Your first paragraph is redundant because it assumes AMD cards are not capable at FP16 needed for BVH at any kind of usable level. They are actually very capable with 26.88 TFLOPS.

And just like OP, you got it into your very dense skull that BVH intersection uses FP16. Have you ever used FP16 for geometry? No: you haven’t.

Because if you had, you’d know that the precision of FP16 is absolutely terrible for geometry. That’s why even the Riva TNT used more than FP16 for geometry calculations. You need at least FP24 to do anything remotely useful.

You also make no allowance for the fact that RTX still can't raytrace a scene in adequate strength to not require software denoising.

Why should I make allowance for that? What matters is that the RT cores have the ability to do ray/triangle intersection and order of magnitude faster than a generic compute implantation. How to use it up to the developers.

No you are, I specifically said implementations because that's what I'm talking about.

And yet you also claim that ray/BVH-triangle intersection performance, the core ingredient of ray tracing, is some proprietary Nvidia bullshit.

You can’t have it both ways.

You're talking absolute nonsense now. AMD cards support DXR.

Yes they support it. I never claimed otherwise. And it’s performance on AMD is an order of magnitude slower on AMD GPUs. Despite your magical ACE units. Because they can’t offload triangle intersection to fixed function HW.

So they're going to want to use whatever API covers the most hardware aren't they.

That’s what you are hoping.