Nvidia RTX Discussion

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

What has me excited is that PUBG, Battlefield, Tomb raider, Vulcan API and UE4 all support RTX. This means if you are not checking that box your not seeing the game at its best.

Two things,
Enabling Ray tracing is going to tank your FPS. I'm going to make a safe assumption of 50% performance drop.
Second thing, most gamers don't care how it looks. They care about how much fun it is to play.

Torn between a 1080 or 2070, (coming from an RX480 4gb) either would be massive, but I've just picked up an Oculus rift so a bit torn.

I'll remain patient..

What were you expecting? The card has 3 separate cores doing different functions. They could have jumped regular rasterised performance by a lot more by utilising all of that massive die for it but they decided to change how they design gpus completely. It should still be at least 30% faster with all the new tech as well and you expect it to be the same price?

Ray tracing is the future and Nvidia brought it now. Will wait to see benchmarks but performance will be entirely dependent on how heavily it is used. There will be quality settings for ray tracing as well. More rays = more quality/definition and more performance cost.

It's a game changer. Proper reflections, proper global illumination, proper shadows and a multitude of other uses like ray traced sounds for proper 3d audio. While it's possible to fake all of those things with rasterisation they don't look anywhere near as good and it's a pain in ass to develop. Ray tracing makes the dev process way easier and it looks/sounds a lot better. The biggest graphical jump we're gonna have in about a decade.

Just buy a 10 series if you don't care about RT. These cards aren't for you if you don't. As I said before these cards are for developers who really want to use RT and early adopters who don't mind dropping a grand on a gpu.

I don't understand the butthurt. These cards are crammed with completely new technology. Would they be cheaper if AMD had something? Probably. But they don't so just wait a gen if you don't like these cards but I feel all future cards will be like these. Traditional rendering methods are coming to the end of the line.

This isn't just some proprietary crap to try and shut AMD out of the market. It's DX12 based. AMD can do the same if they want but they have had their fingers in their asses on the gpu side for about 5 years now.

By the time 10 series inventory dries up the GTX 2060 and below series will be out to replace it and won't include the additional cores to get the cost down.

10 series is still great. 4k and high fps users might have wanted just a much faster card to drive frames/resolution but the last 3-4 series of cards have done that. This is an actual revolution in graphics quality outside of frames or resolution. On top of that it will still be around 30% faster with like for like cards. Nothing wrong with that.

Can't have it all in 1 gen.

The design process is identical except it cuts out some seriously tedious work. In unreal engine it's as simple as changing your light sources from static to dynamic and enabling the various ray tracing options and then it just works. You get to see what you will see in game in real time in the editor. No making lightmaps for every single model, no long ass light/shadow baking times, no placing reflection captures all over the map to try and fake reflections. On top of that it looks a lot better. It will in the long run massively speed up development times.

For now devs will still have to use both methods until it transitions completely. There is a not a single game dev out there who is not excited by these cards. That's good news for gamers because this will be heavily adopted and become the norm in a few years.

I don't know. Based on the core count increase and speeds it should be around 30%

There should be no performance hit from RT. That's the point of the RT core. It's up to the devs to optimise their scenes to not exceed it's limitations.

Really the games where you want maximum visual quality you won't mind taking a small fps hit anyway. You're not going to be enabling all of this stuff in some high fps multi player shooter.

keffiyeh wrote: »

God in heaven the cringe, I think I just cracked a molar...

Consoles are also not €2500 ...

... they're also the lead platforms with PC waiting months for ports which then come lumped with denuvo...

... let's keep the small man syndrome talk to a minimum shall we. Every platform has its pros and cons...

... and let's not even try for the 'it's a joke bruh' angle considering your sincere yet misguided breakdown as to why you feel this way.

It was just a joke I'm sure. The guy likes PC's as do most of us here. Hence the forum. Also PC has many exclusives and consoles wait for many months for ports from PC. There's entire genres missing from consoles that PC has many games for like RTS/Moba, MMO, Simulation and the entire indie scene + modding.

It doesn't take a €2500 PC to beat a consoles graphical quality/performance either. A €600 one will do that just fine.

Consoles are what they are. Great plug and play relatively cheap entry points with some great exclusives. There's no reason why you can't have both.

Genevieve Disgusting Self-improvement wrote: »

If that were the consensus then innovation would be dead. I remember Crysis 1, that ran like a dog on even good hardware. VR was meant to push hardware forward, but the general lack of uptake of that has not been what the industry hopped for. When you have battlefield support RTX and Unreal engine (vulcan is coming soon I hear) then I think that uptake is pretty good. Battlefield is second biggest AAA title out there.

Innovations that people want or that will make a noticeable improvement in their lives will and have always thrived in the marketplace. You only have to look at the likes of the Walkman, MP3 players, DVD and smartphones to name just a few, to see how fast consumers will adopt new tech and duds like smartwatches and 3D TV's just fade away.



VR has yet to really take off as it stills lacks killer games that make people want to invest in the cost. This new raytracing tech looks cool but to me its an expensive sidegrade over what's always most important in a GPU, pushing lots and lots of frames per second around my screen at high refresh rates.



I wouldn't put much faith in the upcoming Battlefront pushing anything seeing how badly it's doing in pre-orders right now and the complete mess it's made with its fanbase.