Nvidia Ray-Tracing (RTX) tech demos.

Mar 26, 2015
1,027
382
280
Brazil
#5
I was really impressed when i first saw these demos, it is a really nice feature.

But it remains to seem if Ray tracing ande DSLL will be supported in future games.
 
Dec 3, 2013
18,650
12,477
565
#7
Still feels quite overrated to me.

It's super intensive and is it really that much better than what we have seen in previous games?





I dunno, it just feels like a buzz word at this point to me.
Whoa, I forgot how good that game looks. I still have it in my backlog. Get me some of that Troy Baker goodness pretty soon.
 
Sep 4, 2014
592
319
390
Germany
#8
While it looks good, the performance hit is just too ridiculous. It feels like I'd need a whole second card to play RTX enabled games at around 144fps. Feels like back in the days where the PhysX cards were standalone too.
 
Likes: DonF
Jul 9, 2017
692
439
245
#9
Ladies and gentleman everything you just saw ... the lighting .. the shadow .. the animation .. was all real time.


Slow clap. Yer we guessed that. It looks slightly better than Mass Effect 4 and not as good as Anthem.
 
Jan 28, 2018
787
303
225
#10
Still looks like such a pile of bullshit.

Raytraced reflection may be coming but the difference it make in the current environments and pipeline is so ridiculous that it's almost useless for the power cost.

And of course those real-time raytraced cinematic, it's all run by expensive GPU server that have nothing to do with current or next-gen console and PC so much it's far away.
 
Likes: Daymos
Feb 9, 2018
158
97
200
#12
Looks very nice in my opinion. It's a new tool for developers to potentially save enormous amounts time during development if i understand it correctly.

For gamers this will obviously be more accessible in the coming years as graphic cards (with rt support) get cheaper.
 
Last edited:
Jan 7, 2019
10
9
80
#14
Still feels quite overrated to me.

It's super intensive and is it really that much better than what we have seen in previous games?





I dunno, it just feels like a buzz word at this point to me.
I guess the main point of ray tracing is how easier it makes the development, you basically don't have to worry about mapping reflections or anything like this, the ray tracing technology will take care of it for itself. AND, it still looks better.
 
Aug 3, 2014
8,993
598
340
#16
Still feels quite overrated to me.

It's super intensive and is it really that much better than what we have seen in previous games?





I dunno, it just feels like a buzz word at this point to me.
That's screen space reflection. Totally and completely different from Raytracing. It's like you have no clue what Raytracing is. Screen Space Reflection is a post process of what is rendered on screen (it's kinda in the name...lol) whereas Raytracing renders real time out of view light sources.



If you look at this you can see the flames reflected in the eye. If this was SSR then you'd not see that because the flames are not in the "Screen Space". The flames are out of view and being rendered real time and therefore being reflected off the eye.

Also Raytracing isn't just a fancy SSR. It affects all sorts of other light sources to the point it's a completely different way of rendering a game. Being rendered real time and having so many rays of light to process is what makes it so impressive. I do think that Raytracing will be huge but right now it's still quite demanding to render. That's why performance ain't so great. Once more games implement it and hardware becomes more powerful then Raytracing will likely replace rasterization as standard. That will be a good many years away yet though.
 
Feb 4, 2013
3,640
1,214
575
#18
The first game is Justice Online from NetEase Games also known as Treatcherous Waters Online (rough translation).
Currently in OBT in China I believe, haven't followed it since registered but did play around a bit.
Beautiful game as is even without an RTX, but like most large and graphically extensive MMO's it has frame rate issues.
Ray-tracing is just going to make it worse, so while it truly is a sight to marvel the reality is far more depressing.

If you want to give it a try the game can be found here: http://n.netease.com/forum-74-1.html
https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=justice+online+treacherous+waters&disable_polymer=1
 
Jul 10, 2017
1,914
1,363
255
#20
As people pointed out, this might be more interesting for the developers. I'm completely ignorant, but how do reflections work right now without rtx? I've seen games with great reflections like both Battlefront games. Actually, I saw the ray traced scene with Phasma and wasn't impressed. This demos look great, but I don't feel that the results are worth the heavy performance cost.
 
Jan 24, 2015
7,347
1,923
365
#22
As people pointed out, this might be more interesting for the developers. I'm completely ignorant, but how do reflections work right now without rtx? I've seen games with great reflections like both Battlefront games. Actually, I saw the ray traced scene with Phasma and wasn't impressed. This demos look great, but I don't feel that the results are worth the heavy performance cost.
it will be just not right now. in about 8 years this will be more common hopefully.
We kinda hit a ceiling at photo realism and all things to make it better have minimal gains.
There are way more interesting things to better in games like destruction and ai.
 
Likes: DonF
Oct 9, 2014
179
28
280
#23
Seriously, if they continue to fetch their deep learning engine and if users can contribute data, we might get in 5 years some impressive graphical tech in 5 years powered by AI.
Particularly with DLSS.
 
Last edited:

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,321
2,754
405
Unknown Body, Proxima Centauri, 4th O.B.
#24
Still looks like such a pile of bullshit.

Raytraced reflection may be coming but the difference it make in the current environments and pipeline is so ridiculous that it's almost useless for the power cost.
That's because in BFV the game really isn't built for to showcase Raytracing properly. Atomic Heart, a late 2019 game, is a far better example since it also does proper shadowing, proper reflections (Mirror in mirror effects) and overall is more illustrative of raytracing than BFV.

Have you bought one? Atleast you can then run Nvidia's NASA demo then on the moon landings. ;)

That's screen space reflection. Totally and completely different from Raytracing. It's like you have no clue what Raytracing is.
To be fair, i think a lot of people here downplaying on RT don't know what it is and why it is kinda a thing... they see how much effect it has on BFV (Oh cool i can see myself in a car and it only costs me 30 fps on average drop!) and combined with high RTX prices = ''Raytracing is kinda meh.''

Whilst it is so much more though. Its a fundamentally different way to how we render things for games... and we are only doing a hybrid mixed approach here still.

As people pointed out, this might be more interesting for the developers. I'm completely ignorant, but how do reflections work right now without rtx? I've seen games with great reflections like both Battlefront games. Actually, I saw the ray traced scene with Phasma and wasn't impressed. This demos look great, but I don't feel that the results are worth the heavy performance cost.
Through either Screen Space Reflections, or on the basic level, a cubemap/environment map.
 
Last edited:

Kadayi

Probable Replicant
Oct 10, 2012
6,100
3,541
710
theconclave.net
#25
Visually I think its very impressive but I can only imagine the hardware overhead is considerable, to say the least. Even if money wasn't a consideration I'd be somewhat loathed to jump on board with the first gen RTX cards, simply because they're basically going to be a paid beta for the next gen cards.
 
Feb 10, 2016
32
4
160
29
United Kingdom
#26
Visually I think its very impressive but I can only imagine the hardware overhead is considerable, to say the least. Even if money wasn't a consideration I'd be somewhat loathed to jump on board with the first gen RTX cards, simply because they're basically going to be a paid beta for the next gen cards.
As far as I know, the RT cores are completely dedicated to RT, so with a complete implementation the performance impact could be negligible, i.e. the raytracing could be completely asynchronous to the raster. It remains to be seen how many rays need to be calculated, but 10 billion rays/sec should be enough for several rays per pixel at a few hundred FPS.
 
Sep 25, 2015
5,360
2,615
340
Somewhere in space
#27
I'm more interested in the hardware becoming powerful enough to allow for 100% raytraced rendering paths at reasonable resolution and framerate. I want to be able to arbitrarily transform light rays on contact with a surface and create some wild effects with it.
 
Last edited:
Apr 19, 2018
1,016
901
265
#28
It reminds me a lot of racing games graphics talk when people compare games based on how detailed bolts on wheels are.
Which is why RTX doesn't bring that much. Because you need to notice it exist first.

Only way for it to shine is to give developers faster game creation which it does if it is only thing used.
Problem is that it comes at huge cost to performance.

Simply put it is not ready yet for general use.
 
Jan 28, 2018
787
303
225
#29
That's because in BFV the game really isn't built for to showcase Raytracing properly. Atomic Heart, a late 2019 game, is a far better example since it also does proper shadowing, proper reflections (Mirror in mirror effects) and overall is more illustrative of raytracing than BFV.
.
Any video or better yet, comparison showcase of RTX for Atomic Heart?
 
Sep 11, 2005
2,729
209
1,115
#32
Technology and progress will continue to march forward.

I remember when texture mapping was new and a massive hit to performance.

But, back in the olden everyone werent cynical assholes and complain "this texture mapping is bullshit, why do we need these power hogging floating pictures when flat shaded polygons are just fine"
 
Jan 28, 2018
787
303
225
#33
You have to ignore Jensen Huang though. ''This is in realtime'' but it does show comparisons.

Yup, doesn't change much again, especially for the overhead, although I'm surprised it does caustics, which I actually doubt it really raytraces.

It's not something I'll miss when rendering given the little performance/time boost, nor when playing Atomic Heart.
 
Apr 11, 2010
2,289
44
570
#35
While it looks good, the performance hit is just too ridiculous. It feels like I'd need a whole second card to play RTX enabled games at around 144fps. Feels like back in the days where the PhysX cards were standalone too.
By that logic we should have stayed with sprite based rendering. Any new tech is going to be intensive on hardware, look at early polygonal games.
 
Jan 8, 2018
672
778
210
#36
Still feels quite overrated to me.

It's super intensive and is it really that much better than what we have seen in previous games?





I dunno, it just feels like a buzz word at this point to me.
It just goes to show you and a lot of people do not know what you are talking about at all. This is not Ray Tracing in these screenshots you have provided, this is all fake reflections while Ray Tracing is all about showing reflections in real time. Ray Tracing is the holy grail for lighting and realism in games and other applications.
 
Last edited:

Fbh

Member
Dec 6, 2013
10,254
2,062
580
#37
It just goes to show you and a lot of people do not know what you are talking about at all. This is not Ray Tracing in these screenshots you have provided, this is all fake reflections while Ray Tracing is all about showing reflections in real time. Ray Tracing is the holy grail for lighting and realism in games and other applications.
Can't speak for the person you posted but I think the point he/she is trying to make is not that Infamous SS uses ray tracing but that the regular fake reflections we have been using these gen already look pretty good and it just makes ray tracing seem less impressive.

The only examples of it in actual games (not tech demos) that I've seen are in Battlefield V and it's mostly "if you pause this scene and zoom in 10x on the left corner you can see how cool the reflection looks on this window".

I'm sure there's a type of user who really cares about that stuff and appreciates all the details but IMO a lot of the examples given of ray tracing, at least in BFV, are the sort of thing a lot of people will probably not even notice unless you point it out to them.
I think for most people if a puddle of water reflects something that at a glance looks accurate that's good enough. I doubt many people are that bothered that it's not a realistic reflection being rendered in real time

Still, I'm way too ignorant about it to know how big/low the effect of it will be in the long run. I can imagine that as an early example, BFV might be a very basic use of the technology

But at least so far BFV is the only real use of it I've seen and I can't say I find it impressive.
 
Last edited:
Nov 25, 2015
6,307
3,091
500
#38
It just goes to show you and a lot of people do not know what you are talking about at all. This is not Ray Tracing in these screenshots you have provided, this is all fake reflections while Ray Tracing is all about showing reflections in real time. Ray Tracing is the holy grail for lighting and realism in games and other applications.
Exactly what Fbh said.
When I used to be primarily a PC gamer the first thing I’d switch off to increase framerate was shadows and reflections because they do bugger all for the game and are the least thing to be impressed about whilst playing.

Maybe when VR really takes off it’ll have greater uses but right now they add little to the gaming experience.
 
Jun 20, 2018
1,958
2,046
240
#39
Better Reflections are not worth losing half the framerate but i am glad for early adopters to keep stuff like this going so it can be refined and cheaper in the future instead of being abandoned.
 
Oct 4, 2011
12,068
386
595
#40
It's really cool tech, but not enough to make me want to upgrade from the 1080ti. I still think we are at least 1 generation(more likely 2) away from GPU's being able to render this efficiently and in such a way that the visual overhead is worth the cost of entry. It's cool, but not quite there yet. Will be awesome in the future when more devs come to grips with it and the tech can catch up. I'm just glad that we are FINALLY getting around to ray tracing, I remember Carmack talking about ray tracing in the 90's and thinking it was just around the corner, here we are 20 years later.
 
Last edited:
Sep 4, 2014
592
319
390
Germany
#44
By that logic we should have stayed with sprite based rendering. Any new tech is going to be intensive on hardware, look at early polygonal games.
No. By that logic, they should introduce this feature in workstation cards so that engines can be prepared for this tech and once it's developed enough be put on consumer cards. See what it did now. The 20XX is considered a mess, PR and Tech wise. So far it's only 2 games and a 3 one coming and even then it's probably only noticeable on 70 through 80ti. But the price increases still doesn't justify the performance drawbacks on consumer side. Why do you think there are 120hz abs 144hz and even higher Hz monitors if suddenly with RTX on its 60fps?
 

Redneckerz

Those long posts don't cover that red neck boy
Jun 25, 2018
3,321
2,754
405
Unknown Body, Proxima Centauri, 4th O.B.
#45
Yup, doesn't change much again, especially for the overhead, although I'm surprised it does caustics, which I actually doubt it really raytraces.
Why so?

The difference is quite there, i am surprised you don't find it that much when the difference between SSR and actual reflection is mightly apparent.

It might not be for you, but downplaying it because you can't tell the difference is another thing.