-
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.
Will Raytracing become a huge leap forward for gaming visuals or will be discarded as a performance hog?
- Thread starter ItWasMeantToBe19
- Start date
I think a more appropriate question is how long until hardware catches up and you're playing games on 60fps+, 4k res and RT.
Yes, I watched but really I did not see how walking right up to a window or a metal pole to see your reflection justifies a 50% hit. I watched other videos that showed close to no benefits in scenes, while still halving the framerate.
It adds some immersion, excellent. But it needs to add more to take away half my framerate in a shooter, and I'm beginning to think that it's too much to ask.
I feel like they jumped the gun with raytracing tbh, but I'm still hoping there's going to be some amazing uses of it. There has to be because there's pretty much nothing else for a few more years.
much like i can't see a future in which all big-budget games run at high framerates, i can't see a future in which big-budget games will skip over raytracing entirely
and the workflow benefits from the development side shouldn't be overlooked, either: i'd imagine a world without lightmap baking is an appealing one
and the workflow benefits from the development side shouldn't be overlooked, either: i'd imagine a world without lightmap baking is an appealing one
I doubt base NG consoles will be able but i think there is a realistic chance for mid gen refreshes
Here to stay. There's only so much you can do without it, games have been sorely lacking raytracing.
RT is awesome. Evan with my mobile 2060 RTX I had some good RT results in Control, Metro and Q2RTX. This is like the implementation of Shaders, a game changer. I'm glad that NVidia started. I can't wait for AMD to implement it as well.
Pure realtime raytracing/pathtracing is the future! That said, the hardware implementation we have now is just a weak middle step of getting there. I am super exited that we now finally gonna have a console implementation of that middle step, meaning it will force hardware manufacturers to push their tech more and more each generation to get to actual true realtime raytracing.
Quake II with RTX (although Quake II is old as hell) looks PHENOMINAL. So yeah this!
yeah this is the biggest question, now that Raytracing can actually be used in real time in a satisfactory way, its only a matter of time before devs jump in and decide they want to use those resources to no longer take the time to fake it, decreasing dev time etc. I think sometime in the middle of this console generation we might see some 3rd party games do this for the PC if they feel they can make up for any potential loss in sales with the consoles.
Everyone can bet their life that Ray Tracing will be the future of real time graphics.
It seems like it's really difficult for some people to grasp this, a fully ray/path-traced real time rendering solution is the logical future of graphics, it may seem expensive now but performance will improve as the transition progresses.
I think RT is quite a lot more than a one off example I use in a video to prove a specific point (in that Wolfenstein example I was trying to just prove a point about how small the reflections can be). It can be completely entirely scene transformative:
Off:
On:
It's definitely the future. While performance now seem bad, things can only get better. Newer and more capable GPUs will come out. Also developers will be able to utilize ray tracing in more efficient matter.
And this is when I jump in, until that, I won't get overpriced cards that try to sell a gameworks type of RT to then dump it after the real thing (not locked to a card) show up. I don't even like the way some of the RT changes look in that Wolfenstein Digital Foundry video (the chrome rail for example).
I like my incredibly high framerates, and free sync (gsync compatible) monitors. This new gen is going to be exciting, especially with SSD becoming more important on the PC side hopefully.
For PC, sure, I'm still cynical on how well these consoles will handle Ray Tracing at a decent frame rate. Perhaps when the technology develops to be optimised for consoles in the future. Still insist most games aming for a solid 60 FPS or above or open world games will use traditional lighting techniques.
What makes you say that? RTX is just accelerating DXR, and everyone can use DXR, it's pretty open for every GPU vendor. Once devs make optimizations to DXR, RTX will benefit from that as well.
Sure but right now basically useless to include in your game.
I definitely think it won't be implemented in console games next generation, not any that aren't first-party technical showcases at least. Even with 12 teraflops or whatever, it's still massively intensive.
It may become the standard in realtime rendering, but not soon.
It may become the standard in realtime rendering, but not soon.
this is the future, and devs are probably friggin stoked to be able to utilize it in their games like this. idk why anyone WOULDNT want raytracing to become the new standard.
It's not useless, it really depends on the implementation. Just look at Alex' screenshot of Metro, the difference in lighting and atmosphere is huge.
I don't understand how anyone looks at Ray tracing and say it doesn't add enough.
Even just ray traced shadows makes the objects in the world so much more connected and set in the environment.
Idk if anything Sony or Microsoft announces for the consoles will beat the fact we're getting hardware ray tracing. It's so exciting.
Even just ray traced shadows makes the objects in the world so much more connected and set in the environment.
Idk if anything Sony or Microsoft announces for the consoles will beat the fact we're getting hardware ray tracing. It's so exciting.
2 Gens if we are talking minimum fps and next easy if we are talking peaks.
We already are near it and with optimizations don't see why we can't. Hardware has caught up to the point the industry isn't giving the feature to us as a marketing gimmick for consoles but as feature games will actually be able to use. Gaming hardware has made huge strides in a 20-30 year span on this topic.
A solution that uses compute and hardware RT to give me the best look and performance would be a start.
Why be cynical?
Most consoles devs worth a damn have proven they will get a lot done with a little the past two gens with no rt hardware and hacks. You don't think the best 15 studios that make console games won't adjust to superior lighting model that will leave them with less problems and guess work or optimizaiton eventually? I could easily name 40 devs who will no problem enjoying rt and what it allows when they feel it's approriate.
The consoles next gen will have strong cpus, some form of rt solution and gpus that easily are 2060 levels or more. 4k 60fps is out of the question but not 1080p or 1440p in a console environment certainly not 4k30fps.
Last edited:
It's not going to be like this year. But it is going to be. Long term it's senseless for devs to continue to do all of the extra work involved in NOT using it.
At first I thought I'd go for the performance over the RT version, but it seem like the RT version may eliminate the need for ambient occlusion. Does it? Does RTX take the place of more stuff as well? Subsurface, screen space, etc. AO too, that could be how it makes up for it's pricey performance cost.I think RT is quite a lot more than a one off example I use in a video to prove a specific point (in that Wolfenstein example I was trying to just prove a point about how small the reflections can be). It can be completely entirely scene transformative:
Off:
On:
That's good to know, going by Nvidia's past features I figured it was one of their gameworks class experiments, something like Physx.
Witcher has so many gameworks features that I just leave off even though it doesn't seem to effect my performance much, though it does keep me from max framerate of my monitor.
My guess is it will mostly used as ambient occlusion and not much else for this gen, too resource hungry even counting it's the first gen.
And, honestly, there instances where flat and unnatural lighting looks/works better.
And, honestly, there instances where flat and unnatural lighting looks/works better.
Okay, yeah, it's a lot less flat, and that is what I've been wanting from games for a long time now... but 50% of the frames.... come on Nvidia. Losing 50% of the framerate is a massive loss for anything, especially fast-paced games where you might not even get to really appreciate the difference (?). In an RPG, I'll take it.
Add some more RT cores, something...
I don't disagree with the future being about raytracing but right now...when we've had so many years of similar limitations in games from the PS3 to PS4 era...to sacrifice it all is a lot to ask without killer implementations.
Last edited:
"Our game will run at 4K/30fps"
"So does that mean there will be 1080p/60...?"
"As for our 1080p mode, we have the game running with RTX at a solid 30fps"
"So does that mean there will be 1080p/60...?"
"As for our 1080p mode, we have the game running with RTX at a solid 30fps"
RT GI in metro replaces screen space AO, among other things.
In metro it is not 50% of the framerate though. On the High setting, which is what the developers recommend and not ultra, it is decidedly less.
I'm expecting some games to completely ignore it in favor of better performance but raytracing adds more than just prettier graphics. It open up a lot of possibilities with more realistic lights and mirrors (we'll definitely see some next gen games using mirrors as a gameplay element). It can also be used for more realistic ambiance sound.
We've barely scratched the surface of what's possibe with RT. What an amazing generation awaits us all...
Regardless of the question whether it is the future or not, the problem I see at the moment is that it comes at the worst possible moment for consoles. On the one hand, there's still that push towards native 4K rendering and current high-end GPUs are more or less managing this by now, so 4K@30fps on next-gen consoles seems to be a realistic goal, overall (4K@60fps is already looking dicey though).
...in comes raytracing and throws a whole bunch of spanners into the works with its massive hardware requirements.
...and if that wasn't bad enough, TV manufacturers are already starting to gear up for 8K displays and you can bet your ass that they'll be hyping the shit out of those a few years down the line.
So in short, yeah looks neat and everything, but I just don't see the hardware capable of providing the necessary rendering power for 4K@60fps *with raytracing* for another ... I don't know, 6-8 years perhaps.
...in comes raytracing and throws a whole bunch of spanners into the works with its massive hardware requirements.
...and if that wasn't bad enough, TV manufacturers are already starting to gear up for 8K displays and you can bet your ass that they'll be hyping the shit out of those a few years down the line.
So in short, yeah looks neat and everything, but I just don't see the hardware capable of providing the necessary rendering power for 4K@60fps *with raytracing* for another ... I don't know, 6-8 years perhaps.
I'll wait for the end of next gen to maaaybe get a graphics card that can do RTX. They will have work to do with optimization on consoles first anyway, and if we are lucky they'll get to it on PC in the distant future.
I expect them to let PC players eat massive performance increases instead though.
I expect them to let PC players eat massive performance increases instead though.