I have both an amd and an Nvidia gpu PCs. Ray tracing looks cool but pretty demanding, but dlss is useful. Also the amd drivers have some pretty cool optimisation options which i have never heard anyone talking about them online.
Dlss is one of the worst things that happened to gaming. Developers don't care about optimisation anymore and now you can't play recent games comfortably with older cards even tho you should just because they don't have fake frame generator or fake resolution dlss
Upgrading to a 4090 and a 9800x3d wont magically make a game better, 90% of Promos you see are edited, and 100% of the streams you watch are played on smaller screen than the one youre currently watching it on. Optimization is dead, ill be purchasing my last computer ever, with top of the most top of the line parts likley totaling 4000$, with the expectation as soon as i do it will become outdated, seriously. They scammed me half my life encouraging me to get waste.
Yep that was me with my old 3060, just got a 3080 for 300$, playing ratchet and clank fully cranked to ultra settings and rt 1440p different experience 😂
My issue with Ray tracing is that most game's lightings are not made with raytracing as default in mind. So most often turning it on just makes it look worse instead of better
@@mockingbird_redactedtruth man. I'm not staring at the water for 30 minutes looking at the real time reflection. at most I'd take a glimpse and then completely forget about it for the rest of the game.
raytracing can be nice but sometimes it feels very "gimmicky". What i mean is that some games include reflections to everything, even if irl they dont, they add a lot of noise actually making the image worse in a lot of cases, they cost a lot of fps and i think that raytracing technology while is now here, it still needs some years to actually mature
Nvidia added a fix to the gimmickyness to fix the noise ( this will slightly lower performance) but there is dlss 3.5 that smooths out noise and on the first frame rendered its not a white and black mess
for noise, that's because it would require 100X to do accurate rt like in the movie where you need a cluster. nvidia method is just low quality rt with denoise
Ray and then path tracing is 100% the future of lighting in PC games, and is something that was a long time coming to eventually replace rasterization entirely. Gamers used to bitch a lot back when 3d accelerator cards started to be required for games too in the late 90s.
Yeah but without dlss you can only do a small amount, and dlss in turn makes it look kinda bad imo, light the colourings off and it’s a bit blurry at times. Makes me wonder why I even got an NVIDIA card at all (4070ts)
As much as I dislike Cybershit, the devs had the smart idea to be able to enable path tracing only in photo mode in the options menu. That way, I don't have to deal with the shitty performance that comes with it but I can also take pretty screenshots
My problem is with RTX, that entry level cards can't even handle RTX properly. I had a 3060 before my 7900XTX and boy ohhh boy... The card was really powerful for it's price but when i turned on RTX it just plummeted in fps. The other thing is, if i spent a hefty amount to a high end card, i want my card to have raw power. Without dlss or fsr. I just dont like the idea of paying a price of a car on a graphics card that can't keep up without upscaling.
To be fair it's not really the cards fault it feels weak, developer's have all but forgotten the art of optimization. The 4090 even struggles to get 60fps in the new silent hill remake because of how poorly optimized it is
@NepetaLeijon Fair point though. But for now, it's not really the norm to have games like the new Indi, Silent Hill 2 Remake and even S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 had it's fair share of struggles with the built in rtx. Just a few days ago, i streamed it and the Faust boss fight was just misarble due to the fps drop. Silent Hill 2 on the otherhand could be fixed with some afterwork. For me the drops were always on the same spots on every run. Otherwise it ran well.
100% on your side, when was the last time you pass a nice reflection and think "yoo total worth it, what a nice reflection..." No one cares xD and imagine buying a high end card and one of the reasons to choose is dlss or fsr hahaha what a joke, this features will maybe important in about what? 5years or more? And at this time fsr dlss will be that advanced that it will be rly good!
@@Alex-fu2mr On the top of that, i dont really see the progress in those technologies. Rtx to this day dont really amazes me. And upscaling still messes up things despite pouring money and resources into it. I worked with AI because it's got big and it get me intrested but the more you got deeper the more underwhelming it is. I don't want to sound like a boomer and undermine other people achievments, but it really is just a gloryfied database where your card, processor, language model, you name it, picks the thing from the database it's need to pick. And companies try to sell it as some tech magic.
@@ZooiWanteddlss is much better than fsr and It doesn't mess up anything, i have both Nvidia and AMD gpus and im an AMD fanboy cpu side, so my opinion is honest
For single player games I love using it. Ive always enjoyed exploring and taking open worlds in and looking at landscapes so in most single player games yes I use it However I find it hard to believe a studio would even think about bothering with raytracing for a multiplayer game
I've really been had with RTX, when i got my new build with a 4070 super, it was the first thing i've done in CP77 which was basically the flagship for the technology, all i can say is that it was different, not better or worse just different. This technology really only benefit developpers as they don't need to put nearly as much work as they do with rasterization. Now, i've tried path tracing on CP77, now THAT was actually an improvement, could even play with decent FPS on 1440p but well, i don't expect to hold well in the coming years in that departement
Ray tracing implementations only replace some parts of the lighting in a mix with legacy rasterization for others. Path tracing is a big difference because then ALL lighting elements use the same photon simulation method.
I'd say that is the main point people have. I like the idea, but I'm also not willing to spend the money for a 4090 just to see some nice light. On any other card, the performance loss just isng worth it.
Textures are Vram and make no impact to performance, that is why I have always used cards that tech influencers call “a waste of Vram” GT220 1gb, GT640 2gb, RTX2060 12gb! I love my high/max textures! Always CPU bottlenecked, so I just kinda take whatever I can get for FPS.
Ray tracing isn’t for gamers, it’s for devs, it is WAY easier to just ray trace then to try to get around it like games used to, but it’s WAY harder on the GPU to Ray trace which is why it hasn’t been common until recently
@utopic1312 Real gamers as in people who love gaming and play it regularly. If you can't afford it, that's understandable, but let not pretend that people don't care about the evolution of technology towards gaming.
Yes, but the better question would've been "Is ray tracing too expensive?" No one would complain about the tech if high end hardware was actually more affordable.
I just pulled out my old Atari St from 1985(I've been upgrading it just to see what It's capable of) I learned ray tracing in assembler on it, obviously it wasn't real time 3D, but ray tracing was how you did 3D shading back then.
I actually do use ray tracing in many games I play. Since I primarily only play story-based games that are largely cinematic it elevates the experience for me cuz I’m more worried about looks over frames. If you’re playing competitive games it won’t be as important cuz your more worried about getting the most amount of fps possible
I’m a flight-simmer and use ray tracing. Absolutely love it! It’s practically a must have for photorealism and immersion. But then again simming is about realism and immersion , not extreme FPS .
Ray/path tracing in real time is amazing tech, and the denoisers will continue to get better. The cost of the top tier graphics cards is related to supply/demand among other considerations like lack of competition.
I bought an RTX 2060 two years ago and its good. I've been using DLSS in every game and the cuda cores are really useful when I render something in blender.
If you're content with imperfections, it's entirely optional for sure. Some games do the whole nine yards and it makes ray tracing feel like a crazy uplift in atmosphere. Seeing the shadows/lighting/reflections look closer to real just hits different sometimes.
@Yamikitsune it's a decent difference, nothing crazy with my GPU, but it's enough to be noticeable. There's a definite FPS drop, but I don't play anything competitive so I don't really notice a difference. I definitely prefer RTX on.
I use ray tracing when it makes the game look better, sometimes it doesn't. Cyberpunk with ray tracing looks great (now, obviously it had issues earlier!)
It’s like how supersonic business jets were marketed. They figured out how much they need to charge to make it a business viable product. So every release prior to it, they increased the newest model’s price by 50% so when the SuperSonics jet is release, it would come as a sticker shock.
Problem with ray tracing, in my opinion, is that if done properly it looks so real yet most people wouldn’t even notice it. We have grown so accustomed to what video games without ray tracing looks like, it’s kind of come to expect that look. And perfectly realistic lighting and shadows don’t really make much of a difference. Only time I think it’s truly remarkable looking is the realistic bounce lighting that can make a dark room with a window, nice and bright. I do think ray traced shadows, and not having the weird screen space reflection artifacts in water is really nice though.
It's fine dude, quite solid if you can get those parts With a good discount (the alternative would be to get a 7900 GRE if you can spend like 50-80 more dollars on the GPU but the 7800xt Is good). Just get 32 gb of RAM 6000MHz and CL30 and you are golden imo
There is a feature on the cards called Carlsim which is not necessarily for gamers but it is a huge boon for people who are creating ai. It is a powerful engine.
I personally do use ray tracing when possible, however I tend to not completely max it out specially considering i own an AMD card going out of your way and search for optimized settings for a specific game to then apply some level of ray tracing, take cyberpunk as an example, using HardwareUnboxed's Optimized Settings and then apply ray traced reflections gives fantastic results
I mean if you have a 80 or 90 series card from nvidia, there is 2 reasons you're not using it, you're playing esports game or you didn't find the button to turn on raytracing yet.
I just recently built my first PC. My number one thing was high quality ray tracing and steady 60fps at least. I was able to achieve that with my build.
Me with a boxed RX 7900XTX upstairs watching this; I see this as an absolute win. Yes, I was torn between a 4080 Super and the XTX, but I just concluded that the xtx fits me more, especially with AMD's improvements the last month. I don't play a lot of story games, let alone good Ray Tracing ones. I am more of a competitive player so raw performance is just awesome.
@@josenoyola4816you can use raytracing with other cards too like a 4070 super which is a third of the price. Hell I have the worst MSI 2x 4070 super and it plays 1440p high path traced cyberpunk with balanced DLSS at 50fps. With frame gen around 80fps which still feels extremely smooth and there's no noticeable input lag
@@josenoyola4816 Ray and then path tracing is the future of lighting in games just like it was for the pre-rendered film industry decades ago. Do you really just expect graphics advancements to stop just because you don't want to buy a better card?
I use the 7900 xtx with medium raytracing. But since I've overclocked it, it performs better than the 4080s, about half way to the 4090. And 4080s performance when max raytracing. And all costing $400 AUD less than the 4080s.
I recently upgraded to a 4070 super and now you can use raytracing with a very minimal performance drop... It became worth it with the higher grade 40 series cards. Have tried it only with "old" games tho.. like elden ring, witcher 3, shadow of the tomb raider and such 50 series might make it possible to have it enabled by standard without being much of a difference
I use ray tracing, especially in games like Spider-Man Remastered and Watch Dogs Legion. I also use it in Minecraft. It does make the game look much better. Ray tracing is just a personal preference. I actually have a few videos that take advantage of ray tracing on my channel. I use an ENB for Skyrim, which I believe has ray tracing features and a Minecraft video with ray tracing enabled.
I use ray tracing whenever I can afford to without getting laggy and I love it it is way more immersive than the alternative and I think path tracing is definitely the future
i use it cause my old computer was a grx 1650 mobile, and once i upgraded during a black friday sale, i started throwing it on because it was something i wasnt used to at all
not alot of emulators have raytracing so I don't get many chances to use it. but I would if I had the option. old games seem to gain the most from improved lighting as demonstrated with unreal tournament and minecraft. but RTX HDR video is more than enough to make nvidia cards a must have.
Having recently switched to Nvidia, 3080 Ti from a 6800 XT I don’t see much difference (but I also play older games.) What I do see though is.. or don’t see is a pop-up box telling me the driver crashed when I try to watch a movie.
As an amd card user (7900xt) its only used when it actually looks better becuase a lot of the time the games arent made with it in mind. And even then, only if i can keep a steady 60+ fps in 1440p with raytracing on without ai upscaling
I use it. But not often bc it's not supported in a lot of the games I play. But in the ones it does, like Cyberpunk, I don't use it bc it tanks my fps. Plus I only have a 1080p monitor, so it's not really all that crazy anyway
I'm hoping RT becomes more adopted, but really DLSS is the big selling point for me when it comes to NVidia. Being able to squeeze as much frames out as possible is just so nice.
I notice the difference in shadows and lighting when using ray tracing and i absolutely love it, im a sucker for that realistic lighting and seeing all the little details just makes me so hype, that being said tho it is unnecessary but i always use it in my single player games because ive grown up playing handhelds and outdated consoles for the time so im used to playing om 25-30 fps with a controller and while rtx takes my game from 90 fps to 60 im perfectly happy with 60 fps if it means i get to just stand there and admire the absolute beauty and detail the extra better lighting brings, plus i dont need high fps in a single player game anyway. Its not meant for everyone and thats ok, most ppl dont even notice the difference wether its on or off and hey, good for them they can get basically 30 extra fps for free by turning it off but to ppl like myself who find themselves staring and taking in all the details all the time its a godsend. The rtx reflections are cool too but im more hype about the lighting than anything else
The issue with ray tracing is that it was the holy grail for graphics for so long that game engines got really good at faking it. So go that the difference in turning it on is usually quite minimal from a image quality standpoint.
On a 3060 ti, I use it when I can, which isn't often. I usually have to fiddle with settings and use DLSS in combination. Like I'm playing Control with full raytracing using it for all the shadows and lighting so I can turn down a lot of other settings. Then set the DLSS to a bit under 1080p uspacling to 2K and it runs 75 fps with no noticeable input lag. The game has to have actually had it in mind though to be worth it. Like for Control, Remedy ALWAYS pushes the new tech boundaries, so they made Control with raytracing as a design choice so with it on, the game looks so much better. But that's a rare scenario. I really love lighting and reflection visually, so I prefer it m, but it's often not achievable for me.
In most games it’s not worth the performance drop, but there’s a few titles where RTX is really transformative, like Cyberpunk, Alan Wake II, and Black Myth Wukong. As someone who personally loves all of those games and owns a 4K monitor, Ray Tracing and DLSS made the Nvidia tax worth it, but for most people starting from scratch and looking for the best bang for your buck I’d almost certainly recommend an AMD or even Intel GPU and a 1440p monitor.
I do use raytracing, but only for single player games, i play at 60fps 1440p with dlss, it looks awesome. I feel like he mostly spoke to gamers who is focused on competitive games, i play both.
RT and DLSS activated on my 4070 Ti I'm gonna try the games I play without it soon. Never thought about trying to disable these "(unwanted?) features"........
i try to use ray tracing if its available in a game. but tbh i use ray tracing a lot more when I'm doing 3d stuff in blender. i think that's actually a better use case for rtx than games.
I enable most of the time with a 3090, but mostly single player eye candy games (eg: CP2077). I don't mind the frame hit for it, it is still triple digits most of the time.
Why people forget there's creative professionals out there who utilise this feature every single day, 3D softwares or game engine require this feature.
im actually using it and like it,but i need to say ray tracing isn't that much different in most of the game,but still have some will bring a big different gaming experience such as Minecraft and Metro,especially Minecraft
They've basically used a work-in-progress feature for marketing, without optimizing it, and in return have used a resolution upscaled to justify it Just my thoughts on it though
depends on how good the ray-tracing is for a game vs the raster shadows available. Sometimes the shadows are too dark or completely off on character faces with conventional shadows. I’m currently using amd. And I want more ray-tracing support and capability. So I might switch back to nvidia.
the issue is that most games i play don't support it. the next issue is that games that do support it HEAVILY rely on DLSS and other upscaling to get you any form of fps even at 1080p. the AI scalers and "beautifiers" pretty much defeat the point of raytracing in the first place. games in motion look horrendous right now. they only look good if you don't move your camera.
I have used ray tracing on single player games. It makes the game look prettier. And with dlss and frame gen I always get around 60-90 fps which is enough for single player games. Obviously I never use ray tracing for multiplayer games. So it really boils down to what games you play.
My friend (who I left behind on the PlayStation to build a PC) foams at the ray tracing, in fact he wants to buy a PS5 PRO (albeit not at the retail price) to play 4K with raytracing with stable 30. In every non PvO games he just plays in 4K with graphic mode on at 20-30 FPS because he isn't bothered by low fps, especially if it's 30 locked.
The thing is, we waited for RTX for so long that we learned to fake it way too well. It sure is different but it as surely isn't something that is worth losing so much performance for
After building my first custom PC (4070 Ti Super + 7800X3D) I always turn on raytracing if it’s available. But as soon as it comes at the cost of FPS numbers I’m no longer happy with in the future, I’m turning it off
raytracing could be a good thing to other applications because for gaming its absolutelly a big ol nothing, just a performance hog for something that barelly makes a difference. It could be usefull in art, although a very niche usecase like 'tradigital' painting software, ray tracing could be technically used to calculate the 'bumps' and textures of simulating real life painting materials. Kinda like what rebelle 7 intended, but better
It absolutely makes a huge difference most games just don't implement it fully. Just look at Cyberpunk with path tracing, makes a huge difference and improvement to lighting quality
Depends on a game. For example I used it on Cyberpunk and Metro. On Indiana Jones its impossibile to play since it gets from 180 fps off to 12 fps on...and i have a 7800x3d and a 4070ti...
I'm not gonna lie I use ray tracing in any game it's an option. Maybe it's just because I used to play on an ancient rig, so if I have the opportunity to make a game pretty (without sacrificing performance ofc) I crank that bad boy up
Single player games I run 60 fps rt max and my 3080 handles it like a champ. Anything competitive I'm more using high setting 144fps cap and no rt but that single player experience with rt on is 10/10 chefs kisses
You can run 30fps path tracing 2k with dlls on Alan Wale with a 500-700€ 4070, which is even cheaper than a PS5 Pro. Gamers usually prefer fps over graphics. IMHO, I use it everyday unless I get less than 45fps or I’m playing Fortnite or any online game with RT capabilities which is nuts to prefer graphics over fps
I use raytracing. I mean, I have to use framegen and scaling at 1440p to get over 100 fps for my 1440p 180hz monitor. Sometimes, I actually hit that cap. Feels good when I do. But if I don't have the other options, raytracing's being turned off.
Do you use ray tracing?
Am AMD team no need to ray tracing crap 😂
I don't care about reflections in puddles
Nope, still haven't bothered.
Yep its nice but I only use it on some games because how much power it uses
no. i can't
only time i see ray tracing used is in the comments to discredit amd cards
This guy gets it
I have both an amd and an Nvidia gpu PCs. Ray tracing looks cool but pretty demanding, but dlss is useful. Also the amd drivers have some pretty cool optimisation options which i have never heard anyone talking about them online.
Fr
Dlss is one of the worst things that happened to gaming. Developers don't care about optimisation anymore and now you can't play recent games comfortably with older cards even tho you should just because they don't have fake frame generator or fake resolution dlss
@@mr0mooz368yeah, amd software is goated
How to use Ray Tracing
1. Turn RT on
2. "WOW, that looks nice"
3. Turn RT off and resume normal gameplay.
Definitely not if it can turn on it’s staying on. That said that’s only for single playing games.
Upgrading to a 4090 and a 9800x3d wont magically make a game better, 90% of Promos you see are edited, and 100% of the streams you watch are played on smaller screen than the one youre currently watching it on.
Optimization is dead, ill be purchasing my last computer ever, with top of the most top of the line parts likley totaling 4000$, with the expectation as soon as i do it will become outdated, seriously.
They scammed me half my life encouraging me to get waste.
@CMWeber88 If it can sustain a frame rate of 75fps+ with 1% lows being above 60, then yes it can stay on.
Yep that was me with my old 3060, just got a 3080 for 300$, playing ratchet and clank fully cranked to ultra settings and rt 1440p different experience 😂
@@christianlilavois5706 yeah I had a 3080TI FE got it at MSRP I definitely was not paying any more then that
My issue with Ray tracing is that most game's lightings are not made with raytracing as default in mind. So most often turning it on just makes it look worse instead of better
Its because not everyone can afford an rtx card I have a 6650xt it's a non rt 3060 I can't play games if it runs at 2 fps 720p2
Or you have to look really hard for the effects of Ray tracing like the reflection in a lamp or a window
@@mockingbird_redactedtruth man.
I'm not staring at the water for 30 minutes looking at the real time reflection.
at most I'd take a glimpse and then completely forget about it for the rest of the game.
@Poggersvale I'd assume he meant people who have a card that can do it but just don't use it
How do u activate ray tracing on 4090 is it in Nvidia control panel ?
raytracing can be nice but sometimes it feels very "gimmicky". What i mean is that some games include reflections to everything, even if irl they dont, they add a lot of noise actually making the image worse in a lot of cases, they cost a lot of fps and i think that raytracing technology while is now here, it still needs some years to actually mature
Nvidia added a fix to the gimmickyness to fix the noise ( this will slightly lower performance) but there is dlss 3.5 that smooths out noise and on the first frame rendered its not a white and black mess
i use cyberpunk with path tracing and it's a perfect must have for all games if you're willing to play at 90fps only
for noise, that's because it would require 100X to do accurate rt like in the movie where you need a cluster. nvidia method is just low quality rt with denoise
@@foxy-48514 sadly i am using amd that is not as good as nvidia for ray tracing, but i am still very happy for my rx 7600
Ray and then path tracing is 100% the future of lighting in PC games, and is something that was a long time coming to eventually replace rasterization entirely. Gamers used to bitch a lot back when 3d accelerator cards started to be required for games too in the late 90s.
Worth it, nah... But Cyberpunk do have some pretty rays
Yeah but without dlss you can only do a small amount, and dlss in turn makes it look kinda bad imo, light the colourings off and it’s a bit blurry at times. Makes me wonder why I even got an NVIDIA card at all (4070ts)
@@Noba46688DLSS without ray tracing looks good. But when combine both, looks noisy and smear. Thats what i found on my 4060ti.
As much as I dislike Cybershit, the devs had the smart idea to be able to enable path tracing only in photo mode in the options menu.
That way, I don't have to deal with the shitty performance that comes with it but I can also take pretty screenshots
@@NotKenBlock94 bruh how is it a bad game? It was ass at release but they’ve fixed all the major issues now and the story itself is peak
@@Noba46688it looks better with DLSS though because of the sharpening... What are you talking about?
The colours also all look identical??
My problem is with RTX, that entry level cards can't even handle RTX properly. I had a 3060 before my 7900XTX and boy ohhh boy... The card was really powerful for it's price but when i turned on RTX it just plummeted in fps. The other thing is, if i spent a hefty amount to a high end card, i want my card to have raw power. Without dlss or fsr. I just dont like the idea of paying a price of a car on a graphics card that can't keep up without upscaling.
To be fair it's not really the cards fault it feels weak, developer's have all but forgotten the art of optimization. The 4090 even struggles to get 60fps in the new silent hill remake because of how poorly optimized it is
@NepetaLeijon Fair point though. But for now, it's not really the norm to have games like the new Indi, Silent Hill 2 Remake and even S.T.A.L.K.E.R. 2 had it's fair share of struggles with the built in rtx. Just a few days ago, i streamed it and the Faust boss fight was just misarble due to the fps drop. Silent Hill 2 on the otherhand could be fixed with some afterwork. For me the drops were always on the same spots on every run. Otherwise it ran well.
100% on your side, when was the last time you pass a nice reflection and think "yoo total worth it, what a nice reflection..." No one cares xD and imagine buying a high end card and one of the reasons to choose is dlss or fsr hahaha what a joke, this features will maybe important in about what? 5years or more? And at this time fsr dlss will be that advanced that it will be rly good!
@@Alex-fu2mr On the top of that, i dont really see the progress in those technologies. Rtx to this day dont really amazes me. And upscaling still messes up things despite pouring money and resources into it. I worked with AI because it's got big and it get me intrested but the more you got deeper the more underwhelming it is. I don't want to sound like a boomer and undermine other people achievments, but it really is just a gloryfied database where your card, processor, language model, you name it, picks the thing from the database it's need to pick. And companies try to sell it as some tech magic.
@@ZooiWanteddlss is much better than fsr and It doesn't mess up anything, i have both Nvidia and AMD gpus and im an AMD fanboy cpu side, so my opinion is honest
For single player games I love using it. Ive always enjoyed exploring and taking open worlds in and looking at landscapes so in most single player games yes I use it
However I find it hard to believe a studio would even think about bothering with raytracing for a multiplayer game
I've really been had with RTX, when i got my new build with a 4070 super, it was the first thing i've done in CP77 which was basically the flagship for the technology, all i can say is that it was different, not better or worse just different.
This technology really only benefit developpers as they don't need to put nearly as much work as they do with rasterization.
Now, i've tried path tracing on CP77, now THAT was actually an improvement, could even play with decent FPS on 1440p but well, i don't expect to hold well in the coming years in that departement
Ray tracing implementations only replace some parts of the lighting in a mix with legacy rasterization for others. Path tracing is a big difference because then ALL lighting elements use the same photon simulation method.
do NOT abbreviate cuberpunk, please
Ray tracing is pretty cool tech, but I'd rather use the processing for frames and texture quality.
Maybe if i had a 4090 or something.
I'd say that is the main point people have. I like the idea, but I'm also not willing to spend the money for a 4090 just to see some nice light. On any other card, the performance loss just isng worth it.
Textures are Vram and make no impact to performance, that is why I have always used cards that tech influencers call “a waste of Vram” GT220 1gb, GT640 2gb, RTX2060 12gb! I love my high/max textures! Always CPU bottlenecked, so I just kinda take whatever I can get for FPS.
Ray tracing isn’t for gamers, it’s for devs, it is WAY easier to just ray trace then to try to get around it like games used to, but it’s WAY harder on the GPU to Ray trace which is why it hasn’t been common until recently
it's ridiculously resource heavy.
a 4090 gets 200fps in portal 2, ray tracing brings it down to 30...
It's weird because most real gamers would say they love ray tracing/path tracing. Only pc builders and casuals say they don't.
@@thevarietyoflife7283"real gamers" is laughable but tbh you have to justify paying that rtx tax somehow
@utopic1312 Real gamers as in people who love gaming and play it regularly. If you can't afford it, that's understandable, but let not pretend that people don't care about the evolution of technology towards gaming.
@@thevarietyoflife7283 "real gamers" love to play games at fps higher than 50
Yes, but the better question would've been "Is ray tracing too expensive?" No one would complain about the tech if high end hardware was actually more affordable.
Right.. When you've bought decent cars for less than a new gpu the prices seem nuts.
It's going to get much worse under the Trump admin, buy the 5090 and any other PC hardware next month if possible.
I just pulled out my old Atari St from 1985(I've been upgrading it just to see what It's capable of) I learned ray tracing in assembler on it, obviously it wasn't real time 3D, but ray tracing was how you did 3D shading back then.
It's been around for many decades now but not really in real-time rendering in games until the last 6 years.
I actually do use ray tracing in many games I play. Since I primarily only play story-based games that are largely cinematic it elevates the experience for me cuz I’m more worried about looks over frames. If you’re playing competitive games it won’t be as important cuz your more worried about getting the most amount of fps possible
I’m a flight-simmer and use ray tracing. Absolutely love it! It’s practically a must have for photorealism and immersion.
But then again simming is about realism and immersion , not extreme FPS .
The human eye cant see ray tracing.
@@dnegel9546and people thought the eyes couldnt see past 60fps till 144hz monitors rolled around. Keep thinking the way you do boss
Ray/path tracing in real time is amazing tech, and the denoisers will continue to get better. The cost of the top tier graphics cards is related to supply/demand among other considerations like lack of competition.
I have it enabled in most games. When you hit the button for the highest graphical preset in every game it usually enables it.
I bought an RTX 2060 two years ago and its good. I've been using DLSS in every game and the cuda cores are really useful when I render something in blender.
I'm still on a 2060 super I bought almost 5 years ago and DLSS (and in some games FSR 3.0 frame gen) really help extend it's longevity at 1080p.
If you're content with imperfections, it's entirely optional for sure. Some games do the whole nine yards and it makes ray tracing feel like a crazy uplift in atmosphere. Seeing the shadows/lighting/reflections look closer to real just hits different sometimes.
I always use ray tracing. I just think it looks neat.
Good it seems you are 5 in this comment section.
Can you tell a difference while playing on how pretty it is?
@Yamikitsune it's a decent difference, nothing crazy with my GPU, but it's enough to be noticeable. There's a definite FPS drop, but I don't play anything competitive so I don't really notice a difference. I definitely prefer RTX on.
@@Yamikitsune100%.
Yes it works the best with a 4090 or similiar.... (for 4k)
Cyberpunk is one of the best looking games with Path Tracing in 4k
@@Rehsalus well, path tracing is newer/ more advanced (i believe) than ray tracing.
I always use ray tracing in single player games if it's avaliable, in multi I prefer to have constant high frames
A little off topic but this just reminded me that I can now play ray traced Minecraft on my 4070
Minecraft raytracing is AMAZING, as long as you pick the right pack
If we want to really up our game, it seems like the best way is to get surround sound, and use "ray tracing" for directional audio.
I use ray tracing when it makes the game look better, sometimes it doesn't. Cyberpunk with ray tracing looks great (now, obviously it had issues earlier!)
It’s like how supersonic business jets were marketed. They figured out how much they need to charge to make it a business viable product. So every release prior to it, they increased the newest model’s price by 50% so when the SuperSonics jet is release, it would come as a sticker shock.
Next graphics cards should be PTX for path tracing 🤑🤑🤑
Problem with ray tracing, in my opinion, is that if done properly it looks so real yet most people wouldn’t even notice it. We have grown so accustomed to what video games without ray tracing looks like, it’s kind of come to expect that look. And perfectly realistic lighting and shadows don’t really make much of a difference. Only time I think it’s truly remarkable looking is the realistic bounce lighting that can make a dark room with a window, nice and bright. I do think ray traced shadows, and not having the weird screen space reflection artifacts in water is really nice though.
Made the decision between 4080 S and 7900xtx, went NVIDIA just for the lower power Consumption... hardly use RT
was it worth the 500 dollar difference
Its not a 500dolar difference@@SiloTheatrix
@@SiloTheatrixthey’re literally the same price
@@SiloTheatrix It definitely is who's gonna choose amd over nvidia😂? Only poor idiots 😂.
@@adisingh6113 We got a rich guy over here
I use it whenever its available as long as it doesnt drop performance too much
I making a build with 7500f and rtx 7800xt is it good if there could be any good changes plz recommend me
It's fine dude, quite solid if you can get those parts With a good discount (the alternative would be to get a 7900 GRE if you can spend like 50-80 more dollars on the GPU but the 7800xt Is good). Just get 32 gb of RAM 6000MHz and CL30 and you are golden imo
Yes, nearly always use RT if it's possible, cuz I really like shades and reflections features.
It's good for quick and dirty lighting effects in ancient games like quake and morrowind.
There is a feature on the cards called Carlsim which is not necessarily for gamers but it is a huge boon for people who are creating ai. It is a powerful engine.
I don't use RT and don't even know what it does 😂
I personally do use ray tracing when possible, however I tend to not completely max it out specially considering i own an AMD card
going out of your way and search for optimized settings for a specific game to then apply some level of ray tracing, take cyberpunk as an example, using HardwareUnboxed's Optimized Settings and then apply ray traced reflections gives fantastic results
I mean if you have a 80 or 90 series card from nvidia, there is 2 reasons you're not using it, you're playing esports game or you didn't find the button to turn on raytracing yet.
I just recently built my first PC. My number one thing was high quality ray tracing and steady 60fps at least. I was able to achieve that with my build.
Me with a boxed RX 7900XTX upstairs watching this; I see this as an absolute win. Yes, I was torn between a 4080 Super and the XTX, but I just concluded that the xtx fits me more, especially with AMD's improvements the last month. I don't play a lot of story games, let alone good Ray Tracing ones. I am more of a competitive player so raw performance is just awesome.
I use it whenever possible. In games like The Finals and Cyberpunk, I couldn’t imagine not having it.
its ryzen 7 5800x and rtx 4070 good combo?
Yes
try getting an am5 cpu instead like the ryzen 5 9600
No try 7800x3d and rtx 4070 super best for 1440p
Go for 7800x3d
If you already have a PC With am4 socket, then yes, the Ryzen 7 5800x Is pretty sólido coupled With a 4070.
I use Ray Tracing Overdrive aka Path Tracing in Cyberpunk. It’s the reason why I even bought a 4090 to enjoy my favorite on max settings with PT.
As a game developer who makes high quality games, I love it when I see people playing my games with ray tracing on
The 0.97 percent on steam using a 4090? Yeah
@josenoyola4816 you don't have to rant about people not having 4090's... I was just saying that I add that feature and I like it when people use it
@@josenoyola4816you can use raytracing with other cards too like a 4070 super which is a third of the price. Hell I have the worst MSI 2x 4070 super and it plays 1440p high path traced cyberpunk with balanced DLSS at 50fps. With frame gen around 80fps which still feels extremely smooth and there's no noticeable input lag
@@josenoyola4816 Ray and then path tracing is the future of lighting in games just like it was for the pre-rendered film industry decades ago. Do you really just expect graphics advancements to stop just because you don't want to buy a better card?
I use it when it’s well implemented, especially for reflections
I use the 7900 xtx with medium raytracing. But since I've overclocked it, it performs better than the 4080s, about half way to the 4090. And 4080s performance when max raytracing. And all costing $400 AUD less than the 4080s.
I recently upgraded to a 4070 super and now you can use raytracing with a very minimal performance drop... It became worth it with the higher grade 40 series cards.
Have tried it only with "old" games tho.. like elden ring, witcher 3, shadow of the tomb raider and such
50 series might make it possible to have it enabled by standard without being much of a difference
I happily use retracing wherever possible. I waited decades for it to arrive
I use ray-tracing, gives you an edge in some game like reflection showing the position of an enemy when sneaking
I have a 4080. Ray Tracing wasn't why I got it, but I do actually use it when it's available.
Yes, all settings maxed out, including ray tracing when available, at 4K.
I use ray tracing, especially in games like Spider-Man Remastered and Watch Dogs Legion. I also use it in Minecraft. It does make the game look much better. Ray tracing is just a personal preference. I actually have a few videos that take advantage of ray tracing on my channel. I use an ENB for Skyrim, which I believe has ray tracing features and a Minecraft video with ray tracing enabled.
I definitely use it, although I also play sort of of old games, so the base lighting isn't the best
TRUEgotcha mentioned you guys built his pc, you guys definetly delivered! Great build!
I use ray tracing whenever I can afford to without getting laggy and I love it it is way more immersive than the alternative and I think path tracing is definitely the future
i use it cause my old computer was a grx 1650 mobile, and once i upgraded during a black friday sale, i started throwing it on because it was something i wasnt used to at all
not alot of emulators have raytracing so I don't get many chances to use it. but I would if I had the option. old games seem to gain the most from improved lighting as demonstrated with unreal tournament and minecraft. but RTX HDR video is more than enough to make nvidia cards a must have.
Having recently switched to Nvidia, 3080 Ti from a 6800 XT I don’t see much difference (but I also play older games.)
What I do see though is.. or don’t see is a pop-up box telling me the driver crashed when I try to watch a movie.
As an amd card user (7900xt) its only used when it actually looks better becuase a lot of the time the games arent made with it in mind. And even then, only if i can keep a steady 60+ fps in 1440p with raytracing on without ai upscaling
I do use ray tracing when playing war thunder, it is not very good ray tracing but the game looks really beutiful with it.
I always use it if it’s offered. Always looks phenomenal.
Yea. I'll use it. It's pretty. Veilguard looks crazy good.
Not in gaming, but i use ray tracing when using CGI art programs like Daz studio for renders.
I use it. But not often bc it's not supported in a lot of the games I play. But in the ones it does, like Cyberpunk, I don't use it bc it tanks my fps. Plus I only have a 1080p monitor, so it's not really all that crazy anyway
I'm hoping RT becomes more adopted, but really DLSS is the big selling point for me when it comes to NVidia. Being able to squeeze as much frames out as possible is just so nice.
I notice the difference in shadows and lighting when using ray tracing and i absolutely love it, im a sucker for that realistic lighting and seeing all the little details just makes me so hype, that being said tho it is unnecessary but i always use it in my single player games because ive grown up playing handhelds and outdated consoles for the time so im used to playing om 25-30 fps with a controller and while rtx takes my game from 90 fps to 60 im perfectly happy with 60 fps if it means i get to just stand there and admire the absolute beauty and detail the extra better lighting brings, plus i dont need high fps in a single player game anyway. Its not meant for everyone and thats ok, most ppl dont even notice the difference wether its on or off and hey, good for them they can get basically 30 extra fps for free by turning it off but to ppl like myself who find themselves staring and taking in all the details all the time its a godsend. The rtx reflections are cool too but im more hype about the lighting than anything else
The issue with ray tracing is that it was the holy grail for graphics for so long that game engines got really good at faking it. So go that the difference in turning it on is usually quite minimal from a image quality standpoint.
I do in single player games where the visual upgrade is significantly noticeable and the performance is ok. (I have a 4090)
On a 3060 ti, I use it when I can, which isn't often. I usually have to fiddle with settings and use DLSS in combination. Like I'm playing Control with full raytracing using it for all the shadows and lighting so I can turn down a lot of other settings. Then set the DLSS to a bit under 1080p uspacling to 2K and it runs 75 fps with no noticeable input lag. The game has to have actually had it in mind though to be worth it. Like for Control, Remedy ALWAYS pushes the new tech boundaries, so they made Control with raytracing as a design choice so with it on, the game looks so much better. But that's a rare scenario. I really love lighting and reflection visually, so I prefer it m, but it's often not achievable for me.
In most games it’s not worth the performance drop, but there’s a few titles where RTX is really transformative, like Cyberpunk, Alan Wake II, and Black Myth Wukong. As someone who personally loves all of those games and owns a 4K monitor, Ray Tracing and DLSS made the Nvidia tax worth it, but for most people starting from scratch and looking for the best bang for your buck I’d almost certainly recommend an AMD or even Intel GPU and a 1440p monitor.
In games absolutely not, but I’m working on path tracing on Twinmotion and it definitely helps.
I do use raytracing, but only for single player games, i play at 60fps 1440p with dlss, it looks awesome. I feel like he mostly spoke to gamers who is focused on competitive games, i play both.
RT and DLSS activated on my 4070 Ti
I'm gonna try the games I play without it soon.
Never thought about trying to disable these "(unwanted?) features"........
I do. I use path tracing too in CP 2077.
i try to use ray tracing if its available in a game. but tbh i use ray tracing a lot more when I'm doing 3d stuff in blender. i think that's actually a better use case for rtx than games.
I enable most of the time with a 3090, but mostly single player eye candy games (eg: CP2077). I don't mind the frame hit for it, it is still triple digits most of the time.
Why people forget there's creative professionals out there who utilise this feature every single day, 3D softwares or game engine require this feature.
im actually using it and like it,but i need to say ray tracing isn't that much different in most of the game,but still have some will bring a big different gaming experience such as Minecraft and Metro,especially Minecraft
They've basically used a work-in-progress feature for marketing, without optimizing it, and in return have used a resolution upscaled to justify it
Just my thoughts on it though
depends on how good the ray-tracing is for a game vs the raster shadows available. Sometimes the shadows are too dark or completely off on character faces with conventional shadows. I’m currently using amd. And I want more ray-tracing support and capability. So I might switch back to nvidia.
I do. Mostly because I've been playing Star Wars Outlaws and there's no other option. I also like it in Cyberpunk though.
Some people say they can't see pass 60fps. I pay, i use, i enjoy.
There are people who sell PCs with 1080ti as high end gaming pc...
A few weeks ago is probably the first time I’ve used ray tracing in years and that’s because it’s a single player game that doesn’t need high fps
the issue is that most games i play don't support it. the next issue is that games that do support it HEAVILY rely on DLSS and other upscaling to get you any form of fps even at 1080p. the AI scalers and "beautifiers" pretty much defeat the point of raytracing in the first place. games in motion look horrendous right now. they only look good if you don't move your camera.
I have used ray tracing on single player games. It makes the game look prettier. And with dlss and frame gen I always get around 60-90 fps which is enough for single player games. Obviously I never use ray tracing for multiplayer games. So it really boils down to what games you play.
Gamers don't use is but designers do,it's game changing if you often render stuff. For gaming probably no one does
A lot of people with the hardware to run it do. Because it looks great in ganes
My friend (who I left behind on the PlayStation to build a PC) foams at the ray tracing, in fact he wants to buy a PS5 PRO (albeit not at the retail price) to play 4K with raytracing with stable 30. In every non PvO games he just plays in 4K with graphic mode on at 20-30 FPS because he isn't bothered by low fps, especially if it's 30 locked.
Raytracing still feels like a new technology yet to be unleashed at full capacity
Because it would cost 50k to be viable. But most people don't know that.
The thing is, we waited for RTX for so long that we learned to fake it way too well. It sure is different but it as surely isn't something that is worth losing so much performance for
I sometimes use raytracing. But only when I just want to see some fancy lights.
I have a 4000 series card with frame gen. Its actually really dope
After building my first custom PC (4070 Ti Super + 7800X3D) I always turn on raytracing if it’s available. But as soon as it comes at the cost of FPS numbers I’m no longer happy with in the future, I’m turning it off
I am going to use it when i get my high end rig. I aint wasting any potential
Not if it's an option to turn off, no.
Overall performance is more important than hyperrealistic lighting.
raytracing could be a good thing to other applications
because for gaming its absolutelly a big ol nothing, just a performance hog for something that barelly makes a difference.
It could be usefull in art, although a very niche usecase
like 'tradigital' painting software, ray tracing could be technically used to calculate the 'bumps' and textures of simulating real life painting materials. Kinda like what rebelle 7 intended, but better
It absolutely makes a huge difference most games just don't implement it fully. Just look at Cyberpunk with path tracing, makes a huge difference and improvement to lighting quality
If it wasn’t so taxing I would definitely use it. It looks incredible. However it’s not worth the trade off of the stress it puts on your machine
My son is really into Minecraft, I put ray tracing into it with vanilla rtx mod pack and it looks really nice, for Minecraft.
Depends on a game. For example I used it on Cyberpunk and Metro. On Indiana Jones its impossibile to play since it gets from 180 fps off to 12 fps on...and i have a 7800x3d and a 4070ti...
I'm not gonna lie I use ray tracing in any game it's an option. Maybe it's just because I used to play on an ancient rig, so if I have the opportunity to make a game pretty (without sacrificing performance ofc) I crank that bad boy up
worst part is that you only notice it that much if you have it side by side (these Rtx on and off comparisons)
Single player games I run 60 fps rt max and my 3080 handles it like a champ. Anything competitive I'm more using high setting 144fps cap and no rt but that single player experience with rt on is 10/10 chefs kisses
You can run 30fps path tracing 2k with dlls on Alan Wale with a 500-700€ 4070, which is even cheaper than a PS5 Pro. Gamers usually prefer fps over graphics.
IMHO, I use it everyday unless I get less than 45fps or I’m playing Fortnite or any online game with RT capabilities which is nuts to prefer graphics over fps
I use raytracing. I mean, I have to use framegen and scaling at 1440p to get over 100 fps for my 1440p 180hz monitor. Sometimes, I actually hit that cap. Feels good when I do. But if I don't have the other options, raytracing's being turned off.