Cyberpunk 2077 will not have Ray Tracing on AMD RX 6000 GPUs at launch

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Nov 22, 2020.

  1. Dragam1337

    Dragam1337 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,535
    Likes Received:
    3,581
    GPU:
    RTX 4090 Gaming OC
    Yes, text looks fine with dlss - everything else does not. Talk about cherry picking. But if you can't see that, you are clearly in need of glasses...

    And lol at you using wccftech as a source - they are more or less the least credible tech site on the web...

    What is ironic is that you are using a gpu that doesn't support dlss, thus aren't able to use it yourself, yet you are talking about it as if it is the holy grail. The people speaking against dlss in this thread more or less all have gpus that supports dlss, and have tried it themselfs... perhaps something to think about.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
  2. pharma

    pharma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,485
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    GPU:
    Asus Strix GTX 1080
    You are missing the point. DLSS can improve upon Native rendering but not in all scenarios. It's not perfect but can only get better. Look at any major review after 2.0 in Control and you'll find the same thing said.
    Remedy's Control vs DLSS 2.0 - AI upscaling reaches the next level


    BTW, wccftech is an excellent source not what some considered from a while ago. In addition to normal site activities, not many sites conduct or are granted "developer" interviews with gaming studios on a frequent basis.
     
    Stormyandcold likes this.
  3. Dragam1337

    Dragam1337 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,535
    Likes Received:
    3,581
    GPU:
    RTX 4090 Gaming OC
    Not in all scenarios ? Look at the screenshots i posted again, without being a biased green eyed little twerp - everything aside of text looks worse with dlss on. Everything from airvents on the floor, to pavement outside, and reflections on the ground - all looks worse with dlss on.

    As someone who has actually tried dlss, i can state that dlss does NOT look as good as native res. And until you have tried it yourself, i honestly dont give a rats arse about your opinion, because you are just going off on what other people has said.

    And no, wccftech is pure garbarge.
     
    moo100times, JAMVA and Fox2232 like this.
  4. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    That what's called Native uses bad form of TAA. Author of article even explains why he opts to use it. But people have other options which do not suffer from TAA's downsides.

    Then there is problem with motion which you'll not see on screenshots unless someone actually focuses on capturing it.
    Like instead of standing still, capturing lossless video and quickly turning around. Then pulling frames which aim in same direction.

    Thing that's presented on screenshots is representation of best case scenario.
    - - - -
    If you want to benchmark 4K DLSS, ask Valve to implement in in CS:GO.
    And let people use it to reach higher framerate. You'll see if it is more popular or not.
    144fps on 4K DLSS wins over native 1440p 144fps, right?
    In motion and response time, both would be same. 4K has more pixels for accuracy.
    But what if those pixels are not actually accurate? => Fail.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
    moo100times, pharma and Dragam1337 like this.

  5. PrMinisterGR

    PrMinisterGR Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    8,125
    Likes Received:
    969
    GPU:
    Inno3D RTX 3090
    What about how crap the traditional upscaling used by FidelityFX looks. AMD should run yesterday to implement DirectML.

    Since they traditionally have great compute, it would be interesting to see what kind of performance impact it will have, since it can only run on shaders, and what quality we will get.
     
  6. Stormyandcold

    Stormyandcold Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,872
    Likes Received:
    446
    GPU:
    RTX3080ti Founders
    Pharma re: post 62

    In the examples shown it's pretty clear to me that the DLSS2.0 screenshots look the best. There's obviously more detail resolved, but, there's also some AA-like blurring. I think "native" should be referred to as the version without any AA applied. However, like has been noted, in motion is a different thing to screenshots.

    It seems obvious to me that if this feature only offered a 10% performance boost, but, near/same image quality at 4K, then, it probably wouldn't gain as much attention, but, the fact it's scalable could potentially open the door for the majority of people to use it without hesitation.

    Maybe less is more with this kind of tech for the die-hard image-quality purists? Ultra-high quality DLSS3.0 with only 10% or less performance boost for near/same/some stuff better image-quality? It's certainly a mixed-bag right now, but, there's loads of room for improvement.

    On the other-hand, even as a long-time PC gamer, I'm not sure I actually want 100 graphics options in every game to tweak every little thing. I will always applaud having more options, but, in the end, I want to get on with gaming.
     
    pharma likes this.
  7. Ryu5uzaku

    Ryu5uzaku Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    7,547
    Likes Received:
    608
    GPU:
    6800 XT
    Well DLSS 2.0 is better AA then TAA in the example of "native". TAA anyway is best in motion else it kind of sucks.

    Totally should compare to SSAA or MSAA.
     
    pharma and Stormyandcold like this.
  8. pharma

    pharma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,485
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    GPU:
    Asus Strix GTX 1080
    If the native TAA has some inaccuracies, then reconstruction and improvement on the flaws I consider a win.
    Two image below are either native TAA or DLSS. See if you can spot which is being used and what you consider a flaw.
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  9. Dragam1337

    Dragam1337 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    5,535
    Likes Received:
    3,581
    GPU:
    RTX 4090 Gaming OC
    Flaw is that both screenshots are poo quality.
     
    Fox2232 likes this.
  10. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    @pharma : Upper image is more like DLSS, and lower image is more like what Wolfenstein uses to get performance.
    And I mentioned why DLSS has chance in Wolfenstein. Their base IQ is not exactly good.

    Lower image does not use edge AA, but uses some sort of transparency-AA or temporal-AA. That's why there are artifacts around object edges. Instead of having gradient, there is just rogue dark pixel next to rogue bright pixel.
    Game on certain places uses something like bad variable shading rate. Except it does not use same math result of certain effect pass to calculate 2 adjacent pixels. It results in 2 adjacent pixels being exactly same.

    So, upper image where DLSS clears up edge artifacts and applies actual edge AA is better around edges. Because lower image practically has almost no AA and there where it does have it, it produces unacceptable artifacts.

    When comparing right side (building at close distance) even without AA, no-DLSS has better details and looks more naturally. While DLSS over-enhance some parts and can't get details to other parts.

    Central part (building in distance). Since DLSS needs to compensate/enhance details it produces sharper look which enables better to distinct what is there. But Half-Life 2 would do better job than both together on transparency of balcony fence and antenna. Which again says a lot about quality of engine settings developers used. I would rather see FXAA.

    Left Side (building with shadows). DLSS has rather unpleasant shadow artifacts which look like kind of echo. This problem is caused by attempt on enhancing details in fine gradient. as in the end, average of zone needs to be same. DLSS suffers from shadow artifacting in Wolfensten a lot. You can see it on gun too.

    And on same wall you can notice DLSS enhanced some kind of dithering like shading / noise filter. Can't blame DLSS for that. It tries to enhance details of what's given to it.
    Closest fence post shows this noise on both images. It looks pretty annoying. I wonder how that look over time. If it is noise post-processing or it is applied to certain material.
    (Either way, it is bad.)

    Then there are little windows under neon sign. non-DLSS has alternating lines of fine detail wooden window shutters. DLSS did not have sufficient source image to reproduce that.

    And I can go on about deformed geometry. But making full list of issues with engine and DLSS working above that would annoy everyone. (Including myself.)
    - - - -
    Both images are 1080p. non-DLSS is miserable to begin with. DLSS helps in some areas as result, but is worse in other areas. Removes bad AA artifacts, normaly made games do not have to begin with. But adds artifacts to shadows/larger gradients.
    Since use of DLSS frees some performance, I would in this case try to run same DLSS settings to produce 1440p and use precise downsampling to 1080p.

    I expect that DLSS will deliver bit lower fps, but for crappy game like Wolfenstein, it may produce big IQ boost.

    And that's one of problems with Deep Learning Super Sampling.
    In past we had Super Sample AA where those details needing AA been rendered at much higher resolution and downsampled afterwards.
    Now we have so called Super Sampling which is actually upsampling in practice. (And only part which enables it to call itself Super Sampling is that Machine Learning part is trying to simulate Super Sampling.)
    But if DLSS has been used to produce super sampled image above native resolution and then downsampled back to native, we would likely have winning AA method for next 10 years.
     
    Last edited: Nov 23, 2020
    pharma likes this.

  11. Syranetic

    Syranetic Master Guru

    Messages:
    618
    Likes Received:
    145
    GPU:
    Zotac RTX 4080
    The only people that need to get their eyes checked are the ones that say DLSS 2.0 is more blurry. You're the same people who go buy old record players and tell everyone it has a warm sound -- people just ignore you because they are too busy listening to streaming music.

    I can imagine 5 years from know you will be the guys playing at 60 fps telling us how you have the 'true' image quality while everyone else is playing 100+ FPS with DLSS.
     
  12. pharma

    pharma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,485
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    GPU:
    Asus Strix GTX 1080
    The top is DLSS "balanced" and the bottom is TSAA 8x.
    Source: https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._test_wydajnosci_ray_tracingu_i_dlss?page=0,2

    It's funny because another forum where we had this discussion some game developers preferred the top image because it was less blurry and details (like distance window frames, spot light, building outlines) were more distinct. Their comments were TAA and it's variants give too smooth a vibe. The capacity of DLSS to clean up aliasing was noted as a positive (even though some might not consider that to be ground truth).

    Understandable people will have preferences with regard to their own "ground truth", but can see progress with reconstruction techniques and ultimately up-scaling will eventually provide overall better image.

    Source: https://www.purepc.pl/karty_graficz..._test_wydajnosci_ray_tracingu_i_dlss?page=0,2
     
  13. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Guest

    Messages:
    11,808
    Likes Received:
    3,371
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    They really call that AA an "8x"? Like what? Are they mental or something?
    On most of places, it is not even applied.
    And where it is applied, results are atrocious. As I wrote, people behind this Wolfenstein did really poor job.
    But if they called that whatever it was an "8x", they are out of their minds.
     
    Dragam1337 likes this.
  14. JonasBeckman

    JonasBeckman Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    17,564
    Likes Received:
    2,961
    GPU:
    XFX 7900XTX M'310
    8x as in (From my understanding) the 8 prior frames.

    Temporal Super Sampling using the "samples" as the number of past frames to sample from. :)
     
  15. craycray

    craycray Member Guru

    Messages:
    168
    Likes Received:
    43
    GPU:
    3080 Gaming X Trio
    Is this Witcher 3 hairworks debacle again?

    Agreed, it doesn't make sense.
     

  16. moo100times

    moo100times Master Guru

    Messages:
    566
    Likes Received:
    323
    GPU:
    295x2 @ stock
    Just looking at the cpu specs for cyberpunk 2077 and the higher cpu recommendation for RT.

    Had never considered RT and DLSS to require increased CPU use, I thought it was all offloaded to the GPU.

    Still reasonable though considering quad cores are recommended across the board.

    As for no RT support on consoles, Nvidia must have given them a fair bit of cash for that exclusivity over Xmas.
     
  17. fantaskarsef

    fantaskarsef Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    15,697
    Likes Received:
    9,574
    GPU:
    4090@H2O
    Or, they invested more money / dev time / blackboxes for CDPR ahead of time. It's not uncommon for "new" tech to be treated like that by Nvidia. They head over to the devs and either convince or help or pay to take their blocks and libraries.
     
  18. pharma

    pharma Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,485
    Likes Received:
    1,180
    GPU:
    Asus Strix GTX 1080
    Tunnel vision? What about GodFall? Or should we exclude RT not running on Nvidia hardware. I wonder who is calling that shot since a small studios like GodFall have more to lose with this decision.

    AMD and Nvidia were partners and worked closely with Microsoft in implementing the DXR spec, so there should be no surprises. The major difference is CyberPunk is the first game to use 4-5 different RT effects in-game, and might likely be the source of the problem. TBH, I think it's more technical and AMD was involved in the decision to wait. Once AMD hardware gets the required patches to run Cyberpunk it should be good to go.
     
  19. TheSissyOfFremont

    TheSissyOfFremont Master Guru

    Messages:
    252
    Likes Received:
    112
    GPU:
    3090 FE
    We need to be specific about this - it can produce additional visual information - that is not the same thing as objectively improving an image.
     
    pharma likes this.
  20. Truder

    Truder Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,392
    Likes Received:
    1,426
    GPU:
    RX 6700XT Nitro+
    I have to be honest, you really do have to squint and scrutinise to perceive differences between either images. I think the top image is the upscaled one, there appears to be blurring/loss of detail on the edges of things (railings, rivets, the hexagons but then I ask myself... Would I really notice this loss of detail in motion playing the game?
     
    pharma likes this.

Share This Page