Battlefield V Raytracing Features are now enabled (benchmarks)

Haha.. can you run ray tracing @4K... No You Cant! Good luck spotting a difference in normal play in battlefield of all titles, but I bet RTX owners will notice something at least...... their framerate!

In all honesty, its not the consumers problem that the chip is big and expensive to manufacture. People making excuses for a corporation with billions in profits. Half the reason that chip is so big is because its full if features that where not meant for gaming, NVidia is trying to sell you the same chip they made for other industries.

Anyway reflections are faked so well in games today, nVidia had to do some really misleading PR to even show a noticeable difference. To top it all off nVidia knew these cards aren't good at ray tracing and didn't manage customer exceptions correctly. Now people payed $1200+ for a pointless feature

 

Well we can agree it’s proof of concept just a really expensive one.

 

What an absolute pile of crap.

 

Why do you think 'all the people' are forgetting something that is your invention? There's a lot of games and tech released that never gets to consoles. I also do not agree with your 'good enough' argument. That too, is subjective. PhysX is used in hundreds of games including consoles. Maybe you should research a bit.

 

That's true!

Yet the consumer makes it his problem when Nvidia brings the desired/compelling performance on a small chip.
Because then he starts hammering forums with posts about "midrange", "small die", demanding "moar bandwidth", and "at least 384-bit MC".
Also Nvidia "laughing all the way to the bank".

Semi-educated consumer will also frequently yammer about Pascal being "overclocked Maxwell", "moar of the same old", while demanding more innovative approach instead of "brute force".
And then when he gets just what he asked for... well

 

Not worried about that, my 1060 does just fine in games, but I couldn't use DSR personally. I've tried it and it just looks way too blurry IMO. I have plenty of performance to spare if I wanted to use it though.

 

Doesn't DLSS use the tensor cores, which DXR is using...if anything wouldn't performance become even worse?

 

Some games have this anyway in certain titles.. i know its more fake and not real time like RTX can do it, but the performance hit to me would kill me

Crysis in my eyes had more merit for the expression, when you look at other games back then it was worlds apart. BFV although does look nice, it isn't jaw dropping like crysis was, Not to mention i think us gamers have changed and adapted, many of us now want 120+ frames in games for the more fluid look. If a game like crysis was to come out now, i don't think it would be praised as much.

 

Beautiful cinematic+10 experience at 1440

 

T

Then you are doing it wrong or use wrong dsr factor while ingame. 2.25× is 1620p in my case and it's perfect.


Quakechampions at ultra runs 90fps+ not really slow, or other games. Those really demanding e.g. rotr etc I use native.

 

Hi some news about testing with 2*2080Ti RTLINK i tried the 3 available DX12 SLI profiles with Nvidia Inspector Profile but not good. Finally I force AFR and 2 cards compute and again the numbers of frame are good but not playable accross 40/50FPS in 4K with drops to 34 PFS. I tried to lock 4K@30Hz like XBOX One X, constant 30 FPS but not smooth. In 1440P i get constant 60Hz but again a lot of input lag make it unplayable (need a real SLI support and dedicated profile I guess). Finally I opt for 1080P and I use only one card to verify that those lags are due to SLI emultation. And yes it is smooth and playable with all Ultra settings with a light overclocking 111% Power Limit, Core +50MHz, GDDR6 +750MHz. I finished almost all first 3 chapters in solo and It is sometimes 100FPS. But to be honest il will say this water reflect effects in 1080P are less impressive now that one on the first Far Cry where for us (on the beach remenber guys)... The lack of resolution is the issue here. In 4K its impressive but looks like a 3DMARK2020 so like you can dream to play smoothly in 4K@60Hz only it with a 2280Ti or 2380Ti

 

In the chip diagram, every technology is "mixed" in the same core, but each one have different instructions pipelines, and the tensor, RTX and Cuda, are separated. I think they made an intended marketing misspell, to make it easier to understand, and the presentation sketch didn't helped.

Still, does Battlefield V RTX engine ray trace lights, shadows and reflections, or only the last one? Can those reflections change the overall image quality by themselves, or are you exaggerating? Because the whole picture it's hard to understand if I don't know this, at least for me.

 

I spoke specifically about raytraced reflections, which should be quite clear from my post.

Lighting is indeed where raytracing could help the most, but again... it is super expensive to use, and i don't agree that there aren't any games with good lighting. Infact there are many, most of which uses baked global illumination - asscreed unity for instance. The baked global illumination in battlefield 5 is also excellent.

 

You must be new to sli... 1. Use dx11. 2. Use the sli profile from the previous game using the same engine... in this case meaning star wars battlefront 2.

 

The tech is used for more than just reflections - Tomb Raider is using it for Shadows, Metro for AO, in a generation or two there will be games will be utilizing it for all lighting systems. Why would engine devs want to spend thousands of man hours creating hackery "fake" lighting effects for multiple edge cases, that don't even provide accurate simulations, when they can have one system that handles everything? You can also accelerate sound, collision detection and a bunch of other stuff they already do with raytracing in current games. The hardware will improve to accelerate it better and the denoising will improve to decrease the number of rays necessary - game devs will learn to use it better across a wider function of cases with better optimization.

The scaling on BF5 with RT on proves there is more left in the tank on these cards to handle increased LODs/details now. The frametime is held back by RT only which acts as a completely separate process on the chip. Further the main thing holding back increased lod/asset details is just artists. Look at Epic's Paragon - character models there were insane - performance was fine. 99% of games don't even hit that level of detail. Nothing holding it back but people just spending the time doing it.

In a generation or two consoles will be streaming games from the cloud - Microsoft/Sony/Nvidia even Google have all actively stated that's the direction they are going. So the performance argument about consoles won't even be relevant. Also the Xbox One X is like 6tflops already, a RTX2070 is like 7.5 and console users love 30fps.

Your comparison to PhysX is stupid. GPU PhysX wasn't adopted into Vulkan/DX, PhysX only worked on one vendor's GPUs, PhysX wasn't alleviating massive amounts of work in the development process. PhysX just aided in performance and/or added more of the same onto the screen. The best comparison to RT is the one I already made - tessellation was implemented by both Khronos, Microsoft - came with a massive performance penalty but the long term benefits and usecases for it led to an increased adoption by game developers and focus on GPU architectures to accelerate it and make it ubiquitous in gaming in both PC and consoles.

 

https://forums.guru3d.com/threads/b...enabled-benchmarks.423914/page-6#post-5607457

Streaming games from the cloud wont be a universal solution until everyone who could possibly wish to game has a sufficient internet connection, which far from everyone has. In denmark for instance you still have alot of people on less than 20 mbps connections, cause their only option is old phone cables.

Console users might not be against 30 fps, but they are against low resolution, hence why the xbox one x is praised for often using native 4k. That aint happening with raytracing, unless the fps target is changed to 10...

 

It doesn't have to be a universal solution - the XB1X isn't a universal solution it's an option. Internet connections are getting faster - compression is getting better.

You don't need to run the RT sim at 4K, you can run it at 1080p and scale it to match 4K raster. The AI scaling is getting better by the minute - last year the tech was a pipedream that everyone said would take decades now it's doable in real time at 60fps. Honestly even 4K just two years ago everyone on Guru3D was siting here going "not possible on consoles, PC superior leloleoleoe" and now you're sitting here saying it's expected lol.

I've been on this forum since 2004 and it's hilarious how myopic people have been over years on new technology.

 

I use sli from a tri sli of 480GTX and every generation after so I am less new than you i presume... Here the issue is I need DX12 to get raytracing. In DX11 I get 90PFS in Ultra 4K so there is no need of SLI...

 

BFV does not support SLI in DX12 and probably wont if previous BFs are anything to go by.

It doesn't even officially support it in DX11 although you can use the Battlefront 2 profile as @Dragam1337 said.

 

Took DICE 6 years to ship a BF with working Mantle/DX12 period. DX12 Multi-GPU will be ready by 2142.