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

[Vayra86]

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.

This is indeed an issue with RT in games. Many situations may be 'real' but they certainly are not playable that way. It will always have to be tweaked, I think.

A few years ago we were keen comparing games with movies, because CGI got so good and games gained graphical fidelity, mocap, and other stuff similar to what's used in film. But people seem to have forgotten that movies get edited too. The camera roll is often pretty horrible to look at on its own.

Question remains how much truly realistic RT will be left when all is said and done. That said I do like the low-key approach, noticing those finer details I think is where RT can shine, the technology needs to pick its battles, both for fidelity and performance.

And yeah... Motion blur, chromatic abberation and vignetting... whoever thought those were good ideas needs a punch in the face.

 

[Mescalamba]

RayTracing is rendered into maybe same resolution, but original picture doesnt have same resolution. Its impossible right now to have real time ray tracing that would actually give you even half of 4k.

RTX is significantly reduced version of full fat ray tracing, cause nothing can render that much rays in real time.

At full HD, it might not be that striking difference and in two generations it will be superior to our normal rendering.

Right now it aint there, its just usable. If you want pin sharp image, go with regular rendering. Btw. you cant see as much details as 4k in real life either. So RTX is sorta quite realistic. In being a bit fuzzy.

 

[londiste]

RayTracing is rendered into maybe same resolution, but original picture doesnt have same resolution. Its impossible right now to have real time ray tracing that would actually give you even half of 4k.
RTX is significantly reduced version of full fat ray tracing, cause nothing can render that much rays in real time.
At full HD, it might not be that striking difference and in two generations it will be superior to our normal rendering.
Right now it aint there, its just usable. If you want pin sharp image, go with regular rendering. Btw. you cant see as much details as 4k in real life either. So RTX is sorta quite realistic. In being a bit fuzzy.

You have misunderstood how raytracing is used in COD:MW. It is not used to render the image. Image overall is still rendered the same way with and without RTX.
Raytracing is only used to render certain part of shadows that is then merged with shadows from other (more usual, rasterization) methods.

 

[moob]

And yeah... Motion blur, chromatic abberation and vignetting... whoever thought those were good ideas needs a punch in the face.

Holy hell yes. The trifecta of awful visual effects.

Though I do enjoy a good implementation of DoF. I know a lot of people hate that as well.

 

[Assimilator]

Expected a bunch of idiots who haven't played the game with RTX, whining that RTX looks wrong and/or blurry in static screenshots of said game. Was not disappointed.

 

[Xzibit]

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

Remember Metro Exodus had the same Softness issue with DLSS. Later a sharpening filter was applied in a "optimization" patch.

 

[Fluffmeister]

Expected a bunch of idiots who haven't played the game with RTX, whining that RTX looks wrong and/or blurry in static screenshots of said game. Was not disappointed.

Pretty sure the softness just boils down the AA implementation, as Nvidia noted in their performance guide:

Modern Warfare exclusively uses SMAA anti-aliasing to counteract jagged and flickery lines and edges on surfaces and moving game elements. On the low end of things is SMAA 1X, a super fast, albeit basic implementation that lacks a temporal component, meaning flickering and shimmering on moving elements can still be seen.

To tackle those unsightly blighters, you need a good dose of temporal anti-aliasing, which SMAA T2X delivers in spades. So, what's the final option, "Filmic SMAA T2X"? Simply, it's a softer implementation that's intended to closer mirror reality by introducing an additional post-processing pass that improves AA accuracy and further reduces the visibility of aliasing, giving you a near-perfect, aliasing-free picture, at the cost of some sharpness.

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare PC Graphics and Performance Guide

Get the inside line on Modern Warfare’s PC-exclusive ray-traced shadows, discover which settings impact performance, see how these settings affect image quality, and get the lowdown on all of the other PC tech enhancements.

www.nvidia.com

As such...

When enabling SMAA T2X or Filmic SMAA T2X, you can configure the Anti-Aliasing Filmic Strength slider. By default, the strength is set to max. Turning it down, detail becomes sharper, but aliasing and temporal aliasing can creep back in, most noticeably on long-distance detail ...

Call of Duty: Modern Warfare PC Graphics and Performance Guide

Get the inside line on Modern Warfare’s PC-exclusive ray-traced shadows, discover which settings impact performance, see how these settings affect image quality, and get the lowdown on all of the other PC tech enhancements.

www.nvidia.com

But yes, presumably you can just apply the sharpen filter, if your the kind of Call of Duty gamer that likes to obsessively zoom in to teacups whilst you play.

 

[Xzibit]

Pretty sure the softness just boils down the AA implementation, as Nvidia noted in their performance guide:

But yes, presumably you can just apply the sharpen filter, if your the kind of Call of Duty gamer that likes to obsessively zoom in to teacups whilst you play.

If thats the case those issues should appear on both the RTX On and Off unless we are being presented with different settings under each. Page 3

 

[Fluffmeister]

If thats the case those issues should appear on both the RTX On and Off unless we are being presented with different settings under each.

I guess, what is your personal experience with the game?

 

[rtwjunkie]

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

Just...no. They have already had every bit of performance squeezed out with drivers. Beyond that, when more intensive and complex games get made, older GPU families cannot help but be left behind.

 

[wolf]

Yes, power use is close with the Nv cards eeking it out for what little that is worth.

I wouldn't call a ~25% difference in power use "a bit more power hungry" (225W vs 175W). With that, it isn't winning the performance /W metric either... or am I math challenged this morning?

All of a sudden power consumption matters to AMD flag wavers now that they're competitive, when Vega/Polaris etc were much worse "nobody cares about power consumption" because of price : performance ratio etc etc. It's entertaining how fast it flips.

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

The tinfoil hat is strong with this one. They don't degrade performance, total myth. They just pour more much more optimization effort into the latest generation. Various tests have been done proving that in the same titles over the years performance generally improves slightly or stays the same. Let me google it for you.

To be on topic for a moment, I am very keen to try out this title as I loved the Original, excellent coverage as always W1zzard

 

[EarthDog]

All of a sudden power consumption matters to AMD flag wavers now that they're competitive, when Vega/Polaris etc were much worse "nobody cares about power consumption" because of price : performance ratio etc etc. It's entertaining how fast it flips.

AMD flag raiser???? Hahaha, good one.

 

[Vayra86]

Holy hell yes. The trifecta of awful visual effects.

Though I do enjoy a good implementation of DoF. I know a lot of people hate that as well.

DoF is a bit like DX9's Bloom. It used to suck monkey balls, nowadays you barely ever have to turn it off. DoF is fast going that way it seems. I used to disable it all the time, but found myself not disabling it more often recently.

All of a sudden power consumption matters to AMD flag wavers now that they're competitive, when Vega/Polaris etc were much worse "nobody cares about power consumption" because of price : performance ratio etc etc. It's entertaining how fast it flips.

Did you just assume his gender?

 

[Mescalamba]

You have misunderstood how raytracing is used in COD:MW. It is not used to render the image. Image overall is still rendered the same way with and without RTX.
Raytracing is only used to render certain part of shadows that is then merged with shadows from other (more usual, rasterization) methods.

Dunno, cause that output on pics looks exactly like full RTX. Also shadows look different enough to doubt merging with normal too.