If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon. No dlss. No opportunity for high end gaming.
Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled. With the least issues also.
Radeon was and still supposed to be the cheap alternative. Now with global crisis due to crypto and corona, even radeon gpus are expensive. It was bound to happen. Amd should deliver more!
If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon. No dlss. No opportunity for high end gaming.
Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled. With the least issues also.
Radeon was and still supposed to be the cheap alternative. Now with global crisis due to crypto and corona, even radeon gpus are expensive. It was bound to happen. Amd should deliver more!
"I would not buy radeon. No dlss."
"Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled"
If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon. No dlss. No opportunity for high end gaming.
Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled. With the least issues also.
Radeon was and still supposed to be the cheap alternative. Now with global crisis due to crypto and corona, even radeon gpus are expensive. It was bound to happen. Amd should deliver more!
"No opportunity for high end gaming"
"Amd should deliver more!"
But they did ... and they also have more space for oc better numbers with Smart Access Memory Performance
and although it is expensive it still remains cheaper than Nvidia
how much more to deliver????
itpro said: ↑
If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon.
a few games have been added lately but still the number remains very small and it has been 2 years since the RT appeared on the Nvidia gpu
If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon. No dlss. No opportunity for high end gaming.
Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled. With the least issues also.
Radeon was and still supposed to be the cheap alternative. Now with global crisis due to crypto and corona, even radeon gpus are expensive. It was bound to happen. Amd should deliver more!
Why do you care that much about ray tracing? It's overrated as of today lol
If I knew I cannot play latest games with raytracing on I would not buy radeon. No dlss. No opportunity for high end gaming.
Enthusiasts want maximum visuals enabled. With the least issues also.
Radeon was and still supposed to be the cheap alternative. Now with global crisis due to crypto and corona, even radeon gpus are expensive. It was bound to happen. Amd should deliver more!
The vast majority of Steam customers are not enthusiasts. Just like the vast majority of drivers, when you hit the highway, are not car enthusiasts, even if they drove ungodly kilometers a year due to their work. Besides, saying enthusiasts want the least issues... Who exactly are the people who want issues? Class action lawsuit lawyers? However, enthusiasts are actually the people who are most likely to accept the risk of issues. Enthusiasts build their own PCs, so they don't have the guarantee the PC was tested to be functional when it left the factory. An enthusiast knows that every component could be DOA, and if there's a problem, the enthusiast needs to figure out, on their own, which component is causing it, and then deal with it.
There's a lot of talk about raytracing here, but I still haven't seen 1 game that makes me think, "Wow, my next gpu must have raytracing!" Even the Doom Eternal raytracing video the other week looked pretty much identical except for some shiny reflections of characters and explosions.
I'd personally rather have the higher frame-rate and more money left in my wallet.
Happy to be proved wrong. Anyone got any examples of game videos with ray tracing on that looks incredible?
I'm pretty sure AMD would gain GPU share too if availability wasn't so bad (and even more CPU share).
Which begs the question how much purpose do such surveys even serve at the moment when most people are stuck with what they got even if they wanted to get something else.
AMD gaining CPU share is to be expected now, since they have superior desktop CPUs now (the only thing holding them back now is availability). For GPU it's more complicated, people buy any graphics card they can buy now (as long as the price is not absurdly high). But overall nVidia still has advantage here, their brand influence won't go away soon (and also because they're still very competent, unlike Intel's desktop CPU).
Ah, the wonderful logic of tying everything to viewport resolution, as if anything else in the game is rendered at that, and then claiming "visual quality".
What happens to visual quality when you halve the frame rate? AMD themselves know they need to deliver on the DLSS/Upscaling bandwagon, and I bet they will do it with RDNA 3.0, when suddenly all fanboys will praise them for it.
Doom Ray Tracing incoming. See you there Radeon fans.
I think you're the 1% of people that are all in for RT and is using it to cover your Nvidia obsession.
I'd personally buy the cheapest better performing card whatever the company, only considering other if the price was really close and I was thinking what were my favourite drivers.
RT still is a gimmick, cuz it needs to be baked and optimized and doesn't work for both teams out of the box.
IMO it doesn't show a visual benefit, yet, to justify both the performance loss and the marketing around it.
Maybe by the time we have 4x more powerful RT hardware I'll see a meaningful difference and say: yes, we are in the future.
Right now even if I had a 3080 I'd disable that shit for performance and efficiency reasons.
Doom Ray Tracing incoming. See you there Radeon fans.
Doom Eternal as it is needs more than 8gb memory even at 1440p so raytracing/dlss should eat up even more. Just look at the nvidia lineup and think how many nvidia fans will see you there.
I mean, I played doom eternal on a 290x 1080p high and it actually looked great, ran beautifully smoothly, solid 60fps+. Also too busy killing things to probably appreciate how the light bounces slightly differently.
I mean the video looked good, but I really had to look for the subtle differences. It isn't exactly a game to wander around quietly and appreciate the scenery.
I also think there is a lot to be said still for programming a game decently rather than designing something that is unmanageable on the currently available hardware.
Overall AMD is doing great, CPUs are delightful to use, cannot wait to see new hardware from both current pipeline and further with incorporation of xilinx IP.
New Samsung SoC with and graphics looks promising too. Good to have real competition back, should drive some real innovation.
RT is like that story about the fox and the grapes. All these people going "Reeeee RT is not good not something we want" etc., can't use it and think it's somehow less because 1 company does it better than anyone else.
I wouldn't guess that the audience on this forum are too young to remember when the same arguments were rolled out about Glide accelleration, OpenGL, Direct3D, graphics cards with Hardware T&L... "reee we don't want any of this it looks bad, it looks not good enough for the performance impact, it doesn't look good enough for the price".
Amazing how history repeats itself.
RT is like that story about the fox and the grapes. All these people going "Reeeee RT is not good not something we want" etc., can't use it and think it's somehow less because 1 company does it better than anyone else.
I wouldn't guess that the audience on this forum are too young to remember when the same arguments were rolled out about Glide accelleration, OpenGL, Direct3D, graphics cards with Hardware T&L... "reee we don't want any of this it looks bad, it looks not good enough for the performance impact, it doesn't look good enough for the price".
Amazing how history repeats itself.
I agree, though it is worth pointing out that early adoption of technologies is often a poor choice - you pay a high premium for an underwhelming and slow experience. I was confident from the beginning that RT is important and poses a great future for gaming (and developers), but I think it's perfectly reasonable to not want to get invested in it now. I still think it needs another couple years until it's polished and worthwhile. This is a much more advanced technology than what we've seen before, coming at a time when people demand more detail at higher resolutions and higher refresh rates.
That being said, even though AMD basically just checked a box saying "yeah we have this feature" despite being mostly unusable, Nvidia's performance with RT doesn't convince me to buy their product either. You pretty much need a 3070 to get a reliably good RT experience at 1080p, and I'm just not spending an MSRP of $500+ (let alone scalper prices) in 2021 for a 1080p experience. If I were willing to use a higher resolution with DLSS, I'd rather just turn off RT.
amd have got 5nm coming soon and 3d cache samples working
there's nowhere to run to,baby,there's nowhere to hide.
although I think the quantity is mostly thanks to r3000 series,not r5000,which is super expensive.
kapu:
That that 8 gb on 3070 will do the job just fine , sure it will 🙂
well it's gonna do something,even if it comes at the cost of lowering textures from ultra nightmare to nightmare
unlike on rx6000 series which is just too weak to run nvidia's full resolution RT.maybe it can do some low-med preset with 1/4 res reflections.
this tug of war between you&undying and rtx users is getting old.sure 8g is borderline,but 16g with weaker RT performance and no dlss is not exactly a good substitute.
a few games have been added lately but still the number remains very small and it has been 2 years since the RT appeared on the Nvidia gpu