This new tech could END Nvidia's RTX advantage 

Not to mention the overuse of TAA in the base engine

Lots of UE5 games with no stuttering, it's not an engine issue

TAA is destroying gaming for people that aren't blind. Games with it look worse and blurrier than 15 y/o games that you can run with 2msaa, it's horrible.​@@cookiecan10

Stuttering usually happens because the developers did not provide a way to compile shaders on the first launch of the game. Because of this when a new shader is introduced in a level or an effect happens that has a shader you haven't seen before the game has to stop and compile it quickly. This causes stutter.

livestream screen capture is why stuttering.

Agreed, this is not even a "lesser evil" type situation. Both companies have proven they suck already.

It already kinda happened for example cd projekt red dropping its own engine and moving to ue5

Epic can't even fix their shader stutter issues on PC

nope. the dumbest idea is to keep an existing monopoly.

You sound like someone who hates new technology. Don't forget that nVidia created hardware T&L that EVERYONE called a gimmick and yet now you cannot live without it. Imagine being that stupid and uninformed.

100% the problem with the creation engine is the lack of development. Most in-house engines have their own department or entire studio. When Skyrim released BGS had 2 programmers for their engine. For FO4 they had help from ID because they didn't have enough people.

Nvidia is becoming a monopoly, and they need to be disrupted. But creating ANOTHER MONOPOLY with Epic........is the dumbest solution anyone could possibly come up with.

You have Frostbite and Cryengine, both of them are good choices.

@@kdc420421 Yep, that was about when my brain stopped listening because good god that's a short sighted idea. UE is an amazing engine, yes, and dropping the Slipspace engine is a great idea... for 343i/Halo Studios, because, like with Bethesda's engine, it hasn't been properly maintained in ages. But for everyone to adopt Unreal, that's a monopolist's dream. For all of Tim Sweeney's posturing, what he wants most is a platform LIKE Steam so Epic can make a ton of money. IF UE became the only thing people used, they would 100% squeeze developers as hard as they can.

Forget about Godot.

Considering that it's still an experimental feature, that is by no means something to worry about too much. We'll see what it looks like when it's finished.

what's better? REnginge? Frostbite? Cry? Or any other proprietary engine no one outside of the company can even comprehend? Or maybe kindergarden Unity? Unreal is literally the only reasonable engine out there. Anything else is either a kid's toy or a dumpster.

@@Zorro33313 not every game needs unreal, unless it’s an open-world with a day/night cycle. You can make a great game on source, for example. My point is that unreal is not bad as a tool itself, but that misuse of its features and severe mistakes in the development process lead to unoptimised and crappy games with budgets bloated to hundreds of millions. Some indie developers make much better games with a fraction of AAA budgets and much better performance both because of skill and fundamental knowledge. AAA studios on the other side, don’t care about the product itself nor the developers. They only care about the investors, so the Epic Games with their “universal” tool which consumes a lot of hardware resources if used by developers with skill issues, so the nvidia and amd with more powerful and expensive hardware to compensate that synthetic demand.

Don't forget the traversal and shader compilation stutters!

@@andrikgolova mostly agree then

Yup, when GTA 4 came out I could do max settings on 1680x1050 (that's just under 1080p) and it looked great, even compared to many titles today.

@@CasualGamers blud was on something when he wrote the script

​@@xxch1coriaxxFor real, UE5 is the most demanding engine

yeah the fact unreal engine runs so bad is proof everything they say is nonsense.

Ikr? However, it does affect sales still somehow

It's FOMO

ретарды, которые покупают видюхи от нвидии

It’s a nice addition. No people play for it specifically

@@analogGigabyte it's just an argument to say nvidia is better, rx 6000 were more power efficient, nvidia fanboys never cared, now rtx 4000 is more power efficient, now they care and bring it as a major point both gpus are very similiar for gaming, if you want to play 4 games with maxxed RT effects, then nvidia is the way, but overall it's the same, dlss is the biggest point, because there are barely any games with decent fsr, and for one CP 2077 is atrocious one, which ironically is most used for comparisons

I play it on my 4070 ti super and get 60 fps with ray tracing

I have 4080 and in Wukong the framerate was so low that I turned off RT, reduced most settings (they did nothing to the image quality anyway), and had to enable frame generation (+ DLSS of course) to get a smooth experience of 120-170 FPS. The game somehow looks very harsh without frame generation, possibly because of the sharpness of all the objects (motion blur disabled of course) which does not look good in movement without some degree of blur or very high FPS. Meanwhile Doom Eternal, a properly optimized game with way more enemies on the field and detailed graphics can easily go up to 240 Hz without frame generation.

@@user-pi4qo3zc2e I too have an 4080s, and in last star wars game, in some places my frames goes from 120/140 to 56/78, yes, everything in ultra, without DLSS. But shit, all games of today are horrible optimized shit, and the looks of them.....all blur, that´s why i try to no use DLSS.

Yeah, we'll get there in 10 years lol ..

@@pool842 idk, cyberpunk 2077 overdrive was realtime RGB-pathtraced. Spectral with hero wavelength can be close to rgb-trace speed. 10 years from now is semi-fast wave optics🤞🤞

Really? How do you know that it does not? Epic hasn't given us much info about how it works and for all we know by early source code browsing it takes a lot of inspiration from ReSTIR. I wouldn't make claims like this at current stage.

Isn't RTX already using ReSTIR?

What if Nerf somehow competes in lighting? I don't really keep up with it but it seems possible.

they have had BVH processing since RDNA2, what killed the performance was that the end render point after the BVH was calculated fell back onto the shaders. RDNA3 tried to improve this with double pump shaders and a wider BVH instruction path on the RT cores, it helped quite a lot by increasing RT performance from RDNA2 - 3 by around 30-50%. Only problem was that Nvidia were already 2-3x faster, and had hardware that was capable of denoising PT and running it with the advent of frame generation. I expect top end RDNA4 will match around the RTX4070 in terms of RT performance and around 4070Ti/4080 in terms of raster. It won't be until RDNA5 or 6 where AMD will finally merge CDNA and RDNA to make UDNA. Where we will finally get all that bespoke fixed function hardware units in real RT cores and "tensor"like cores. Just look at MI350X to see what I mean.

Don’t forget though. There’s one more thing holding AMD back, and it’s no longer the software or drivers. It’s the fact that they have no CUDA counterpart. So in productivity apps, AMD falls short quite drastically.

The only thing holding AMD back is that their GPUs are shite. And before you run your fking mouth, I have an AMD CPU and an nVidia GPU. So, just keep that mouth closed.

Yeah but if they really want to make money they should be in ai feeding us fake baby peacock pictures.

even if UE was performant monopolies are never a good thing but yeah I was like that was a strange statement lol

Yep, honestly ue5 looks amazing in renders but the games that have come from it haven’t been very convincing. They look good, but not that much better than older games, and perform terribly.

I have yet to see any stuttering on a 3090. Maybe you can just not have shit hardware.

@@DarkMatterBurrito You say that like you have something special. The stuttering is real whether your running a 7900xtx or a 4090. Devs have become lazy due to upscaling and frame gen.

@@DarkMatterBurrito yeah... Either you're lying or you can't notice crap

what's your PC build?

@@Zorro33313 If you are asking this silly question for monopoly reasons, I do not own anything Nvidia. Not sure about your actual intent however so I'll leave it at that.

@@Zorro33313 Freescale PowerPC E5500 CPU with an S3 Chrome 540GTX GPU. ;)

Why?

@@Divinicus1er Tell me one time monopoly wasn't abused? It's the literal reason we can't have a true free market. Having a free market just means you are waiting till someone makes it a monopoly and by that not free.

Agree, but that's an unlikely scenario, so much so that, there is no point talking about it. This new ray trace tech supose to kill nvidia's RTX is hubris until others in the market could not catch up in the hardware side with dedicated accelerators for ai/ray tracing/upscaling and performance with software and hardware synchronization you can kiss goodbye to humble nvidia and make them care. To be honest i am surprised that they so mild with their monopoly practices.

Hopium, but true.

people have been saying this for 20 years it won't happen unless AMD open sources ROCm which also wont happen

It makes game development easier and faster, so it's good even in that aspect

@@NBWDOUGHBOY To be honest nvidia is pretty mild with their monopoly practices.

@@Krushx0 Honestly, I agree with you. Ppl just love to complain about everything. I personally have no problem with Nvidia Charging what they charge. I wish the 70 and 80 was a little more worth it but, Im not gonna cry, bltch and moan about it 24/7, it is what it is.

@@NBWDOUGHBOY most of the people who vocolize their dissatisfaction with the price are young people who are not earning or in the early stages of earning and need house,car, appliances etc. Those people will very sensitive for any price they cannot afford without considerations or give up future planned purchases, especially in the current market. Production of these graphics cards are requiring a long chain of industries and the prices of these industries are increasing at an alarmingly rate due to inflation and the high demand because of AI development. I admit nvidia is little frugal what they give with each tier of their graphic cards hardware compared to their pricing but what people usually miss is their software offering that based on the hardward is wide and rich, CUDA, dlss, ray tracing, etc and on top of that they keep innovating and keep having them self as a competitor and don't getting stucked in the comfortable zone. They are no angels by any mean but they are definitely pioneers on the forefront of graphics, software, ai and networking surprisingly and they ask for hefty price for it, and no I do not mean their consumer xx90 graphics cards here, they are cump change compared to their enterprise hardware solutions.

Also worth noting they've been avoiding the optimisation issue for years now by purposely doing certain render tasks at low resolution even on high-end setups. As in, features like SSRI are run at 1/4 or 1/2th the rendering resolution *at maximum* and the resultant pixellation is blurred with the FXAA/TAA, creating the signature UE "vaseline goggles" look.

@@Krushx0 nah mate, its the opposite: We're old enough to remember extremely complex GPUs (for their time) with an expensive BoM selling for 1/3rd the price of a 4090 despite similar production costs accounting for inflation those and smart enough to put together that nVidia's record profits have coincided almost perfectly with these GPU price rises, along with them adopting a similar marketing strategy to Steve Jobs-era Apple. (Just replace the turtleneck with a leather jacket) I mean if you wanna pay those prices then pay those prices, if you don't then maybe start only buying used instead of complaining like I have cause verbal complaints ain't going to get you anywhere that falling 1st party sales won't get you faster, but either way your boat wants to float it's pretty obvious the duopoly in the GPU market is inflating prices pretty far beyond what they'd be at with real competition. And yeah, it ain't that bad right now but neither was the first half of Intel's dominance period where we got Conroe, Penryn, Nehalem, Westmere, Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge and Haswell (All great CPUs for their time) before they started stagnating, and even afterwards Skylake itself wasn't overtly bad until Ryzen had matured enough with the 3000 series. besides if I'm gonna be spending that much on PC hardware imma spend it on esoteric old crap 100% of the time because it's far more interesting

not an argument

will bethesda gs ever make a game where the ai is more radiant than in oblivion? obviously so far , no , but hopefully in the 2030s?????? right todd????

@@Kek-dela-Kek no. You will have 1 billion rays 360p rendering with DLSS and you'll be happy

@@xxch1coriaxx for only 3 grand

>Nobody wants this. Objectively wrong.

@@Augusto9588 Objectively correct if you take your head out of your ass and actually stop fan boing about mUh REalIsM!!!

you mean 'as slow as a 4090' (RDNA 5 /UDNA / RTX 6090 or something in mind 😉😅)

@@grospoulpe951 AMD already said they are not going to (read CAN"T) compete in the high end for the upcoming generation. So...............................

just like there is competition against Apple for phones. but.......

How exactly would they do that? Sweeney owns 51.4% and Tencent owns 35% which only leaves 13.6%.

Yeah. It's hard too keep up with though. There's a hyped nerf research getting shared like every 3 days.

What is that what does it do

Not to mention, look at UE game modding...Far, far, far more limited than anything under Creation simply because Epic wasn't ever as focused on that kind of modding. You'd pretty much kill off the main drawpoint Bethesda still has. ...that and UE is so goddamn overrated simply because it's easy to develop in and looks good. It's poorly optimised especially when talking script-heavy games and is badly suited to stuff like simulators and the like. Even Ark's optimisation issues are because UE simply isn't designed for that kind of game with that much background crap going on. Even beyond the monopolisation issues the entire industry moving to UE has made games feel a lot more generic than they used to even when most developers were using Renderware. (largely cause Renderware was focused on Rendering, most of the other aspects of an engine were made by each developer themselves)