yeah, only positive thing from 50 series was dlss 4. Again though from reviews, FSR 4 is close but worse and better than 3 which was already good enough for me.
you have already stated before that dlss3 is too blurry for you even at quality, so logically DLSS4 would better suit you
I cant try it on 30 series. i have tried FSR framegen, and it worked well on Witcher 3. But i dont think ill use framegen on fast paced games.
yep, latency hit is much bigger on other frame generation tech
Nope, i have tried it on Cyberpunk and its not worth it at all. Maybe PT but i prefer 90+anyday ( 4k + 3080).
your vram held you back for PT, 10gb is simply not enough for PT and it was just a 3080, you wouldnt get good rt perf for PT unless you were on 40XX series, but thats a subjective matter, DF has amply demonstrated just how transformative/
essential RT is on Cyberpunk, same for DL2, I simply wouldnt play either of the games without RT,
My point was that i would take higher framerate over RT. If i get 90+ with RT, then maybe yes for some incremental benefits.
fair enough
Raster is catching up too. RT on witcher 3 worked great over forested areas shading them nicely. But these days you can get similar effects via raster from what i saw ( KCD2 i think).
It probably will be less accurate and have errors here and there, but you get more framerate.
its not, devs have to spend an extraordinary amount of time to get near to RT as possible and they still hit far off the mark. Witcher 3 had a shitty DX12 translation layer which massively held it back for RT
And yes, HDR is much much more impactful that RT. Not even a question for me. Doom eternal is maginficient with it, ori games too.
what monitor do you run? if its not an OLED (or doesnt go high enough on brightness) or doesnt have local dimming zones, then its just a placebo, HDR will objectively look worse if both of these conditions are not true.
But anyway different things for different people.
Digital foundry guys for example keep saying that DLSS3 performance is good enough, and it looked awful too me in most games. Blurry in motion.
DLSS4 seems to have improved that yeah. I really dislike blurry graphics
Its a disease. Fast and clear for me.
then even FSR4 should be a deal breaker for you
RT performance is definitely something peeps with budget should focus on, more and more games now are implementing RT only approach, because dev times get a lot cheaper, and while lumen/nanite can emulate software rt, performance delta is too big to ignore hardware RT
I feel that the standard RT with with games like Cyberpunk and Dying Light 2 (haven't played the other game) wasn't transformative enough. Even the first PT implementation on Cyberpunk wasn't good enough, but the update that added ReSTIR GI was what I would call really transformative.
ReSTIR GI was there ever since the first PT update, Ray Reconstruction wasnt working properly with PT and was outright disabled for normal RT, which was fixed on later updates which is what you are probbaly talking about
Digital Foundry has a video up with Doom's PT upgrade, and just look how much better reflections on rough materials and emissive lights look. This is what RT upgrades should have looked like in the first place.
just go look at DL2 analysis, it
is transformative
P.S. even ignoring hardware RT, features like DLAA/Ray reconstruction are way too underrated imo, both of them transform the game massively, specially Ray Reconstruction, RT with RR was just
chef's kiss in cyberpunk
My original plan was to upgrade at the start of this year. With the shithow of GPU launches and prices, that went out the window. My 3080 will have to extend duty till end end of the year, and I *may* go for a 5070 Ti (depending on the pricing then), or the 9070XT.
Right now, I just force DLSS4 into whichever game I can, and things run great for me. While there is no shortage of raw grunt, that 10G frame buffer is getting awfully close to RAM swapping with most games coming out these days.
honestly speaking, hold on to your 3080, wait for next gen launches, where AMD would have caught up even more with Nvidia, or Nvidia would have a fire lit under their asses and reveal something even more transformative, either way, a win-win for you
Plus current console generation lifecycle is coming to an end, better to wait for next gen consoles in 2027 and match hardware specs to it
Check Hardware Unboxed's comparison of DLSS4 & FSR4. FSR4 is good & is usable at 1080p as well like DLSS4, but sure, DLSS4 is still better.
9070XT performs similar to RTX 5070 in RT with close to 5070Ti like raster perf. In PT, surely much inferior to Nvidia. For its price between 5070 & 5070Ti, it surely is sitting in a sweet spot. Say if 5070Ti costs 10% extra over 9070XT, no reason to buy 9070XT.
price delta right now is roughly 20%, which for me just is not enough, leaving aside DLSS4, just lower latency in DLSS FG, DLAA, Ray reconstruction and the fact more and more games are going RT only for their lighting, makes Hardware RT perf an important metric, if the delta was 30% and above, I would make do with AMD, but for a 20% delta between 5070 ti and 9070xt, I would still choose 5070 ti, but thats my personal opinion, there are different priorities for everyone
but personally, I wouldnt buy either of them right now, this console generation is coming to an end, and I would rather wait till next gen consoles are revealed and then build a pc to match their specs, that would make sure my pc is future proof enough for the next 5-7 years
