Proof! Rtx, the most embarrsing scam in computer history! 2008 cpu raytracer outperforms 2080ti!

Cpu based realtime raytracing has been around a long time,
even in 2008

The video above is just to explain how a game with cpu based realtime raytracing would work(note that everything in the video above is rendered by the cpu thats why its a bit messy),
to make it short the cpu calculates the position of a set of rays with a set of vectors and the gpu then knows what to reflect from outside of the camera view.
This was used in an gta mod that ran flawless with ambient occlusion raytracing on 2013 hw!!!!(as seen from the reflection from objects outside of the camera view)

Just a reminder this is the bf v benchmark before the downgrade!

and thats what they promised

there is no denying in the fact that this was a professional preplaned scam from the beginning preying on the hype a prerendered video and fake benchmark results would produce which nvidia has done in the past to hype scams!
https://www.geek.com/games/futuremark-confirms-nvidia-is-cheating-in-benchmark-553361/
If you want raytracing make pressure on gamedevs to do sth for theyre money other than lootboxes, they have no excuse if a hobbyist in his basement could do it.
Think twice before spending 1000$ on a scam.

 

yeah and soon the nVIDIA Drivers will cause current GPUs to drop in performance to force people to upgrade.

I really wish AMD gives us a good GPU so we can bid nVIDIA farewell.

 

Dont count on amd, we need the 90s back when over 100 companys competed on the x86 and gpu market.
Cyrix, nexgen, siemens, ti, art-x, 3dfx, powervr, ati, ibm(resolled the best binned cyrix cpus), umc even transmeta(in ipc/watt) mobbed the floor with the established brands.
The cyrix 6x86 pr200+ delivered the perfomance of 200mhz+ pentium II(which didnt exist at the time) at 75mhz, today this would be 8 ghz (no turbo) 64 cores 8700k or sth for a tenth of the price.
http://datasheets.chipdb.org/Cyrix/M1/6x86/6X-PR200.pdf
And in 3 months you would get a 52% cpu on average for the same price.

 

Alright lets fix some issues here.

First of all, the ray tracing in the video (CPU wise) would not work properly in actual games, the ressources needed to let the CPU handle ray tracing like that would innstantly make any CPU go to 100% and the game run at absolute horrid frames.

Second, GTA 4 does NOT feature ray tracing at all. You can clearly see the only thing that GTA 4 reflects are buildings, not actual objects such as cars, lightning etc. As you can see on the scene where police is chasing nico.

That being said, ray tracing is indeed another marketing bs from Ngreedia to make people puchase their RTX cards. Hitman 2 does feature reflections just like ray tracing on any card, without huge performance hits, so ray tracing can easily be done on any card.

 

While they really don't offer anything worthy of consideration for notebooks, and probably will not anytime in the foreseeable future, if you are willing to lower your performance standards (and the graphics settings) you can save a lot of money going with an AMD desktop GPU right now. It does not require a lot of crazy GPU horsepower for most games at 1080p and their best GPU models (RX 580 and RX 590) already do that well enough to suit most gamers unless you have all the settings maxed out. But, I agree it would be really nice to have some respectable competition for the high end GPU market. I'd love to see the NVIDIOTS sweating drops of blood and losing sleep over it. But, I'd expect to see donkeys fly before that would happen. AMD needs to keep its engineering and financial resources focused on the CPU space or they'll end up not mattering any more like the decade preceding Ryzen. They already are borderline not mattering in the GPU space, so I think they're smart to not burn any calories on that. Fighting one battle at a time is the better approach for them. But, yeah... I definitely agree with wanting it to happen someday.

 

Seems like you have posted this kind of thing in more than one place. What's up with that? Do you have an axe to grind with NVIDIA for some reason? (I did back around 2006-2007, when ATI made excellent GPUs and NVIDIA GPUs were dropping like flies. I was part of the class action and hated them back in the day when ATI was actually better.) Just curious what the motivation is for burning all the calories on this and I am not asking in a combative or argumentative way. Just asking.

 

Alrighty then... for the budget-conscious gamer with the bar set low, here is a SCREAMING great deal on a GPU that will do OK with lowered settings and 1080p. Go ahead... just buy it... honestly, so dirt cheap it is tempting, even for someone like me, because I could rack up a bunch of HWBOT hardware points with it for next to no cost after selling it on Craigslist for $20 less than what I paid for it, or to a moron on eBay for $40 more than I paid for it.

PowerColor RED DRAGON Radeon RX 580 - $179 | NewEgg (Enter code 181SRPC85 at checkout to get the full discount)

...and, since our standards are low now, we can use the money saved compared to an RTX card to buy a one of these metal-chassis gems (which is actually a very good price for a gamer-boy BGA turdbook that puts everything else in the same class and with the same specs to shame)...

OVERPOWERED Gaming Laptop 15+, 2 Year Warranty, 144Hz, Intel i7-8750H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060, Mechanical LED Keyboard, 256 SSD, 1TB HDD, 16GB RAM, Windows 10 - $799 | Walmart.com

...and, if we want to save an extra $300 and lower the bar on specs (and game settings) even further and still have the metal chassis, we can use the money saved for a gaming mouse, headphones, candy, bubble gum, Doritos and soda pop...

OVERPOWERED Gaming Laptop 15, 2 Year Warranty, 144Hz, Intel i5-8300H, NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1050, Mechanical LED Keyboard, 128 SSD, 1TB HDD, 8GB RAM, Windows 10 - $499 | Walmart.com

...or, we can buy an XBOX or a Playstation, plus a Chromebook, call it good, and skip all of the above.

 

I think AMD should partner with Qualcomm GPU division and Intel GPU division to create a good GPU.
Those prices are sweet for BGA books. I'm jealous of Americans now! Walmart priced it right with minimum SSD,RAM and even warranty. I hope OEMs do that as well. 499-799$ with GTX 1050/60 with 2 year warranty is totally worth the money for a portable device that is.

 

If I were going to stoop low enough to buy a BGA turdbook, which is extremely unlikely, that's the only one I would consider in light of the price and the 144Hz panel with the metal chassis. Brother @B0B loves them and has some good YouTube videos on them. They're way better than anything else with the same specs and the super low price just makes them a little more of a tolerable compromise. I mean, c'mon, why spend a TON more money for an Alienware, Razer or MSI turdbook with the same or similar specs when you can spend a small fraction of the price for something equal or better. When the bar is extra low, the price needs to be commensurately low, and they've accomplished that.

 

I don't agree with your viewpoint and neither with the evidence you show there. That 2008 CPU ray tracing, that's not better than 2080ti ray tracing, for a start it was running at very low frames and you could actually see the rays being filled in when he panned the camera, so that's inferior to 2080ti ray tracing, at least in as much that it's not real time - you can see the rays being filled in when he pans the camera, and like another user said here it was using all CPU resources of a 64 thread CPU, so that's not a feasible strategy for gaming. The GTA V video, I wasn't impressed with the visuals there, and I'm not even certain if any ray tracing is happening there, I think it could be using 'tricks' to mimic some aspects of ray tracing. The BF V trailer, I'm not sure that the ray tracing has been significantly downgraded since that trailer was made - I'm thinking you could recreate some of those scenes by placing cameras within the current game. I know in the recent patch that they did indeed downgrade some levels of detail of the ray tracing, but from what I've seen it's not visually significant. My viewpoint on the NVidia RTX lineup is that I think it's great that they've taken the step to include ray tracing (and some of the other features like DLSS x2), and I think it's a way to move the whole industry forward, but I dislike the huge price of these cards (I see it as unfair pricing), and I dislike the pretty small increase in general rendering performance which equates to only about 30% performance increase over Pascal cards which is hardly worthy when you consider Pascal cards have been out for over 2 yrs now, quite a pitiful increase in performance for a new generation of cards.

 

Its an workstation from 2008 calculating the complete image with an sw renderer, the rtx 2080ti is a state of the art high performance gpu it was just to show that the above shown video running on a threadripper(give 16 cores just for that lightstuff) would deliver much better results when just calculating the position of the lightrays and gpu would just render the picture as normal and still be cheaper.
Its not provided by gta iv, its the ambient occlusion function of a mod called enbseries,
Ambient occlusion calculates how exposed each point in a scene is to ambient lighting so the lighting looks more real. This involves also lightsources from outside of the camera view, its not the same but the results look way better than the rtx stuff to me since the lighting looks much reaerl on a 2008 game with a mod than in bfv even before the downgrade. This was just to show how bad the results we have now in 2018 for a 1200$ gpu are.
I definetly agree with that, its false advertising at its finest.

My problem is that i had to pay 800$+ for an gtx 1080 mxm, false advertising (youve seen the trailer and the audio gmbh video thats how it really looks), purposly not providing enough cards for market, etc.
My motivation is just to get consumer awarness back i dont care about some amd vs nvidia stuff i think if they both bancrupted over night the gpu market would get back where it was in the late 90s with over 30 companys competing(art-x, powervr, matrox, sis, s3 gfx ,etc) and delivering 120% performance increases each year on average, just look at the improvements from quake 1 1996, quake 1997, unreal 1998 that was how it should be progress wise in gfx today not some bogus the hairs now wave in the wind and you need to pay 500$ extra for it. 3dfx went bancrupt for deliviering a product line with the same stigma as the rtx line(only 30% performance increase), the problem is that all these "tech expert" either have no clue or just are paid to hype the nvidia stuff, and its not like theyre faking benchmarks since they exist and the quality in benchmark title gets lowered a lot by the driver just to get the fps counter high so some "expert" can say "see higher fps, same settings, its better". Most companys that would try to get into the pc market again in the past (powervr for example) also wont even try it since they would just get a negative public perception by some fake benchmark result.
https://www.geek.com/games/futuremark-confirms-nvidia-is-cheating-in-benchmark-553361/
https://www.se7ensins.com/forums/threads/nvidia-once-again-cheating-benchmarks.1353515/
Calling out the results helped a lot in at the ryzen launch(at first only 720p on low results! were published by pc-world and the other outlets). My point is those duopolys in the pc market need to go as fast as possible.

 

Its a 2008 cpu, that renders the complete image in sw render mode, if you let 8 cores in a threadripper just calculate of the position of the lightrays it would be no problem at all id say.
In regards to the trailer, it was prerendered thats what they showed investors at audi are the real best case results since those people would go to court for fraud if theyve had showed them the bfv trailer and wanted theyre money for that.

If you look at the reflection and general light quality it looks far worse than the 32 core workstation from 2008, that was what i wanted to point out, so there is no step forward for the industry (i cant see it since it eveon from the 2008 example) its generally really bad quality when compared to hitman 2 s light and reflection quality even to the 2013 enb mod.
I agree with you if those cards had a good price, no one would have a problem with the rtx line.

 

Well not everyone has threadripper CPUs so it would be silly to build a game around the requirement for a 16 core 32 thread CPU. I also highly doubt that 8 cores of a threadripper would do a significantly better job of ray tracing than a 64 thread CPU from 2008, CPU performance hasn't increased massively over those years. And it would have to do a massively massively better job at raytracing than your original video showed, because that was operating at very low frames per second and you could actually see the rays forming as he panned the camera, so it wasn't in real time at all - it would have to run at over 60 frames per second and would have to do the ray tracing for each frame faster than 16ms, not 2 seconds (2000ms!) like in that video.

Those "NVidia cheating in benchmarks" links, one is from 2003 so not relevant, and the other is something posted by someone in a forum. The reason you say for the cheating, is lowering the quality of anisotropic filtering - that makes no sense because the performance impact of anisotropic filtering on modern cards is well below 1%, I've enabled x16 anisotropic filtering forced through the NVidia control panel for virtually zero peformance hit, so your links don't add up here. Anyway, that's nothing to do with RTX and raytracing, which is what your OP was all about.

 

You clearly do not understand the difference between an object and a dynamic entity. Rendering a dynamic entity requires WAY more performance than a CPU can ever handle. Not only that but ENB still has no ray tracing. I already debunked your ENB ray tracing statement, so stop spreading nonense.

 

Things are a little hysterical in here …closed.

Charles