Insane Metal
Member
Dat PT performance. Damn.
This statement not make sense at all. Faked lighting isn't a less noticeable difference compared any real time rendering insofar as better can be path tracing over raytracing.There's a difference between rasterization and ray tracing, but I feel like there's a massive difference between ray tracing and path tracing. The way every light source is accounted for and bounces light more realistically to lit up the place.
If we ever get to a point where PT is the standard and everything is actually designed around it, that's when things start looking crazy.
Look at the post I'm replying to. He said they nerfed the standard RT mode to shit, but the standard RT mode uses the same techniques as F1 24…DDGI for the lighting because it's cost-effective, so they didn't pare back the RT. They enhanced it with the new mode.It's actually technically nerfed. Game uses Nvidia's DDGI for its RT presentation. DDGI needs additional AO, be it SS or RT, for contact shadows and additional tuning for self shadows. As we can see, the RTAO implementation ends up leaving a lot of stuff out of the BVH, and the SSAO they use can't even make up for that because they are featuring CACAO, which, although I have never used it, it has always looked like crap and almost non-existant in any game it got featured in.
I don't understand, why does this need to be in real-time? If the time of day doesn't change, why not use path tracing during dev to look at various light sources, and then recreate it all during rasterization?
Time of day is fixed, environment is fixed, I don't understand the need for real time computing
This statement not make sense at all. Faked lighting isn't a less noticeable difference compared any real time rendering insofar as better can be path tracing over raytracing.
Ok so for you between the last two pics there is the bigger difference... I mean, you are free to think so but the pic doesn't exactly help your cause.![]()
Maybe this helps you out.
![]()
Thanks for your input Karim, we will be in touch if we need anything more.Ok so for you between the last two pics there is the bigger difference... I mean, you are free to think so but the pic doesn't exactly help your cause.
Listen I'm just saying you have just bizzare take and very subjective, but baked effects are far more worse vs raytracing over raytracing vs pathtracing. But you are free to prefer prebaked rendering (which really I don't get it at all, you notice immediately when something is faked when you get used to real time effects.)Thanks for your input Karim, we will be in touch if we need anything more.
You can still rasterize lights and reflections to look similar to ray traced. That raster in this example is a lazy raster.![]()
Maybe this helps you out.
![]()
You can still rasterize lights and reflections to look similar to ray traced. That raster in this example is a lazy raster.
I.. never said that? What I mean is that tray tracing looks better than rasterization, but path tracing looks vastly better.Listen I'm just saying you have just bizzare take and very subjective, but baked effects are far more worse vs raytracing over raytracing vs pathtracing. But you are free to prefer prebaked rendering.
My bad for the last sentence,but still the gap among raytracing versus rasterization is a lot more dramatic...I.. never said that? What I mean is that tray tracing looks better than rasterization, but path tracing looks vastly better.
Well, yeah. One thing I have noticed is that since RT has started to become more and more of a thing, select devs have pushed out "lazy" raster solutions. Letting RT do the heavy lifting and lessening their artistic craft.The same could be said for the raytraced example too, nothing stopping you from casting more rays and having multiple bounces to get a similar look to "pathtracing"
What are your settings graphically cos mine dont look this sharp at 4k.Game is goated. Best looking racing game on the market now. Cross posting my shots from the graphics fidelity thread:
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
![]()
Also forget all that nonsense about needing a 5090 for path tracing:
![]()
What are your settings graphically cos mine dont look this sharp at 4k.
Look at the post I'm replying to. He said they nerfed the standard RT mode to shit, but the standard RT mode uses the same techniques as F1 24…DDGI for the lighting because it's cost-effective, so they didn't pare back the RT. They enhanced it with the new mode.
Yes everyone knows that mate, I want it on my PS5 where my F1 25 copy is and I have a racing wheel and stand which is setup in my living room for the PS5. I have a PCVR headset for PC. So I should just buy it twice? C'mon.. PlayStation has a huge player base, it's just unacceptable.you can if it's connected to a PC.
No?No offence but aren't you the same person who predicted the PSSR was sort of bilinear upscaling or something in line of such approach, very rudimentary, because sony hasn't the same access to the new tech as Nvidia?
Close to be able to do PT in an AAA game in anything resembling 4K.Close to what? You're crazy if you think the PS6 won't be able to do path tracing. The only way it won't is if it comes out in 2027.
Not here, in the purple forum. You have the same avatar doubt it's another person.No?
Close to be able to do PT in an AAA game in anything resembling 4K.
This will be you after doing three laps in Spa:I just want F1 25 for PSVR2!
Unfortunately to you I have a good memory; I copied the test and there is a link to the thread clicking on it, your prediction about PSSR before the real specs leaked:No?
Close to be able to do PT in an AAA game in anything resembling 4K.
Close to be able to do PT in an AAA game in anything resembling 4K.
Still worth it.This will be you after doing three laps in Spa:
![]()
Never heard anyone complains about prebaked rendering thought is dated from awhile.We just got ray tracing. It's a hardware bloated pos and now it's already outdated. Nice.
How did you arrive from that quote (which ended up being 99% correct btw) to "the PSSR was sort of bilinear upscaling or something in line of such approach, very rudimentary" claim which I never made?Unfortunately to you I have a good memory; I copied the test and there is a link to the thread clicking on it, your prediction about PSSR before the real specs leaked:
"For the ML upscaling part I find it rather dubious that there will be any "custom h/w" either tbh because that "custom h/w" would need to sit inside the GPU pipeline making it also an AMD developed one. It is far more likely I think that the "custom" part there would be the s/w not the h/w, namely Sony's ML TAAU, developed and trained by them. That TAAU would probably be able to run on any h/w capable of fast FP16/INT8 math which isn't really that custom and is present in AMD's GPUs for years now - albeit it is absent in the PS5 GPU."
I had the same nickname there, no need to look at avatars (still have? no idea, I left after they've banned me for a couple of days for using some forbidden word of theirs again).Not here, in the purple forum. You have the same avatar doubt it's another person.
I'm not saying "native 4K", "resembling 4K" means upscaling well enough to look as 4K as well.Well.....of course the PS6 won't do PT in an AAA at native 4K. Why would that be necessary? That's a pure waste of resources.
I'm not saying "native 4K", "resembling 4K" means upscaling well enough to look as 4K as well.
If the console will launch in a couple of years from now you should not expect it to be more powerful that the PC midrange GPUs of today. Most of them aren't able to do PT with a 4K target in current gen AAA games already. And PS6 will have to run next gen games.