Please give this video a thumbs up if you liked it and feel free to comment below or ask me anything. It will help me to get recognized by youtube's algorithm. Thanks! :) WATCH NEXT: ○ Cyberpunk 2077 DLAA 1440p TAA vs DLAA vs DLSS 3.1 - th-cam.com/video/aC0Z8BzHbYw/w-d-xo.html ○ Dying Light 2 Ray Tracing On vs Off - Graphics/Performance Comparison - th-cam.com/video/r9LtQhrHY24/w-d-xo.html ○ Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing On vs Off - Graphics/Performance Comparison - th-cam.com/video/gQ7YgcBqPBw/w-d-xo.html
Awesome video! Just bought a 4080 super, ryzen 7800x3d, Alienware 34 inch qoled monitor. Can't wait to build it this weekend. This background music sounds sick too.
Path tracing is physically accurate when it comes to lighting. Its basically unbiased, meaning it will fire off rays to an almost infinite degree until a pixel is solved, just like how your eye look at things in real life, until you closed them that is. Which is why its only 20-30fps at best, its not efficient because of how it doesn't really stop calculating.
None of those images looked convincing, ray sometimes makes reflections better...sometimes!, then path adds a bit of colour near shadows, its hardly breathtaking and not worth spending good money on.
Będzie tylko wtedy, jak RTX 4000 będą tańsze. Bez tego nie ma sensu tworzyć gry na path tracing, który tylko niewielkie garstki gracze mogą w to zagrać.
@@Hermes_C oh, it definitely will be the standard in a few years. Especially with Unreal Engine 5.3 (and newer versions in the near future). Lumen, Path Tracing, Ray Tracing... and possibly a RTX 50 Series in late 2025 as leaks said... it will be the standard really fast, especially when the prices of the RTX 4070 and 4080 drop in 1 or 2 years.
Path tracing is fucking incredible man. I only ever cared for RT reflections, in most games I could barely notice a difference with RT lighting, this comparison confirms that fact even more. In some games/scenes RT lighting even looks unrealistic. Path tracing is the real difference maker tho, it just adds a level of depth you didnt even think was possible. Coming from a 6800xt, I'm just waiting for the day where this is the norm in studios and even the lowest GPUs manage to get 60+ fps in low/med settings. It will likely take a while to get there but with the way things have been accelerating, you never know. Exciting times (even tho the current situation is ass)
The difference is this: Path tracing bounces on 100% every geometry objectin your scene. Imagine foliage, water, leaves on a tree, everything. You can imagine that in realtime this would destroy your framerate. This is why path tracing is an offline, post processing intensive gpu task. It works on a single frame at a time. Therefore, single shot renders or movie renders are perfect for path tracing. Ray tracing is for high fps realtime gaming and therefore less realistic and less performance intensive.
Yeah, totally awesome haha, in gaming you don't pay attention to that sort of thing anyway, so why would you have something like that if you lose more than half the performance? I don't know how old you are, but if you're a grown man, would you really want to buy a GPU that costs, say, $2k just to have a slightly better picture that you don't really pay attention to but have to play at 30 fps? If your answer is yes, then I'm not surprised why Nvidia has become successful with stupi* customers.
@àdamJansenthekiller-98 Nah, I prefer staying at a lower res like 1080p, with say like a 4070, and path trace above absolute minimum 45 with DLSS Q, and use FG if I felt I needed it I aint gonna pay that much to play 4K Path Traced I'm one of those few guys that like Path Tracing or RT only in the games that render it properly CP, Black Myth Wukong, Indiana Jones are somehow the only games that have proper path tracing
Unlike others, I like what I see with path tracing, even though it's just in videos as I have a GTX 1660 Super. The differences from RT off to RT to PT are perhaps not day and night, but they are there and they do make the world feel more realistic. That's the best thing about it. This in turn will push graphics (textures and not just) become more realistic too. It's a great move by whoever did this and yes I do wish I could have a PC to run this game like this. It won't happen for...ever perhaps. Anyway, my point is even though I can't afford this and it is not perfect yet (at the very least performance wise), I think it's super cool and I hope they keep improving the technology. But we are going to need AMD to do their magic too, leaving this more or less on Nvidia alone is not good for quick advancement.
I‘m currently playing with it (1st playthrough as well) and it’s really good, and I can play just fine except for a couple pretty small issues. I can totally see this being the future but it‘ll really still take much more time. cbp77 is like one of the few games that has nice rt/pt and the hardware requirements are insane. So yeah both games and hardware is not quite there. Tbh I‘m excited for what will happen with Unreal Engine 5 because what is possible with that seems incredible too and their in built raytracing seems to work much better too, on lower end and non-rt hardware, so idk. Just hope it‘ll not make all of the next big games feel even more samey as they already are. PT definitely makes a big difference btw and is the goal i guess, just again implementation is not there. even in cbp it’s sometimes a little weird cause the game wasn’t designed around it, but once games can actually build their scenes with pt in mind (which will also be easier because devs can just experiment and place the lights, and don’t need to fake lighting effects manually for hundreds (or more) of lights) that issue will be gone too.
@@redtro8678 Thank you for your reply. I agree competely, especially with your last paragraph. I was thinking about this too when I was looking at the scenes and how they compare. You can see that some are WAY too dark strictly because they relied on "fake" lighting. Whenever developers know that they develop games with PT in mind, we are going to see the next level of it, if not from a technical standpoint, from a game experience. Have a nice gaming weekend.
hello friend, you can play this with a 3080 on geforce now if you have the servers available in your country, and it should be decent. give it a few years and consoles will be playing it for 400$. things will only improve and I hope you get the best experience as soon as possible
@@lovesunset1703 Thank you. I don't use and I will never use stream to play schemes/services. It's just another way to take any remaining control away from the gamer/customer. As for the consoles, you are probably right, but I have given up on consoles with this current generation and I don't see me going back. For me it is now DRM free PC gaming (like from GOG) and nothing else. I am sick of the BS. Thanks for the suggestion though. Happy gaming.
0:30 Bro what hte hell? This sign in the middle. They could've just take a picture of baked lighting and put it behind the sign so it would've looked better. But they didn't. RT my ass.
old comment but I dd have to say that there is a big difference when you can just drop lights where they should be, at the brightness they should be and they then light actually correct colored objects in a way that looks realistic. There is optimization and then there is effectively 1-1 modeling a game to how it is in real life and it looks like it's real.
I recently upgraded to a 4090 and a 5800x3D and play on WQHD and DLSS quality mode. I have around 140 FPS constant with Pathed Raytracing (around 200 with normal Raytracing). It looks great, but there is a lot of flickering in the world in random spots, so I hope they will fix this soon.
@@dhaumya23gango75 Of course I do, not using the tech that helps would be stupid imho. I tried DLAA, it cuts the FPS almost in half. Average was only 75 FPS with DLAA instead of DLSS.
@@dhaumya23gango75 DLSS 3 frame gen really should've been called NFG 1 or something. Wish i could frame generate money to give nvidia so it looks like i'm paying $2000 for a gpu but i'm actually only paying $1000
This is why I set on 4k ultra and turn raytracing off completely with my 5800X3D & RTX 4090 (undervolted only up to 250 watts max usage) This all raytracing hype is completely bullshit and I just don't get the sense of it!
@@xamalion7334 The 4090 manages around 40 fps at 1440p native with rt overdrive. Doesn't DLAA run similar to native ? I think you are using DLAA with frame gen to get 75 fps.
Path tracing is what raytracing was back in the 20 series. Beautiful but the cards can't run it. Now in the 40 series even 60 class cards with 3rd gen rt cores can play games with rt easy I am guessing will be another 2 generations at least till 60 or even 70 class cards can actually use path tracing in proper gameplay
Frankly, I think RT is a bit overhyped. The most impact it has is with reflections and, granted, I can't deny that the difference between rasterization-based lighting and RT is night and day. With that said, however, without knowing what RT would do if enabled, I don't find myself feeling like something is out of place. I think we've spent so long trying to perfect RB lightining that we've got to the point where we need to be quite nit-picky to notice the specific differences between RT on and off. Cherry-picked RT demonstrations excluded, of course; Nvidia or whatever has some phenomenal RT showcases where the difference is abundantly obvious, but from my experience, that's far from the norm.
I ended up getting 63ish fps (rtx4080) with dlss3 quality /ultra/ high mix settings. I'm at 5120x1440 tho so not the full 4k... Graphics are insane... I get reflections of reflections while looking into water.
I'm at the same resolution, and I get 85-90 fps dlss3 quality, everything maxed. 4090. My cpu is a potato (5600x) but that doesn't seem to matter with path tracing because of how much it depends on your GPU. I'm sure I'd get 100+ with a 7800x3d, though.
The performance loss is definitely not worth it for path tracing in my opinion. Maybe after a couple more generations of graphics cards. Nice comparison.
Thanks! This path tracing update is playable only with DLSS Frame Generation enabled to compensate the performance loss. In this video it was disabled to show the actual performance hit between ray tracing and path tracing.
@@michakaminski5335 Yes me too. I have a 1440p Monitor and am awaiting my 4080. Curious if I can run this at 60 FPS in overdrive mode at 1440p with DLSS 3.
@Im not a time traveler • 84 years ago [edited] ___ With DLSS Auto, maybe with Performance mode, we would see more fps. Will see it on Friday when I'll get my 4080 to play
Nope, ReShade is not going to add any reflections. As for the lighting, you’d need a dynamic ReShade script that somehow knows when you’re outside and when you’re inside to change the settings accordingly. Something like this might be possible with AI but isn’t worth the hassle.
Biggest difference is in this game is Traced SSR, traced shadows Is a minor difference but so performance demanding. Traced SSR isn't so performance demanding but does look really good and with less artifacts than standard SSR.
From what I have seen so far from youtube videos (I will confirm as soon as I get my new gaming rig) is that ray tracing really makes a huge difference in scenes where there's water surfaces, lots of reflections and refractions, on those scenes with a side by side comparison, in some games the water surface would look unnatural without ray tracing and it would look stunning with ray tracing enabled. Path tracing gives an even better visual result and it seems that path tracing results in lighter scenes overall, like pushing the "gamma correction" slider up, making stuff less dark, removing strong contrasts between light and dark. But overall, when I look at common scenes where there's no water or other such materials that really "shine" with ray tracing, in those cases the visual differences are still noticeable, but it becomes a mere matter of taste... the scenes without ray tracing look different, but just as good... As a developper I would keep that in mind. If heavily depending on ray tracing, then at least adapt your model's poly count to improve overall performance. Nice graphics do not alway have to be super hires or fotorealistic... thnx for this video, mate! Especially because my GPU will be a cheaper one (4060Ti 8Gb), it's nice to know that the stuff I will be missing out on, I won't be missing it that much in the 1st place, and even then only partially, that is to say only in those scenes with a lot of glassy or watery surfaces 😋. I went for the 8Gb version because the 16Gb only makes a performance difference above 1080p and I prefer to go for maxed out effects at lower resolutions anyway, and it's at lower resolutions that antialiasing really improves the overall visual quality, especially at 640×480 and 800x600, anything higher than the native resolution of your monitor is overkill.
In game the difference between Ray Tracing and Path Tracing isn't night and day, but it is a nice improvement on image quality. Especially in city environments. Sort of "warmer and more accurate". Of course getting 90+FPS with Ray Tracing vs 30+ with Path Tracing on my old OC RTX3070, makes the decision easy.
The cyberpunk genre (of which this game obviously represents, hence its name) has always had lighting as one of the key elements in its visual style. Cyberpunk 2077 is a game that clearly benefits heavily from better lighting. It's often said that graphics are less important than gameplay, which is a blanket statement with elements of truth in it. But it's very clear that the experience this game offers is greatly enhanced through better lighting which ray tracing and path tracing provide. From the neon, bustling streets to stylish, melancholy interiors the lighting sets the tone of everything in cyberpunk.
11-13GB of VRAM used with both RT and PT... tells a lot about how useful the 4070/4070Ti will be in 1-2 years... Nvidia is peak Planned obsolescence...
This literally makes no sense, the 4070 isn’t a 4k ray tracing card in the first place. AMD cards also suck in RT performance, so you aren’t getting anything with the extra vram.
well they're capable of it but developers decide to make them so unoptimized that you have to use upscaling by default. They might as well say up to 4k with scaling.@@Mulmgott
Path tracing was always the correct direction for gaming. We must remember that out GPUs are still not able to "Fully" path trace a game, you would kill the GPU. It looks gorgeous though!
@@devinegamingtv3427 I see you and I have two different definitions then, this game fully path trace 2 ray counts and 2 bounces per pixel then use denioser to remove inaccuracies rather than millions of rays which is not necessary because of the improve techniques (camara perspective) for the scene to look real. I think art style, texture and game assests make it look not "real life".
@@UnrivaledEntertainment Or perhaps you just don't want to understand what it is I'm trying to write. This game looks gorgeous, out right stunning. I am not saying the game doesn't look different, or nicer- I am simply saying for a game to resemble real life, or a life-like render you would need millions of rays. As you can imagine this requires a metric shit-ton (mathematical term) of rays just to produce a single image. The resulting image can be much more realistic, but could take a 4090 many seconds to many minutes (or hours) to render a single frame.
@@devinegamingtv3427 The lighting techniques used here aren't that much off from ground truth offline path traced reference. Just few more bounces and better edge case material integration and it's close enough. From a pure visual standpoint it's not the same as a standard offline path tracer doing few samples due to how well it reuses data.
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see anything groundbreaking. Besides a few spots where reflections come into play, there are no significant differences between presented options.
There is not a huge difference in most of cases, for me it really doesn't matter. Still, I understand that for the most enthusiastic who can afford it, it may be worth it.
This gen is like the Turing of Path Tracing. It runs reasonably well but nothing special. Nowadays Turing gpus cant handle more than 720-960p internal resolution when running high RT workloads, it's required to tune the load down, for what the architecture can do. Ada already needs sub 1080p resolutions and frame gen and bla bla bla to get decent framerates. And there're people telling me that this isnt meant for future hardware lmao.
As is often the case with these things, you don't REALLY notice the difference until after you get used to it, then downgrade. Been playing Cyberpunk 2.0 on my RTX 3090 with path tracing, but there were some moments that just bottlenecked things so I downgraded to RTX Psycho settings for a while to get my 55 FPS back. Many hours later, during some select cut scenes without too much activity, I turned PTX back on and it really popped out how much more realistic the lighting and skin textures are for everything (as if this game didn't look realistic enough already!) with PTX. Not as revolutionary as the leap from RTX off to RTX on but it's DEFINITELY there and has me sold to buy a 5090 when it comes out. It's been trickery though. There's been a tradeoff between this enhanced lighting and FPS. I'm looking forward to the future of games this decade with the 5090 whenever Nvidia releases it. The future is bright (and well shaded)!
Only way to run Path Tracing on a 4090 at 4K is to have Frame Generation ON, but then v-sync is disabled, therefore screen tearing 😞 Hopefully DLSS3 is compatible with v-sync soon!
You can already play with V-sync on and Frame Generation even without G-sync capable panel. You need to disable any in-game framerate limiters and V-sync, then open the NVIDIA Control Panel and in Cyberpunk 2077 profile enable V-sync and limit your frame rate at 58fps (for 60Hz) or 142fps (for 144Hz). In that way you'll get rid of screen tearing without any increase in input latency.
Well said, this information is completely accurate. As a note for any LG TV users, if you have a C2 or any 120hz Tv the same applies but lock your frames to 118 to match the fresh rate of display. Basic reasoning is to reduce screen tearing you want to lock your frames under the max refresh rate of the display if it does not have V-sync can also be useful for ones that do.@@MxBenchmarkPC
with Path Tracing. I stop messing with the Game Graphic Settings, just turn it ON and done. the Shadows, lightings, reflections and Colour accuracy damn!!
My 4070 Ti gets wrecked in 3440x1440. Getting around 60-70~ fps WITH Frame Generation enabled. Not playable due the low baseline fps and high inputlag.
CDPR has also updated the DLSS implementation to 3.1.1 version with this update, so don't be shy to use balanced or performance mode for DLSS if you need more performance.
Probably one of the very few games where I genuinely think one should play with ray tracing… it makes such a difference. Path tracing is that even further step ahead, but due to how intensive it is on the graphics card, it’s not streamlined yet
@@dontomaso11 that sounds fast but is there any input lag? I tried those exact settings on my 4080 and I can barely turn a car or aim my gun at 90 fps. It’s really nice for cinematic shots but I’m not sure about actually playing the game with these settings on a 4080, even 4090 needs it and gives a lot of input lag. This technology is definitely for the future, one day we will run it natively without any lag or AI enhancements.
@@SubZyYT lol, ran the test again, it was max fps that was 90, average was 75 :p But when playing I can't say that the FG latency bothers me, the same when playing through W3 with it. Which is weird because vsync latency have on occasions over the years made me turn it off even though I absolutly hate screen tearing. FG latency, for some reason, still feels responsive enough for me. Dunno why :s
I feel like my eyes must be broken, because I feel like the only situation where I'd be able to tell the difference (without seeing them side by side) is when looking at reflections.
its hard to notice the difference just by looking at the images, when u play it thats when u see it. Path tracing makes it look so good its unbelievable but ofc. its unplayable at the same time (even with 4090).
I think ray tracing looks better when I play personally. There is way too much grain/noise with path tracing. It makes everything in motion look quite bad especially with RR.
Ну хз, если учесть сколько жрут эти фишки фпс и какая разница в принципе не большая в визуале, напомню если брать в расчет утрату фпс, то я лучше буду играть без лучей, но с плавностью. Слишком они требовательны короче
Accuracy of Lighting, reflection and shadow are scene dependent: ray tracing off sometimes is actually more accurate (not prettier) than ray tracing on or path tracing. The accuracy of light, reflection and shadow varies between the three modes. Ray tracing might be the future for image rendering, but it is still in an incomplete stage.
Do I need to have the rest of the rt settings on for overdrive to take full effect? Or is it enough to turn it alone? Does it provide the reflections shadows etc?
Is it weird that I prefer Ray Tracing to Path Tracing? At least, for this specific game. The lighting might not be as realistic, but it feels "more Cyberpunk."
I'm on my 1st pt on a 14700K + 4090. I've done quite a few tests and I'm still torn between RT vs PT. Some areas of the game look better w/ RT while others look better w/ PT. It's nice that we can toggle between them w/o having to restart the game. It almost seems that PT favors night scenes while RT favors day scenes but that could just be my personal pref.
RT adds reflections and refractions, and calculates edges of the shadows better (looks softer). PT will literally calculate everything to as close as how our eyes see in the real world, including extra bounces of light for specular and refractive surfaces. This causes a dip in fps though because it doesn't stop firing rays to calculate scenes. Not many rigs can play it without some issue over another. But as a game, these settings are really personal preference. RT will always be a biased renderer. Which make things look more like a game. PT is unbiased and will work very hard to get realistic results until you tell it to stop. Which is what filmmakers use with their UE5 screen on set (replacing greenscreen) to make everything look as real as possible.
Is any of you actually looking at how much of a performance drop there is in comparison to the increase in visuals. Everything looks a little better yes, but no where near worth the performance drop. We're basically talking about 1080p with RT or PT on vs 2160p without, they'll cost the same GPU Load.
I plan to play overdrive mode on a 4080, capped at 60fps 4K. Can anyone tell me what settings would be best as far as DLSS, frame generation and all those options? Thanks.
I cant really tell the difference besides path tracing is just “brighter” but not really in a good way imo. The reflection difference between rt on and off is probably the biggest
Yeah, same. Weird that they all hype it up so much. I can see a difference, sure but it's not like it's doing much. Path tracing often makes it even too bright for my taste. Ultra sharp reflections in puddles and such don't feel very realistic either, it's too clean. Considering the massive framerate drop this is just a gimmick to me.
ngl if you don't have a paused side by side comparison and you just play you won't tell the difference...beside the huge drop in fps that is :p when you got them side by side paused you can tell a noticeable difference on very specific stuff, like the reflection on glass. i noticed though that on certain stuff like the ads signs you would miss what they read because the light made the letters disappear with rt and pt on, i guess because the game is made with raster as a priority. keep in mind that cp is a game that's supposedly made for rt, normally the difference would be even smaller. i personally didn't have a clear winner even in cp, because sometimes the rt looked better, sometimes the path tracing did and some other times i preferred off. in general i feel this technology ain't there yet and it's not worth the extra money for a high end card and performance drop in fps, although it appears that's not a popular opinion :D
They are intended to disappear when Path Tracing is enabled. I showed the Ray Tracing settings in full, so people could see that for Ray Tracing the Psycho settings was used, not Ultra settings like i usually do.
I saved $250 by getting a Radeon card over nVidia 4070. All I needed to do was turn down some ray-tracing settings. I got ray-tracing on my Rx6750xt that was "good enough"
Just bought the game recently, and I was disappointed by the disservice the reviews did for the game. The lore, personality, and immersion are next level. I'm want to just enjoy the game for what it is on affordable hardware now, but I am very much so looking forward to seeing how graphics tech adjusts in the next couple of years. Hopefully we can see path tracing in full, high resolution, with stable frame rates.
Well you just bought the game recently, of course you aren't going to have as bad of an experience with the initial reviewers. The game was BROKEN at launch, and trust me you would be saying the same things as the reviews you saw and would definitely have gotten a refund. Things have already improved so much, so obviously you're not going to get the same experience.
Chiplet gpu design is the only way we will be able to get massive jump in pathtrasing preformice were you can make a massive rt compute die to handle path tracing
Hi need help. When i turn on the ray tracing my fps still around 70 fps but its really clunky and slow. Any advise? Performance mode helps but i thought the slowness will only happen if its bellow 30fps
I've a 3080Ti, with the frame reconstruction mod I can pull this game in 2 ways : 2560*1080 Rt phyco, dlaa 97fps 2560*1080 path tracing + frame reconstruction, dlss quality 70fps Which one would you pick?
how do you have 70fps with path tracing and dlss in quality? I have a 3080, with path tracing and dlss quality I have 48-60fps in 1080p (average like 54fps)
So doo you need a 4000 series card to run path tracing here? I have a 10gb 3080 and play at 1440p and haven't returned to CP2077 in probably a year. I've been waiting for both the game to improve and to decide whether my hardware is good enough to run it with the settings it deserves
You don't, I'm on 3060 ti and I can run path tracing and i get like 40-50 fps on 1080p, then you can turn on frame generation and you can easily get around 100ish fps in path tracing but turning on the vsync from nvidia control panel is recomennded as the screen might tear. It sure is not perfect but really worth it. But regardless you don't need 4000 series, it says on cyberpunk settings that any power graphic card like 3090 or 4070 ti will work
Do you use hdr or not? I don't have an oled monitor and I'm not sure it's worth it. It looks good, but waaaay to dark, and I'm not techy enough to know how to calibrate it correctly. I'm also only running at 1440p.
I think ray tracing off is nicer, I don't need any reflections, I never pay attention to them anyway and I don't like the brightly lit signs either, which ray tracing also has I don't like functions like the bloom effect at all
Personally i much prefer playing at 120-170fps so stick to raster with ray traced shadows only. The gameplay is slick then. Even 60fps feels really slow these days.
Have mercy for the 3060 😂 RTX 3060 can run all ray tracing effects at ~60FPS with DLSS Quality. With Path Tracing it will drop below 30FPS for sure, you would have to use DLSS even in Performance mode at 1080p.
def depends on the scene, look at 1:12 it looks much better, but yea sometimes it is kinda too bright and washed out. When I have it on and i'm trying to snipe, the lights are sometimes blinding lol
Thanks for the video, now it confirms to me again and again how pointless this ray tracing technology is. I mean, sure, you can see a difference, but it's neither better nor worse, just different. The Nvidia fanboys who are celebrating this RT Path are just ridiculous. Just look at how much performance you lose because of it. Who plays games under 60 FPS for a slightly better picture these days? These comments are so ridiculous. And it's precisely because of people like this that Nvidia can afford to bring graphics cards onto the market that sell for over 2k euros/dollars. These people spend so much money to get a slightly better picture and worse performance. Gamers are that stupid today, and they'll only get worse in the future.
Path tracing is way better than normal RT, normal RT feels very insufficient. In normal RT it feels nice to have accurate shadows and lighting but I feel like the colors look wrong and it gives this uncanny feeling. In RT OFF at least they tried to mimic Path tracing, there are no accurate shadows and reflactions yes but it feels more ¨natural colored¨.
Please give this video a thumbs up if you liked it and feel free to comment below or ask me anything. It will help me to get recognized by youtube's algorithm. Thanks! :)
WATCH NEXT:
○ Cyberpunk 2077 DLAA 1440p TAA vs DLAA vs DLSS 3.1 - th-cam.com/video/aC0Z8BzHbYw/w-d-xo.html
○ Dying Light 2 Ray Tracing On vs Off - Graphics/Performance Comparison - th-cam.com/video/r9LtQhrHY24/w-d-xo.html
○ Cyberpunk 2077 Ray Tracing On vs Off - Graphics/Performance Comparison - th-cam.com/video/gQ7YgcBqPBw/w-d-xo.html
can u give me ur pc ?
Bro really 4090 and 4080 are the best gpu for rt I am also using 4090 😊
Can you please assist - i have 4080 but path tracing looks very dark in some areas, i prefer Ultra RT instead, is it game issue?
Awesome video! Just bought a 4080 super, ryzen 7800x3d, Alienware 34 inch qoled monitor. Can't wait to build it this weekend. This background music sounds sick too.
The accuracy for lightning and shadow Path Tracing gets is crazy dude
True, but beware; pay close attention to the FPS differences in this video. Thar be a reason this is labeled as a "technology preview."
Path tracing is physically accurate when it comes to lighting. Its basically unbiased, meaning it will fire off rays to an almost infinite degree until a pixel is solved, just like how your eye look at things in real life, until you closed them that is. Which is why its only 20-30fps at best, its not efficient because of how it doesn't really stop calculating.
None of those images looked convincing, ray sometimes makes reflections better...sometimes!, then path adds a bit of colour near shadows, its hardly breathtaking and not worth spending good money on.
the named suggest path tracing is self explanatory. path tracing was never real time before. It is getting on another level.
I cannot wait for this to become the new standard
never will 😏
Będzie tylko wtedy, jak RTX 4000 będą tańsze. Bez tego nie ma sensu tworzyć gry na path tracing, który tylko niewielkie garstki gracze mogą w to zagrać.
@@Hermes_C it will…
@@Hermes_Cyes it will never be the standard..... only for you. as your poor ass cant afford new tech.
@@Hermes_C oh, it definitely will be the standard in a few years. Especially with Unreal Engine 5.3 (and newer versions in the near future). Lumen, Path Tracing, Ray Tracing... and possibly a RTX 50 Series in late 2025 as leaks said... it will be the standard really fast, especially when the prices of the RTX 4070 and 4080 drop in 1 or 2 years.
Thanks for this video! And glad to see you reach 3.6k subs!
Thanks!
I lost my black pro mist filter, heard CD Projekt Red knows where it is
Path tracing is fucking incredible man. I only ever cared for RT reflections, in most games I could barely notice a difference with RT lighting, this comparison confirms that fact even more. In some games/scenes RT lighting even looks unrealistic. Path tracing is the real difference maker tho, it just adds a level of depth you didnt even think was possible. Coming from a 6800xt, I'm just waiting for the day where this is the norm in studios and even the lowest GPUs manage to get 60+ fps in low/med settings. It will likely take a while to get there but with the way things have been accelerating, you never know. Exciting times (even tho the current situation is ass)
Can't wait for the RTX 5070 to be priced at $1000
that cheap?@@zaleskar
@@rhyssaunders1323no, for example, 3070 started from 500 USD (if we're not gonna mention crypto boom)
How many games with Path Tracing?
The difference is this:
Path tracing bounces on 100% every geometry objectin your scene.
Imagine foliage, water, leaves on a tree, everything.
You can imagine that in realtime this would destroy your framerate.
This is why path tracing is an offline, post processing intensive gpu task. It works on a single frame at a time. Therefore, single shot renders or movie renders are perfect for path tracing.
Ray tracing is for high fps realtime gaming and therefore less realistic and less performance intensive.
Good God I cannot imagine what graphics technology will look like in 10 years...unbelievable.
I said the same what I got a copy of MS Flight Simulator 98 decades ago....
1:26 I can feel the sun's heat by just looking at my phone on path tracing!!! It's unbelievably realistic
Yeah, totally awesome haha, in gaming you don't pay attention to that sort of thing anyway, so why would you have something like that if you lose more than half the performance? I don't know how old you are, but if you're a grown man, would you really want to buy a GPU that costs, say, $2k just to have a slightly better picture that you don't really pay attention to but have to play at 30 fps? If your answer is yes, then I'm not surprised why Nvidia has become successful with stupi* customers.
@àdamJansenthekiller-98 Nah, I prefer staying at a lower res like 1080p, with say like a 4070, and path trace above absolute minimum 45 with DLSS Q, and use FG if I felt I needed it
I aint gonna pay that much to play 4K Path Traced
I'm one of those few guys that like Path Tracing or RT only in the games that render it properly
CP, Black Myth Wukong, Indiana Jones are somehow the only games that have proper path tracing
Unlike others, I like what I see with path tracing, even though it's just in videos as I have a GTX 1660 Super. The differences from RT off to RT to PT are perhaps not day and night, but they are there and they do make the world feel more realistic. That's the best thing about it. This in turn will push graphics (textures and not just) become more realistic too.
It's a great move by whoever did this and yes I do wish I could have a PC to run this game like this. It won't happen for...ever perhaps.
Anyway, my point is even though I can't afford this and it is not perfect yet (at the very least performance wise), I think it's super cool and I hope they keep improving the technology.
But we are going to need AMD to do their magic too, leaving this more or less on Nvidia alone is not good for quick advancement.
I‘m currently playing with it (1st playthrough as well) and it’s really good, and I can play just fine except for a couple pretty small issues. I can totally see this being the future but it‘ll really still take much more time. cbp77 is like one of the few games that has nice rt/pt and the hardware requirements are insane. So yeah both games and hardware is not quite there. Tbh I‘m excited for what will happen with Unreal Engine 5 because what is possible with that seems incredible too and their in built raytracing seems to work much better too, on lower end and non-rt hardware, so idk. Just hope it‘ll not make all of the next big games feel even more samey as they already are.
PT definitely makes a big difference btw and is the goal i guess, just again implementation is not there. even in cbp it’s sometimes a little weird cause the game wasn’t designed around it, but once games can actually build their scenes with pt in mind (which will also be easier because devs can just experiment and place the lights, and don’t need to fake lighting effects manually for hundreds (or more) of lights) that issue will be gone too.
@@redtro8678 Thank you for your reply. I agree competely, especially with your last paragraph. I was thinking about this too when I was looking at the scenes and how they compare. You can see that some are WAY too dark strictly because they relied on "fake" lighting. Whenever developers know that they develop games with PT in mind, we are going to see the next level of it, if not from a technical standpoint, from a game experience.
Have a nice gaming weekend.
hello friend, you can play this with a 3080 on geforce now if you have the servers available in your country, and it should be decent. give it a few years and consoles will be playing it for 400$. things will only improve and I hope you get the best experience as soon as possible
@@lovesunset1703 Thank you. I don't use and I will never use stream to play schemes/services. It's just another way to take any remaining control away from the gamer/customer.
As for the consoles, you are probably right, but I have given up on consoles with this current generation and I don't see me going back. For me it is now DRM free PC gaming (like from GOG) and nothing else. I am sick of the BS.
Thanks for the suggestion though.
Happy gaming.
@@Trusteft DRM free is the way.... and Geforce Now is just another money milker source for Nvidia... Don't accept that BS..
0:30
Bro what hte hell? This sign in the middle. They could've just take a picture of baked lighting and put it behind the sign so it would've looked better.
But they didn't.
RT my ass.
old comment but I dd have to say that there is a big difference when you can just drop lights where they should be, at the brightness they should be and they then light actually correct colored objects in a way that looks realistic. There is optimization and then there is effectively 1-1 modeling a game to how it is in real life and it looks like it's real.
I recently upgraded to a 4090 and a 5800x3D and play on WQHD and DLSS quality mode. I have around 140 FPS constant with Pathed Raytracing (around 200 with normal Raytracing). It looks great, but there is a lot of flickering in the world in random spots, so I hope they will fix this soon.
Don't forget to mention that you are using frame generation, otherwise your claims are false from the benchmarks i have seen.
@@dhaumya23gango75 Of course I do, not using the tech that helps would be stupid imho. I tried DLAA, it cuts the FPS almost in half. Average was only 75 FPS with DLAA instead of DLSS.
@@dhaumya23gango75 DLSS 3 frame gen really should've been called NFG 1 or something. Wish i could frame generate money to give nvidia so it looks like i'm paying $2000 for a gpu but i'm actually only paying $1000
This is why I set on 4k ultra and turn raytracing off completely with my 5800X3D & RTX 4090 (undervolted only up to 250 watts max usage)
This all raytracing hype is completely bullshit and I just don't get the sense of it!
@@xamalion7334 The 4090 manages around 40 fps at 1440p native with rt overdrive. Doesn't DLAA run similar to native ? I think you are using DLAA with frame gen to get 75 fps.
Path tracing is what raytracing was back in the 20 series. Beautiful but the cards can't run it. Now in the 40 series even 60 class cards with 3rd gen rt cores can play games with rt easy I am guessing will be another 2 generations at least till 60 or even 70 class cards can actually use path tracing in proper gameplay
Frankly, I think RT is a bit overhyped. The most impact it has is with reflections and, granted, I can't deny that the difference between rasterization-based lighting and RT is night and day.
With that said, however, without knowing what RT would do if enabled, I don't find myself feeling like something is out of place. I think we've spent so long trying to perfect RB lightining that we've got to the point where we need to be quite nit-picky to notice the specific differences between RT on and off. Cherry-picked RT demonstrations excluded, of course; Nvidia or whatever has some phenomenal RT showcases where the difference is abundantly obvious, but from my experience, that's far from the norm.
I ended up getting 63ish fps (rtx4080) with dlss3 quality /ultra/ high mix settings. I'm at 5120x1440 tho so not the full 4k... Graphics are insane... I get reflections of reflections while looking into water.
I'm at the same resolution, and I get 85-90 fps dlss3 quality, everything maxed. 4090. My cpu is a potato (5600x) but that doesn't seem to matter with path tracing because of how much it depends on your GPU. I'm sure I'd get 100+ with a 7800x3d, though.
Neo G9 Gang? If so, im with you!
@@GeriatricMillenial yessir!
The performance loss is definitely not worth it for path tracing in my opinion. Maybe after a couple more generations of graphics cards. Nice comparison.
Thanks! This path tracing update is playable only with DLSS Frame Generation enabled to compensate the performance loss. In this video it was disabled to show the actual performance hit between ray tracing and path tracing.
@@MxBenchmarkPC How is the performance of the 4080 with DLSS and Frame Generation? I'm curious about 1440p
@@michakaminski5335 Yes me too. I have a 1440p Monitor and am awaiting my 4080. Curious if I can run this at 60 FPS in overdrive mode at 1440p with DLSS 3.
@@I_am_not_a_time_traveling_fed Thank you, so I should be more than fine at 1440p!
@Im not a time traveler • 84 years ago [edited] ___ With DLSS Auto, maybe with Performance mode, we would see more fps. Will see it on Friday when I'll get my 4080 to play
I feel like you can get the same effect with almost none of the cost by simply tweaking settings in something like reshade.
Nope, ReShade is not going to add any reflections.
As for the lighting, you’d need a dynamic ReShade script that somehow knows when you’re outside and when you’re inside to change the settings accordingly. Something like this might be possible with AI but isn’t worth the hassle.
Biggest difference is in this game is Traced SSR, traced shadows Is a minor difference but so performance demanding. Traced SSR isn't so performance demanding but does look really good and with less artifacts than standard SSR.
yes, RT reflections are worth it 100%
Awsome video, thanks !
Glad to help!
From what I have seen so far from youtube videos (I will confirm as soon as I get my new gaming rig) is that ray tracing really makes a huge difference in scenes where there's water surfaces, lots of reflections and refractions, on those scenes with a side by side comparison, in some games the water surface would look unnatural without ray tracing and it would look stunning with ray tracing enabled. Path tracing gives an even better visual result and it seems that path tracing results in lighter scenes overall, like pushing the "gamma correction" slider up, making stuff less dark, removing strong contrasts between light and dark. But overall, when I look at common scenes where there's no water or other such materials that really "shine" with ray tracing, in those cases the visual differences are still noticeable, but it becomes a mere matter of taste... the scenes without ray tracing look different, but just as good... As a developper I would keep that in mind. If heavily depending on ray tracing, then at least adapt your model's poly count to improve overall performance. Nice graphics do not alway have to be super hires or fotorealistic... thnx for this video, mate! Especially because my GPU will be a cheaper one (4060Ti 8Gb), it's nice to know that the stuff I will be missing out on, I won't be missing it that much in the 1st place, and even then only partially, that is to say only in those scenes with a lot of glassy or watery surfaces 😋. I went for the 8Gb version because the 16Gb only makes a performance difference above 1080p and I prefer to go for maxed out effects at lower resolutions anyway, and it's at lower resolutions that antialiasing really improves the overall visual quality, especially at 640×480 and 800x600, anything higher than the native resolution of your monitor is overkill.
In game the difference between Ray Tracing and Path Tracing isn't night and day, but it is a nice improvement on image quality. Especially in city environments. Sort of "warmer and more accurate". Of course getting 90+FPS with Ray Tracing vs 30+ with Path Tracing on my old OC RTX3070, makes the decision easy.
Looks amazing, can't wait to get 24 FPS on my RTX 3050 with DLSS Performance 😂
I don't have a proper confirmation yet, but CDPR stated that 8GB GPUs can't run path tracing at all, only in photo mode at low resolutions 😂
@@MxBenchmarkPC true anything below the 3090 (1080@30fps)or the 4070Ti can't run it
@@MxBenchmarkPC I've seen someone say he got it working on a 2060 (and as expected, poor performance) and someone else on a 3070 Ti.
@Funnky that's interesting. I'm gonna try path tracing on my 3080 anyway, so we'll see how it runs.
@@MxBenchmarkPC 😂
I guess I'm the outlier because in all the examples I like the ray tracing option the best.
The cyberpunk genre (of which this game obviously represents, hence its name) has always had lighting as one of the key elements in its visual style. Cyberpunk 2077 is a game that clearly benefits heavily from better lighting. It's often said that graphics are less important than gameplay, which is a blanket statement with elements of truth in it. But it's very clear that the experience this game offers is greatly enhanced through better lighting which ray tracing and path tracing provide. From the neon, bustling streets to stylish, melancholy interiors the lighting sets the tone of everything in cyberpunk.
Great comparison!
Thanks!
11-13GB of VRAM used with both RT and PT... tells a lot about how useful the 4070/4070Ti will be in 1-2 years... Nvidia is peak Planned obsolescence...
It doesn't help that this particular game needs much more optimization
They would definitely need to worry if AMD didn't perform so poorly with RT applications
4k resolution. Those cards are not capable of 4k anyways.
This literally makes no sense, the 4070 isn’t a 4k ray tracing card in the first place. AMD cards also suck in RT performance, so you aren’t getting anything with the extra vram.
well they're capable of it but developers decide to make them so unoptimized that you have to use upscaling by default. They might as well say up to 4k with scaling.@@Mulmgott
Impressing! Thank you!
Happy to help!
Path tracing was always the correct direction for gaming. We must remember that out GPUs are still not able to "Fully" path trace a game, you would kill the GPU. It looks gorgeous though!
This is fully path traced similar to Portal with RTX.
@@UnrivaledEntertainment No game today is fully traced. The amount of rays needed to get to a realistic point is simply not do-able at the moment
@@devinegamingtv3427 I see you and I have two different definitions then, this game fully path trace 2 ray counts and 2 bounces per pixel then use denioser to remove inaccuracies rather than millions of rays which is not necessary because of the improve techniques (camara perspective) for the scene to look real. I think art style, texture and game assests make it look not "real life".
@@UnrivaledEntertainment Or perhaps you just don't want to understand what it is I'm trying to write. This game looks gorgeous, out right stunning.
I am not saying the game doesn't look different, or nicer- I am simply saying for a game to resemble real life, or a life-like render you would need millions of rays.
As you can imagine this requires a metric shit-ton (mathematical term) of rays just to produce a single image. The resulting image can be much more realistic, but could take a 4090 many seconds to many minutes (or hours) to render a single frame.
@@devinegamingtv3427 The lighting techniques used here aren't that much off from ground truth offline path traced reference. Just few more bounces and better edge case material integration and it's close enough. From a pure visual standpoint it's not the same as a standard offline path tracer doing few samples due to how well it reuses data.
1:48
Reflection map? Never heard of that thing. We just turned on RT :O
Maybe it's just me, but I don't see anything groundbreaking. Besides a few spots where reflections come into play, there are no significant differences between presented options.
There is not a huge difference in most of cases, for me it really doesn't matter.
Still, I understand that for the most enthusiastic who can afford it, it may be worth it.
This gen is like the Turing of Path Tracing. It runs reasonably well but nothing special.
Nowadays Turing gpus cant handle more than 720-960p internal resolution when running high RT workloads, it's required to tune the load down, for what the architecture can do.
Ada already needs sub 1080p resolutions and frame gen and bla bla bla to get decent framerates. And there're people telling me that this isnt meant for future hardware lmao.
As is often the case with these things, you don't REALLY notice the difference until after you get used to it, then downgrade. Been playing Cyberpunk 2.0 on my RTX 3090 with path tracing, but there were some moments that just bottlenecked things so I downgraded to RTX Psycho settings for a while to get my 55 FPS back. Many hours later, during some select cut scenes without too much activity, I turned PTX back on and it really popped out how much more realistic the lighting and skin textures are for everything (as if this game didn't look realistic enough already!) with PTX.
Not as revolutionary as the leap from RTX off to RTX on but it's DEFINITELY there and has me sold to buy a 5090 when it comes out. It's been trickery though. There's been a tradeoff between this enhanced lighting and FPS. I'm looking forward to the future of games this decade with the 5090 whenever Nvidia releases it.
The future is bright (and well shaded)!
Only way to run Path Tracing on a 4090 at 4K is to have Frame Generation ON, but then v-sync is disabled, therefore screen tearing 😞 Hopefully DLSS3 is compatible with v-sync soon!
You can already play with V-sync on and Frame Generation even without G-sync capable panel. You need to disable any in-game framerate limiters and V-sync, then open the NVIDIA Control Panel and in Cyberpunk 2077 profile enable V-sync and limit your frame rate at 58fps (for 60Hz) or 142fps (for 144Hz). In that way you'll get rid of screen tearing without any increase in input latency.
You have a 4K panel without g sync? why?
@@Pisscan Gaming on a B8 55” OLED, I think it’s one generation off from g-sync compatibility
@@alexanderc3682 I went from a C6 (the curved 3d monstrosity) to a C1 about 2 years ago. Since you have a 4090 you need a vrr/g sync display
Well said, this information is completely accurate. As a note for any LG TV users, if you have a C2 or any 120hz Tv the same applies but lock your frames to 118 to match the fresh rate of display. Basic reasoning is to reduce screen tearing you want to lock your frames under the max refresh rate of the display if it does not have V-sync can also be useful for ones that do.@@MxBenchmarkPC
with Path Tracing. I stop messing with the Game Graphic Settings, just turn it ON and done.
the Shadows, lightings, reflections and Colour accuracy damn!!
My 4070 Ti gets wrecked in 3440x1440. Getting around 60-70~ fps WITH Frame Generation enabled. Not playable due the low baseline fps and high inputlag.
CDPR has also updated the DLSS implementation to 3.1.1 version with this update, so don't be shy to use balanced or performance mode for DLSS if you need more performance.
Did you enable reflex? it fixed the input lag for me.
Nice one 🙂 Good job. You got a new sub 😁
Thanks mate!
Imagine in a few years when we can do path tracing without dlss at 144+hz at 4k!
that's would be cost 50000Watt powers
1:05 doesnt RT Off look the best here?
No
@@toddfrombethesda6963 To me it looks like the image is burnt with brighness. No contrast.
@@mrleonspainthat’s how it would be in real life
@@TheGrimFiend I want it to look good, not realistic
Pathtracing looks so overblown
Probably one of the very few games where I genuinely think one should play with ray tracing… it makes such a difference.
Path tracing is that even further step ahead, but due to how intensive it is on the graphics card, it’s not streamlined yet
I'm simply blown away seeing the difference in quality. Never seen anything like it before.
Someday✨
👍for your time and work.
Thanks!
With DLSS Balanced or Performance + Frame Generation, you should have decent fps on 4080 with Path Tracing.
Yeah, you are right.
I tried the benchmark on my 4080. FG+Dlss performance gave an average of 90, with lowest at 59 fps. A lot better than I expected actually.
@@dontomaso11 that sounds fast but is there any input lag? I tried those exact settings on my 4080 and I can barely turn a car or aim my gun at 90 fps. It’s really nice for cinematic shots but I’m not sure about actually playing the game with these settings on a 4080, even 4090 needs it and gives a lot of input lag. This technology is definitely for the future, one day we will run it natively without any lag or AI enhancements.
@@SubZyYT lol, ran the test again, it was max fps that was 90, average was 75 :p
But when playing I can't say that the FG latency bothers me, the same when playing through W3 with it. Which is weird because vsync latency have on occasions over the years made me turn it off even though I absolutly hate screen tearing.
FG latency, for some reason, still feels responsive enough for me. Dunno why :s
I feel like my eyes must be broken, because I feel like the only situation where I'd be able to tell the difference (without seeing them side by side) is when looking at reflections.
its hard to notice the difference just by looking at the images, when u play it thats when u see it. Path tracing makes it look so good its unbelievable but ofc. its unplayable at the same time (even with 4090).
@@dvls2945 dlss on quality = +-70fps on 4070 super
I think ray tracing looks better when I play personally. There is way too much grain/noise with path tracing. It makes everything in motion look quite bad especially with RR.
Ну хз, если учесть сколько жрут эти фишки фпс и какая разница в принципе не большая в визуале, напомню если брать в расчет утрату фпс, то я лучше буду играть без лучей, но с плавностью. Слишком они требовательны короче
Accuracy of Lighting, reflection and shadow are scene dependent: ray tracing off sometimes is actually more accurate (not prettier) than ray tracing on or path tracing. The accuracy of light, reflection and shadow varies between the three modes. Ray tracing might be the future for image rendering, but it is still in an incomplete stage.
Do I need to have the rest of the rt settings on for overdrive to take full effect? Or is it enough to turn it alone? Does it provide the reflections shadows etc?
Path Tracing looks like a CGI 3D render
i think the problem in path tracing is it makes some of the places way too bright.
Awesome video, thanks! Can you please tell me the name of the track? It's so beautiful.
Marcin Przybylowicz - V's End
Is it weird that I prefer Ray Tracing to Path Tracing? At least, for this specific game. The lighting might not be as realistic, but it feels "more Cyberpunk."
Imagine doing this but with sound in video games
Can’t wait to get my new oled and the play this again. Craziest graphics
Without the comparison, I don't think human eyes can differentiate between RT and PT
In many cases, it seems Ray Tracing is like an ENB or Reshade. Path tracing, on the other hand, is the real deal.
I'm on my 1st pt on a 14700K + 4090. I've done quite a few tests and I'm still torn between RT vs PT. Some areas of the game look better w/ RT while others look better w/ PT. It's nice that we can toggle between them w/o having to restart the game. It almost seems that PT favors night scenes while RT favors day scenes but that could just be my personal pref.
RT adds reflections and refractions, and calculates edges of the shadows better (looks softer).
PT will literally calculate everything to as close as how our eyes see in the real world, including extra bounces of light for specular and refractive surfaces. This causes a dip in fps though because it doesn't stop firing rays to calculate scenes. Not many rigs can play it without some issue over another.
But as a game, these settings are really personal preference.
RT will always be a biased renderer. Which make things look more like a game.
PT is unbiased and will work very hard to get realistic results until you tell it to stop. Which is what filmmakers use with their UE5 screen on set (replacing greenscreen) to make everything look as real as possible.
Yet there are times when the game looks better when RT is turned off.
4090 on an OLED HDR 1000 nits Gsync Monitor. WQHD, Pathtraing on. Looks amazing
Is any of you actually looking at how much of a performance drop there is in comparison to the increase in visuals. Everything looks a little better yes, but no where near worth the performance drop. We're basically talking about 1080p with RT or PT on vs 2160p without, they'll cost the same GPU Load.
Path tracing makes the neon POP. Got a 4080S and I’m only playing with this on. I’ll take a FPS hit for that.
I plan to play overdrive mode on a 4080, capped at 60fps 4K. Can anyone tell me what settings would be best as far as DLSS, frame generation and all those options? Thanks.
Ultra Settings, DLSS Super Resolution on Balanced with DLSS Frame Generation enabled should give you a 4K/60fps experience on a 4080.
@@MxBenchmarkPC excellent. Thank you :-)
@michalsavatar7 glad to help.
I cant really tell the difference besides path tracing is just “brighter” but not really in a good way imo. The reflection difference between rt on and off is probably the biggest
Yeah, same. Weird that they all hype it up so much. I can see a difference, sure but it's not like it's doing much.
Path tracing often makes it even too bright for my taste.
Ultra sharp reflections in puddles and such don't feel very realistic either, it's too clean.
Considering the massive framerate drop this is just a gimmick to me.
@ i agree, i went amd gpu this time around and saved a small fortune
The picture reminds me of 2008's Fallout 3. Looks quite the same
ngl if you don't have a paused side by side comparison and you just play you won't tell the difference...beside the huge drop in fps that is :p
when you got them side by side paused you can tell a noticeable difference on very specific stuff, like the reflection on glass. i noticed though that on certain stuff like the ads signs you would miss what they read because the light made the letters disappear with rt and pt on, i guess because the game is made with raster as a priority. keep in mind that cp is a game that's supposedly made for rt, normally the difference would be even smaller.
i personally didn't have a clear winner even in cp, because sometimes the rt looked better, sometimes the path tracing did and some other times i preferred off.
in general i feel this technology ain't there yet and it's not worth the extra money for a high end card and performance drop in fps, although it appears that's not a popular opinion :D
When I enable Path Tracing all the other ray tracing options disappear, while yours still stay as a option, strange.
They are intended to disappear when Path Tracing is enabled. I showed the Ray Tracing settings in full, so people could see that for Ray Tracing the Psycho settings was used, not Ultra settings like i usually do.
Ray tracing is very beautiful but I wouldn't sacrifice my fps for a "realistic reflection", but now path tracing really makes the difference
In that shot at 0:46 it's like a 'spot the difference' between ray tracing off and ray tracing yet nearly 70fps difference. So not worth it.
Path tracing to those cards below a 4090: im coming for your fps BOYZ!
I saved $250 by getting a Radeon card over nVidia 4070. All I needed to do was turn down some ray-tracing settings. I got ray-tracing on my Rx6750xt that was "good enough"
yo what song is in the background? I can't find it, i know it's not the official ost
Marcin Przybylowicz - V's End (Cyberpunk 2077).
Hey, minimum psu req is 750w for 4080. Did you have any problems with your 700w psu?
I did not have any problems with my 350w 3080 for 2 years and there are definitely no problems with the 280w 4080.
Just bought the game recently, and I was disappointed by the disservice the reviews did for the game. The lore, personality, and immersion are next level. I'm want to just enjoy the game for what it is on affordable hardware now, but I am very much so looking forward to seeing how graphics tech adjusts in the next couple of years. Hopefully we can see path tracing in full, high resolution, with stable frame rates.
Well you just bought the game recently, of course you aren't going to have as bad of an experience with the initial reviewers. The game was BROKEN at launch, and trust me you would be saying the same things as the reviews you saw and would definitely have gotten a refund. Things have already improved so much, so obviously you're not going to get the same experience.
Chiplet gpu design is the only way we will be able to get massive jump in pathtrasing preformice were you can make a massive rt compute die to handle path tracing
I've realized a few issues with path tracing that are not in ray tracing.
it's like they are pushing all this tech in just to demolish the fps to let you buy the most expensive GPU to get barely 30 fps 😅
Indeed😂
@pipiboii
You stole my thumbnail 😵
@@HappyDude1 we both stole it from Fall Out
Hi need help. When i turn on the ray tracing my fps still around 70 fps but its really clunky and slow. Any advise? Performance mode helps but i thought the slowness will only happen if its bellow 30fps
once you have experienced 144fps, you dont want to go back to 60fps, and then normal raster looks tempting again. 😅
I've a 3080Ti, with the frame reconstruction mod I can pull this game in 2 ways :
2560*1080 Rt phyco, dlaa 97fps
2560*1080 path tracing + frame reconstruction, dlss quality 70fps
Which one would you pick?
how do you have 70fps with path tracing and dlss in quality? I have a 3080, with path tracing and dlss quality I have 48-60fps in 1080p (average like 54fps)
@@freddyespinoza5115 Try the fsr 3 mod (frame Gen)
So doo you need a 4000 series card to run path tracing here? I have a 10gb 3080 and play at 1440p and haven't returned to CP2077 in probably a year. I've been waiting for both the game to improve and to decide whether my hardware is good enough to run it with the settings it deserves
You don't, I'm on 3060 ti and I can run path tracing and i get like 40-50 fps on 1080p, then you can turn on frame generation and you can easily get around 100ish fps in path tracing but turning on the vsync from nvidia control panel is recomennded as the screen might tear. It sure is not perfect but really worth it. But regardless you don't need 4000 series, it says on cyberpunk settings that any power graphic card like 3090 or 4070 ti will work
Yes you need it especially in QHD resolution.
just try the Frame Generation mod , with a 3080 I can run Cyberpunk 2077 with path tracing at 90-100FPS in 1080p
Do you use hdr or not? I don't have an oled monitor and I'm not sure it's worth it. It looks good, but waaaay to dark, and I'm not techy enough to know how to calibrate it correctly. I'm also only running at 1440p.
I don't use HDR.
I think ray tracing off is nicer, I don't need any reflections, I never pay attention to them anyway and I don't like the brightly lit signs either, which ray tracing also has I don't like functions like the bloom effect at all
Personally i much prefer playing at 120-170fps so stick to raster with ray traced shadows only. The gameplay is slick then. Even 60fps feels really slow these days.
I play this maxed out with PT on my 3080ti. Dlss quality at 1440p and the fps is playable.
I'll update my GTX 1070ti when path tracing will be the new standard.
RT off: green
RT on: green but better
PT on: actual lighting
I hope 5090 will be able to do 4k ultra graphics rt psycho at 60+ fps in any area
And pay a fortune plus huge electricity bills 😮
Damn it looks amazing
Different between Path Tracing and Overdrive?
whats the name of this version of the song in the background? It sounds like a darker, more sinister version of been good to know ya.
Marcin Przybylowicz - V's End
can you do the same test but in 1440p?
Yes, i'll test it at 1440p as well.
@@MxBenchmarkPC Thank you!!
@Adarsh Anie no problems mate.
My 3060 couldn't even handle Path Tracing it's been giving me 30FPS at max with DLSS2 on Balanced
damn path tracing literally so real like right now
Bro can you make with rtx 3060 pls? thanks for all videos.
I'll look into it.
@@MxBenchmarkPC Thanks bro you are the best of ones.
Make video also with 3060 at 1080p with dlss quality
Have mercy for the 3060 😂
RTX 3060 can run all ray tracing effects at ~60FPS with DLSS Quality. With Path Tracing it will drop below 30FPS for sure, you would have to use DLSS even in Performance mode at 1080p.
@@MxBenchmarkPC yeah but can u make a video on that
not possible with 3060, or really any gpu with less than 10gb of VRAM.
@@TreSneaky RTX 3060 has 12 GB, but I see your point 🤷🏽♂
@@mobarakjama5570 wow what the hell, I never took notice of it having more vram than a 3070 lmao. Nvidia makes no sense at all sometimes.
@ 0:45, path tracing kills the mood, rtx and no rtx looks so much better
def depends on the scene, look at 1:12 it looks much better, but yea sometimes it is kinda too bright and washed out. When I have it on and i'm trying to snipe, the lights are sometimes blinding lol
Thanks for the video, now it confirms to me again and again how pointless this ray tracing technology is. I mean, sure, you can see a difference, but it's neither better nor worse, just different. The Nvidia fanboys who are celebrating this RT Path are just ridiculous. Just look at how much performance you lose because of it. Who plays games under 60 FPS for a slightly better picture these days? These comments are so ridiculous. And it's precisely because of people like this that Nvidia can afford to bring graphics cards onto the market that sell for over 2k euros/dollars. These people spend so much money to get a slightly better picture and worse performance. Gamers are that stupid today, and they'll only get worse in the future.
nice comparison, clearly shows that improvement in just lighting and shadows eats riduculous amount of fps, not worth it imho.
Am I the only person who think RT off looks best? I've put almost 1000 hours into CyberPunk on an RTX 3090, and I purposefully leave ray tracing off.
Yo what in the world is this majestic background music what its incredible, anyone knows whats this is?
Marcin Przybylowicz - V's End
Path tracing is way better than normal RT, normal RT feels very insufficient. In normal RT it feels nice to have accurate shadows and lighting but I feel like the colors look wrong and it gives this uncanny feeling. In RT OFF at least they tried to mimic Path tracing, there are no accurate shadows and reflactions yes but it feels more ¨natural colored¨.
Path tracinf is the most noticeable, but RTX on and off look, similar i guess? RTX on looks like 15% better
In short what we thought games would look like with ray tracing turned on did, path tracing actually does that