>Crytek has showcased a new real-time raytracing demo which is said to run on most mainstream, contemporary GPUs from NVIDIA and AMD. The minds behind one of the most visually impressive FPS franchise, Crysis, have their new “Noir” demo out which was run on an AMD Radeon RX Vega graphics card which shows that raytracing is possible even without an NVIDIA RTX graphics card.
wccftech.com
Other urls found in this thread:
GCN dont have "ray tracing cores" so the card lose much more FPS than the NVIDIA RTX gpu because it's use his main cores
Die space is die space and there are pros and cons to tensor cores. Those aren't mature yet to be a proper alternative to rasterization and don't necessarily justify the cost.
And? Just watch the demo and try finding the shitty grainny reflections and low fps like the RTX cards with their exclusive Raytracing on Battlefield V.
>not in realtime
whoa amazing based AMD
>real-time raytraced reflections
>Crytek made it
Jow Forums is such a great place.
Crytek scammers use fake Voxel Ray Tracing while Nvidia geniuses use REAL Pixel Ray Tracing.
Pixel Ray Tracing is superior due to greather and more difficult computational complexity!
All you PLEBS are too BLIND discern the difference, but RTX is always superior! Just like DLSS is always superior to resolution scaling!
The lack of a grainy look immediately gives away that it isn't actually performing raytracing. It's doing something similar, but not raytracing.
daily reminder that ray tracing is based on geometric optics which is a fake and gay approximation on wave optics which is a fake and gay approximation on the maxwell equations
also all raytracing implementations simulate camera shutters instead of your actual eyes which perform exposure over time by fluctuating nerve sensitivity, a universal effect that is poorly simulated by bloom and other postprocessing effects
>simulate camera shutters
is that a bad thing when it's being shown on a computer monitor which most likely 60hz like a camera shutter