I believe in ray tracing, but I do not believe in Nvidia's RTX 3000-series GPUs

[Łukasz Romaniuk]

I remember  back in late 90s I was upgrading my PC every 2 years just to be able to utilize latest achievements in graphics - look and performance always was related to graphics hardware but only most demanding graphics concepts push hardware forward. In last years rasterized 3D graphics was pushed to its limits with all the tricks in screen space to mitigate its weaknesses - througput was more important than raw power. Thats why you could live with your card for several years. For example in last 15 years I've upgraded my graphics three times - 8800GTX->580GTX->1080GTX and I never felt that I'm missing something. RT raytracing is a concept that will evolve now over several years with small steps every generation just like rasterized 3D graphics did in the 90s until mid 00s, and just as back then you will be forced to upgrade more often to praise quality and performance of whats comming in the future of realtime RT. At least I'm not suprised and honestly I'cant wait for what's comming.

[L]

@ Łukasz Romaniuk
I couldn't have put it better, the only problem is that people want that without spending money. Every new technology needs to develop over time with a lot if investment. I sincerely miss the times when you could talk with opposing fans without anyone getting offensive..

[NVIDIA is evil]

@NVIDIA is evil
If someone cannot afford expensive hardware then too bad, I have never had top end GPUs but I fully understand the nee to develop RT until it gets more mainstream. Don't stop it because only few have money to use it. FYI, I use a 1660Ti and I don't complain. New technology was always expensive, I don't see people complaining about the price of first ssds..

Then i feel "sorry" for ya for never see people complaining about the price of first ssds, it goes without saying that you are newbie to this world, venture out to more sites, will ya?

It is still vivid in my mind the years when 120GB SSD was three times the price of now and in the first phase  of the tecnology, when SSDs become "commercially" priced, i read a lot of complained regarding the price, heck, i even hear it from my own geek friends, it is not until now that one can buy SSD for cheap (and don't forget when those evil companies, especially Samsung, playing with the price of NAND flash as their heart's content by claiming that the stocks and producing yields are "low")

Read more before commenting, dear

[IcantBelieveWhatIJustRead]

The writer does not seem to have any kind of knowledge on this subject he is writing about.

He seems to be writing things based purely on feelings and his own believes and expectations.

First of all the rtx 3000 series almost doubled the RT performance compared to 2000 series and that is a raw FACT.

I dont even bother to comment the other false claims he made in this peace of a rubbish article.

[Gambiting]

What an absolute load of nonsense. I wonder if the author has any idea what they are writing about or if they are just making things up. This bit in particular:

"The first one has to do with the fact that my very own RTX 2060 (mobile) is simply not capable of using any ray-tracing effects in any modern title. Yes, technically, I can turn RTX on, but practically I cannot"

That makes me think that the author hasn't actually tried it at all. I have a Legion 5i with the RTX2060 and cyberpunk works in Raytracing Medium settings, never dropping below 30fps. Watch Dogs Legion runs with Raytracing on and 60fps. Like, I've been playing cyberpunk all day like that yesterday and it's a hugely enjoyable experience. I also prefer it to playing on my desktop 1080Ti, which yes, has a higher details settings, but the game looks just so much better with RTX on.

[ThisIsReal]

Love this article. My summary: nvidia is trying to convince the world that quality is what's missing in games and raytracing will be a must. Little issue: it just can't deliver on the promise RTX is so much slower it actually HURTS the game play.

This has been a marketing push from nvidia since the beginning. Either they 10x the performance, or they can't ask for $1,500 for a card with a feature that Makes Games Worse.

[L]

@NVIDIA is evil

Was it to such a scale as this subject with so little content matter? This is new technology, same as those first SSDs, it needs to develop and first generation is always the most expensive as seen in the aforementioned SSD market.
As for the price fixing that is an entirely different subject. If you want to compare Nvidia to it the put AMD also in the scope as their prices are similar while having more expensive CPUs and motherboards than Intel, but I don't see such a big backlash, it's only Intel that is evil. Please be more objective and not everything is about "value", which has so much been brought about during the last few years..

[Inissa]

You are right, please buy an ATI 😂. Destroyed in performance and technology.
The worst is their drivers... ATI never ever again.

[Arius]

This must be the shittiest article I've ever read. I'm going to block this website with my Pihole. I dont need this nonsense bullshit.

[Cyberpunked]

That's pretty good insight for someone who only owns a 2060.  I bought an OC model of 3090 because I didn't want to spend hours tweaking or choosing what graphics details to sacrifice when playing non-competitive games.

Alas an hour or so tweaking in Cyberpunk 2077 showed me that was somewhat naïve.  The choices seem to come down to these:

• Play with RTX off and DLSS off for crisp details at 70fps+ fluidness
• Play with RTX on and DLSS on for 70fps+ but blurriness in general and shimmering artefacts
• Play with RTX on and DLSS off for the most beautiful graphics experience but at hard-to-aim and motion-sickness inducing and ~30fps

Maybe DLSS fairs better at 4K but not at 3440x1440 where loss in fidelity is night and day.  No screenshots could ever convey the emersion difference.   Also, if I played with a controller rather than keyboard+mouse I might find 30fps more acceptable.

Having said that, I'm glad I bought the 3090 because at least I can play with RTX off and just enjoy the game at 70fps+.

[Kk]

Does the author really have a 2060 mobile? Because I have no issues with RTX in modern titles.

Control: 1440p, RTX Medium, DLSS Performance, medium volumetric lighting = rock solid 60 FPS
Wolfenstein Youngblood: High Image Streaming, everything else Mein Leben, RTX On, DLSS balanced= rock solid 60 FPS
Bf5 : Ultra, 1080p, High Textures, DXR medium: rock solid 60 fps.
Cyberpunk: 1440p, mix between medium and high, DXR reflections, DXR Shadows, DLSS Performance, rock solid 30 FPS (minus memory leak issues over time) 1080p60 with only dxr shadows and DLSS possible as well.

Plus this is only going to get better in the future. With DLSS, the 2060 mobile has more power than a series X and without DLSS, more than a Series S. So there will be lighter RT in the future.

[light]

Yeah, all these nvidia fanboys missing the point here. Raytracing is the future, but by the time raytracing becomes the present, ampere will be too weak to run it.

I mean, not even a 3090, the most powerful ampere GPU, is capable of running Cyberpunk at high framerates even with DLSS. I'd guess that it'll probably take another 3-5 years for RT to truly realize, and at that point your 3090 is gonna be doing, what, 20-30 FPS with DLSS?

The only thing ampere cards will ever be good for in terms of raytracing will be gorgeous cinematic titles where you're okay with choppy cinematic framerates.

[Horban]

This autor is just dumb, you should verify your article before making it public or you will lose lot of readers.

[YouAreFullOfCrap]

I'm running Cyberpunk on an RTX 2070 60+ fps, at 1080p with raytracing on high. Dlss on automatic.

Do with that what you will, but I think you're full of crap.

[Michael S.]

I actually don´t get the point of this article at all.
Maybe because it is plain gonzo, riding on the nVida s***-storm wave?

Nvidias step cutting ties with a journalist is plain stupid, I agree.
But that has nothing to do with the technology itself.

I understand that people are frustrated when buying a 700$/€ + graphics card, then having issues playing the latest games on Ultra with a feature that was promoted as much as this.
That is a lot of money for a feature that is not running as perfect as it should.
But there is always that one thing on "current" generation that will test technology to its extreme.

Using a gaming laptop and complaining about game performance is some kind of loss of reality. You just cannot expect to run this/other games on a mobile device at peak performance!?

Regarding the "unplayable" on RTX3000 chips I also am not sure what there actual benchmark reference of the author is.

Running the game at 4k Ultra, RTX On, DLSS ON with a I7 8700k + RTX3090 FE @ around 60 fps (+/-5) is quite solid for an RPG.
With some tweaks and downgrades in upscaling/resolution/raytracing quality i get into the 80-90fps even around 100.
This is not CS:GO where you aim for 300fps?!

Also the game looks fantastic without the raytracing.

If any, nVidias only fault regarding raytracing is promoting it the way they do, as a mainstream "everyone -can-have-it" feature.
It is still the peak feature of the current gen gaming technology (and probably will be for some time) and sadly reserved to people that pay 700$/€ and more for a GPU.

So still, don´t get the point of this articel except some clickbait free-riding.