I totally agree, I appreciate that the nuance isn't lost on people!

I agree, but for overall gameplay I still prefer using RT with DLSS3 on. FPS beats looks overall for me. And I am using a 4090. But maybe in next gen? ;)

I started to ignore Raytracing because of the performance loss and it wasn't that much of a big visual deal, but after playing with it in some games you can feel that the game feels more alive.

Dang thank you, means a lot! Might have to throw another one together

@@eightleafgaming Yes! You have very good selection of scenes day/night and I bet you have a good idea for some other interesting spots as a showcase in Night City. Many other videos I've seen so far, were quite a aimless. :p

I gotchu - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/pLVpgNKhnJOtnYU.html

same

i cant for now, prob update incoming

Thanks! I thought it was pretty concise

Nice! frame generation really is incredible. Thanks for checkin it out!

Awesome, thank you!

Thank you I appreciate that!

I have a "lowly" 3090 and I'm curious to try this out at 1080p with DLSS and reduce some settings to possibly hit 60fps. Like to me I think good lighting produces better graphics than just cranking up the resolution.

Haha I’ve always kind of felt like the ground was covered in oil

Hey it was in 4k with DLSS 3 set to Quality! it makes a big difference imo just wandering around.

id say the opposie i hate the default shadow system it looks like they made it worse just to make people use rt

Thanks I really appreciate it! I am more interested in this tech for games like oblivion or fallout 3, then it might actually run well too haha.

​@@mryellow6918 nah it's just that you can't do certain effects well without RT like with reflections , i think the default shadows look good enough but RT is a substantial upgrade and path tracing is a substantial upgrade above that as well

the lighting is in all realtime, but not accurate without pathtracing.

Yep, I'd even go so far too recommend people with low to mid range GPUs to simply turn off SSR and Ray tracing. It still looks great and with more FPS.

Well the way you tell the difference is "light leak" around objects where it shouldn't be. There's no light leaking when pathtracing is enabled.

Yeah that kills me too

its like real light ur not suppose to see in a dark alley or room

gotta wear shades cuz the future so bright

100%

You have to understand that to make raster look good and realistic you have to put in a stupidly colossal amount of work tweaking random things like that PER SCENE, because otherwise things fall apart really quickly, where with full RT (PT) it all comes basically for free and the assets don't need to be tweaked for use in different scenes and conditions. Raster and RT are very different worlds. As a 3D artist I'm SUPER happy to see the industry move forward. To be honest - I didn't expect this to happen for another 5 years or so, but Nvidia pulled a sneaky on everyone with the 20 series and started an RT revolution :)

Haha wow can’t believe I missed that when editing. Thanks for the comment and checking the video!

@@TheUltimateBlooper I think the by-hand tweaking is a direct product of how the developers designed their GI system in the first place. Look at Lumen, it doesn't require the same kind of manual tweaking like conventional GI probe lighting tends to. If they'd implemented a more dynamic and robust solution for their rasterized GI it could've gone a long way toward freeing up artists' time spent tweaking lights and carefully choosing which ones cast shadows and which ones don't. While it does allow a more truly unified lighting model, raytracing hardware isn't the end-all be-all solution to alleviating that kind of work for artists. Basically, I'm just saying that the manual tweaking isn't inherently a requirement for pure rasterization, it just happens to be in many instances because of the actual implementations developers go with for their games. Where there's a will there's a way!

Will it be available for Nvidia cards?

@@PSPbrtag FSR is open source and any dev can add it to their game it's not like DLSS where you have to partner with NVIDIA and it works on any GPU

I hope so too! And don't forget ... Steamdeck user's with fsr 3 ...wow

@@PSPbrtag FSR 1 and 2 can be used on pretty much any nvidia or amd gpus....hopefully fsr 3 keeps that trend alive...

@@spirallava FSR looks fuzzy... no thx

cause dlss performance

@@snowpuddle9622 nah tested it myself even with dlss quality and sharpening it def blurs the image. Switching between on and off it's easy to notice ingame

@@jizamkizam9611 got to wait for that torrent

July 2035! Lol

That’s why I appreciate them calling it a technology preview, kind of a: why? Because we can haha. Agreed a good game is good with it without RT but it’s so much fun to see the progression.

TBH it's what I thought ray tracing was when I first started doing this a few months ago haha... I've certainly learned a lot since then! Thanks for checkin the vid

PT and RT really aren't that different but then again having a fully path traced scene will be much harder on the GPU than the hybrid RT most games do today.

Yeah! I’ve noticed it in a bunch of games, especially in like far off birds and things like that. It’s terribly noticeable when driving in this game

@@eightleafgaming The overdrive patch also updated DLSS to the newest version. Older version (I think 2.5.1) had less ghosting from what people say. You can replace it easily - it's just one file that you can get from techpowerup.

Yep, it's a by-product of the image reconstruction as well as the pathtracing de-noiser.

Try the holy grail DLSS 2.5.1 dll, it should mitigate that. Every DLSS revision brings some improvements and some issues, so people keep constantly comparing the dll versions for quality, particularly ghosting.

@@TheUltimateBlooper Well, interestingly enough i tried the other methods with Intel/amd and i didn't had those issues. The fps gain isn't by far as much as from dlss but it was playable without any smearing effects.

the shadows are always better, no matter what. and pathtracing is always about light/shadows.

I certainly don't mind it, OD just seems like another layer

play some classics like fallout new vegas or oblivion!

It's mixed up, the first image is actually RT Overdrive

@@BornJordan dont know about that the stats are clearly a realtime recording on the screen

@@charleyweinhardt It couldve been added to the video separately, but after looking at it again I'm not so sure what to think. There is a reflexion on the ground only in the first image that would make you think it is Ray Traced. On the other hand the reflections of the neon on the right are more precise in the last two pictures. So I don't know.

true

other one is 4 yrs younger so understandable, dirt2/3 is more fair

Yep, that happens with tech like RT, it's supposed to be more realistic, and for all intents it is, but doesn't mean it'll look visually appealing. So it's not odd at all, sometimes it be like that.

That's the issue from day one when NVidia introduced RTX. The amount of rays you need to have in a scene to get proper indirect lighting is far greater than what NVidia can deliver at playable framerates. I mean at night, you won't notice it much but in any daytime scene it's obvious (though even here they need to fix the camera exposure ingame - that's not tuned for the amount of light present now it seems). Though this looks vastly more impressive than what we had for RT in all games. I don't think hardware will have the power before 26-28 before it's somewhat comparable with offline renderings.

the scene's lighting placement was designed with the rasterized lighting in mind. so when light behaves naturally in the scene, it can change how it was envisioned by the artist. overdrive is stunning and absolutely worth using if you have the pc, but its an inherent issue that will be present when you add ray tracing into a game that wasn't designed with it in mind in the first place.

Sometimes Ray tracing ruins the intended artistic look of a scene. We aren’t used to true to life lighting in games. Lighting has been baked so long we’re used to that look. Path tracing really shines in shadows because most rasterization light sources aren’t dynamic and don’t cast shadows. Certain games would benefit more mainly realistic games like kingdom come, modern warfare, red dead redemption, ace combat etc. stylized games might look weird like Zelda, dishonored, bioshock etc.

@@Quast agreed; and since even the 4090 struggles with OD, I guess the real leap will be the RTX 60xx generation which will have minimum 24GB VRAM.

now bring it to more games!

Hey forgot to mention I’m using DLSS 3 in quality mode with frame generation, added to the description!

Well said! Especially the bit about mixing up the clips, I absolutely believe that to be true haha. Thanks for checkin out the vid and the well thought out comment!

Ray tracing does add bounce lighting, and it can be good for ambient occlusion, but when it comes to reflections SSR and Planer Reflections are the way to go, and dynamic soft shadows are more than good enough

Couldn’t have said it better myself, way too expensive for the slight improvement, I think other graphical techniques would do a better job at making games look more realistic and impressive than just taking up all the resources on ray tracing. Seems like a gimmicky way of selling graphics cards

You said it perfectly. I feel the same way verbatim.

Idk, this opinion is crazy to me. Yes depending on the scene it might be hard to definitively tell which one is old ray tracing option and which one is overdrive pathtracing (but then again there are scenes where its extremely obvious and a clear win for pathtracing). But when you compare either to the regular non RT version its just a different world. The game looks flat and not coherent. The life in many scenes is lost, walls look very video gamey and glowing, the deep shadows are missing, reflections missing, no light bouncing off surfaces. RT transforms that into an authentic looking image. Lighting adds to realism far more than any texture could.

Judy

@@eightleafgaming Thanks bro!

thanks for the comment! I appreciate opinions of those who understand it! It's definitely a great looking game but I'll admit I don't play it much outside of looking around!

I swear ppl are blind

I get the most divided comments on my RT comparison videos haha.

The softest!

There's way more than just fancy shadows. The game now simulates the bounce of light around a scene accurately and in real time. It's not traditional "shadows" that are on display here, it's simply the absence of light that is rendering them. Because of this, EVERYTHING in the game will accurately cast a shadow with proper penumbras. Not only that but it's per pixel so no need for contact shadows or shadow resolution, it's all being simulated like it would in real life. A bright light cast on a colorful object will cause the color to bounce around the scene and thus more accurate lighting which ties the scene together with almost perfect accuracy.

Ah my bad meant to put it in the description. I can’t remember but I’ll check when I get home and let you know!

Hey the first is "Extraction Action" and the second is "Close Probing" both off the Cyberpunk 2077 OST!

Believe me, this person found the worst places to compare them, I have screenshots where the difference is huge. This is not a good comparison

But why should I have to cherry pick scenes just to see a difference? These are just some real world examples of what you can expect, and it's not always that crazy. next time maybe I'll center in on some more obvious examples though!

@@eightleafgaming Exactly...If the tech is so impressive it should be all over the place as metro enhanced. TBH the game looked good as it was. This is just to sell more GPUs by nvidia.

@@eightleafgaming Personally I'd enjoy seeing the obvious examples but it's interesting to see the less obvious as well. Crazy how good rasterization has got for purely outdoor scenes etc.

@@harydragonborn9566 No it shouldn't, because there are some environments where rasterization does an ok job, hence you see smaller differences. I wasn't impressed at all by Metro Enhanced, it turned all the dark places into something too bright. This is much more accurate and more immersive.

Someone sounds like an entitled gamer™ with no understanding of what is going on :)

That's for sure! I want more games with the tech in mind from the get go. That, or put it in old games like remix is supposed to do!

The developers have done a fantastic job of baking light in the rasterized version but it still retains that "game" look because of the limitations.

@@AdiusOmega Consider that RT was already defined and mathematically expressed centuries ago before people even had computers, while raster is only a few decades old and born out of need for a faster way to shade computer graphics at the expense of visual quality/accuracy. Literally everything that RT does "for free" - light bouncing, reflections, refractions, sub-surface scattering, soft shadows, etc etc etc - all of that needed to be approximated in raster somehow, so over the decades we ended up with hacky things like SSR, AO, shadowmaps (and cascading shadow maps to simulate softness of the penumbra), portal textures, etc etc, none of which look right anyway, hence the "game look". All this modern realtime RT stuff - however limited and undersampled it currently is - is very much tickling my 3D artist's balls. Can't wait to see what comes next and how far we have left until realtime graphics genuinely match the quality of offline rendering.

Nah you can tell by the frame rate haha

I don't mind the hit to 100 but won't go to 60 haha

Could say that about litterly anything.

Definitely seems like a just because we can type thing for now. Obviously unobtainable for 99% of gamers. Fun tech though!

2018: People say that implementing ray tracing isn't worth it because only people with RTX 2080Ti can play it. Ray tracing appears in games, gets worked on more, optimised, new GPUs support it more. 2023: People say that full ray tracing/path tracing isn't worth being worked on, lets stop developing new graphics, we don't need further advancements, we're never gonna use it. Even if you don't have good enough GPU (I don't, I can play it in 1080p with DLSS Quality in 50-70 FPS, which isn't worth it), the technology is amazing and when I'll be buying my next GPU (in like 2 generations), I hope the technology will be used in many games already and that middle range GPUs will be able to use it. That's what this is about. Let rich people finance advancements in technology, so we can use it in the future when it's cheaper. 20 years ago I thought that I will never experience any kind of ray tracing in real time in my life. You needed years to render something longer on the most powerful supercomputers in the world. Nowadays we can do (still much simpler) kind of ray tracing with 60 frames per second. Even when I was in college, it took minutes to render a single frame of animation for my project. You have no idea what this technology means in the long term. It's worth praising, even if most of us can't afford the hardware to run it yet.

It's bleeding edge technology right now but in the future you'd be hard pressed to find a developer not have their lighting engine be a pathtraced render.

Agreed it’s a cool tech but I feel like there are other techniques that could be used for far cheaper that will have a greater impact on visuals So you can have cyberpunk that runs around 40-60 fps or play an unreal 5 game that looks way better for cheaper. We’ll I guess that’s what CDPR figured too. There will be other lighting techniques in the future that have similar results for far cheaper. It’s like the hoopla with 4k vs 1080 From greater than 5 feet you can’t tell the difference but it’s 4 times the processing power. Just a way to sell more tvs and overpriced cards.

squinting helps I think

looool right?!

@@eightleafgaming yeah, they always have a reason why you should buy their new shiny card🙂

I really want it to come to old games! Then maybe it would actually run well too

Amazing video though.

It is worth it

@@llalanll maybe at the point when RT(especially OD) gets good optimization and high-end cards don't cost as an entire entry level setup? Yeah. But not now.

@@dckstomper4592 Thanks :D

@@dckstomper4592 I don’t know, man. He got 60fps with OD mode, do we really need more than that? Haha

Hey there, I just wanted to show how it looks in normal gameplay. This is a completely unbiased set of real world examples to let the viewer make up their own mind. I assume everyone already watched the digital foundry video to learn what’s changing, so these are just examples. I could surely find things that make it seem like you NEED this but it’s not always the case… thanks for checking out the vid and be assured I have no agenda one way or the other!

@@eightleafgaming I fail to see the significance of showcasing examples of areas that have undergone the least change or improvement. Perhaps, if included, such examples could be placed towards the end of the video, with a clear statement that not all areas are equally affected. Otherwise, it may come across as disingenuous when juxtaposed with shots of significant changes.

Ive seen the Digital Foundry video and while looking nicer I feel that OD mode takes up way too much resources and doesn’t justify the cost for what it adds.j The differences seen are not worth a 2000 dollar card to run at 60 fps

@@socratese5 The differences are huge... especially in shadows cast. And if you already have the card or get one in the future its a great update. Not to mention lots of people can still use this on older cards. Play at 1440, etc

@@danielbeattie9509 Thanks for the tip, I'll definitely consider it for next time! I appreciate the feedback.

They make it blatantly clear that this is a tech demo, not sure what your expectation is.

@@Aftershock416 it's a preview of what's to come which i was a expecting current gen consoles would have but they're "old" tech

Thanks for checkin it out!

Haha I like it! Overdrive is a tech preview and basically unobtainable right now but it’s neat tech

Kind of ridiculous to use so much power for a slight tonal shift in lighting

Gotta agree, really cool but it doesn’t also feel super smooth since it’s really only 30fps. I actually typically limit my 4090 to 350w since there is only like 3-5% difference in fps!

It's all in the details. It's essentially a completely new lighting engine. Stripped the baked lighting completely out of the game and instead relies on pathtracing to do the work. It's a testament to how good rasterization (old methods) have gotten but there's no amount of fancy technology you can slap on top of that to replicate proper simulation. Perhaps it's not worth the performance hit but if you are at all interested in this sort of tech it sure is a pleasure to dive in and experience the game this way. It's much much more cohesive in visual presentation.

​@@socratese5 Idiots who don't understand what's going on here and what a technical achievement is is, as per usual.

Idiots who don't understand what's going on here and what a technical achievement is is, as per usual.

Haha right? And half those are generated frames

просто стало ярче

off rtx bro, it’s just a broken technology 😂

I hope reddit community finds a way to unlock frame generation for 3000 series . I want to play with OD on my 3060ti ;((((

Dude, it's a technology DEMO, nobody is actually gonna seriously play with it at 60 fps on 4090 instead of 144+.

3080 can run it fine

At what res? I used a 3090ti and couldn't get to 30p maxed out in 4k.

Ohhh bby. And Witcher 1 remake in unreal 5

Soon like 5 years

unfortunately that is soon in gaming years now :( *cough*elderscrolls*cough*

haha yeah it's really steep.

i can understand you, but for a single player game having 60-75 fps is enough. Its not a competitive fps shooter like valorant, CS:GO, overwatch etc where you need those frames. In a single player game i rather loose some frames but have the game look nicer.

@@Pilek01 maybe enough for you subjectively. I like the fluidity of 144fps MUCH MUCH more than 75fps in ANY game. you always feel that increase in immersion, unlike some minor shadows and reflections that you have to stop and actively look for (and wouldn't even notice if there wasn't a side by side comparison...)

@@elu5ive fair point.

Idiots who don't understand what's going on here and what a technical achievement is is, as per usual.

In real-time rendering in video games, you can only have 10 lights in a scene that can cast shadows if you want a playable framerate. Path Tracing combined with DLSS3 allows all lights in a scene to cast shadows and have a playable framerate.

​@@EnneiteJames are you kidding me,mate? They even just did not create a light SOURCE into this lamp that's the reason why it does nost cast the shadows.. Lol, so much games had awesome shadows even without RT.

@@user-sb4ml3ww4d Most games have baked in shadow maps which means it cannot work with dynamic weather. Name the games that do then.

@@eddiek8179 the metro exodus even without RT mode had awesome baked shadows! And this game had changable day/night cycle

@@user-sb4ml3ww4d So does this. There's baked in shadows implemented when there's no RT on. The enhanced version of Metro Exodus also discards baked in shadows implementation when they go full RT. They also do not create shadows for every light source and their RT solution, while fantastic, is less complex than the overdrive version. Your own example nullifies your assertion.

Not a scam in the slightest. This is some of the most impressive lighting in any game on the market. It is essentially full path tracing in real time with 2 bounces of light. Whether or not you have the hardware to run it is up to you but you can try it on any RTX card or even the AMD 6000 and 7000 series cards. It's making up for a lot of the downsides of using rasterization and is doing this that would actually be much worse performance wise or extremely difficult or impossible with rasterization. Yes most scenes look brighter because light can bounce around multiple times making the scene overall brighter. Plus now every light casts shadows unlike the previous version where only 10 lights could cast shadows. The only issue is that the game was not built with path tracing in mind so some scenes might look slightly worse while others can massively benefit from it.

Cant imagine the performance with longer draw!

​@@eightleafgaming 😅horrible as f*😆 but unreal 5 demonstrations shows much more higher lumen/path tracing distance. Maybe, game itself has some performance troubles.

@@CoBB1eUA lol this is how do dont understand anything about game technology, lumen is not path tracing, lumen wont give you this same quality of lighting because it does trickery on screenspace, so of course you'll get higher render distance on the lighting. The fact that this path tracing technology can run now in real time and at the quality it does its marvelous.

​@@Fede101kill3r7if turn everything to "on" in unreal editor, it would be path tracing instead of screen space. But it has terrible performance and glitches which are leads to crash.

@@Fede101kill3r7 I learn so much in the comments of these videos!