It would be disingenuous to say that ray tracing is a gimmick in 2026. Eight years after Nvidia first brought real-time ray tracing to consumer GPUs, the technology has certainly evolved and become a key part of modern gaming. Path tracing has brought exceptional realism to some games, and helpful tools like upscaling and frame generation have somewhat mitigated the associated performance hit. That said, the idea that ray tracing and path tracing are a must and GPU buying decisions should hinge on ray tracing performance, isn't something I agree with.

If you're being honest with yourself, you'll realize that you've only played a handful of ray-traced games in your lifetime where the visuals were truly breathtaking. The majority of gamers still prefer performance to eye candy, which mandates lowering RT settings or turning them off completely. You should think twice before spending a premium on a high-end GPU only for its ray tracing capabilities.

How many games with worthwhile RT do you actually play?

You already know the number is a rounding error

In all the time developers have had access to ray tracing, we've only seen a few games where the implementation was truly something that hasn't been achieved by rasterization alone. And even in that small list, path tracing, also known as full ray tracing, has been behind the game-changing visuals people often gush over. The thing is, though, path tracing is brutal on GPUs, and only a handful of cards can deliver playable framerates, even with upscaling enabled. Frame generation helps boost the FPS, but adds its own latency that hits the overall responsiveness. Hence, the titles that feature objectively impressive RT visuals are few and far between. You may be thinking of Cyberpunk 2077, Alan Wake 2, Control, Metro Exodus, Black Myth: Wukong, and Indiana Jones and the Great Circle — that's about it.

Now I want you to ask yourself how many hours you've spent on these games as a percentage of the total time you spent gaming in the last eight years. You can probably answer "not enough" without even making an estimation. It's great to see what ray tracing and path tracing can do in high-end AAA titles, but most of the time, you're probably playing esports, MOBA, and strategy titles with your friends online and don't bother with ray tracing at all. Other times, you might be playing indie titles or non-RT AAA games anyway. Does it make sense to spend a bomb on an upper mid-range or flagship-grade GPU only for the privilege of 60+ FPS ray tracing performance at High-Ultra presets? You can probably buy an alternative card that maximizes value per dollar, provides you with more rasterized performance, and does an okay job at ray tracing.

When was the last time you maxed out RT settings?

Probably on a 5-year-old game

Even if you spend most of your time playing single-player AAA titles, dialing every setting to 11 is probably something you can't afford. The way generation gains have panned out in the GPU space, only high-end GPUs can sustain high graphical fidelity alongside high framerates. Everything down the product stack has to choose between one or the other, and most gamers are forced to choose performance every single time. You might be able to turn ray-traced reflections, shadows, and lighting on in demanding games, but the highest RT presets are probably still out of reach of your GPU. Modern mid-range cards like the RTX 5070 and RX 9070 should be enough to max out RT settings in the newest titles, but they can barely cross 60 FPS without upscaling and frame generation.

The last time you probably maxed out ray tracing settings on your new GPU was probably in an old game like Control or Metro Exodus. That's where we are on the ray tracing development curve — the technology outpaced GPU horsepower long ago. Companies like Nvidia and AMD have shifted to AI-powered innovations instead of raw rasterization gains to make the technology work on modern GPUs. Ever since Nvidia's RTX 2000 series cards came out, everyone was sure that in a few generations, we'll have GPUs that'll breeze through demanding RT games. That future never happened. What happened instead was developers getting lazy with optimization and relying on upscaling and frame generation more than ever. Ray tracing started as a niche feature only worth it on expensive GPUs, and has remained so to date.

Do you really sacrifice FPS for RT?

If you do, you probably own a flagship GPU already

The main question remains: Do you prefer ray-traced visuals over a comfortably high FPS? Ray tracing and path tracing are still too demanding on modern graphics cards, and upscaling or not, they eat a significant chunk of your FPS. If the choice is between a visually stunning experience at 60–80 FPS and a slightly less impressive one at 120–150 FPS, wouldn't you choose the latter in every game? I believe most gamers would, while preferring the former only once or twice every two years in games that truly demand maxed-out settings. It's always fun to talk about cutting-edge titles that use mesh shaders, mandatory ray tracing, or some other groundbreaking innovation. However, these titles aren't the meat and potatoes of the gaming industry. It's still the live-service multiplayer titles, top-down MMORPGs, satisfying side-scrollers, and sports titles.

Ray tracing is like the icing on the cake, but most games look great even without it. With the majority of gamers priced out of the high-end and flagship GPU market, the RT performance hit can be too much to swallow. So, the next time you're planning a GPU upgrade (which could be a long time from now), make sure you aren't overpaying for a feature that you'll use a handful of times. The way data center demand is gobbling up silicon, buying high-end GPUs may become a thing of the past in another year or two. So, save your money, buy the most FPS for your dollar, and treat ray tracing performance as a bonus, not a must-have.

Ray tracing should not dictate your buying decisions

Buying a graphics card is not a small decision. Unless you're after entry-level performance, "budget" GPUs don't really exist anymore. For a decent gaming experience in modern titles, you have to spend at least $400–$500 today. If you make high-end ray tracing performance a non-negotiable, prepare to spend upwards of $700 (or even more). If you're honest with yourself, you'll probably realize ray tracing isn't worth spending a premium on, and the games you play regularly don't even use the feature.