PS5 has no loading screen
Damn it's so nice. Imagine if you die alot? That will be so nice to just get back into the game.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
[DF] Resident Evil Village: The Digital Foundry Tech Review + PS5, Xbox Series X|S Analysis!
- Thread starter 3liteDragon
- Start date
Damn it's so nice. Imagine if you die alot? That will be so nice to just get back into the game.
Ev1L AuRoN
Member
Hope ps5 is patched to improve performance, great to hear that the game is mostly good, make me feel good about pre-ordering the PC version. Now I only need to know how my RTX 2060 will cope with the game.
carloseduardocd
Member
sonomamashine
Member
I'm also wondering if they could have done a better job with the CPU & GPU on the PS5.
I think they could have done a better job with the I/O on the XSX.
This thread...
Let see. Crash 4, Tony hawk, the show, and maybe immortal. Wanna bet account ban that series x never lose on comparison again?
Fulcizombie
Banned
Tony Hawk, a last gen remaster, The show a Sony game, and Crash a patch on a last gen game. Notice how I actually left out patches of last gen games where the XSX demolishes the ps5 , like Marvel’ avengers ? The truth is that in every new game after launch period the XSX has won. If «going back and forth» is the ps5 winning on a sony developed game and a bunch of patches while the XSX wins in every new 3rd party game then so be it.
As for the ban bet, what would you lose exactly ?
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
I don't think they could have gotten the PS5 version to a Native 4K 60FPs given the hardware limitations. And due to the differences in I/O I don't believe the elimination of a loading screen is possible on the XSX. Mostly due to the advantages that each system has.
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
Wait, you don't count crash or Tony hawk, but you count Avengers?
No, the Xbox didn't win every game after the launch period. lol
Fulcizombie
Banned
I actually didn’t mention avengers in my original post, read more carefully. Anyway if winning in games like Hitman 3 and Resident Evil 8 is the same with ......Tony hawk remastered then o.k, I guess.
You are a troll at the point. Tony hawk, crash all are native on series x and ps5 just like outriders and hitman 3. The show is Sony game but it was not an exception because it's better on ps5. Now you mention avenger, the ps5 just have the ps4 pro checkerboard rendering. No doubt the series x is better here but this entirely on the developers time constraints during Corona virus. Also the ps5 has more stable frame rate because of the cheap ps4 pro checkerboard rendering. As for hitman, I have already posted about it. It was dynamic resolution. If hitman had dynamic resolution then, you will see a situation like assassin creed where it favor the series x.
Last edited:
IbizaPocholo
NeoGAFs Kent Brockman
Whether you're running Resident Evil Village on a PlayStation 5 or a base model PS4, the game looks fantastic. Here are a few scenes from the opening of the game side by side so you can get a look at exactly how the game will run on the hardware you own.
The Hamburglar
Banned
You literally just said the same thing 5 posts up from this one.
Are you obsessed with Xbox?
Last edited:
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
I'm talking about that you consider it demolished it.
You left out games because that's where the PS5 had advantages. You're discrediting the games by saying, "they're remasters" when they're no different than cross-gen releases such as Hitman 3 and Resident Evil 8. Tony Hawk and Crash have advantages. Mortal Shell is now has stable frame-rate after the update with similar settings to the XSX Version. You also have MLB The Show.
You're fooling by excluding games there PS5 has the advantage. lol
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
He has no argument here. He is just like one of the tweeter troll. I took back what i said about account bet after look at his tag and pattern of postings.
Move on from the insecure list wars and weird brand flexing designed just to antagonize. Either talk about this game and the techniques used or exit the thread.
MasterCornholio
Member
What's interesting is that RE7 load times are around 7 seconds on the PS5. Pretty curious that they managed to reduce it to under two seconds. I'm guessing using Kraken and all that custom hardware helped improve the loads a great deal. It's also a result that I've observed in other games on PS5 such as NiOh, Demon Souls, Spiderman, Ratchet and Clank and even Returnal. I don't think it's a fluke that the loads are that fast.
carloseduardocd
Member
Yep, Kraken + Oodle textures + new APIs + new algorithms.
The DAO/Repository layer would have different algorithm implementations with a new i/o. Maybe with HDD latency they have some compromisses in source code.
A game like Assassin's Creed Valhalla or Dirt 5 probably have the same DAO/Repository layer in all SKUs. Same algorithms in Xbox One, PS4, PS5, Xbox Series X. Next-gen consoles would load Dirt 5 assets faster, but not so faster as they can because it's old algorithm strategies in new APIs.
Last edited:
This isn't even true because it's 30.22GB on Xbox. I can install it from my phone.
rapid32.5
Member
it's 30.2 GB on series X, playing it right now. nice try though. There was a place in the game where texture loading very noticeable and it wasn't technically demanding area. You could tell it's a cross gen title by noticing that, it's a good starting game for this gen visually.
Last edited:
Lol, my mistake. I thought it was 50GB. But the basic premise still holds.
MasterCornholio
Member
I understand that's the best way to do a comparison but I also understand that it's extremely difficult to do. Besides a benchmark or cutscenes it's very difficult to capture exactly the same moment on both.
It's definitely a nice addition that Sony went ahead and provided a blanket license to kraken for devs. It's basically the industry standard moving forward. I don't think it'll matter much in comparison between the consoles. Given the base SSD sizes, PS5 games would need to be about 20-25% smaller to be able to install similar amounts of games on each. It does matter in comparison to last gen though for sure.
J_Gamer.exe
Member
Interesting about the loading, we had seen examples on 1st party games but now we're are seeing a huge difference in performance.
No not in the seconds as that will never feel huge but the % difference. 5.39 times faster or whatever it is.
This is nice for loading but is promising for the real purpose of asset streaming.
That sort of advantage would be massive and means for eg ps5 wouldn't need as much data in ram being stored only to be potentially used.
So if an open world game on ps5 contains data for the next 1 second of gameplay, wherever you may go be it left right, back etc, the data will be loaded only for that second, and stream in on that basis.
This game whilst utilising ps5 speed won't be re written to completely use ps5 advantages as its still cross gen.
The xbox being much slower may need considerably more to be stored in ram to be potentially used so maybe 5 or so seconds worth of data for wherever the player can reach in that time. Only based off this games difference though.
Its funny despite ps5 showing it could do this before still people questioned where is the ssd and io advantage, well its pretty clear here in the multiples faster.
People arguing over maybe upto 10% on frames but here we have 539% faster or whatever the actual number is, in an area where devs said was the thing they were most excited for and could make the biggest difference this gen.
The ssd and io once utilised which be a big advantage for ps5 this gen once the engines built around it arrive.
No not in the seconds as that will never feel huge but the % difference. 5.39 times faster or whatever it is.
This is nice for loading but is promising for the real purpose of asset streaming.
That sort of advantage would be massive and means for eg ps5 wouldn't need as much data in ram being stored only to be potentially used.
So if an open world game on ps5 contains data for the next 1 second of gameplay, wherever you may go be it left right, back etc, the data will be loaded only for that second, and stream in on that basis.
This game whilst utilising ps5 speed won't be re written to completely use ps5 advantages as its still cross gen.
The xbox being much slower may need considerably more to be stored in ram to be potentially used so maybe 5 or so seconds worth of data for wherever the player can reach in that time. Only based off this games difference though.
Its funny despite ps5 showing it could do this before still people questioned where is the ssd and io advantage, well its pretty clear here in the multiples faster.
People arguing over maybe upto 10% on frames but here we have 539% faster or whatever the actual number is, in an area where devs said was the thing they were most excited for and could make the biggest difference this gen.
The ssd and io once utilised which be a big advantage for ps5 this gen once the engines built around it arrive.
Last edited:
Yes, that makes sense since thorough video game comparisons cannot be completely scripted. However, if the video has like for like scenes but they are just out of sync, it is more accurate(though more work) to manually adjust to account for them. At the very least, they should not be discounted when brought up as the reason for an exceptional difference.
When comparing two systems, if one is experiencing frame drops because of an explosion on screen and the explosion is not present on the other system, then that moment should not be used as an example of frame rate disparity. Especially if the other system has the same explosion and experiences similar drops only seconds apart.
I hope this isn't making it sound like I'm trying to say that this DF analysis is bunk, because I don't believe that. Xbox wins this comparison, hands down and I personally think this will be the outcome of the majority multiplatform games in the future.
I'm only saying that disparities due to out of sync on-screen events should not be discounted when brought up. By accounting for those events, you end up with a more accurate comparison.
MasterCornholio
Member
I guess it depends on who is doing the analysis. Overall Digital Foundry, NXgamer and VGtech try to deliver like for like comparisons. Of course sometimes the scenes don't match with them. The only one that I've seen that does a poor job is ElAnalistadeBits.
I believe this game has been done pretty well on these systems and takes advantage of their strength. The PS5 has an I/O advantage while the XSX has a framerate advantage. I expect we will get many more titles with similar results.
The only one that's disappointing is the XSS with its RT mode. As I stated earlier in the thread they either need to drop the settings or lock the framerate at 30FPs. The current results are unacceptable to me but like John said it might be fine for people who can deal with poor performance.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Ha. There you go. Up to 9-10% advantage. Which makes sense since that entire 30 second clip starting at the 15:07 mark has the Xbox fps higher than PS5 almost the entire time.
You on the other hand, uploaded cherry picked images trying to make it look like Xbox and PS5 run at the same frame rate or are only 1 frame rate apart. That entire scene runs at about 50-60 fps on each console which is stated as up to a 9-10% gap. So you trying to flatline the results reworking DF's video with your own bogus methodology doesn't even make sense as you are trying to make the difference as close to 0% as possible.
And that was obvious as you only did images where the green and blue lines were close or intersected. That entire scene has much bigger gaps for stretches of time showing Xbox higher and you ignored all those parts of the video.
Last edited:
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
No, cherry picking is what YOU were doing. You cherry picked the 59-51 scene and back another person's claim in which he cherry picked another.
You were too busy complaining and didn't take the time to read what I posted. I posted ONE synchronized scene because it was a static scene with no effects being shown. The second picture shows the frame-rate dropping to the high 40s on BOTH consoles. The frame-rate graph is more than a second long and it's still in the 40s on both consoles. I never said that part was synchronize The THIRD scene show alpha particle effects which DF themselves said was the CAUSE of the frame-rate drops.
No one is misrepresenting the facts from DF but you.
If they say the effects from the water is what cause the frame-rate to dip and it appears one second later on the PS5 version, then you're being dishonest by talking about one frame where XSX appears 8 frames ahead when the dip happened a second earlier on the XSX version.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
I interpreted the video fine. They did video analysis and posted results saying Xbox is up to 9-10% faster. I'm going by their video.
I'm not the one trying to tear down their video and reconstruct it in my own way to make the frame gaps as close as possible to 0% even though they stated it can be 9-10%.
As I said to you before, that section is about 30 seconds long. So if you are going to do your own video editing and compare frames since you claim it's an unsynced bogus video, then at least compare all 30 frames instead of only uploading a couple images where you picked the part Xbox and PS5 lines intersected or were only 1 frame apart.
Last edited:
I agree with you 100%, I think. I wasn't clear, but my rant was aimed at people who are the audience of those outlets, not the outlets themselves. DF, NXgamer and the like don't have unlimited time to do these reviews and it would be unreasonable to expect for them to do a frame-by-frame sync or to catch every minor detail.
So my beef isn't with DF at all, but with the people who dismiss some fair concerns about things that DF may not have had time to address or possibly even missed.
I'm pretty happy with this console generation but I would be lying if I said the Series S was on my radar even in the slightest bit.
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
You didn't, otherwise this wouldn't be so hard for you to understand. We've said it's within that 9%-10% advantage, but you're cherry picking a picture that shows the biggest difference.
Why didn't you pick other scenes that appear closer?
Oh yeah. We know why. lol
I said the pictures I shared wasn't suppose to make the gap as close as possible, I'm showing you how FAR the graphs dip when the effects appear. For some reason, you're unable to understand this simple fact and you choose to lie about what people are saying.
How about this. Tweet any member of DF and see what they have to say. Ask them are the drops happening at the exact same time and they'll even tell you no.
MasterCornholio
Member
For me the Series S would be a pretty bad purchase. But I do understand who it is for though. However I do believe that Microsoft could have offered a diskless XSX at a slightly lower price.
Yep developers did a very good job with both versions of the game. I like how they took advantage of each systems strengths. Very happy with how they implemented RT in this game without a huge sacrifice in peformance.
StreetsofBeige
Gold Member
Don't call me a liar. Go call DF liars. I'm just going off their video.
If they claim Xbox is better by 9-10% but the video they uploaded on YT shows 58 vs 49 and 59 vs 51, that's not for me to video edit or analyze for them.
If you don't like results, go ask the DF guys to re-do the video. You can even offer to help them out since you've been doing your own video editing all day.
Last edited:
MarkMe2525
Member
The art team did a hell of a job with this game. Looks gorgeous on both. I'm glad I ponnied up and got a display with VRR when I was in the market last year, I feel that most games utilizing RT are going to need it for a consistently smooth experience.
yes RT implementation seen done right for the perf level of those systems and yes both systems shows their advantages
DForce
NaughtyDog Defense Force
They said the frames drops when theres a lot of effects on screen when the monster appears.
Does the monster appear at the exact same time on screen or not?
alabtrosMyster
Banned
You wish!
But they used to do these things (for the cutscenes anyway, gameplay is always somewhat erratic, but they do their best).
This is why we need the FPS at different percentiles, etc.
Often the differences aren't even significant.
MasterCornholio
Member
When it comes to the PS5 I wasn't expecting them to cut out the loading screen. I thought that both versions would have it. It's neat but it kind of looks weird at the same time.
Probably done to show even more the advantage of the fast ssd . Btw After the first loading time (and not to downplay the ps5 fast ssd, but i can def wait 6 seconds more on a initial loading time) seen to be a seamless experience on both console as per the video with no more loadings
So both versions are great, with minimal differences. One has a slight speed advantage, the other more horse power. As expected then. Most people cannot tell the difference. Let's see where things stand in 2 years when these developers come to grips with the advantages of each.
Not to take anything away from Cacpom, even the S version appears to be good. Capcom is truly on a roll.
Not to take anything away from Cacpom, even the S version appears to be good. Capcom is truly on a roll.
Zathalus
Member
What I find odd is that loading in the demo on the Series X was substantially faster than loading in the retail game. Perhaps due to it being a demo it was loading less assets I guess, but then the PS5 loading time improved from the demo to the retail game. As a point of comparison, Avengers on Series X loads in around 4 seconds, similar to the PS5. The PS5 has a faster SSD yes (not up for debate at all lol), but the difference should be 2x-2.5x at most. Then again, you only really load once in this game, so it does not really matter in the end I suppose.
I picked this up for Series X, as while the performance difference between the two is not that large for the most part, one currently has VRR and the other does not. Seriously Sony, its been almost 6 months, tons of TVs have VRR support already and I can't possibly see how it's that hard to implement. Returnal has the rare drop that annoys me, and VRR would totally help with that as well. I'm nigh convinced its because no released Sony TV has VRR yet (which is mind-boggling itself), and the company doesn't want to advertise a feature you can only get on a competitors TV. I seriously would have been torn between PS5 and Series X versions if VRR was implemented on the PS5.
/rant about VRR over.
I picked this up for Series X, as while the performance difference between the two is not that large for the most part, one currently has VRR and the other does not. Seriously Sony, its been almost 6 months, tons of TVs have VRR support already and I can't possibly see how it's that hard to implement. Returnal has the rare drop that annoys me, and VRR would totally help with that as well. I'm nigh convinced its because no released Sony TV has VRR yet (which is mind-boggling itself), and the company doesn't want to advertise a feature you can only get on a competitors TV. I seriously would have been torn between PS5 and Series X versions if VRR was implemented on the PS5.
/rant about VRR over.
killatopak
Gold Member
Yep. It's very fair to criticize Sony in their lack of implementation in VRR. Xbox has this advantage so it's only right to point it out. We know PS5 will eventually get it but just like reviewing games, you base it on what the current experience is and not when it's patched in the future.
As for loading, normally it should only have a 2.5 increase in speed if we're just accounting for hardware. The compression is what makes the difference I think. PS5 has a hardware decompressor specifically tailored for the Kraken and Oodle method and has licensed it for every PS5 game.
Xbox games on the other may be using different compression method per game. This explains why some games are close to PS5 loading while other are not. I assume Xbox first party will all be using BCpack though so their load times will be more consistent.
The game is 9.23% smaller on the PS5.
The PS5 HDD is 16.8% smaller than the Series X.
Your 'basic premise', that the PS5 'will have effectively more storage than XSX' is at least 112% total bullshit.
mxbison
Member
Really not much of a difference.
Just shows that we're nowhere near seeing the actual potential of the new consoles.
Riky
$MSFT
Also in that Xbox file size is the Series S files.
Physiognomonics
Member
Exactly 7% using the identical scene at 8:20. 4 and 7% is also what showed DF using 2 identical scenes in their video. up to 10% is using slighty different moments in their video, they probably stating up to 10% because it's a round number.