Radeon Adrenalin 2020 Edition Driver Overview
Guru3D Winter 2019 PC Buyer Guide
Corsair QL120 and QL140 RGB fan review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro for $13 With Office 2016 For $33
Corsair Void RGB Elite Wireless Headset review
Team Group PD400 Portable SSD review
AMD Athlon 3000G review
Team Group T-Force Delta Max 1 TB SSD review
Guru3D Rig of the Month - November 2019
ASUS ROG Rampage VI Extreme Encore review
Update: Cyberpunk 2077 PC version with raytracing, first screenshots - Reserves 80GB for Install
CD Projekt Red announced close collaboration with Nvidia for the PC version of Cyberpunk 2077. For the Geforce RTX team a nice moment to create some momentum for a raytracing showcase. We have the first screenshots of Cyberpunk 2077 with raytracing active on Geforce RTX graphics cards.
Thanks to "Raytracing-specific Geforce RTX GPUs, these effects can be rendered in real time in the game," says CD Projekt Red. What effects are implemented exactly with this (raytracing reflections, raytracing shadows) remains unclear (but we'll use the screenshots to reflect on reflections; in the Gamescom demo 2018, screen-space reflections with clearly visible absence will also be present) DLSS support has question marks. However, Adam Badowski, Head of Studio at CD Project Red, believes that raytracing allows "realistic representation of the behavior of light in a condensed urban environment". Thanks to raytracing, "additional levels of depth and verticality could be introduced to the already impressive megacity".
Matt Wuebbling, Head of GeForce Marketing at Nvidia, believes that "the world of cyberpunk will benefit greatly from realistic raytracing lighting." To give a first impression of real-time raytracing in Cyberpunk 2077, the first screenshots were released to demonstrate gameplay in Ultra HD resolution. You will find these pictures at the beginning of the following gallery. We also have some new "normal" screenshots of the E3 integrated, so you have a comparison.
Update: Cyberpunk 2077 is the most anticipated games of 2020, and while we all know that game installs are getting bigger and bigger here passing a new threshold. The minimum storage requirement for the game is 80GB, Reddit user /u/PhoOhThree however, mentions that it might simply be a placeholder as the game is not yet finished. Cyberpunk 2077 will launch on April 16th, 2020.
Cyberpunk 2077 E3 2019 trailer + release date - 06/10/2019 11:44 AM
CD Projekt RED has released the E3 2019 trailer for Cyberpunk 2077. This trailer basically showcases a cut-scene from the game, giving you a glimpse at the game’s story. Furthermore, it also...
The Hunt - Cyberpunk 4K - 12/14/2018 08:37 AM
Beffio, a group of passionate people who love to create games and assets in Unity3D game engine, has made a Cyberpunk environment in Unity Engine, showing what a next-gen sci-fi game could look like i...
Cyberpunk 2077 Gameplay Reveal - 48-minute walkthrough - 08/28/2018 07:36 AM
Watch 48 minutes of official 2018 gameplay from Cyberpunk 2077 and get a glimpse into the world of perils and possibilities that is Night City - the most vibrant and dangerous metropolis of the future...
Cyberpunk 2077 - first gameplay details - 06/13/2018 07:27 AM
CD Projekt RED has shown Cyberpunk 2077 behind closed doors at E3. However, gameplay details from this build have surfaced online. According to the reports, Cyberpunk 2077 will be a first-person RPG ...
E3 2018: Cyberpunk 2077 official trailer - 06/11/2018 07:05 AM
CD Projekt RED has released the official E3 2018 trailer for Cyberpunk 2077. Cyberpunk 2077 is a narrative-driven, open world RPG set in the most vibrant and dangerous metropolis of the future Night...
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9765
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9765
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5686698 Posted on: 07/03/2019 09:51 AM
It's sad that people actually want to have a company remove technology and stunt the growth of visual improvements.
Hopefully the next generation has no GPUs in it that do not have RTX, so this idea that we should stop trying to improve is gone.
If you want a GPU without RTX features, go buy a navi or vega 2. Get the same rasterization performance for the same dollar amount, and less features.
There is only one issue. 2070 vs 1660Ti.
2070 has 64% more transistors and is in general some 37% faster. You can compare SMs of both GPUs to find out where they differ and what kind of transistor investment went to those differences.
Or you can just take this: Turing which is enabled to do RT has some 16% worse performance per transistor than Turing which is not enabled to do RT.
Now, imagine that There would be no GTX 1660(Ti), 1650(Ti). But there would be RTX variants with same transistor count and same price as result... all 16% slower.
(Too weak at RT and slower at older techniques than needed.)
Apparently, if nVidia manages to double RT capability without drastically increasing transistor count of SM, then even GPU that can do like 75~80fps on average before enabling RT, could be usable for RT. (Even while average is horrid keyword here as fps dips would be to 40s...)
It's sad that people actually want to have a company remove technology and stunt the growth of visual improvements.
Hopefully the next generation has no GPUs in it that do not have RTX, so this idea that we should stop trying to improve is gone.
If you want a GPU without RTX features, go buy a navi or vega 2. Get the same rasterization performance for the same dollar amount, and less features.
There is only one issue. 2070 vs 1660Ti.
2070 has 64% more transistors and is in general some 37% faster. You can compare SMs of both GPUs to find out where they differ and what kind of transistor investment went to those differences.
Or you can just take this: Turing which is enabled to do RT has some 16% worse performance per transistor than Turing which is not enabled to do RT.
Now, imagine that There would be no GTX 1660(Ti), 1650(Ti). But there would be RTX variants with same transistor count and same price as result... all 16% slower.
(Too weak at RT and slower at older techniques than needed.)
Apparently, if nVidia manages to double RT capability without drastically increasing transistor count of SM, then even GPU that can do like 75~80fps on average before enabling RT, could be usable for RT. (Even while average is horrid keyword here as fps dips would be to 40s...)
fantaskarsef
Senior Member
Posts: 11038
Joined: 2014-07-21
Senior Member
Posts: 11038
Joined: 2014-07-21
#5686707 Posted on: 07/03/2019 10:29 AM
Dude, I so know what you're talking about. I suffered through just this kind of motion back then, and I instantly got reminded reading those lines.
One thing I can say for sure, since going with only a single GPU, I have not had issues with drivers in the last three to four years. Not a single driver messed things up really, if one was doing weird things, I simply switched back a gen and waited for the next. Issue resolve is a matter of 5 minutes this time.
I had sworn to stick with sli, but nvidia has worn me down with them completely dropping official sli support (undoubtedly their intention in order to force sli users onto overpriced single gpus such as the 2080 ti)... so i am changing to the fastest single ampare gpu when it launches at some point.
Dude, I so know what you're talking about. I suffered through just this kind of motion back then, and I instantly got reminded reading those lines.
One thing I can say for sure, since going with only a single GPU, I have not had issues with drivers in the last three to four years. Not a single driver messed things up really, if one was doing weird things, I simply switched back a gen and waited for the next. Issue resolve is a matter of 5 minutes this time.
Stormyandcold
Senior Member
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2003-09-15
Senior Member
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2003-09-15
#5686908 Posted on: 07/03/2019 09:38 PM
I doubt if you're not actually running RTX features that it will do this, so no, this scenario doesn't happen.
Not to mention it makes the chip draw more power and become hotter.
I doubt if you're not actually running RTX features that it will do this, so no, this scenario doesn't happen.
Dragam1337
Senior Member
Posts: 1473
Joined: 2017-11-23
Senior Member
Posts: 1473
Joined: 2017-11-23
#5686911 Posted on: 07/03/2019 09:52 PM
If that was true, then a chip would consume 0 watts in idle... which it doesn't, so it isn't.
I doubt if you're not actually running RTX features that it will do this, so no, this scenario doesn't happen.
If that was true, then a chip would consume 0 watts in idle... which it doesn't, so it isn't.
Stormyandcold
Senior Member
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2003-09-15
Senior Member
Posts: 5233
Joined: 2003-09-15
#5686946 Posted on: 07/03/2019 11:46 PM
Actually, what you're assuming is that the tensor cores will still contribute to more power usage and heat when not being used. I don't think so. At least not in the way you made it out to be. In absolute terms, yes, there will be some insignificant power-draw.
In practical terms, we expect a card running/using RTX to use more power and produce more heat vs RTX off.
If that was true, then a chip would consume 0 watts in idle... which it doesn't, so it isn't.
Actually, what you're assuming is that the tensor cores will still contribute to more power usage and heat when not being used. I don't think so. At least not in the way you made it out to be. In absolute terms, yes, there will be some insignificant power-draw.
In practical terms, we expect a card running/using RTX to use more power and produce more heat vs RTX off.
Astyanax
Senior Member
Posts: 3908
Joined: 2018-03-21
Senior Member
Posts: 3908
Joined: 2018-03-21
#5687054 Posted on: 07/04/2019 08:50 AM
The 16xx series will be a once off.
um, no. the framebuffer is still projecting an image to the screen, you demonstrate a classic case of not knowing how any of it works.
all modern gpu's employ tech to selectively turn off parts of the core but you cannot get to absolute zero power usage, ever.
have a read
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00853849/document
2) If so, will they actually have the same performance, minus RTX stuff?
The 16xx series will be a once off.
If that was true, then a chip would consume 0 watts in idle... which it doesn't, so it isn't.
um, no. the framebuffer is still projecting an image to the screen, you demonstrate a classic case of not knowing how any of it works.
all modern gpu's employ tech to selectively turn off parts of the core but you cannot get to absolute zero power usage, ever.
have a read
https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00853849/document
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 12018
Joined: 2008-08-28
That was Witcher only thing