assurdum
Banned
The last monster hunter is uncappedMonster hunter?
The last monster hunter is uncappedMonster hunter?
How about no, buster?
he is saying you need to shut the fuck up and take an L like a warrior that you are, pretty much.i used google translate for thisoneSorry I have no clue what you're talking about
Weird, that sucks.
Or they could cap the framerate to 30. This is likely the performance most 30fps games would have if the framerate was unlocked.Series S must be withdrawn from the market.
The Last monster hunter is rise on switch.The last monster hunter is uncapped
he is saying you need to shut the fuck up and take an L like a warrior that you are, pretty much.i used google translate for thisone
I was talking about using the another one gif.Yeah people need to stop lumping all Xbox fans together like a hive mind. Idiots on Twitter are just that, idiots. If you know of Xbox fanboys spouting the 40% difference (which doesnt even make sense as the difference is around 18%) on this forum, name then.
As for your other nonsense. The game is better on Xbox, as a lot of games have been better on PS5 so far. These comparisons are not only for fanboy nonsense, but also for people to have an informed choice of which version to get. You need to stop this 'PS5 still wins because the XSX isnt beating it by 18%' crap. You cant just claim your version is the best because its not that far behind lol.
Why you making it sound like a 10% performance advantage is throughout the whole game, when in fact the average performance in less than 1%?
WHOaaaa woa whoaaaaa buddy easy there that's a but excessive don't you think? pheeeewwwwwI'm not a warrior, I deal in reality. Yeah I'm done with these threads, fucking morons
lmao i know i had him on ignore for a reason
Because if the PS5 has a 0.5% frame rate advantage in a two second long section of a game, there then follows 150 gifs of that fat blobby bearded bastard jiggling around my screen.
Because if the PS5 has a 0.5% frame rate advantage in a two second long section of a game, there then follows 150 gifs of that fat blobby bearded bastard jiggling around my screen.
Series X runs well within the VRR range so we're getting perfect performance with RT on
I bolded what I was replying to. But you RUINED it.Sorry I have no clue what you're talking about
You say the same thing over and over and over again. It's so dull and pathetic. Why are you so triggered by any criticism (or perceived) of the Series S? Is it that really that important. Why do you want to be the Series S knight in shining armour so much?My goodness this is the point right here! Especially for this game that is on the PS4 and X1 yet the XSS is the problem!? Its like people aren't even thinking what they are typing. The XSS is a $299 device that has raytracing. Is there a more powerful console for the same or less money? The Switch is also $299 how do those two devices compare power wise? Can you build a PC for $299 with raytracing? People are setting an unreasonable expectation on a budget device that is clearly outclassing last gen devices AS IT SHOULD.
If Capcom capped the frame rate to 30 or kept it at 1080p it would most likely not have the same issues. The frame rate was higher than 30 in the video so it had some power head room. People just like dumping on the low cost option like it is actually affecting them in some meaningful way it's pretty pathetic.
Just curious. Care to price out the PC that matches XSS specs? Needs a Zen2 CPU, an SSD, a GPU capable of raytracing, an OS, and a controller. Your budget is $299.
It's so odd to hate a console just because you don't want to buy one. It clearly isn't targeted at you if you aren't interested in lower resolution gaming at a lower price point. If MS increased the specs it would increase the cost and that was something they wanted to avoid. This system will ALWAYS be more affordable than any other current gen console and THAT is what MS was aiming for.
On top of that can you name a lower cost, higher performing device? The Switch is also $299. You think they are equal in performance? They already sell a product for higher end graphics and they didn't need another. Also for all your resolution comments you didn't mention the role VRS, SFS, and VA will play on creating XSS games. Those features haven't all be used on the platform and they will mitigate some of the ram and bandwidth issues. The XSS is fine and it will continue to be fine for this entire generation. MS has never dropped a console mid-gen. If they can support the X1 for 8 years the XSS will receive plenty of support.
My goodness this is the point right here! Especially for this game that is on the PS4 and X1 yet the XSS is the problem!? Its like people aren't even thinking what they are typing. The XSS is a $299 device that has raytracing. Is there a more powerful console for the same or less money? The Switch is also $299 how do those two devices compare power wise? Can you build a PC for $299 with raytracing? People are setting an unreasonable expectation on a budget device that is clearly outclassing last gen devices AS IT SHOULD.
If Capcom capped the frame rate to 30 or kept it at 1080p it would most likely not have the same issues. The frame rate was higher than 30 in the video so it had some power head room. People just like dumping on the low cost option like it is actually affecting them in some meaningful way it's pretty pathetic.
I never said I want PS5 to be winning.« XSX version should run at 69 FPS for that 15% advantage, otherwise I win »
Better keep those goalposts moving fast as the wins are starting to pile up.
- framerate with RT is unlocked, targeting 60 fps
- both XXSX and PS5 manage to hit 60 FPS with RT most of the time
- at best Series X delivers 10% more performance during stress-test scenes.
Xbox win.
Maybe you should consider the fact that different games leverage hardware features at different amounts, even if there's still performance being left on the table.re has rt mode and still advantage xsx is rather modest, xsx big cu count advantage with rt is repeating on many forums that of course has no much sense as its just scale also with clock so difference between consoles is still simillar also in rt
Well I can't disagree with you but it would be obvious with the PS5 since XBSX has been touted to be significantly more powerful.Because if the PS5 has a 0.5% frame rate advantage in a two second long section of a game, there then follows 150 gifs of that fat blobby bearded bastard jiggling around my screen.
So Xbox fans should spam a million another one gifs in load time comparisons even with longer load times?Well I can't disagree with you but it would be obvious with the PS5 since XBSX has been touted to be significantly more powerful.
The PS5 coming anywhere close or outperforming the XBSX deserves a million gifs after all the huge power gap you guys been hyping up all gen.
Are those different scenes?- framerate with RT is unlocked, targeting 60 fps
- both XXSX and PS5 manage to hit 60 FPS with RT most of the time
- at best Series X delivers 10% more performance during stress-test scenes.
Xbox win.
So Xbox fans should spam a million another one gifs in load time comparisons even with longer load times?
Because "LOL 900p" and earlier trolling this generation. The pendulum always swings back the other way. I hope you like chickens because they're coming home to roost.so they are basically the same with 2- 3 fps advantage to series x in some scenes ??
is anybody going to notice it in real life ?
why is this thread 4 pages ???
Maybe you should consider the fact that different games leverage hardware features at different amounts, even if there's still performance being left on the table.
Keep in mind you're using a game that was initially designed with last-gen platforms in mind (and therefore likely heavily leveraging fixed-function rasterization of traditional pipelines, rather than compute-driven rendering as this game does not use mesh shading to what is known information) to attempt downplaying whatever advantages are present for a given platform when it comes to this game.
Because that seems to be the driving reason you and a few others are even bringing this up; I think most people are aware that not all work scales evenly to every single part of the hardware spec, as that comes down to software needs and the engine. But rather than accepting that rather simple answer, you guys seem to keep pressing the fact the advantage isn't 100% reflective of paper specs (a fact everyone discussing this can tell just by looking at the numbers so...?) because, as some of the more extreme comments (not necessarily just here but in other places to) suggest, it can be inferred by others as pushing the idea of some hardware design bottleneck creating a lower-threshold advantage for one platform over the other.
Which...basically leads back to the back-and-forth petty console warring ad nausea.
Well actually, the PS5 is loading faster with "next'gen" games. According to a lot of Xbox gafters, the XSX would eat monsters for breakfast and destroy the PS5 from day one. Only thing xbox fans hide behind are BC games and Gamepass.
So... let me get you up to speed. Xbox One X was introduced with the slogan "It's a Monster!" So it's fitting to say Xbox Series X eats monsters for breakfast, and indeed it does crap all over Xbox One X, there's no denying that. That marketing slogan has NOTHING to do with the PS5.
At the end of the day, Xbox Series X is more powerful than the PS5, but only by about 20% and maybe more so when RT is involved according to some devs.
Measure the performance right now is like trying to measure Xbox One Vs PS4 and using Destiny as a metric, however a year or 2 when games become even more demanding where consoles may even have to settle for 30fps games again just to keep up with the PC market, the performance difference is going to paint a different picture than what you see today on these games with all this extra overhead.
game just behave close to theoretical difference between console that some consoles warriors like to ignore (so around 20% advantage both for compute and rt not bigger in rt)Maybe you should consider the fact that different games leverage hardware features at different amounts, even if there's still performance being left on the table.
Keep in mind you're using a game that was initially designed with last-gen platforms in mind (and therefore likely heavily leveraging fixed-function rasterization of traditional pipelines, rather than compute-driven rendering as this game does not use mesh shading to what is known information) to attempt downplaying whatever advantages are present for a given platform when it comes to this game.
Because that seems to be the driving reason you and a few others are even bringing this up; I think most people are aware that not all work scales evenly to every single part of the hardware spec, as that comes down to software needs and the engine. But rather than accepting that rather simple answer, you guys seem to keep pressing the fact the advantage isn't 100% reflective of paper specs (a fact everyone discussing this can tell just by looking at the numbers so...?) because, as some of the more extreme comments (not necessarily just here but in other places to) suggest, it can be inferred by others as pushing the idea of some hardware design bottleneck creating a lower-threshold advantage for one platform over the other.
Which...basically leads back to the back-and-forth petty console warring ad nausea.
So why it's just it?The Last monster hunter is rise on switch.
Its RE engine and capped at 30.
Enjoy that 20% advantage, oh wait. Statistical tie is a loss for a console which only has "power" for marketing.I waited for DF, Series X is best version .
The tools are here !
Only natural really, Series X has more CUs.
Continue to live in your bubble.So... let me get you up to speed. Xbox One X was introduced with the slogan "It's a Monster!" So it's fitting to say Xbox Series X eats monsters for breakfast, and indeed it does crap all over Xbox One X, there's no denying that. That marketing slogan has NOTHING to do with the PS5.
At the end of the day, Xbox Series X is more powerful than the PS5, but only by about 20% and maybe more so when RT is involved according to some devs.
Measure the performance right now is like trying to measure Xbox One Vs PS4 and using Destiny as a metric, however a year or 2 when games become even more demanding where consoles may even have to settle for 30fps games again just to keep up with the PC market, the performance difference is going to paint a different picture than what you see today on these games with all this extra overhead.
Probably is the one to go with for you in every case as the most who persist to repeat the same argumentation, looking at the post historyLooks like the Series X version is the one to go with.
Which devs?So... let me get you up to speed. Xbox One X was introduced with the slogan "It's a Monster!" So it's fitting to say Xbox Series X eats monsters for breakfast, and indeed it does crap all over Xbox One X, there's no denying that. That marketing slogan has NOTHING to do with the PS5.
At the end of the day, Xbox Series X is more powerful than the PS5, but only by about 20% and maybe more so when RT is involved according to some devs.
Measure the performance right now is like trying to measure Xbox One Vs PS4 and using Destiny as a metric, however a year or 2 when games become even more demanding where consoles may even have to settle for 30fps games again just to keep up with the PC market, the performance difference is going to paint a different picture than what you see today on these games with all this extra overhead.
So PS5 is only winning on load times on 0.1% of the games released so far then? The rest are actually losses just because Series consoles are surprisingly close?Well actually, the PS5 is loading faster with "next'gen" games. According to a lot of Xbox gafters, the XSX would eat monsters for breakfast and destroy the PS5 from day one. Only thing xbox fans hide behind are BC games and Gamepass.
Yeah that would be betterThey should change the XsS RT mode to locked 30
If this makes you happy, well that's ok by me.This is it? This is how supposedly the most powerful console with almost 2 TF advantage with one and only full RDNA 2 providing over PS5 in this game? So, basically they are both indentical in every mode. Even in RT mode XSX isn't stable. But people told me that XSX should have a huuuuge RT advantage in every game. This is laughable for Xbox.
So, this is a win for a weaker console like PS5.
Another rubbish post.Another win for PS5
This is what lock down does to people.... absolutely nuts!This is it? This is how supposedly the most powerful console with almost 2 TF advantage with one and only full RDNA 2 providing over PS5 in this game? So, basically they are both indentical in every mode. Even in RT mode XSX isn't stable. But people told me that XSX should have a huuuuge RT advantage in every game. This is laughable for Xbox.
So, this is a win for a weaker console like PS5.
Wait a minute, you’ve actually nailed it here. With how hyped the ps5s life changing SSD was supposed to be, surely every face of should naturally go to the xbox as a win because the loading times are so close that all the hype cerny and sonys fans put behind the ssd hasn’t come into fruition.So PS5 is only winning on load times on 0.1% of the games released so far then? The rest are actually losses just because Series consoles are surprisingly close?
Sorry but I think this is total bs. It makes zero sense to claim a win or loss based on how the results relates to a specs sheet difference.
Ignoring the warriors, people just want to know where they should buy the game, that’s why these face-offs exist, or that’s the plan at least. PS5 fans claiming a win with worse performance or Xbox fans claiming a win with longer load times is console warring on the lowest level, it helps no one.