German website PCGamesHardware tests the RTX 2080 Ti on Tomb Raider with a WIP implementation of ray tracing: 1080p at 30-60FPS

[D13H4RD]

So, here's a little snippet of 2080 Ti performance. 

 

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafikkarten-Grafikkarte-97980/Videos/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Ti-Performance-in-Shadow-of-the-Tomb-Raider-1263244/

 

Sadly, the entire video is in German, so I can't give a proper quote as of this time. But from the video, we can see that at 1080p with Ray Tracing enabled, the 2080 Ti runs within a range of 30-60FPS at 1080p, sometimes dropping below 30. 

 

The website also reminds readers that the game's ray tracing shadows and others features are still in development and as such, these performance figures may not necessarily indicate final performance. 

Quote

Important: This is not a final version of Shadow of the Tomb Raider, the developers have already confirmed that the game will be released without raytracing features. The raytraced shadows will be submitted by patch after release.

Personally, this doesn't surprise me. Ray Tracing is an incredibly taxing way to handle extremely complex lighting and reflections. Given that RTX and the Turing architecture is currently the first proper consumer implementation of real time ray tracing, such a performance hit is not completely unexpected. 

 

Although for the price NVIDIA is asking for, I can see why some might be soured. 

 

Regardless, these are all early days. There's every chance that others may perform better over time, especially since Shadow of the Tomb Raider's ray traced effects are still in development 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

So, here's a little snippet of 2080 Ti performance. 

 

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/Grafikkarten-Grafikkarte-97980/Videos/Nvidia-RTX-2080-Ti-Performance-in-Shadow-of-the-Tomb-Raider-1263244/

 

Sadly, the entire video is in German, so I can't give a proper quote as of this time. But from the video, we can see that at 1080p with Ray Tracing enabled, the 2080 Ti runs within a range of 30-60FPS at 1080p, sometimes dropping below 30. 

 

The website also reminds readers that the game's ray tracing shadows and others features are still in development and as such, these performance figures may not necessarily indicate final performance. 

Personally, this doesn't surprise me. Ray Tracing is an incredibly taxing way to handle extremely complex lighting and reflections. Given that RTX and the Turing architecture is currently the first proper consumer implementation of real time ray tracing, such a performance hit is not completely unexpected. 

 

Although for the price NVIDIA is asking for, I can see why some might be soured. 

 

Regardless, these are all early days. There's every chance that others may perform better 

is ray-tracing the new Crysis of the decade? (imagine fi Crysis supported ray tracing that would be the ultimate benchmark)

[D13H4RD]

1 minute ago, NovaMan01 said:

is ray-tracing the new Crysis of the decade? (imagine fi Crysis supported ray tracing that would be the ultimate benchmark)

Sorta like when tesselation first hit 

[FloRolf]

Can I get a side-by-side comparison w/ and w/o RT in the game? 

[NelizMastr]

3 minutes ago, D13H4RD2L1V3 said:

Sorta like when tesselation first hit 

At least tesselation was vendor agnostic.

[PlayStation 2]

I mean, 30-60fps is real-time, so Nvidia wasn't lying about that.

[Lathlaer]

There was a discussion on these forums about whether we hit a wall with how games can look like and whether more fps + more k in resolution is the only thing that can be upgraded now.

 

Turns out it isn't. Ray Tracing may need some time to mature as technology but it's the future and it genuinely looks better but it does not surprise me that it takes such a hit when enabled.

 

The first RTX generation might be a bit too soon with such performance loss but I much prefer this direction - new tech that makes games look better instead of just going for 5-8k resolution. 

[D13H4RD]

2 minutes ago, FloRolf said:

Can I get a side-by-side comparison w/ and w/o RT in the game? 

Not yet but there will probably be one soon 

1 minute ago, Lathlaer said:

Turns out it isn't. Ray Tracing may need some time to mature as technology but it's the future and it genuinely looks better but it does not surprise me that it takes such a hit when enabled.

I'd say we give it some time. 

[SADS]

30-60fps at 1080p may well be impressive. But that just isn't the performance that I want yet.

I'd sooner play titles at 1440p at 100+ fps.

 

For the price of these new cards, I am struggling to see the desire to be an early adopter of the technology at the moment.

[Lathlaer]

Just now, SADS said:

30-60fps at 1080p may well be impressive. But that just isn't the performance that I want yet.

I'd sooner play titles at 1440p at 100+ fps.

Then it's a good thing that RTX can be turned off like any advanced graphics option. It's really no different than antialiasing or HBAO+ or other options. Or even Gameworks. You get to decide whether you want your game to look better or run smoother, simple as that.

[PlayStation 2]

3 minutes ago, SADS said:

30-60fps at 1080p may well be impressive. But that just isn't the performance that I want yet.

I'd sooner play titles at 1440p at 100+ fps.

 

For the price of these new cards, I am struggling to see the desire to be an early adopter of the technology at the moment.

For real-time ray-tracing.

I'm not fanboying for anyone here, but that's the card's main purpose, and clearly, it seems to be doing that pretty damn good. 30fps may not sound like a lot, but remember, ray-tracing is incredibly expensive on hardware.

[SADS]

3 minutes ago, Lathlaer said:

Then it's a good thing that RTX can be turned off like any advanced graphics option. It's really no different than antialiasing or HBAO+ or other options. Or even Gameworks. You get to decide whether you want your game to look better or run smoother, simple as that.

I guess we'll have to wait to see how these cards perform in standard procedure then. It would have to blow my mind to try and persuade me not to skip a generation from a 1080ti.

[D13H4RD]

3 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

For real-time ray-tracing.

I'm not fanboying for anyone here, but that's the card's main purpose, and clearly, it seems to be doing that pretty damn good. 30fps may not sound like a lot, but remember, ray-tracing is incredibly expensive on hardware.

And I think people tend to miss that. 

 

Yeah, 30FPS isn't great but considering how taxing it is, it's at least a solid first step. Though for a $1000 GPU, I think I can sort of understand a bit of the angst

 

With all that said, we haven't got info on performance without Ray Tracing 

[SADS]

4 minutes ago, Dan Castellaneta said:

For real-time ray-tracing.

I'm not fanboying for anyone here, but that's the card's main purpose, and clearly, it seems to be doing that pretty damn good. 30fps may not sound like a lot, but remember, ray-tracing is incredibly expensive on hardware.

Oh I don't disagree there, it's a really impressive achievement for the technology.

However, for what you have to sacrifice in resolution and frame rate to use RayTracing, I find it hard to see it as more than an expensive gimmick at the moment.

[PlayStation 2]

Just now, SADS said:

Oh I don't disagree there, it's a really impressive achievement for the technology.

However, for what you have to sacrifice in resolution and frame rate to use RayTracing, I find it hard to see it as more than an expensive gimmick at the moment.

Yeah, admittedly I think this feature, for now at least, will lie solely on the user's tastes of what they want.

[Muffin_man17]

16 minutes ago, FloRolf said:

Can I get a side-by-side comparison w/ and w/o RT in the game? 

Here ya go m8!

 

https://www.nvidia.co.uk/geforce/graphics-cards/rtx-2080-ti/

[Lathlaer]

Also I'd like to point out that historically the new Tomb Raider games have been pretty demanding in general. Not barely 60fps in 1080p demanding but still something to consider ;-)

 

I've been playing Rise of the Tomb Raider at 4213x1768 maxed and getting about 90-110fps, I fully expect Shadow of the Tomb Raider running about 20-30fps less than that under the same circumstances (without RTX).

[Jurrunio]

not enough RT cores are there? People capable of affording the 2080ti will be using very high end monitors as well, like 1080p 240Hz, 1440p 144Hz, heck very likely considering 4K 144Hz atm. I hope the 2080ti will make these people happy with RTX stuff disabled, but I'm sure they will be sad when RTX is enabled.

 

 

[D13H4RD]

8 minutes ago, SADS said:

Oh I don't disagree there, it's a really impressive achievement for the technology.

However, for what you have to sacrifice in resolution and frame rate to use RayTracing, I find it hard to see it as more than an expensive gimmick at the moment.

I think it's best summed up in 2 words 

 

Early Adopter 

[asus killer]

so you either play in your expensive 4k monitor or even 1440p, or enable ray tracing, you can't have both. In a 1000€+ card. This seems fine 

 

People with 1080p 60hz monitors are like...  

[TVwazhere]

I'm looking at it with a pinch of salt

 

• we dont know if it was max settings or not (we assume so but it might have been turned down a bit to actually stay above 30fps)
• It's just one AAA game in alpha, so it's not final
• Like VR, it might take years for it to become mainstream (still waiting on VR so lets hope this doesnt take as long)

Live PhysX I'll most likely leave this setting off. 

[porina]

Can't watch the video right now, but will aim to do later.

 

There's another dimension I think that still needs to be understood. At the presentation yesterday the RT and rasterisation seems to be happening in parallel, with the combine and denoise on the end. So you would be limited by the worst of the two parts... will there be separate quality settings on the RT and raster sides? If so, it will be interesting to see how they could be adjusted, and their impact on performance and visual quality.

 

We already have a difference in RT performance between the announced cards, and presumably that will go even lower with the to be announced cards. Presumably some kind of scaling will have to be in place, and that will then allow people to make the usual tradeoffs in quality and framerate.

[Lathlaer]

10 minutes ago, asus killer said:

so you either play in your expensive 4k monitor or even 1440p, or enable ray tracing, you can't have both. In a 1000€+ card. This seems fine 

 

People with 1080p 60hz monitors are like

Finally we will have more interesting answers to questions about bottlenecking

[Brooksie359]

14 minutes ago, asus killer said:

so you either play in your expensive 4k monitor or even 1440p, or enable ray tracing, you can't have both. In a 1000€+ card. This seems fine 

 

People with 1080p 60hz monitors are like...  

I got a 240hx gsync so I am fine with this. Now I don't need to buy a 4k monitor

[descendency]

I'm interested to see that 30 FPS on a GSYNC+HDR monitor, even if it is at 1080p. 

 

As far as the comments about 4k or 1080p with RT. . .  the 1080TI has one option: 4k with rasterization. The 2080TI has two options, 4k with rasterization (at a higher FPS) or 1080p with RT. It's an additional option you get. I can't wait to see benchmarks with (AAA) 4K games at over 120 FPS.