AMD Radeon RDNA2 Navi (RX 6500, 6600, 6700, 6800, 6900 XT)

Ye, maybe, i am the wait-and-see kind of person. If AMD, sony says so il believe that, its still too vauge though. NV is apparently using its local tensor core hardware to achieve the results we get with DLSS. If RDNA2 gpus do it on the CUs (like partially RT), then im wondering how and if that impacts performance somehow.
DLSS isnt just a software solution.

I guess it will come down to how much compute do you need to render at something like 4k vs render at lower resolution + a super resolution solution.
 
Only if it makes any sense to do so. Just because something is new and popular doesn't make it the best tool for the job. UE4's new TAA gets results similar in quality to DLSS at a lower performance cost.

What many devs really want is a TAA tool that's easy to set up. Today's TAA can be a full time job of setting up dynamic res, tweaking everything per title, etc etc. If "Super Resolution" can cut down on that in a performant and good enough looking matter it will be a success.

I said it better than what they have before. Be patient, you can see the result and after you can say what you think about it.
 
Only if it makes any sense to do so. Just because something is new and popular doesn't make it the best tool for the job. UE4's new TAA gets results similar in quality to DLSS at a lower performance cost..
Did you see the TAAU vs. DLSS 2.0 results from the DLSS 2.0 presentation? TAAU definitely has much lower quality from the same internal resolution as DLSS 2.0.
 
The game has a built-in profiler that shows this kind of stuff nicely. This is on an RTX 3080 at 1440p, mostly default settings I think (GI high):

View attachment 5106

Asvgf full is the denoiser cost. Would be nice to see some profiler shots from Radeons.

Just tested Quake II RTX on my overclocked RX6800XT and I'm happy with how it performs as I had very low expectations to start with.
Good news is, it works and it performs better than RTX2060 I had a chance to play on previously.

Full details with Upscaling AA:
1920x1080 = 79FPS on Demo1 map
2560x1440 = 48FPS on Demo1 map

I took few photos as screen grab was turning black screens form fullscreen mode.
20201217-001533.jpg
20201217-001625.jpg
20201217-001616.jpg
20201217-001654.jpg
20201217-001705.jpg


Top pictures are QHD and the last two are FHD ;)
We should get one person with an RTX 3080 and one with an RX6800 to stand in the exact same spot in the game, with the same settings, and get the profiler shots from both cards. We can then normalize the numbers, and we can get an idea which card is better at which function. The shots are currently too different to make educated estimates.
 
We should get one person with an RTX 3080 and one with an RX6800 to stand in the exact same spot in the game, with the same settings, and get the profiler shots from both cards. We can then normalize the numbers, and we can get an idea which card is better at which function. The shots are currently too different to make educated estimates.

If there is a save file for us to compare
 
Great, I like :)

Here is a link to my save in this spot:
https://we.tl/t-ji2oR2IqIG


Recording a video took about 0.5FPS to 1 FPS.
And my OC settings:

My-OCSettings.png

Nice, you have selected Temporal Upscaling as AA method though not Temporal AA. Time of day can change performance as well.

Running my 3080 at undervolted 1860MHz@836mV, 9500MHz MCLK, ~290W.

Temporal AA
temporalaaz4ja8.jpg

Temporal Scaling
temporalupscalingvhjwc.jpg

No performance difference, lol.

And balls to the walls setting: 2025MHz@981mV, 10875MHz MCLK, ~420W :runaway:
quake007hqk6t.jpg

Time of day:
quake006xcklm.png

cropped profiler sshots:
temporal aa ~290W
temporalaa2kfk4m.png


temporal upscaling ~290W
temporalupscaling2adjyi.png


temporal upscaling ~420W
temporalupscaling_oc_4qjry.png
 
Last edited:
So the save file doesn't save time of day or sky settings. Makes sense, but a bit inconvenient for what we need.
Do the sky settings or time of day influence the overall load seen in the profiler significantly? We can test this by maybe loading the save 5 times (for example) with the same settings, and looking at how different the profiler looks.
 
The difference in denoising (asvgf full) is pretty surprising. Maybe well optimized for Nvidia arch and not at all for RDNA2.
 

Excellent job with the table!

I have also now noticed your edit with 420W OC results, not the most efficient settings given gains of less than 1ms at the cost of 127W, but I love squeezing every drop of performance like that! Shame my card is so far power limited due to lack of BIOS flashing tool.
Now we need someone with 1st gen RTX card to add results ... Oh wait! I have 2060RTX in a laptop! Be right back :)

Had to do driver update for new version of Quake to work with Vulkan, so took a bit longer.

Please ignore wierd colors, they are fine in game, just MSI Afterburner's screen capture is not working properly.

https://ibb.co/dtzWqnV
https://ibb.co/cx56T1C
q2rtx-2020-12-23-21-42-11-068.png
 
Last edited:
Do the sky settings or time of day influence the overall load seen in the profiler significantly? We can test this by maybe loading the save 5 times (for example) with the same settings, and looking at how different the profiler looks.
Sky setting doesn't change performance, just colour palette.

As for time, it doens't progress in the game, but you can toggle it via menu or by pressing "/" on the keyboard.

The results are as follows:
https://ibb.co/FHvnghk
https://ibb.co/GQSj7pV
https://ibb.co/ZYWsKSh
https://ibb.co/7v379pP
 
Back
Top