GPU Ray Tracing Performance Comparisons [2021-2022]

[PSman1700]

You were answering a comment of someone comparing what Fornite UE 5.1 is doing to Portal RTX again they aren't even doing the same thing at all. And Epic is probably knowing what they are doing with their own technology. Perfomance and quality will improve in the future on Nanite side and Lumen side. And for Fortnite, they needed to release the season now. From an art point of view and some configuration (less aggressive HLOD), the game will improve a lot.

I was answering your comment, implying i want to see a game designed around UE5 game before we start to make any comparisons to other games. Thats actually going to be a stronger case for UE5 since a game designed truly around UE5 would most likely look much and much more impressive (like the ue5 pc tech demo etc).
Comparisons do make sense though, why would one not be able to compare Portal RTX to Fortnite UE5? Technically thats very much a valid point, both are using some form of ray tracing/path tracing, and in that sense you can compare those.

IMO, Portal RTX and Fortnite performance cant really be compared, Portal is doing super-heavy ray tracing which is much more resource heavy than whatever UE5 is doing in Fortnite. Performance comparisons between these two games is just awkward. Fidelity is another, but thats going to be person to person on what they like more.

 

[chris1515]

I was answering your comment, implying i want to see a game designed around UE5 game before we start to make any comparisons to other games. Thats actually going to be a stronger case for UE5 since a game designed truly around UE5 would most likely look much and much more impressive (like the ue5 pc tech demo etc).
Comparisons do make sense though, why would one not be able to compare Portal RTX to Fortnite UE5? Technically thats very much a valid point, both are using some form of ray tracing/path tracing, and in that sense you can compare those.

Again The scope of the two games aren't the same at all. Portal aren't even a last generation console level of geometry. Fortnite without Nanite push probably more geometry than Portal. Out of raytracing, Fortnite does much more stuff. This is a 100 players Battle Royale with fully destructible building and house taking place on a huge map with tons of vegetation.

Using pathtracing, Fornite UE 5.1 would probably run in a single digit fps on a 4090.

 

[PSman1700]

Again The scope of the two games aren't the same at all. Portal aren't even a last generation console level of geometry. Fortnite without Nanite push probably more geometry than Portal. Out of raytracing, Fortnite does much more stuff. This is a 100 players Battle Royale with fully destructible building and house taking place on a huge map with tons of vegetation.

Using pathtracing, Fornite UE 5.1 would probably run in a single digit fps on a 4090.

You cant compare performances across these two games, different engines doing completely different things. Get over it.

 

[PSman1700]

On topic:

Next gen gaming is here.

 

[chris1515]

You cant compare performances across these two games, different engines doing completely different things. Get over it.

Again this is not me begin to compare Portal RTX to Fortnite 5.1 but basically compare the workload of a 2007 games to a 2022 game is not a thing to do at the beginning. Portal RTX is a good idea but there is a reason they can use a 2007 game and not a modern game to do RTX Remix.

 

[PSman1700]

Again this is not me begin to compare Portal RTX to Fortnite 5.1 but basically compare the workload of a 2007 games to a 2022 game is not a thing to do at the beginning. Portal RTX is a good idea but there is a reason they can use a 2007 game and not a modern game to do RTX Remix.

Just because one is based on a 2007 game and the other on a 2019 doesnt mean the older is less taxing, hell, Portal RTX is probably MUCH more taxing on the HW than Fortnite is. Ray tracing is a performance hog, dont forget that. Portal is doing much more of that.

 

[chris1515]

Just because one is based on a 2007 game and the other on a 2019 doesnt mean the older is less taxing, hell, Portal RTX is probably MUCH more taxing on the HW than Fortnite is. Ray tracing is a performance hog, dont forget that. Portal is doing much more of that.

But again does the same thing level of raytracing on Fortnite and it would run at 1 or 2 fps on a 4090. There is a reason they don't do it on modern games. Because it would not be playable even on the highest end PC card.

 

[PSman1700]

But again does the same thing level of raytracing on Fortnite and it would run at 1 or 2 fps on a 4090. There is a reason they don't do it on modern games. Because it would not be playable even on the highest end PC card.

I suspect Portal RTX is more demanding compared to Fortnite UE5, and your 1fps on a 4090 seems to confirm that.

 

[techuse]

Let's please avoid the useless visual comparisons between an interior focused game, vs an exterior focused open world game, and instead get back to discussing what Portal RTX is on it's own merits?

So in Portal RTX native 1080p, the 3060 Ti is 30% faster than 2080Ti, while the 3070 is 50% faster! This also applies to 4K DLSS Performance.

There is some possible reasons for that, either the game might be using ray traced Motion Blur, which is accelerated on Ampere but not Turing, or the game is finally tapping into the updated RT cores in Ampere.

It’s also possible Nvidia just didn’t care to optimize it for Turing as they no longer sell those GPUs.

 

[Diamond.G]

Steam doesn’t say, but does Portal RTX use Vulkan as the renderer?

 

[DavidGraham]

Steam doesn’t say, but does Portal RTX use Vulkan as the renderer?

Portal RTX uses RTX Remix to render everything, RTX Remix uses VulkanRT API to replace DX8/DX9 APIs. So yes it's Vulkan.

 

[troyan]

Portal RTX based on nVidia's RTX Remix so it uses Vulkan RT.

Again The scope of the two games aren't the same at all. Portal aren't even a last generation console level of geometry. Fortnite without Nanite push probably more geometry than Portal. Out of raytracing, Fortnite does much more stuff. This is a 100 players Battle Royale with fully destructible building and house taking place on a huge map with tons of vegetation.

Using pathtracing, Fornite UE 5.1 would probably run in a single digit fps on a 4090.

Portal RTX isnt about geometry, it is about Pathtracing. And for that it is more impressive than anything else right now on the market. Fortnite with UE5.1 has an upgraded 2019 lightning model. So it is one generation behind. Metro Exodus EE runs better with better quality. Here is just an example from Fortnite and Metro:


Fortnite UE 5.1 runs abnormal, less than 100 FPS indoors with wrong lightning on 4090 in 3440x1440 makes this unplayable for everyone else.

 

[Henry swagger]

Portal RTX based on nVidia's RTX Remix so it uses Vulkan RT.

Portal RTX isnt about geometry, it is about Pathtracing. And for that it is more impressive than anything else right now on the market. Fortnite with UE5.1 has an upgraded 2019 lightning model. So it is one generation behind. Metro Exodus EE runs better with better quality. Here is just an example from Fortnite and Metro:
View attachment 7692View attachment 7693

Fortnite UE 5.1 runs abnormal, less than 100 FPS indoors with wrong lightning on 4090 in 3440x1440 makes this unplayable for everyone else.

Engine differences are also at play.. metro's game engine is more advanced than unreal 5 and the portal one

 

[neckthrough]

Half life 2 next?

Yes please!

Although Doom 3 would also be cool. Or maybe Riddick.

 

[chris1515]

Portal RTX based on nVidia's RTX Remix so it uses Vulkan RT.

Portal RTX isnt about geometry, it is about Pathtracing. And for that it is more impressive than anything else right now on the market. Fortnite with UE5.1 has an upgraded 2019 lightning model. So it is one generation behind. Metro Exodus EE runs better with better quality. Here is just an example from Fortnite and Metro:
View attachment 7692View attachment 7693

Fortnite UE 5.1 runs abnormal, less than 100 FPS indoors with wrong lightning on 4090 in 3440x1440 makes this unplayable for everyone else.

Again path tracing scale with geometry. For sure it counts 2007 level of geometry is not the same than now and not even at the same level than PS4/XB1 console generation. Let compare UE 5.1 realistic art style with Metro Exodus. And this is not unplayable for everyone else. People just need to drop down some settings depending of the GPU they have.

 

[DavidGraham]

PCGamesHardware posted their benchmark with upscaling TAAU Quality for AMD and NVIDIA GPUs.

At 1080p TAAU Quality, the 3080 is 3.3x times faster than 6900XT, and 4x times faster with DLSS Q instead of TAAU Q. The 4090 is 7.5x times faster with TAAU, and 9x times faster with DLSS than 6900XT.

6900XT: 17 fps
3080: 58 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 71 fps
4090: 134 fps
4090 DLSS Q: 161 fps

At 4K TAAU/DLSS Q, the 4090 becomes 28x times faster than the 6900XT!

6900XT: 1.8 fps
3080: 13 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 17 fps
4090: 41
4090 DLSS Q: 50 fps

Wie gut sieht Portal RTX wirklich aus? Vergleiche, Benchmarks und mehr

Portal RTX: Benchmarks mit RTX 4090 und Co.

www.pcgameshardware.de

 

[DavidGraham]

World Of Warcraft Dragon Flight is released with RT shadows, at 4K, the 3080Ti is 27% faster than 6950XT, while the A770 is 20% faster than the 3060.

Hardwarehungriges Dragonflight im Techniktest: WoW 10.0 läuft nicht auf jedem Toaster [Update 2]

Auf dieser Seite beschäftigen wir uns mit der Leistung des neuen Dragonflight-DLC. Wie schnell müssen Prozessor und Grafikkarte für ein reibungsloses Spielvergnügen sein?

www.pcgameshardware.de

 

[Cyan]

PCGamesHardware posted their benchmark with upscaling TAAU Quality for AMD and NVIDIA GPUs.

At 1080p TAAU Quality, the 3080 is 3.3x times faster than 6900XT, and 4x times faster with DLSS Q instead of TAAU Q. The 4090 is 7.5x times faster with TAAU, and 9x times faster with DLSS than 6900XT.

6900XT: 17 fps
3080: 58 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 71 fps
4090: 134 fps
4090 DLSS Q: 161 fps

At 4K TAAU/DLSS Q, the 4090 becomes 28x times faster than the 6900XT!

6900XT: 1.8 fps
3080: 13 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 17 fps
4090: 41
4090 DLSS Q: 50 fps

Wie gut sieht Portal RTX wirklich aus? Vergleiche, Benchmarks und mehr

Portal RTX: Benchmarks mit RTX 4090 und Co.

www.pcgameshardware.de

that's surprisingly bad. I wonder why that happens. TAAU Gen4 and TAAU Gen5 perform very well even on a much less powerful A770 when I play Gotham Knights, TAUU 4 and 5 run the game at 60 stables fps too, like XeSS.

Also, the RX 6xxx video cards are super performers with algorithms like XeSS, and afaik XeSS is a somewhat heavy algorithm.

 

[Man from Atlantis]

PCGamesHardware posted their benchmark with upscaling TAAU Quality for AMD and NVIDIA GPUs.

At 1080p TAAU Quality, the 3080 is 3.3x times faster than 6900XT, and 4x times faster with DLSS Q instead of TAAU Q. The 4090 is 7.5x times faster with TAAU, and 9x times faster with DLSS than 6900XT.

6900XT: 17 fps
3080: 58 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 71 fps
4090: 134 fps
4090 DLSS Q: 161 fps

At 4K TAAU/DLSS Q, the 4090 becomes 28x times faster than the 6900XT!

6900XT: 1.8 fps
3080: 13 fps
3080 DLSS Q: 17 fps
4090: 41
4090 DLSS Q: 50 fps

Wie gut sieht Portal RTX wirklich aus? Vergleiche, Benchmarks und mehr

Portal RTX: Benchmarks mit RTX 4090 und Co.

www.pcgameshardware.de

Wished they had A770

 

[DavidGraham]

So Portal RTX can be optimized to deliver massively more performance, by sacrificing little things that are not always needed, like reducing the 8 way bounces to 3 or 2 way (portal is an all interior experience, you rarely need more than 4 bounces) .. you can also reduce the denoiser quality a little bit, sacrifice some particles lighting, reduce reflection bounces and resolution, use High settings instead of Ultra, .. etc. The game will still look amazing.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600921483336765440

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600927494194225152

https://twitter.com/x/status/1600924229574135808