote that feature? How can any other manufacturer catch up if by the time they catch up, Nvidia already moves to something else? (from example from heavy tessellation to heavy RT)?
Most of the people think Nvidia helps the industry with these tricks because the games are "more realistic" with the heavy RT. But in fact they are only interested to sell their new cards, they don't care how realistic the game looks or even if it becomes an industry standard. When AMD will be close in RT performance, they will move to the next thing. And heavy RT games won't be used in the next years outside Nvidia sponsored titles. They may never be created if the cost to performance is too big and there are other ways to make the game look " more realistic".
Ray tracing, or better, path tracing is the holly grail of computer graphics. I don't think you can do more about that in terms of visuals.
Sure, you do more in terms of physics, AI, animation, etc. Just because RT is used in multiple areas (global illumination, ambient occlusion, shadows and reflections), doesn't mean that is heavy - as in shooting more rays than necessary so you can compare it with tessellation.
AMD on the other side, just puts out there different demos and tech and stands aside, waiting for devs to pick everything up and put it in their games. Tessellation was in some way (True Form was called if I recall correctly) in AMD's hardware waaaay before dx11. They also had AI, GI and other stuff running on the GPU back in HD4xxx days. True Sound rings a bell? Bullet (AMD's alternative to physics)?
I couldn't care less if is AMD or nVIDIA (or Intel?) in my PC. I only care getting the best card on my budget and needs and at those launch prices, to me and my needs, the green team has a better offer.
And Nvidia blocking ray tracing in Godfall.
How stupid one can be to think AMD is blocking ray tracing in Cyberpunk? Why wouldn't they block them on Minecraft or Quake II?
Becuase people don't buy a graphics card to play Quake 2. They buy cards to play games like Cyberpunk and if AMD enabled RT within Cyberpunk at launch then no one would be buying AMD cards.
Where did I say they were? If you look back you will see that I buy the best card at the time. I don't care if it's AMD, Nvidia or soon to be Intel.
By your logic nobody would be buying anything below a 3080 because the rest of the line up isn't exactly stellar at running RT now is it?
Hmmm?
ECH pretending to only be "the messenger". Bro, all your posts, are biased af. Not once did you report any negative AMD news. NOTHING. Nada.. All you do all day is bash NV. Honestly not sure if fanboy or shill tbh (or is it astroturfer?? not up to date with these things).
Just drop the act, as you can see, no one is falling for your BS
For once i agree with you.Let me laugh some more.
Your posts read like you care.
BTW DLSS is not the future, its based on Nvidia's proprietary hardware and therefore will always be something that only comes with Nvidia sponsored games.
DirectML is the future.
The RTX 3080 has 68 RT cores.
The 6800XT has 72 RT cores.
in terms of Ray Tracing we don't yet know what the true performance of RDNA2 is, not yet, not until we have more RT games that aren't sponsored by Nvidia.
The 6800XT has 72 RT cores.
in terms of Ray Tracing we don't yet know what the true performance of RDNA2 is, not yet, not until we have more RT games that aren't sponsored by Nvidia.
What?
You have no idea what that Idiom actually means and when to use it.
What? Why would you capitalise idiom
Perhaps you don't like the choice of words, so please explain why you think AMD is so far behind in RT?
I certainly wouldn't be happy buying below a 3080 for 1440p or a 3070 for 1080p RT.
Your choice of words is wrong, unless you have internal emails to prove that AMD don't want RT.What? Why would you capitalise idiom
Perhaps you don't like the choice of words, so please explain why you think AMD is so far behind in RT?
To answer your question
- Because it is their first try?
- Because AMD have recently become profitable and can now put money towards GPU developement?
- Because RDNA was funded by sony and MS who wanted to focus on Raster performance?
- Because most games are built around how Nvidia accelerates RT?
Are you now relegating these cards from being 4k (3080) and 1440p (3070) cards, or do we expect people to have two gaming monitors one for RT gaming and one for raster gaming.
Well since people struggle to get more than 60fps with RT they could buy a cheap second monitor for all their RT gaming needs.
Lethargy ... a lack of energy and enthusiasm. I think that perfectly describes AMD's RT performance.
- Their first try, even though Nvidia are on their 2nd generation. Why didn't they get involved earlier? Yes, building silicon is expensive, but running silicon compilers is relatively cheap. Manufacturers know the performance before a design is fabricated. AMD knew that Nvidia would be increasing their performance.
- AMD may have been in financial trouble, but that is something that is often accompanied by a lack of energy and enthusiasm.
- Microsoft and Sony wanted cheap APUs that would be good enough for console gamers. That's what RDNA2 appears to be. Though Sony were smart enough to build in some additional features that are not part of RDNA2 found within PC cards.
- Games using RT so far are built on DXR or Vulkan. 3Dmark's Port Royal is built around DXR.
- Status