🔥 5% OFF with coupon code "BFG" - hitech-gamer.com/BFG
Part 1 - • Ray Tracing ON vs OFF ...
💻 PC Specs - Buy on Amazon / Newegg
MSI RTX 3080 Ti Suprim X - geni.us/SREM1Qg
AMD Ryzen 9 5950X - geni.us/UAowvMb
MSI MEG X570 Unify - geni.us/Kc3SkGE
G.Skill Trident Z Neo 2x16GB, 3600 CL16-16-16-36 - geni.us/nniU
Enermax Liqmax III 360 - geni.us/eaU9l
Streacom BC1 Open Benchtable - geni.us/9PgRsf8
🎮 Games
00:00 Ghostrunner
01:15 The Ascent
02:06 Metro Exodus - Enhanced Edition
02:53 Crysis 2 Remastered
04:30 Far Cry 6
05:40 Doom Eternal
🎵 Music
Away - Patrick Patrikios
Just Dance - Patrick Patrikios
Outside the Box - Patrick Patrikios
🎥 Recorded with dual PC Setup
AVerMedia Live Gamer 4K, GC573 - amzn.to/39ODnJn
The links used are affiliate links. By buying through the links I may receive a commission for the sale. This has no effect on the price for you.
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.
📜 Channel information
Your are not satisfied with 60 FPS? You want more for the best price? On my channel "Benchmarks for Gamers" I'll show you PC systems that make your gaming dreams come true and match your needs! For this I test gaming PCs in all price ranges and for every budget. My game inventory includes current PC games, but also old classics. In my videos you learn what you really need and where you can easily make compromises. Curious?
Let's play!
*Part 1 - **kzhead.info/sun/eZiBm7x9sayZha8/bejne.html* Control, Fortnite, Watch Dogs: Legion, Cyberpunk 2077
E
Maybe this is just being difficult, but I think screen wipes are not as good as just an immediate shift. I have to try to remember what a certain part of the image looked like when it wipes, but for immediate changes, it’s easier to see the difference.
I find that turning the playback speed to 0.5 or 0.25 and pausing the video when the line hits the middle is the best way to view these videos
Goes to show how useless RT is
@@wallacesousuke1433 Honestly, I agree. It’s worthless in almost all games. Even in games where they actually do stuff, it’s super subtle at best. It’s more of a “it’s accurate” than a “wow that looks better” thing.
@@lllULTIMATEMASTERlll Agreed. NVIDIA probably used screen wipes in their OG ads for that reason. Cause they didn’t want their audience to notice the lack of improvements from non RTX to RTX on, as an immediate switch from one to the other would look just about the same. Although RTX has definitely become more of a thing, it’s still basically useless in gaming beyond “looking cool”.
@@wallacesousuke1433 so all the 3d artist are dumb who use it? You don't even know what it does
A huge fps sacrafice for reflection and some lightning effects. Meh. At the end of the day you will remember the gameplay, how it's capable to hook you in. Some reflection and lightning will not change the overall experience but the reduced fps will do. RT is okay but not today. A couple of years later when even an integrated GPU will operate with an RT feature - will be fine. Imagine you buy a 2 000$ GPU to see reflections on specific surfaces in game. Isn't it ridiculous?
its true, smooth gears of war or final fantasy gaming experience is more preferable than laggy cyberpunk
they actually better than cp wo rt
There were only 2 that i thought looked significantly better. Far Cry 6 and Metro. I think it has to do with the lighting engine in those games in particular. It was most noticeable on Metro. Like it wasn't just reflections but the lighting in general. For most games, it seems RT only affects the reflections. In Metro, all of the lighting was improved.
Maybe that's why RTX has such a huge negative impact on performance in metro.
And in my opinion reflections sometimes look worse with RT in case of reality, because in reality they are more blurry, especially on the puddles
All the things you see in reality except for light sorces is reflections, not the color of the objects itself like what rasterization does, so I don’t know WTF you’re talking about except for some reflections like global illumination isn’t being raytraced in poorly implemented games. And Crysis 2 Remastered obviously also have a significant difference at 4:20, where the object on the receptionist desk is reflected even when the desk is not really glossy. The reason why raytracing is still poorly implemented especially for console ports is because console have much inferior ray tracing capability, we’re talking about worst than RTX 2060 level of crap, so instead of being able to implement Path tracing (A more global solution of Raytracing), Ray tracing is implemented along with traditional raster techniques, so developers will have to implement traditional raster techniques anyway, thus defeats one of the important advantage of ray tracing, being much much easier to implement than setting perameters for Cube maps, shadow maps, Cone traced signed distance fields and Voxel reflections, or SSR and SSAO, so when developers has to do raster anyway, they often just half ass RT at the end for “bonus point” just to check some next gen boxes, and AMD with their RDNA 2 graphics on console is to blame, they are the one who is hindering the game industry with their half assed garbage RT cores. The reason why RTX on vs off doesn’t look that different in some instances, is because there is not difference at all because in those instances very little RT implementation is being used, games with poor implementation of RT includes Capcom’s Resident Evil games, and Shadow of the Tomb Rader, and plus some of the performance drop is mainly due to developer’s incompetence of still enabling a lot of the raster techniques when enabling ray tracing, a lot of developers still leaves SSAO, shadow maps, and cone traced signed distance field reflections and cone traced voxel global illumination on dispite Raytracing obviously being able to completely replace those techniques. If you want to have a fair comparison, Control, Doom Ethernal, Ghostwire Tokyo, along with the two games you’ve mentioned is the real way to see what Raytracing can do.
@@An_Xat Nonsense, unless you’re looking litterly at a puddle of mud, all water puddle without wind and rain are just as reflective as clear water and glass, the glossiness of water surfaces isn’t being change just because there is mud in it, it’s just how transparent reflections work, if it’s dark beneath the surface, it will seems more reflective, if it’s at an angle any thing will be more reflective because of Fresnel effect, if it’s bright beneth the surface and you’re looking straight at it, it’s much harder to see the reflections, like a puddle on the surface of concreate, but that doesn’t mean gloss reflections isn’t there at all!
@@dpptd30 and because of this there is "In my opinion...". Alright, maybe I don't really remember the look of puddles. TY for the details
honestly ray tracing depends on the game itself some games like ascent RT will make its artstyle more bland and less provocative and other games like crysis 2 where the character's animation (on reflections) is just horrible and will break your immersion. I think RT is a really neat feature but its not for every game.
Ray tracing is not an artistic choice It’s always the way to go. If ray tracing doesn’t looks good on a game is because the programmers did a bad job implementing it. Ray tracing is basically treating light bounces across every surface as closer as possible as how it works in real life. Everything we see with our eyes , is precisely that , light bouncing off objects , How can it ever be a bad choice, to make light bounce as it does in real life? If implemented properly it is a game changer. It’s not that it works for some games and artistic styles and it doesn’t for others. It’s just that some programmers added it as an afterthought. And some built the game with ray tracing in mind. We are in the transition period. So that is why many games have ray tracing as an afterthought, for a smaller audience, therefore damaging the popular vision regular gamers have about the technology , and making people think . It’s not that game changing visually, so it’s not worth the performance hit, and the hardware upgrades. It this gen , even consoles are RT capable, not to mention graphic cards. So many games are already being developed with RT in mind. And people will see how much of a difference RT makes. Not only for the much better visuals the player will get . But also for development times. Artists spend thousands of hours, manually placing colorized light sources , reflections and cube maps around video game maps, to make them look “real”. All this time will be saved with ray tracing just bouncing light realistically around the map. Minecraft ray tracing is a great example of how much the graphics of a game can change with a good ray tracing implementation. It’s literally the worst graphical game in the world and ray tracing makes it look cool. And wait till we see fully path traced games. Lights , reflections , fog , shadows everything ray traced That’s going to be the biggest graphical change in vide game history.
@@lawyerlawyer1215 Well said, Raytracing is a technolog and not an artstyle, therefore it has nothing to do with the games artstyle or atmosphere. You just have to know how to use it the right way to complement your games artstyle the best.
@@lawyerlawyer1215 Minecraft RTX is basically already doing Path Tracing. And absolutely yes, some incompetent game developers really don’t know what they are doing, some ray traced games still enables SSAO, SSR, shadow maps, cone traced signed distance field or cone traced voxel global illumination on, despite the whole point of ray tracing is to be able to completely replace those techniques entirely. And a lot of gamers are just too tech illiterate and stupid to understand how much of a game changer hardware accelerated real time ray tracing is, it not only make the game’s gloss reflections look accurate, it also can completely replace raster techniques like cube maps, SSR, SSAO, planar reflections, cone traced volumetrics, cone traced signed distance field reflections, cone traced voxel global illumination, and shadow maps, all of which has to have their perimeters meticulously set just to make the game sort of realistic, while with ray tracing, all you need to set is the glossiness of the object, and how metallic it is and the texture normal map, and that’s basically it to easily achieve photo realism with raytracing, no more complicated shader instructions that needs to be compiled separately on your CPU. Ray tracing will make games cheaper because no effort needs to be wasted on setting shader parameters, higher quality because developers can laser focus on game mechenics instead of worrying about rather to implement cube map or cone traced signed distance field reflections for each area of the game that many players only will be there for a few second, or have shorter development time because raytracing is just quicker to implement thus more games per year, but a lot of gamers who are tech illiterates that does not give a shit’t how hard developers work to make a game just doesn’t care because they have to spend more to buy an Nvidia RTX GPU than if they were to buy AMD Radeon or a Console. Console gaming with RDNA 2 graphics I’ll say is what is holding raytracing back, we’re talking about worst than RTX 2060 level of RT performance, so path tracing on console games is basically impossible to implement, forcing developers to implement raster techniques anyway. If developers has to do all the raster techniques anyway plus raytracing on top, it basically defeats the purpuse of ray tracing reducing developement time all together, of the current console developers, raytracing is not a time saver, is just another extra thing they have to be bother to add, which many of them either half ass it, or not implement it at all, and I blame AMD for that, it’s their half ass attitiude towards developers, towards ray tracing, or even towards AI upscaling solution that really pisses me off, all they bother to do is just make an inferior copy of Nvidia’s solution and make it open sorce and expect everyone to support it, there will not be a problem if AMD doesn’t have a monopoly on console graphics, which is where most gamers play their games on. The current obstacle for raytracing being fully adopted are: AMD’s horrible RT performance and their lack of an AI upscale solution on consoles, cheap console gamers that doesn’t want to buy an expensive PC with Nvidia graphics just to only play games on it, despite PC games being cheaper on the long run and you can actually do work on a PC for it to pay for itself instead of the money bleeding machine that is the console, most populer games being competitive FPS games that prioritize FPS instead of graphical fidelity, and of course tech illiterates that think raytracing is a gimk and a scam from Nvidia, if only they are a quarter as smart as the developers that actually made all the games they play and enjoy, they would of think completely otherwise.
@@dpptd30 Nobody who doesn't have a pc wants or needs a top of the line Nvidia GPU to do "work". The only work people need a beefy rig for now a days is rendering and animation considering common pc work can be done on a tablet or laptop now. The return on such an investment is going to take a LONG time for anyone just gaming to pay for itself, and that's if the user doesn't decide their parts have run their course over 3 years or so. Fact is, most gamers, even pc gamers, just want a system that can run the games for many years at a stable fps and at least the native res of their monitor. When steam analytics show that most people aren't even running a RT capable GPU, or even 2k monitors, that just tells me the primary market doesn't care about any of this until it becomes cheap, as cheap means common. Instead Nvidia continues to hike prices, AMD skims over RT, and console companies are more focused on developing games than selling future proof hardware to the point that they're offering streaming now. If you want to see RT adopted in more games, take it up with the hardware companies and developers, not the consumers. Consumers seem very positive toward RT, and I'm pretty sure early demos and real time lighting explanations helped most people understand this'll make development easier, but as it stands it's not affordable for the majority of them, especially when Nvidia's newest 40 series have the worst prices seen for a gpu launch, and that power draw is uh, breaker box breaking. These companies don't help the push for RT either when they sell budget RT gpu's like the 2060 that end up being unimpressive and result in people calling it a gimmick. Gamers shouldn't be called cheap for not wanting to "invest" in an overpriced RT gpu, Nvidia and AMD should be lambasted for handling RT the way that they are, and Xbox and Sony should as well for claiming rayracing on consoles that can barely stabilize at 30fps with it on. I'm just thankful we're reaching the point of diminishing returns with graphics, so hopefully 5-10 years from now worrying about RT, frame rate, and resolution is all a thing of the past. I doubt RT will lead to devs pumping out more games per year though. Maybe the industry as a whole as smaller studios need to work less, but AAA studios are still gonna spend years making junk.
@@bruhtholemew You have to be very careful with the Steam survey results as they're extremely skewed and it's bothersome that Techtubers don't look into the details of those surveys at all. The Steam survey is highly skewed by net/gaming cafe's and the third world in general. These aren't the folks who in general, new games are tailored to. Those markets tend towards very cheap older games rather than the cutting-edge new games coming out when it comes to PC gaming. If you use the Steam Hardware Survey results, game devs would be stuck in the early 2000s level of game production as that's the hardware that's predominantly in use. If you actually want to make improvements for the poorer markets, you need to be aggressively pushing the boundaries at the top end of the market. As games push the boundaries of technology and further normalize it, it causes a higher adoption rate at the top which then trickles down quicker to the lower-end markets. This is why AMD's GPUs can be so much cheaper. They aren't pushing any new technology at all. They're finding new ways to cut technical corners/costs with traditional tech and are just half-assing the implementation of more advanced features onto their standard hardware which is why we're seeing such terrible RT performance on AMD's side. The issue is, because AMD skipped out the on the RT and AI dedicated hardware and haven't put much effort/money into its development, AMD's GPUs should be FAR, FAR cheaper than Nvidia's GPUs right now. The fact that AMD is charging $1K for a GPU that's comparable to the RTX 4080 in rasterization but crap in RT that they paid little to no development costs into is what's staggering. AMD is attempting to brute force their RT implementation and losing horribly at it with how absurdly inefficient it is. This type of implementation costs them no capital in development. Even Intel went with RT specific hardware and they don't see nearly the same losses when RT on that AMD sees. AMD is eventually going to have to bite the bullet and develop RT specific cores along with AI based scaling/sampling. AMD DID add some AI cores onto RDNA 3 but who knows if those things are even getting used. They mentioned briefly in passing that they're there, but didn't mention what they're planning to leverage with those AI cores. Hopefully, FSR will be getting its own AI boost similar to DLSS and we'll have parity there.
You probably notice when you watch video about on/off Ray tracing, but in actual gaming you don't even have time to pay attention on it.
Shadows, reflections, lighting look a tiny bit nicer with on but still not worth the ridiculous drop in fps when turned on
"Tiny bit" rightttt
agree, unless you have money to waste
RTX is fucking useless!
@@Varil92 bravo, exactly, just bought a 6900XTU, almost as fast a 3090, but half price. I don't see difference in my BF V. I understand the difference in the water reflections, but I don't understand how is that possible, that some games show the water only with RT on ???!!! This is Marketing Gag
@@mr.y1965 there is no difference, right now they make RT reflections ridiculous, like sea water looking like a mirror with waves in Fortnite so they can bait people into the tech, but raster version can look just as good RTX version, the thing is RTX is easier to code because it doesn't need mapping. So actually from an image quality pov, RTX does not bring an improvement, it's just less work so coders can focus on other things
The Real benefit of Raytracing doesn't show in most games. In most cases baked lighting looks very compareable, but the difference comes in realtime lighting changes. With Raytracing you can have for example destructible enviorments that are properly lit. Which wouldn't be possible with baked lighting. But there aren't many games that incorporate destructability in big way. That's probably the reason why there is such a focus on RT reflections. Because they are very dependent on perspective you can demonstrate their contribution rather impressively. And just like when pixel shader was introduced, it was used in an exessive way that made surfaces look very atrificial. RT reflections often aren't rough enough, so they look more like mirrors. Which obviously isn't necessarily realistic and doesn't have to look like this. But people like to show off.
RT is just easier to implement because it doesn't need mapping, it's all done on the tensor cores. It does not mean it looks way better, it's just very accurate. In Control they deliberately ignored putting hard work into raster reflections so that RTd version looks better. It was less work from them and also NVidia gave them some $€ to be lazy, so people who are looking can tell there is difference. A well worked raster scene is impossible to distinguish from a RT scene.
control-game shines here
@@craezee247 and what about scene with dynamic lighting? Rasterizing looks horrible with dynamic lighting
Metro Exodus Rtx Was Amazing
just rtx off on low graphics
@@gambikules he, he, exactly. For me ist 144 Hz for smooth images more important. I like my 6900XTU and by BF 5 I don't se the difference with or without RT, so simpel is this.
@@mr.y1965 BF5 doesn't use raytracing for lighting, only for ambient occlusion. It's a completely different implementation to help with depth, readability, and shading for objects in the environment which closely touch/intersect with other assets. (e.g. the dark outlines that stones have underneath them where they touch against the dirt beneath them)
This was cool. Some suggestions if you don't mind. It would be nice to list the type of RT effects present in each game when showing the comparisons. Like a checkbox of (RT shadows, RT reflections, RT global illumination). Only other thing I'd say was a little off was the choice of scenes for Doom Eternal. DE only has ray traced reflections, no global illumination or shadows, so if you're not in an area that has reflective objects you won't notice much of a difference. The Urdak level looks amazing with RT reflections for example. It's a significant improvement over screen space reflections and cube maps
Most of games using ray tracing only for reflections, it’s looking good but not a deal breaker. A succesful SSR (e.g Hitman on consoles) does almost the same job. Only a few games (like Metro Exodus) using ray tracing feature for global illumination, and it’s absolutely amazing
sorry but this is a joke...some reflections and lightning ( technologies maded long time ago in games ) called it now RayTracing just for marketing and earn money by seeling new GPUs
That’s my opinion. I figured we’ve reached the point of high FPS in 1080p/1440p that there needs to be a new struggle for a gpu to overcome for new sales. I don’t need Ray tracing and I will not be using it on my 3090. 1440p really high refresh rate high settings is plenty for me.
5:14 who's man synced this so perfectly hahah
1:03 rtx off looks better
I am able to live without this 😅 yes it looks a bit better but I recognize only in comparison.
honestly, do not see much of an difference
RTX in Metro Exodus is a major improve cuz usually Metro series is just filled with unlogically dark places that holds this dim effect of unnatural light (in my opinion). Usually during the day it is not that dark inside the building cuz light spreads inside from the windows and gaps. Same goes for flashlight - it lights up a little almost everything around the beam and spreads in the room, not just stays in one place leaving everything pitch black. So I think that even if atmosphere might be a bit lost with this technology, but I think that it makes things appear more realistic.
Honestly it's hard to tell the difference. I went from a 2016 laptop with an i7, gtx 1080 ti, and 32g of ram to a brand new laptop i9, rtx 3080 ti, 32g of ram and a ssd. I don't see the difference at all even with rtx on and settings on ultra. I guess it's a matter of the dev properly taking advantage of it since it was pretty new when metro exodus and mechwarrior 5 were made. I'm going to try it on cp2077 and figure out what other games I have that use it
On which resolution did you play? 1440p or 4k? Great videos btw.
Где-то заметно лучше, где-то без изменений.. Кстати, динамичные отражения были доступны с приходом dx9c ещё в 2004 году. Почему это не реализуется не понятно
It does portray illumination and reflections more realistically but is it worth cutting down your avg FPS from 100+ to barely 60 in Cyberpunk? Imho, it's not so I'll just wait for the hardware to catch up and ignore it for now
5:14 the chiken and the sound momment is funny
Honestly I don’t care about Ray Tracing. Raw performance is all that matters.
so play at low settings 720p?
@@user-wq9mw2xz3j like you have to? So you can use rtx at a decent frame rate ?
@@W3TFART uh, even if I played in 720p, on most games, if I somehow found a way to enable ray tracing, I'd get maybe like 2 fps
It’s a personal preference. Anyone who says otherwise is immature.
I bought a laptop Lenovo LOQ with 4060 8GB 115W and will use a eGPU with it ( RX 6800 XT) ? What you people think is RT actually worth it ?
Without ray tracing games still look fine. Sure, RT brings improvement, but it's not worth to sacrifice a lot of fps for that. Maybe in the future we will see much more powerful cards that can handle ray tracing, but at this point we're not ready for it. This option is too demanding & not worth the sacrifice of fps.
Only difference to me RT is more brighter and I can see more. Can I do that in non RT increase the brightness or something?
So little visual enhancement for such a massive hit to performance. No thanks.
metro has the best lighting imo and far cry looks interesting. i didnt think it has so good reflections since its not that demanding
it is scam and nothing more!! developers delibaratelly downgrade game(s) that you will see some effect with raytrace but with fps lose
Ehh, Tripwire Interactive achieved something very similar with “Killing Floor 2,” with HBAO and realtime reflections. Achieved nearly the same affect without anywhere near the loss in performance, and that was 10 years ago.
This video didn't do Doom justice. The cutscenes looked almost exactly the same, and that outdoor area didn't show off the reflections at all compared to indoor areas with glass walls that almost act like mirrors.
i get the feeling the only game that really shows of rtx is metro exodus enhanced edition. makes sens i think because the game is made for only rtx.
at the beginning i was looking forward for RT but, the game has to have a lot of water, crystal things, contrast with many lights (like a party), etc. If your graphic card can afford it without going down 60 fps, nice, otherwise i choose the fps or a gamemode that turn it on in specific and attractive scenes, come Nvidia that sound ez for you plss.
True. Rtx pretty much worthless yet. I prefer higher fps instead of a small graphical difference.
Overall, ray tracing can be used for lighting, shadows, reflections, AI for enemy and NPC, even can be used for sound, but they can't do this because of old gen consoles
I like ray tracing if it's utilised correctly. I don't really care about fps. Honestly if it's above 15 frames per second I probably won't even notice the low frame rate.
@@drlukas4242 frame rate is way more important than stupid RT gimmick
The difference is very little and not important, by some games and scenes nothing. Some games producer tourn effects on only for RT, all for marketing. Why I see water and without RT nothing ?? Perfectly water I saw before 100 years by half life. I bought a RX6900XTU Red Devil Ultimate with 16 GB RAM, selected chips, dual BIOS und two top games, all this for 1299€. This card is some games significantly weaker than a RTX 3080, but without RT is this card almost the RTX 3090 and this RAM, important for the future. For me ist important a smooth image with 144 Hz Frequenz and not RTX with less FPS.
I think we won't have time to notice the differences while playing games
played a lot of RTX games recently. and "the ascent" and "riftbreaker" stand out in how well they implement rtx features. These games are an "orgy of dynamic light and sdhadow, often with loits of fog and rain and other atmospheric weather effects. "control" shines extremely well in how it lights bright and dim offices with reflective glass and damageable window blinds, letting thin streaks of light pass trhough, that can not be rasterized-shadows as nicely. the cyberpunk/noire/neeon setting definitely lends itself much better to RTX than a pastell/cartoon style, as "Ghostwire Tokyo" shows much better than "cyberflunk 2069". The same goes for most space-games with day night cicles, and anything with high-dynamic-range. Games that got rty support after a release with a patch-in update, tend to do less reflections and only getter ambient light, like "deathloop", this only looks 40$ as good as the well lit interiors of "ghostwire tokyo" that show realtime-radiosity much better. Doom Eternal for the most places just has WAY too gritty and rusty settings, that just can not shine in rtx-terms. Farcry 6 gets minus points in immersion, because it arbitiarily reflects a movable tin can while refusing to reflect the movable human ragdoll corpse in the same water puddle. MANY rtx games get minus points for insisting in doing screenspace-reflections on upright glass windows, where you definitely want RTX reflections, talking to you, ghostwireTokyo. the UE-demo "marble game" sarly needs a gpu with 12gb Vram, and it can be tricked into working with 10gb vram in lower resolution and fidelity for a while, but will stutter a LOT after 15 seconds. if it would not do that, this surely wouls also stand out due to extraordinary lighting. I skipped out on BattlefieldV for now.
Ray tracing.. most overrated new feature that everyone wants for some reason
why are you showing RTX ON more?...Let me judge for a second please.
Anyway,Non RT looks better.
which laptop should i buy hp pavilion gaming i5 10300h or r5 5600h for long term use of about 5-6 years
ryzen5 5600h best option . 6 core 12 thread processor
So much super sharp reflection. Where is reflection blur? Similar to shadow blur. Reminds me of 90s selfies when people photoshopped so much sharpness and contrast that you can't see the nose no more 😅
ghostrunner rtx on + metro exodus rtx on very efficient makes a lot of difference
I don't see significant difference, coz when you playing not feeling
I bough Metro Exodus Enhanced on my ps5 and it looks exactly like the RTX on this video. That is to say, it looks GORGEOUS especially compared to ps4. Everything just looks so much better. The character models, the environments, and of course the lighting anc effects. The lighting alone makes it one if the most beautiful games ive ever played
Спасибо за работу!
how do you do it
Unpopular opinion: RTX off is better , not too much distraction.
Why don't I see any difference in lighting? I only see difference in the reflection. Isn't ray tracing supposed to be more than that? Like the Global Illumination or Light bounces
Because most games here either use only ray traced reflections, or shadows. Metro Exodus has full global illumination that is ray traced: kzhead.info/sun/gcapiqeLnWaVjKM/bejne.html
IMO RTX is kinda weird in most of the places, where a surface would maybe make a sort of ressemblance with RTX on it makes a fucking rusty pipe like water
cuando el 3 que lo estoy esperando jj
Funny thing is that you don need ray tracing to do any of Bess fx lol RTX is for lazy budget devs
Take a look at rdr2 even maxes out Ray tracing can’t keep up with it RTX is a scam & dev shortcut
Nice demo. It shows me that my RTX 3080 Ti is useless piece of mining device...
Ok I'm sorry but i really can't call adding lighting to doom eternal thoughts the windows ray tracing
Only Metro Exodus gives the ultimate ray tracing feel. Other games are simply ok
I feel like ray tracing is slightly overrated and even weird looking at times. Like in Ghostrunner the reflections are so high resolution that it even looks more clear than the things the game’s reflecting. Games like Control definitely feel transformative, but playing the game without it still feels fine to play and still looks really good. Same thing with Ratchet & Clank PS5, they are implemented in a way where the reflections don’t stand out as insanely shiny and glossy, it looks way more natural and less off-putting in that game than in games like Ghostrunner or Battlefield V.
This sounds like the words of someone that doesn't own Ray tracing hardware
@@theslayerdog7669 exactly. this dude is coping heavily
Games with RTX on look great!!..but your card needs to be 2080, 3070 or 3080. Otherwise, the drop in FPS is too much
@@omraikar8517 even with a RTX 3090 frames drops lol you all ways should use dlss with ray traceing
Also imho sehen die Spiegelungen in Crysis 2 soo s***** aus^^ bei 3:57 ist sogar das Auto, auf dem der Char läuft nicht mitgespiegelt...
Ha ha - no thanks. Seveal scenes with RTX on looks unnatural. I prefer the scenes with it off ! Not chasing this as must for my next GPU !
I can't tell much of a difference.
2 in one rtx performace .top games
for potato gamers ( like mine ) does not matter ray tracing only foucus in smooth gameplay
Crisis 2 Remastered is pretty dang good
I am a actually tripping.. or is much better off most of the time?! Like... Unless if you are a reflection freak, you won't notice any difference. Sure but light, but honestly... Too much for me. I just play the game look great already
Cant wait for "raytracing is trash because i dont have gpu like that" comments :) bought ghostrunner and metro exodus enhanced edition in steam halloween sale just because of rtx implementation :)
minumun difference in graphics, enourmus diference in performance
Pay 1000€ for realistic puddles.
pretty hard to notice the difference
Not big difference...
so basically its really not worth paying extra for
Now R6S isnt the big rtx difference
It's just better reflections
facts: Nvidia is always better than amd for over 100 years 👍
Rtx is wank factor I don’t have time to stare at puddles when I’m playing a game
It is not just reflections.
in metro exodus is so diferent.
waste of money. Nvidia shoving this crap down our throatslike it's some sort of a gamechanger...
Rtx=\=ray tracing
- 100 fps :)
bottom line you either just want to look at the game or actually play it , when you play it you aren't going to notice anything because you are focusing on the actions rather then is my axe shinier now.