Gameplay Performance at 1440p with Ray Tracing
On this page, we are going to focus on 1440p with Ray Tracing gameplay performance with the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC video card. We will include DLSS and FSR performance on the same graph in the games that are supported. We will use DLSS on NVIDIA GPUs and FSR on AMD GPUs. For video card comparisons we are using a GeForce RTX 3090 Ti FE, GeForce RTX 3090 FE, GeForce RTX 3070 Ti FE, and Radeon RX 7900 XT.
F1 2022
F1 2022 was released on June 28th, 2022 on the PC and uses Codemasters Ego engine. The game supports Ray Tracing, DLSS, AMD FidelityFX, and FSR. We are going to run the game with the highest quality settings of “Ultra High” and TAA+FidelityFX. We will enable all Ray Tracing options in the game to “On.” We will enable DLSS and FSR as needed at the Quality setting for both. We will utilize the built-in benchmark in the Imola track, in dry conditions with a far-chasing cam.
Now comes the really interesting test, can the RTX 4070 Ti handle 1440p with full Ray Tracing in games? In F1 2022, at 1440p but with all Ray Tracing options enabled at the highest quality, the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC can indeed play this game very well at 92FPS. This is an enjoyable and playable gameplay experience at 1440p with all Ray Tracing enabled.
In terms of scaling, the ASUS TUF RTX 4070 Ti OC seems to sit between the RTX 3090 and RTX 3090 Ti. It is 8% faster than the RTX 3090, but 6% slower than the RTX 3090 Ti. We do find that it is only 16% faster than the Radeon RX 7900 XT, the two are not as far apart in Ray Tracing in this resolution. The Radeon RX 7900 XT is also playable at 79FPS with Ray Tracing. Compared to the RTX 3070 Ti the RTX 4070 Ti has a 53% performance uplift.
Overclocking the ASUS RTX 4070 Ti OC improves performance by 3%. In this game, both DLSS and FSR improve performance to well over 100FPS with Ray Tracing at 1440p. The Radeon RX 7900 XT matches the performance of the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC using FSR compared to the DLSS performance, they are identical in the experience with Ray Tracing at 1440p using upscaling.
Dying Light 2
Dying Light 2 was released in February 2022 on the PC and uses Techland’s C-Engine. The game supports Ray Tracing, DLSS, and FSR2. This game supports Ray Tracing environmental effects including Ray Traced Soft Shadows, Ray Traced Ambient Occlusion, Ray Traced Global Illumination, and Ray Traced Reflections. We utilize the built-in preset option to set “HIGH-QUALITY RAYTRACING” which enables the game’s highest graphics settings plus the environmental effects explained above at the highest values. The game is run in DX12 Ultimate mode with ASYNC Compute turned on. We use the built-in benchmark.
In Dying Light 2 the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC is able to provide a playable gameplay experience over 70FPS. In this game, that aligns closer to the GeForce RTX 3090 Ti, though technically it is still faster until DLSS is used. The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 4070 Ti OC is 12% faster than the GeForce RTX 3090, and 2% slower than the RTX 3090 Ti. It is 58% faster than the RTX 3070 Ti. It is also 31% faster than the Radeon RX 7900 XT. Overclocking adds 8% more performance, and now it is faster than the RTX 3090 Ti. With DLSS, performance is on top at 1440p with Ray Tracing.
Cyberpunk 2077
Cyberpunk 2077 was released in December of 2020 and uses the REDengine 4. We have the game patched to version 1.61 and use the built-in benchmark. We test using the Graphics Preset option to set graphics settings. We use the Ray Tracing Graphics Preset of either: “Ray Tracing: Low”, or “Ray Tracing: Medium” or “Ray Tracing: Ultra” as indicated. This game supports DLSS and FSR2.
Oof, even at 1440p, with “Ultra” Ray Tracing enabled in Cyberpunk 2077 the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC is not playable. It does require upscaling (DLSS) to be used in order to provide a playable gameplay experience. At 51FPS, it is 10% faster than the RTX 3090 and 4% slower than the RTX 3090 Ti. It is also 57% faster than the RTX 3070 Ti and 40% faster than the Radeon RX 7900 XT. Overclocking adds 9% to performance, and that is borderline playable. To really enjoy this game with Ray Tracing though you will want to enable DLSS, which boosts the game up to over 80FPS and is now enjoyable. With DLSS enabled, the ASUS TUF RTX 4070 Ti OC is the fastest video card on this graph.
Watch Dogs Legion
Watch Dogs Legion was released on the PC in October of 2020 and uses the Disrupt game engine. We utilize the built-in benchmark for testing. We have the HD Texture pack installed and enabled for testing. We use the built-in graphics preset of “Ultra” for testing. We utilize the “Ultra” preset quality option for Ray Tracing. This game supports DLSS upscaling.
In Watch Dogs Legion the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC video card is very playable at “Ultra” settings with “Ultra” Ray Tracing. At 69FPS it is 10% faster than the RTX 3090, and right on par with the RTX 3090 Ti. Interestingly, it and the Radeon RX 7900 XT are very close, within only 6% of each other. The Radeon RX 7900 XT is also very playable in this game without upscaling, at 1440p, and Ray Tracing. The ASUS TUF Gaming RTX 4070 Ti OC is 103% faster than the RTX 3070 Ti in this game with Ray Tracing (the 3070 Ti had a VRAM capacity bottleneck). Overclocking boosts performance by 7% and takes it to the top, above the RTX 3090 Ti. DLSS also boosts performance, and once again with DLSS, it is the fastest video card.
Metro Exodus Enhanced
Metro Exodus Enhanced is being run with Shading Quality at “Extreme” and Ray Tracing at “Ultra.” This is a demanding game, that heavily focuses on Ray Tracing utilization, including Global Illumination. We are utilizing the built-in benchmark.
In Metro Exodus Enhanced, this game is very playable on the ASUS TUF Gaming GeForce RTX 4070 Ti OC video card at 1440p with maximum Ray Tracing. At 71FPS it is faster than the RTX 3090 by 15% and faster than the RTX 3090 Ti by 2%. It provides an uplift of 61% over the RTX 3070 Ti. It also appears to be 9% faster than the Radeon RX 7900 XT, which in the grand scheme of things isn’t a big difference. The Radeon RX 7900 XT is actually also playable at 65FPS at these settings as well, the 4070 Ti is not that much faster, technically speaking. Overclocking adds 7% and brings performance to the top. DLSS can also be used and brings performance close to 100FPS at 1440p.
Discussion (19 replies)
Join Discussion →Aaaand, it's a dud. The 7900 XT now actually makes sense.
Sort of want, but will wait until under 500. 1080ti still gets job done.
Ok, so this is only tangential to the topic... but at what point do you get to call it either a monopoly or price fixing?
Now, I do not think that AMD and nVidia are colluding to raise consumer prices. I think nVidia is doing it because they can get away with it, and AMD is just playing along with "just slightly less than" pricing because their shareholders would oust them outright if they didn't.
There is no government limit on the margin a company can ask, or the profit they can pull in. That's kinda how capitalism works. But I sure hate this feeling that we are just getting utterly taken advantage of. I guess it's just a hobby, I don't have to play along - I just hate seeing it happen before my eyes.
Nvidia has enormous pricing power because of RTX & DLSS3
At the premium price points ($500 plus) people most likely go by added features rather than outright raster performance
What is surprising is that: even in below $500 prev gen GPUs, higher price Ampere cards outsell equivalent but much cheaper RDNA 2 cards
If more people purchase Navi 22 cards (RX 6750 XT, 6700 XT, RX 6700) instead of Ampere, than Nvidia might get the message !!
DLSS3 itself isn't a real selling point. It exists, and it has a purpose - but not for most gaming scenarios. DLSS2 is still the main DLSS technology and remains more competitive overall, especially in situations where RT is used with heavy loads overall.
If nvidia pushes DLSS3 as hard as they pushed DLSS, we'll see support in most upcoming games.
Besides, 100% performance increase does sound like a big selling point.
Thanks, @Brent_Justice for the very thorough review which answered nearly every question I could have about this card.
Well, it seems the card lies between the RTX3090 and 3090Ti, but men the thing gets bandwidh starved at 4k
I'm really impressed just becauese looking at the specs I really didn't think it would do that good.
Great review!
I figured Nvidias "faster than 3090ti" claims were going to be all fluff, but it does at least get close most of the time, and actually succeeds in others.
Still, not quite sure I'd be happy with the value proposition $799 is a lot for a mid range card.
If I could make a request, if it isn't too much of a main in the ass, Minimum/1%/0.1% framerates are very relevant and would add a lot of information to your reviews. I'd even argue that minimum frames are MORE relevant that average frames.
Sure?
DLSS 1.0 was pretty bad - but showed the promise of intelligent upscaling.
DLSS 2.0 has more or less delivered on that promise. My opinion, of course; I find DLSS 2.0 to be more than close enough to justify any perceived degradation in visuals. Granted I have no problem using FSR / FSR 2.0 where exclusively available, whether I'm gaming on an AMD GPU or that's just what the game in question supports.
DLSS 3.0 is 'frame doubling'. This works great for pre-recorded media (if you like the effect itself), but for real-time applications it means that there's a definite insertion of additional input latency attached with usage. So, for DLSS 3.0 to even be useful in a particular situation, performance already has to be high enough for real-time interaction. Whereas DLSS 2.0 taking you from an arbitrary 20FPS to 35FPS, or 60FPS to 90FPS and so on can significantly impact the quality of the experience, DLSS 3.0 (that is, the 'frame generation' part of it) needs you to be running at 60FPS+ in the first place.
And there's a place for that - many games that aren't as user-response dependent can benefit, thinking anything turn-based or perhaps RPG and adventure-style games. Some simulators as well.
But for anything where optimizing for input latency is already a concern, DLSS 3.0 is a non-starter.
No one should be! But it's still the cheapest entry point for the level of technology Nvidia is bringing to the table.
BTW seems to me the cards are unnecessarily big. It seems the PCB is about 2/3 the size of the card.
I wonder if they reused parts from its bigger brothers to save R&D and inventory costs.
It's a tradeoff. It costs more per unit, but it saves having to develop new parts.
Yeah, I'm sure. There are already about 50+ games announced that will support DLSS3. If someone know how to shove new technology down your throat, that's nvidia. BTW thanks to nvidia reflex, latency is actually lower than without DLLS3. Not saying its going to be great, but by now DLSS already gained high praise and is considered a must have for many gamers, DLSS3 at least deserves a chance.
Anyway AMD is also having its own frame interpolation/frame creation technology coming soon. We'll see.
I haven't owned a Nvidia GPU newer than my 2016 Pascal Titan X, so I ahve not personally played with DLSS yet.
Can all titles that support DLSS3 also run DLSS2? In other words is it backwards compatible or an option?
Because I too tend to think - from what I have read and seen, through not through personal experience) that DLSS2 was the pinnacle of the tech.
Pretty sure the answer is yes. Brent has a write-up on it in his 4090 review that also goes a little more in-depth about the frame generation feature. It's about midway down the first page.
https://www.thefpsreview.com/2022/10/11/nvidia-geforce-rtx-4090-founders-edition-review/