Is ray tracing good?

At the moment fucking NO. The FPS trade off is not worth it.

Looks like the AMD cucks have arrived and are coping/seething to maximum capacity.

retard nigger
modding community was split since the beginning of minecraft mods

fpbp

I'm still mad when corporate jews make it look like they invented this shit in 2018

I have an Nvidia card. kys shill
goyshitassraping is not worth it
maybe in a few years if it gets optimized properly

ray tracing has been around in games and in general since at least 2001

No, you can't notice ray tracing over current imitations. That's why demos always have half the scene be smoke and mirrors, literally and metaphorically.

t. Vega 64/Ryzen 2700x cuck who's in maximum seething mode

Does Minecraft even need raytracing? I thought it was for making realistic spheres and whatnot.

yes
rtx is shit though

It's better for lighting in general.

Attached: 1560952130916.jpg (604x604, 72K)

>realistic spheres
Oh no. Definitely not. Raytracing is about lighting the world in a way that is mathematically correct so it looks better instead of pretending like we do with rasterization.

No. Games don't look good if they look realistic. I dislike shadows in games in general, prefer brightness and prefer things to be in as few colours as possible so that you can tell what's what.
Normal Minecraft looks better (for a game) than (((RTX))) mode.
Original Crash Bandicoot and CTR look better than remakes.
I prefer things being easy to distinguish, not this garbage where everything blends into an incomprehensible mess.

t. seething vega 56 cuck

I'm not retarded enough to waste that much money on a GPU.
Cry more, your buyer's remorse is showing.

raytracing is good when implemented and used properly.
nvidias closed implementation, if you can call a one-sample-per-pixel version that (even raymarching looks and performs way better), is absolute crap to support and there is no benefits in it, only downsides like massive slow downs to you needing to render call at very specific window intervals (more than 60fps on the best hardware available is literally impossible, the implementation is not fast or smart enough to cope with the smaller windows and everything just breaks completely instead of working in bursts)
thanks leather jacket man, i'm glad you continue to milk your sheep and have been offering rebranded 1080tis for a bunch of years on a row now

youtube.com/watch?v=opCDN2jkZaI

Ray tracing is great, ignore all the SEETHING and COPING AYYMDPOORFAGS with no real time ray tracing technolo/g/y

>I'm not retarded enough to waste that much money on a GPU.
>Cry more, your buyer's remorse is showing.
/thread

go away deadhead, this is Jow Forums not lesbian central

>raytracing
yes
>rtx
no

kys corporate cocksucker

/thread

I don't know, ask /v/

>Shaders are "raytracing" now
Thanks marketing

>replies
>I don't know
based retard

>when proprietary ratytracing implementation is active game uses a completely new hi-res texture pack (1k*1k) for all materials, this also includes bump mapping texturing for all materials, that is non-existant if this option is ticked off
LMAO, another wood screws lauch.

>hurrr durrr raytracing bad because RTX bad
You literal fucking retards. Raytracing is the inevitable progression for finally getting graphics that can approach real life in terms of accuracy.

Even in a game with graphics as simple as Minecraft the benefits of ray tracing/path tracing are substantial. If you have a decent GPU you can run SEUS PTGI at a decent framerate and actually have a game that seems more "realistic" to the brain than even the best attempts at recreating real lighting with rasterization (something like the new God of War or Uncharted). Lighting is THE most important aspect of computer graphics and once you have realistic lighting you have a realistic looking game no matter how shitty the textures or geometry are.

Attached: 1j4y3hz9mr131.png (1680x1050, 2.4M)

I didn't say it's bad because RTX is bad. It's bad because it looks like shit.

>it looks like shit.
What looks like shit? Ray-tracing in general or just Nvidia's poor implementation of it?

the pricing of rtx cards

No its not great but Dream VR is good but its photo realism and has options for adding pain and item feeling/smells/tastes. Real mind blowing technology.

Realism in videogames

>ray tracing = rtx

Attached: vO7lRZ7.png (621x702, 56K)

Ray-tracing isn't about realism. It's a much more powerful way of rendering scenes.
Yes it gives you photo-realism for free but you can also render something unrealistic with it.

>Yes it gives you photo-realism for free
Huge performance hit is not free.

people mostly only want to consume media with their eyes and ears, the other senses are too much contact

Assuming you have enough computing power(and we will eventually).

>lel just buy moar RAM xD
I'd rather not waste power on useless shit.

>a shitty kids' game represents ray tracing better than big budget AAA games

the next xbox will 100% have ray tracing

> source: my dad that works for microsoft

Attached: 1555635068570.gif (652x562, 626K)

The PS2 had Ray Tracing, therefore it is revolutionary and magnificent, as it was part of the greatest machine ever built.

t. seething punk motherfucker who got clowned by the fat fuck from LinusTechTips into buying a 5700xt

Raytracing? Yes, very good.
Nvidia's RTX? A retarded meme.

Probably, if you're not playin shit game for 12 yolds as Minecraft

The thing is graphics is always being pushed to the absolute limit of what they're capable of. And anything Ray-tracing can do can be done more efficiently (though less accurately) with standard rasterization techniques.

what's wrong with 5700xt?

+1 deposited on your Nvidia Experience accout

raytracing can be done on any hardware, why is nvidia pushing their cards as the only ones that can do it so hard?

Yeah, it's great. Too bad there aren't any games besides quake 2 and minecraft that make good use of it and that it has a preposterous performance impact even when hardware accelerated.

now, now, goy. don't upset the nvidia stockholder

Wait 17 years until Nvidia launch GPU for PathTracing AAA games and wait PlayStation 7 for Pathtracing experience.

It will be in ~3 years when hardware is up to the task.

Does anyone have a RTX card and has tried the Minecraft raytracing?
How many FPS do you get in it?

No raytracing

Yeah. If game devs stayed still and only programmed graphics designed for the video cards people own today.

Not worth it for now, it's a completely useless technology, the fps loss is simply too great to be worth the price. Maybe in another 3 years because the technology might improve by then but for now you might as well just turn it off as the graphical prowess achieved are relatively minor and insignificant to your experience. Furthermore, there isn't a large plethora of game available using RTX so that's another reason not to fall for "Le Raytracing meme".

Yeah but at what price? Even if Microsoft confirmed this new technology on their latest machine it doesn't mean that it's not gonna run poorly or only used on shitty indie games, it's just some of their false advertising "look guys we got RTX, for Pong 3d".

>search replies only one mention of that company
hmm

>No, soulless garbage designed to push realism even further
>muh videos games are games and therefore shouldn't look photorealistic!
On a technological standpoint, this is probably one of the most impressive technology to have ever been introduced for real-time rendered graphics by the VG industry. The closest we can get to photo-realism. Give it a few more year for that technology to be perfected and enhanced to a greater degree. Yes, this was poorly introduced by nvidia and used as marketing for their overpriced cards which led to a poor launch of the latter, it's still a major upgrade.

>Technology is still in it's fledgling stage
>Just completely abandon it in the hope that it will magically get better
You're a fucking mouth breather. Metro Exodus had HORRIBLE fps drops when RT first came out. Like 2080Ti on 1080p can't even maintain 60fps with blurry as fuck DLSS. Move along and personally I can hit 70FPS @ 1440p with ultra RT enabled AND using regular AA instead of DLSS. Shit even Minecraft devs are talking about implementing ray tracing as a standard feature in their engine rather than a mod.

the only people who bitch about ray tracing being worthless are poor people. Just like all the little features that made expensive cars great that slowly trickled down to even the cheapest shitbox, they were bitched about being "worthless" until it could be had for cheap. Then suddenly it was the best thing in the world!

Bunch of whiny fucking have nots.

Attached: 20180719_001159.png (1080x1304, 1.04M)

yes, but the hardware is expensive right now.

>Renouncing to 4k60 fps for fancier shadows and lights
>Have to buy a RTX 2080ti to truly enjoy this new technology
>little to no games have this technology fully implemented
>Calls everyone a "poorfag" because they "can't afford to/don't want to" buy an overpriced GPU
I never said this technology was bad in the first place just not worth it for the moment due to the limited usage of the latter as well as the FPS loss and the prices. Why would I use that blurry mess that is RTX at low res over crispier details in 4K60 with RTX off?

>Blurry mess that is RTX
Blatantly clear you don't know what RT is. The blur is from the DLSS garbage which I even said. You can choose NOT to use DLSS and standard AA types along with full ray tracing.

Raytracing is great technology but the current generation of hardware isn't capable enough to make it viable for the average user or worth using in most games.
Wait a gen or two, particularly if consoles start fucking around with it, and it'll be commonplace. In ~15 years you'll wonder how people lived with all the makeshift reflections/lighting tech

Raytracing will be good when graphics performance is high enough that we can tank the performance hit. We're not at that point yet, and probably won't be for 5-10 years. Partial raytracing is a waste of time

>soulless
stopped reading

1080p on a 24" monitor draws individual pixels at a smaller size than 20/20 vision can see from 1ft, much less the 1.5 to 2ft most people use their monitors from. Edge detection for human vision is like over a dozen times more acute than resolution detection which means that even at 4k on a 24" screen 4k is nowhere near good enough for edge aliasing to become unnoticeable. 4k is just a poor stopgap. We need 8k on 24" minimum for a truly alias-free game.

It is optimised it just needs more power

>You literal fucking retards. Raytracing is the inevitable progression for finally getting graphics that can approach real life in terms of accuracy.

have you seen DEDICATED cards that do ray tracing?
probably not and by probably i mean you havent and never will

>Even in a game with graphics as simple as Minecraft the benefits of ray tracing/path tracing are substantial.
yes because the most prominent problem of minecraft was its graphics
not the fact that its a fucking single threaded game that after 200 mods your pc starts throttling up like a fucking delta IV rocket ready to be launched
no...
ITS RAY TRACING that it needs

fucking idiots

some quotes of the video just to show how out of reality those devs were

>WATER LOOKS LIKE WATER NOW
>DIAMONDS WILL SHINE BETTER ON THE SUN
>YOUR HOUSE WILL LOOK AMAZING

>investing

If you dont play Minecraft at 480p 120hz with RTX On then dont (you) me

if you dont play minecraft at 144p on a 480hz monitor with dual rtx on dont (you) me

I like it. I'm pretty sure we will see either CPU based raytracing or raytracing on any gpu in the future. That's when things will get interesting.

>have you seen DEDICATED cards that do ray tracing?
Not fully, but Nvidia's new cards already have dedicated hardware built in to speed up ray tracing.
>the most prominent problem of minecraft was its graphics
>not the fact that its a fucking single threaded game that after 200 mods your pc starts throttling up like a fucking delta IV rocket ready to be launched
>no...
>ITS RAY TRACING that it needs
The RTX feature is only coming to the windows 10 edition of Minecraft, not the Java edition. Dumbass.

>accuracy

real time computer graphics are absolutely not about accuracy. they are about speed. there is a reason that john carmack is considered a legend for inventing the fast inverse square root and its not because its accurate its because it got a 95% aproximation of reflections working within their very small computing budget. game graphics are about how quickly and efficiently you can render the image on the screen, not how real it looks.

burning through your very limited computation budget for ray tracing, a method of computation that requires meticulously tracing every single photon in the scene, even in optimistic situations, is never going to compete with faster and more approximate methods that give the same visual result. every single time.

ray tracing IS how you get accurate light and shadows, its not just an inevitable progression, it is brute forcing the actual physics of it through a computer algorithm. if you think its a good idea to do that 10 million times a frame when you're trying to hit a 13ms frame render time goal, then good luck!

>the only people who bitch about ray tracing being worthless are poor people. Just like all the little features that made expensive cars great that slowly trickled down to even the cheapest shitbox, they were bitched about being "worthless" until it could be had for cheap. Then suddenly it was the best thing in the world!

such as? can you name even one feature that fits this example?

this is the best hope for RTX because dedicated computer cores for ray tracing is kind of retarded and limits how well it can be implemented and future proofed

>triggered by words

>graphics that can approach real life in terms of accuracy.
real life graphics = cancer, we need to go back to heavily stylized graphics.

Gimmick that will die in 3 years like physx

nah, physx had dedicated cards and cool tech demos, rtx has a higher barrier for entry and even less ways to show it off. it'll be dead before 2020.

this

>Not fully, but Nvidia's new cards already have dedicated hardware built in to speed up ray tracing.

oh honey if you think rebranded tensor cores is capable to provide a 10.000 ray burst i have bad news for you

>windows 10 edition of Minecraft
yes cause we all know c++ version doesnt have mods right?
LOL

>real time computer graphics are absolutely not about accuracy. they are about speed
And yet average framerates given average hardware of the time have consistently been around 60FPS every year while graphics continue to improve. Speed only matters to a certain degree. People would much prefer a 60FPS game that looks stunning than a 240FPS game that looks like shit.

>burning through your very limited computation budget for ray tracing, a method of computation that requires meticulously tracing every single photon in the scene, even in optimistic situations, is never going to compete with faster and more approximate methods that give the same visual result. every single time.
You're saying this as graphics cards capable of doing (rudimentary I'll admit) ray tracing in real time are currently on the market and in people's PCs at this very moment? Are you that short sighted that you think GPUs will never have enough processing power to deal with more complex ray tracing?

>ray tracing IS how you get accurate light and shadows, its not just an inevitable progression, it is brute forcing the actual physics of it through a computer algorithm
Current computer graphics are pretty much a stop-gap solution though. Developers have poured so much time into trying to emulate real light behavior with hacky implementations of AO and GI that will never look as good as the real thing, not to mention the horrible visual artefacts things like screenspace reflections bring. Just like PBR replaced more traditional methods once processing power could support it, ray-traced rendering will eventually surpass traditional rendering.

Having stylized graphics doesn't mean you cant benefit from accurate lighting. Ubiquitous ray tracing doesn't necessitate that every game looks like modern warfare or something like that. Look at Minecraft with PTGI and a cartoonish texture pack, it still looks 100x better than the default lighting and is stylized.

>yes cause we all know c++ version doesnt have mods right?
Not nearly as much as the Java edition, no. And the c++ version is far better optimised.
>oh honey if you think rebranded tensor cores is capable to provide a 10.000 ray burst i have bad news for you
Who said anything about a 10,000 ray burst? I never said the technology was currently in any way perfect. I'm saying the technology will inevitably improve to the point where ray tracing can be achieved at acceptable feamerates. At that point traditional rendering methods will quickly fall by the wayside.

stop being a faggot, faggot