Call of Duty Modern Warfare Benchmark Test, RTX & Performance Analysis

[Fluffmeister]

Looks like a nice game, and it certainly looks pretty! And with good performance across the board.

The fact you can currently get it free with an RTX card purchase is a bonus.

 

[moob]

It's amazing how people put on their special 'bias' vision (either shade) and spout a whole heap of crap. The RT is very good; it's subtle but you get solidity. RT does not affect the 'blurryness'. That's those 'bias' spectacles folk have on. Likewise, it's not a killer effect, not yet. Certainly not something that will ruin the game for AMD. Jeez, peeps, go and get frenzied over a sporting conflict instead.

Yes. It does. I didn't even pay much attention to it when I first saw the comparison and I mostly just focused on the improved shadows, but after W1zz posted those larger images, it's clearly blurrier. Switching between the larger RTX On/Off images while focusing on the guy crouching at the door is literally making my eyes hurt because of how much blurrier it is, though granted I'm somewhat sensitive to that.

 

[candle_86]

This is the first time an x60 SKU managed to match performance with an x80 TI of the previous gen. 960 was 50% behind 780 Ti and 1060 was 30% behind the 980 Ti. It was about time for the intersection to happen. It's probably time for the x80 Ti SKU to die.

Not quite if we take ti = ultra


Ti 4200 = Ti 500
6600gt = fx5959 Ultra
7600gt = 6800 Ultra

It used to happen, it all went bad with the 8600gts loosing to the 7900gx2, the 9600gt lost to the 8800 ultra, the gtx 260 lost to the 9800gx2, ect

We all just forgot that it used to be last year's $500 card could now be matched or beat by the $200 card from the next generation.

 

[the54thvoid]

Yes. It does. I didn't even pay much attention to it when I first saw the comparison and I mostly just focused on the improved shadows, but after W1zz posted those larger images, it's clearly blurrier. Switching between the larger RTX On/Off images while focusing on the guy crouching at the door is literally making my eyes hurt because of how much blurrier it is, though granted I'm somewhat sensitive to that.

You know what? I'll give you that - you're right. But I think there is a valid procedural reason. The sharper image is false. RT will apply light as it illuminates a surface. Try looking at something that is not under direct illumination- it is always less distinct. By using RT, it's likely the detail you would see artificially, is being smoothed out. It's all covered by Marr's theory of vision, where shapes are derived first and detail follows. In the correct lighting scenario's, detail will always be lost in low (or indirect) light.

But yes, you are correct - RT will create areas of less defined detail. Which is realistic.

 

[moob]

You know what? I'll give you that - you're right. But I think there is a valid procedural reason. The sharper image is false. RT will apply light as it illuminates a surface. Try looking at something that is not under direct illumination- it is always less distinct. By using RT, it's likely the detail you would see artificially, is being smoothed out. It's all covered by Marr's theory of vision, where shapes are derived first and detail follows. In the correct lighting scenario's, detail will always be lost in low (or indirect) light.

But yes, you are correct - RT will create areas of less defined detail. Which is realistic.

Motion Blur is supposedly more "realistic" as well yet it's the first option I turn off when I jump into a new game. I'd take the "false" image with the sharper details and worse shadows over the "real" image with better shadows any day. Or better yet, a combination of both with the better RT shadows with the clearer non-RT image.

 

[Chrispy_]

Hmm... the only note worthy difference I can see is that softshadows and a good ambient occlusion implementation go out the window wherever that magical RTX Logo appears.

Also with DLSS enabled it's enhanced vaseline graphics.

Yeah, and even if I look past the DLSS subsampling blur, I can't help but notice the mistakes that RTX makes too.

They are DIFFERENT, for sure but neither is always 'right'.

The gun rack example (image 10) - the very soft shadows look awful with RTX, as there are hard shadows on the floor, and it's obviously a single point-source, one-bulb room. IMO the RTX off variant is less visually-wrong, though it still has some issues with vertical surfaces like the ammo box.

The last image, RTX seems to be too low-precision to even add the light rays from the window on the steel cage. It just skips it altogether! The developer intent (with the actual god-ray shaders thrown in for good measure) is obviously as per the non-RTX example. In the RTX variant, it's even weirder to see the god-ray shader effect throwing shadow on the steel cage it hits.

I still currently have both a 5700XT and an RTX 2060 at home but I don't care about RTX because I need to finish Call of Duty: Kevin Spacey's the Bad Guy first. I'm WAAAAAY behind the curve with these games!

 

[moob]

I still currently have both a 5700XT and an RTX 2060 at home but I don't care about RTX because I need to finish Call of Duty: Kevin Spacey's the Bad Guy first. I'm WAAAAAY behind the curve with these games!

I own/played them all except for this, WWII, and CoD 3 since it wasn't released for PC. They're a guilty pleasure of mine. I usually wait for them to go on sale for $15 or so and plow through the single player (haven't cared for the multiplayer since CoD4). I'm just glad the engine finally looks like a modern engine. I'll definitely be getting it at some point and hopefully WWII drops in price.

 

[W1zzard]

I'm exploring a new chart for these articles, showing how the cards stack up in performance against the average fps result from our vga reviews.

thoughts?

 

[candle_86]

I'm exploring a new chart for these articles, showing how the cards stack up in performance against the average fps result from our vga reviews.

thoughts?

Any chance of older cards, I'm sure plenty of people still have r9 290/390 and 280/380 or 960 or 760

 

[john_]

I was looking at Red Dead Redemption 2 on Guru3D just before coming here and the charts look identical, meaning that AMD cards there, also perform really well compared to the Nvidia equivalent models. This is a good day for the read team.

 

[W1zzard]

Any chance of older cards, I'm sure plenty of people still have r9 290/390 and 280/380 or 960 or 760

No plans to include older cards in my game articles. This is the same FPS data as in the original article, just relative to average performance, so you can draw some additional conclusions

 

[Xzibit]

You know what? I'll give you that - you're right. But I think there is a valid procedural reason. The sharper image is false. RT will apply light as it illuminates a surface. Try looking at something that is not under direct illumination- it is always less distinct. By using RT, it's likely the detail you would see artificially, is being smoothed out. It's all covered by Marr's theory of vision, where shapes are derived first and detail follows. In the correct lighting scenario's, detail will always be lost in low (or indirect) light.

But yes, you are correct - RT will create areas of less defined detail. Which is realistic.

The denoiser.

Different denoisers are used for point lights, spot lights, directional lights, and rectangular lights. All pull from the G-Buffer and use hit distance, scene depth, normal, light size and direction to guide the filtering.

 

[QUANTUMPHYSICS]

I'm playing Modern Warfare on a Core i9 Extreme, 32GB DDR4, 2080Ti and SSD storage.

The game is at its absolute best during the close quarters missions which are obviously designed to resemble 0 DARK THIRTY. The stealth missions are good too.

I played the game in REALISM. I kept getting killed, but I made it all the way to the final mission before getting completely overwhelmed and forced to drop the difficulty.

I stopped playing CoD after Advanced Warfare and I skipped Ghosts.

This game was FREE with my 2080Ti Black as a download so it cost me nothing technically.

I am enjoying it. It feels like classic CoD, but the action is on a smaller scale so it's more like the original Modern Warfare.

It doesn't match the impact of the original Modern Warfare - which came out around the same time as Crysis - but it definitely is worthwhile and redefines the franchise.

 

[I'm here to throw]

Good to see AMD destroying their equal costing NV counterparts (RX 5700 - 2060, 5700 XT - 2060S) in an NV supported title. 350$ RX 5700 = 400$ 2060S, 400$ RX 5700 XT = 500$ 2070S.

Where were you when Nvidia was destroying their equal costing AMD counterparts in AMD supported titles like BL3 and outerworlds?

 

[Xzibit]

not sure i'm seeing it. do these two images look sharp? (direct links, without our comparison viewer)

https://tpucdn.com/review/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/images/rtx-1-on.jpg

https://tpucdn.com/review/call-of-duty-modern-warfare-benchmark-test-performance-analysis/images/rtx-1-off.jpg

What up with the guys boot on the far right?
RTX OFF you can see the soldiers tread on the bottom of his boot but on RTX On its like it over applied motion blur to his boot.

The soldier at the window his gear is clearer on the RTX OFF switch to the RTX On and the backpack and wraps around his waist aren't as detailed with a soft/blurrier effect. Denoiser or post processing effect. Same for the guy knelling next to the door. His gear, helmet and his uniform around his right arm and shoulder are noticeable.

 

[W1zzard]

What up with the guys boot on the far right?
RTX OFF you can see the soldiers tread on the bottom of his boot but on RTX On its like it over applied motion blur to his boot.

That is motion blur, he moved the foot right before I took the screenshot

 

[Xzibit]

That is motion blur, he moved the foot right before I took the screenshot

Okay. I thought you were running the graphics settings on the page which had them both disabled.

 

[W1zzard]

Okay. I thought you were running the graphics settings on the page which had them both disabled.

Since this is one of my first screenshots, it's possible that I hadn't disabled it yet

 

[Calmmo]

it looks like nvidia is slowly degrading gtx 1080 ti performance...

nvidia are simply optimizing for their latest gpu's. happened with the 900 series, its gonna happen with the RTX2000 series next year etc etc.

 

[64K]

Most of the optimizing has already been done for Pascal.

Taking into account that Nvidia is pushing ray tracing hard with their RTX GPUs then you can expect now and in the future that for games that support ray tracing they will optimize for the RTX GPUs first and foremost.

 

[pandemonium]

Really?
The shadows look nicer, but the entire game looks soft and blurry with RTX ON.

This is exactly what I'm seeing. While the shadows are more realistically defined according to light sources, the entire scene is more blurred with RTX on. I like crisp, clean details. I very much dislike post-processing that reduces image quality (call it soften or what have you) and RTX is doing this on the entire scene. I don't understand how the rest of you aren't seeing this.

Take a look at the teacup (go back to the review if you don't trust my image taken from it below). The drinking edge is softened with it on. Also the print is washed out and the colors aren't as vibrant. The edges defining each part of the pattern is also softened.

It's made clear when you zoom in, but also very apparent looking at the entire scene. There is an overall softening going on with RTX on. Is that just the way RTX functions, by diffusing detail due to light refraction? If that's the case, I really don't care for it.

 

[londiste]

Is that just the way RTX functions, by diffusing detail due to light refraction? If that's the case, I really don't care for it.

It is not. RTX does not touch any of these aspects. What RTX is used for in this game is shadows. Specifically shadowing from point-lights and the generated shadows are merged with other shadows (from shadow mapping and other usual methods).

 

[pandemonium]

Can we explain why RTX on looks softer on its clarity then?

 

[londiste]

Motion blur on? COD:MW has a lot of effects on screen most of the time. Getting 1:1 screenshots is not trivial here.

The other suspicion I have is that the game currently seems to have (minor) issues with asset streaming and memory management. 8GB is not quite enough and from what I saw, both detailed models and detailed textures were not loaded or not fully loaded in certain situations.

Either way, RTX causing this makes no sense at all.

 

[Theliel]

it looks like nvidia is slowly degrading gtx 1080 ti performance...

Absolutely right. That's what every sane person believes. Nvidia have been degrading performance of discontinued cards through their drivers since history.