Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

NVIDIA RTX Remix 0.5 Released For Remastering Old Games

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

  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by danilw View Post

    I hope it was chatgpt essaying.

    There no reason to go for <16Gb GPU does not matter use case.
    Only reason - is those corporations and "tech-youtube-influencers" forgot how money look like - so they think everyone can pay $1000 for 16GB GPU.

    I had old 2Gb GPU, when I need GPU for rendering and some other stuff - I was able to do most of it on 2Gb GPU but less and less comfortable, and option I have is - get 8GB 4060 now or sit with 2Gb for few more years.
    (yes I have 16gb ram with integrated AMD GPU, so I could use it, but AMD GPU is just trash that barely work, it crash too much to consider it being useful)
    No, autism spectrum rambling.

    I bought a 12GiB GPU for six reasons:
    1. I'm poor (also the reason I don't have air conditioning)
    2. It's a single-fan model that buyers agreed is comparatively cool and quiet as long.
    3. It's a single-fan model which would fit in my previous PC without requiring me to spend another $100+ on Silverstone Tek ultra-low-profile right-angle SATA cables.
    4. It was listed in multiple places as being a good budget option for playing around with Stable Diffusion (the only reason I didn't just stay on my GTX 750 from 2014 for even longer)
    5. I bought it back when I was still using an Athlon II X2 270 from 2011 where the onboard GPU can't even be used if a discrete GPU is connected.
    6. It was on deep discount on Cyber Monday

    Leave a comment:


  • danilw
    replied
    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post

    Not to mention, some of us (eg. me) have a second reason for choosing a lower-end GPU: heat output.
    I hope it was chatgpt essaying.

    There no reason to go for <16Gb GPU does not matter use case.
    Only reason - is those corporations and "tech-youtube-influencers" forgot how money look like - so they think everyone can pay $1000 for 16GB GPU.

    I had old 2Gb GPU, when I need GPU for rendering and some other stuff - I was able to do most of it on 2Gb GPU but less and less comfortable, and option I have is - get 8GB 4060 now or sit with 2Gb for few more years.
    (yes I have 16gb ram with integrated AMD GPU, so I could use it, but AMD GPU is just trash that barely work, it crash too much to consider it being useful)

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by danilw View Post

    Ye - we definitely live in perfect world where everyone have money to afford 4090RTX.
    You right - il just throw that 4060 im using to trash right now and go for 4090, that cost more than combined cost of car and house people here live in.
    Not to mention, some of us (eg. me) have a second reason for choosing a lower-end GPU: heat output.

    I've been using 65W TDP CPUs since I started building my own PCs in the mid 2000s, and I'm currently running the hottest GPU I've ever owned by a longshot... an RTX 3060 that I bought to make playing around with Stable Diffusion more viable... which nvidia-smi says is consuming 150W of a maximum 170W when SDing at full-tilt.

    Prior to that, I had a GeForce GTX 750 with a TDP of 55W for a decade, and, while I built a dedicated gaming rig last year out of hand-me-down tech (a 2012 HP pre-built with a 65W Intel CPU and a mobo not upgradable from the 8GiB of RAM it had and a Radeon HD 5870 from 2009 because it won't boot with the GeForce GTX 760 that's also in my box of hand-me-downs), and it does 99% of what I care about aside from PS2 and Wii emulation, I couldn't use it during the summer due to the heat wave.

    If I'd had the money to pay twice as much for a CPU when building this PC, I'd have gotten a Ryzen 9 7900 instead of a Ryzen 5 7600... mostly because, if two CPUs are both 65W TDP, and the amount of work to be done is the same, the faster one will have heated less air by the time it's done. (And the slightly higher boost clock might help emulation, and it'd probably hasten my Rust compiles a bit. While there are bottlenecks, and it is pretty quick, even when building all dependencies from scratch, it does seem to spend a fair time saturating all 12 hyperthreads, so a 24-hyperthread CPU should be an improvement even without a 0.3GHz higher boost clock ceiling.)

    Hell, when I run games like Yooka-Laylee on that 2009 Radeon, I set them to less-than-maximum graphics because maximum ramps up the fan noise for not-really-noticeable improvements. (Granted, the only 4K display we have is a TV and the Radeon's last driver update apparently predates running 4K over HDMI, so I game at 1080p on displays chosen because "if I'm going to drive 4x as many pixels I want to fit 4x as many applications on my desktop".)

    That said, as far as boost-clocking goes, if you're OK with more heat output, the best investment, performance-per-dollar, is to replace the stock CPU cooler with a Noctua one. Mine allows my CPU to run indefinitely with all cores boost-clocked from its base speed of 3.8GHz up to 4.9GHz out of the rated maximum of 5.1GHz... and that's not even why I bought it. (I bought it because the stock cooler has an irritating tonal quality to it. Whether I allow my CPU to boost is an unrelated matter.)
    Last edited by ssokolow; 04 May 2024, 10:38 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • danilw
    replied
    Originally posted by rabcor View Post

    I would rather get a better gpu so I can enjoy the best of both worlds.
    Ye - we definitely live in perfect world where everyone have money to afford 4090RTX.
    You right - il just throw that 4060 im using to trash right now and go for 4090, that cost more than combined cost of car and house people here live in.

    Leave a comment:


  • rabcor
    replied
    Originally posted by danilw View Post

    PortalRTX made using this - on 4060RTX it run with 15-20fps 1080p without dlss, and 40-60fps with dlss3 on 1080p.

    Soooo - performance - as said:


    Will you enjoy 30-40 fps with dlss on 1080p in something like Skyrim just to see blury mess RTX gradients in game?
    I would rather get a better gpu so I can enjoy the best of both worlds.

    But anyhow, I love how they use path tracing like a new word over the improved versions of nvidia's RTX raytracing mechanisms, when in reality it was always pathtracing. And pathtracing is actually inferior to true raytracing quality wise (but it is faster, which is why RTX always used path tracing and not raytracing from day 1).

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by danilw View Post
    Modern games - give you filtered experience of "best" gameplay.
    You do not need to play old outdated game to experience 1-2 good-fun game mechanic that every old game has - you can just play modern popular f2p games - that include hundreds of "fun" game mechanics - will have better experience for less time.
    You're right for transitioning from a lot of MS-DOS era games to their Windows-era counterparts (eg. Silver Box D&D games vs. Bioware Infinity Engine games like Baldur's Gate. When you go back that far, control schemes and UI designs start to become problematic.

    However, my experience is that "modern popular f2p games" tend to be made by people who throw away mechanics I liked as "outdated" and introduce mechanics that grate on my nerves as part of the f2p experience.

    Among other things, I'm the kind of person who is likely to go looking for "remove twitter button/DLC ads from the main menu" mods for indie games (granted, more because I think they spoil the atmosphere), and who quite literally runs a stack consisting of ad-blocking HOSTS file + uMatrix + uBlock Origin + SponsorBlock + Consent-O-Matic to get rid of advertising and then maintains a blacklist/wall-of-shame file for any brands that manage to make me aware of them or annoy me despite my efforts. ("Hey! Want our newsletter?" 'growth hacking' popups are a big offender.)

    I also never play any game or game mode where I can't archive the installer on a DVD+R and install and play it to completion on a machine or in a sandbox with only LAN networking (no Internet access). (I like to get things running under emulation/virtualization ASAP to provide a level of insulation from changes to the underlying platform after the devs stop pushing patches.)

    The one time I bent that rule, I got burned by Notch selling Minecraft to Microsoft instead of carrying through on his at-the-time-I-bought-it promise to open-source it eventually.
    Last edited by ssokolow; 04 May 2024, 12:11 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • danilw
    replied
    Originally posted by ssokolow View Post
    I spend much more time eBaying and playing Gamecube-or-older games (eg. SNES, PSX, N64, etc.) I never had as a kid (or indie games which, more often than not, have pixel art) than I do playing the kinds of games where something like RTX would matter. I just enjoy the gameplay on them more.
    Around 2018 I re-played some Wii games on PC-emulation.
    Only what I used - is "HD upscaled" version of textures for 2d Game.

    I can not imagine RTX or custom modding can improve 3d games from Wii
    like Metroid
    or Dead Space

    ... and even if there will be improvement - I have no motivation to load entire old game to see changed graphic for 1-2 min till I get bored and then uninstall it...
    ... when I can just play modern game for this time with no effort/time waste required...

    I just enjoy the gameplay on them more.

    It's the modern gameplay I find boring.​
    Only reason I played those old games in emulator on PC - because I played them around 2011 on Wii.
    If I have not played them - I would not care.
    Because every modern F2P gacha game include all "best" gameplay and mechanics from all previous games.

    Modern games - give you filtered experience of "best" gameplay.
    You do not need to play old outdated game to experience 1-2 good-fun game mechanic that every old game has - you can just play modern popular f2p games - that include hundreds of "fun" game mechanics - will have better experience for less time.

    Leave a comment:


  • ssokolow
    replied
    Originally posted by danilw View Post
    Modern actual games offer better visuals even without RTX than old modded games with RTX.
    And people play games not because graphic but because gameplay - and no one need outdated boring gameplay you already leaned in past.
    Well, now I know that we can't be friends.

    I spend much more time eBaying and playing Gamecube-or-older games (eg. SNES, PSX, N64, etc.) I never had as a kid (or indie games which, more often than not, have pixel art) than I do playing the kinds of games where something like RTX would matter. I just enjoy the gameplay on them more.

    It's the modern gameplay I find boring.

    Leave a comment:


  • danilw
    replied
    Originally posted by rabcor View Post
    Has anyone actually used this? Do we have a working example of a game using this?
    PortalRTX made using this - on 4060RTX it run with 15-20fps 1080p without dlss, and 40-60fps with dlss3 on 1080p.

    Soooo - performance - as said:
    Originally posted by RealNC View Post

    Not everyone can afford a 2000€ GPU to play 4K@120FPS. Money doesn't grow on trees
    Will you enjoy 30-40 fps with dlss on 1080p in something like Skyrim just to see blury mess RTX gradients in game?

    When you have Dragon's Dogma 2 Path Tracing


    That will work with same 15-20 fps (in pathtracing)_ on 4060rtx 1080p
    But Dragon's Dogma 2 Path Tracing​ - is modern game with much better graphic, and it not RTX it pathtracing.
    And to have 60fps - you need 4090rtx.

    For context - RTX is 1-2 bounce and 1 ray per 4 pixels, Pathtracing - is 8+ rays per pixel with 4+ bounces.

    Modern actual games offer better visuals even without RTX than old modded games with RTX.
    And people play games not because graphic but because gameplay - and no one need outdated boring gameplay you already leaned in past.
    Last edited by danilw; 02 May 2024, 10:42 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • varikonniemi
    replied
    Originally posted by bug77 View Post

    Somebody hasn't watched their DLSS in action videos.
    Oh i have, and that's why i can comment. I too was excited when it launched as i somehow thought it could improve image quality. But immediately what struck me in comparisons was that it makes the game seem like a dream, a bit soft and floaty. But it's a minimal price to pay if you have too slow hardware to otherwise get enough fps.
    Last edited by varikonniemi; 02 May 2024, 02:23 AM.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X