NVIDIA announces DXR (Ray Tracing) support for PAscal/Volta

Nunz said:
Instead of cramming everything into one GPU, I wish we could use the full die for traditional rendering (no tensor cores) and then an add-in card that is exclusively tensor cores for RTX rendering. Give people the option of RTX, not force the technology down our throats for the minimal games that use it.

Imagine how much faster the 2080TI would be if it was a full die and not cut down for tensor cores. How much faster RTX could render on a die of ONLY tensor cores..

I was hoping AMD would go down this route but it appears they are going to follow suite.
Click to expand...

I agree in principle, but I wonder how much faster Turing would actually be? The thing is, these chips are already running at higher power draw than Pascal. If they had even more of the die devoted to rasterization surely that would increase performance, but wouldn't higher power draw also go along with it? I'm not sure there's that much more power envelope available above what we're already drawing.
 
Nunz said:
Instead of cramming everything into one GPU, I wish we could use the full die for traditional rendering (no tensor cores) and then an add-in card that is exclusively tensor cores for RTX rendering. Give people the option of RTX, not force the technology down our throats for the minimal games that use it.

Imagine how much faster the 2080TI would be if it was a full die and not cut down for tensor cores. How much faster RTX could render on a die of ONLY tensor cores..

I was hoping AMD would go down this route but it appears they are going to follow suite.
Click to expand...

Integrating those features into a single GPU creates a pathway for widespread adoption. Offering it as an add-in board/separate solution would be stupid from that standpoint if your goal is to eventually see those capabilities not only included in all GPU offerings, but to have developers take the feature seriously and actually code for it in their games.
 
Pascal peasants can now ray trace.

703EfQ.png


bWrEUY.jpg


hLwNkb.jpg


nA7Ha9.jpg


https://www.nvidia.co.uk/Download/driverResults.aspx/145923/en-uk
 
Last edited:
Tried the effects. Nice slideshow. Still not convinced that I need a 2080 Ti for 2 games.
 
With frames that low why even bother? :lol: Literally nothing is playable.

I guess its all for that marketing effect.
 
logical said:
With frames that low why even bother? :lol: Literally nothing is playable.

I guess its all for that marketing effect.
Click to expand...

Yeah it’s a waste. Cool that they’re throwing the support backwards but don’t really see the point if the performance is that low.

Tomb Raider RTX was a complete waste of time and took forever. So much performance drop and honestly didn’t notice much of a difference. The game was gorgeous without it and ran smooth as butter. With RTX on the hit is pretty hard and I had a difficult time seeing anything that justified the drop.

Metro is still the only game that RTX makes me go “okay wow” and that’s in limited scenes.
 
Why did those charts show the FPS with DLSS on, but not a separate number listing it with DLSS off? That's really annoying. DLSS on isn't really apples to apples.

Regardless, the 10 series obviously isn't really playable anyway. Like I said before:

Nagorak said:
I wonder if this will just end up leading to dumbed down RTX running at really low rates so that normal cards can handle it.
Click to expand...
 
There was no way in hell NV were going to let Pascal owners run a decent set of frames with these drivers even if they were capable.

It's purely marketing to push them Turing sales up.

Personally, I would have hoped for some better frames considering it isn't taking advantage of the full RT capabilities.
 
Nagorak said:
Why did those charts show the FPS with DLSS on, but not a separate number listing it with DLSS off? That's really annoying. DLSS on isn't really apples to apples.

Regardless, the 10 series obviously isn't really playable anyway. Like I said before:
Click to expand...

They did. Dark green is DLSS on light green is DLSS off.
 
RT in the two games I tested looks good. Effects are subtle primarily to do with shadows and reflections in BFV. However, in both games turning off RT effects didn’t make me lose much in terms of visual fidelity. Net net, it is a good feature and some scenes it is quite noticeable even but playing games at 60 FPS with a 2080 Ti will not be worth it for me at WQHD resolution. I am quite OK with close to 80-100 FPS without RT and my 1080 Ti.
 
Oh yeah, Ray-Tracing master-race mother****ers.


At least I won't have to update drivers; hate making any kind of changes, re-configuring all game profiles.
 
I've only tried Battlefield V but at 1440p with everything else on Ultra/max and DXR on Medium the game runs pretty good, all things considered. Joined a 64p conquest game on twisted steel and fps was mostly in the 70-90 range, with drops to 40-60.

DXR on high killed fps to sub 40s, and Ultra to sub 30s. Low performed same as Medium for me, so I would say try Medium if you are on a 1080 Ti.

Had I not played the SP already I would probably have locked fps to 60 and enjoyed the SP with DXR at medium. For MP I will go back to everythinbg low/off/dx11 anyway :D
 
KAC said:
RT in the two games I tested looks good. Effects are subtle primarily to do with shadows and reflections in BFV. However, in both games turning off RT effects didn’t make me lose much in terms of visual fidelity. Net net, it is a good feature and some scenes it is quite noticeable even but playing games at 60 FPS with a 2080 Ti will not be worth it for me at WQHD resolution. I am quite OK with close to 80-100 FPS without RT and my 1080 Ti.
Click to expand...

You need to experience Metro with RTX on. It's THE RTX showcase game ATM.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top