Quake II RTX Performance For AMD Radeon 6000 Series vs. NVIDIA On Linux

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Quake II RTX Performance For AMD Radeon 6000 Series vs. NVIDIA On Linux

Last month with the Radeon Software for Linux 21.10 driver there was finally Vulkan ray-tracing support added to that proprietary Vulkan driver component, the first time that Vulkan ray-tracing has been available on Linux for any AMD Radeon 6000 series graphics card across the multiple driver options. Last month I posted some initial Vulkan ray-tracing AMD vs. NVIDIA Linux benchmarks while questions were raised how well the driver performs with NVIDIA's Quake II RTX port. Here are some initial benchmarks for those wondering...

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=Quake-II-RTX-Linux-Initial-Test

[aufkrawall]

Temporal upscaling to the rescue.

[Krteq]

Quake II RTX 1.0.0?

Latest release of Quake II RTX is 1.5.0 - https://github.com/NVIDIA/Q2RTX/blob...angelog.md#150

[Michael]

Quake II RTX 1.0.0?

Latest release of Quake II RTX is 1.5.0 - https://github.com/NVIDIA/Q2RTX/blob...angelog.md#150

It's the latest Steam release, not sure why NVIDIA when they submitted the test profile marked it as 1.0.0 for the app version field.

[coder]

Well, it looks like AMD has their work cut out for them.

Should we assume linear speedup, when going down to 1440p or 1080p?

[discordian]

The reason why AMD can keep up in many games is that those games do less work on those cards. Similar to resolution you'd need to check if the same amount of rays are at play. Nvidia has dedicated alot more silicon for raytracing, nothing a driver can fix

[CochainComplex]

We need to wait for second the Raytracing Generation of AMD. Nvidia is already on the second, so they have some points in advance. Hopefully AMD can catch up

[GruenSein]

The reason why AMD can keep up in many games is that those games do less work on those cards. Similar to resolution you'd need to check if the same amount of rays are at play. Nvidia has dedicated alot more silicon for raytracing, nothing a driver can fix

I am not sure if the number of rays is actually adjusted depending on the detected GPU vendor. Usually, there are settings for ray tracing quality. The main reason that most games are not that much slower on AMD hardware is that they are not fully path traced like Q2RTX. A large portion of the workload is still conventional rasterization and only a part of the frame time is spent on ray tracing effects. Therefore, only this portion of the frame time is subject to such large performance differences.

[StarterX4]

It's the latest Steam release, not sure why NVIDIA when they submitted the test profile marked it as 1.0.0 for the app version field.

It's 1.5.0 anyway.

[mdedetrich]

Nothing new, its been well known now that AMD's RayTracing in the 6000 series is one generation (and such details was leaked well before the cards released). The RTX 3xxx has just a lot more dedicated hardware for ray tracing, you can't really fix this with drivers.