Neon Noir CRYENGINE Ray Tracing Benchmark

[The1Dickens]

So, in case anyone hasn't heard, CRYENGINE just released a 'benchmark' utilizing ray tracing. You can get the launcher from the website, and then download the benchmark to see how your system performs. It's not crazy like FireStrike or any of those benchmarks, but its interesting to see where your system sits without ray-tracing focused hardware. My system is an i7 6850K and 1080Ti 16GB RAM and barely dips into the high 50s fps at 1440p. Though, at 2160p, I hit as low as low 20s. It also doesn't spit out MIN/MAX fps or anything, just gives an overall score.

 

There is also an option to run the benchmark with Razer Chroma activated (which would be interesting to watch at least once).

 

Anyways, I thought this was pretty neat and figured others might want to try it out (with or without RTXs).

[vanished]

You don't sound impressed but if you're achieving 50+ fps at 1440p doing ray tracing on a card that doesn't even officially support it, that's pretty huge considering how RTX benchmarks tend to run on non-RTX hardware.  This could be, as some have speculated, a sign that the future of ray tracing is general compute + open APIs and not RTX.

[TrigrH]

4 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

You don't sound impressed but if you're achieving 50+ fps at 1440p doing ray tracing on a card that doesn't even officially support it, that's pretty huge considering how RTX benchmarks tend to run on non-RTX hardware.  This could be, as some have speculated, a sign that the future of ray tracing is general compute + open APIs and not RTX.

move to tech news?

[The1Dickens]

2 minutes ago, TrigrH said:

move to tech news?

I didn't follow the proper formatting, so that's why I put it here.

 

8 minutes ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

You don't sound impressed

Ha ha, yeah. Inside, I'm ecstatic, though. Just means I can get a few more years out of my 1080Ti. Not gonna lie, I was a bit nervous thinking it was going to be nearly useless in a couple years if everyone jumped on to ray tracing and it needed hardware.

[SkilledRebuilds]

Ultra is FullRes

Vhigh is like 50% Resolution RT.

 

No Preset or Variability of settings allowed except overall Render Resolution.

GTX1070

900p Ultra performance Matches 1080p Vhigh at 55-75fps typicals and 1080p ULTRA can get to the mid40s up to 65fps on looking directly at HQ Reflections to not....

 

Not Monetized,.. Video showing it off on my System.

https://youtu.be/usXF6AGD71U

 

[Firewrath9]

that's cool, perhaps they'll release a Crysis Remaster with vendor-agnostic raytracing? I'd buy that, I've never played Crysis.

Prepare for the 23 fps on flagship GPU again

[BuckGup]

I mean all the RT focused hardware is just denoising the images because they aren't actually fast enough for the fidelity a consumer would consider as acceptable. So technically if your hardware is fast enough or software is better you don't need all the extra bits

[vanished]

3 minutes ago, BuckGup said:

I mean all the RT focused hardware is just denoising the images because they aren't actually fast enough for the fidelity a consumer would consider as acceptable. So technically if your hardware is fast enough or software is better you don't need all the extra bits

I thought there was two pieces to the specialized hardware - RT cores that specifically do the ray tracing, and then tensor cores that run the denoising code?

[Tristerin]

1600x900 Ultra 4819 points on R9 Fury, lows of 37 got into the 80 FPS but mostly high 40s

[Rune]

I'm still waiting for Crysis 4, damnit. The story isn't over yet.

[JZStudios]

12 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

You don't sound impressed but if you're achieving 50+ fps at 1440p doing ray tracing on a card that doesn't even officially support it, that's pretty huge considering how RTX benchmarks tend to run on non-RTX hardware.  This could be, as some have speculated, a sign that the future of ray tracing is general compute + open APIs and not RTX.

Incorrect. It doesn't support RTX. My 2gb 960 will do ray tracing and has done for years.

Still, getting 50fps is pretty impressive, but game engines have always run better. I'll be completely unsurprised if it turns out that RTX is exceptionally inefficient.

12 hours ago, The1Dickens said:

I didn't follow the proper formatting, so that's why I put it here.

 

Ha ha, yeah. Inside, I'm ecstatic, though. Just means I can get a few more years out of my 1080Ti. Not gonna lie, I was a bit nervous thinking it was going to be nearly useless in a couple years if everyone jumped on to ray tracing and it needed hardware.

You will if Nvidia has anything to say about it. They'll pay off companies to shoehorn RTX in instead of doing an OpenGL implementation or something because it only runs on Nvidia cards, despite that it runs like shit. So far RTX has been optional and I would say will remain so for quite some time. The big launch titles that were supposed to support it have all been pretty underwhelming, with Assetto Corsa just dropping it outright.

[Mira Yurizaki]

12 hours ago, BuckGup said:

I mean all the RT focused hardware is just denoising the images because they aren't actually fast enough for the fidelity a consumer would consider as acceptable. So technically if your hardware is fast enough or software is better you don't need all the extra bits

Technically if you hardware is fast enough, you can do anything. Case in point, you can run DX12 games purely on the CPU using the Windows Advanced Rasterizer Platform

 

However, just because you can run something with "fast enough" hardware, doesn't mean the hardware accelerator is a moot point. Remember when 3dfx said hardware T&L was pointless because you could make up the difference with a fast enough CPU? That went well for them.

 

12 hours ago, Ryan_Vickers said:

I thought there was two pieces to the specialized hardware - RT cores that specifically do the ray tracing, and then tensor cores that run the denoising code?

The RT cores on RTX cards are to accelerate the BVH traversal function, which is the actual "ray tracing" step. But that's the whole point of the RT cores, to accelerate the process. It's much slower in comparison to do it in a pure compute shader.

[kingmustard]

Here are my results:

 

 

Shame it's ray tracing with lots of corner-cutting.

[Zando_]

I spy a fellow X99 boi

 

And hmmmm I should download it tonight and see how it runs on my 1660 Ti, lol. Or if I can be arsed to, pull out my bigboye and see how it does on the Radeon VII. Would be interesting to see how it compares to a 1080 Ti in this task (back when I had a 1080 Ti I didn't do much head to head testing). 

[Mira Yurizaki]

Also for you nerds out there, here's their article explaining the technology: https://www.cryengine.com/news/view/how-we-made-neon-noir-ray-traced-reflections-in-cryengine-and-more

 

Note that ray tracing doesn't require special hardware. It never did. It's like people forgot this was a thing (in 2011):

 

[CarlBar]

On 11/14/2019 at 5:32 PM, kingmustard said:

Here are my results:

 

 

Shame it's ray tracing with lots of corner-cutting.

 

Nice video link explaining how they managed it. Really cleans up some info.

 

TLDR for anyone not wanting to watch: They cut a number of corners meaning it can't do several things that DXR does and the avoid heavily stressing the GPU with lots of reflections in one scene. The result is still a significant uptick in quality for less drop in performance. But it's very much a case of less of a drop in performance in exchange for less of an uptick in quality. The one thing they appear to have got setup better than DXR, (which is the actual software side of things that developers use to implement raytracing effects in their engines, RTX is simply the name of the hardware solution for accelerating this that NVIDIA came up with, AMD could implement ray tracing on the 5700XT simply by implementing the appropriate DXR software hooks in their drivers if they wanted), is that when a particular effect isn't being used it does a much better job of culling unnecessary raycasting.

[Arika]

On 11/14/2019 at 4:12 PM, Rune said:

I'm still waiting for Crysis 4, damnit. The story isn't over yet.

it will be released along side Half Life 3

[Mira Yurizaki]

6 hours ago, CarlBar said:

-snip-

My only issue with this is that it's a benchmark and not more fleshed out tech demo. i.e., something like Ungine's demos where there's a benchmarking mode, but you can also explore the environment. I would've liked to explore around and poke at what it can and can't do.

[CarlBar]

54 minutes ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

My only issue with this is that it's a benchmark and not more fleshed out tech demo. i.e., something like Ungine's demos where there's a benchmarking mode, but you can also explore the environment. I would've liked to explore around and poke at what it can and can't do.

 

That i can dig, the video did note that when there where a lot of reflective surfaces on screen in one section of the benchmark the FPS really dipped, (by around 50%), and longer sight lines or more reflective and/or varied environments would absolutely show more of the limitations or performance hits with the technique. It's still impressive mind, but the fixed demo aspect does let them give a close to best case scenario.