Grab the Stunning "Attic" NVIDIA RTX + DLSS Unreal Engine Interactive Demo, Works on even AMD

[btarunr]

We are hosting the NVIDIA "Attic" RTX + DLSS interactive tech-demo in our Downloads section. Developed on Unreal Engine 4, the demo puts you in the bunny-slippers of a little girl playing around in her attic. This is no normal attic, it's her kingdom, complete with stuff to build a pillow fort, an old CRT TV playing retro NVIDIA commercials, a full-length mirror, really cool old stuff, and decorations. You can explore the place in a first-person perspective.

The interactive demo is brought to life with on-the-fly controls for RTX real-time raytracing and its various features, DLSS performance enhancement, a frame-rate counter, and controls for time-of-day, which alters lighting in the room. The demo shows off raytraced reflections, translucency, global-illumination, direct-illumination, and DLSS. You also get cool gadgets such as the "light cannon" or a reflective orb, that let you play around with dynamic lighting some more. To use this demo, you'll need a machine with an RTX 20-series "Turing" or RTX 30-series "Ampere" graphics card, and Windows 10. The demo also works on Radeon RX 6000 series GPUs. Grab it from the link below.

DOWNLOAD: NVIDIA Unreal Engine 4 RTX & DLSS Demo



View at TechPowerUp Main Site

 

[Legacy-ZA]

Let me just launch... oh, wait...

 

[Prima.Vera]

RTX blurs the shadows too much and also adds a lot of moving noise to them??

 

[Vayra86]

Sorry but no.

RTX = OFF & DLSS = OFF

Its going to take a serious price slash before its on, Huang. And since you'll be peddling Ampere for the next three generations apparently, I'm sure you can manage that.

Still, cool demo.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Delicious blur, and I love how one lighting effect tanks the framerate to PS3 level! TRUELY CINEMATIC!

I can do this on my vega 64, It's called "running at 720p".

 

[Vayra86]

RTX blurs the shadows too much and also adds a lot of moving noise to them??

LOL.

That's proof right there that RTX is total BS.

The RTX Off pic has much more fidelity to it, AND seems more correct in the scene. Blurred shadows from a window pane at such a short distance? Nope. With a strong light, that's going to be a very clear shadow like it shows in RTX Off.

TL DR We can make raster precooked stuff better than we can brute force it in real time.
Duh.
Games have already showed us this fact, too. Its not fully dynamic. But does it need to be? And at the same time, the implementation of RT here shows us that its entirely, still, up to developers setting stuff right for calculations to work out correctly. Hmm.... tomato tomatoe?

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

LOL.

That's proof right there that RTX is total BS.

The RTX Off pic has much more fidelity to it, AND seems more correct in the scene. Blurred shadows from a window pane at such a short distance? Nope. With a strong light, that's going to be a very clear shadow like it shows in RTX Off.

TL DR We can make raster precooked stuff better than we can brute force it in real time.
Duh.
Games have already showed us this fact, too. Its not fully dynamic. But does it need to be? And at the same time, the implementation of RT here shows us that its entirely, still, up to developers setting stuff right for calculations to work out correctly. Hmm.... tomato tomatoe?

The only reason it NEEDS to be dynamically rendered is so nvidia has a new measurement to judge their cards against, because we've gotten to the point of good enough for every resolution except 4k at this point.

 

[HaiKarate]

It runs on my GTX 1070 so you don't need an RTX card to run it. I can even turn on ray tracing, although it drops the framerate down to 3 fps.

 

[Vayra86]

The only reason it NEEDS to be dynamically rendered is so nvidia has a new measurement to judge their cards against, because we've gotten to the point of good enough for every resolution except 4k at this point.

Amen. This is the only explanation that makes sense. Brute forcing was, is and has always been the most ineffective way to approach a problem. Its reserved for when you have no better tricks to get there.

Rasterized was in fact the trick we figured out. RT is a step back.

In that sense its almost like a fashion statement... those keep doing the rounds every ten or twenty odd years too. I guess the pandemic is good for one thing. Some sense of realism and the realization this RT move is way beyond our paycheck, while hardly being any better anyway.

 

[Chomiq]

Let me just launch it on my non-existing current gen GPU - oh wait.

 

[Vendor]

LOL.

That's proof right there that RTX is total BS.

The RTX Off pic has much more fidelity to it, AND seems more correct in the scene. Blurred shadows from a window pane at such a short distance? Nope. With a strong light, that's going to be a very clear shadow like it shows in RTX Off.

TL DR We can make raster precooked stuff better than we can brute force it in real time.
Duh.
Games have already showed us this fact, too. Its not fully dynamic. But does it need to be? And at the same time, the implementation of RT here shows us that its entirely, still, up to developers setting stuff right for calculations to work out correctly. Hmm.... tomato tomatoe?

true, Shadow Warrior 2 has decent water reflections which look as good as RT

 

[Aquinus]

The demo also works on Radeon RX 6000 series GPUs.

RTX On?

 

[Vayra86]

true, Shadow Warrior 2 has decent water reflections which look as good as RT

Water reflections and reflections in any case were already a holy grail that was found.

Oh no its limited to screen space. So we can't see what's off-screen! Imagine marketing that. You have to come up with BS like 10 Gigarays to make it just work. Oh..

At least one quote rang true after all:

'The more you buy, the more you save'.
Jensen knew it all along, mining was about to get accelerated.

 

[Mescalamba]

RTX blurs the shadows too much and also adds a lot of moving noise to them??

In absence of light, noise prevails.

Apart that, reality doesnt have much sharp defined shadows, unless your light source is really sharp too.

That noise is there cause there is light used to create image, and in shadow there isnt light.. sooo. Noise.

 

[windwhirl]

I'll just repeat myself from sometime ago:

"RT... It's a "nice to have", mostly because we had already reached an acceptable level of quality with all the previous features that RT is replacing/complementing, like SSR. I mean, sure, you can push for more realism with RT, but it's not the massive jump that some people say it is. Or at least, I'm not seeing it.

Frankly, if given a choice, I'd drop RT and get obscenely high-quality textures."

 

[Kohl Baas]

RTX On?

You can't turn RTX on or off, because it's the naming of nVidia's RT-capable videocards.

You can only turn RT-effects On or Off. Effects that are mostly based on DXR.

 

[elghinnarisa]

I still dont like how DLSS makes things look, everything look so grainy so.... old? It's like everything has a mesh of static over it, just ever so lightly making large parts of it seem fuzzy and adding a lot of aliasing.
Though the less of the effects that are used, the better it looks. If I leave just translucency and toggle DLSS on or off, its pretty decent.

 

[Chomiq]

In absence of light, noise prevails.

Apart that, reality doesnt have much sharp defined shadows, unless your light source is really sharp too.

That noise is there cause there is light used to create image, and in shadow there isnt light.. sooo. Noise.

More likely RT is done with lower number of rays (possibly at lower resolution) and denoiser isn't doing a great job with handling this. Not to mention that DLSS is also active with RT ON so this will also introduce noise as image is no longer rendered at native resolution. For DLSS to look good you need a high enough sample rate, so that's why image quality takes a big hit once you go down from the 4K which is usually used for comparisons.

 

[Chris34]

DLSS upscale to 1080p looks ugly.

 

[medi01]

What about uneven AMD? Does it work on it?

I was told this runs on both even and uneven AMD GPUs. Not sure bout TXes:

 

[Cr4zy]

All the people in here complaining about ray tracing like it's supposed to work perfectly and run at no performance cost the day it was added. Yeah we get it rasterization came a long way in years of work, no matter how you look at it ray tracing is the future, there are no ifs or buts about it. It's new tech, it's the future of game visuals, just like every other big new thing thats been added to games, it hurt performance but rasterization wouldnt be where it was today if someone went "who needs *fancy new tech* when you can just use *standard old tech*?" These things are and will continue to be toggleable features in games, yet somehow everyone is still crying about the performance impact they have.

 

[FreedomEclipse]

I guess they allowed AMD to get in on it so that they have more ammo to dunk on them with --- Because its no secret that AMDs current cards dont handle RTX/DLSS very well.

 

[StefanM]

It runs on my GTX 1070 so you don't need an RTX card to run it. I can even turn on ray tracing, although it drops the framerate down to 3 fps.

Yeah, same here with GTX 1060
Do you see yourself in the mirror?

FYI:
On Pascal-architecture GPUs, we see that ray tracing and all other graphics rendering tasks are handled by FP32 Pascal shader cores. This takes longer to perform, meaning the gamer encounters a lower framerate.
Source: https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/geforce/news/geforce-gtx-dxr-ray-tracing-available-now/

 

[GerKNG]

RTX On?

yeah why not?

 

[evernessince]

The only reason it NEEDS to be dynamically rendered is so nvidia has a new measurement to judge their cards against, because we've gotten to the point of good enough for every resolution except 4k at this point.

I'd highly disagree, especially since 240 Hz is moving up to 1440p and 360 Hz up to 1080p. If Cyberpunk 2077 is an indication of how demanding upcoming titles will be, you don't need to come up with ways to spend a ton of processing power. Devs are more than capable of using what they are given.

All the people in here complaining about ray tracing like it's supposed to work perfectly and run at no performance cost the day it was added. Yeah we get it rasterization came a long way in years of work, no matter how you look at it ray tracing is the future, there are no ifs or buts about it. It's new tech, it's the future of game visuals, just like every other big new thing thats been added to games, it hurt performance but rasterization wouldnt be where it was today if someone went "who needs *fancy new tech* when you can just use *standard old tech*?" These things are and will continue to be toggleable features in games, yet somehow everyone is still crying about the performance impact they have.

Noting the performance impact is an important point to make. Complaining about others pointing that fact out is not. IMO RTX isn't really worth it until you start getting movie like quality. RTX shadows are really really not worth the performance impact and their visual benefit is very subjective. It's not a definite improvement. RTX reflections do look nice but unfortunately for them, recent updates to game engines have made those exact effects possible via rasterization just as dynamic. There's a massive gap between where we are now and where RT performance needs to be in order to get the quality jump people expect when you imply ray tracing. At 30% a generation, you are looking a decades before we get full modern RT games. Even full RT minecraft has to use a fraction of the default render distance to get reasonable performance.