Seems a good and fair video. The improvement in quality over screenspace reflections is unmistakable and very welcome, but as it drops framerates so much, how many gamers are going to willing to be spend significant money for an effect that kills their framerate? Furthermore, given the huge framerates using rasterising without RT, couldn't a few realtime cubemap renders be used to add more realistic environment reflections? We don't have a comparison of what 1080p60 raytraced versus 1080p60 rasterised looks like. And yes, if you're pushing rasterising down to 60 fps, you may as well use ray tracing, but rasterising would add more fidelity - cast more cubemaps and larger cubemaps, sort of thing.As a production card, $1000 for a 2080 is well worth it. As a gaming card, its value is hugely debateable.
These first game results again point me to the real reason for these cards as RT accelerators for production, not games. 5 fps realtime rendering is absolutely phenomenal and hugely valuable for content creators. Even 1 fps is a massive improvement and well worth the tech. In games though, framerates have to stay above a minimum and even more so for gamers who spend big bucks on big cards to get faster framerates.
For me, the next important showcase will be RT lighting performance. The quality should be the most notable improvement over rasterised lighting and lift visuals to next gen similar to The Tomorrow Children's best visuals, or Uncharted 4's baked interiors. If RT can handle next-gen lighting in decent framerate realtime, it might well be worth including as a de facto tech.