Unfortunately I'm at a point where outside light spillage on a floor in an enclosed space and screens-space reflections irks me. Like it will break my immersion. Especially screen-space reflections, because they're just slapped on things without any regard as to where they'll fail and it's really obvious it's failing.The global illumination used in the original Metro Exodus also only mattered in select scenes, and RT reflections that are only visible on a few surfaces also don't make a huge difference in how a game looks and feels (Battlefield V, Doom Eternal, MechWarrior 5 Mercenaries, Watch Dogs Legion, and Wolfenstein Youngblood). Again, it's not that ray tracing is bad… it's just not good enough that it's really necessary in most games.
How is it shocking? Sufficiently powerful hardware would make them too expensive.but what it all boils down to is that the consoles simply aren't as powerful as PCs with the best graphics cards, and the visual improvements offered by ray tracing in particular aren't worth the loss in performance. Shocking, right?
Yes, considering Nvidia's RTX cards actually need DLSS for raytracing to perform well enough and are way faster at raytracing than even the fastest AMD Radeon card.Wait, that wasn't obvious before?
Which was well defined ahead of time and so the console manufacturers know what kind of cooling system they need to put on it. And it's likely consoles don't throttle, they just shutdown, because consistency is God in consoles.Not only do the current gen consoles not use discrete GPUs (limiting how much heat they can generate before they need throttling)
There's still FidelityFX FSR. Also they use RDNA 2. Otherwise AMD is lying to us.they don't have DLSS to improve performance, and their graphics are based on the RDNA architecture, as opposed to RDNA 2 used in the RX 6900 XT.
The "as opposed to RDNA 2" seems to imply they think the PS5's GPU uses RDNA 1.
Yes, sorry about that. I had checked on Wikipedia to see what the architecture was for the PS5. Didn't expect Wikipedia to be wrong (though I should've known better).The "as opposed to RDNA 2" seems to imply they think the PS5's GPU uses RDNA 1.
I actually read that when it was first published, I was just bustin' your B__ls. I was hoping this generation would be much better at raytracing than it turned out but I wouldn't be able to get one anyways with the state of the gpu market.
Remember how game physics used to the next big thing?It's not so much that consoles aren't powerful enough for ray tracing, it's more that ray tracing as a whole is still so much in its infancy that it's still very much a brute force operation.
As we all know in computer operations over time specialized instruction sets developed to increase efficiency, be they MMX, SSE, AVX, and what have you, and specialized hardware is developed for certain tasks, be it cryptography or what have you which takes the form of a co-processor or ASIC.
Ray Tracing may always be a resource intensive operation, it is by design, but between newer ray tracing methods and what I believe will be a dedicated ray tracing co-processor in next generation MCM GPUs, which I feel will be the superior method to AMD's unified design as ray tracing becomes more of a standardized feature, that additional eye candy will be much more independent from the GPU's power.
It supposedly meets the DirectX12 requirements for RT - whatever that means.While RDNA2 is RT capable, it is not new that it doesn't perform very well with RT enabled. They can squeeze out additional performance with FSR, but to push 4K@60 FPS is itself quite a significant effort even without RT.