Intel Xe confirmed to trace rays

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, RejZoR said:

No, we were just upset because they made so much noise and delivered none of it. I still stand by my words that 3 titles in what's now almost a full year is just sad and pathetic.

That's not how it works and you know it. 

[Tristerin]

WE HAVE DEVOLVED THIS THREAD. ENTER AMD FANBOI

 

AMD FANBOI casts BLIND EYE

AMD FANBOI casts CONFUSION

AMD FANBOI uses Item: NAVI

[Tristerin]

Im sorry

 

 

[RejZoR]

8 hours ago, System32.exe said:

This is just how it works, it always takes ages to see the wide adoption of new tech in games. I mean how many years now have DX12/Vulkan been out? And it's still rare to see games using either API. Tessellation took ages to become commonplace too.

And they used tessellation totally wrong. Instead of it being a performance feature, they turned it into what made most games run like dog shit by cramming millions of polygons on everything with pretty much zero visual benefits instead of REMOVING them with zero visual loss (but massive gains in performance). It's why it took ages. Because it was used in a wrong way. Tessellation is advanced LOD and LOD was always used as performance measure, not visual one.

 

The reason I complain over it is because they made this big deal out of a feature and then failed miserably showcasing it in real world. If they had 5 games with fully operational RT and they said, you can buy these 5 games tomorrow along with our new RTX cards after the RTX press release, I'd be pretty amazed. But it's closing to a year now and all they managed to muster were like 3 titles months after cards were released. It's laughable how they failed miserably at pushing this feature. RT is a big thing and they could've done a better job promoting it with actual products as described above. DX12 wasn't such a big of a deal in all honesty. It's just an API, it doesn't inherently bring a visual feature like RT does. But I know why they rushed it all, it was because of shareholders who wanted new products out. Like I said, if they had 5 games ready to be bought with their RTX cards, I'd be fucking thrilled and amazed and it would probably be the biggest thing this decade. Instead it's just yet another feature we'll be waiting for years... I don't care if this is how things have been done for years. They had the opportunity to do it differently and they decided not to. But I'm not allowed to express my thoughts on it because that makes me an AMD fanboy apparently.

[mr moose]

2 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

They had the opportunity to do it differently and they decided not to.

 

Again that's not how it works,  companies don't just decide how fast the industry can make new tech mainstream.    This argument has been around too many times,  about 6 or 7 different people have now told you you are wrong over several different threads, at what point are you going to realise that maybe you just don't understand it?

[CarlBar]

20 hours ago, RejZoR said:

The problem was, until NVIDIA released DXR capable drivers for Pascal range, it was so niche it didn't even matter. Now that Pascal can use it, it at least makes some sense given it's actually playable even on HW not designed for it. The problem is still that hardly any game is supporting it. BF V is one of rare that does, Metro Exodus is on EGS so I couldn't care any less and I'm not sure if the new Tomb Raider has it yet...

 

The future with RT will be nice, but at the moment there was just too much hype with very little substance. And it'll probably stay this way for quite some time I think.

 

Of the games that support it an the demos and benchmarks using it BFV is the only one thats playable without an RTX card atm. And that has a lot to do with how much of a janky ass poor quality implementation it is. More quality has costs in performancer. That said Vega GPU's have waaaaay more compute power than NVIDIA 10 series cards. In games that can leverage that it's no suprise they'e managing tp push into the realms of the low end RTX cards with special hardware, thats just how much grunt they've got in compute terms. Take a low quality enough implementation similar to BFV's and it's no suprise they can run it.

[RejZoR]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

 

Again that's not how it works,  companies don't just decide how fast the industry can make new tech mainstream.    This argument has been around too many times,  about 6 or 7 different people have now told you you are wrong over several different threads, at what point are you going to realise that maybe you just don't understand it?

They could, you know, wait for developers to implement it and then release the cards. But we know they were pressured by investors and board members...

[mr moose]

1 minute ago, RejZoR said:

They could, you know, wait for developers to implement it and then release the cards. But we know they were pressured by investors and board members...

Again and again and again, that's not how it works,  you are putting the horse before the cart.   Are you seriously suggesting that developers are going to develop a product when no suitable hardware or API exists to implement it? 

[RejZoR]

4 hours ago, mr moose said:

Again and again and again, that's not how it works,  you are putting the horse before the cart.   Are you seriously suggesting that developers are going to develop a product when no suitable hardware or API exists to implement it? 

Then what the fuck is GeForce RTX ? NVIDIA bragged how they were doing it for 10 fucking years, do you seriously believe they not once colaborated with any software studio during this time? Oh no, it just magically appeared yesterday and DXR feature for it as well, no dev has seen that one coming aye? Do you even read what you say? Most of graphic features including API are designed WITH hardware vendors. That being that Microsoft works with AMD, Intel and NVIDIA to bring these API's to market. Or do you seriously suggest DXR was entirely cooked up by Microsoft and they were like "oy lads, here's this shit we made, figure it out now and use it in games using your hardware LOL".

[pas008]

33 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Then what the fuck is GeForce RTX ? NVIDIA bragged how they were doing it for 10 fucking years, do you seriously believe they not once colaborated with any software studio during this time? Oh no, it just magically appeared yesterday and DXR feature for it as well, no dev has seen that one coming aye? Do you even read what you say? Most of graphic features including API are designed WITH hardware vendors. That being that Microsoft works with AMD, Intel and NVIDIA to bring these API's to market. Or do you seriously suggest DXR was entirely cooked up by Microsoft and they were like "oy lads, here's this shit we made, figure it out now and use it in games using your hardware LOL".

again you dont know how it works

you dont go blabbing to anyone confidential shit thats how leaks happen by far

and they been working on it for 10yrs not doing it

real time rt is a big deal and look how nvidias version isnt really being fully utilized yet

and that also doesnt mean nvidias version is right or going to be the norm as you can see many are leaning another way

but nvidia could just maybe fix their way with drivers or see how the mainstream takes it and maybe adapt to that

 

 

[RejZoR]

Never heard of NDA apparently...

[pas008]

4 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Never heard of NDA apparently...

apparently you arent frequenting in tech news area with constant leak talks

lol

 

nvidia cant track every developers employees or ex employees

 

and these big companies are only giving reviewers small windows now because of the fact

 

guess you dont get it

 

[RejZoR]

So fucking what if something leaks? It's not like Intel or AMD would be able to cook up a competing product out of one rumored leak. When you have a product so far ahead it doesn't even matter. But whatever.

[mr moose]

8 hours ago, RejZoR said:

Then what the fuck is GeForce RTX ? NVIDIA bragged how they were doing it for 10 fucking years, do you seriously believe they not once colaborated with any software studio during this time? Oh no, it just magically appeared yesterday and DXR feature for it as well, no dev has seen that one coming aye? Do you even read what you say? Most of graphic features including API are designed WITH hardware vendors. That being that Microsoft works with AMD, Intel and NVIDIA to bring these API's to market. Or do you seriously suggest DXR was entirely cooked up by Microsoft and they were like "oy lads, here's this shit we made, figure it out now and use it in games using your hardware LOL".

 

So you think because Nvidia called it RTX that that changes the way the industry evolves?  Your logic is just baffling to me.

I seriously don't understand why you are so adamant that NVIDIA has the power to force other companies to develop things just because they are are developing them.

 

 

[CarlBar]

1 hour ago, mr moose said:

 

So you think because Nvidia called it RTX that that changes the way the industry evolves?  Your logic is just baffling to me.

I seriously don't understand why you are so adamant that NVIDIA has the power to force other companies to develop things just because they are are developing them.

 

 

 

Let me try to explain it in terms anyone understands.

 

Money dear boy.

 

The main thing you need for RTX to appear in games is game engines to support it as most games use 3rd party engines. However adding the support to engines costs money. meaning unless they expect to be able to charge more for it game engine developers won't add it till they know there's going to be hardware that supports and can run it and they'll time the start of the project to have development finish slightly past the hardware release date as this lets them see actual consumer level performance, (rather than whatever the hardware company/s are quoting them), so they can ensure the implementation meets their optimization goals.

 

But that doesn't mean you'll see instant adoption,. Implementing RTX means dedicating development resources, particularly money, to thing. Now some companies are big enough they can cover the cost as an extra on the side, others can get funding from other sources, (and some of these are big enough to get access to game engines beta's prior to public release), but for most projects it's going to be only when the ones that started after the new engines publicly released.

 

Now to be fair for various reasons the ones that can add it miway through development are going to be disproportionately represented amongst the bigger titles. So it's not as bad as it sounds. But you where allways going to see things start with a slow trickle that gets steadily faster and faster because no one was going to have a publicly available means of adding it until after the cards hit the shelves.

[mr moose]

1 hour ago, CarlBar said:

 

Let me try to explain it in terms anyone understands.

 

Money dear boy.

 

Who do you think you are? Please, If I wanted someone to talk down to me like I was an idiot or teenager I would go a start threads in off topic about being a leet 420 player. I don't need your self inflated ego (occasionally misinformed to boot) trying to "educate" me.  If you want me to read your posts, then just say what you think and drop the embarrassing pretense. 

 

Simple fact of the matter is tech takes time to develop then support and gain widespread traction.  claiming otherwise is as bad as those posts where people kept trying to argue RT was a proprietary Nvidia tech.  The ignorance regarding this industry is just astounding.

[RejZoR]

7 hours ago, mr moose said:

 

So you think because Nvidia called it RTX that that changes the way the industry evolves?  Your logic is just baffling to me.

I seriously don't understand why you are so adamant that NVIDIA has the power to force other companies to develop things just because they are are developing them.

 

 

I was talking about the cards, not RTX as feature (which is why I called it GeForce RTX and not just RTX). Jesus... But whatever, it's pointless talking since you just don't want to understand it. When DX12 was announced it was like whatever and we could wait since it brought nothing visual. But if you make something as big as real time ray tracing, they should've made sure they have some actual titles right after release of cards (as in right the next day) for which they should've made sure that companies making them would deliver it. They piss a lot of money shilling their GameWorks stuff, but somehow they couldn't be bothered doing this right. Like, come on. Which totally explains why reception of RTX cards was so shit at launch and is still pretty crappy, otherwise they'd never even bother releasing pointless GTX 1600 series. Why bother jumping on brand new stuff if you can't really use it for anything for months to come. Just imagine during RTX press release, if Huang said "the RTX cards are going on sale tomorrow and to use real-time ray tracing straight away, Battlefield V and Metro Exodus are also getting released tomorrow as well". Not 5 games, just 2 big profile ones would do it. They collaborate with EA all the time and so have with Metro devs and they could easily strike a deal which would benefit both parties. But they decided not to and go with the old way of SW catching up for months. Sigh. That's like Ferrari releasing a whole new 1500 HP supercar, but you'll be able to unlock its full potential like 6 months later when Pirelli releases tires for it...

[leadeater]

11 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Which totally explains why reception of RTX cards was so shit at launch and is still pretty crappy, otherwise they'd never even bother releasing pointless GTX 1600 series

You say that but if I take some sample data from a segment of the gaming community that covers people like us on the forum RTX cards are selling well.

 

That's just slightly over 2 years of sales data, of thousands of cards, and the total sales over that period shows two things. 1.) 1080 Ti was a roaring never seen before success. 2.) RTX generation cards are equal or outselling Pascal bar the 2080 Ti.

[mr moose]

16 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I was talking about the cards, not RTX as feature (which is why I called it GeForce RTX and not just RTX). Jesus... But whatever, it's pointless talking since you just don't want to understand it.

Understand what?  what you have been saying regarding RT and Nvidia is just wrong,  There is nothing to understand.

 

Quote

When DX12 was announced it was like whatever and we could wait since it brought nothing visual. But if you make something as big as real time ray tracing, they should've made sure they have some actual titles right after release of cards (as in right the next day) for which they should've made sure that companies making them would deliver it.

 

Again, that's not how it works,  I am not sure in what dimension a company can ensure other companies are developing for non existent technologies, but it doesn't happen in this one.  Nvidia cannot ensure games have RT becasue they do not make the games.  1.  the API that permitted it was only released in October and 2. much of the hardware that has been out up until the last generation or two and has not been powerful enough.  

 

You are literally asking for Nvidia to make MS and game devs produce things faster for what? because it satisfies your desire to blame nvidia for something?

 

Quote

They piss a lot of money shilling their GameWorks stuff, but somehow they couldn't be bothered doing this right. Like, come on. Which totally explains why reception of RTX cards was so shit at launch and is still pretty crappy, otherwise they'd never even bother releasing pointless GTX 1600 series.

Having a shit dig at Nvidia doesn't further your argument, especially when you are wrong about the reception of RTX.  It was a success whether you like it or not. 

Quote

Why bother jumping on brand new stuff if you can't really use it for anything for months to come. Just imagine during RTX press release, if Huang said "the RTX cards are going on sale tomorrow and to use real-time ray tracing straight away, Battlefield V and Metro Exodus are also getting released tomorrow as well". Not 5 games, just 2 big profile ones would do it. They collaborate with EA all the time and so have with Metro devs and they could easily strike a deal which would benefit both parties. But they decided not to and go with the old way of SW catching up for months. Sigh. That's like Ferrari releasing a whole new 1500 HP supercar, but you'll be able to unlock its full potential like 6 months later when Pirelli releases tires for it...

All of that has been explained to you before.  What is clear is you have a personal grudge against Nvidia, why not just say that rather than make up stuff and bend reality to justify your grudge?

 

[RejZoR]

Dude, whatever...

 

@leadeater

Some % means nothing. What are the pieces numbers compared to Pascal release for example? That would show the actual reception.

[leadeater]

10 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Dude, whatever...

 

@leadeater

Some % means nothing. What are the pieces numbers compared to Pascal release for example? That would show the actual reception.

The amount of products sold shows you how poplar something is. Doesn't matter what the price is, people buy all sorts of things for various prices but when you have to caveat it with "for it's price" then it's overall not, but here there is no caveat it's selling well against the entire market.

 

Edit:

Also FYI 1080 Ti did not exist as a product at the start of the data capture.

 

I think you also don't understand what's being shown, it is pieces. That's the total of all cards sold over that time, all of them. Then broken down to show you the representative spread of each one. If GN told you the total you can use the percentage to get the numbers of each sold.

 

If that data is for 12000 then 1248 are RTX 2070s.

[Mira Yurizaki]

56 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Just imagine during RTX press release, if Huang said "the RTX cards are going on sale tomorrow and to use real-time ray tracing straight away, Battlefield V and Metro Exodus are also getting released tomorrow as well". Not 5 games, just 2 big profile ones would do it. They collaborate with EA all the time and so have with Metro devs and they could easily strike a deal which would benefit both parties. But they decided not to and go with the old way of SW catching up for months.

If we're going to go this route, then go do some homework for me:

• When Hardware T&L was available for consumers (via DirectX 7 and GeForce 256), how many games that used it were available at launch?
• When programmable shading was available for consumers (via DirectX 8 and GeForce 3), how many games that used it were available at launch?
• When DX10 was available for consumers (via Windows Vista, GeForce 8, and Radeon HD 2000), how many games that used it were available at launch?
• When DX11 tessellation was available for consumers (via Windows 7, Radeon HD 5000, and GeForce 400), how many games that used it were available at launch?
• When DX12 was available for consumers (via Windows 10), how many games that used it were available at launch?

Once you have the answer to all of those, come back and tell me if what we have now is anything vastly different.

[RejZoR]

Out of all the features listed, only Pixel Shaders brought a significant visual gain. The rest was meh and it didn't really matter whether it existed or not, at least for casual consumers.

 

Besides, this is NOTHING I've been talking about which is why I keep repeating that you don't get it, but instead I can already sense the "you must be AMD fanboy pissing on NVIDIA vibe yet again lke always). I've been talking about how much bigger impact it would have if they DID launch it this way. So it was NVIDIA this time, I'd hold same opinion if it was AMD or Intel in the same position. I'm talking about NVIDIA wasting a good opportunity to make a far bigger release than they made. Or has all of you forgot the times when people were buying specific cards BECAUSE of games and not specific games because they already had specific graphic card? Or am I really that fucking old to remember that?

 

@leadeater

Now, ask those users how many of them bought the cards because of RTX specifically and not just because they were buying new card and these happened to be the newest ones at the time? I bet you'd get a whole different picture... Especially because that GTX 1080Ti is so high up there because of good value even at its launch price. At 800€ it was over 40% faster than vanilla GTX 1080 which was what, 599€ at the time 1080Ti was released? Somewhere along those lines. So, for 200-300€ premium you got 40% more performance using single card. That alone justified the purchase even if it didn't bring anything else to the table. It's also why I picked it and I can bet again it's why that graph for it is by far the highest. Hell, everyone was saying get GTX 1080Ti if you can when RTX cards were already out. So, there's that...

[leadeater]

18 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Now, ask those users how many of them bought the cards because of RTX specifically and not just because they were buying new card and these happened to be the newest ones at the time? I bet you'd get a whole different picture...

Why, all you implied is that RTX cards were not selling very well which isn't the case. None of them as much as the 1080 Ti which was such an amazing product, that people knew would be coming, that offered a great performance uplift over the 1080 for a price at the time many were willing to pay.

 

Even under much harsher pricing conditions the RTX card are selling well for higher prices and that data for the graph is only missing 4 months of sales data for Pascal.

 

RT/RTX technology objectively appears to have no bearing on the sales of the cards. This is because it doesn't make them worse performing products, had RTX implementation in the few games that have them been better or been visually more impressive the number likely would be higher but then we'd be arguing that a successful selling product could have been more successful but regardless it's still successful.

 

Here the product and the technology can be separated and evaluated alone because the failure of the technology doesn't make the product a failure, it still does all the traditional graphics processing. As for the technology, it's far too soon to declare it's success or not.

 

Since I know you were in those threads you should think back to my opinions on the RTX product pricing and on how good I think current RTX game implementation is. None of that stops me from looking at the sales data and seeing that the RTX cards are indeed selling just fine irrespective of my opinions of the products and pricing.

 

Edit:

18 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

Hell, everyone was saying get GTX 1080Ti if you can when RTX cards were already out. So, there's that...

Only because at the time it was cheaper, that hasn't been true for a while. There is no reason to pay more for a 1080 Ti over an RTX 2080 when they both perform the same with the RTX 2080 fairing better in newer titles using newer technology. Nobody should pay more for less, so buy what ever is better regionally which was the actual advice.

[Mira Yurizaki]

24 minutes ago, RejZoR said:

I'm talking about NVIDIA wasting a good opportunity to make a far bigger release than they made. Or has all of you forgot the times when people were buying specific cards BECAUSE of games and not specific games because they already had specific graphic card? Or am I really that fucking old to remember that?

I don't even think you're that old considering that this has been a problem since, oh, I don't know, the beginning of time.

 

There wasn't any Hardware T&L games available when the GeForce 256 came out. There wasn't any programmable shader games available when the GeForce 3 came out. There wasn't any DX10 games available when Vista was released. I think there was like only one game that had any significant amount of attention when DX11 came out.

 

So you were either in two camps when a graphics card with a revolutionary new feature came: you bought one hoping for the future, or you were waiting for the future to arrive. And it hasn't even been with graphics cards. This has happened with hardware in general.

 

EDIT: Also I do buy games based on the technological features it has if I have no real interest in it otherwise, just to see those technological features in play. For instance, I bought Battlefield V after my GTX 1080 became DXR compatible, even though I don't care to play the multiplayer (it was also on sale, so there's that, but I wouldn't have bothered if my card wasn't DXR compatible)