PC Gaming

7287 readers

1 users here now

Rule #1: Be civil

Rule #2: No spam, memes, off-topic, or low-effort posts/comments

Rule #3: No advertisements

Rule #4: No streams, random gameplay videos, highlights, or shorts

Rule #5: No erotic games or porn

Rule #6: No facilitating piracy

Rule #7: No duplicates

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Raytracing overblown? (lemm.ee)

submitted 6 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

25 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Much as I love the look of Quake RTX, it feels like it’s a barely there performance hog in modern games. You look at the benchmarks on the newer cards and so much is focused on ray tracing performance but I just don’t see that big a difference in Cyberpunk on an 3080 Ti unless I look really hard for it.

Am I alone in this? I’d much rather have 100+ non generated FPS at 4k over what raytracing is delivering in major titles. And by 4k I really mean my super modded Skyrim VR :)

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 6 days ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

You are not alone in feeling it's overblown.

Well-done ray tracing can be beautiful, but realistically, it doesn't matter to me. I'm not Narcissus; I don't play games to stare at my reflection in a puddle. My time and attention are almost entirely devoted to things that move too fast for ray tracing to matter, or reading text, or the geometry of a scene as I plan my approach to whatever I'm about to do.

If all other things were equal, I would gladly take the extra eye candy. But to me, it's not worth paying significantly more money for real-time ray tracing hardware and higher electricity bills.

Please wake me up in ten years or so, when every GPU does it well without measurably increasing power draw.