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

trinibwoy said:
Does it really matter why we haven’t seen it in games? Like I said I’ll believe it when it actually happens.
Click to expand...

No idea yet if it will or won't happen, but...

Consoles are the current limiting factor. If it is more performant than RT on consoles than it will be leveraged more in games than RT on consoles. If it isn't more performant than RT on consoles then it won't be leveraged more in games. If it is used more on consoles, it'll become the defacto way to do X thing regardless of whether RT can do it better on PC.

This doesn't mean that the occasionally developer won't push RT hard on PC, but that in general games will utilize what is performant on consoles and what is performant on PC doesn't really matter too much.

So, for example, I expect developers like Remedy and DICE to push things on PC that aren't used much on console. OTOH - I'm somewhat doubtful that Rockstar Games will push much beyond what works well on console...of course they'll dial all of that up to 11 on PC, but they are unlikely to greatly push something on PC if the same code won't easily run on console with a simple downscaling of quality.

But that said, if something like SVOGI or something else that currently isn't used much because of last gen console limitations becomes feasible on current gen consoles, I'm willing to bet it'll end up seeing widespread adoption in games.

The key here is whether or not current gen consoles (the gen that just started) can make better use of these techniques than previous gen consoles.

Personally, while I expect to see some limited use of RT in games going forward because of the consoles, I don't expect to see RT really pushed hard until the next generation of consoles, regardless of how far PC GPU RT progresses in the meantime. Similar to how we didn't see much progress in PC gaming graphics until developers dropped PS3/X360 and started to develop for the PS4/XBO and suddenly the exact same graphics cards and CPUs were suddenly pumping out significantly better graphics in games.

This is, IMO, unfortunate, but a practical reality of a world where at least 2/3rds of a game's sales are likely to come from consoles. There are of course exceptions with the occasion game selling better on PC than console, but in general greater than 66% of a AAA developers games will be sold on console. That combined with the cost associated with developing a AAA titles means that most dev resources will be spent on leveraging console hardware. Again, there will be some few developers that can afford the extra cost associated with leveraging PC specific features, but it's the exception rather than the rule.

Regards,
SB
 
Silent_Buddha said:
If it isn't more performant than RT on consoles then it won't be leveraged more in games.
Click to expand...
Nope, DXR will be pushed on PC the same way textures, draw distance, shadow resolution, lighting resolution ..etc are being pushed, Watch Dogs Legions is a great example of that, RT reflection resolution, distance, and details are modest on consoles, yet they are cranked to 11 on PC. Crysis Remastered and Call Of Duty Cold War followed the same path too.

Svensk Viking said:
What the sceptical users are asking is, would the modern versions of these games really have been better, or even the same, if they didn't target the combined console userbase?
Click to expand...
The argument was that the large install base of low end PCs is preventing PC games from pushing the envelope, that argument is thus false, as all of those mentioned games started on the PC while requiring high end specs with no regard of low end PCs.
 
This talk of console performance regarding RT, kind of misses the point that RDNA2 is actually low on RT performance and that the consoles just scale in accordance with that.

So in that regards its not consoles holding it back its RDNA2.

What it means is that devs will get creative with its use.
RTX may have been out for a couple years but we are only at the start, rolling start maybe but start nonetheless.
Maybe in 5 years we'll get all out performant RT in consoles also, until then spiderman MM, COD, WD Legion, etc are just the start not the end.
 
DavidGraham said:
The argument was that the large install base of low end PCs is preventing PC games from pushing the envelope, that argument is thus false, as all of those mentioned games started on the PC while requiring high end specs with no regard of low end PCs.
Click to expand...

Stating that something is false today based on how it was 20-30 years ago is arguably a false argument too.

I do find it weird that you do note that the games you listed did in fact start out on PC, but competely ignore the tendency that each of them eventually did go to consoles as time went on. Gone are the times when you could expect the new Doom to be made by a team of 10 persons maximum.

Saying that for example Doom 1 not paying regard to low end PCs in 1993 means Doom Eternal could have been released in 2020 exclusively for PC without any regard to low end PCs, yeah, don't expect many to follow that reasoning.


And like I usually feel when this discussion occur, why don't people make an extensive list of the PC exclusives that make greater use of the higher core count and utilizes all new DX12/Vulkan features than the multiplat releases?
 
Last edited:
Flappy Pannus said:
and exclusive to one particular console manufacturer to boot, and they're very successful while ignoring the PC market entirely.
Click to expand...

At the same time we are seeing some of these Sony aaa appearing on pc too, with better visuals to boot. According to Sony boss this is going to be more and more. So the best on console is only going to look even better on pc. CP2077, one of the best lookers out there now, is only going to look this good on pc for now, consoles have to wait from patch next year. And even by then, it will look much better on pc in special regarding ray tracing.
A couple of exclusives to playstation isnt changing all that much.

The pc is in the best situation to me, you get all PC games, all Xbox games and sony games to an extend. All multiplat games are the best versions. The freedom of controls and settings is another factor, too.
 
Last edited:
It’s kinda pointless to speculate about what would happen in an alternate universe where consoles don’t exist.

RDNA 2 variants in consoles will continue to define the baseline and fundamental inner workings of game engines. PCs will get tacked on peripheral effects. Hopefully those tacked on effects become easier to tack on.

Funny enough here’s a slide from Titanfall devs talking about how PC CPUs are holding them back due to lack of advanced SIMD instructions :D

3-AC79130-2-C1-A-497-D-B1-BC-33-CBDD877-BD8.png
 
trinibwoy said:
It’s kinda pointless to speculate about what would happen in an alternate universe where consoles don’t exist.
Click to expand...

Who's doing so? They have co-existed since the beginning, and both do fine doing so. Games always have been targetting consoles as a baseline, even during the 6th generation. There are outliers like HL Alyx and SC. Just like there are outliers on PS, but alteast some of those land on PC.
 
Is anyone seriously going to contemplate the argument that consoles were the ones somehow largely responsible for holding back progress in graphics technology behind AAA games in the last generation when the vast majority of their advertised PC min spec featured hardware that's worse than a GTX 670 which usually performed worse than the leading console as well ?
 
PSman1700 said:
At the same time we are seeing some of these Sony aaa appearing on pc too, with better visuals to boot.According to Sony boss this is going to be more and more. So the best on console is only going to look even better on pc. CP2077, one of the best lookers out there now, is only going to look this good on pc for now, consoles have to wait from patch next year. And even by then, it will look much better on pc in special regarding ray tracing.
A couple of exclusives to playstation isnt changing all that much.
Click to expand...
This has nothing to do with which platform is actually the prime mover in producing the most graphically advanced games though. Yes, when Sony ports some games (years later, and assuming they're actually decent ports, unlike Horizon for its first 4+ months of release) to the PC, they might end up looking better if you have the hardware (and assuming they don't release a PS5 patch/re-master).

No one's denying that the PC gaming market exists, Sony can certainly make some extra $ doing this - the argument is whether the existence of $500 GPU's is what actually drives the production of the graphics we love to see running on them. The PC can enhance these games, sure - albeit there are reasons Hardware Unboxed and Digital Foundry often do 'optimization' videos detailing what dumbass ultra setting is killing your fps for marginal to no actual perceptible graphical enhancement that the devs threw in to satisfy the PC heads. That ties into this whole argument, whether developers will largely just provide 'ultra' settings that significantly change the appearance of the game and really take advantage of the far (?) superior ray tracing capabilities of the Nvidia GPU's. I'm very skeptical, albeit what I consider 'significant' may differ, as WD:Legion is used as an example of the difference the PC can provide, whereas I would use it as an example of "settings dialed up to 11" which actually don't really do much for the overall image, at least relative to the price.

Horizon:ZD sold over 10 million on the PS4. Releasing it on the PC was by no means necessary for it to be a massive success, if anything it's potential advertising for Horizon:Forbidden West. It's great that they're doing this, but "Sony might release a version years later that might look better on substantially more expensive hardware" doesn't really back up the argument that the PC, as a platform, is anything like a main driver in game graphic engines.
 
I don't
Silent_Buddha said:
This is, IMO, unfortunate, but a practical reality of a world where at least 2/3rds of a game's sales are likely to come from consoles. There are of course exceptions with the occasion game selling better on PC than console, but in general greater than 66% of a AAA developers games will be sold on console. That combined with the cost associated with developing a AAA titles means that most dev resources will be spent on leveraging console hardware. Again, there will be some few developers that can afford the extra cost associated with leveraging PC specific features, but it's the exception rather than the rule.
Click to expand...
Your game sales numbers seem a bit off ... Console sales are about 28%, PC Sales 23% and Mobile game sales 48%. The numbers don't seem to support resources spent mostly on consoles gaming.
Newzoo_Games_Market_Revenues_2020-1024x576.png

The World’s 2.7 Billion Gamers Will Spend $159.3 Billion on Games in 2020; The Market Will Surpass $200 Billion by 2023 | Newzoo

Edit:
Another more recent report has PC gaming audience at 48% of 3.1 billion gamers. Only 8% are exclusive console gamers, who also happen to have the highest spending per gamer.
As for what these 3.1 billion people are playing, we know that Ghost of Tsushima was the best-selling game of July 2020, followed by Call of Duty: Modern Warfare and Paper Mario: The Origami King. These lists from NPD don't include mobile games, however, or free-to-play games like the mega-hit Fortnite
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Flappy Pannus said:
whether developers will largely just provide 'ultra' settings that significantly change the appearance of the game and really take advantage of the far (?) superior ray tracing capabilities of the Nvidia GPU's.
Click to expand...
Even without Ultra crazy RT settings, the hit to performance will be less using the superior RTX capabilities, meaning higher fps while playing, or playing at higher resolutions. RTX hardware also enables you to enjoy path traced experiences without tanking your fps into the toilet.
Krteq said:
At least Quake 2 RTX, Crysis Remastered and Wolfenstein Youngblood are NOT DXR titles.
Click to expand...
Who cares? We are discussing RT integration in PC games, doesn't matter if it's DXR or Vulkan or even OpenGL.
 
Did anyone have an RDNA bench of CP? with my 570 with everything low/mid and 75% min resolution with CAS I got the *almost* stable 35 FPS. Please kill me now :D. Hope RDNA2 works better...The game looks fantastic even at this settings tho.
 
AAA exclusives arent that many considering. Close to a niche market seeing the numbers that buy them (10% of the ps install base).

Good chance Forbidden West will see a pc version too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Kaotik
AMD Radeon Software Driver Announcement thread
2
Replies
29
Views
13K
DegustatoR
D
Back
Top