So much for RTX: Crytek reveals real-time ray tracing demo for AMD and Nvidia hardware

[dj2017]

AMD TressFX was literally unplayable on 680gtx until Nvidia optimized it on their own you had framedrops to 15fps, 680gtx /highend/ was slower than 7870 /mid tier card/

https://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page4.html


Do I need to address your other tales or was that enough for you ?

Do I have to remind you first AMD DX11 games, like Dragon Age II where 580gtx was slower than piss poor AMD 5770HD, which is even slower than the oldy GTX260 at FullHD?

DX11 is pretty much optimized and runs better than DX9 and DX10, it is AMD fault their driver has serious overhead issues under DX11.

As always, AMD is never to blame, it is always the others.

Because TressFX was OPEN, it took Nvidia LESS THAN A WEAK TO OPTIMIZE.

Any more lies, hoping that no one remembers?

The rest of your arguments are not any better. For example, AMD had driver problems because all games where developed on Nvidia hardware. A couple of years after the introduction of the new consoles and before AMD started losing market share again, we where seeing a number of problems with Nvidia drivers in games. That was normal considering that developers where creating games primary for the console hardware that was ALL AMD. Nvidia's programmers didn't forgot how to program drivers all of the sudden. The games where made with AMD hardware in mind.

 

[Evernessince]

Probably some optimization error, ray tracing is computational expensive after all. However as gamersnexus demonstated with his video, a demo with static objects can have fake GI and reflections, only with interactive objects that show the real benefit of Global ilumination and reflections.

Did you watch the video you linked? GamersNexus faked GI, not ray traced reflections. It's even in the title of the video. Heck if their next video in the series is able to fake reflections as well you might as well get rid or RTX altogether as a rasterization method would be way more efficient. Much better performance and zero noise done by a single person? GamersNexus example may be "fake" but it certainly seems to have it's merits.

AMD TressFX was literally unplayable on 680gtx until Nvidia optimized it on their own you had framedrops to 15fps, 680gtx /highend/ was slower than 7870 /mid tier card/

https://www.techspot.com/review/645-tomb-raider-performance/page4.html


Do I need to address your other tales or was that enough for you ?

Do I have to remind you first AMD DX11 games, like Dragon Age II where 580gtx was slower than piss poor AMD 5770HD, which is even slower than the oldy GTX260 at FullHD?

DX11 is pretty much optimized and runs better than DX9 and DX10, it is AMD fault their driver has serious overhead issues under DX11.

As always, AMD is never to blame, it is always the others.

I think you missed his point buddy. TressFX was only ever poorly optimized on Nvidia cards for about a week until Nvidia released a patch. After that every TressFX title has run well on Nvidia cards, which is the beauty of this tech being open. Nvidia has never let AMD optimize for GameWorks and likely will never. I shouldn't have to point out the humongous difference between the two but there it is.

Likewise, Freesync is a technically inferior solution to Gsync and is DOA outside of gaming monitors due to being tied to Displayport. Both techs are likely DOA once HDMI 2.1 hits though; HDMI's VRR implementation likely wins by default since its mainlined in the HDMI spec.

This statement is factually incorrect. First, G-Sync only supports DisplayPort. FreeSync supports DisplayPort and HDMI. Second, FreeSync supports a wider VRR refresh rate range. G-Sync can only go as low as 30 Hz before having to turn on LFC. FreeSync can technically go as low as 4 Hz.

 

[Max93]

Wow! Impressive! Congratulations to Crytek! At least some common sense with something that runs on every hardware like PC gaming meant to be.

 

[wizardB]

A $300 gpu can do this today color me impressed. It took Dice and Nvidia months after launch to get a playable framerate in BFV on a $1200 gpu. Rtx is the modern day gameworks/Physx. Nvidia found a way to gimp us again. Fool me once shame on you fool me twice shame on me.

Like Gsync, Nvidia likes to charge Beaucoup dinero for something that AMD (free sync)gives us for free. Nvidia is a rape and pillage company and has been since their destruction of 3dfx Interactive were they bought out a company with better tech and instead of building on that tech buried it to make their crap look better.

 

[AndrewD1981]

It's funny how everyone is jumping on the hate Nvidia bandwagon. Nvidia have never said you can't run ray tracing on older hardware. They brought out cards with dedicated hardware to handle ray tracing even better.
This is 1 demo running on 1 card at 30fps and 30fps is terrible. Why didn't they run it on Vega 64, VII, Pascal or rtx cards? Just wait on more comparisons before you act all mighty.
Fanboys will fanboy

 

[ATInsider]

Nvidia deserves the hate bandwagon, simply because these RTX gpus are well overpriced.
The reason why they ran this on Vega56 is to show it can be run on AMD GPUs. And looking at side by side comparisons, RTX is useless, doesn't give games any benefits or its personal preference. Either way, Nvidia can enjoy one of its worse launches in history with a huge 1.575 Billion unsold GPU inventory. Congrat's.

 

[AndrewD1981]

Where the side by side comparisons?

 

[godrilla]

I just posted a coment on crytek forums requesting the demo will keep you guys posted.

It's here for the public FYI