| Many developers and Nvidia advertise with Ray Tracing. Many people would say "it's just a gimmick, I don't see the difference" which is fair enough. Since Ray Tracing still uses Rasterisation lighting aswell. If you don't know where to look, you wouldn't see much difference. Only a hand full of games, you would notice the difference. The rest of games games, like Elden Ring feels just like a gimmick. But does this counts for Path Tracing aswell? CD Projekt Red released a new Cyberpunk 2077 update, which enabled the Overdrive mode. Overdrive update contains a new technology named Path Tracing. Path Tracing removes rasterisation entirely. Light bleeding is no more, everything cast a shadow now and light bounces on objects and even change colors, based on the object color. Do you still think Path Tracing is a "gimmick" aswell or does this new technology brings gaming to a whole new level? I've tried it myself and I must say that i'm impressed, for me personally it gave a extra atmospheric touch to the game. I used a L40G Nvidia graphics card, and I couldn't even get a stable FPS without DLSS enabled. So, the current hardware is struggling at this moment. Digital Foundry has a video with explains a lot between Ray Tracing and Path Tracing. |
Toonen1988May 29, 2023 3:29 AM
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
| the only downside to Path Tracing is the expensive computation for it but maybe AI can speed it up sooner or later NVIDIA said Moores Law is dead so AI is the future of GPU optimizations anyway |
deg said: the only downside to Path Tracing is the expensive computation for it but maybe AI can speed it up sooner or later NVIDIA said Moores Law is dead so AI is the future of GPU optimizations anyway I've tried DLSS Frame Generation and DLSS Super resolution on different settings. It does improves my FPS, but somehow the games feels less responsive. I'm using a L40G graphics card from a Nvidia data center and everything looks crisp sharp in 4k. But soon when I enable DLSS Super Resolution, I get a better FPS and "slightly" less response time. But almost non noticeable, and it's still very playable. But when I enable DLSS Frame Generation to add additional frames (This settings is only available for RTX 40xx series), I get a massive decrease in response time. It feels like the AI slow down the responsive time. Like the AI tries to render additional frames to get a smoother experience, but is just to slow to keep up. |
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
Toonen1988 said: deg said: the only downside to Path Tracing is the expensive computation for it but maybe AI can speed it up sooner or later NVIDIA said Moores Law is dead so AI is the future of GPU optimizations anyway I've tried DLSS Frame Generation and DLSS Super resolution on different settings. It does improves my FPS, but somehow the games feels less responsive. I'm using a L40G graphics card from a Nvidia data center and everything looks crisp sharp in 4k. But soon when I enable DLSS Super Resolution, I get a better FPS and "slightly" less response time. But almost non noticeable, and it's still very playable. But when I enable DLSS Frame Generation to add additional frames (This settings is only available for RTX 40xx series), I get a massive decrease in response time. It feels like the AI slow down the responsive time. Like the AI tries to render additional frames to get a smoother experience, but is just to slow to keep up. AI can only improve over time so give it few more future versions of DLSS NVIDIA is focusing a lot on AI GPU hardware will not improves drastically anymore since ye Moores Law is dead so transistor count will not increase anymore unless consumers want GPUs to be the size of motherboards already and consume like 1000+ watts of electricity |
deg said: Toonen1988 said: I've tried DLSS Frame Generation and DLSS Super resolution on different settings. It does improves my FPS, but somehow the games feels less responsive. I'm using a L40G graphics card from a Nvidia data center and everything looks crisp sharp in 4k. But soon when I enable DLSS Super Resolution, I get a better FPS and "slightly" less response time. But almost non noticeable, and it's still very playable. But when I enable DLSS Frame Generation to add additional frames (This settings is only available for RTX 40xx series), I get a massive decrease in response time. It feels like the AI slow down the responsive time. Like the AI tries to render additional frames to get a smoother experience, but is just to slow to keep up. AI can only improve over time so give it few more future versions of DLSS NVIDIA is focusing a lot on AI GPU hardware will not improves drastically anymore since ye Moores Law is dead so transistor count will not increase anymore unless consumers want GPUs to be the size of motherboards already and consume like 1000+ watts of electricity That's true, that's why I'm now using Geforce Now, which decreases my energy consumption and stress on my own hardware. And if you look at the image sharpness, I get a way better sharpness than my own local machine. Since i'm still working with a GTX 1080. Planning to buy a RTX 4080 TI end this year/begin next year. I'm still in education that I need to pay. But somehow Geforce Now is very successful for me, and if I put Cyberpunk on Psycho mode, it feels very responsive, no delay, no unsharp imaging and it runs and looks way better as on my local machine. But when I enable overdrive (Path tracing), my FPS drops insane. So, I need to use DLSS super resolution or DLSS frame generation, which incease my FPS, but decreases response time. You are correct that the AI still need to "learn" how to optimize or be more sufficient indeed. Who knows what the future will give us, maybe in the future we can play new games on very old hardware, due the fact that AI generates frames. Time will tell how sufficient this will be, but I think this will also increase "ghosting" effects or strange aritfacts when the AI doesn't render correctly. Here are 4 screenshots I took in Cyberpunk 2077 in native 4k from a Nvidia Data center, with everything on the highest settings with path tracing enabled. DLSS super resolution was set to (auto). So I let the system and AI to choose the best option.     |
Toonen1988May 29, 2023 4:01 AM
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
| @Toonen1988 yep 4080 TI is a great upgrade for your 1080 for sure and im sure with few more software updates Path Tracing can run good on it |
| And here I am playing the game like: I hope my 2080 Ti doesn't die before I finish my current playthough, and wondering if one mod or another is making V's boobs bigger than they should be even though I picked the "default" size. ...Anyway. I'll get back to this when I have another $1,200 to spend on a GPU. ...and another $200 for a new power supply. ...or switch to AMD since they're not buying Nvidia's "Moore's Law is dead" rhetoric or being stingy with VRAM, and rasterization is still good enough for me since I prefer a high and steady frame-rate. The only RT feature that I immediately notice while actively playing a game are reflections, and in my mind, Control is still the main tech demo for that specific feature while Cyberpunk is more about shadows and lighting. Oh, and, some side-by-sides comparisons between rasterization, ray traced, and path traced versions of the same scenes would probably help show the differences a bit more than just describing them since I, like many people, are not going to watch or re-watch that video, and without using DLSS to eliminate resolution scaling as a variable so that it's strictly about the graphical features. |
 |
FacelessVixen said: Oh, and, some side-by-sides comparisons between rasterization, ray traced, and path traced versions of the same scenes would probably help show the differences a bit more https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2022/03/23/what-is-path-tracing/  |
degMay 29, 2023 5:58 AM
Toonen1988 said: Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation.Many developers and Nvidia advertise with Ray Tracing. Many people would say "it's just a gimmick, I don't see the difference" which is fair enough. Since Ray Tracing still uses Rasterisation lighting aswell. If you don't know where to look, you wouldn't see much difference. Only a hand full of games, you would notice the difference. The rest of games games, like Elden Ring feels just like a gimmick. Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts, and rasterisation for the rest. This is why in some games the effect is much less noticeable than others. For example, Elden Ring only uses ray tracing for shadows and AO. This is why it feels like a gimmick. But they don't have to use rasterisation for the rest, they just choose not to, because of the performance hit. CD Projekt Red released a new Cyberpunk 2077 update, which enabled the Overdrive mode. Overdrive update contains a new technology named Path Tracing. Path Tracing removes rasterisation entirely. Light bleeding is no more, everything cast a shadow now and light bounces on objects and even change colors, based on the object color. Ray tracing already does this. Just look at Minecraft with raytracing, the light bounces, picks up colour based on the object it bounced off of, etc. What you are talking about isn't really unique to path tracing. In reality, Cyberpunk was previously only partially ray traced, due to limitations in hardware and software. This is why the overdrive mode looks much better. |
Saku_k said: Toonen1988 said: Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation.Many developers and Nvidia advertise with Ray Tracing. Many people would say "it's just a gimmick, I don't see the difference" which is fair enough. Since Ray Tracing still uses Rasterisation lighting aswell. If you don't know where to look, you wouldn't see much difference. Only a hand full of games, you would notice the difference. The rest of games games, like Elden Ring feels just like a gimmick. Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts, and rasterisation for the rest. This is why in some games the effect is much less noticeable than others. For example, Elden Ring only uses ray tracing for shadows and AO. This is why it feels like a gimmick. But they don't have to use rasterisation for the rest, they just choose not to, because of the performance hit. CD Projekt Red released a new Cyberpunk 2077 update, which enabled the Overdrive mode. Overdrive update contains a new technology named Path Tracing. Path Tracing removes rasterisation entirely. Light bleeding is no more, everything cast a shadow now and light bounces on objects and even change colors, based on the object color. Ray tracing already does this. Just look at Minecraft with raytracing, the light bounces, picks up colour based on the object it bounced off of, etc. What you are talking about isn't really unique to path tracing. In reality, Cyberpunk was previously only partially ray traced, due to limitations in hardware and software. This is why the overdrive mode looks much better."Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation" "Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts." I do get what you are saying, but aren't you saying two opposite things? You just confirmed what I was saying. I didn't say Ray Tracing is rasterisation. I said that they used Ray Tracing in combiniation with rasterisation. You just formulated in a different way. And afcourse, Ray Tracing also uses bounced off lights. But Path Tracing can bounces off light multiple time. For example, a car shines with a white light on a wall. Then the white light bounces off from the wall towards a blue contrainer. From the blue container, the light bounces off towards the ceiling as a blue light. Path tracing also fixed a lot of light bleeding, because they don't use rasterisation at all. The video I posted, explains it very well. |
Toonen1988May 29, 2023 6:11 AM
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
Toonen1988 said: I am not saying two opposite things.Saku_k said: Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation. Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts, and rasterisation for the rest. This is why in some games the effect is much less noticeable than others. For example, Elden Ring only uses ray tracing for shadows and AO. This is why it feels like a gimmick. But they don't have to use rasterisation for the rest, they just choose not to, because of the performance hit. Ray tracing already does this. Just look at Minecraft with raytracing, the light bounces, picks up colour based on the object it bounced off of, etc. What you are talking about isn't really unique to path tracing. In reality, Cyberpunk was previously only partially ray traced, due to limitations in hardware and software. This is why the overdrive mode looks much better. "Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation" "Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts." I do get what you are saying, but aren't you saying two opposite things? You just confirmed what I was saying. I didn't say Ray Tracing is rasterisation. I said that they used Ray Tracing in combiniation with rasterisation. You just formulated in a different way. And afcourse, Ray Tracing also uses bounced off lights. But Path Tracing can bounces off light multiple time. For example, a car shines with a white light on a wall. Then the white light bounces off from the wall towards a blue contrainer. From the blue container, the light bounces off towards the ceiling as a blue light. Path tracing also fixed a lot of light bleeding, because they don't use rasterisation at all. The video I posted, explains it very well. You said "Since Ray Tracing still uses Rasterisation lighting aswell." This isn't true, because not all games use rasterisation along with ray tracing. You can have a game with just ray tracing. In regards to bouncing light, again, it really depends on your implementation. Ray tracing can also bounce light multiple times. Even with path tracing, you will have games that bounce light more than others. It's just a software setting. More bounces = more hardware intensive, which is why most of the time they go for a small number. I've seen the video. I watched it back when it first comes out. You are making it sound like things like light bleeding were caused because they used ray tracing previously, which "required" rasterisation, and the new amazing technology of path tracing means they don't have to use rasterisation at all. In reality, they had to use rasterisation previously, because hardware and software just wasn't good enough. For example, things like DLSS 3 did not exist when Cyberpunk originally came out. You can ray trace all of the things that were rasterised in the previous version of Cyberpunk if you wanted to. In fact, Nvidia frequently refers to the Overdrive mode as simply Full Raytracing instead of path tracing. |
Saku_k said: Toonen1988 said: I am not saying two opposite things."Ray tracing doesn't use rasterisation" "Most games only choose to have ray tracing for certain parts." I do get what you are saying, but aren't you saying two opposite things? You just confirmed what I was saying. I didn't say Ray Tracing is rasterisation. I said that they used Ray Tracing in combiniation with rasterisation. You just formulated in a different way. And afcourse, Ray Tracing also uses bounced off lights. But Path Tracing can bounces off light multiple time. For example, a car shines with a white light on a wall. Then the white light bounces off from the wall towards a blue contrainer. From the blue container, the light bounces off towards the ceiling as a blue light. Path tracing also fixed a lot of light bleeding, because they don't use rasterisation at all. The video I posted, explains it very well. You said "Since Ray Tracing still uses Rasterisation lighting aswell." This isn't true, because not all games use rasterisation along with ray tracing. You can have a game with just ray tracing. In regards to bouncing light, again, it really depends on your implementation. Ray tracing can also bounce light multiple times. Even with path tracing, you will have games that bounce light more than others. It's just a software setting. More bounces = more hardware intensive, which is why most of the time they go for a small number. I've seen the video. I watched it back when it first comes out. You are making it sound like things like light bleeding were caused because they used ray tracing previously, which "required" rasterisation, and the new amazing technology of path tracing means they don't have to use rasterisation at all. In reality, they had to use rasterisation previously, because hardware and software just wasn't good enough. For example, things like DLSS 3 did not exist when Cyberpunk originally came out. You can ray trace all of the things that were rasterised in the previous version of Cyberpunk if you wanted to. In fact, Nvidia frequently refers to the Overdrive mode as simply Full Raytracing instead of path tracing. Please provide information of games that only uses Ray-Tracing without rasterisation. Second, I never said that Ray-Tracing "required" rasterisation. One of the reason you said yourself, hardware intensive. That's one of the reason why many developers still use ray tracing in combination with rasterisation, so it's not that hardware intensive. But it doesnt "required" rasterisation, nobody said that. Ray tracing uses a single ray to calculate the color and intensity of each pixel. Path tracing on the other hand uses multiple rays per pixel compared to ray tracing. Which results in a more natural and realistic behaviour of lighting and more realistic light bounces as ray tracing. There are tons of websites that explain the difference between them. Ray tracing is more faster and efficient compared to Path tracing. But Path Tracing is more accurate and more realistic. Yet again, many games uses ray tracing with rasterisation, to decrease the stress of the hardware. Path tracing on the other hand, is now used in Cyberpunk 2077 without rasterisation at all. As for DLSS3, that has been added with the overdrive update. Before that, Cyberpunk did had DLSS and DLSS 2 for a long time. DLSS was added from the release. Back in the day, the RTX 40xx was not even released and DLSS3 is only supported by RTX 40xx series. DLSS is a upscaling AI technique and has basically nothing to do with ray nor path tracing. It only boost your FPS by making use of a AI upscaling technique. And I believe that Cyberpunk 2077 is the first game that uses Path tracing. The lightbleeding in Cyberpunk 2077 was caused by Rasterisation, which is now completely gone on Path Tracing. Since ray tracing was still being used with Rasterisation in Cyberpunk 2077. Also provide information where Nvidia stated that overdrive is just "full" ray tracing, since Ray and Path tracing are different. Like I said, Ray-Tracing uses a single ray per pixel. Path-Tracing uses multiple rays per pixel. The pro's and con's I also said, and if you don't believe me, Google is your friend. Tons of tech sites and even Nvidia site explains the difference very well. |
Toonen1988May 29, 2023 6:58 PM
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
deg said: FacelessVixen said: Oh, and, some side-by-sides comparisons between rasterization, ray traced, and path traced versions of the same scenes would probably help show the differences a bit more https://blogs.nvidia.com/blog/2022/03/23/what-is-path-tracing/ Welp, basically more shiny for 5x the raw computing power requirement. Why should I even bother? It's not as impressive as first 3D accelerator or VR experience. Rasterization went a looong way to develop many way of fooling our eyes. I don't sadly feel any form of hype for this new tech. Although I remember being excited about a tech demo with one light source back in like 2005. Fully ray traced game? Quake 2 RTX or Portal for example, so 1997 title and 2007 title. Back in the day RTX 2080 was struggling to get 60FPS in... 1997 Quake 2 with every pixel ray traced. We still probably need like decades to see a fully path traced Cyberpunk running at 60+ FPS. Most games are just using some RTX shadows or reflections and that still tanks hardware a lot, while providing next to no benefit. This is why it's fair that people think about it as a gimmick to force people into buying new, expensive hardware. |
• あきらめないで • slice of life / drama / mystery / supernatural / fantasy / sci-fi / comedy |
Mayron_Luctus said: Welp, basically more shiny for 5x the raw computing power requirement. Why should I even bother? It's not as impressive as first 3D accelerator or VR experience. Rasterization went a looong way to develop many way of fooling our eyes. I don't sadly feel any form of hype for this new tech. Although I remember being excited about a tech demo with one light source back in like 2005. Fully ray traced game? Quake 2 RTX or Portal for example, so 1997 title and 2007 title. Back in the day RTX 2080 was struggling to get 60FPS in... 1997 Quake 2 with every pixel ray traced. We still probably need like decades to see a fully path traced Cyberpunk running at 60+ FPS. Most games are just using some RTX shadows or reflections and that still tanks hardware a lot, while providing next to no benefit. This is why it's fair that people think about it as a gimmick to force people into buying new, expensive hardware. It's not just "more shiny", but they do admittedly overly abuse reflective surfaces, since those make a bigger easy to notice difference in the image. High quality indirect diffuse lighting is the more interesting part, it adds a kind of subtle realism, that will go over most people's head... Computer graphics had many innovations, that people initially didn't get, and just complained about the performance difference, that have now become commonplace. |
 |
| Here is a very indepth video about ray tracing vs path tracing, Quake 2 RTX, Minecraft RTX and Cyberpunk 2077 Overdrive. Funny thing is, Minecraft does have light bounces, but just one. They used a technique called surface cache. Funny how that one guy in this topic said otherwise. This video explains a lot. |
Toonen1988Jun 4, 2023 7:33 PM
| "Most people talk about killing time while time is killing them. You can outrun everything but you'll never outrun the hands of time. Use it wisely before you expire". - Toonen1988 "Cyberpunk show us the dark side, reveiling the dangerous side effects of the drug of futurism." - Indigo Gaming |
More topics from this board
» 2 questions about Danganronpa seriesBright_Horn - 2 hours ago |
1 |
by Timeline_man
»»
53 minutes ago |
|
» Gacha SurveyShizuna - Apr 11 |
46 |
by 0arche
»»
3 hours ago |
|
» What's the funnest local multiplayer game with friends.SnipeStrike - Apr 16 |
9 |
by FanofAction
»»
6 hours ago |
|
» Rarest/Coolest gaming related things you own.SnipeStrike - 10 hours ago |
3 |
by Theo1899
»»
8 hours ago |
|
» What are you playing right now? (v2) ( 1 2 3 4 5 ... Last Page )anime-prime - Oct 4, 2020 |
3503 |
by DesuMaiden
»»
12 hours ago |