Ray tracing as we think of it now came about in 1979 and it seems like every since then you've had poorly educated CS students go about how it is O(log n) and thus is the One True Way. It isn't like they added the feature and noted it was new and talked about possible applications for high end computation (as they did when they first added FP64), no they went on about how amazin' it would be for games and all that.Īlso you have to understand some skepticism from people when it comes to ray tracing as we have been hearing about it for a loooooong time.
They also hyped it hard, and continue to hype it. Now I fully realise that it wasn't a causal thing like "raytracing happened so price jumped" but nVidia certainly tries to use it as a selling point to justify the higher price. The issue is that they aren't right now, and I think many people are a little miffed at the price hike for what is more or less a useless feature at this point. but not eye-popping difference.Īnd that's fine, when they are powerful enough to be useful in 5-10 years. Like with first shader GPUs (DX8 era) we can expect few effects here and there, improved dynamic lighting, etc.
#Metro exodus ray tracing full
Reflections can also be for the most part done without RT as many games have done for many years, even before shaders were a thing.ĭoes this mean RT is dead end? Absolutely no!Īs a consumer technology hardware accelerated RT is new thing and obviously Nvidia did not went full batshit crazy with it. It is hard to expect that much of a difference on static maps on which they already did static light baking.Īnd even then many of dynamic global illumination effects that ray-tracing can do can also be approximated with rasterization methods which do not require RTX hardware like eg. It is more like dynamic lighting baking and it is not even done fully. It does not implement reflections or any other fancy effects and because of rather monochrome graphical themes it is hard to spot global illumination at work. This game even with RTX ON is still mostly rasterized game and ray-tracing is mostly helping to improve global illumination a little. In Metro Exodus ray-tracing does make lighting more consistent and in some places fixes shadows and removes fake SSAO shadows in places light position suggest there should be no shadows. Here is the one scene I found that made a sizable difference: That room had a fairly sizable difference, but nothing else I saw switching back and forth at my random intervals made the game any better or any more realistic - subjectively. It was a room with a small window and shreds of curtain in the way. So I spent the next half hour turning ray tracing on and off (all settings at extreme, and Raytracing to Ultra) and finally found one room that made a difference. In this techspot reviews screenshots I can't even tell the difference. So I looked it up to learn if I should be able to tell the difference? I mean I heard it was subtle, but I couldn't tell any difference at all. I mean Vermantide 2 looked as good or better for instance and that doesn't have Ray Tracing.Īnyway - turned off Ray Tracing while turning a desk lamp on and off and low and behold. I turned on DLS and Ray Tracing and though this looks good - but not sure it's necessarily next gen looking.
#Metro exodus ray tracing Pc
I tried Metro 2033 Exodus on the Xbox PC Pass Beta Subscription service. I loaded up the RTX benchmarks in FutureMark - double Meh.doesn't look any better than anything else they show in their benchmarks and runs even slower. I've downloaded the Star Wars Ray Tracing demo, since you can't interact with it, and it's capped at 24 frames per second - it might as well just be pre-recorded FMV game video - how could I tell the difference? Meh. I swapped out a 1080TI for a 2080 in a pretty lateral move so I could experience Ray Tracing.
0 kommentar(er)
