Radeon Series RX 6000 Raytracing numbers posted by AMD, match RTX 3070

Sorry to intervine,but benches from who?If its directly from Microsoft with DXR support then ok.
https://old.reddit.com/r/nvidia/comments/9lcs4u/microsoft_dxr_demos_compiled_for_windows_10/

But if its from 3Dmark Port Royal (made it by Nvidia) then no.
Future console games for PS5/XBOX will support everything because RDNA2 and Ryzen 3.The PC gaming will have m
Heck even actual RT games do not work well on every Nvidia RTX gpu,because infancy and PS4/Xbone consoles with their games(ported on PC) do not supported.

 

Can we read the article before we intervene?

 

Doesn't make sense. What about PS5? It's not DX-12 complient.

 

How's that?RDNA 2 (PS5/XBOX)do not support DX12 Ultimate?I guess does,including DXR 1.1.

 

PS5 is not RDNA2 ... no VRS, Sampler Feedback, etc, RT is believed to be different (not sure) ... I believe they have something schedule shortly for more detail.

 

Sony developed their own APIs called GNM and GNMX for the PS4, likewise PS3 used their own APIs, presumably they'll do the same for the PS5.
That one uses DX12 instead of Vulkan or another proprietary API matters little in this case.

Long term, I wouldn't be surprised to see RDNA2 GPUs age better than Turing and Ampere, like what happened for GCN vs Kepler.

Mark Cerny said PS5 is RDNA2, Microsoft now claims theirs is the only full RDNA2.
Putting their words against eachother is as reliable as AMD and Nvidia and Intel claiming whose GPUs are better.

 

At this point I'm intrigued, but will still wait for the official release of the cards, more reviews, and benchmarks in real games (CP2077) comparing all of the RDNA2 cards to Ampere. And then I will have facts to decide on.
But, if they can match 3080 performance in raytracing with the 6900XT or what it will be called, I'd be pretty impressed. Still slower, but not bad for a start. But the pricing will be a thing then, being slower in RT, since they should be cheaper than Nvidia cards, I feel.

 

As expected, if the RT performance was great they would be the first ones to shout about it. Personally, i´m not concerned about RT performance too much, so no problem.

What bothers me the most are prices, higher than they should be, both for Nvidia and AMD. If the 6800xt was around 500€, i would probably get one, but at around 700€, i think i´ll pass...

 

Errmm from a random site,not so big:
https://www.howtogeek.com/677445/what-is-directx-12-ultimate-on-windows-10-pcs-and-xbox/

"Future RDNA2-based AMD graphics cards, as well as the Xbox Series X, will also support DX12 Ultimate."
https://devblogs.microsoft.com/directx/new-in-directx-feature-level-12_2/

 

Remember when the CEO of AMD, stated that the PS5 uses RDNA2.

https://twitter.com/lisasu/status/1260602084669390850?lang=en

 

Really? Can you point out where in this video it's totally worth it?
Just read the comments below it. No-one seems to agree.

 

It is possible I could be misinterpreting the scenario. However the tech/dev sites I frequent are patiently waiting for Sony's announcement regarding DirectX 12 Ultimate compliance which should be very shortly.

 

Sony will never use DirectX, because it's a proprietary API, that belongs to MS.
Sony has to create it's own API, that calls to RDNA2 feature set.

 

It's actually better than I guessed if true. However at $650 I think it's not quite as good unless the 6800XT can brute force it's way past or the RT deficiency.

 

To me, the best (and really, only) practical use of RT is for secondary lighting effects, which to my understanding (and may be wrong) is also the least taxing on GPUs. Tertiary reflections are also really nice, but seldom ever come up. Developers have pretty much perfected shiny and semi-glossy surfaces (with or without texture) for years now, where RT really doesn't yield any noteworthy benefit at all, but is hugely computationally expensive.

It's kind of weird to me, how people are willing to sacrifice tens of FPS for something like puddles that don't really look any better than what technology has offered before, but balk at the idea of buying a piece of hardware (whether that be CPU, GPU, RAM, storage, etc) that, despite any other advantages, has an unnoticeable performance drop under specific workloads.

Unlike a lot of people, I do legitimately think RT is absolutely critical to the future of gaming graphics, but it's pretty sad when Minecraft is the only really good example of how it should be used.

Of screenshots I saw, there are a small handful of situations in Metro Exodus that really stood out as "this is a great example of RT" but in most cases, it yielded no significant advantage at all.

 

That's great and all, but all I'm asking is for someone to point out where FULL RTX makes the game look significantly better. I'd even take slightly better. There's none in that Metro video.
In the AMD presentation the World of Warcraft Shadowlands supposedly showing off ray-tracing effects only resulted in some wall's with some ambient glow on it. It looked abysmal, and nothing you couldn't do without raytracing.

 

^From a random dude CapFrameX

Spoiler: Random RTX

https://twitter.com/CapFrameX/status/1321737970135699456

https://twitter.com/CapFrameX/status/1321734286979047425

Right now all RT games are made it for and with Nvidia RTX Turing cards.In 2021-2022 wil be another story because new consoles.

 

Was a bit worried when RT was not mentioned. Although right now is not a deal breaker, with next gen supporting it we may see more and more games include it maybe making it a deal breaker for some.

If this is also the 6900XT performance on it, then thats worrying. Don't get me wrong great for first gen of it, but I bet running RT will see performance drop so much.

The other thing that wasn;t mentioned was DLSS or something like that, which also begs the question is that also sub-par?

By pure rasta, these cards are beast and competitive with Nvidia, but think Nvidia have the edge with the extra RT and AI cores that can bring about extra performance in games, which at the moment is just current titles but I did see DLSS start to get impliments in far more games which the jumps up on FPS using DLSS has been amazing

 

You touched on a very controversial point. IMO RT is great, but a future technology. Right now it's implementation is just going to be a way to show power and, maybe, gain some performance.

True RT is only going to come into play when all lighting are real time. Meanwhile, it's only for some happy few that can afford a top of the line GPU.

 

AMD is really impressive on paper however I am going to wait for actual reviewer benchmark results. After what AMD has pulled in the past with their benchmark results it is very difficult to trust them.