Not so far no.
-
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.
What do gamers actually think about Ray-Tracing?
- Thread starter Purgatory
- Start date
Not so far no.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Aug 2009
- Posts
- 3,192
It's scene depended, others are darker. Is hard to say if the Raster was the intended design or just ended up that way due to being too expensive to have a global, realistic GI in raster. Not to forget that Raster limits your shadow casting lights as well while for PT is unlimited...I prefer the aesthetic of the top one, even if it's less technically accurate
The bottom one is too bright imo - whether that's limitations of the original design being done for both Raster and RT modes, or settings dependent I don't know.
The overall issue is that it was both designed for incredible weak hardware (old consoles) and has the "dumbed down" effect, meaning they've chosen to go with what looks good/fancy/arcadish instead of realism. If it would have been a proper game, with physics and reactive city (think some Watch Dogs vibes and gameplay), would have been a lot better. But this is the curse of raster in the same manner.
Caporegime
Good chance to check out the AV1 NV App recording then and provide you with this:
Here are a couple more sets of daytime PT vs Raster, both have DLSS Quality and Frame Gen enabled, notice how garbled the DMC headlights are in the 2nd set on the Raster, only setting DLAA with raster seems to resolve that, but then you get 59fps lol.
Path traced // Raster:
Path traced // Raster:
Ah yes, the M1.
Interesting story behind that car, BMW's first attempt at a mid engine super car, and only attempt, it was a really good car, ahead of its time.
They built it because they wanted to go racing and they had to have sold a number of the car retail before they could, so it became a road car, a super car
The body and frame were originally meant to be made by Lamborghini, but before they could start Lamborghini went bust, so before the receivers could take possession of their mould and blueprints BMW, in the dead of night broke in to the Lamborghini factory and stole their own blueprints and body moulds.
They ended up making the car in house, it was a commercial flop, too expensive and the racing series it was meant to compete in was cancelled.
So they had all these high performance engines they had developed, built and stocked, along with performance running gear, breaking and suspension systems, they took all of those parts and bolted it all to an E28 chassis, an early 1980's 5 series, and with that the M series was born.
Also....
Last edited:
Man of Honour
I knew of the M1 and some of those already, as an old M car owner it's a right of passage 
We'll never see engines like these again sadly.
We'll never see engines like these again sadly.
Not in mrk's case but I am convinced that the majority of people who don't like HDR do not understand how it should be set on the game, their TV, and or their OS.
Google any game and you'll see Reddit drones posting things like "HDR is broken in this game", "HDR makes my colours look washed out".
Google any game and you'll see Reddit drones posting things like "HDR is broken in this game", "HDR makes my colours look washed out".
If anything we’ve been going backwards not forwards. A £400 gpu used to do 1440p comfortably yet now we only get 1080p card and that’s before throwing RT into the mix.
Soldato
Sometimes it feels like it stands for "Return To eXtremism".
Still, a brilliant marketing, very Nvidia - it doesn't really mean anything useful when they slap it over a game but everyone knows it's Nvidia.Right, how can you compare DLAA Vs DLSS and say it runs better with dlss+fg Vs dlaa (image quality aside)? No, it doesn't. It's apple to oranges, very misleading."But R4st3R is B3tte4!!!!"
Meanwhile...
https://imgsli.com/MjY5ODA2/0/2
Raster + DLAA + Everything on Psycho via custom tweaks:
Path traced + DLSS + Everything on Psycho via custom tweaks:
This is a good scene to this sort of comparison, two massive lit up billboards behind V, you can see Raster doesn't much account for that illumination, which is apparent in most other raster only games too. Then there are the faked reflections that don't seem convincing.
PT looks better, runs better, uses less CPU time & power, uses less GPU power.
Case closed surely.
It sounds like you simply prefer more contrast in the image - which is quite typical for humans, we often find more contrast more interesting/better looking. But that's just a human bias.
It's also why so many reshade presets for games or other recolour mods increase contrast (totally destroying realism imho) and people love them.
Man of Honour
No, that is a specific comparison as a light jab at people who constantly say DLAA is superior than DLSS when the reality of the now is that it isn't. The screens that followed in later posts up above had DLSS/FG enabled for BOTH raster and PT.
As for image quality, the DLSS examples are better as evidenced by the IMGsli, not just in that post, but every post in every IMGsli posted. There is also temporal breakup using DLAA in raster on specular highlights, something that doesn't exist using DLSS with Path Tracing.
Last edited:
You specifically wrote it runs better with PT. It doesn't. That's very misleading and that is my point.
That aside, PT is CP had a lot of issues in movement (not on screenshot), which gladly introduction of RR helped with a lot though it's not perfect - things like very visible delays in GI when lights changed colours, very fuzzy and rather wrong looking reflections (not enough rays!) etc. All caused because current hardware is still too slow for proper PT. Which is why I tend to repeat myself that Lumen will be most likely (everything points to that) the tech we will see in games, in coming years, not PT.
Man of Honour
I suppose you missed the bit in the IMGsli then where PT+DLSS runs BETTER than Raster+DLSS then:
Current hardware is not too slow, AMD hardware is too slow or can;t use RR/ReSTIR GI., if that's what you mean.
Spoiler alert, UE5 is implementing path tracing too, currently it's mostly software Lumen, but PT is coming to UE as well as that's the eventual goal of all this with Epic and NV both working together. I don't expect we will see the end result until the next Cyberpunk game as CDPR are the medium which Epic and NV are using to showcase that tech due to the 15yr contract CDPR signed with Epic.
Cyberpunk 2077 // PT vs Raster - Imgsli
imgsli.com
Current hardware is not too slow, AMD hardware is too slow or can;t use RR/ReSTIR GI., if that's what you mean.
Spoiler alert, UE5 is implementing path tracing too, currently it's mostly software Lumen, but PT is coming to UE as well as that's the eventual goal of all this with Epic and NV both working together. I don't expect we will see the end result until the next Cyberpunk game as CDPR are the medium which Epic and NV are using to showcase that tech due to the 15yr contract CDPR signed with Epic.
Last edited:
I'm sorry, what? I have rtx4090 (as per my sub) which is why I know what I'm talking about from practice and that what you write is just misleading. It's also been shown with details by hub and other channels - even with RR it's far from perfect. It's a great tech demo (PT in cp2077), very pretty, but it's not where the market is moving, for very obvious reasons. As also shown by CDProject themselves who switched to UE and is working on Lumen in their future games and not PT. There's ones thing to appreciate tech demo for what it is and the other to realise it's a paid by Nvidia advert to sell more of their GPUs and not indication of the coming games (even from same studio).
It helps, it doesn't solve it. It's a good bandaid but it's not perfect. You know what would actually solve the problem? More rays!
But that can't be done by current hardware and likely won't happen in the next 10+ years. Till then various shortcuts and bandaids will be needed. aLumen itself is also such but so far it doesn't exhibit same issues we see with PT in cp2077.
Current hardware is by far way too slow. Anything else sounds to me like blind fanboyism.
Last edited:
Man of Honour
But it is where things are heading,they aren't moving to UE to get away from PT, UE just does things much better than the now ancient RED engine which they've been tacking tech onto for years and it can't take any more. UE is just better full stop in terms of rendering, and PT will be a part of that once CDPR are done with it. Even Epic themselves have said in dev streams how they envision hardware RT/PT before with how UE5 is advancing.
GPUs will also be at least 2 generations more powerful when that time comes too so this is inevitable. UE5 can do things on a massive scale that REDengine cannot, or any other engine for that matter, and it only seems to be getting better with each point version update.
It sounds like you simply prefer more contrast in the image - which is quite typical for humans, we often find more contrast more interesting/better looking. But that's just a human bias.
Well I am a human
If I want realism I can just go outside. I hear it runs RTX 9090's and it is free to use
Trouble with reshade is it messes up other things. Only ever used it in a couple of games because of that and that was maybe a decade ago. I remember using it on Dishonoured last.
There is a big difference between reshade and what I am saying. But feel free to play SDR for realism
Associate
If I want realism I can just go outside. I hear it runs RTX 9090's and it is free to use
also.. real guns
Caporegime
Its also about personal taste, i don't like most in game HDR, i can see where they are going with it, its a nice clear image with what i would call accurate yellows, blues, greens... it is a nice image in a way, but i find the image dull, especially Star Citizen.
I like a bright punchy picture, so i have calibrated Windows Auto HDR and turned the SDR Content Brightness slider to 70%, try that on your screen, you will see what i mean, its bright, its punchy, i love it, i cannot go back to an SDR screen now...
PS: my screen is HDR10 400, not high nits but unlike a lot of HDR screens it is 10Bit, not 8.
Second gen VA, LG.
Last edited: