Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Quake 2 Gets Real-Time Path Tracing Powered By NVIDIA RTX / VK_NV_ray_tracing

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #21
    Originally posted by Kemosabe View Post

    Oh my god. This is one comment from you I did not skip and you're ranting, insulting, and coming up with imaginary friends to support your claims.
    Would you mind reconsidering how you express yourself eventually?
    I don't keep on making outrageous egregiously wrong statements like most open source fanatics here. Also, they love to twist the facts to push their agenda (like NVIDIA/Microsoft are evil and have no redeeming qualities). On the contrary I prefer to stick to the facts and if you don't like it, please, black list me and keep on living in your fantasy bubble like most people here do.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by Aeder View Post

      He's not lying technically, just imprecise in his statement. If you game at 4K, RTX makes it go from playable 60+ fps to barely above 30 fps at Medium preset....
      If AMD had been the first to implement RTX it would have been peddled like crazy everywhere, AMD would have been praised as a second coming of Messiah, and since it's NVIDIA, it's strictly meh, no one ever needs, it's not fast enough, it's too expensive, it's proprietary (even though it's now a standard both both D3D and Vulkan) etc. etc. etc.

      It's just pathetic really.

      NVIDIA made possible something that had been deemed impossible for over 50 years but still NVIDIA sucks.

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by birdie View Post

        You're lying though your teeth but who cares? Enough with fanatics. This is getting on my nerves.



        Vega 64 and RX 590 are the best GPUs in the world. NVIDIA permanently sucks. Hope, you're happy. And also f off.
        According the video linked the solution is:

        A) Drop RTX quality and texture quality https://youtu.be/E2pMxJV4xr4?t=473
        B) Overclock your brand new $350 graphics card https://youtu.be/E2pMxJV4xr4?t=718

        You have to choose one of the options above to game at 60 FPS. The game still looks great (not perfect) with option A, but still not worth it IMO. I am a windows gamer (vfio) so if I had to choose right now I would go for something like the 1070 ti which gets 80-100 FPS at 1080p ultra (even in multi player) in bf5 and the graphics looks great. If I only played games on Linux I would use a rx 580 which has the great drivers and price/performance.

        RTX might be a step in the right direction, but with current hardware even if you ignore cost the SPP is too low and noise is too high so for gaming I'm sticking with pure rasterisation. This technical video explains part of the reason why https://youtu.be/jaUP4LucmZM I hope nvidia and game developers can improve this in the future or release a highend card without RTX.
        Last edited by Jabberwocky; 01-18-2019, 10:53 AM. Reason: Typo

        Comment


        • #24
          I remember this being done in 2007 with Quake 3 using a CPU.



          Also you can do Ray-Tracing on a none RTX card. In fact this demo was made back in 2013 which will run on any DX11 graphics card in real time. No RTX needed.
          Last edited by Dukenukemx; 01-18-2019, 10:53 AM.

          Comment


          • #25
            Originally posted by msotirov View Post

            Woah, don't take it so personally. There's no pain on my part. I stopped caring when NVidia released the highly overpriced 1xxx series. And sorry but RTX owners are not the "first people on Earth" to enjoy ray-tracing. There were versions of Quake Wars and Wolfenstein with ray-tracing 10 years ago.
            Overpriced? NVIDIA is not a charity and they set the exact prices the market can bear. It's not NVIDIA's fault AMD cannot really compete. Also, do you really buy a new GPU every generation? I don't and I'm content with their pricing while replacing my GPU every 3 years. I happily run the GTX 1060 6GB at the moment and I bought it for freaking $330 right after its introduction. Pricing for new GPUs/CPUs in this country is a little bit insane.

            Those versions of Quake Wars and Wolfenstein? Is it some kind of sick joke or what? The quality was shit, the resolution was shit, the graphics was shit and the performance was shit and no one played them. Find some valid arguments next time not some BS.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by Jabberwocky View Post

              According the video linked the solution is:

              A) Drop RTX quality and texture quality https://youtu.be/E2pMxJV4xr4?t=473
              B) Overclock your brand new $350 graphics card https://youtu.be/E2pMxJV4xr4?t=718

              You have to choose one of the options above to game at 60 FPS. The game still looks great (not perfect) with option A, but still not worth it IMO. I am a windows gamer (vfio) so if I had to choose right now I would go for something like the 1070 ti which gets 80-100 FPS at 1080p ultra (even in multi player) in bf5 and the graphics looks great. If I only played games on Linux I would use a rx 580 which has the great drivers and price/performance.

              RTX might be a step in the right direction, but with current hardware even if you ignore cost the SPP is too low and noise is too high so for gaming I'm sticking with pure rasterisation. This technical video explains part of the reason why https://youtu.be/jaUP4LucmZM I hope nvidia and game developers can improve this in the future or release a highend card without RTX.
              I don't understand your obsession with > 60fps. If you're into competitive games you will make sure your games run at the very least at 120fps and in this case RTX is a strict no-go. And if you're in for exceptional graphics, you'll enable RTX and enjoy lower framerate.

              At which framerate do AMD GPUs run raytraced BF5? At 0? So why is NVIDIA bad for implementing something which was deemed impossible just a few months ago? Your nitpicking is just pathetic. "If it's not >60fps, then RTX just sucks". Wow.

              Also, you judge RTX by the only game which implements it. So much data, so many conclusions.

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by birdie View Post

                If AMD had been the first to implement RTX it would have been peddled like crazy everywhere, AMD would have been praised as a second coming of Messiah, and since it's NVIDIA, it's strictly meh, no one ever needs, it's not fast enough, it's too expensive, it's proprietary (even though it's now a standard both both D3D and Vulkan) etc. etc. etc.

                It's just pathetic really.

                NVIDIA made possible something that had been deemed impossible for over 50 years but still NVIDIA sucks.
                "If AMD had been the first to implement RTX..."

                But it didn't, and I don't see how getting angry at a speculative fantasy that only exists in your head helps your point. Specially when you decide to argue against additional points no one made here.

                It just makes you look like a bitter fanboy, even if you aren't.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by birdie View Post

                  You're lying though your teeth but who cares? Enough with fanatics. This is getting on my nerves.



                  Vega 64 and RX 590 are the best GPUs in the world. NVIDIA permanently sucks. Hope, you're happy. And also f off.
                  So much for not going to comment anymore. After saying that you're finished, you respond multiple times. You're a very angry (and probably depressed) person. Why don't you avoid these forums if it all gets on your nerves so much?

                  Why don't you save your own sanity (and ours) by just showing yourself out?

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by birdie View Post
                    Actually I won't comment in this topic any more.
                    What happened to this statement. And instead of yelling at people with opinions that aren't yours and sounding like a shill. Kemosabe is right, you're ranting. I don't comment much on here but your rants are counter productive.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      I see all the usual suspects who are talking shit about me. They are not discussing the article or my arguments, or provide their own arguments - no, my own shit cult is discussing me personally, keeps calling me names and assigning me various mental diseases. What a shithole this place is. I'll go ahead and blacklist Darknation and sa6666666 because they're unable to talk argumentatively.

                      Originally posted by Aeder View Post

                      "If AMD had been the first to implement RTX..."

                      But it didn't, and I don't see how getting angry at a speculative fantasy that only exists in your head helps your point. Specially when you decide to argue against additional points no one made here.

                      It just makes you look like a bitter fanboy, even if you aren't.
                      Exactly where was I angry? Exactly where did I behave like a fanboy or defended NVIDIA's practices or even said anything good about them?

                      I've never been a fan of any company in the world. I always buy products based on performance/value/price ratio. And I've never ridiculed AMD or people who bought their GPUs. The very first message in this topic ridicules NVIDIA and everyone who buys their GPUs. Too many people here have shit instead of grey matter. What a fucking cesspool we have here.
                      Last edited by birdie; 01-18-2019, 11:55 AM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X