Thumbs up man, we really need to know what's what.......especially for those prices.
-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
Raytraced SotTR runs at ~30-50 FPS/1080p on $1200 nvidia RTX 2080 Ti [Up: BF5 doesn't hit 1080/60]
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
- Status
Thumbs up man, we really need to know what's what.......especially for those prices.
Will the video cover TR as well, or just BFV? Regardless, any idea on what's happening with the TR demo?
Or maybe people expected 1080ti performance for less than a 1080ti, with all the technical progress after 2 years. I know I did lol, left disappointed. Did not expect "shadows" tbh.
This is nice for people with the money to blow, otherwise it's pretty meh.
I think I could use 1080p if Nvidia was able to scale it properly. Right now any non-native resolution is a blurry mess while consoles can at least handle 1080p with integer scaling on a 4K TV. It's been a requested feature for a few years now with no interest from Nvidia to actually implement it. I used to have a Dell 30" 2560x1600 display that did a much better job at upscaling than my GPU. I tried display and GPU scaling back and forth and the GPU was much blurrier.
I don't see myself gaming on a RTX and settling for a blurry resolution in exchange for better shadows and reflections. It will be interesting to see how graphics settings deal with raytracing, can we for example use lower quality RT to get better frame rates at the expense of image quality.
I don't see myself gaming on a RTX and settling for a blurry resolution in exchange for better shadows and reflections. It will be interesting to see how graphics settings deal with raytracing, can we for example use lower quality RT to get better frame rates at the expense of image quality.
No, they expected to actually get higher fps. Because the shader cores have less work to do with shadows/reflections and can do something else. That was the dream.
Glad to hear it. As someone eyeing a 2080 or 2070 instead Im worried about the trickle down effect if the 2080 ti can't hold 60 fps.
This wasn't an unreasonable expectation.
They are saying, Ok if I want bleeding edge visuals I can turn on ray tracing and not gain frames over the previous gpu or I can do without it and gain frames with a visual quality I was already happy with.
This expectation they had isn't hard to grasp.
It actually simulates light instead of faking it. Light beams are rendered and actually exist vs faked
then Nvidia owners will just turn off raytracing and take the crown back
Pretty much this. Dedicated Ray-Tracing is new to video cards, I'm not sure why people are laughing at these facts, the card is beefy as fuck to even pull off what it's pulling off.
It's a roller-coaster ride of being both sad and happy at the same time. One second you read, holy crap this is incredible. The next, this is garbage. :D
Lmao dude that koolaid
Where does it say anywhere it is the best card out there?
The newest? Sure
The best? LOL
The shadows, reflection, ambient occlusion
Part of it is baked and pre-calculated and then the rest is real-time, like the material effects roughness and reflections and AO and multiple bounces
Seems like less dependence needed on global illumination when the raytraced part does have multiple bounces, also no need for screen space effects when the raytraced part is doing that job
But this is not ready for proper gaming, not even close, not at the current expectations of resolution and framerate
Hopefully when the next consoles hit this will be ready to ship, which means that it has to be being built into them right now (2 years prior to launch).
So it is a possibility this won't be a huge feature of the next consoles, but will be there to at least help with shading possibly in some respect (maybe not to this degree)
To add to the other explanation you got, in laymans terms that matter to you as a gamer: way better reflections without artifacting, way better shadows without jaggies, and better ambient occlusion/indirect lighting that is real time and more realistic (if you stand with a white shirt near a brightly lit green wall, it would reflect green light on your shirt).
All of these are doable now with tricks but the accuracy is dependant on how much work you put in your scene to "fudge" it, and if you wanna support expensive features like AO. Unity is forgiving with real time reflection support, high end shadows, and good global illumination, but it takes a lot of work to manually set up a scene ans real time reflections are super expensive.
We went from hopping these new cards would deliver 4k/60fps with all the bells and whistles, to 1080p/60fps with some fancy shadows/reflections.. and that's with the 1300€ flagship. Yikes. Raytracing is cool on paper, but it's clearly not ready for mainstream adoption.
We are a fickle bunch.
Don't worry, the ones saw 3D acceleration being created in front of us recognize the jump that Ray tracing is.
Let's not judge so quickly here. BFV is much faster and we know the team had very little access to this hardware. I suspect TR is the same.
Also, TR is perhaps the least impressive playable game of the bunch in terms of how RTX is used. Resident Evil 2 and Metro look dramatically more impressive and ran like butter.
How dare you bring some common sense into this topic! Things like drivers improving and optimization are just crazy talk.
So why no benchmarks so far? I suspect that 2080ti might not be a great advantage over 1080ti with rtx off.
To put in simple terms.
You get Toy Story visuals instead of reboot preseason three.
Videogame companies will be able to drastically reduce the manhours spent on simulating light when they can just generate a light source and tell that source to output x number of rays. This either should lead to faster development and thus more games released per year or an increased focus on other technical factors.
As a user expect a massive loss in performance but eventually way higher visual clarity and fidelity that was never seen before.
It's a card that's better than their previous cards. Why is that so hard to understand? Even if it was the exact same without the raytracing processors.. it still has them so by default it's better.
And I might get one.. later. I have a Vega 64 sitting in my main gaming pc right now so I don't think I quite qualify as been a gpu fanboy.
I personally found the shadow details in this video of Shadow of the Tomb Raider to be looking pretty impressive. But yeah, like HairWorks...it's not something I'm willing to chop performance for
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlKGctu7OC8
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mlKGctu7OC8
I would bet my life that most of them are running at 1080p with RTX features on, especially if he's describing the performance as butter :D
I didn't get a super close look at the monitor but I assume. They're using g-sync monitors that were 1080p.
Sure, it'll grow, but asking to buy in now at that price when the enthusiast market they are selling it to are accustomed to high frame rates or resolution seems a bit silly.
It accurately lights a scene by bouncing simulated light rays around the area and computing the outcome (hence raytracing) as opposed to the modern "tricks" we use to fake what light would do. What this means is any fully raytraced scene will exhibit accurate lighting (like picking up colors from other sources diffusing through surface etc), accurate shadows that behave as a real shadow would (as opposed to a hard shadow map that doesn't exhibit the properties of a real shadow), as well as accurate real time reflections (as opposed to only affecting whats on the screen space or other inaccurate methods to fake it).
In practice you get a difference like this
Last edited:
I just realized that in 10 years we could have legit, honest to God, ray Trace rendering vr. Holy shit.
Maybe even five years.
Idk that I can t afford it, I will gladly go to a VR arcade (they exist) just to see it.
Maybe even five years.
Idk that I can t afford it, I will gladly go to a VR arcade (they exist) just to see it.
It's still a damn good start. I won't get the first gen of RTX cards, but it certainly bodes well for the future.
Nobody called you a fanboy, but that koolaid is strong if this is their "best" card
Where is it "better?" At the raytrace part whatever, but this shit ain't ready for prime time. I get where you are trying to angle this, that "one part" is better, but this is not a performance jump.
This is a technology shift that is sacrificing current rendering performance otherwise. That's a sidestep, not an upgrade.
Yea it's gonna happen at some point, but this isn't super relevant for current games for most people.
But I do honestly hope you enjoy the card, if you can afford it by all means, I would buy one if I cared enough. But for most this is irrelevant right now.
I'd personally just wait a couple of generations or three or four before jumping onto this part of the tech, let it mature a bit.
Also want to see what it does in the consoles.
I don't think people are disatisfied with the effects or what RTX brings to the table, it's just that to get such performance and at 1080p mind you, you have to fucking shelve about 1300€ (some cards are hitting 1400€ here). It's a month worth of salary for people.
How is that in any way reasonable?
How is that in any way reasonable?
This totally. I can see my 1080 lasting me at least 2 more years
I'm glad someone who actually saw this stuff and knows what they're talking about is chiming in. Although, considering the general tenor of this thread, it might be like shouting at an F5 tornado.
Don't worry, gsync will save the day but 4K gsync screens are too expensive anyway, 1080p with gsync on is where it's at! :)
I've already preordered a 2080 but I'm just wondering if they'll have mobile versions too. I want to buy a laptop next week but it'd suck if new mobile GPUs came out in a few weeks /months
Only 2 weeks? That's actually crazy impressive.
Only 2 weeks? That's actually crazy impressive.
Yeah, I think you have basically described where my head was at with this. I wanted something like:
2080 Ti- 4K100Hz, $750
2080- 4K60, $550
2070- 4K40ish, $450
What we got were crazy high prices and an emphasis on real-time ray tracing. Which is cool, but it does *fuck all* for me right now. And if performance isn't going to be acceptable at 1440p or 4K with ray tracing, I wouldn't even bother.
Again, ray tracing in real-time on consumer 3D hardware is cool. But that's not what we wanted. And those prices, no, I'll stick on my 1080 Ti @ 1440p144 and ride it out until the next consoles come out. Or maybe I'll do a full AMD build and ditch my GSYNC monitor and GPU.
- Status