Metro and Control are console games, too. Didnt hold Remedy and 4A Games back to implement a full scalable raytracing implementation...
GPU Ray Tracing Performance Comparisons [2021-2022]
- Thread starter DavidGraham
- Start date
Metro and Control are console games, too. Didnt hold Remedy and 4A Games back to implement a full scalable raytracing implementation...
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Ummm, did you even read my post? I specifically pointed out Remedy with Control.
Metro falls into both categories depending on which release you are talking about. The first release would fit into the first category (RT implemented that benefitted current consoles in no way, but served as R&D for future consoles). The second release falls more into the second category (the only major thing that the non-console versions add is reflections).
I disagree. Remedy has a history of experimenting with things (both on consoles and PC). RT would have happened regardless of what IHV first implemented RT. NV didn't have to push Remedy to use it. If politics were a thing, then Remedy would have also used NV's version of DLSS 1.x rather than rolling with their own version of DLSS.
Regards,
SB
And much higher resolution RT should you so wish (checkerboard half res or full res RT above the quarter resolution that the consoles will be using).
What I don't understand is why some PC gamers are celebrating the lack of console+ settings in this game. The whole RDNA2 line up on PC has more than enough performance to handle increased RT resolution so why be happy we didn't get it just because it makes things look more even between AMD and Nvidia? If I were lucky enough to own and RDNA2 based GPU I'd absolutely be wanting developers t push all settings to the max - even if it meant I could only play at 1440p when Nvidia users could play at 4k.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Yes, but that's not as much an addition as just a higher quality version of what is already there.
Regards,
SB
DavidGraham
Veteran
Then there is Call of Duty Black Ops Cold War, Watch Dogs Legion, Crysis Remastered, The Medium, Pumpkin Jack, Ghostrunner and Cyberpunk 2077, the list will go on and on, all willing to go beyond console RT capabilities. If anything it's AMD's backed RT titles that are the outliers here.
Just checked RE8's config for fun and yes, maximum settings for RT are following:
RayTracingQuality=STANDARD
RayTracingSpecularRoughnessThresholdQuality=STANDARD
STANDARD is actually medium for all other settings in the game menu.
So standard is 2 presets below HIGH and HIGHEST, guess this answers the question whether there was any politics involved.
Will compare quality vs HIGHEST setting once I find appropriate location in the game.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
And all of those with the exception of maybe COD, are heavily PC focused as well. The Medium had been PC exclusive until they saw the specs for XBS-X. Crysis is by a developer who is also an Engine licensor. CDPR has a long history of being a first adopter on PC when it came to new tech (DX).
Basically, all of those with the possible exception of COD proves my point. And out of these, even here, the developers aren't pushing PC as hard as they have in the past. Crytek is pushing a little, but they aren't pushing the bounds of what is possible nearly as much as they did a decade+ ago.
Now, find primarily console devs who have added things that just plain don't exist on console? Anything Capcom makes is likely to just be console specific. Anything Square Enix makes will be console specific until a 3rd party port appears that might/might not push PC centric things (like a 3rd party port developer adding RT in the Tomb Raider game) some time after the console version. Some EA studios will push things (like DICE) some likely won't (like the FIFA devs).
For these, at best, you're likely to see higher settings for what exists on console, but you likely won't find much added that wasn't implemented for consoles.
Regards,
SB
DegustatoR
Legend
Where did I say "NV"? It happened because one IHV made a sizeable effort for it to happen - in both h/w and s/w. It wouldn't have happened otherwise. Hell, this IHV made a separate one off version of DLSS for that game specifically even. There was no "their version of DLSS".
The point is that one IHV right now seem to be if not straight up blocking implementations of advanced features then just being content with PC versions of multiplatform games staying at console graphical levels because this is the way they can showcase their h/w the best - the less optimizations and options there is the better. And I'm puzzled why anyone see this as a good thing. Doubly so because even with that this IHV's h/w is still loosing when RT is used so it's not like they will go from leading to loosing - they'll just be loosing a bit more right now but this will create even more stimulus for people to buy their future h/w once that will become available. It's just a puzzling situation all around.
It's a great question but I suspect many people involved in these debates don't actually play games
As far as I can tell RE8 is a straight console port with no PC specific features. It would be strange if they put in additional work on PC yet also decided to limit settings to the lowest common denominator. That doesn't seem to be the case though and it's just a "lazy" port with no nefarious undertones.
Nah, it seems changing RT to highest in cfg file has no effect, at least for AO.
There are the same disocclusion artifacts and grainy image all over the place during motion with any RT settings - https://imgsli.com/NTM3MjM/0/1
People are just glad its not a version of RT that absolutely demolishes framerates while not really uplifting visuals much. See nearly any UE4 game, Control, Tomb Raider, COD etc.
The implication that AMD has prevented Capcom from achieving their vision of ray tracing on PC is rather funny. Is it AMD who has been behind all these basic console ports for the last 15 years?
Has their been a comparison showing that there are no minor improvements on the PC version in the typical areas such as shadows and LOD? Or that the CBR is worse? CBR being worse wouldn't be a first. Several titles have worse reconstruction/AA techniques. HZD, Far Cry games, Watch Dogs 2 etc.
Last edited:
This made me curious. After watching RT on/off vids both for 3070 and PS5, i did not spot dynamic GI at all. Payed attention to opening doors, statues moving up from floor, moving characters, but... nothing changes with any of those things? Lighting seems static?
I mean, i see RT on is brighter, looks a bit better and maybe has a bounce, but that's not what i've meant with 'GI is a bad example to spot RT usage'. I should see dynamic changes also on a compressed YT video.
So is it officially confirmed the game has RT Global Illumination, or is it just me who gets something wrong?
It's a great question but I suspect many people involved in these debates don't actually play games
As far as I can tell RE8 is a straight console port with no PC specific features. It would be strange if they put in additional work on PC yet also decided to limit settings to the lowest common denominator. That doesn't seem to be the case though and it's just a "lazy" port with no nefarious undertones.
Many so called console ports are developed on PC first, though.
DavidGraham
Veteran
I disagree, those games I mentioned were developed with consoles in mind.
Control's RT doesn't uplift the visuals? don't make me laugh. What does in your books then? RE8?
Tomb Raider has significant shadows difference that made many scenes massively better with RT.
And in all of those games you mentioned there were clear scalability, where you can select low, medium and high ray tracing. If you don't like the massive cost, scale it down, RE8's solution is just cheap tricks, replace Standard quality with High quality, and the suckers will think they have a performant RT solution, while in fact it's just low quality RT disguised as High, even worse it still hits RDNA2 GPUs twice as much as NVIDIA GPUs.
Remembering comparisons with Control GI iguess it's baked with RT improving close range GI?
Not worth to manage BVH just for that and some reflections, IMO. RT off. (not that i had a choice
RE 8 is a mild visual uplift for a mildish performance hit. It doesn't sap up to 80% of your framerate away like Tomb Raider for example. And no I don't consider Control RT to be a large net visual gain. The only titles I consider to have large improvements in general are the Metro games.I disagree, those games I mentioned were developed with consoles in mind.
Control's RT doesn't uplift the visuals? don't make me laugh. What does in your books then? RE8?
Tomb Raider has significant shadows difference that made many scenes massively better with RT.
And in all of those games you mentioned there were clear scalability, where you can select low, medium and high ray tracing. If you don't like the massive cost, scale it down, RE8's solution is just cheap tricks, replace Standard quality with High quality, and the suckers will think they have a performant RT solution, while in fact it's just low quality RT disguised as High, even worse it still hits RDNA2 GPUs twice as much as NVIDIA GPUs.
Note I’m only referring to modern games, not Minecraft and Quake.
Last edited:
I will check that out too - thank you
edit: Just checked it out "HIGH" and "HIGHEST" when edited into the config for either of those values do nothing in game, sadly. Guess we are just stuck with this very low resolution RT.
Last edited:
According to this RT takes up more like 50% of performance on RDNA2, but I really don't see why giving people the option is a problem. The visual uplift can be significant as demonstrated by @DavidGraham shots above, and if you have an RDNA2 based GPU with more than enough power to run those visuals at either 4k/30 or 1440p/60 then why wouldn't you want the option?
In that particular bench it cuts the performance on AMD GPUs in half. It gets worse depending on the scene. I think the RT in RE Village is certainly better than this.According to this RT takes up more like 50% of performance on RDNA2, but I really don't see why giving people the option is a problem. The visual uplift can be significant as demonstrated by @DavidGraham shots above, and if you have an RDNA2 based GPU with more than enough power to run those visuals at either 4k/30 or 1440p/60 then why wouldn't you want the option?