NVIDIA RTX In 2020 - STILL Not Worth It? [HardwareCanucks]

Ploid 6.0 · Feb 8, 2020

NVIDIA's RTX technologies like ray tracing and DLSS have been included into more games but has performance been improved enough? We've spent countless hours actually playing these games so let's take a deep look into ray tracing and DLSS and the framerate sacrifices you make by enabling them.

On a positive note, we have so many exciting games coming in 2020 that promise ray tracing (potentially not at launch, but sometime in the future), and at least that's kind of exciting. Until performance is not cut in half I think we should remain skeptical.

It has been a year, there's still some odd stuff like missing reflections, and big performance hits, but it looks like there's still a long way to go. Better hardware is needed. I'll be holding out for two more card cycles and hopefully by then AMD is showing their ray/path tracing cards.

For me, it might be a good thing Xbox Series X is waiting a year before first party games are built around it's new hardware as the lowest common denominator. This gives me extra time with my current build, with a window of what to expect while looking over at PS5 stuff (not ray tracing related, but in gauging what kind of next gen console ports recommended specs will be on PC, if one is needed at all). I'm going to wait as long as I can to jump on ray tracing. I need those frames, luckily I don't care for 4 or 8k.

Yogi · Feb 8, 2020

I appreciated this video, he did a good job pointing out pros and cons. And I'm really looking forward to seeing the raytracing in Cyberpunk 2077. Hopefuly the RTX 30XX series brings big gains to RTX performance and will be out by then, or by the time Cyberpunk gets RTX - hopefully it's not just some shadows but GI.

Metro does look good though, wish I could try it on Geforce Now but I only have it on Gamepass. Might pick it up to check it out when it hits steam.

-Though it's real cheap on EGS with the voucher...

laxu · Feb 8, 2020

I wish they had not gone for the clickbait title because otherwise it's a pretty reasonable video.

As a 2080 Ti owner I am all aboard the raytracing train after seeing how it does in Control and Metro Exodus. I want to see more support for this tech and I want to see it in games that are not fast paced first person multiplayer shooters. You don't have time to check out fine details in those and everyone else is sacrificing details for framerate anyway.

horkrux · Feb 8, 2020

If there's one thing I regret, it's not playing RTX games to make the most of my purchase. I think there's plenty of titles to show off the technology now, but here I am playing games on my Vita instead.

TaySan · Feb 8, 2020

I think Ray Tracing will really shine once the next series of GPUS launch. The 3080 ti will do wonders for performance.

LavaBadger · Feb 8, 2020

laxu said:
I wish they had not gone for the clickbait title because otherwise it's a pretty reasonable video.

As a 2080 Ti owner I am all aboard the raytracing train after seeing how it does in Control and Metro Exodus. I want to see more support for this tech and I want to see it in games that are not fast paced first person multiplayer shooters. You don't have time to check out fine details in those and everyone else is sacrificing details for framerate anyway.

Something to consider is the degree to which you are brute-forcing this tech with a $1200 video card. While the tech may be cool, the point being that it's current implementation is not in fact ready or reasonable when you consider the performance cost is a good one. For everyone but a fraction of users with the highest end hardware, it's not a great technology right now.

I'm very curious to see the degree to which next gen games actually use RTX. It's going to take a lot of development in this area to make it performant without a lot of sacrifices when it comes to the new consoles, even if we assume they do meet the rumoured 2080 area of performance.

Monster Zero · Feb 8, 2020

Control and Metro made it worth it last year. Cyberpunk, Vampire, MechWarrior, Watch Dogs, and Dying Light 2 make it worth it this year.

ApeEscaper · Feb 8, 2020

RTX 2060 is the most popular RTX card so far as expected since it's the "cheapest" (still damn expensive lol) RTX card even though it launched later than the others https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
The Super variant is much less popular annoying that when DF covers RTX 2060 it's always the Super version not the normal RTX 2060 everyone else and i got

When the 3000 series cards come out i expect the 2060 to drop in price even further and will have even more higher adoption rate unless Nvidia stops selling them. Hope Nvidia continues to push the 2060 as the good enough jump in RTX card we'll see how it fares with official Minecraft RTX for example, they already do several videos on their socials and youtube channel only on 2060 marketing still

Qudi · Feb 8, 2020

Seems like im not losing much with an amd card. Yet.

Gray · Feb 8, 2020

Playing through Quake 2 with RTX was amazing. Though I don't think the tech is there yet to have it in games with more complex geometry and play at reasonable framerates.

Ploid 6.0 · Feb 8, 2020

LavaBadger said:
Something to consider is the degree to which you are brute-forcing this tech with a $1200 video card. While the tech may be cool, the point being that it's current implementation is not in fact ready or reasonable when you consider the performance cost is a good one. For everyone but a fraction of users with the highest end hardware, it's not a great technology right now.

I'm very curious to see the degree to which next gen games actually use RTX. It's going to take a lot of development in this area to make it performant without a lot of sacrifices when it comes to the new consoles, even if we assume they do meet the rumoured 2080 area of performance.

The thing about consoles is they have games developed for specific hardware so they utilize tricks and smoke/mirrors to keep performance at a reasonable level (for console that will likely be 30fps with maybe some dips, especially for a GTA or whatever Rockstar is dreaming up). PC doesn't have that privilege since 30fps alone would be horrible, especially without hardware specific workarounds (though DLSS seems like a good workaround to give current cards better framerates with RTX). For example, I recall a Digital Foundry person on this forum said they tried gaming with a PC that matched current gen consoles specs and found it to be horrible. I can't find the article or video though.

While I doubt the consoles will do that much with their raytracing hardware, they can get a lot more use out of it due to how focused games made for their hardware can be.

Tahnit · Feb 8, 2020

With reconstruction like DLSS and others that massive hit isn't an issue really.

Herne · Feb 8, 2020

Ploid 6.0 said:
I'll be holding out for two more card cycles and hopefully by then AMD is showing their ray/path tracing cards.

AMD is meant to be releasing "Big Navi" chips with raytracing this year.

No Depth · Feb 8, 2020

Q2 RTX can be real harsh if playing at native resolutions, especially 1440+.

But tone the resolution down(I mean its freaking Quake 2, you won't notice it that much) and you can make that game scream with everything maxed.

laxu · Feb 9, 2020

LavaBadger said:
Something to consider is the degree to which you are brute-forcing this tech with a $1200 video card. While the tech may be cool, the point being that it's current implementation is not in fact ready or reasonable when you consider the performance cost is a good one. For everyone but a fraction of users with the highest end hardware, it's not a great technology right now.

I'm very curious to see the degree to which next gen games actually use RTX. It's going to take a lot of development in this area to make it performant without a lot of sacrifices when it comes to the new consoles, even if we assume they do meet the rumoured 2080 area of performance.

That's fair, but I consider it a true ultra high quality option. We need more of those to push graphics forward and beyond what current hardware can do. What is the point of having an "excessive" ultra graphics preset if a midrange card can run it just fine? I think people have just gotten used to being able to crank nearly all details to max for so long that having less than ideal performance for what is a feature that currently only works on high end cards seems unfathomable.

wafflebrain · Feb 9, 2020

Have only had it a short while but still wondering if my 2060 Super was worth it as an upgrade over my 970. Metro Exodus performs decently with rtx and dlss but rtx Quake is iffy. Granted my decision was a bit impulsive after HL Alyx's announcement, just hoping this card won't already feel left in the dust once we start seeing full on next gen third party titles (non cross gen).

dgrdsv · Feb 9, 2020

I honestly don't know what they are babbling about. I've beaten several games with RT last year on my 2080, all in 2560x1600, all were completely playable if sometimes were below 60. But I fail to see how that fact that RT games can run below 60 make RTX "STILL not worth it in 2020". Does the fact that RDR2 can run below 30 without any RT make all modern h/w "not worth it"?

Pop-O-Matic · Feb 9, 2020

TaySan said:
I think Ray Tracing will really shine once the next series of GPUS launch. The 3080 ti will do wonders for performance.

A $2000 GPU better fucking do well with raytracing.

ProstatePuncher · Feb 9, 2020

Managing to hold 60 fps at 1080p high raytracing with Control on a 2070 Super was great for me. I really don't care about maxing out stupid high framerates if I'm using raytracing because its such a hefty new tech. Thinking that 60 fps is somehow a failure of RTX cards is just mental and beyond me.

liquidmetal14 · Feb 9, 2020

what I probably wouldn't articulated quite like them, at the end of the day it really isn't worth it at all right now in part 2 the price gouging. I get those of you that have the hardware and the money to spend on it or whatever you had to do to get it and sacrifice but most of us are looking for that sweet spot of between 4 and 700 for a high performer.

As I said, if you got the money then power to you and I would be right there with you but at the same time I want to know if I'm spending over 1000 that I'm getting not just high-end but capable hardware of running the minimum standard of resolution which is 4K these days.

I've had nothing but Nvidia gpus for the last eight or nine upgrades but it hasn't been primarily due to the fact that they were the most expensive because I never paid full retail for those cards. Even the Radeon 6970 that I had bought that was retail, was reasonable in price which is why at the time I bought it.

At the end of the day it's a really good debate if you want to make it a debate but I do hope the new consoles having Ray tracing optimize this further because more importantly than anything else and as some have pointed out, I just want 60 plus frames at 4K in any game coming out this year from modern hardware available today. I can appreciate games that really push things and give us the options to tweak enough to get to that point. Stuff like volumetric clouds and things that are expensive that sacrifice very little visual fidelity. That's the benefit of PC and it always will be so you could almost argue that it invalidates any cynicism but at the same time my argument is probably always going to be more about price which I hope will change as competition gets better.

Look at what happened on the CPU front. I do nothing but recommend AMD now and rightfully so.

EvilBoris · Feb 9, 2020

Jeez that guy loves sharpening.
I almost threw up in my mouth.

Deleted member 49611 · Feb 9, 2020

i have an RTX 2080 and i have yet to play a game with raytracing. i bought this in October 2018. just none of the games i want to play have it. i bought the card because i wanted a performance upgrade so the RTX was just a bonus.

the first game i'll play with raytracing will be Doom Eternal if they add it in. if not then it'll be Cyberpunk 2077 but by then i might have replaced this card.

i don't think RTX is worth it yet but maybe in 2021/2022 i think it'll be way more common if consoles are going to be using it.

myojinsoga · Feb 9, 2020

I've been speccing and respeccing the system I want to build, and I think I've settled on a GTX1660ti. It feels too early for ray tracing to bring much of interest to the table.

(Specifically because I'm going for mid-spec affordability, I suppose ... However I'm amazed this technology is here and 'am fine' with it being the future. I remember 20 years ago first hearing about it as this unicorn / pipe dream, and here we are)

Deleted member 11276 · Feb 9, 2020

Samusaran said:
RTX 2060 is the most popular RTX card so far as expected since it's the "cheapest" (still damn expensive lol) RTX card even though it launched later than the others https://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/videocard/
The Super variant is much less popular annoying that when DF covers RTX 2060 it's always the Super version not the normal RTX 2060 everyone else and i got

When the 3000 series cards come out i expect the 2060 to drop in price even further and will have even more higher adoption rate unless Nvidia stops selling them. Hope Nvidia continues to push the 2060 as the good enough jump in RTX card we'll see how it fares with official Minecraft RTX for example, they already do several videos on their socials and youtube channel only on 2060 marketing still

DF has made plenty of RTX 2060 videos now and they always mention it in their RTX videos.

I could see Nvidia putting out a RTX 3050 (Ti) with RTX 2060 specs but based on Ampere for an under 250 dollar price. That would massively increase RTX adoption for sure.

Blade Wolf · Feb 9, 2020

Amazing tech no doubt, but it's definitely not worth it at the moment, probably not worth it for another 5 years.

Right now you need the RTX series cards to properly display the tech and even then it completely eats up the performance.
I have zero idea how developers are gonna tackle this technology with the PS5 & Series X' hardware. Are we going to see sub 30fps performance across true next-gen games? Will the devs offer a RTX off mode that runs at 60fps? What if the devs just say no to RTX altogether?

Ray tracing is great, but we are biting off more than we can chew here.
This is like the base PS4 and the PSVR all over again, the tech itself is amazing but the hardware just isn't good enough.

My prediction is that RTX absolutely WILL NOT become the standard until the next, next generation.

Bosch · Feb 9, 2020

The tech now doesn't worth and for sure console solution will be really simple. First amd rtx gen and the cost on performance will limit the technology on consoles. People who think consoles will have native 4k with rtx live in a pipe dream.

orava · Feb 9, 2020

Bosch said:
The tech now doesn't worth and for sure console solution will be really simple. First amd rtx gen and the cost on performance will limit the technology on consoles. People who think consoles will have native 4k with rtx live in a pipe dream.

I have a feeling that the next gen consoles push this "not worth it" mentality even further just because the hardware is so limited and the tech is again stuck at that level. PC RTRT can't truly advance and the effects will be same basic stuff but with better perfomance and higher fidelity.

ThereAreFourNaan · Feb 9, 2020

EvilBoris said:
Jeez that guy loves sharpening.
I almost threw up in my mouth.

I remember that time last year where you just couldn't kill the meme that the AMD sharpening filter was a superior version of DLSS.

MORE sharpening

laxu · Feb 9, 2020

Blade Wolf said:
Right now you need the RTX series cards to properly display the tech and even then it completely eats up the performance.
I have zero idea how developers are gonna tackle this technology with the PS5 & Series X' hardware. Are we going to see sub 30fps performance across true next-gen games? Will the devs offer a RTX off mode that runs at 60fps? What if the devs just say no to RTX altogether?

My guess is that they will use raytracing to enhance scenes on a smaller scale. Interior sections with less things to render, for example Metro Exodus interiors look far better with RT global illumination so imagine something like PT hallways but with better lighting and shadows. Cutscenes where they know how it will perform because the player can't affect it and can tailor the use and performance of RT carefully so the RT hardware doesn't need to operate on a full scene. They could use it just for those bathroom mirrors you inevitably find in a lot of games or for 3D raytraced audio to enhance the atmosphere in a horror game.

It's just going to be another tool in the developer's toolbox and is already available in Unreal and Unity engines so using it is not necessarily a massive effort for the developer either.

Deleted member 22585 · Feb 9, 2020

RTX + improved DLSS is the way to go at the moment.

Jobbs · Feb 9, 2020

There aren't many games that really do a lot with it yet (control and metro exodus are among the only ones) but it's definitely the future. It's not like your RTX card will never get anything to do, and as time goes not only will performance and results improve, but this will actually help devs accomplish more with less work. It's a win all around. If you don't care about the few games now that use it well that are currently released, then it's fine to not be in a rush to upgrade, but it's still the future of game rendering!

Nola · Feb 9, 2020

regawdless said:
RTX + improved DLSS is the way to go at the moment.

This.

People talking about this tech isn't ready have to be excluding this from their calculus.

An improved DLSS style solution plus ray tracing is the foundation for the next few years and likely the next gen cycle imo.

I can absolutely imagine next gen consoles leaning heavy into this combo to squeeze ray tracing in but not cripple performance on what will almost certainly be cards from AMD less capable then a 2080ti or even Super today.

And I am not sure what debate people think is being had? This is not five years off, or maybe we should hold off, this is here, now, and it's not going away. The major publishers have or are incorporating it into major titles, industry leading companies are showcasing it in their games, it's not like we get through this year and suddenly all the franchises planning to incorporate it will abandon it right as newer hardware makes it even more viable. This is here to stay and you damn well know console developers are going to want in and will incorporate it. I mean isn't the rumor that both Microsoft and Sony want to ensure this capability now?

tokkun · Feb 9, 2020

Jobbs said:
this will actually help devs accomplish more with less work.

That remains to be seen. The video demonstrates that there a lot of cases where current raytracing technology doesn't "just work" and where pre-baked reflections or shadows actually look better. Moreover, if it incurs a major performance penalty, it may require more optimization work elsewhere to compensate for it.

DSP · Feb 9, 2020

I am playing wolf young blood right now. It runs so well with RTX and the visual impact is quite big. I think the performance is completely reasonable right now for what you get. A 2070 Super has no problem playing it at 1440p so I really don't get what even the complaints are about. I think RTX in a competitive game is not something you should care about but everything else the performance is perfectly fine and you don't need 150fps to play control. In fact, I think the visual impact of RTX is so large that I am willing to turn off other settings to gain frames back.

Nola · Feb 9, 2020

tokkun said:
That remains to be seen. The video demonstrates that there a lot of cases where current raytracing technology doesn't "just work" and where pre-baked reflections or shadows actually look better. Moreover, if it incurs a major performance penalty, it may require more optimization work elsewhere to compensate for it.

They mostly pointed to an early access game just now implementing ray tracing to make that point.

There have been a number of actual tech experts and designers in the various threads and they all seem to echo that ray tracing will absolutely improve both visual output(undeniable) and improve workflow in the lighting department. And why wouldn't it? From everything I understand pre-baked lighting is an arduous task due to the constraints and tricks that need to be done just right to fake what ray tracing does better.

The only really question is performance, but as I and others already pointed out, there are already viable and rapidly improving solutions to bridge the gaps like DLSS.

I've played Control and Metro with ray tracing and had no problems, and if the upcoming GPU's are going to have the rumored leap, the concerns are even less tenable.

tuxfool · Feb 9, 2020

Nola said:
They mostly pointed to an early access game just now implementing ray tracing to make that point.

There have been a number of actual tech experts and designers in the various threads and they all seem to echo that ray tracing will absolutely improve both visual output(undeniable) and improve workflow in the lighting department. And why wouldn't it? From everything I understand pre-baked lighting is an arduous task due to the constraints and tricks that need to be done just right to fake what ray tracing does better.

The only really question is performance, but as I and others already pointed out, there are already viable and rapidly improving solutions to bridge the gaps like DLSS.

I've played Control and Metro with ray tracing and had no problems, and if the upcoming GPU's are going to have the rumored leap, the concerns are even less tenable.

It will only improve workflows when classical methods can be dumped wholesale. Until then there will be host of issues when juggling independent systems together.

I mean if it were so easy, then a game with a strong technological backend would ship with RT systems from the get-go.

zombiejames · Feb 9, 2020

I guess this guy is too young to remember when features like anti-aliasing first hit. Just because something takes a big performance penalty now doesn't mean it's not worth using or perusing. Even in the benchmarks he ran, only two games were sub-60fps but still playable (one was in the mid-40s, the other in the mid-50s), everything else was north of 60. Those are fantastic numbers for something as intense and new as ray tracing. I don't get it.

Jobbs · Feb 9, 2020

tokkun said:
That remains to be seen. The video demonstrates that there a lot of cases where current raytracing technology doesn't "just work" and where pre-baked reflections or shadows actually look better. Moreover, if it incurs a major performance penalty, it may require more optimization work elsewhere to compensate for it.

Not now, but over the long haul it'll be a win on all fronts.

Nola · Feb 9, 2020

tuxfool said:
It will only improve workflows when classical methods can be dumped wholesale. Until then there will be host of issues when juggling independent systems together.

I mean if it were so easy, then a game with a strong technological backend would ship with RT systems from the get-go.

No tech is without a transition period.

If transitional pains were the barrier then we would still be on cartridges and blast processing.

long-term every single person I have read or heard comments from thinks this is superior on both fronts long-term.

And the tech is literally about a year old, pointing to games not having it out the gate is silly. The fact that it can be incorporated as quick as it is tells you something though. To do what was done for Quake in months would take way longer trying to use the pre-baked methods and produce lesser results at the end.

Andri · Feb 9, 2020

Is the picture in OP supposed to be an argument against RTX ?
Cause it looks vastly better, and i cant really see how 900+ FPS is good for anything but "look how big my fps numbers are" contests.

The vast majority of the gaming public is at sub 60 atm, so 60 with very nice graphics seems way more appealing than same graphics and fps so high no monitor supports them.

EvilBoris · Feb 9, 2020

it does make you wonder if there is widespread adoption, how will that effect the PC landscape.

If both consoles are using RT, then artists won't be placing all manner of objects and materials may well continue to be authored in such a way to suppose these smoke and mirror approaches to the game art.

If they aren't there, then the game will literally look like a potato when you disable RT.

EvilBoris · Feb 9, 2020

Andri said:
Is the picture in OP supposed to be an argument against RTX ?
Cause it looks vastly better, and i cant really see how 900+ FPS is good for anything but "look how big my fps numbers are" contests.

The vast majority of the gaming public is at sub 60 atm, so 60 with very nice graphics seems way more appealing than same graphics and fps so high no monitor supports them.

The brightness and gamma is out of whack , along with other weird flavours of forced post processing in most of the games shown In that video, so trying to make any kind of objective (or subjective even) comparison is impossible due to how the image has already been changed

tuxfool · Feb 9, 2020

EvilBoris said:
it does make you wonder if there is widespread adoption, how will that effect the PC landscape.

If both consoles are using RT, then artists won't be placing all manner of objects and materials may well continue to be authored in such a way to suppose these smoke and mirror approaches to the game art.

If they aren't there, then the game will literally look like a potato when you disable RT.

Doesn't matter if these consoles have RT or not. They won't be doing the bulk of their lighting work with RT.

Also even with RT, it will be a few years before people hang any game design around the existence of ray tracing.

TaterTots · Feb 9, 2020

I'm still not sure what ray tracing even does. When I look at comparison shots/videos I'm hard pressed to see a difference. The photo in the OP is the first one I've seen that's blatantly noticeable, but the game is 23 years old. Think I'm going to sit this one out until I HAVE to upgrade from my 5700 XT.

EvilBoris · Feb 9, 2020

tuxfool said:
Doesn't matter if these consoles have RT or not. They won't be doing the bulk of their lighting work with RT.

They will one day. And even if it's not the entire lighting system, it could be one significant component of it.
It's less likely to happen with Microsoft and 3rd party, as they have got to be concerned over the PC market and even Switch.
But perhaps over on PS5 where they aren't held back by the current penetration of the technology on PC, then maybe we shall see it.

lucebuce · Feb 9, 2020

TaterTots said:
I'm still not sure what ray tracing even does. When I look at comparison shots/videos I'm hard pressed to see a difference. The photo in the OP is the first one I've seen that's blatantly noticeable, but the game is 23 years old. Think I'm going to sit this one out until I HAVE to upgrade from my 5700 XT.

This was the image that convinced me that Ray tracing can be a game changer for horror/survival games in terms of pure atmosphere. There are other applications as well (like seeing realtime reflections of things happening off screen)

tuxfool · Feb 9, 2020

EvilBoris said:
They will one day. And even if it's not the entire lighting system, it could be one significant component of it.
It's less likely to happen with Microsoft and 3rd party, as they have got to be concerned over the PC market and even Switch.
But perhaps over on PS5 where they aren't held back by the current penetration of the technology on PC, then maybe we shall see it.

The highest end RTX cards struggle with wide ranging RT implementations. It seems unlikely that consoles will even be able to match that in terms of raw computational power.

Just the silicon area required towards accelerating RT makes this infeasible, at least in the next generation. I would guess that consoles will pick their battles in regard to where they apply RT.

Jedi2016 · Feb 9, 2020

Right now, raytracing is still a niche feature, only available for PC, and only for the highest of the high end. The consoles will make it mainstream. Not at first, and not all at once, but it'll end up as one of those "every single game released will have it" features. Maybe not for everything, and not always in an "in your face" kind of implementation, but it'll be there. Eventually there won't even be the option to turn it off, even on PC.

EvilBoris · Feb 9, 2020

tuxfool said:
The highest end RTX cards struggle with wide ranging RT implementations. It seems unlikely that consoles will even be able to match that in terms of raw computational power.

Just the silicon area required towards accelerating RT makes this infeasible, at least in the next generation. I would guess that consoles will pick their battles in regard to where they apply RT.

Just as we see on PC now, you have some using it for refractions, others for emissive light sources, others for shadows, some for global illumination.
I think that type of thing will happen with consoles too

ILikeFeet · Feb 9, 2020

EvilBoris said:
They will one day. And even if it's not the entire lighting system, it could be one significant component of it.
It's less likely to happen with Microsoft and 3rd party, as they have got to be concerned over the PC market and even Switch.
But perhaps over on PS5 where they aren't held back by the current penetration of the technology on PC, then maybe we shall see it.

Microsoft is the one company I expect to push RT the hardest. Especially since they intend to keep supporting the XBO for a couple of years. And what better way to differentiate games than to have the XSX use RT

NVIDIA RTX In 2020 - STILL Not Worth It? [HardwareCanucks]

SayTan

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

Deleted member 49611

Account closed at user request

Alt Account

User requested account closure

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

Community Resettler

Prophet of Truth - HDTVtest

DF Deet Master