Next Gen GPU's will be even more expensive

[AusWolf]

I don't believe anyone dislikes RT/upscaling.

It's a bit more complex than that.

I like upscaling for giving a helping hand to those with lower-end GPUs. I also like it for letting me play on my HTPC connected to a 4K TV. But I utterly hate it on my main PC. If I've already spent £500+ on a graphics card, then I shouldn't be expected to play with an upscaled low-res, blurry image. No, thanks, I'd rather decrease some other visual settings first.

I don't dislike RT, either, as it is truly a step forward in how we do lights and shadows. But I don't like the performance hit it takes. I also don't think that lights and shadows should be the main focus of computer graphics while humanoid characters still look like lifeless plastic toys up to this day. Textures and geometry are infinitely more important, but nobody seems to be talking about those.

TL,DR: I don't dislike modern advancements in graphics. What I dislike is that these advancements aren't made in areas that I consider crucial.

 

[wheresmycar]

I like upscaling for giving a helping hand to those with lower-end GPUs. I also like it for letting me play on my HTPC connected to a 4K TV. But I utterly hate it on my main PC. If I've already spent £500+ on a graphics card, then I shouldn't be expected to play with an upscaled low-res, blurry image. No, thanks, I'd rather decrease some other visual settings first.

Just curious, for your PC gaming what display resolution are you working with? I'm on 1440p and its a bit of a hit and miss... essentially in some games just not enough pixel density for the sharper/finer upscaled content. So it does have its limitations and you've got most gamers stuck on 1080p hence paying more for ineffective features certainly doesn't help.

I don't dislike RT, either, as it is truly a step forward in how we do lights and shadows. But I don't like the performance hit it takes. I also don't think that lights and shadows should be the main focus of computer graphics while humanoid characters still look like lifeless plastic toys up to this day. Textures and geometry are infinitely more important, but nobody seems to be talking about those.

I'm totally with you on this one. Its one of the reasons i can't be arsed with RT in its current performance standing (outside of the flagshit 4090). Its either undesirably perf taxing or just not appealing enough for the overall eye candy to warrant a BIG spend/perf compromise. My current RTX 3080 gets me through the door to play around with these settings/features but in actual play i'm prioritising performance every time. Some of the less competitive titles or less demanding games i play where I would have fancied RT enabled (without compromising performance goals), sadly those titles are not supported.

Trust me when it comes to more realistic textures/geometry i've been banging on about that stuff for years now. Even at 4K some of the shit thats coming out is lacklustre to say the least. I don't believe for a second the accountability sits with the game developer although they have their part to play in it. The pace of realistic graphics advancements is closely tied to hardware capabilities. We're only a tiny step through the door with some stingy increase of VRAM across mid-tier cards and the rest is thrown in the wind with mediocre generational upgrades and not enough oomph in the mainstream arena (consoles/low-mid end performance builds) to fire-up graphical fidelity through the roof. I hate the lack of depth/realism plastics too!! For the artificial and tasteless eye candy It has to be bloody good gameplay to keep me interested.

 

[tfdsaf]

Nvidia jumped the gun because their 2000 series were giant turds! They had to sell something, so they decided to sell snake oil. RT is amazing, its fantastic and it is the future, in the FUTURE, probably good 5 to 10 years away from actual good real time ray tracing which bring us more real life quality lightning that dramatically changes games, but we are still 5 to 10 years away from that and are relying on crappy RT which blurs the image or changes the image or softens the image, it does all sorts of things except enhance it.

In order to run the crappy blurry RT we need to enable even crappier and blockier upscaling which even further reduces quality, instead of improving it! That is the issue with RT and I blame Nvidia for the initial batch of shit, but I now blame the consumer who buys into the scam.

In 7 years now and 50+ RT games so far, there is probably 2 games where RT looks actually better than raster lightning and that is because they just didn't care about raster lightning and focused primarily on RT and yet it still makes games run like crap.

Again in 5 to 10 years we might have GPU's which do RT with minimal performance loss and the actual RT is movie like quality, not blurry messes who use cheat to get you the lightning and is not real RT.

I'd rather game developers focus on textures, shadows, polygons, interactive objects, real life weather effects for visual quality over lightning. Instead of even low tier gamers gaming at 1440p now at max settings, we are back to the rock and stone ages with having to run 720p upscaled at even medium tier GPU's which now cost $600+.

Mid tier used to cost $350 to $400 and was able to run games at 1440p at max settings with high refresh rates, now we have to run DLSS3+++, FG1,2,3,4, mesh this mesh that, blur turd+, etc... on a $600 "mid tier" 4070 to be able to play at 720p with fake RT.

 

[mama]

Just putting it out there: AMD has not confirmed that it is sticking to the mid-range.

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

Just putting it out there: AMD has not confirmed that it is sticking to the mid-range.

AMD also hasnt confirmed anything high end. Every leak we have seen tops out at a 7800xt class chip.

This is definitely madness. These game developers should be permanently banned from game development (unless graphics on potato settings is better than Cyberpunk 2077 ultra preset).

It's not tho? The 2080ti was twice as fast as the venerable 980ti, which is a decade old card by this point. The 2000 series in general stalled out, and the consoles that released 2 years later raised the bar much higher.

I mean, the 2080ti is 6 YEARS old. Launched in 2018. The 980ti was in the same position in 2021. The 8800 ultra and 3870 were in the same position by 2012. It still manages over 30 FPS at ultra in the newest games that challenge its 11GB framebuffer and limited RT, at med/high it has no issue maintaining 60 FPS. That's pretty good for a over half decade old flagship that's not that much faster then the PS5's GPU.

In retrospec, this would be like using a radeon 9800 pro to play x360 era games, or using a fermi GPU to play games in the late 2010s. It's holding up well,a ll thigns considered.

The fact that stuttering and other problems still happening on the Top high-end single card setups basically proves that dual gpus were never the problem. Its jank game engines that are under developed.

S.L.I/mGPU would/could help if developers actually bother to use it, but instead they take easy way out. Have some a.i do the hard part then add just patch on to the game that adfs d.l.s.s/f.s.r/x.e.s.s. done, let the driver team do the dirty work for d.l.s.s. bwcausw you always need a driver upadte for d.l.s.s for it to work pr look good of not flicker.

Multi GPU was absolutely a problem. The frame latency of modern games stuttering doesnt hold a candle to the dual GPU setups of yesteryear. And with DX11/12, that support was made way harder.

Even with DX12 multi GPU, its not as simple as turning a feature on. It requires a lot of technical support, and of course devs are not going to sign up to support a feature for years on end that makes them no money, for the ~5% of the market that would do it.

 

[iameatingjam]

I'd rather game developers focus on textures, shadows, polygons, interactive objects, real life weather effects for visual quality over lightning. Instead of even low tier gamers gaming at 1440p now at max settings, we are back to the rock and stone ages with having to run 720p upscaled at even

Mid tier used to cost $350 to $400 and was able to run games at 1440p at max settings with high refresh rates, now we have to run DLSS3+++, FG1,2,3,4, mesh this mesh that, blur turd+, etc... on a $600 "mid tier" 4070 to be able to play at 720p with fake RT.

You know what ? I would too. But... I think this is the way we are heading for a couple reasons.

Biggest is.... Rt is easier for developers. I think we'll see more and more games with no rt off options, as we find further ways to optimize and simplify it for mid tier hardware. You can already see traditional lighting methods getting less attention in new games... Like mirrors no longer working without rt when we've had mirrors in video games since Duke Nukem and probably before that. I don't really like this direction either, but it is what it is.

And the other thing is physics... We're getting pretty damn close if not already passed diminishing returns with node size. Improved performance is gonna have to come more from clever designs rather than relying on the next shrink for all the uplift.... hence higher costs and software tricks to try to give you some reason to buy... I'm not a big fan of FG but dlss is like magic, I gotta admit it's pretty amazing tech.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

I'm so disappointed that AMD isn't going to have a high end card this generation. Just having a single vendor that makes high end gpu's is SO BAD. Arc is making good strides but I fear it'll still be so many years until it can properly compete with amd/nvidia.

I’m glad that AMD is going that route.

Lets be honest, you and everyone else complaining about the “lack of competition “ really want AMD to force Ngreedia to cut prices just so all of you can buy a cheaper Ngreedia gpu.

You never had the most minimum intention in giving your money to AMD.

 

[AusWolf]

Just curious, for your PC gaming what display resolution are you working with? I'm on 1440p and its a bit of a hit and miss... essentially in some games just not enough pixel density for the sharper/finer upscaled content. So it does have its limitations and you've got most gamers stuck on 1080p hence paying more for ineffective features certainly doesn't help.

I'm on a 1440 ultrawide at 34". It's fine at native res, but upscaling makes it look blurry as heck in most games. Hogwarts Legacy looked acceptable, but in basically all other cases, it's just meh. I can live without super realistic lighting, but I can't stand a blurry mess regardless of the quality of effects used.

With that said, upscaling is great on my 4K TV, looking at it from a distance. It makes me think that's probably its intended purpose, not a computer monitor.

I'm totally with you on this one. Its one of the reasons i can't be arsed with RT in its current performance standing (outside of the flagshit 4090). Its either undesirably perf taxing or just not appealing enough for the overall eye candy to warrant a BIG spend/perf compromise. My current RTX 3080 gets me through the door to play around with these settings/features but in actual play i'm prioritising performance every time. Some of the less competitive titles or less demanding games i play where I would have fancied RT enabled (without compromising performance goals), sadly those titles are not supported.

I don't play competitively, so I don't chase top performance. Freesync is a brilliant thing, it makes me see everything within its range (which is 48-144 Hz/FPS on my monitor) as smooth. If I have that, happy days. If not, I'll turn off RT, and some other visual settings if needed. Enabling upscaling is the last thing I'd consider doing when everything's on low and I still need a bit more oomph.

Trust me when it comes to more realistic textures/geometry i've been banging on about that stuff for years now. Even at 4K some of the shit thats coming out is lacklustre to say the least. I don't believe for a second the accountability sits with the game developer although they have their part to play in it. The pace of realistic graphics advancements is closely tied to hardware capabilities. We're only a tiny step through the door with some stingy increase of VRAM across mid-tier cards and the rest is thrown in the wind with mediocre generational upgrades and not enough oomph in the mainstream arena (consoles/low-mid end performance builds) to fire-up graphical fidelity through the roof. I hate the lack of depth/realism plastics too!! For the artificial and tasteless eye candy It has to be bloody good gameplay to keep me interested.

Totally!

As for RT, I've only seen three cases:
1. It looks great, but the game looks great without it as well (Cyberpunk, Deliver us the Moon),
2. I can't see any difference (Hogwarts Legacy, Alan Wake 2),
3. The game looks meh with or without it because of poor textures or models (SW Outlaws).

Yet, there's a 4th case which the feature is advertised by: RT being something that really makes your game pop, but I haven't seen this anywhere, yet. RT, whether it looks great or not, just isn't necessary to enjoy a game in any case.

 

[iameatingjam]

Yet, there's a 4th case which the feature is advertised by: RT being something that really makes your game pop, but I haven't seen this anywhere, yet. RT, whether it looks great or not, just isn't necessary to enjoy a game in any case.

Same. I've tried it a few times, and every time it makes the scene look different, but not better. Just.... different. In Alan wake 2 I thought it looked worse actually. Certainly not worth the extra watts.

I have seen RT on some old classics like quake, and I got to admit, that looked pretty cool. But thats about the only nice thing I have to say about my experience with RT.

 

[mtosev]

I'm also the opinion that newer Nvidia graphic cards will be sadly more expensive.

 

[Macro Device]

what more do you want?

I want people to argue with my opinion and not to fight whatever I never said for whatever reason.

I stick to my opinion anyway. 2080 Ti is on par or sometimes better than 4060 Ti (a $400 GPU) so if a game requires you to lower your settings to the minimum for you to run it at 60 FPS it's a wrongfully coded game. Unless, I repeat, it looks awesome (better than any pre-2020 game at Ultra) on such settings.

And, yeah, if you want halo GPUs to cost reasonable money you should have some competition on the market. There is none. We're lucky RTX 4080 and higher tier GPUs don't cost five figures.

 

[chrcoluk]

You know what ? I would too. But... I think this is the way we are heading for a couple reasons.

Biggest is.... Rt is easier for developers. I think we'll see more and more games with no rt off options, as we find further ways to optimize and simplify it for mid tier hardware. You can already see traditional lighting methods getting less attention in new games... Like mirrors no longer working without rt when we've had mirrors in video games since Duke Nukem and probably before that. I don't really like this direction either, but it is what it is.

And the other thing is physics... We're getting pretty damn close if not already passed diminishing returns with node size. Improved performance is gonna have to come more from clever designs rather than relying on the next shrink for all the uplift.... hence higher costs and software tricks to try to give you some reason to buy... I'm not a big fan of FG but dlss is like magic, I gotta admit it's pretty amazing tech.

Sadly I feel like all of hardware advances are serving to make game development easier.

As I said in older posts, I bet if you remade older games today with same visuals as they had, they would need way more grunt than when they did in the past.

I also agree with your point on non RT losing quality. One way to make RT seem like wow is to nerf the non RT quality.

Another aspect as well is with older versions of DX, optimisation was done more in the driver than it is now, so the likes of Nvidia could do more performance enhancing driver side, DX12 shifted that to the game developers.

 

[AusWolf]

I want people to argue with my opinion and not to fight whatever I never said for whatever reason.

I mean, what more do you want from AMD/Nvidia? Halo cards are upsold on the general consensus of them being halo cards, but they aren't any different from all the rest - just a bit faster, but so what? Being the fastest available is not a virtue. Next year, the next best thing comes out, and then, that will be the fastest. There's nothing new or interesting about it.

 

[wheresmycar]

I'm on a 1440 ultrawide at 34". It's fine at native res, but upscaling makes it look blurry as heck in most games. Hogwarts Legacy looked acceptable, but in basically all other cases, it's just meh. I can live without super realistic lighting, but I can't stand a blurry mess regardless of the quality of effects used.

That makes sense, i'm in the same boat with the same RES. Great little tool for Nvidia to target the big spenders on 4K.

As for RT, I've only seen three cases:
1. It looks great, but the game looks great without it as well (Cyberpunk, Deliver us the Moon),
2. I can't see any difference (Hogwarts Legacy, Alan Wake 2),
3. The game looks meh with or without it because of poor textures or models (SW Outlaws).

You can add battlefield to that list too... horrible or almost non-existent RT implementation. Looks as real as a painted canvas. Maybe things have improved over time but im not even bothered to check. My hardware averages around 90fps... can't afford a RT hit on that.

The only game i've played where RT did carry some nice perks is Metro Exodus. The problem being, the perks were limited to some select scenes which did make the visuals pop. In most areas, RT is either over exposed, some odd refractions and you got ambient occlusion working in reverse which somewhat goes against a game which is renowned for dark and gloomy atmospheric environments.

I'm sure there are other examples out there or maybe some unique offerings in the positive. For my games library the RT value at the moment is almost non-existent but something to look forward to eventually.

 

[Zach_01]

Yesh and can totally understand that perspective if I was still on my 3080ti the visual improvement wouldn't be worth the perfomance hit but my current card is literally 2x faster and that's before we even account for DLSS in path traced games.

I also think people are so use to the way games look more realistic doesn't always look better to them.

I still find it hard to believe anyone wouldn't notice PT on vs off in AW2 though.... But we don't have the same eyes or same monitors or the same hardware...

Even with crap youtube compression it's easy to see a difference at least to me.

That being said there are areas that don't benefit just like in CP2077 but until we get games developed with it solely that probably won't change.

At the end if the day what looks better is always going to be subjective. Alan Wake 2 still looks very good with RT off regardless.

Small differences but add up to immersion of a game.
I tried CP2077 3440x1440 native no RT and with FSR2 quality, medium RT, no path and I enjoyed the latter far far more.

 

[iameatingjam]

Sadly I feel like all of hardware advances are serving to make game development easier.

As I said in older posts, I bet if you remade older games today with same visuals as they had, they would need way more grunt than when they did in the past.

I also agree with your point on non RT losing quality. One way to make RT seem like wow is to nerf the non RT quality.

Another aspect as well is with older versions of DX, optimisation was done more in the driver than it is now, so the likes of Nvidia could do more performance enhancing driver side, DX12 shifted that to the game developers.

Yeah I agree with both of those. A lot of the advances are just used for laziness (for lack of a better word - don't want to go too hard at developers I know its not easy for them right now) but thats essentially what it is. Who was it that said ' the real programming starts when you run out memory' well, computers have a lot of ram these days, and still pretty fast ssd paging files behind that. Every new version of Word or photoshop uses more resources and does mostly the same things. I remember running the first photoshop on a computer with 1MB of memory. I mean of course there are improvements (and more os overhead), but the graphs don't seem to be scaling at the same rate.

Dx12 and vulkan may be 'closer to the metal' which in theory gives room for more game optimizations, but thats assuming you have the time to actually do that. A lot of games are made with pre-made engines these days anyway. I like how that gives an easier in for beginners, but the engines have problems of their own. Shader compilation stutter on UE has been a problem for a long time. Programmers CAN do things to lessen it but may not always have time. They are always being pushed for deadlines.

And with all these tools making programming easier - still development times have ballooned. Perhaps its the size of the projects. Maybe its a factor that that so many veteran programmers that know the tricks you used to need, are retiring. There's also all the layoffs to consider (or maybe its the opposite - too many cooks the kitchen). But taking a whole generation to make a game is ridiculous and obviously unsustainable. Maybe projects need to be scaled down? idk. I think we're right in the middle of some kind of shift right now.

Just please - dont let it be more f2p games. I am so often going through steam, something catches me eye only to see the dreaded 'free to play'

 

[TheinsanegamerN]

I’m glad that AMD is going that route.

Lets be honest, you and everyone else complaining about the “lack of competition “ really want AMD to force Ngreedia to cut prices just so all of you can buy a cheaper Ngreedia gpu.

You never had the most minimum intention in giving your money to AMD.

Um, no? We want AMD to compete with nvidia so we can buy flagship radeons without having to spend as much as a used car. Duh? Dont let your anger blind you like this, its not a good look.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

As for RT, I've only seen three cases:
1. It looks great, but the game looks great without it as well (Cyberpunk, Deliver us the Moon),
2. I can't see any difference (Hogwarts Legacy, Alan Wake 2),
3. The game looks meh with or without it because of poor textures or models (SW Outlaws).

Add the game The Ascent.

Beautiful game without RT and enabling RT only gave me…pretty puddles.
And over 50% drop in fps.

Um, no? We want AMD to compete with nvidia so we can buy flagship radeons without having to spend as much as a used car. Duh? Dont let your anger blind you like this, its not a good look.

If that was true, AMD would had a way higher market share.

About the “used car” price, I got a Pulse 7900 XTX with 2 games (worth 170) for 800 so my gpu ended costing around 600 brand new.
Expensive? Yes, but not over 2K for the 4090 or 1300 for the 4080, yet everyone went with those 2 and ignored the 7900xtx.

Anger? Not sure from where you got that impression, i simple spoke the truth.

 

[TumbleGeorge]

Just putting it out there: AMD has not confirmed that it is sticking to the mid-range.

You sure? Because AMD senior vice president say that.
Well maybe with rDNA 5 will got something big. But this is just hope nothing secured.

 

[Ruru]

If that was true, AMD would had a way higher market share.

About the “used car” price, I got a Pulse 7900 XTX with 2 games (worth 170) for 800, brand new. Expensive? Yes, but not over 2K for the 4090 or 1300 for the 4080, yet everyone went with those 2.

Anger? Not sure from where you got that impression, i simple spoke the truth.

I'm pretty sure that people think that Radeons are still as problematic like in the dinosaur era.

Maybe they have some issues from time to time, yet I remember only the 5700 XT issues from the recent years. Though at least I haven't had a single issue with my 6700 XT.

 

[Neo_Morpheus]

I'm pretty sure that people think that Radeons are still as problematic like in the dinosaur era.

Maybe they have some issues from time to time, yet I remember only the 5700 XT issues from the recent years. Though at least I haven't had a single issue with my 6700 XT.

I think that besides what you stated, is the fact that all influencers (formerly known as tech reviewers) keep pushing Ngreedia proprietary tech like dlss as a must have, but never warn them about what lock-in tech is.

I prefer FSR simply because it works on all gpus, not just on AMD and avoid anything that limits my options as a consumer, like DLSS now and PhysX before.

Back when we had real reviews, such techs and tactics would be called out.
Now? Praised and labeled as a must have.

 

[iameatingjam]

I’m glad that AMD is going that route.

Lets be honest, you and everyone else complaining about the “lack of competition “ really want AMD to force Ngreedia to cut prices just so all of you can buy a cheaper Ngreedia gpu.

You never had the most minimum intention in giving your money to AMD.

Um, no? We want AMD to compete with nvidia so we can buy flagship radeons without having to spend as much as a used car. Duh? Dont let your anger blind you like this, its not a good look.

These statements don't necessarily conflict to me. You are both clearly talking about different demographics. Neo-Morpheus is talking more high statistical level., TheinsanegamerN is talking more about the exceptions/the minority/theAMDfanboy. Its not like nobody buys AMD gpus. They may have a small market share, but its a big market.

 

[Ruru]

I think that besides what you stated, is the fact that all influencers (formerly known as tech reviewers) keep pushing Ngreedia proprietary tech like dlss as a must have, but never warn them about what lock-in tech is.

I prefer FSR simply because it works on all gpus, not just on AMD and avoid anything that limits my options as a consumer, like DLSS now and PhysX before.

Back when we had real reviews, such techs and tactics would be called out.
Now? Praised and labeled as a must have.

Yeah, FSR is totally usable like I used it with my 6700 XT when I used it on my main PC with a 4K monitor. Now I use DLSS simply because I currently have a Ngreedia card.

 

[gffermari]

Next gen gpus won't be necessarily more expensive. Even if they come at the same prices as Ada ones, will be bad.
The x90 can be as expensive as the leather jacket man wants. It's a halo product and any price is irrelevant because it targets enthusiasts.
The x80 at 1000 or more is bad. Not slightly or anything bad. Just bad. The x80Ti should be at 1000-1200 and the x80 below 1000.
Meaning from 699 to 899 - depends on the how significant the jump is from the previous x80.

The x60s are way too expensive for me as well as the x70s but not at the same level.
The manufacturing cost has been increased dramatically and the entry level cards cannot be priced according to their value.
-----------
RT is amazing, PT is even greater, as long as you know what to expect.
If you don't have a clue about what RT/PT is doing and how many calculations have to be done for just a single ray then ok, you all can moan endlessly about the requirements.
-------------------
The 2080Ti was capable of running basic RT effects in the games of its era. The 2080 was not. The difference is that the 2080 can use DLSS and play nearly everything today while the 1080Ti, although a better and more powerful card overall, is ready for retirement.

 

[wolf]

Um, no? We want AMD to compete with nvidia so we can buy flagship radeons without having to spend as much as a used car. Duh? Dont let your anger blind you like this, its not a good look.

I would absolutely buy a flagship Radeon if they get the specs, features and price right, but for what I want in a video card, it's been a while, at least since that was better (on balance of all 3 factors) than a competing Nvidia product, but if AMD gets it right enough there is zero roadblock to me getting a Radeon. DLSS is far from the lock in people claim it is.

In fact I'd argue that many if not most PC enthusiasts would do the same if the Radeon were actually compelling enough, some people just need to make imaginary arguments to 'win'. And coming online to essentially act as volunteer marketing for one team and name calling and constantly crapping on the other isn't a good look, as you say.