Hogwarts Legacy Benchmark Test & Performance Analysis

[Vya Domus]

The difference in rt capabilities between the 2 cards is nowhere close to 17% but again, sure whatever

Then you're literally incapable of understating what you're reading.

If it says 17%, then it's 17%, what the hell are you talking about ?

 

[JustBenching]

Then you're literally incapable of understating what you're reading.

If it says 17%, then it's 17%, what the hell are you talking about ?

Absolutely, that's why in pure tracing benchmarks the difference is over 50%. Cause "17%". In fc6 and sotr. Goddman people supporting brands can;t see clearly, it's fine, whatever makes you sleep at night.

 

[Vya Domus]

Absolutely, that's why in pure tracing benchmarks

What are "pure tracing benchmarks" and why the hell would those matter ?

Games are primarily rasterized with an optional RT pass, there are no "pure ray tracing games". Man I swear every time I read your comments it's most nonsensical stuff imaginable.

Port Royale is the closest thing to a "pure aryan tracing benchmark" and the difference between the 4080 and 7900XTX is no where near 50%. So as usual you are speaking utter nonsense. Only a hardcore fanboy would assume this one game is a better representation of RT performance rather than a literal benchmark specifically designed to showcase differences in RT performance.

 

[AusWolf]

Absolutely, that's why in pure tracing benchmarks the difference is over 50%. Cause "17%". In fc6 and sotr. Goddman people supporting brands can;t see clearly, it's fine, whatever makes you sleep at night.

Because FC6 and SoTR don't matter. Only games where the difference is huge matter. Is a viewpoint like that not a form of supporting a brand one way or another?

 

[JustBenching]

Because FC6 and SoTR don't matter. Only games where the difference is huge matter. Is a viewpoint like that not a form of supporting a brand one way or another?

Οnly games that actually have a fair amount of RT matters when you are benchmarks RT. FC6 is 97% raster performance, you are not testing RT there, it's pretty obvious. Why do you think there are games that nvidias are 50% faster in RT? Why aren't there games that amd is 50% faster in RT? Wanna take a guess?

What are "pure tracing benchmarks" and why the hell would those matter ?

Games are primarily rasterized with an optional RT pass, there are no "pure ray tracing games". Man I swear every time I read your comments it's most nonsensical stuff imaginable.

Port Royale is the closest thing to a "pure aryan tracing benchmark" and the difference between the 4080 and 7900XTX is no where near 50%. So as usual you are speaking utter nonsense. Only a hardcore fanboy would assume this one game is a better representation of RT performance rather than a literal benchmark specifically designed to showcase differences in RT performance.

Blah blah blah. Whatever, port royal is hybrid, this is the actual fully path traced 3d mark bench. I wonder why it shows different results to the hybrid one if the difference in performance is only 10%. I really, really wonder why...

 

[HTC]

@W1zzard

According to HU, it seems this game uses frame generation in the 40X0 GPU series, DESPITE the option being greyed out, as noted here (starts @ 22:34):

He was forced to use a "workaround" to disable it.

Did you experience this in your review? Just wondering.

 

[Vya Domus]

Whatever, port royal is hybrid, this is the actual fully path traced 3d mark bench.

Who the hell cares about that except you. You are the only one who looks at this and concludes that performance should be representative of actual games, which obviously isn't, how can you not comprehend that ?

Once again, games are not fully ray traced, they are hybrid, you are seemingly in denial about this one fact, if benchmarks say a 4080 is 17% faster in games with RT then that's the reality. But you must be having a blast staring at that one fully traced benchmark, good for you buddy.

 

[JustBenching]

Who the hell cares about that except you. You are the only one who looks at this and concludes that performance should be representative of actual games, which obviously isn't, how can you not comprehend that ?

Once again, games are not fully ray traced, they are hybrid, you are seemingly in denial about this one fact. But you must be having a blast staring at that one fully traced benchmark, good for you buddy.

I don't care about who cares, im saying the difference in RT performance is totally not 17%.

 

[AusWolf]

Οnly games that actually have a fair amount of RT matters when you are benchmarks RT. FC6 is 97% raster performance, you are not testing RT there, it's pretty obvious. Why do you think there are games that nvidias are 50% faster in RT? Why aren't there games that amd is 50% faster in RT? Wanna take a guess?

I think the question is, does "testing for RT" matter? I mean, you play games, not pure RT. You can throw extremely heavy benchmarks onto anything, but it won't matter when you're looking at game performance.

Just like testing your car on a dyno isn't the same as driving it on an open road.

Why should you care about anything else than the games you play?

 

[Vya Domus]

RT performance is totally not 17%.

It is in games.

I think the question is, does "testing for RT" matter? I mean, you play games, not pure RT. You can throw extremely heavy benchmarks onto anything, but it won't matter when you're looking at game performance.

Not only that but hilariously that chart defeats his argument because in that the difference between 7900XTX and 4080 is actually smaller than it is in this game and the benchmark is using full path ray tracing.

In other words, full path ray tracing performance is representative of nothing at all.

 

[JustBenching]

I think the question is, does "testing for RT" matter? I mean, you play games, not pure RT. You can throw extremely heavy benchmarks onto anything, but it won't matter when you're looking at game performance.

Just like testing your car on a dyno isn't the same as driving it on an open road.

Why should you care about anything else than the games you play?

Because you can actually see that huge difference in games as well. Everything that has heavy RT, the difference skyrockets. You don't really buy an RT card to play FC6. It's ridiculous, it doesn't actually have RT. You buy it to play cyberpunk.

A friend comes over to your house to see what that RT is all about, wondering if he needs to jump on the bandwagon and buy an rt capable card. What would you show him, farcry 6? I don't even understand why we are having an argument here, it's clear where the issue lies. When you are putting into your averages games that have a single tree with RT shadows somewhere on the background and claim that's the difference in RT performance, that's just misleading.

 

[W1zzard]

http://imgur.com/f3a4a4L

This is 7900 XTX 1080p, Ultra + RT Ultra .. I see no indication of any obvious issue

 

[JustBenching]

It is in games.



Not only that but hilariously that chart defeats his argument because in that the difference between 7900XTX and 4080 is actually smaller than it is in this game and the benchmark is using full path ray tracing.

In other words, full path ray tracing performance is representative of nothing at all.

Do you know math? The difference in the 3d mark benchmark is over 50%. Exactly what I claimed a few posts ago. Wtf are you talking about?

 

[Vya Domus]

The difference in the 3d mark benchmark is over 50%.

Which is not the case in actual games, how many times are we going to need to go over this ?

 

[JustBenching]

Which is not the case in actual games, how many times are we going to need to go over this ?

It is in games that actually use more than a single RT tree somewhere in the background. FC6 is not really an RT game, nobody gets an RT card to play fc6.

 

[W1zzard]

Also added "RX 7900 XTX @ RT Low" to the RT results.

These numbers suggest the RT Ultra profile breaks something on Radeon GPUs

http://imgur.com/IiMkc2P

Did you experience this in your review? Just wondering.

I can confirm that menu bug, encountered it, too. FG wasn't enabled during my testing. The GeForce 40 FPS numbers would be much higher relative to the GeForce 30 numbers otherwise

 

[Vya Domus]

It is in games that actually use more than a single RT tree somewhere in the background. FC6 is not really an RT game, nobody gets an RT card to play fc6.

Dude, who the hell cares about FC6, why are you stuck on that ? Some games are heavier on RT than others, 50% performance difference is never a typical figure in games, no matter how you spin it.

Not that it would matter, even it was 50%, performance is crap without upscaling on any card.

 

[AusWolf]

Because you can actually see that huge difference in games as well. Everything that has heavy RT, the difference skyrockets. You don't really buy an RT card to play FC6. It's ridiculous, it doesn't actually have RT. You buy it to play cyberpunk.

A friend comes over to your house to see what that RT is all about, wondering if he needs to jump on the bandwagon and buy an rt capable card. What would you show him, farcry 6? I don't even understand why we are having an argument here, it's clear where the issue lies. When you are putting into your averages games that have a single tree with RT shadows somewhere on the background and claim that's the difference in RT performance, that's just misleading.

If a friend came over to see RT in action, I'd show them the truth, and I'd tell them not to jump on the RT bandwagon, yet. It's too expensive, the cost in performance is too much, and the benefits are minimal.

 

[JustBenching]

If a friend came over to see RT in action, I'd show them the truth, and I'd tell them not to jump on the RT bandwagon, yet. It's too expensive, the cost in performance is too much, and the benefits are minimal.

Sure, thats your opinion, I respect it. Im not even sure i disagree with it. But factually the difference in RT perrformance between amd and nvidia is not 17%. That's just delusional

 

[Vya Domus]

But factually the difference in RT perrformance between amd and nvidia is not 17%. That's just delusional

You're the only one on here who ignores performance figures on literally everything else expect that one benchmark and claims everything else is "not RT performance", somehow.

Tell me again, who is delusional here ?

Every normal person who is not a hardcore fanboy trying to prove his point only considers RT performance in games as being relevant.

If a friend came over to see RT in action, I'd show them the truth, and I'd tell them not to jump on the RT bandwagon, yet. It's too expensive, the cost in performance is too much, and the benefits are minimal.

The point is that performance sucks no matter what GPU you use.

No one plays these games natively, they run like crap, you have to use upscaling, at which point these considerations lose their meaning because you can do that on any GPU.

 

[lightofhonor]

http://imgur.com/f3a4a4L

This is 7900 XTX 1080p, Ultra + RT Ultra .. I see no indication of any obvious issue

Huh, the only difference I see is HUB aren't using Beta drivers. I wonder if that could be it.

 

[AusWolf]

Sure, thats your opinion, I respect it. Im not even sure i disagree with it. But factually the difference in RT perrformance between amd and nvidia is not 17%. That's just delusional

Depends which way you look at it. It can be 17% when you benchmark the same games as TPU and make an average from that. Or it could be something different. This is why I don't believe in averages.

Regardless, enabling RT only makes sense if you've got a 4080 or 4090, both of which are ridiculously overpriced. That's why I think RT is not worth it.

 

[SonikkuHedgie]

Huh, the only difference I see is HUB aren't using Beta drivers. I wonder if that could be it.

I want to throw in the possibility of the issue being Windows 11 22H2.

We already see the HUB numbers on 7700X with DDR5-6000, lemme add that ComputerBase used a 12900K with 32 GB DDR5-5400 and got better 7900 XTX numbers.

Both CB and HUB are using Windows 11 21H2 with different hardware… TPU is using Windows 11 22H2.

 

[AusWolf]

The point is that performance sucks no matter what GPU you use.

No one plays these games natively, they run like crap, you have to use upscaling, at which point these considerations lose their meaning because you can do that on any GPU.

Exactly. If you have 10 FPS on an AMD GPU, and double that on an Nvidia one, that's still only 20 FPS which is still under the border of being playable.

As a 1080p gamer, I don't care about FSR and DLSS. They just make the image look like crap. Disabling RT makes a lot more sense to me.

I want to throw in the possibility of the issue being Windows 11 22H2.

We already see the HUB numbers on 7700X with DDR5-6000, lemme add that ComputerBase used a 12900K with 32 GB DDR5-5400 and got better 7900 XTX numbers.

Both CB and HUB are using Windows 11 21H2 with different hardware… TPU is using Windows 11 22H2.

Maybe. If I had spare 50 quid to buy the game, I'd test it with Windows 10 (I think 11 is crap anyway).

 

[W1zzard]

Intel RT scores have been updated, I benched RT Low by accident. I'm still including RT Low for RX 7900 XTX, RTX 4090 and Arc A770 as they are an interesting data point. RTX 4090 RT low results testing right now, will be added within the hour