Poll: Which is the better visual upgrade, HDR 10 or Ray Tracing?

[jubei]

So i have a c9 downstairs and now a cx oled for my monitor and i'm not sure i would even know if i was seeing HDR or not. People are talking like it's a massive game changer but i havent noticed a difference. I was under the impression that Punisher and things on netflix was in HDR but i watched it before and after i got the oled and i didnt notice anything?

Is there a particular source i can look at that will allow me to see a comparison?

 

[deuse]

Definitely HDR, by such a margin I’m surprised this is ever a question.

For those saying 4K and ray tracing are bigger jumps, are you using poor implementations such as HDR 400 / HDR 600?

I've got 2000+ Nits and windows can't control my HDR\FALD TV

 

[Nexus18]

I am using a vega 56 (cost me £300) on my e7 (cost me £900) and mostly game at 1440 60HZ on my oled, HDR still fully works and games still look far better than any other non HDR/LCD display especially compared to 4k monitors and I much prefer gaming on my TV compared to my 3440x1440 144HZ IPS screen in every way possible, even motion clarity is superior on the oled compared to my LCD monitor.

One of the many advantages of TVs over monitors, their scalers are superb i.e. you don't have to run at native res. unlike monitors, anything but native res. looks crap.

So i have a c9 downstairs and now a cx oled for my monitor and i'm not sure i would even know if i was seeing HDR or not. People are talking like it's a massive game changer but i havent noticed a difference. I was under the impression that Punisher and things on netflix was in HDR but i watched it before and after i got the oled and i didnt notice anything?

Is there a particular source i can look at that will allow me to see a comparison?

Play some games, best ones I find for HDR are assassins creed odyssey, gears 5, fallen order, battlefront 2 and COD modern warfare.

 

[mingey]

Whole premise of the thread was baited towards AMD regardless and to make a point of Ray Tracing Vs HDR, both completely different but thread was done so in a fashion to highlight the fact AMDs weakness in RT is a moot point because we have HDR, AMD shills/fans need only apply.

 

[Woodsta888]

I am using a vega 56 (cost me £300) on my e7 (cost me £900) and mostly game at 1440 60HZ on my oled, HDR still fully works and games still look far better than any other non HDR/LCD display especially compared to 4k monitors and I much prefer gaming on my TV compared to my 3440x1440 144HZ IPS screen in every way possible, even motion clarity is superior on the oled compared to my LCD monitor.

One of the many advantages of TVs over monitors, their scalers are superb i.e. you don't have to run at native res. unlike monitors, anything but native res. looks crap.



Play some games, best ones I find for HDR are assassins creed odyssey, gears 5, fallen order, battlefront 2 and COD modern warfare.

Well a Vega 56 was never going to run your 1440p monitor at 144hz unless you turned all the settings down. So you are comparing running 60hz on an OLED 2560x1440 vs 3440x1440@ 144hz which your card will never run? And you've never used Ray tracing? LoL.

Give me high refresh and associated framerates any day over a 60hz slide show.

 

[Woodsta888]

Whole premise of the thread was baited towards AMD regardless and to make a point of Ray Tracing Vs HDR, both completely different but thread was done so in a fashion to highlight the fact AMDs weakness in RT is a moot point because we have HDR, AMD shills/fans need only apply.

Oh yeah, forgot OP used to work for AMD

 

[M1k3H]

Whole premise of the thread was baited towards AMD regardless and to make a point of Ray Tracing Vs HDR, both completely different but thread was done so in a fashion to highlight the fact AMDs weakness in RT is a moot point because we have HDR, AMD shills/fans need only apply.

AMD weakness in a feature that only 0.01% of games have and looks nice in about half of them, whilst tanking performance.* Corrected that for you.

HDR on my C9 is great. Obviously there’s a difference watching a stand up comedy in HDR versus a nature documentary.

 

[almoststew1990]

I've got an HDR10 TV (Sony XH9196) and HDR looks pretty grey and washed out. I was aware that my budget wouldn't stretch to "real HDR" when I bought it and that seems to be the case but the thread title suggests HDR10 is the real HDR?

It's an edge lit TV so maybe that's why.

(I also bought it because it advertised a "motion rate of 1000Hz but a native rate of 100Hz". Nope, it's a 60Hz panel, pretty ****** advertising tbh!)

 

[SnR3]

The real ray tracing is far superior visual effects upgrade than hdr.
Nvidia rtx implementation of it and amd 6800 series clone and RT on consoles Is a pathetic attempt at that and should be considered gimmick for justifying driving prices up.

 

[mburn_83]

AMD weakness in a feature that only 0.01% of games have and looks nice in about half of them, whilst tanking performance.* Corrected that for you.

HDR on my C9 is great. Obviously there’s a difference watching a stand up comedy in HDR versus a nature documentary.

That is only relevant if you want to count every game that has come before.

CPunk is the only game that matters imo and will be the sign of things to come.

HDR has not impressed me - washed out colours/random solar flares; but i dont have an oled - so it perhaps requires a high end panel to fully appreciate.

 

[Wrinkly]

I'm lucky as my display matches the one on the right

Just out of curiosity, to all HDR owners, don't you find that eye-strain sets in quicker with HDR, especially in a darkened room? I find DCR adds some value to the image, while tireing my eyes.

 

[DeenC]

It's such a shame that PC monitors aren't up to the job of displaying proper HDR unless you go for the ludicrously overpriced ones. Then you have LG charging £900 for ultrawides with no local dimming and faux HDR. If someone like Samsung could produce a 40" tv with all the features of their high end QLEDS such as Full array dimming, HDMI 2.1, high refresh etc they would clean up. LG 48" OLED is just too big for most to be used as a monitor.

One of the advantages of ray tracing is that your current monitor, no matter how crap will still show the benefits. I have HDR 400 on my ultrawide and haven't even bothered turning it on, although it is nice on my Panasonic OLED and PS4 Pro combo in the living room.

 

[M1k3H]

That is only relevant if you want to count every game that has come before.

CPunk is the only game that matters imo and will be the sign of things to come.

HDR has not impressed me - washed out colours/random solar flares; but i dont have an oled - so it perhaps requires a high end panel to fully appreciate.

okay, how many new games come out now relative to ones that don’t, that have RT and don’t require me upscaling to my native resolution to have playable frames? And can I play those games with a £500 GPU?

Don’t get me wrong, RT is the future, but not the present. It reminds me a bit of gameworks, great in theory, made things more realistic, but tanked your fps for what was a tiny up scale in detail.

I bought 6 new games last 6 months, none of them have RT, and even if they did, would enable it once, look at the image, and turn it off. Like I did with gameworks features.

 

[DeenC]

Just out of curiosity, to all HDR owners, don't you find that eye-strain sets in quicker with HDR, especially in a darkened room? I find DCR adds some value to the image, while playing havoc with my eyes.

Not really, HDR to me seems to boost highlights on certain objects in game like explosions, light sources etc but isnt enough to cause eye strain, particularly on OLED where peak brightness doesnt get beyond 700 nits or so.

 

[LtMatt]

So why would you pose the OP then if there is only one correct choice?

I thought it was an interesting question, so did HUB as they answered it on their Q&A.

Which option did you vote for?

Whole premise of the thread was baited towards AMD regardless and to make a point of Ray Tracing Vs HDR, both completely different but thread was done so in a fashion to highlight the fact AMDs weakness in RT is a moot point because we have HDR, AMD shills/fans need only apply.

Oh yeah, forgot OP used to work for AMD

Used?

No need to get so defensive folks.

Are you upset because HDR1000 is winning the poll or something?

It's just an opinion no need to get bent out of shape over it.

 

[LtMatt]

Double Post.

 

[Wrinkly]

Oh yeah, forgot OP used to work for AMD

Last I heard they caught him with Nvidia cards in his machine

 

[DeenC]

I bought 6 new games last 6 months, none of them have RT, and even if they did, would enable it once, look at the image, and turn it off. Like I did with gameworks features.

Now I have a 3080, I've bought the following in the last few weeks in the sales:

Metro Exodus
Star Wars Squadrons
Control
Cyberpunk
COD Black Ops Cold War
Watchdogs Legion (came with the card)
Doom Eternal
Shadow of the Tomb Raider
Gears Tactics

Being a married man with two kids I dont play much so the above will keep me going for about 8 months. Most of those have ray tracing and Doom should be getting support soon. With ray tracing off games just look flat, to me it makes a big difference. Problem is unless you have a 3080/3090 frame rates will probably drop below acceptable levels...

 

[Radox-0]

HDR is pretty dang nice. Why I love playing more on my QLED / OLED these days more then my dedicated gaming monitor (granted the OLED has 120hz @ 4k with 3090 anyways). Can make a noticeable difference. Assassins creed Odyssey was good example for me where it was noticeable, for some reason on odd occasions game turned off HDR itself and was wondering why it looked garbage (relatively speaking) until I enabled HDR again. So on the whole right now prefer a well done HDR implementation.

That said, since I got a Ampere GPU, ray tracing has been pretty impressive in some games and noticeable. Watchdogs in particular looks good as does control. I do find myself stopping and standing and taking pics at times. However performance impact right now is too great and I find to an extent, even with HDR once I get into the game and enjoy it, the HDR or lack of, along with RT or lack of, become noticeable for most the part.

 

[Nexus18]

Well a Vega 56 was never going to run your 1440p monitor at 144hz unless you turned all the settings down. So you are comparing running 60hz on an OLED 2560x1440 vs 3440x1440@ 144hz which your card will never run? And you've never used Ray tracing? LoL.

Give me high refresh and associated framerates any day over a 60hz slide show.

Only have to drop the settings, which are resource intensive and don't add much to the IQ in the first place anyway. Been playing plenty of games recently where FPS is a solid 120+ and I still rather play on oled at 60HZ as the motion clarity and the way oled handles it just can't be matched. Don't get me wrong, I like my monitor and do enjoy using it for the occasional game where M+K and sitting at a desk works better but when I have them side by side, there's just no comparison.

You don't need to have a display/hardware to be able to see what RTX does, unlike HDR, where you need a quality HDR display to actually see the benefits of it. RTX is great but HDR is in another league.