Ray tracing is one of the most talked-about, yet least understood, graphics features of recent years. Some gamers see it as a visual revolution; others see it as "an unnecessary FPS killer." The truth is somewhere in between — and largely depends on which GPU you own.
What does ray tracing actually do?
Traditional game graphics use mathematical shortcuts (rasterization) to "fake" light and shadows — fast, but limited in realism. Ray tracing instead simulates how light actually behaves in the real world: virtual rays are traced as they genuinely "bounce" off surfaces in a scene to calculate the resulting image. The result: far more realistic reflections, shadows, and global illumination (like how light spreads across the walls of a room).
Why is it so expensive in terms of FPS?
These ray calculations are mathematically far heavier than traditional rasterization — potentially millions of rays need to be traced per frame. That's why it's normal to see a 30-60% FPS drop with ray tracing enabled, sometimes more in certain games.
Why is DLSS/FSR always mentioned alongside ray tracing?
The most common way to offset the performance cost of ray tracing is upscaling — the GPU renders at a lower internal resolution and upscales the image, which largely balances out ray tracing's FPS cost. We cover how this pairing works in our DLSS vs FSR guide — in practice, this technology is what makes ray tracing "sustainable."
On which GPUs does it make sense?
- High-end RTX cards (RTX 4070 and above, RTX 50 series): You can use ray tracing alongside DLSS and stay at a reasonable FPS.
- Mid-range RTX cards (RTX 4060, 3060, etc.): Usable in some games at low/medium ray tracing settings with DLSS on, but may not be satisfying in every title.
- AMD cards: Ray tracing performance generally lags behind NVIDIA's equivalent tier — even with FSR support, the gap can be noticeable.
- Older/budget cards (GTX series, entry-level RTX): Keeping ray tracing off generally gives a better overall experience.
Is ray tracing actually "worth turning on"?
This entirely depends on your priorities:
- In cinematic, single-player games (like Cyberpunk 2077 or Alan Wake 2), the visual impact is very noticeable and generally "worth it" — especially if you have a powerful GPU.
- In competitive, fast-paced games (FPS/battle royale titles), most players prefer high and consistent FPS over visual quality — ray tracing is typically left off in these games.
Know before you test on your own card
It can be hard to predict how much FPS ray tracing will cost on your hardware without trying it — you can toggle the ray tracing option in our FPS calculator to see the expected difference. If the result falls below a playable range, try turning on DLSS/FSR or dropping the ray tracing level to "Low" instead of fully off — many games offer partial ray tracing options (e.g. shadows only, or reflections only).
Summary
Ray tracing isn't "unnecessary flash" — it creates a real, measurable visual difference. But because the FPS cost is significant, keeping it off generally gives a better overall experience unless you have a high-end GPU or aren't playing a competitive title.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does a game look bad with ray tracing turned off?
No — modern rasterization techniques (screen-space reflections, pre-baked lighting) still produce very good results. Ray tracing is an "extra" visual layer, not a baseline requirement.
Can I enable ray tracing for just specific effects?
Yes, many games offer partial ray tracing options (e.g. shadows only, or reflections only) — this carries a much smaller FPS cost than enabling everything at once and can be a good middle ground.
Does ray tracing work the same way on consoles as on PC?
No, consoles typically use reduced ray tracing settings combined with an upscaling technology almost all the time — more limited than the experience on a high-end PC, but it still delivers a visual improvement.