• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

DLSS 2.0: why aren’t more people raving about it?

Soldato
Joined
19 Feb 2007
Posts
14,259
Location
ArcCorp
Physx was the biggest con going about. Ridiculous what was "locked" out from the games default effects just to push that.....

I wouldn't say a con, Some Physx effects are immensely complex, The billowing smoke, Mist and fog in the Arkham series that is completely interactive for example, Debris, Cloth etc... all very complex and computationally expensive.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,467
Physx was the biggest con going about. Ridiculous what was "locked" out from the games default effects just to push that.....

you have no idea what you're talking about. Games today still have inferior physics than 10 year old games that used hardware Physx. CPUs aren't even able to match old GPUs, a GTX1080 can process more than double the particle simulations than a brand new 8 core/16 thread CPU today
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
4 Jun 2009
Posts
30,926
Read the post again.....

Physx and the graphical effects were good.... but the fact they were locked behind geforce gpus was a joke and a con. At least with ray tracing, everyone can use it, heck even consoles can!
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
40,436
Location
United Kingdom
Read the post again.....

Physx and the graphical effects were good.... but the fact they were locked behind geforce gpus was a joke and a con. At least with ray tracing, everyone can use it, heck even consoles can!
I wonder what percentage of Steam users own a GPU that supports Ray Tracing. I bet the percentages are very low.
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
27,421
Location
Utopia
I wonder what percentage of Steam users own a GPU that supports Ray Tracing. I bet the percentages are very low.
Steam user surveys take into account everyone in the world with Steam... that includes a majority of people with crappy hardware in every developing and low-income country too where the ratio of people with low-end rigs is much higher than in Europe.

New developments in gaming software, hardware and technology are not driven by the low-end masses, they are driven by the people buying mid-range and high-end rigs. Otherwise, there would be almost no progress.
 
Caporegime
Joined
12 Jul 2007
Posts
40,436
Location
United Kingdom
Steam user surveys take into account everyone in the world with Steam... that includes a majority of people with crappy hardware in every developing and low-income country too where the ratio of people with low-end rigs is much higher than in Europe.

New developments in gaming software, hardware and technology are not driven by the low-end masses, they are driven by the people buying mid-range and high-end rigs. Otherwise, there would be almost no progress.
Sure, but even if you just take into account active gamers, i bet the total percentage of people that have a GPU that supports RT is tiny.
 
Soldato
Joined
6 Feb 2019
Posts
17,467
I wonder what percentage of Steam users own a GPU that supports Ray Tracing. I bet the percentages are very low.

depends on your definition of support. Technically rayvtracing runs on any GTX card which will cover most steam users

if you are referring to how many people have a card that has fixed function hardware acceleration cores for BVH intersections to speed up rayvtracing, then currently it's at: 15.9% (15.9% is the sum of all RTX2000 and RTX3000 cards at the end of March and that covers models from the RTX2060 up to the RTX3090 and everything between those, no GTX cards included)
 
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
27,421
Location
Utopia
Sure, but even if you just take into account active gamers, i bet the total percentage of people that have a GPU that supports RT is tiny.
Of course but that is completely to be expected with how long they have been out vs how long all of the other cards have been out. All previous generations combined will of course outnumber the new ones, especially with the current pricing and availability.

It's not really a "sign" of much... the higher-end of electronics is almost always a smaller percentage in the grand scheme of things, same as almost all 'luxury' goods.
 
Associate
Joined
21 Nov 2011
Posts
35
depends on your definition of support. Technically rayvtracing runs on any GTX card which will cover most steam users

if you are referring to how many people have a card that has fixed function hardware acceleration cores for BVH intersections to speed up rayvtracing, then currently it's at: 15.9% (15.9% is the sum of all RTX2000 and RTX3000 cards at the end of March and that covers models from the RTX2060 up to the RTX3090 and everything between those, no GTX cards included)

Nice numbers, helps answer OP, covers DLSS up to 2.0

80+ percent not really having access to DLSS yet to have an opinion based on experience. YT videos aren't gonna do it justice.

Over time its only going to climb, more games get support and alternatives come out and eventually we have wide adoption of one main version of it I guess.

Consoles will help drive it at the 'lower end' and PC hardware will trickle down in used market or features will become available to lower end GPU's - then at some point all those mining GPU's are gonna hit the steam survey anyways. And then we can ask if ir why people don't seem to be raving about it.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2004
Posts
7,587
Location
Eastbourne , East Sussex.
Physx was very good - until Nvidia put it behind the pay wall of owning an Nvidia card (i have an old Aegia Phyx PPU card here still). Nothing uses Physx in 2021, the last `big ` title to use it was Metro Exodus then not lot since warhammer in 2016
 
Soldato
Joined
7 Jul 2004
Posts
7,757
Location
Gloucester
Read the post again.....

Physx and the graphical effects were good.... but the fact they were locked behind geforce gpus was a joke and a con. At least with ray tracing, everyone can use it, heck even consoles can!

How does that make it a joke and a con? Nvidia developed it for their GPUs, so it's a con that other GPUs can't use it?

That's like saying Amazon made a series for Prime and it's a con that you can't watch it on Netflix

IIRC Nvidia were happy to license it to AMD but AMD refused
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2004
Posts
7,587
Location
Eastbourne , East Sussex.
IIRC Nvidia were happy to license it to AMD but AMD refused


AMD refused 12 years ago saying the tech was dead end unless it was open source (in early 2009), and shortly after the VP for Physx left Nvidia for AMD anyway. Aegia was bought by Nvidia in 2008. It wasnt until 2018 that Nvidia open sourced (sort of) Physx, which was far too late by then.
 
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2013
Posts
1,877
Location
Nottingham
Physx was very good - until Nvidia put it behind the pay wall of owning an Nvidia card (i have an old Aegia Phyx PPU card here still). Nothing uses Physx in 2021, the last `big ` title to use it was Metro Exodus then not lot since warhammer in 2016
this is what i see happening with nvidia based raytracing. unless nvidia plan on helping every dev out there with baking it in which is not going to happen based on the fact that they like to bring in the money and not spend it. could be wrong ofc
 
Associate
Joined
6 Dec 2013
Posts
1,877
Location
Nottingham
How does that make it a joke and a con? Nvidia developed it for their GPUs, so it's a con that other GPUs can't use it?

That's like saying Amazon made a series for Prime and it's a con that you can't watch it on Netflix

IIRC Nvidia were happy to license it to AMD but AMD refused
they only did it to kill it off is what i think he means, which is a joke since it was a decent feature.
 
Soldato
Joined
19 Dec 2010
Posts
12,019
How does that make it a joke and a con? Nvidia developed it for their GPUs, so it's a con that other GPUs can't use it?

That's like saying Amazon made a series for Prime and it's a con that you can't watch it on Netflix

IIRC Nvidia were happy to license it to AMD but AMD refused

Correct, AMD even admitted that they didn't reach out to Nvidia to discuss it.


AMD refused 12 years ago saying the tech was dead end unless it was open source (in early 2009),.

That's not why. It's because AMD didn't want to develop a Cuda driver for their cards and license Phsyx from Nvidia.

And if they really wanted open source, why did they go with Havok instead which was owned by Intel and not open source at all.
 
Soldato
Joined
17 Jun 2004
Posts
7,587
Location
Eastbourne , East Sussex.
Back
Top Bottom