1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

The Ray Tracing Slideshow: DXR on Nvidia Pascal Tested

By Julio Franco · 26 replies
Apr 17, 2019
Post New Reply
  1. elementalSG

    elementalSG TS Enthusiast Posts: 64   +45

    And again we see why Techspot is awesome, getting us the actual benchmarks. Thanks for doing this article!
     
  2. QuantumPhysics

    QuantumPhysics TS Guru Posts: 815   +558


    So long as you have an i9 9900k...

    I kinda think the i7 8700 would have made more sense... most people can't afford the i9.

    I have the i9 7980 Ex. I'm not sure if the 9900 is better or not. It is so much newer.
     
  3. QuantumPhysics

    QuantumPhysics TS Guru Posts: 815   +558

    The Titan model is always at the forefront of the present technology.

    I had the Titan and the Titan XP before getting the 2080Ti. Many people claimed the Titan wasn't worth the money and we didn't need the extra memory, but I looked upon it as future proofing.
     
  4. ExReey

    ExReey TS Rookie

    Just registered to let you know that Techspot has quickly become my favorite tech news site with great in depth tests like these.

    Keep them coming.
     
  5. EnesK

    EnesK TS Rookie

    Titan v should have been tested since it has lots of tensor cores.
     
    mbrowne5061 likes this.
  6. cldmstrsn

    cldmstrsn TS Addict Posts: 166   +118

    Its really only future proofing if you dont get every new card that comes out.
     
    HyPeroxya, Adhmuz, rub900 and 5 others like this.
  7. nnguy2

    nnguy2 TS Member Posts: 24   +21

    LOL I was thinking exactly the same.
     
    rub900 and ShagnWagn like this.
  8. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,265   +518

    I'm thinking of testing the Titan V but I only own Battlefield V - not the other games that currently support the technology.
     
  9. veLa

    veLa TS Evangelist Posts: 848   +282

    So the conclusion is that ray tracing is pointless whether you're using an RTX or a GTX card.
     
  10. mcborge

    mcborge TS Guru Posts: 544   +446

    Nvidia only released RT on pascal to show that it only really works on RTX cards in the hopes it would push users to upgrade to RTX. Given how much an RTX card with sufficient RT performance costs and how little adoption to this new tech there has been from game devs, this seems like a pretty desparate move on Nvidia's part.
     
  11. ShagnWagn

    ShagnWagn TS Guru Posts: 601   +430

    What would the real-world case scenario for enabling this? If they added ray tracing to older games. I don't really see this happening, at least not games in enough quantity to justify buying one of these cards. What company would go back to an old game and add this?
     
  12. mbrowne5061

    mbrowne5061 TS Evangelist Posts: 1,144   +612

    Honestly, not question TS methods, but these numbers don't really make all that much sense to me. I am thinking the nVidia gimped the ray tracing on Pascal cards - it wouldn't be in their interest for GTX cards to be able to keep up with even the low-end of the RTX cards.
     
    PEnnn likes this.
  13. GreenNova343

    GreenNova343 TS Maniac Posts: 348   +230

    Not really. As briefly mentioned in this article (& mentioned to death in the many other RTX-related articles), ray tracing is primarily designed to work with RT cores, not the mainstream CUDA cores, because the RT cores are optimized for that particular type of work. CUDA cores can ray-trace -- just like CPUs can also ray-trace -- but it requires a more brute-force method...& dedicating CUDA cores just to the ray-tracing portion means that the CUDAs aren't available for the rest of the rendering workload. Whether the ray-tracing implementation for the GTX cards is a "we allocate X% of the CUDA cores to do the ray-tracing workload, leaving fewer cores for the rest of it", or is a "we added the ray-tracing workload on top of the rest of the rendering workload the CUDA cores have to complete", it's basically increasing the CUDA workload without providing additional resources. Hence the performance hit they take. And as this article pointed out, one of the likely reasons for nVidia to provide it is to allow developers to test ray-tracing with their existing GTX cards (as they pointed out, unless you're looking at actual gameplay experience testing, developers don't need the game to run at 30 FPS, let alone 60 FPS, when they're writing the code or verifying that the models & textures are built correctly), as the idea would be that the more games that come out/get updated with ray-tracing support, the more gamers will buy RTX products to take advantage of it.
     
  14. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,903   +690

    SO this raises the question, if CUDA can do ray tracing, would two CUDA cards make a significant difference, as in, can one be "dedicated" in a sense to do ray tracing, or at least with double the CUDA count would it make a significant impact on the performance. Games themselves rarely benefit from SLI these days but I would be curious to see if ray tracing can take better advantage of the additional CUDA count?

    Heck, how does SLI affect RTX cards in RT titles while at it?

    Would especially like to see what a pair of 1660 series cards can do and maybe a pair of 1070s.
     
  15. LNCPapa

    LNCPapa TS Special Forces Posts: 4,265   +518

    I tried the demos with a 1080 Ti SLI setup but they only ever used 1 GPU. :( I'll try forcing some AFR later to see if it's better.
     
    Adhmuz likes this.
  16. elementalSG

    elementalSG TS Enthusiast Posts: 64   +45

    When ray tracing is turned on, the results are most likely GPU bound, so we would get similar results with lesser CPUs. TechSpot probably used an i9-9900k just so no one could dispute that it was CPU bound (or because the previous RTX cards they already tested on the i9-9900k and didn’t want to retest everything again on a different CPU).
     
  17. kmo911

    kmo911 TS Enthusiast Posts: 67

  18. rmoore123

    rmoore123 TS Rookie

    How well does sli work for ray tracing?
     
  19. Bullwinkle M

    Bullwinkle M TS Enthusiast Posts: 84   +38

    TSMC is on track for 2020 production @ 5nm

    Translation:
    NVidia could massively outperform AMD and skip 7nm next year with greatly improved 2nd gen Ray Tracing @ 5nm

    But, does anyone really want RTX2080-Ti performance and the "equivalent" of an i9-9900K next year running comfortably on a 450-500 Watt STX power supply in a tiny case?

    Oh he11 yeah

    and throw in some HBM memory while yer at it
     
  20. gamerk2

    gamerk2 TS Addict Posts: 204   +126

    You're still brute forcing Ray Tracing in that case, and will still lose performance relative to using RT cores.

    I would imagine; the default is for each card in SLI to create alternate frames, so I'd expect it to scale. That being said, SLI is basically dead now that each developer is responsible for implementing it (Thanks Vulkan/DX12!).

    Putting aside the recent lack of SLI support, you still aren't going to get acceptable FPS. Let me be clear: Ray Tracing is *very* hard to compute in a traditional manner; that's why NVIDIA is adding specialized HW on to their cards to try and speed up the workload at a minimum of die space.
     
  21. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,903   +690

    Yes I know, I am very much aware of this...

    I am also aware of SLI being a dead thing, I'd still be curious to see what would happen if it was used, and more so with RTX cards with actual RT cores, does ray tracing itself scale, and how well if at all.

    Dude, I know RT is hard for none RTX cards that do not have the hardware dedicated to calculating it. You aren't clarifying anything, you're stating the obvious which everyone already knows...

    The fact of the matter is, CUDA cores can do it, let me be clear: More GPUs with More CUDA cores could eventually do it at an acceptable frame rate, I also understand the concept of diminishing returns, but as an experiment I think it would be interesting none the less to see what would happen.
     
  22. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,903   +690

    Unfortunately it's highly possible nVidia will not allow you to use a 2nd card with any DXR features intentionally because it would hurt sales of their RTX cards, it would essentially make in meaningless for someone in your situation to upgrade if acceptable frame rates can be achieved. It could be a limitation in the demos but I find that equally unlikely.
     
  23. HyPeroxya

    HyPeroxya TS Enthusiast Posts: 71   +8

    720P tho, surely they could make a great showing or ven 900p ...not too shabby.
    Still haven't seen any difference RT vs Non-RT. And could these tensor cores, DLSS be re-purposed to give a) better non-RT performance ?
    b) some mining functions (ethereum etc)
    c) some AI / ML functions ?
     
  24. Markoni35

    Markoni35 TS Member Posts: 34   +22

    Nvidia deliberately slowed down ray tracing for the GTX cards.
     

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...