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

[coder]

The benefit was that the film industry could move on from the old ugly plastic looking worthless cgi from the early 90:ies to the type of cgi (path traced) that is used everywhere today on films and series.

The film industry only switched over to ray tracing a little more than a decade ago. There were a lot of non-"plastic looking worthless cgi" produced before that point.

[F.Ultra]

I can find nothing that says Quake II RTX uses anything other than simple ray-tracing and even if it did, there is nothing "mind blowing", it just tells me that someone really wanted to use the most inefficient rendering method possible.

And still a very simple google gave me an entire video presentation on how the path tracing in Quake II RTX works:

Not to mention that the first name of the project was "Quake II Vulkan Path Tracing"

I also don't know what benefit you think going from simple ray-tracing to path-tracing had/has on the "creative process of the film industry".

The benefit was that the film industry could move on from the old ugly plastic looking worthless cgi from the early 90:ies to the type of cgi (path traced) that is used everywhere today on films and series.

[coder]

upscaled to 4k, still looks like shit

Not upscaled in the traditional sense -- it's natively rendered at 4k. Using raytracing.

And I certainly don't think it looks like shit.

What exactly is the point of ray tracing and this game?

There are A/B comparisons on Youtube.

[sophisticles]

No offense but no, you don't understand what you are seeing, you are looking at path tracing rendering in real time and that's mind blowing. If you want to understand learn the difference between ray tracing and path tracing and the effect that the transition from the former to the latter had on the creative process of the film industry.

Your silly rejoinder in no way offended me, what offends me is that lack of thought you employed in crafting your response.

Hoe Nvidia describes the game:

Quake II RTX Available Now: Download The Ray-Traced Remaster Of The Classic Quake II For Free (nvidia.com)

Quake II RTX, our ray-traced remaster of Quake II is now available to download and play!

So Nvidia considers it ray-traced.

Future of Gaming : Rasterization vs Ray Tracing vs Path Tracing | by Junying Wang | Medium

Path tracing is a type of ray tracing.

I can find nothing that says Quake II RTX uses anything other than simple ray-tracing and even if it did, there is nothing "mind blowing", it just tells me that someone really wanted to use the most inefficient rendering method possible.

I also don't know what benefit you think going from simple ray-tracing to path-tracing had/has on the "creative process of the film industry".

[danielmaciel]

Please test 1080p!

[Azrael5]

Nvidia on Linux is actually the best but current wayland support.

[bug77]

Let me see if I understand what I am seeing, a 24 year old game, has been redone using raytracing and upscaled to 4k, still looks like shit and even the fastest video cards from the vendor that actually carried out the "port" can't run the game at acceptable frame rates.

What exactly is the point of ray tracing and this game?

It's part a place for devs to get to terms with the tech (that's not a simple "hello world") and part proof of concept. It's not meant to instill new life in Quake2 and it's definitely not a RTRT showcase.

[CochainComplex]

Let me see if I understand what I am seeing, a 24 year old game, has been redone using raytracing and upscaled to 4k, still looks like shit and even the fastest video cards from the vendor that actually carried out the "port" can't run the game at acceptable frame rates.

What exactly is the point of ray tracing and this game?

The same point like in the 70ies with low res 2d games....it is simply the beginning and restricted by the hardware capability. Realtime raytracing is very very demanding. Just have a look at any cgi software for movies and see how long a frame by frame rendering takes on a decent workstation without gpu raytracing. If you go back 10years minutes per each frame was already good. Isnt the Cinebench benchmark exactly how fast can your cpu render just ONE frame ?And seeing that a game @4k fully raytraced delivers enough fps to be playable is huge albeit I dont see a buying point for me yet. Only the 3090 gives enough perfomance to use rtx switch in any modern game. At the moment i prefer 60fps+ over 30fps with better reflections. But maybe in 3years.

[CochainComplex]

True, but look at the benchmarks again. He also tested a bunch of first the Raytracing Generation of Nvidia cards, and they all did much better than any of AMD's GPUs!

Normally it should be an apple to apple comparison. But Luke_Wolf pointed it out correctly in the post prior to yours it depends on the different techniques of the vendors. In another thread few weeks ago this was also discussed. Of course at the end the delivered experience/performance to the user is the culprit. I can not asses what's the pro and cons of each approach and when which technique results in a better performance. But If the quake raytracing engine was build up from scratch with nvidias approach in mind which is very likely its difficult for AMDs implementation to gain some ground dispite of their contribution.

At the end AMD needs to change gears no matter if increasing raytracing cores on the die, driver and software implementation or in marketing, convincing game engine devs to use their techniques.

[Paradigm Shifter]

Eh, I'd just like to be able to play the Linux version of Quake 2 RTX. I've not tried v1.5.0 yet, but so far whether Ubuntu or Arch, it crashes before it even loads on a RTX 3090 for me. Same hardware with Windows installed (well, a different NVMe SSD, as I didn't want to wipe my nicely-set-up Arch install) it runs fine.