Battlefield 5 - New Update will improve RayTracing Performance by up to 50% says Nvidia

[CarlBar]

2 minutes ago, D13H4RD said:

It's not a 50% overall improvement. 

 

It's an improvement of up to 50%

 

Quite a difference there, because it means the gains will vary depending on various conditions. 

 

What i meant is that there's a strong possibility long term over the course of several updated to both software and drivers that they could see an average 50% improvement across the board, not that we'd get the full 50% al the time from just this update alone.

 

I'll do a little type up after this.

[Kibelok]

14 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Technically, they're competing with themselves.  I guess I'm just more patient than most and waiting until next fall to watch the whole Navi/RTX thing go down before I up to a better card.

Oh yeah definitely, I'm in the same boat as you. I think AMD will show us great cards that can run Real Time Ray Tracing. We'll see.

[illegalwater]

7 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

And, I can probably reduce or match that by OCing a 1080 Ti which would be far more worth it to me.  The only problem there is if you run into the factor of the game hating OCs.  Which then ya maybe if you really need those frames go for it.

It's impossible to match a 2080 Ti by overclocking a 1080 Ti though, you're not even going to get close. Also the 2080 Ti can be overclocked as well..

[jasonvp]

24 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

I was watching benchmarks on youtube...

OK, so fair point: you don't have first-hand experience.  Got it.  It actually matters.

 

Quote

 

I would just like to see an update performance at 4k with a 2080 Ti pushing 140 frames at ultras in extremely demanding games without RTX on.

 

To be completely fair: that's an unrealistic expectation.  No single GPU can handle that right now.  Not anything from NVidia nor AMD.  To push 4K/140, you need a pair of them.

 

[Blademaster91]

2 hours ago, jasonvp said:

No, it really isn't.  It's just "hate train" stuff at this point that won't ever stop.  At this point, NVidia and Dice could show us 4K/140FPS in ultra with DXR set to ultra as well, and the same set of folks would tell us it sucks.

The "hate train" is because Nvidia is charging $500 or more for a gimmicky tech that cuts your FPS in half, and is especially a huge gimmick in a fast paced FPS game like Battlefield 5 where you don't care how shiny the puddle of water or a window is because you're focusing on actually playing the game.

2 hours ago, RorzNZ said:

Why didn't they just release the game like this, instead of releasing a now unfinished product? For 50% you'd have to have a fair bit unoptimised. Just wait a few months and you'd have much better marketing for RTX straight off the bat.

That claim of "up to" 50% seems a bit much IMO, and well because EA released BF5 as a service so the game is broken at launch and things that should been fixed at release don't get fixed until later.

[Guest]

Just now, Blademaster91 said:

That claim of "up to" 50% seems a bit much IMO, and well because EA released BF5 as a service so the game is broken at launch and things that should been fixed at release don't get fixed until later.

I do know why really lol because money, but it shouldn't be this way. 

[jasonvp]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

So, I can't have an opinion unless I touch every product I give an opinion on?  Cuz most people who do give opinions just look at benchmarks.  I think you're just trying to dismiss opinions to avoid buyer's remorse.

Of course you can give your opinion.  Just don't try to color them as "logic" or "fact" when they're neither.

 

Quote

I can have my opinion on the matter by watching benchmarks and doing other research.

Yes, you can.  And now we're done.

 

[jasonvp]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

As for this bit you took it out of context.  I was saying to call it a curb stomp which you keep calling 10-20 frames.

Here's my direct experience on the matter.  Not something I read, or a video I watched.  It's actually using the cards in question with the games I play:

 

Rainbow Six Siege's AnvilNext engine is an awfully-optimized pile of poop as far as game engines go from a performance perspective (opinion).  Trying to make it push 4K/140 with a pair of Pascal cards was frustrating, but I did eventually get it to work.  The thing was: I had to turn some of the deets down, like the Shadow Details (not the Shading... there's a difference).  With that, 4K/140 but: both cards were working at or near 100%.  Constantly.  Literally flat-lined at 100% in the Afterburner graphs, and confirmed with my Playclaw system overlay.

 

I installed the 2080Tis in SLI.  They laughed at Siege in 4K.  140FPS?  Easy-peazy.  I was able to crank the Shadow Quality back to max.  Still 140 (soft-capped).  I played with the AA and was still able to keep 140 (soft-capped).  All this time the cards were running at anywhere from 40-60%.  High enough that 1 card wouldn't handle it reliably.  Low enough that they're basically sleeping.

 

I call that a curb stompage.

 

Battlefield V has been a nightmare as far as performance goes.  Completely ignoring DX12 and DXR.  I'm purely talking about DX11 performance.  Again: with the Pascal cards in SLI I was never able to hold 140 for any length of time.  And both cards were nearly sweating to do it.  Pinned at or near 100%.

 

After installing the 2080Ti cards, I found: 4K/140 was a lot easier.  Not "easy-mode" like Siege, but a lot easier.  They're not running anywhere near 100% for any length of time, and my frame rate generally hovers around my soft-cap of 140.  This with details set to "high" except AA, AO, and post-processing (lowest allowed).

 

Curb stompage.

 

You don't seem to want to admit or acknowledge, but these 2080Ti cards are just better in every possible way.  That is unless you're also concerned with price/performance.  I'm not.

 

[asus killer]

is this another one of those nvidia % things

 

[Blademaster91]

19 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

So, I can't have an opinion unless I touch every product I give an opinion on?  Cuz most people who do give opinions just look at benchmarks.  I think you're just trying to dismiss opinions to avoid buyer's remorse.

 

^Like right there.  Or a bit after it just "hate or ignorance".

I can have my opinion on the matter by watching benchmarks and doing other research.  I'm not saying the 2080 Ti is a bad product, but I have yet to see a justification for such a rushed product.  Maybe you have.  I'm just not going to pay early adopter fees, wait for drivers and support to mature, and to wait for AMD to compete rather than Pascal to be the primary competition to these cards.  

A lot of buyers gave Nvidia their opinion with their wallets and bought 10 series cards instead.  I just don't see the logic in buying into a rushed product that few games support,and only slightly justifies BFV yet is also a rushed product. I could care less if Nvidia and EA increases RTX performance by 100% the game itself is still incomplete and buggy.

[kingmustard]

On my 2080, I ran the game at 1440p ultra (ray tracing low) at 50-60 FPS (with occasional dips onto the 40s).

 

Hopefully, this will allow me to hit 60 FPS most of the time

[CarlBar]

34 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

And, I can probably reduce or match that by OCing a 1080 Ti which would be far more worth it to me.  The only problem there is if you run into the factor of the game hating OCs.  Which then ya maybe if you really need those frames go for it.

 

 

Not even close, in many game the 2080Ti is 30% faster than a 1080Ti, you just can't push a 1080ti that far. You need to get up around 2400mhz core clock and that requires LN 2. the 2080Ti does this out the box.

 

An OC'd 2080Ti can potentially with the right silicon hit 90FPS at 4k. Thats not bad at all and it's the only card that can do 1440p at 144hz in the more demanding games.

 

 

And that last point is sort of the reason i got a 2080Ti, it will let me keep playable frame rates at max settings in future games long past the current time point. A 30% performance hike could easily be a year plus more time before FPS starts to become an issue.

 

 

I did say i was going to do some quick breakdowns on the BFV RTX render stuff DICE revealed.

 

Very simplified version of what goes on to create each frame to the best of my understanding first:

 

Step 1. Do a normal render in the rasterization engine of the scene minus reflections. This is identical to what you'd get rendered for BFV with reflections disabled.

 

Step 2: Render a special version of the scene for ray tracing to happen in. This hs a lot of stuff removed from it compared to the normal render, but it's still yet another complete render.

 

Step 3: Use the RT cores to send rays bouncing around.

 

Step 4: The Rasterization engine grabs colour values from where the rays stopped and composites them all together to produce the Ray Traced image.

 

Step 5: The ray traced image is denoised. Currently it appear but is not confirmed this is being done on the Raster engine, not the Tensor Cores.

 

Step 6: Combine the Ray traced image with the image produced in step 1 from the normal rasterized render.

Step 7: send to Monitor.

 

 

The key issues are two fold. First despite performance savings in each of the renders it's virtually guaranteed that steps 1 plus 2 will take longer than a normal raster only render with raster reflections.

 

Second the Render pipeline can only do one thing at once. That means aside from step 3 the RT cores are doing nothing whilst during step 3 the raster engine is sitting on it's hands.

 

Whilst what DICE have announced should have a major positive effect on the framerate as it's speeding up steps 3-5, the real trick they're waiting on is NVIDIA to enable multiple rendering in their drivers. Turning supports doing 2 things at once on the raster engine but there's currently a driverlockout in place. With the lockout removed they could be doing all of the ray trace image steps on the raster engine in parallel with rendering the normal image. Whilst they'll slow each other down somewhat it means neither has to wait on the other so the frametime is now equal to the longer of the 2 sets of operations rather than the sum of the times of all the operations. Add in ray trace render optimisations and raytrace optimisations to get those steps down and we could start seeing frame times that are much lower because there's less dead time on the system.

[IceCold008]

I still say wait for the 21 series or later for RTX to really shine. I guess the 2000 series is for all those BETA testers out there LOL. And im not joking. 

 

My bad i meant 21 series or 22 series. Its late and im tried lol

[kingmustard]

Just now, IceCold008 said:

I still say wait for the 3000 series or later for RTX to really shine. I guess the 2000 series is for all those BETA testers out there LOL. And im not joking. 

That's 10 generations...

[illegalwater]

1 minute ago, kingmustard said:

That's 10 generations...

Just like how 10 series -> 20 series was ten generations too. Oh wait..

[kingmustard]

Just now, System32.exe said:

Just like how 10 series -> 20 series was ten generations too. Oh wait..

IceCold008 clearly thinks the next generation of cards will be the 30x0, instead of the 21x0 cards.

[illegalwater]

2 minutes ago, kingmustard said:

IceCold008 clearly thinks the next generation of cards will be the 30x0, instead of the 21x0 cards.

Pascal = 10X0

Turing = 20X0

Next gen = 30X0

 

[kingmustard]

Just now, System32.exe said:

Pascal = 10X0

Turing = 20X0

Next gen = 30X0

 

5x0, 6x0, 7x0, 9x0, 10x0.

 

Each was a generation.

 

Which bit are you struggling with? I can try to help.

[illegalwater]

Maxwell = 9X0

Pascal = 10X0

Turing = 20X0

Next gen = 30X0

 

There's a pattern here, what could it be..

 

Oh yeah, the first number always goes up by one each generation.

[Speakerator]

well, looks like we have to wait for the update a little longer... what's up with all the companies messing up their updates lately... 

 

[Master Disaster]

Interesting, so EA is gimping RTX so the few thousand people who actually bought BF5 and own a 2000 series card can play at a decent FPS.

 

Meanwhile the game is buggy and totally unfinished for everyone.

[Blademaster91]

52 minutes ago, Speakerator said:

well, looks like we have to wait for the update a little longer... what's up with all the companies messing up their updates lately... 

 

 

Spoiler

 

It seems like most "AAA" game companies are having trouble with their games. But wow, not looking good for EA selling BF5 as a live service. What a mess if they can't even launch their first Tides Of War chapter on time.

46 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Interesting, so EA is gimping RTX so the few thousand people who actually bought BF5 and own a 2000 series card can play at a decent FPS.

 

Meanwhile the game is buggy and totally unfinished for everyone.

If i remember correctly, the BF5 launch was delayed in the first place to work on RTX. It sucks they'd rather have the game buggy and waste time and money on RTX instead.

[CarlBar]

1 hour ago, Blademaster91 said:

It seems like most "AAA" game companies are having trouble with their games. But wow, not looking good for EA selling BF5 as a live service. What a mess if they can't even launch their first Tides Of War chapter on time.

 

Could be Microsoft's delayed October update left everyone behind on final QC checks which means they're hitting time crunches.

 

2 hours ago, Master Disaster said:

Interesting, so EA is gimping RTX so the few thousand people who actually bought BF5 and own a 2000 series card can play at a decent FPS.

 

Meanwhile the game is buggy and totally unfinished for everyone.

 

Nowhere have they indicated they are gimping it. Seriously read up thread where someone ran a debug tool and found the actual RTX hardware isn't even being seriously taxed. It's the raster engine parts that are holding things up. And this fits with DICE's descriptions of area for improvement, (see my breakdown up thread), and that also fits with observed lower power consumption during RTX enabled usage. That was one of the big red flags of RTX performance as it implied that less of the silicon was active on average despite a new silicon side element being enabled.

[williamcll]

Would you buy a cheaper 2080ti if its special cores were removed?

[TopHatProductions115]

@williamcll For the right price, yes. Turing is still worth the upgrade IMO. If a refresh comes out for that same arch, even better  Especially if it came with Tensor cores...