RTX already dead same as physx

>RTX already dead same as physx

What went wrong?

Attached: 213125326.jpg (1280x720, 118.06K)

The Can't-Soles use AMD hardware, which is too weak to do ray-tracing.

>RTX off
>144fps
>RTX On
>30fps for slightly better reflections unless you downgrade the resolution with DLSS

Everyone turns that shit off

DLSS is pretty good if used for quality, it's superior to FXAA. That's what it was meant to compete with when it was released after all so that's a win for nvidia

Incredibly taxing for bullshit. Video games are illusions. Devs should be creative in how they recreate reality or imaginary worlds. RTX is a cop out.

I think RTX will eventually become good and stay, but you'll see it for art and graphic designers who would benefit from RTX, but not for gaming.

>using lighting that is literally real is a copout

lmao, cringe

Gimmickvidia dumped millions into developing a pointless technology that not only raises the production cost of cards but makes them worse if that tech is used in games. There was no reason for RTX to ever exist to begin with and all those super efficient emulated reflections that have existed since forever were there because people were well aware of the lack of feasibility of realtime ray tracing.

DLSS still looks worse than native resolution. It introduces ghosting and shimmering in motion. Screenshots don't tell the whole story and YouTube compresses videos so much that it blurs the artifacting. Anyone with actual eyes will prefer native over DLSS.

only cardlets

But it's not real, it's software. "Real" time light can be created if you're smart enough. Shadows are more important. PERFORMANCE is more important.

left looks better

>"Gimmick"
>AMD supports it (And thus consoles)
>Intel will support it
It's like calling GPU acceleration a gimmick. It's not a gimmick when everyone does it.

Speaking of physics are there any software tech demos of what computers are capable of now? I remember playing around with that game where you could spawn the ball when physics were first starting to get interesting.

It will take a long time for it to become standard.

>What went wrong?
nothing, it's fine.
People who have some spare fps can optionally use it making to make games look better and then offset some of the fps hit with DLSS. The only people who think this is bad are people who can't.

Dev's have gotten pretty good at faking it with better performance. Most people don't even notice when it's not accurate. It'll definitely help speed up work on the production side in terms of previewing.

'Realistic' lighting can often look a little boring.

Attached: file.png (1280x720, 768.77K)

not sure what that image is meant to prove as both look shit

There's nothing else left most gamer's won't be able too tell movies from games by 2030.
And then we can focus on important stuff.

>rtx hate thread again

cardlets really don't know how much better it is and I love watching them seethe. This tech is the biggest leap visually since 2003-4 era bump mapping.

cope and seethe poors

It was just to sell you this last gen of cards. Don't worry there'll be some dumb new hype next round.

closed source
All of NVIDIkike'sclosed source shit flops.
PhysX only gained traction when they started running it on CPU's. It's going to be AMD that will standardize ray tracing, just like how they standardized freesync, fidelityFX and helped develop Vulkan and DX12.

Probably has something to do with how it completely kills your performance when you turn it on unless you have a $1700 card tbqh

>It's not a gimmick when everyone does it.
What kind of retarded logic is this

Ray tracing is dead and they've already shifted focus to DLSS since people actually use that.

>barely adds anything
>tanks performance
It's Hairworks all over again.