4 ms·

The performance numbers shown were cherry picked though, and conspicuously didn't include anything with raytracing enabled. Leaked 3DMark raytracing benchmarks

The performance numbers shown were cherry picked though, and conspicuously didn't include anything with raytracing enabled. Leaked 3DMark raytracing benchmarks showed Big Navi lagging far behind Ampere so I wonder how that's going to bear out in real games.

throwaway2048 6y ago
Very few games have implemented raytracing
- mcraiha 6y ago
  But since both PS5 and Xbox Series X support ray tracing, there will be many upcoming PC games that support it too. You want a future proof GPU when you spend over 500 dollars to it.
  - leetcrew 6y ago
    imo "future proofing" doesn't really make from a price/perf perspective, especially for something so easily replaced as a desktop GPU. by the time the cool new feature goes mainstream, that high end GPU you bought probably needs to run everything on medium anyway. I expect the RTX 2000 series will age very poorly. a better approach is to aim for the price/perf sweetspot for a target resolution and upgrade often. I bought a 1080 TI more because I could than because it made sense.
  - doublepg23 6y ago
    Aren't both of those going to be using the same AMD ray tracing tech?
    - oulu2006 6y ago
      That's what I was thinking, seems a little odd that ray tracing can be significantly behind when both those consoles use AMD tech to implement their ray tracing capabilities.
      - zamadatix 6y ago
        I wouldn't expect ray tracing on the consoles to be better than Nvidia 2xxx ray tracing performance and that was only useful as a small gimmick just to put the "ray tracing" label on a game or a couple decent effects but at 30 FPS. I'm not even sure the 3xxx does ray tracing well enough to be worth it and it's ~2x the performance level. I.e. just because games on the consoles can support ray tracing now doesn't mean they actually support it well. I still think it's a generation or 2 away from running well (as a current 2080 Ti owner)
  - snvzz 6y ago
    As these consoles use AMD hardware, future-proof means AMD hardware. The hardware these console games are made for.
freeflight 6y ago
The cherry picking happens pretty much with all of these kinds of presentations. Nvidia did that by enabling DLSS and RTX in everything, that's how they ended up with "Up to 2 x 2080 performance" which in practice only seems to be the case with Mincecraft RTX running on 30 fps instead of 15 fps.
- fluffy87 6y ago
  Why wouldn’t you enable RTX and DLSS in a 3070 or 3080? I mean, I get that you can’t enable these on AMD 6000 series because the card doesn’t support these well.
  - freeflight 6y ago
    > Why wouldn’t you enable RTX and DLSS in a 3070 or 3080? Not every game supports RTX, those that fully rely on it are still performing so badly that a 15 fps increase can be marketed as "double 2080 performance", while saying absolutely nothing about the much more relevant rasterization performance. Using DLSS can be misleading as picture quality is very difficult to objectively compare. But common sense makes the idea of "More performance with more details!" just sounds too good to be true, even with ML magic involved. Reminds me much more about something like Temporal Filtering: Giving more performance, but a slight cost of picture quality that might not be too noticeable with the extra raw pixels trough upscaling.

throwaway2048 6y ago

Very few games have implemented raytracing

mcraiha 6y ago
But since both PS5 and Xbox Series X support ray tracing, there will be many upcoming PC games that support it too. You want a future proof GPU when you spend over 500 dollars to it.
- leetcrew 6y ago
  imo "future proofing" doesn't really make from a price/perf perspective, especially for something so easily replaced as a desktop GPU. by the time the cool new feature goes mainstream, that high end GPU you bought probably needs to run everything on medium anyway. I expect the RTX 2000 series will age very poorly. a better approach is to aim for the price/perf sweetspot for a target resolution and upgrade often. I bought a 1080 TI more because I could than because it made sense.
- doublepg23 6y ago
  Aren't both of those going to be using the same AMD ray tracing tech?
  - oulu2006 6y ago
    That's what I was thinking, seems a little odd that ray tracing can be significantly behind when both those consoles use AMD tech to implement their ray tracing capabilities.
    - zamadatix 6y ago
      I wouldn't expect ray tracing on the consoles to be better than Nvidia 2xxx ray tracing performance and that was only useful as a small gimmick just to put the "ray tracing" label on a game or a couple decent effects but at 30 FPS. I'm not even sure the 3xxx does ray tracing well enough to be worth it and it's ~2x the performance level. I.e. just because games on the consoles can support ray tracing now doesn't mean they actually support it well. I still think it's a generation or 2 away from running well (as a current 2080 Ti owner)
- snvzz 6y ago
  As these consoles use AMD hardware, future-proof means AMD hardware. The hardware these console games are made for.

freeflight 6y ago

The cherry picking happens pretty much with all of these kinds of presentations. Nvidia did that by enabling DLSS and RTX in everything, that's how they ended up with "Up to 2 x 2080 performance" which in practice only seems to be the case with Mincecraft RTX running on 30 fps instead of 15 fps.

fluffy87 6y ago
Why wouldn’t you enable RTX and DLSS in a 3070 or 3080? I mean, I get that you can’t enable these on AMD 6000 series because the card doesn’t support these well.
- freeflight 6y ago
  > Why wouldn’t you enable RTX and DLSS in a 3070 or 3080? Not every game supports RTX, those that fully rely on it are still performing so badly that a 15 fps increase can be marketed as "double 2080 performance", while saying absolutely nothing about the much more relevant rasterization performance. Using DLSS can be misleading as picture quality is very difficult to objectively compare. But common sense makes the idea of "More performance with more details!" just sounds too good to be true, even with ML magic involved. Reminds me much more about something like Temporal Filtering: Giving more performance, but a slight cost of picture quality that might not be too noticeable with the extra raw pixels trough upscaling.