I don't accept that as a reason why a few drops of rain should make roads look like they're caked in ice.
I think the whole "water = mirror" concept looks pathetic, especially when there's no splashing, drainage, or any other effect that would show that water is actually a transparent liquid.
Like I said, I'm not against RT at all, but this kind of implementation looks like crap. Sorry, it's just my opinion.
Not only that, look at that artifacting of lighting behind the wheels of the car, or any contrasted edge with reflective surface behind it.
Its plain turd material, literally polished, even besides how 'out of place' it all looks in the scene that barely has clouds in the sky. No trace of that storm that blanked the streets hours earlier in the distance, either. Its a fine morning. Someone pissed all over the streets. Cigar?
What if we have it all wrong? What if Nvidia packs less VRAM into their GPUs because they know they don't have the horsepower to use it all. Just because AMD packs a bunch of VRAM on their low to midrange GPUs doesn't mean you still get good performance from it.. am I wrong?
But they
do have the core power to push it all. I retired my GTX 1080
not because it was too slow but because it started stuttering in TW WH3, because that game eats 8GB at campaign start and then goes straight for lunch. I was running that game at 45-60 FPS at medium-high settings on that campaign map, at 3440x1440 no less.
Horsepower is never an issue on Nvidia. If you're short on horsepower on a good Nvidia card, you're also pushing bandwidth/memory limits. Whereas on AMD I do think and agree, some cards have been given too much VRAM. I think 6800XT could have gotten away with 12GB, if only just, for example. With 16GB its simply capable of lasting another 2 years
if you accept somewhat lower FPS or settings. Texture quality is overall a pretty low FPS hit, compared to post processing effects that we often even prefer turning off or reducing. Because in the end, that's what quality settings are: FPS limiters. The VRAM baseline requirement for games though is already at well over 6GB even at the
lowest quality. With more VRAM you simply have more room to play with pretty high texture settings (maxed) and turning off very expensive post processing to keep things playable. Whereas if you have to lower textures (or object detail, LOD, etc), it immediately hits the entire scene.
What struck me most about Nvidias moves in the last 4-5 gens was the sudden change in how they dealt with VRAM capacity, and then the plot obviously thickens when you see they add VRAM intensive RT to the mix. Consider that we went from Kepler 2-3GB to Maxwell 4-6GB (+50%) and then to Pascal with 8-11GB (another similar jump)... and then we got RT, we got some more cache and Turing gave us a 1080 equivalent 2060 with... 6GB. 2080ti stalled at the same 11GB as a much weaker 1080ti. Ampere made it even worse. Ada takes the fucking cake.
You don't have to be a rocket scientist here to read between the lines. This is
all Nvidia. Not devs. Not some industry wide conspiracy with AMD playing the 'other side'. This is Nvidia trying to corner the market for a gen-to-gen upgrade need.
/s
