[Guru3d] NVIDIA Announces Support for lots of RTX ON based games at Gamescom - Page 5 - Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community

Forum Jump: 

[Guru3d] NVIDIA Announces Support for lots of RTX ON based games at Gamescom

Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #41 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-25-2019, 01:26 PM
mfw
 
ToTheSun!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Terra
Posts: 6,892
Rep: 382 (Unique: 200)
Quote: Originally Posted by ILoveHighDPI View Post
It’s ironic that I was fully prepared to buy a $1000+ Nvidia GPU as long as it gave another 80% boost over the 1080Ti, and then Nvidia shot themselves in the foot (over and over again).
nVidia using their comfortable performance lead to compromise raster capabilities in order to try to further technology that finally allows true graphical fidelity - imagine that! What a shot in the foot!

CPU
Intel 6700K
Motherboard
Asus Z170i
GPU
MSI 2080 Sea Hawk X
RAM
G.skill Trident Z 3200CL14 8+8
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 EVO 1TB
Hard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB
Power Supply
Corsair SF600
Cooling
Noctua NH C14S
Case
Fractal Design Core 500
Operating System
Windows 10 Education
Monitor
ViewSonic XG2703-GS
Keyboard
Ducky One 2 Mini
Mouse
Glorious Odin
Mousepad
Asus Scabbard
Audio
Fiio E17K v1.0 + Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO (B pads)
▲ hide details ▲
ToTheSun! is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #42 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-25-2019, 01:38 PM
Portgas D. Ace
 
keikei's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 9,907
Rep: 311 (Unique: 238)
Quote: Originally Posted by treetops422 View Post
It's hard to have faith in a company that says you have to be crazy not to buy RT in 2019 while selling GPU's without RT. Number 2 a 2060 Super with RT is pointless. By the time RT becomes required, the 2060 Super won't meet the min requirements. RT on the next consoles will be a light version or only exist on a limited amount of titles that require very little resources. Pointless but it appeases the masses. So people can think hey my console has RT! yay. In 4 years people would probably rather upscale to 8k then use RT. That is if 8k monitors don' exist. 980 ti (2015) The 1080 ti(2017) to 2080 ti(2018) gives what a 40% increase if your generous. If we get a 4080 TI with a 80% gain in 2023, you might be able to RT at 4k 60 fps? It's been a year since RT came out and on the performance side we see no improvements in BF5. Unless AMD leaps ahead with big Navi in a insane way, I don't see RT becoming viable.

It doesnt need to be insane. Next gen already confirmed to have RT.

PCMR
(18 items)
CPU
AMD RYZEN 7 1700
Motherboard
ASROCK TAICHI X370
GPU
ASROCK RX 570
RAM
G.SKILL Ripjaws V Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) DDR4 3200
Hard Drive
WD Red 4TB NAS HDD (x2)
Hard Drive
8TB Seagate Barracuda HDD (x2)
Hard Drive
SAMSUNG 860 EVO SSD 1TB
Hard Drive
WD Blue SSD 2TB
Power Supply
EVGA SuperNova 1300 G2
Cooling
Noctua NH-U14S (CPU COOLER)
Cooling
Cooler Master JetFlo 120mm Blue LED Fan (X6)
Case
LIAN LI PC-V760B
Operating System
WINDOWS 10 64
Monitor
Dell UltraSharp UP2718Q - LED monitor - 4K - 27"
Keyboard
VORTEX POK3R WHITE EDITION
Mouse
LOGITECH G305 WIRELESS GAMING MOUSE
Audio
Sennheiser HD 598 Cs Headphones
Other
Real Arcade Pro. 4 Kai Joystick modded
▲ hide details ▲
keikei is online now  
post #43 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-25-2019, 02:23 PM
Waiting for 7nm EUV
 
tpi2007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 11,302
Rep: 893 (Unique: 502)
Quote: Originally Posted by ILoveHighDPI View Post
I’m really hoping Big Navi has no Ray Tracing features “unless” AMD actually gets a flexible architecture running that doesn’t sacrifice Rasterization performance, otherwise my ideal GPU is just a really big version of the 5700XT and simply does not feature any Ray Tracing components.
4K120 is the new high end Home Theater standard (seen on 2019 LG OLEDs) and 4K240 will be “possible” on PC as soon as HDMI 2.1 and DP2.0 are out, then eventually Checkerboard 8K should be the final resolution upgrade in gaming standards.
Given that Checkerboard 8K theoretically only needs 2x more GPU power than Native 4K it’s not as demanding as people might expect... as long as Rasterization isn’t abandoned entirely as Nvidia seems to indicate they want to do.
Ray Tracing just came a few years too early.
It’s ironic that I was fully prepared to buy a $1000+ Nvidia GPU as long as it gave another 80% boost over the 1080Ti, and then Nvidia shot themselves in the foot (over and over again).

They wouldn't have been able to give you that card with that level of performance on 12nm anyway, unless they had improved the architecture even more to be even more power efficient. Right now the relatively moderate TDP's for such large chips, including the RTX cores, are possible because when you're playing only rasterization based games the RTX cores aren't being used and when you're playing RTX enabled games, the RT and Tensor cores are such a bottleneck that the raster cores are not working to their full potential. That is to say, a chip the size of TU102 filled with only rasterization cores and comparable clocks as now, would have a TDP much higher than it does now.

Is your CPU bottlenecking your GPU ? Find out: CPU and GPU usage along with FPS in-game
Read my reviews here.
Clubs (founder): The rare / unusual CPU club
Clubs (member): Corsair Professional HX / AX Series PSU Owners Club || The Official Cooler Master HAF X/932/922/912(+) Club
CPU
Core i7-3820
Motherboard
Asus Sabertooth X79
GPU
MSI GTX 1060 6 GB Gaming X
RAM
16 GB Corsair DDR3 1866 Mhz Dominator
Hard Drive
Samsung SSD 830 128GB + WD Caviar Black 2TB
Optical Drive
Sony Optiarc DVD-RW
Power Supply
Corsair AX750 Professional Modular 80 Plus Gold
Cooling
Corsair A70 + Noiseblocker M12-P
Case
Cooler Master HAF 912 Plus
Operating System
Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit
Monitor
BenQ RL2455HM
Keyboard
Cooler Master Octane
Mouse
Cooler Master Octane
▲ hide details ▲


tpi2007 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #44 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-25-2019, 10:28 PM
New to Overclock.net
 
ILoveHighDPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,277
Rep: 133 (Unique: 84)
Quote: Originally Posted by ToTheSun! View Post
nVidia using their comfortable performance lead to compromise raster capabilities in order to try to further technology that finally allows true graphical fidelity - imagine that! What a shot in the foot!
Most games today still look fantastic with graphical options set to lowest, and play twice as well that way because you get to pump up the resolution and framerate.

I’ll add the exception that Draw Distance is also a high priority, allowing more content on screen and expanding the scope of interactivity, and it should go without saying that resolution and draw distance go hand in hand, you need one to take advantage of the other.
Over the decades the industry has gone through these bizarre cycles of shrinking and growing environments and it seems like every time we’re about to get really good at doing games at a large scale the hardware industry ruins everything with a bunch of new lighting effects. This is why classic games so often feel fresh and innovative compared to modern games, it’s what you get when game design is freed of these horrible technical restrictions (as Ray Tracing is about to become).

Look at Deus Ex (2000) vs. Invisible War (2003), the scope of the original was much more grand, one of many examples of gameplay sacrificed in the name of “Graphical Fidelity”.
Nintendo crafted one of the best games ever in Breath of the Wild by sacrificing overall “Graphical Fidelity” for the sake of gameplay, the best thing you could do to improve that game is run it in 4K with extended draw distance, Ray Tracing on the other hand would practically ruin the experience because of the implications on performance.
The same applies to Minecraft or basically any other open world game, and practically to most games in general. You have to be looking at a very specific genre to actually say that Ray Tracing is worthwhile (games locked to an isometric view for example).

Just Cause 2 from 2010 is arguably still better than JC3 or JC4 in many ways because of the lack of graphical features. It was the most “free” in terms of creative design. I love the physics in JC3 but the design of the island in JC2 is universally preferred.

In the 90’s things were so rudimentary that new graphics features usually enabled new gameplay, but that hasn’t been the case for the last two decades. The theme of “Graphics Ruins Gameplay” has been fairly consistent for the last few hardware generations.
It would be much more beneficial for the gaming industry if we stuck with the same graphics technology for one more generation to actually push out the best game designs that can possibly be had with Rasterization before once again jumping into another pit of technological experimentation.
I “was” looking forward to PS5 as being like the SNES era of 3D Gaming, but now that seems to be in doubt.

Hopefully game designers can ignore “progress” for just long enough to finish making the best games in history before handcuffing game development to a tiny GPU budget all over again.
ILoveHighDPI is offline  
post #45 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-26-2019, 12:05 AM
Robotic Chemist
 
Asmodian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: San Jose, California
Posts: 2,546
Rep: 185 (Unique: 123)
You say it was different in the 90s but your logic holds up just as well then too. Why do we need Quake when Doom runs so much faster on the same hardware? We could have turned up draw distances and increased the interactivity of the world instead then too. We could have done that with literally every hardware improvement since Pong. A Voodoo Graphics PCI card is pointless, all the best games are 2D anyway.

In 20 years this will look like the same thing, it has to start at some point to exist and once it has for long enough and something better comes out people will say moving forward is pointless... rinse and repeat.

You argue that for the last two decades improved graphics hasn't enabled new gameplay but graphics technologies have not changed significantly in that time. If improving technologies helped games in the 90s what makes you so sure ray tracing won't? It is arguably the first big change in the way rendering is done since Quake. Immersion is important and I can say for sure that I prefer, and spend money on, games with better graphics.

Bemone getting older and remembering games from the past with nostalgia. The games you played in the past are always better.

Quote: Originally Posted by ILoveHighDPI View Post
Most games today still look fantastic with graphical options set to lowest, and play twice as well that way because you get to pump up the resolution and framerate.
No they don't, min framerates are CPU limited so lowering the graphics options does little to improve performance where it counts and they look pretty bad even on the best settings, let alone the worst.

You are simply used to the crap graphics of today, I thought Doom looked fantastic when I was playing it in the 90s too.
Asmodian is offline  
post #46 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-26-2019, 03:53 AM
mfw
 
ToTheSun!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Terra
Posts: 6,892
Rep: 382 (Unique: 200)
Quote: Originally Posted by ILoveHighDPI View Post
Most games today still look fantastic with graphical options set to lowest, and play twice as well that way because you get to pump up the resolution and framerate.
Define looking fantastic. We're talking about a fundamental paradigm shift here. Physically modeled lighting is much more impactful than any new setting or technique developed in the past 2 decades. We're just starting implementing ray/path tracing in games, through RTX and custom mods, and even blocky, "ugly" games like Minecraft already look more realistic than a lot of rasterized AAA titles of 2019.

Light is king in photorealism. There's no point in focusing too much attention now, going forward, on effects and fake graphics when all we need is textures and rays. We have long to go still, but we have to start somewhere.

Also, what @Asmodian said.

CPU
Intel 6700K
Motherboard
Asus Z170i
GPU
MSI 2080 Sea Hawk X
RAM
G.skill Trident Z 3200CL14 8+8
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 EVO 1TB
Hard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB
Power Supply
Corsair SF600
Cooling
Noctua NH C14S
Case
Fractal Design Core 500
Operating System
Windows 10 Education
Monitor
ViewSonic XG2703-GS
Keyboard
Ducky One 2 Mini
Mouse
Glorious Odin
Mousepad
Asus Scabbard
Audio
Fiio E17K v1.0 + Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO (B pads)
▲ hide details ▲

Last edited by ToTheSun!; 08-26-2019 at 03:56 AM.
ToTheSun! is offline  
post #47 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-26-2019, 05:25 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
ilmazzo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South United States Of Europe
Posts: 947
Rep: 29 (Unique: 16)
I recall something like "It is not progress if not everyone can benefit from it"

Maybe some marxist school or whatever? Anyway I like it!

M8
(11 items)
Otto
(9 items)
CPU
AMD Ryzen 2600X
Motherboard
Asrock Taichi X470
GPU
sapphire fury nitro oc
RAM
GSkill Trident Z RGB 16GB 3200 Cl14
Hard Drive
SSD Crucial MX500 500GB
Power Supply
Antec HPC 850 Platinum
Cooling
noctua dual fan 120
Case
Phanteks Enthoo Pro M Acrylic
Operating System
microsoft windows 10 pro
Monitor
DELL U2311H
Monitor
ASUS MX34VQ
CPU
Intel Core i3/i5/i7
Motherboard
P8H77-I
GPU
AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
RAM
8 GB 1600
Hard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB
Power Supply
Seasonic G-750
Case
Bitfenix Prodigy mitx
Operating System
Windows 8.1
Monitor
DELL U2311H
▲ hide details ▲
ilmazzo is offline  
post #48 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-26-2019, 07:07 AM
mfw
 
ToTheSun!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Terra
Posts: 6,892
Rep: 382 (Unique: 200)
It's no progress at all if no one can benefit from it.

CPU
Intel 6700K
Motherboard
Asus Z170i
GPU
MSI 2080 Sea Hawk X
RAM
G.skill Trident Z 3200CL14 8+8
Hard Drive
Samsung 850 EVO 1TB
Hard Drive
Crucial M4 256GB
Power Supply
Corsair SF600
Cooling
Noctua NH C14S
Case
Fractal Design Core 500
Operating System
Windows 10 Education
Monitor
ViewSonic XG2703-GS
Keyboard
Ducky One 2 Mini
Mouse
Glorious Odin
Mousepad
Asus Scabbard
Audio
Fiio E17K v1.0 + Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO (B pads)
▲ hide details ▲
ToTheSun! is offline  
post #49 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-26-2019, 08:16 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
DNMock's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Dallas
Posts: 3,423
Rep: 171 (Unique: 125)
Quote: Originally Posted by bigjdubb View Post
So who is training them? It has to be the older people, right?
Nope, social media algorithms creating echo chambers.

Quote: Originally Posted by ILoveHighDPI View Post
I’ll add the exception that Draw Distance is also a high priority, allowing more content on screen and expanding the scope of interactivity, and it should go without saying that resolution and draw distance go hand in hand, you need one to take advantage of the other.
Over the decades the industry has gone through these bizarre cycles of shrinking and growing environments and it seems like every time we’re about to get really good at doing games at a large scale the hardware industry ruins everything with a bunch of new lighting effects. This is why classic games so often feel fresh and innovative compared to modern games, it’s what you get when game design is freed of these horrible technical restrictions (as Ray Tracing is about to become).
That's untrue imo. Games can push the envelop graphically and still be amazing and innovative titles. Take The Witcher 2 and/or 3, Hellblade, or Last of Us as examples.

The reason there seems to be less innovation lately has nothing to do with tech or anything like that, and a lot more to do with the industry being less likely to take risks with how high development costs are. It's a safer bet to throw out a new Call of Duty game than it is to put out a new and innovative IP. Not to mention the lowered development costs since they can re-use a lot of assets from the last 20 iterations.



Last edited by DNMock; 08-26-2019 at 08:31 AM.
DNMock is offline  
post #50 of 174 (permalink) Old 08-27-2019, 02:49 AM
New to Overclock.net
 
ILoveHighDPI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,277
Rep: 133 (Unique: 84)
Quote: Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
You say it was different in the 90s but your logic holds up just as well then too. Why do we need Quake when Doom runs so much faster on the same hardware? We could have turned up draw distances and increased the interactivity of the world instead then too. We could have done that with literally every hardware improvement since Pong. A Voodoo Graphics PCI card is pointless, all the best games are 2D anyway.
Moving from Sprites to Polygons is hardly equivalent to Ray Tracing vs. existing lighting.
We’ve had plenty of examples showing that existing technology can give you 99% of the practical functionality that people want in Ray Tracing, Hitman 2 gives us rooms full of reflections, and most “RTX On” examples give barely any perceivable difference.
Minecraft gives such a stark contrast because the default engine practically doesn’t have any lighting capabilities at all. Try comparing RT with an actual good shader pack instead, existing techniques get you 99% of the way there and people have to look for fringe scenarios to actually point out where Ray Tracing is working differently.
Rasterization vs. Ray Tracing is very much a “DOOM vs DOOM 2” comparison (except RT cripples your framerate).

Ray Tracing is well within the realm of diminishing returns.

If there’s a technological revolution to be had with practical benefits to gameplay, great, Nvidia should have made that with their first pitch, instead we’re just adding horribly expensive effects that require proprietary hardware on top of all the existing lighting effects that will still do 99% of the heavy lifting anyway because it’s so much more efficient.
You’re still better off using cube maps than Ray Tracing when they accomplish the same thing but one effect requires dedicated hardware that destroys performance at all times instead of just some of the time if reflections were to be used excessively.
(Ok again if AMD gets a flexible architecture running then we could see games able to balance effects per-situation again, but that’s certainly not the market we have today.)

Quote: Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
In 20 years this will look like the same thing, it has to start at some point to exist and once it has for long enough and something better comes out people will say moving forward is pointless... rinse and repeat.

You argue that for the last two decades improved graphics hasn't enabled new gameplay but graphics technologies have not changed significantly in that time. If improving technologies helped games in the 90s what makes you so sure ray tracing won't? It is arguably the first big change in the way rendering is done since Quake. Immersion is important and I can say for sure that I prefer, and spend money on, games with better graphics.
No changes in the last 20 years?
CUDA?
PBR?
Global Illumination is already a thing, just it’s a thing that currently I can turn off and get back a good 20-30% of my GPU performance.

Quote: Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
Bemone getting older and remembering games from the past with nostalgia. The games you played in the past are always better.
I played through Half Life again quite recently, there’s no nostalgia, the late 90’s was the peak era of the First Person Shooter.

Quote: Originally Posted by Asmodian View Post
No they don't, min framerates are CPU limited so lowering the graphics options does little to improve performance where it counts and they look pretty bad even on the best settings, let alone the worst.

You are simply used to the crap graphics of today, I thought Doom looked fantastic when I was playing it in the 90s too.
And sometimes the original DOOM does do things that practically no other game has done since. I don’t think I’ve ever seen any other shooter with more than 100 enemies on screen.
I remember a tech demo using DOOM to run some thousands (maybe millions?) of AI’s, so there’s an example of uselessly large scale, sure the principle can be taken too far, but today we’ve got more ability to use that scale in creative ways than ever before.
Game developers are always striking some sort of “balance” between graphics and gameplay, but the status quo for practically the entire existence of 3D gaming has been to heavily weigh the scales to sacrifice gameplay for better graphics. There has always been a laundry list of fancy new effects to gobble up all the graphical budget, we need a period of respite from the onslaught of new tech to give people a chance to actually look at their games with a focus on creativity first.
The fact that many people will prefer the style of gameplay in DOOM over Quake is testament to the longevity of legacy tech.

Speaking of which, Ion Fury just came out using a 25 year old engine, and it probably is one of the best shooters this generation.
ILoveHighDPI is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Overclock.net - An Overclocking Community forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in



Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off