Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, Feb 13, 2019.
removed - watch your language please.
Amen! I will not buy a single game on Epic / Tencent communist propaganda launcher!!!
I agree. That indoor scene with the guitar is much more realistic to my eye with raytracing. Looking at the girls face difference is amazing in comparison. Light from the lamp and all that shadowing looks spot on for me as well. I have to admit.
Glad there are additional features over console. Like every other nvidia special effect, I don't see why such minimal IQ additions cost 20 - 30 fps. Remember nvidia's hair works? PhysX? Several others. Someone pays a premium for a 2080Ti, like the console counter-part, it should perform well. The gripes are more about the extra TLC console seems to get. PC gets a game and be it broken, buggy, etc we need to just be grateful they ported it? BS.
Visually, it's a great looking game. I said the visuals dont match the performance. Hopefully in your inevitable next response you can actually read what I type and respond with whats actually there?
I would imagine the developers get no more money for a sale to either console or PC, so they must look at things very differently.
This basically applies to many games as well. Been saying this for last 10-15 years. People dont seem to bother experimenting to find the proper balance between IQ and performance. In most games, you could achieve nearly indistinguishable IQ differences, but big performance gains just by tweaking and testing a few settings. Many peeps just want to hit the ultra setting for everything thinking its a massive IQ gain over anything else.
That's pretty good for Radeon 7 against 2080. 1% Low shows so much more stable fps.
It's not really minimal IQ differences, though.
The amount of extra calculations that go towards a ray traced image are exponential compared to older techniques, and you really need to spot the subtle differences to appreciate it.
Diminishing returns are only going to get worse from both a performance and development time perspective. Gone are the days of just doubling polygon count for better graphics. I'd rather companies strive for better image quality through paradigm shifts in rendering technology then trying to just plug away with the same old hackery.
Sure DXR penalizes performance now and at best gives only slightly better results but long term raytracing/pathtracing is simply the better technique and they need to start somewhere. Obviously I'd prefer it not start at $1200 but w/e, I'll wait for next gen. In the meantime I appreciate the advancement.
I am all about image quality as well, I just want the quality improvements to be unformed across a title.
Please delete... double posted. Thanks.
Pascals slowly going down the drain. I saw this happening. FineWine working as expected though.
Look my post
Not referring to RT, but about other settings in games that can have minimal IQ differences vs performance gains when turned down.
Hmm... really not impressed with RT and DLSS on this one.
That comparison screenshot between DLSS and 75% resolution scale stuff really made me wonder why one should be interested in DLSS in this game, but not go for superresolution. That was BFV though. Here it just looks blurry...
Also, I felt that RT was actually taking off some of Hilbert's screenshot's graphical fidelity, except indoors. Here, thank you very much @Hilbert Hagedoorn for doing those, I love them when I seem them on other sites. Only a fullscreen mode of those could be better. Great review, as always.
DX11 and DX12 performing the same... that's a surprise. Feels more like DX11 in a working wrapper that eats up the performance that could probably be there. On the other hand, you never know if you're not simply GPU limited, I guess.
I'm not really surprised with performance at 1440p (+33%) and 4K (+38%), since here it looks like what I'd have expected, the basic boost of +33% seems, compared to the 1080TI, like Turing working (architecture) with the new VRAM (GDDR6).
Bascially we've reached times where the top dog GPU still profits of features like Gsync and recently Freesync if you have a resolution above 1080p. Monitor manufacturers like that.
All in all... Metro still doesn't allow the fastest performing card at the highest resolution around (sort of), like back in the day, with the first Metro. No big surprise with that, if one's been around long enough
I would agree so far about DLSS, but not the Ray Tracing. It looks better then the standard lighting imo.
Stable fps under 60... Ugg
For 60 Hz screen user, Radeon 7 low fps value makes game quite survivable. But RTX 2080 low 1% makes game unpleasantly stuttery. (Especially if you consider that average fps is same for both and that means RTX 2080 has much higher frametime variance.)
Not gonna pretend that I would want to play game which generally goes under 60fps since I prefer 120fps as minimum. And then I lock fps to that minimum. Stable, locked fps is great. If you can't have that, then smaller the fps (or frametime) variance, better gameplay.
Downloading now. Bring it on i say.
Like any game.
Ultra settings are a con. 1% improvement in visuals for 30% cost.
There's always one or two settings that do nothing for the visuals you would notice, but kills your framerate.