Rdna have no ray tracing hardware so ps5 gpu will have midrange rdna2 gpu as amd stated it will support it somewhere next year.

i m very excited for an upgrade of ps4 to ps5 and backward compatibility. I would love tho, to see old games improves a little bit. Like unlock higher resolutions and and try to hit 4k/60 on OLD games using the full power and not the backward compatibility mode. Or even just enable 1440p for who plays on a monitor

Undying:

Rdna have no ray tracing hardware so ps5 gpu will have midrange rdna2 gpu as amd stated it will support it somewhere next year.

Well it's not like any radeon gpu has dedicated hardware for ray tracing yet you can do that anyway radeon rays are a thing. You don't need specific hardware, while it does make it easier to have dedicated hardware alas nvidia.

Undying:

Rdna have no ray tracing hardware so ps5 gpu will have midrange rdna2 gpu as amd stated it will support it somewhere next year.

Its a Custom GPU, with HW Raytracing. What will be HW Raytraced is yet to be defined. i don't expect it to be able to do all of it in HW, just some of it.

its a hybrid RT implementation.

Undying:

Rdna have no ray tracing hardware so ps5 gpu will have midrange rdna2 gpu as amd stated it will support it somewhere next year.

I think you don't really need dedicated hardware to run RT. Might not be as powerful, or accurate, but software implementation is already a thing for years. And making games look good is, for a long time, a fool your eyes game. I'm sure AMD is working on a way to RT using less hardware and a more software approach.

Nvidia kinda showed us that you can have raytracing on gtx hardware but why amd didnt do the same? Polaris/vega/navi users should atleast have an option to try it. Maybe Jensen is right. Buying a gpu without hardware capable raytracing is stupid.

Silva:

I think you don't really need dedicated hardware to run RT. Might not be as powerful, or accurate, but software implementation is already a thing for years. And making games look good is, for a long time, a fool your eyes game. I'm sure AMD is working on a way to RT using less hardware and a more software approach.

We already know AMD's approach - it's detailed in their RT patents. It's similar to Nvidia's only their RT hardware itself isn't going to do the texture fetch, the already existing texture units are. This approach uses less silicon but it's left to be seen if it has performance parity. It depends on what the bottleneck in raytracing is and how the shader hardware is being utilized while waiting for BVH traversal.

Undying:

Nvidia kinda showed us that you can have raytracing on gtx hardware but why amd didnt do the same? Polaris/vega/navi users should atleast have an option to try it. Maybe Jensen is right. Buying a gpu without hardware capable raytracing is stupid.

There is probably a great deal of driver work involved in order to get DXR on existing hardware. Nvidia most likely was able to share most of the RTX code to GTX in order to get a compatibility mode running quickly. Idk if it's worth getting DXR on GTX/Polaris/Vega/Navi but would be neat to see.

DXR fallback is presently optional for WDDM validation, but this might change in the future.

Evildead666:

Its a Custom GPU, with HW Raytracing. What will be HW Raytraced is yet to be defined. i don't expect it to be able to do all of it in HW, just some of it.

We do not know if it is hardware or software, honestly for all we know it could be RT Audio the PS5 and new Xbox will feature in their RT process.

I'm not sure how much CPU processing power the PS5 needs, but do you think Ray Tracing threads could be handled mostly by the CPU? I'm not sure if this is possible in either hardware or software level though.

As long as it comes with PSVR 2.0 and a VR update for the ps4 camera and ps move controllers.

Seems quite optimistic, is this still supposed to cost like 500$ ? I guess we'll see rather soon.

Undying:

Nvidia kinda showed us that you can have raytracing on gtx hardware but why amd didnt do the same? Polaris/vega/navi users should atleast have an option to try it. Maybe Jensen is right. Buying a gpu without hardware capable raytracing is stupid.

Denial:

There is probably a great deal of driver work involved in order to get DXR on existing hardware. Nvidia most likely was able to share most of the RTX code to GTX in order to get a compatibility mode running quickly. Idk if it's worth getting DXR on GTX/Polaris/Vega/Navi but would be neat to see.

Answer is much more simple. Marketing/Looks. GTX 1660Ti can do RT. Not very good at it. Makes RTX 2060 look worth it. As long as AMD does not play RT game, their products can't be compared. How many tech sites make recommendations on GPUs based on RT capability? Likely None as they would not recommend AMD by default. But moment you get those RT numbers, even Navi will not look very tempting. That's because tech sites will be benchmarking RT games with RT ON. And funny thing about people is that they'll deem GPU as unworthy because of low RT performance even while they did not want to and did not buy single RT enabled game. It is simple Marketing game and game of Faces. RDNA/Vega/maybe older GCN are planned to have support on shader level. But question is when. Likely around time RDNA2 with TMU enabled RT is very close or even after. (Minimal damage risk.)

Denial:

We already know AMD's approach - it's detailed in their RT patents. It's similar to Nvidia's only their RT hardware itself isn't going to do the texture fetch, the already existing texture units are. This approach uses less silicon but it's left to be seen if it has performance parity. It depends on what the bottleneck in raytracing is and how the shader hardware is being utilized while waiting for BVH traversal.

When RTX cards launched nvidia stated that RT cores and Raster hard can't run simultaneously, so I don't expect amd approach to be much slower.

las:

Imagine how much Nvidia could destroy AMD if they really wanted to. AMD can barely beat RTX 2060 Super + Nvidia uses like 50% the chip for TENSOR AND RT CORES, while also using 12nm. Nvidia launched RTX now because they are YEARS ahead of AMD.

No, my dear. nVidia is behind AMD. They were delivering about equal performance with same transistor count GPU as AMD at same clock with Turing vs Vega. They were ahead of AMD's GCN with Pascal for gaming. And way behind with compute till Turing. Guess what you need for RT... yes, compute capability. In other words, Apples to apples nVidia had better gaming, worse compute GPUs up to and including Pascal. With Turing they were about same as Vega except RT features that very few really "need" even today. RDNA1 is ahead of Turing. nVidia could have destroyed AMD if they decided to make much bigger Pascal. Or improve on Pascal, but Turing is what people got. And that's where we are. Turing and its RT with market demand for much more RT. And that means requirement to have higher RT to rasterization ratio. Now for destruction. 2060S is sold at very comparable price to 5700 XT, delivering very similar performance per $ ratio. And that's at 12nm as you wrote. If nVidia does mere die shrink to 7nm, this 2060S (7nm) will cost 15% more while clocking maybe 10% more. Yes, 7nm transistors are more expensive. And 7nm EUV cost even more. What those processes enable is to have more transistors in one GPU. So nVidia which recently makes GPUs with more transistors will be able to make GPUs with even more... at adequate price increase due to given manufacturing process and reduced yields. There is no destruction of either side. They are pretty close. Only thing that remains to be seen is how much more RT nVidia squeezes in at each price point and how RDNA2 implements RT (additional transistor count per TMU and entire WGP).

TieSKey:

When RTX cards launched nvidia stated that RT cores and Raster hard can't run simultaneously, so I don't expect amd approach to be much slower.

Not exactly, Tom Petersen did explain what can run simultaneously and what can't in one of his videos.

Remember - consoles tend to have hardware-specific optimizations, which is why they can offer great graphics on mediocre hardware. If this GPU is capable of 4K gaming on a PC, I wouldn't be surprised if it manages to pull off 4K@60FPS, even with raytracing enabled. This seems to be the first console that actually will actually have good and modern hardware on its release day.

Fool me once.... Xbox 360 "720p or higher gaming" Halo 3 540p. Xbox One "1080p/30fps or higher gaming" Some games scale to 720p. Many games have 20's some, teens frame rates. Xbox Scarlett "4k60fps" Me...so 1440/30fps then? Why does everyone fall for corporate hype? They oversell before hand and make excuses after the fact. I just don't see how a console is going to have ray-tracying and maintain 60 frames at 4k. I understand being in a closed environment they'll get more out of the hardware, but still...https://www.techradar.com/news/pc-gamers-rejoice-playstation-5-wont-be-as-powerful-as-an-nvidia-rtx-2080

I'm going to ask we not turn this into a *console bad, RT bad* conversation.

sound very interesting if true. thought I would love to see the ps5 do more then just be compatible with ps4/pro games I want to see it enhance there framerates and resolution ideally, at very lest enhance the fps to 60fps for games that were not locked at 30fps