This is the thing that has been true since way back in the demoscene from the 80s.
if you can fake it fast enough you can get away with really low resolution/level of detail or inaccuracy.
i.e., in a game like competitive FPS, frame rate is everything. and in a game like that where frame rate is everything, nobody gives a shit if you can see reflections in the other guy’s eyes or whatever if it costs 50-70% of your frame rate.
Don’t get me wrong, ray tracing is the future, eventually. But we are WAY off yet. Until we’re surpassing say 4k144p with ray tracing on, heaps of people will turn it off for more frames. And even then, decent VR will require higher resolution than that, ideally at similar or higher rate.
I think one of the graphics guys from AMD (in an interview from a year or two back) was suggesting something like 16k res per eye was what you need for proper VR (with a decent field of vision). We’re simply nowhere near that, and rasterizing can “fake it” well enough that the frame rate difference is simply not worth it to do ray tracing yet.
I have learned to stop being involved in these threads because I can tell exactly where they’re going from the first post, but I can’t help but wonder if the majority of comments/ers here are saying they would never buy one and how bad it is, surely that was settled ages ago when the price was announced? I don’t understand the beating of the dead horse.
Sadly its going to be the only option in about 6 months for high end gaming whether you actually use RTX or not. Sure some 10 series stuff will still be around but not much.
I don’t think it was settled at all because RTX performance was unknown. So there was always… well its a mild improvement in rasterization but certainly not worth the price increase, let’s wait for RTX. Now RTX results are coming out and its a steaming pile of shit. The narrative of “It just works”, TH’s “Just buy it” and other hyping NVidia was responsible for only to have it fall flat on its face is just now being released… because RTX just came alive. This was going to be a 2 part review anyways, rastarization and RTX. Now the question will be, how long will reviewers keep benchmarking RTX? Undoubtedly things will improve so maybe from steaming pile of shit to shit but reviewers want to produce new content… not rehashing of the same ole same ole at NVidia’s beck and call.
That’s all fair, so you would class the RTX line or at least the 2080ti as “not worth it” in the current iteration and pricing , correct? That seems to be the verdict that was reached very early on in the thread. I actually agree that ~1k is a fuckload of cash to drop on a gpu, and a gpu that is apparently, not that super fantastic.
What I would seriously ask is, is there a point, however hypothetical, that the RTX line COULD impress? Maybe not even impress, but for those currently not happy with it to turn around and say “eh, okay. That’s not awful.”
because if there is NO chance of that happening, then this is less of a fact based “as it stands” thread, and more of an echo chamber.
Actually yes the RTX line could impress… if the 2080Ti could do 144 FPS with RTX on at 1440p. I just don’t see it reaching that point anytime soon… there would have to be a breakthrough of some sort that unleashes significant increase while keeping temps in check. 2070 class cards (and the invariable 2070Ti that will come out at some point) 1080p RTX on at 60+ FPS. Also the graphics would have to be useful in some respect… if I’m playing BF5 I’m not looking for muzzle flashes in eyes.
As far as the thread is concerned not sure what you were expecting. This thread would have taken a different turn had there been say a 65% increase in rastarization AND/or significant FPS with RTX performing well. Where else should deep dives and 1st videos with actual numbers go? Everyone thought it probably wasn’t going to go well, especially with all the shit from NVidia that has spawned memes for years to come. And the numbers prove it out.
But you would still constitute this as “shit”, as stated above?
And anytime soon == anytime at all? 2019? 2025?
It’s new technology, it underwhelmed, there’s no support. That’s the standard. Stop buying into marketing hype (which I doubt you did, considering your hard stance). I remember in the late 90s to mid 2000s waiting a year or so for new hardware because of stuff like this. Live and learn, I guess.
i wasn’t really under many expectations, really. Like a lot of threads on here, I was just curious and thought I would learn something, which we all did. Ie, that most functioning adults present agree that the 2080ti is far overpriced for what it is. Which my original point was, said conclusion was reached VERY quickly, and the thread has since become less about a friendly PSA that the cards are overpriced and not worth it, to most of the replies coming from people who do not want one.
I do not particularly need Threadripper, so would it make sense for me to round up all the people who have already decided they do not want Threadripper, make a Threadripper thread, and post about how we do not want Threadripper?
Again, the conclusion that the RTX line wasn’t worth the money was reached VERY EARLY, why then are people still finding reasons to talk about how bad they are?
Well I wouldn’t think 2025 but maybe it’ll reach that point then, of course I would hope we would be far past this at this time. Anytime soon… yeah 2019 would work, and if it gets to be usable next year well congrats it’s not shit. Marketing is part of a product and we should be judging companies by their marketing. if you don’t believe that, that’s fine… don’t have to post.
Because new reasons are coming out as to it sucking. That’s the hard part to understand. This is new shit, you have rastarization and RTX both of which are using different parts of the GPU die.
If you don’t like a thread don’t participate, others continue to do so. Watching a train wreck can be fun. Some people enjoy not only watching the train wreck but the reasons behind the train wreck. What is RTX doing wrong, what are the issues, what could be remedies that are employed? Some people actually learn about the technology behind the train wreck. If that’s not you well great… but crapping on a thread that in your opinion has turned into a thread crapping on the mess called RTX 20XX doesn’t really make much sense.
I think the discussion has moved on from that point.
RTX performance numbers are out (for the technology) and i think the discussion has moved from “RTX CARDS ARE SHIT” to “Ray tracing is not worth it”.
Irrespective of card, no one right now is going to give up 70% of their frames for some reflections.
Irrespective of how fast the RTX cards are, the flagship feature that Nvidia is selling them on is now being discussed, now that real performance numbers are out.
Whatever card you’re running ray tracing on, 70% frame rate hit is simply not worth it at this point. Whether it is intel, nvidia or AMD - we don’t have enough spare capacity to take that hit yet. There’s far more important things to spend the power on for the time being (VR at better res, triple head 4k gaming, etc.).
Yeah now that a Titan card for the RTX line up has been announced, this thread…
The bottom line about that card is that it’s not for everyone, and the market segment for a Titan card has always been overlapping between consumers and professionals. Hence the celebrity-endorsed-premium-like price. Mind you, what was the Vega Frontier Edition for?
Yup I was disappointed when he did the single players testing at low and ultra showing the hard dips to 30fps. But then praised the online for running around 60fps, while stating he does not know why people pick on the low fps that just is not reality… Neglecting to mention he was only on low during the online portions but for one very quick aside near the end.
2500$, for 256 more cuda cores, and 24gb ram with like 36 bits more width. All in all, a strange proposition. Same GRay count, because that’s tied to the number of SMs.
