Is Gaming with Ray Tracing worth it in 2024 ?
Vložit
- čas přidán 14. 06. 2024
- Ray tracing has been around for 5 years now, so after some maturity can you actually see the difference when turned on ?
All testing done on max quality presets at 4K.
Games tested:
Cyberpunk 2077
The Finals
Hogwarts: Legacy
COD: Warzone 3
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt next gen update
Elden Ring
My PC:
CPU- AMD Ryzen 7 5700X - amzn.to/3PiW6SZ
GPU - Nvidia msi RTX 4090 Ventus- amzn.to/3spBcZe
Mo - Gigabyte X570 AORUS ELITE
RAM - Corsair vengeance RAM 32GB - amzn.to/44rqkr0
PSU - EVGA Supernova 750 - amzn.to/45os8CC
Case - Corsair iCUE 4000X - amzn.to/47N5dT8
Content:
00:00 Ray tracing in 2024
00:33 Cyberpunk 2077 RTX ON vs OFF
1:02 The Witcher 3 RTX ON vs OFF
1:40 The Finals RTX ON vs OFF
2:38 Elden Ring RTX ON vs OFF
3:21 Hogwarts:Legacy RTX ON vs OFF
4:04 COD: Warzone 3 RTX ON vs OFF
4:52 Detailed Look at RTX vs OFF
11:22 Which do you prefer ?
#pc #pcgaming #raytracing #rtx - Zábava
How did you do ? Also do you usually play with RTX ON or OFF ?
even though i have the hardware to do so, i keep it off. Its just not worth it. I play games for the sake of playing a game rather than searching for visual "improvements"
Always on. I also don't buy new AAA games which don'T at least have raytraced shadows and reflections any more. It is a new standard and should be mandatory for every new game, with pathtracing also being an option in every game. In my opinion every new game should have path traced global illumination and ambient occlusion + reflection and shadows + ray reconstruction. If I start a game without raytracing I immediatly notive the incorrect shadowing, bad AO and light not correctly transfering object colors to other objects. The exception to this is lumen in Hellblade 2, that game looks good without raytracing because it has technically "software raytracing" by lumen. But the reflections again in Hellblade 2 are really bad which puts me off always I look at them and kinda diminishes the fun of playing.
@@williehrmann Could you explain why this is important to you? Because video games are by definition not real. Nothing in video games is real or would be this way in real life. Why then should lighting be most accurate? Shouldnt games be played for the sake of gameplay? isnt that what is most fun. I found games with the most artistic art style and the most unaccurate lighting to be the most appealing because they are more gamy and the game stays longer in my head. Realistic graphics is just boring, at least for me.
@@user-jx5xq8hu9e I mean I also like playing games with artistic graphic styles, but in different genres. As soon as I'm gonna play a story heavy title it has to be ultra realistic graphics for me to get the immersion. That is also why I never could watch animes or cartoons really. I just prefer plain camera recorded series and films. I catch myself often skipping any cutscene or dialogues when the graphics aren't right in a story heavy game. If the gameplay itself is nice I might still play but just skip every story part. If I wanna enjoy the story and understand the characters I need immersive graphics.
The best way to spot if Ray Tracing is on is by looking at the frame rate LOL
Lol what a comment.
@@rolgoldingamd gpu user comment
to me the non-RT looked better almost in all the games, meaning i guessed wrong mostly; thought the non-RT was RT. So it is a win win for me, i save money. have high fps and get the best looking picture. RT is at the moment not worth it, half the fps, high cost to get into it (highend RTX card needed) , fake framegen needed and non native Highres, but upscaling. Meh, i pass.
Ray tracing doesn’t make a game look inherently better it just makes it look a little different and that’s only in games that fully utilize RT like Cyberpunk and Alan Wake 2
Simply false, cyberpunk without path tracing is unplayable to me after experiencing path tracing.
@@jaytay420 get new eyes
I'd say ray tracing (not RTX) is a very expensive solution looking for a problem that's not worth the computational cost......for now. Fidelity, resolution, frame rate and frame consistency all matter in a gaming experience and at this point I'd rather play at a higher native resolution or grab a few more FPS than turn on ray tracing. Maybe once we get 50% better than 4090 path tracing performance for 300-500 bucks, ray tracing can be baked in as a minimum requirement, but I also think by them lighting engines will also evolve with tech like Lumen and Nanite in UE5. For now, upscaling is the more exciting tech, in my opinion.
also energy consumption is ridicolous. Why wasting that much of energy for a tiny visual bump?
RT is game developer issue not gamer. If we stick to gamer mind set then our graphic will never move beyond half life 2 level of graphic.
@@arenzricodexd4409 exactly. It is what game developers want ant gamers dont care when you think of the tradeoffs.
Reflections is cool on raytracing. I think reflections more noticeable.
CP: It was the contrast between light vs dark spots and the way the blue neon lights lit up the front of the bar that gave me the answer
W3: It was the water
Finals: I was wrong. I was going off of the reflections in the floor but I guessed wrong
Elden Ring: The shine when you walked over the loot. I guessed right because of the yellow reflections on the armor, otherwise I wouldn't know
Hogwarts: I guessed wrong
Warzone: I guessed wrong but I didn't notice the difference, unlike Hogwarts and Finals I just took a blind guess. ETA yeah I completely looked over the background, didn't pay any attention at all lol
When you were showing Witcher on/off, I actually prefer off. If you look at the boards they're more vibrant with RTX off, and Geralt's armor looks better too. Don't know if that's due to the pics not being identical but Geralt's armor looks sharper and more crisp with RTX off
I think that in Hogwarts it is most noticeable in the floor reflections.
Yeah I should have mentioned about Geralt's armour, but yes It does look a lot sharper in the RTX off version. I think that this because the RTX off screenshot is a little closer to Geralt than the RTX on one. Not entirely sure though.
Are we all just going to ignore how funny the
'Don't have the capacity 😢"
actually was.
Big AMD fan, but that made me laugh 😅
It will be worth when normal GPUs will be powerful as rtx 4090 is now. Until then its nice to turn on here and there but for me is mostly off, on Nvidia or AMD.. We all have 144hz or faster screens these days and i found using high refresh fps is more fun for me than watching shadows and reflexions. Ofc there are slow games like Alan Wake but its not my cup of tea..
personally, high fps on high refresh rate monitors in the most noticeable visual improvement on video games out of all the technologies that have come out so far. ray tracing is noticeable only if you stand still look at the scene carefully and know what little details to look out for, if even then. if you aren't specifically looking out for it, you won't have a clue if it's on or off while playing normally.
for me, RTX on W3 is a complete waste of resources. What makes the game genuinely better graphically is the foliage ultra +
Ray Tracing is good when implemented right, like in Control, Metro Exodus, Alan Wake II and Cyberpunk 2077. Other games try to implement one solution or another and it is usually badly implemented. Some games you've shown are good examples of that. Elden Ring is not really noticeable, The Witcher 3 not noticeable, COD: Warzone is a "WTF" implementation... The problem with companies failing to add ray tracing is that the FPS will drop, no change will be seen and Ray Tracing will get a bad image among players.
Witcher 3 is noticeable, especially outdoors.
Ray tracing reminds me of Dolby Atmos. Cool to have, but I wouldn't even notice, unless I was trying to look out for it. Foe me. It's still a bit of an expensive sales gimmick.
Lots of times I end up hating RT in certain areas like dark areas; it really make you regret cheaper display panels and black light bleed and then you are onto trying to figure out what to upgrade next; the bloom can be an issue if you dont have decent dimming zones as backlight bleed can make blacks really crushed and awkward for so many games that try to make more atmospheric visuals
It becomes hard to see and i either get lost more easily since dark is really dark and areas just dont navigate as easily; I’m into a great thriller or horror game but everything looking wet and mirror like isn’t ideal; at that point just change the material composition of everything and get similar results to appearance
Overall i believe at the very least it gives a variant of art direction, as developers can design one game and RT and raster can make up 2 totally different art styles which can accommodate not just playability but how one perceives surfaces to look or how environments are either lifelike due to their own subjective interpretation
Quality vid👌
true🔥
Ray Tracing add real-time reflections and some bouncing. The real Ray Tracing is called Path Tracing, this one really makes difference, as it adds real-time reflections and light bouncing/spreading. Cyberpunk is the only game where you will notice the differences well, but it's not worth playing RT with low frames vs. non RT with good frames.
Metro 2033
When doing comparisons like this, you REALLY need to find a spot that you can replicate.
I can tell just when you move the camera up and down screen space reflections will disappear ray traced reflections won’t. But in all reality when you’re moving through environments fast screen space reflections are very convincing nowadays.
Shadows and reflections are the two things that pop for me when ray tracing is on.
i usually play with RT with games like alan wake because it really changes how the game look with just a low RT even with DLSS enabled the games still look beautiful
Got everything right, but doesnt really bother not having it
Elden Ring has raytraced AO as well which is kind of obvious when it's on (at the highest raytracing setting only!) because it gets rid of Fromsoftwares SSAO that has pretty visible white haloing artefacts.
The raytraced shadows are kind of whatever because it still follows the rasterised shadow map flaws in not every object casting dynamic shadows, so the main benefit of capturing small objects dynamic shadows (like grass) isn't applicable here.
I got most of them wrong, lol! I just looked for which one looked more realistic to me.
4 years ago I would say: it's impossible to notice the difference. After 4 years, playing multiple RT games, I can definitely notice the difference and all my guesses in this video of whether it was rt on or off were right. I definitely prefer RT, mainly playing in an OLED screen, it seems they were made for each other. The shadows and ambient occlusion works much better with RT. And as to the reflections, RT is way superior in terms of being faithful to the image. Everytime i llay a full rasterized game nowadays I see how much better it could be if it was RT.
I definitely noticed the difference when playing on my OLED TV but struggle to notice much of a difference on my monitor unless they are side by side.
I play many games Cyberpunk, Witcher, Red Death 2 using Samsung Odyssey G9, rtx3080 at 1440p. Ray tracing is suck, it make the shadow darker but I prefer lighter shadow. Imagine taking picture of someone under strong light, probably you have to adjust the shadow lighter to see thing under shadow. Also looking into the small water drop and see the whole building behind, that's not realistic. Ray tracing is a scam, it's a lie, it makes things look worse and take away your GPU raw power, I played with Ray tracing on for couple days, and have to turn off for all of them, RT off is better
@@TbearMuhahah Ray tracing is not about making it "beautiful". It's all about realism, it's the way to go if we want to have more realistic games in the future. A dark place is a dark place, a place without light is dark as hell, and such things are only reproducible with ray tracing. A reflection exists even if you are not looking at the object in real life as well, again, only possible with RT.
I agree with you, visually RT is not beautiful in many games, but it's the closest to "real" simulation of light that we could reach so far, mainly with path tracing.
And as for reflections, they tend to exaggerate the water reflections. However we are surrounded by many reflection surfaces everywhere, but at this point you probably never paid attention to such details around you. In my home even the kitchen cabinets have reflections.
@@TbearMuhahah you could bake the shadows and colors in a game to look realistic (not the reflections) as it's done in many games so far. But it takes a lot of development time, and the result is still artificial. So RT also speeds up development time as it's already included on DirectX API. In a full RT game, you actually don't need to bake anything, just need to work with the light sources and materials. Now with AI + RT, game development becomes way easier than 10 years ago...
@@Vecchete When they showcase their tech they say it makes things more beautiful, I don't feel that and see that in my game. You say it's more realistic, and your kitchen has lots of reflection. What is it? Your shiny spoon and cup reflect the whole kitchen? You tell me you can see your kitchen reflection and I don't notice it? Create light source and then make rasterized shadow objects based on it is a method used by developers for a long time. Now with Ray Tracing your GPU create a light source and carry it with you all the time and generate object shadow based on it. Developers thank you for that, they do less work, more work for your GPU. A lot of good optimized games you totally don't need Ray Tracing, turn it on mean create your own light source, it's costly heavy and the visual is the same.
The answer.... maybe, depending on the game, but most of the time not worth it since enabling upscaling and fake frame tricks to get the games to a halfway decent framerate often have their own detrimental effects. Let's see if I'm right!
Yup, only game I see as really worth it is CP2077 with path tracing (since RT isn't ALWAYS better in CP2077 than default lighting), but I don't want to shell out $1,600+ for a GPU and then also have to use DLSS2 and 3. I also wonder how many of these games actually call it the Nvidia branded term 'RTX' and how many use the actual 'Ray Tracing' in the menus. RTX is basically the new 'Band-Aid', where many people call bandages 'Band-Aids' due to marketing, like in this video.
It's very easy to tell when you know what to look for and the implementation in the game. I got each one correct.
As a tech demonstration, rtx is great, but for gaming, give me consistent framerates as i am not looking at how beautiful the reflections are when I'm trying to actually perform the fun parts of the game.
for god sakes stop saying RTX on & RTX off. RTX is NVIDIA BRANDING, its their branding for raytracing supported cards. Just call it raytracing not RTX.
For Witcher 3, the RTX difference is generally indoors.
RTX is an eyecandy for me, it's fun but at a cost, yet still it would be nice to have on a very powerful gpu..
RT on in cyberpunk = looks like it just rained, everything is overly reflective, its annoying tbh
U clearly never seen the game with path tracing so u are bsing urself. Keep telling urself that
disagree with witcher 3, the out of city areas look MUCH better with RTX on. The RTX shadows probably make the biggest difference on grass/foliage especially at a distance.
W3 looks absolute breath taking with RT, problem is it still massively immersion breaking bugs and even worse they seem to have stopped supporting the game as the last patch was about 6 months ago😢
The example he used in this video was not a legit comparison. Like literally that was rtx on vs on. Water reflections with rtx on and off is literally night and die. Bullshit vid to craft the narrative that ray tracing doesn’t look considerably better which is an absolute lie. Being worth the fps cost is another issue entirely
imma be honest, i couldn't tell the difference in almost all of these, the only one i could guess right was the one with the scope, because the non rt one didn't have anything reflecting but i'm pretty sure that if i hadn't seen this same video idea from linus tech tips just a couple minutes ago, i wouldn't even have looked out for that detail and wouldn't be able to tell the difference. as of now, this tech ain't all that, nvidia is just using this as marketing to scam goofy nerds into buying their inferior small pp vram gpus at ridiculously high prices.
Toms Tech Table : RTX is simply too buggy to be justified and very subjectively better at best....in most of the cases is worse than rasterizing because it makes too much contrast in colors and causes shadows to be incorrectly drawn as well as texture tearing.
it doesn't worth it due to the high FPS drop. In the other hand, what it does worth is DLSS 3 and frame generation.
Futility. I don't even play games on ultra settings. Ray Tracing is just marketing and a loss of 30-50% of game performance.
yep your completly right. It is alsways the same , every now and then nvidia comes out with a technology, which should be a "lifechanging" graphics improvement. First Advanced Physics, Tesselation, HBAO+ , Godrays , Hairworks, TXAA , Softshadows and now RT . Its rediculous
Far cry 1 has a raytracing. Land reflection. It is a demo level of ray tracing as always.
id buy rtx if theyr at same price
No one would play the game frame by frame.
Graphic details, scence design, resolution, effects, fluency is much more than ray tracing.
First of all difference or not, baking lighting takes time away from devs, with rt you can have better lighting faster, this shouldn't even be a question
RTX off was better in all the comparisons except for COD.
Biggest difference can be seen in motion. Raytraced shadows don't shimmer and aren't blocky. Then you have no weird artifacts on reflections and halo effect with ambient occlusion.
It's a big upgrade when you actually play with it. If gpu can run it at 60fps, i'll leave it on. Frame gen is amazing, you don't even notice you're playing at 30fps, completely usable with cyberpunk and pathtracing on 4070Ti.
jesus... well that just made me AMD from Nvidia..... RTX on not worth the extra £s or the loss in frames for me. thanks for the video
Good luck with the drivers crashes and artifacts
@@jaytay420 drivers are fine on my ROG Ally…..
In 4k resolation..4090 is even can not handle 60 fps when rtx on on most of the games..with dlss help it reaches but graphic look shitty when dlss is on..so for rtx gpus are not ready at 4k..other hand you lose -%50 fps when rtx is on..and it doesnt change so much..so its so lame..you sell gpu which cannot handle rtx..😂😅😅 nvidia = scam people
4090 can handle 4k native with raytracing on in plenty of games like Jedi Survivor, Dead space remake, Avatar frontiers of pandora. And dlss quality at 4k looks indistinguishable and sometimes even better than native 4k. 4k performance dlss also looks great better than native 1440p. Dlss only looks noticeably worse than native when balanced/performance mode is used at lower resolutions like 1080p, 1440p. People who extensively use dlss like zwormz gaming and myself have a better idea than you, so spare me that nonsense that you wrote dude.
And at 4k even with raytracing off, even high end GPUs have to use upscaling to reach 60fps and amd users are forced to use fsr which is inferior to dlss, that's how demanding 2023 triple A games are.
@@dhaumya23gango75 The Dlss is Nvidia's best feature.
@@dhaumya23gango75 how does upscaling from 1440p to 4k look better than native 4k resolution? and who buys a 4090 to use upscaling???? are people that desperate for extra fps?
@@rehaanally9952 I am pretty darn sure you haven't used DLSS ever. I could go on elaborating on this but it will be like I am speaking to a wall, not ready to waste my energy. You do you.
None of them were right💀
Elden Ring has the shittiest implementation of RTX.
Next time in Witcher 3 move the camera up and down and SSR brakes… And my answer of course I can tell the difference I play games with RT on since I had my RTX 3090 and now my RTX 4080. Worth the frame rate cost. If I play competitive titles I don’t care because I want to push out hundreds of fps so I turn down graphics but in single player games, no brainer to turn on much higher fidelity.
Couldn't care less about RTX, just another gimmick from Nvidia to try and justify the absurd pricing of their underwhelming cards. Honestly, all I want is more VRAM and better clock speeds. Despite having a now outdated card, still able to play most games with everything on high/medium and all the RT garbage disabled (if temperatures stay in check that is), and honestly, looks fine to me. RT isn't worth the performance cost compared to the charging price, and besides, most games these days run like arse for everyone from their 4090s down to GTX cards. RT just amplifies that issue even more.
If anything, I think even NVidia underestimated the amount of power that is required to run anything other than rasterization in real-time. Ray tracing made a lot of things worse, but if you think RT is bad, wait till you see what true Path-tracing can do to your rig. But RT made things looks worse, especially things like transparency, it used to render smooth, now it looks noisy, character hair is especially looks garbage in games these days.
Only thing I hate more than RT is screen space reflections and Ambient occlusion.
You didn’t play games on your PC with Ray Tracing I’m 100% sure.
I was playing resident 4 remake in a rtx 4090, i couldn't see the difference. That why I came to this video. In my opinion, it doesn't worth it.
@@sherman1989 Worst example. RE4 has only reflections and they look bad. Try Cyberpunk 2077 Path Tracing or Alan Wake II with Path Tracing. Ratchet and Clank looks amazing with RT too such as Dying Light 2 and Witcher 3 remastered basically every game which implemented not just some low quality shadows but RT Global Illumination and RT Ambient Occlusion with higher ray count.
@@sherman1989resident evil games usually AMD sponsored. they put very limited RT so it did not tank their performance too much. In RE village for example reflection resolution was rendered at 1/8 of base resolution. Dying Light 2 also look much better with RT. with RT off the game look just like any other games out there but with RT on it looks much more pleasant on the eyes...at least for me but the kind of performance hit was crazy haha. As times goes by developer will be able to take advantage RT better and make some graphical effect that is not possible with raster possible similar to FP16 vs FP32 before.
@@sherman1989re4 is the worst example of RT in games. Play something like portal or cyberpunk you'll have second thoughts on what you just wrote.
Ray tracing is the worse!!!