Battlefield V with GeForce RTX DirectX Raytracing

[lexluthermiester]

Game also looks beautiful without it.

Not quite as beautiful.

Or are you saying 'let's turn off AA on 1080p so I can look at a glass pane'

No, I'm saying let's turn it off because it's not needed. But I also game at 1440p which really doesn't need AA. Pixel density is just to high to justify the need for it.

I haven't used AA in games in almost a decade.

 

[Gasaraki]

"DirectX 12, a rendering mode that experiences some stuttering in Battlefield 5, something that was present even in BF1, and that the developer has been unable to completely fix."

Why bother DICE? If you can't do it properly don't do it at all.

 

[Steevo]

Uhhh ohh, those reflections are wrong, very wrong, perhaps the timing of calculating Ray's is taking place before the scene is fully rendered to mask the latency.

Perhaps W1zz could record some video that we could look at, both RTX on and off to see if other areas are affected.

Check out the last 2 screens showing on page 2: how is it possible that You can see a reflection of a building that is behind the train cart perpendicular to it's windows?

Old Unreal on Glide/D3D had better reflections, and that was 1998!

 

[cellar door]

@W1zzard - what about the power consumption? What happens to the clocks when you all of a sudden engage the RTX cores on the card.

 

[z1tu]

Check out the last 2 screens showing on page 2: how is it possible that You can see a reflection of a building that is behind the train cart perpendicular to it's windows?

Old Unreal on Glide/D3D had better reflections, and that was 1998!

I think they're trying to reflect the other building but still seems kind of wrong.

 

[Robcostyle]

Wait. 4real, those RTX should be rendered by dedicated cores. So why frame drop? It looks like overall chip's fault.
I mean, increased latencty, framtime, freezes because RT cores are way back from cuda's - yeah.
Seems like thos RT cores are integrated in the whole structure even more than I thought.

IMHO, Anyway, I've seen enough tests for Nvidia RT via other resources - results are even worse - and I'm not buying it. The whole pack of cards is just rubbish, even 2080 ti doesn't fully serves to my needs. It is sillt decent 60 fps in 1440p, but hey - I have 144hz screen, and this card? For 1500$? ROFL

 

[rtwjunkie]

Not quite as beautiful.

No, I'm saying let's turn it off because it's not needed. But I also game at 1440p which really doesn't need AA. Pixel density is just to high to justify the need for it.

I haven't used AA in games in almost a decade.

Except you really seem to have missed the dismal FPS on 1440 with RTX on. This necessitates the playing at 1080p, where AA is actually needed. So there you go, you would have to use it for the first time in years.

 

[EarthDog]

@W1zzard

Did I also miss in this performance review, how exactly this was benchmarked (process/scene)? I asked a couple days ago in the other thread, but didn't receive an answer there either.

Any information would be helpful. You may also want to consider listing this on all performance reviews if they do not have an integrated benchmark. Finding settings and methods here are incredibly difficult (for me - anyone else?).

 

[荷兰大母猪]

Currently I have RTX 2080 Ti SLI now but I found that when I enable DX12, this game won’t support SLI. I want to know is there any chance that in the future this game will be SLI supported when enable DX12?

 

[unikin]

We need GPUs that can deliver much higher framerates at 4K if we want to see progress in VR. Eye tracking and foveated rendering will take few more years to implement so we need NVidia and AMD to fill the gap in between by increasing rasterizing performance of GPUs. Moving to 7nm dies and doubling stream Processors/cuda cores would do the trick, We would get 50-60 % more performance compared to todays GPUs. Combined with good reprojection probably enough to drive 4K per eye resolution at comfortable refresh rates, maybe even higher. I'd gladly pay $1.300 for such GPU.

 

[INSTG8R]

Currently I have RTX 2080 Ti SLI now but I found that when I enable DX12, this game won’t support SLI. I want to know is there any chance that in the future this game will be SLI supported when enable DX12?

It’s apparently coming but I only know that as rumour. Apparently you can use the BF1 Profile.

 

[Prince Valiant]

Well, the $1200 2080 Ti can at least clear 65fps at 1080p, so the game will still run nice and smooth for a 60Hz vsync lock for the most part.

Driver and game optimisations might improve on this somewhat, but I still think it's worth waiting for the next gen card if RTX is your primary feature. I don't think $1200 for this performance is quite good enough though, hence the wait recommendation.

Doubtful it'll make enough of a difference to push it into acceptable performance. Looks alright on ultra if you ignore the errors (noise?) but the performance hit is nuts.

 

[MAXLD]

Ironic, over the years they spent countless time to make game graphics / details look "less perfect" / "more realistic" with the use (and obnoxious abuse) of things like:
- Blur
- Lens flare
- Chromatic aberration
- Depth of field
- all kinds of fog
etc...
Now, behold, RTX / RT. The cards / technology that makes the typical C.S.I. TV show's reflection "enhancements" look like stone age stuff. Everything strangely reflects perfectly like a mirror (even in the middle of a warzone).
"And it could be yours, for just 59.99% less performance, call now".

Tbh, all this is not just something to make these RTX 2000 cards look appealing... it's more something to make the 2000 series look like absolute crap when the 3000 arrives and stumps that shameful performance to the curb.
"- The brand new RTX 3000 series, now "up to" double the RT performance! (aka, actually only with 40~50% fps penalty instead of 50~60)
- Oooooh, sht, pre-order!"

Y, sure. The tech is not ready to be viable on current hardware, and considering AMD can't put up a fight on the top tier for the time being, they made another "2 in 1" strategy move (kind of a "praise now to slam later"):
- 1st: try sell the 2000 cards, marketing the RTX as the revolutionary bandwagon you have to be in right now, and you're missing out if you don't buy one
- 2nd: make you look like a tool, when they come up with the new 3000 one that inevitably improves RT performance to a certain degree... one that tries to make you feel like it's enough to justify the swap.
In the end, the performance hit is still nowhere near worth the actual visual benefits, but hey... new card... look at it, it's better... gotta buy that now.

I'm all up for new tech advancements, obviously, and RT will be the standard one day, but there's still a long way to go. nVidia just wanted to brag about it / cash in (very) early. Which is not unexpected, though.

 

[TheGuruStud]

Check out the last 2 screens showing on page 2: how is it possible that You can see a reflection of a building that is behind the train cart perpendicular to it's windows?

Old Unreal on Glide/D3D had better reflections, and that was 1998!

Opengl, especially. But then microlosers killed it. Direct X looked like you smeared shit on window and tried looking through it (check out the vids on youtube, I remember it vividly from playing).

 

[mouacyk]

Check out the last 2 screens showing on page 2: how is it possible that You can see a reflection of a building that is behind the train cart perpendicular to it's windows?

Old Unreal on Glide/D3D had better reflections, and that was 1998!

Because they weren't doing tricks in 1998 -- it was a completely different render pass, once the view matrix was transformed to align with the reflection.

And in 1996, Duke actually had a clone of himself and the entire bathroom behind the "mirror". The clone moved with a slight lagg.

 

[John Naylor]

It would seem the comments pretty much line up with whatever preconceived notions existed before it came out. Could easily have said the same about 4k as even a 1080 Ti struggles to maintain fps that justify having a $2500 144 hz IPS screen .... just not there yet. OTOH, it's a very good time with respect to this.

I just picked Witcher 3 as an example, I'm sure other games will do worse and some other games will do better. But Vega 64 is only 48% as fast as the 2080 Ti. So... in other words....the best nVidia has to offer **with everything RTX turned on** is going to be about as fast as the best that AMD can offer... so from that standpoint, it's genius. Sure, the Devs have a long way to go in implementing their game code, nVidia has a long way to go in tweaking their drivers but as with any "new thang" this will occur over time. If there's no card to display it, then there's little incentive to code it into the game and no progress will be made.

Of course there's the price issue ...the 2080s are now the same $700 price that top tier cards have averaged since the year 2000. We know that the stock of 10xx cards is still significant so that price premium over the typical xx80 will remain at least till that is gone and production lines for 20xx cards can begin to meet demand. We see this every new generation, albeit to lesser extent because of unique conditions now (0 competition in top 4 tiers, overabundance of last gen cards in pipeline and , usual low initial yields). We also have the fact that the Ti usually doesn't arrive until 6 months or more after the xx80; all nVidia is doing here, is why don't we get some cash for these cards that pass while we are tweaking the line to improve yields ? If you are too impatient to wait until price stabilize, there's only 1 person to blame.

I won't speak to what makes sense today for the reason's above ... but I do expect that prices will drop to close to "usual" level, adjusted for inflation and yes, it does have extra capability. I will consider the 2080s a recommended buy when they hit $650 / $680-$690 for the AIBs. The Ti is going to have to get to $750 / $780-$799 before I can recommend it... which i don't expect will happen till May.

So given that the 2080 Ti is more than twice as fast as anything from AMD, other than price, what's there to whine **if you turn on RTX and get the same performance as a Vega 64 ?? Ya have a game where your system will be below 60 fps, leave it off, your twice as fast as Vega 64 ... you have a game at 140 fps, turn it ON and enjoy a better visual experience at the same speed as Vega 64. Sure the 2080 Ti is ridiculously priced ... why ?.... because they can. People are buying them up faster than hey can make them. The 2080 has MSRP of $700, normally we see AIB cards for $20-$40 more but as long as they sell faster than they can be built, vendors will of course take what they can get.

My B-I-L has a food truck he brings to county fairs and stuff. Stocking up, he fills up all his cabinets and refrigeration with food, selling his sammies for $5 each ... he runs outta food by 1 pm. Next time he tries $6 and goes home at 3 pm. Next time he tries $7 and he runs out 15 minutes before closing time.... So he charges $7 and will continue to do so until he finds food left over at the end of the day. Don't blame nVidia for what they are required to do by law... maximize the return to stockholders; blame the people who are causing new stock to be sold within 48 hours after arrival. When yields improve, and the "I gotta be 1st on my block to have one" / "Money doesn't matter" crowd's demand is filled, prices will drop.... as they always have.

The whining here is the same as we saw witht PhyX ... "not all games support it" ... so what ? I don't turn my AC on in the car most of the time, but it's damn nice on those hot summer days and it's needed. Who walks into a car dealership and says "So, you're saying that the car I want, with AC, is the exact same price as the one without it.... is that right ? Well that's stoopid, I only use the AC maybe 120 days a year or 33% of the time, so why would I want a feature I can't use 100% of the time ?

 

[Easy Rhino]

This is amazing tech. Haters gonna hate.

 

[B-Real]

Well, the $1200 2080 Ti can at least clear 65fps at 1080p, so the game will still run nice and smooth for a 60Hz vsync lock for the most part.

Driver and game optimisations might improve on this somewhat, but I still think it's worth waiting for the next gen card if RTX is your primary feature. I don't think $1200 for this performance is quite good enough though, hence the wait recommendation.

"at least" 60 fps in FHD for a 1200$ card in a game that is one of the most optimized ones on the market. What a joke this is.

It would seem the comments pretty much line up with whatever preconceived n0tions existed before it came out. Could easily have said the same about 4k as even a 1080 Ti struggles to maintain fps that justify having a $2500 144 hz IPS screen .... just not there yet. OTOH, it's a very good time with respect to this.

I just picked Witcher 3 as an example, I'm sure other games will do worse and some other games will do better. But Vega 64 is only 48% as fast as the 2080 Ti. So... in other words....the best nVidia has to offer **with everything RTX turned on** is going to be about as fast as the best that AMD can offer... so from that standpoint, it's genius. Sure, the Devs have a long way to go in implemeneting their game code, nVidia has a long way to go in tweaking their drivers but as with any "new thang" this will occur over time. If there;s no card to display it, then there's little incentive to code it into the game and no progress will be made.

Of course there's the price issue ...the 2080s are now the same $700 price that top tier cards have averaged since the year 2000. We know that the stock of 10xx cards is still significance so that price premium over the typical xx80 will reman at least till that is gone and production lines for 20xx cards can begin to meet demand. We see this evey new generation, albeit to lesser extent because of unique conditions now (0 competition in top 4 tiers, overabundance of last gen cards in pipeline and , usual low initial yields). We also have the fact vthat the Ti usually doesn't arrive until 6 months or more after the xx80; all nVidia is ding here, is why don't we get some cash for these cards that pass while we are tweaking the line to improve yields ? If you are too impatient to wait until price stabilize, there's only 1 person to blame.

I won't speak to what makes sense today for the reason's above ... but I do expect that proces will drop to close to "usual" level, adjusted for inflation and yes, it does have extra capability. I will consider the 2080s a recommended buy when they hit $650 / $680-$690 for the AIBs. The Ti is going to have to get to $750 / $780-$799 before I can recommend it... which i don't expect will happen till May.


So given that the 2080 Ti is more than twice as fast as anything from AMD, other than price, what's there to whine **if you turn pon RTX and get the same performance as a Vega 64 ?? Ya have game where your system will be below 60 fps, leave it off, your twice as fast as Vega 64 ... you have a game at 140 fps, turn it ON and enjoy a better visual experience at the same speed as Vega 64. Sure the 2080 Ti is ridiculously priced ... why ?.... because they can. People are buying them up faster than hey can make them. The 2080 has MSRP of $700, normally we see AIB cards for $20-$40 more but as long as they sell faster than they can be built, vendors will of course take what they can get. My B-I-L has a food truck he brings to county fairs and stuff. Stocking up, he fills up all his cabinets and refrigeration with food, seeling his sammies for $5 each ... he runs outta food by 1 pm. Next time he tries $6 and goes home at 3 pm. Next time he tries $7 and he runs out 15 minutes before closing time.... So he charges $7 and will continue to do so until he finds food left over at the end of the day. Don't blame nVidia for what they are required to do by law... maximize the return to stockholders; blame the people who are causing new stock to be sold within 48 hours after arrival. When yields improve, and the "I gotta be 1st on my block to have one" / "Money doesn't matter" crowd's demand is filled, prices will drop.

The whining here is the same as we saw witht PhyX ... "not all games support it" ... so what ? I don't turn my AC on in the car most of the time, but it's damn nice on those hot summer days and it's needed. Who walks into a car dealership and says "So, you're saying that the car I want, with AC, is the exact same price as the one without it.... is that right ? Well that's stoopid, I only use the AC maybe 120 days a year or 33% of the time, so why would I want a feature i can't use 100% of the time ?

Nope. This is not genius even from the performance standpoint.

This is amazing tech. Haters gonna hate.

Yes, for sure.

 

[R0H1T]

It would seem the comments pretty much line up with whatever preconceived n0tions existed before it came out. Could easily have said the same about 4k as even a 1080 Ti struggles to maintain fps that justify having a $2500 144 hz IPS screen .... just not there yet. OTOH, it's a very good time with respect to this.

I just picked Witcher 3 as an example, I'm sure other games will do worse and some other games will do better. But Vega 64 is only 48% as fast as the 2080 Ti. So... in other words....the best nVidia has to offer **with everything RTX turned on** is going to be about as fast as the best that AMD can offer... so from that standpoint, it's genius. Sure, the Devs have a long way to go in implemeneting their game code, nVidia has a long way to go in tweaking their drivers but as with any "new thang" this will occur over time. If there;s no card to display it, then there's little incentive to code it into the game and no progress will be made.

Of course there's the price issue ...the 2080s are now the same $700 price that top tier cards have averaged since the year 2000. We know that the stock of 10xx cards is still significance so that price premium over the typical xx80 will reman at least till that is gone and production lines for 20xx cards can begin to meet demand. We see this evey new generation, albeit to lesser extent because of unique conditions now (0 competition in top 4 tiers, overabundance of last gen cards in pipeline and , usual low initial yields). We also have the fact vthat the Ti usually doesn't arrive until 6 months or more after the xx80; all nVidia is ding here, is why don't we get some cash for these cards that pass while we are tweaking the line to improve yields ? If you are too impatient to wait until price stabilize, there's only 1 person to blame.

I won't speak to what makes sense today for the reason's above ... but I do expect that proces will drop to close to "usual" level, adjusted for inflation and yes, it does have extra capability. I will consider the 2080s a recommended buy when they hit $650 / $680-$690 for the AIBs. The Ti is going to have to get to $750 / $780-$799 before I can recommend it... which i don't expect will happen till May.


So given that the 2080 Ti is more than twice as fast as anything from AMD, other than price, what's there to whine **if you turn pon RTX and get the same performance as a Vega 64 ?? Ya have game where your system will be below 60 fps, leave it off, your twice as fast as Vega 64 ... you have a game at 140 fps, turn it ON and enjoy a better visual experience at the same speed as Vega 64. Sure the 2080 Ti is ridiculously priced ... why ?.... because they can. People are buying them up faster than hey can make them. The 2080 has MSRP of $700, normally we see AIB cards for $20-$40 more but as long as they sell faster than they can be built, vendors will of course take what they can get. My B-I-L has a food truck he brings to county fairs and stuff. Stocking up, he fills up all his cabinets and refrigeration with food, seeling his sammies for $5 each ... he runs outta food by 1 pm. Next time he tries $6 and goes home at 3 pm. Next time he tries $7 and he runs out 15 minutes before closing time.... So he charges $7 and will continue to do so until he finds food left over at the end of the day. Don't blame nVidia for what they are required to do by law... maximize the return to stockholders; blame the people who are causing new stock to be sold within 48 hours after arrival. When yields improve, and the "I gotta be 1st on my block to have one" / "Money doesn't matter" crowd's demand is filled, prices will drop.

The whining here is the same as we saw witht PhyX ... "not all games support it" ... so what ? I don't turn my AC on in the car most of the time, but it's damn nice on those hot summer days and it's needed. Who walks into a car dealership and says "So, you're saying that the car I want, with AC, is the exact same price as the one without it.... is that right ? Well that's stoopid, I only use the AC maybe 120 days a year or 33% of the time, so why would I want a feature i can't use 100% of the time ?

I don't think it'll happen, ever. This is why I'd also say that the RTX cards may have changed the GPU landscape forever, at least price wise.

 

[Easy Rhino]

people really don't understand how computationally expensive ray tracing is...

 

[Franzen4Real]

@W1zzard What's going on with the 2080ti med/high/ultra fps? They are all within a couple frames difference at any res. If we were viewing conventionally rendered games, we would see this as a CPU bottleneck starting at medium settings.

 

[INSTG8R]

people really don't understand how computationally expensive ray tracing is...

Of course but Turing isn’t up to it in any meaningful way. Hopefully Turing 2 will be able double the performance marking usable feature while maintaining better performance. I’m curious when they allow SLI if they’ll allow DXR on both cards as well and we might see something close to reasonable performance.

 

[Easy Rhino]

Of course but Turing isn’t up to it in any meaningful way. Hopefully Turing 2 will be able double the performance marking usable feature while maintaining better performance. I’m curious when they allow SLI if they’ll allow DXR on both cards as well and we might see something close to reasonable performance.

Seems okay to me. If you think it is too expensive given the performance then the card clearly isn't for you.

 

[INSTG8R]

Seems okay to me. If you think it is too expensive given the performance then the card clearly isn't for you.

Not at all about price it’s about diminishing returns 2080Ti performance becomes 1060 performance just to achieve it. it’s not for anyone unless they like dumbing down there Resolution and FPS on a Flaghship card that can easily do 4K
Would you play at 1024 or 720 on your 970 just for this feature?

 

[mouacyk]

Seems okay to me. If you think it is too expensive given the performance then the card clearly isn't for you.

Right. So where's the card with +50% raster performance over 1080 TI and costs $650? 4K@120Hz are out and will need every ounce of raster performance it can muster. Call it a stretch, but NVidia delayed BFGD in order to push RTX (out of nowhere.)