The CEO said that the game would not be delayed in the first time when the "tinfoil" doom and gloom doubt and insiders said will be delayed
I only brought it up because you were wrong about saying it was delayed "a whole entire year." It would have to have released this month.
People are going to believe in whatever they want apparently
Not sure if you read my post, but it said that ray tracing is not new. Looking at perf charts and card prices, the only cards that can do ray tracing are the 4090 and 5090. Value prop just isn't there for my use. If more and more games start running like TDA without upscaling I'll just start playing less. For what I would expect, anyone with a 5080 has a substandard card, and they paid 2x the price of a flagship for it.
Were you here for COD sub native rendering gate in 360 era?
lol I buy my own shit and I still stand by what he said in the video
It was to do with their smarminess in that video, but with your reply, I can see you'd fit right in.
Well I did say at the end that Doom does use RTX for other things like hit boxes etc so why are preaching at me like I ignored it? I didn't go into detail about it because the topic was forced rtx, not just Doom. Doom was just the latest game yo engorce it / demand it, and the first time they discussed the comments.
whatever you are smoking, it`s too much.
I guess he is talking max setting 4K high framerate.
Why can't they use the hardware GPU to calculate the lighting values and baked these values to the texture?
He's another one of those "nativisits" who refuses to use upscaling methods like DLSS as if native didn't have its own set of problems.
There is no "performance profile" either. Your past expectations has zero relation to new products which are made in new production realities.
DLSS 3 still looks similar to "native" rendering in quality mode. What DLSS 4 does is achieve the same thing with performance mode. So it's not that DLSS 4 opened everybody's eyes, but rather that it extended the range of acceptable compromises.
I can't stand TAA either. Forza Horizon 5 is a great example since it offers TAA and MSAA. You do get aliasing with 4xMSAA that isn't there with TAA, but TAA smears the entire image to achieve this. I'll take the sharp, resolved MSAA all day over TAA. Even though TAA might look "better" at a glance, race a couple races and it's clear that the 4xMSAA produces a much more stable and well resolved image.
It makes a point about DLSS. I don't think it's superior to native rendering + MSAA. I'll take a little unresolved aliasing over soft temporal stew. Even the wizards at id with their own in-house engine have left a search engine trail of "blurry" and "soft" keywords. That is in a best-case scenario where the developer is technically adept, most games won't have this luxury. Nvidia wants to drive us down this path. Consumers could offer some resistance, but we're out here justifying our purchases instead. They can cut these chips down more and more and as long as Digital Foundry is making videos touting the superiority of "I can't believe it's not pixels".
Developers want to use incompatible techniques and performance freed up by not using MSAA, zero to do with what Nvidia wants.
It's going to be some very hard times for these purity warriors. Because upscaling is here to stay.
2X MSAA will gut your performance by half if used on a deferred renderer. You would take that running at 30fps over DLSS Q running at 70fps?It makes a point about DLSS. I don't think it's superior to native rendering + MSAA. I'll take a little unresolved aliasing over soft temporal stew. Even the wizards at id with their own in-house engine have left a search engine trail of "blurry" and "soft" keywords. That is in a best-case scenario where the developer is technically adept, most games won't have this luxury. Nvidia wants to drive us down this path. Consumers could offer some resistance, but we're out here justifying our purchases instead. They can cut these chips down more and more and as long as Digital Foundry is making videos touting the superiority of "I can't believe it's not pixels".
You forgot to mention that the PS3 and PS4 have had a couple of price cuts this far into their lifecycle so GPUs had to compete with that.
"Native" and less temporal data reliant algorithms would not suffer from hallucinations, motion trails / ghosting, disocclusion issues, etc… the gap between when these AI and/or temporal reconstruction algorithms get it right and when they get it wrong widens… aka modern UE5 when pushed.
DLSS doesn't suffer from hallucinations because it is not trying to "guess" what the frame should look like, and ghosting and disocclusion issues are seen with TAA and reflect the problem of whether to keep or discard data from prior frames. DLSS is simply a more intelligent form of TAA.
Not always. 8xMSAA is Forza Horizon 5 is remarkably lean. Depends on the implementation. Our boy TI has a nice video about it if you're curious.2X MSAA will gut your performance by half if used on a deferred renderer. You would take that running at 30fps over DLSS Q running at 70fps?
It has nothing to do with NVIDIA.
Forza Horizon 5 uses a forward renderer, that's my point. Same for Source Engine. Most modern games use a deferred renderer and those get annihilated by MSAA when it comes to performance.
DLSS allows Nvidia to continue selling xx50 chips as xx60Ti. If it was soundly rejected by the market, they'd actually have to make their bins appealing. There are plenty of examples of lean MSAA implementation. Forza Horizon as mentioned above. Half Life Alyx was also an MSAA banger. Plenty examples of trashy temporal implementation as well. Oblivion Remaster anyone? I don't think VR is going to take off, but that's probably a realm where temporal ghosting is unacceptable.
"Plenty" you mean two? Half-Life Alyx is a VR game design to run at 90fps per lens, so by nature it's very lean but also doesn't hold a candle to modern AAA titles graphically. FH5 uses forward rendering. You can only point to a handful of games. 99% of AAA titles don't even have MSAA as an option because it's effectively obsolete.
It's only obsolete for cost cutting reasons. You just named two games that look incredible and use it effectively. You're telling me a 2D game made on the Alyx engine made with Valve quality would lose sales to AC Shadows solely due to graphics? I don't think graphics take sales away from truly great games, they can only give a sales bump to mediocre or bad games. You could certainly build on Alyx and make it look perfectly modern. When Half Life 3 releases in September with glorious MSAA options I expect a written apology.
It's obsolete because it doesn't play nice with deferred renderers. The performance penalty is insane. It's not about cutting cost, it's about the tech being too old and not adapting to new rendering realities and paradigms.
i feel like goalposts have moved and you guys are playing into his hand
Because they are entirely different things, proper RT is not an add-on, it's a way of rendering that is finally becoming possible to use in realtime and will replace rasterisation. Many current implementations are just using parts of RT to replace certain parts of the rendering pipeline, but even just replacing GI in the example of doom or Metro or AC Shadows is making a big difference for development time and visual quality, but also what they can do with world size and destruction. Ray Tracing itself has been around for decades, this isn't just some marketing fluff to justify buying new cards, we just finally have the hardware power to run it. I just don't think you actually understand RT at all.
requiring x80/x90 class gpus is nonsense, even the series s runs the RT fine in doom lol. Basically any modern mid range from the last few years can run basic RT fine.
