• 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] Assetto Corsa Competizione Upgraded For PS5 and Xbox Series X/S - Full Analysis

Topher

Gold Member


Notes:

PS5

-1152p-2160p
-Has edge in shadow quality. More detailed than XSX
-Best performer. Nearly locked 60fps
-DualSense "stands out"


XSX

-1440p-2160p
-60fps in less strenous situations. Adding cars and weather can bring frame rate to high 40s. Game play drops in the 50s is more common in some stressful scenarios.

XSS

-1080p-1440p
-Lower grass density
-Lower texture clarity
-Shadows as good as XSX
-60fps in clear conditions with occassional drops in the 50s. Replays can drop into the 30s

XSX and XSS load a few seconds faster than PS5

Eurogamer article:

Known for its more hardcore approach to its racing simulation and customisation options, Assetto Corsa Competizione is a world apart from the breezy arcade fun of Forza Horizon and the slightly gentler 'simcade' experience delivered by Gran Turismo. It's also more of a PC-centric product, but console ports followed in 2020 - albeit in somewhat compromised form with somewhat dodgy performance. Now we have brand new upgrades for PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series consoles, promising a boost to 60fps alongside larger races and other improvements - and the question is this: do we get a smoother, more polished racing experience or have we swapped out one set of technical problems for another?

Visually, Assetto Corsa has always concentrated on an attractive but functional rendition of the racing experience. The GT3 cars are really the stars of the show: exteriors and interiors are well-handled, with strong materials work and accurate-looking reflections. Vehicle bodywork is suitably high-poly and feels like a close match for the real thing. There are some nice flourishes as well - car mirrors are actually functional, for instance, reflecting back a rasterised low-detail version of the environment. The trackside environments aren't quite as impressive, although they look mostly fine in motion. Track surfaces and grass look quite flat, background buildings and structures are on the low-detail side and spectators are mostly represented by crude 2D billboards. These are typical compromises in last-gen racers but they do tend to stick out somewhat here, particularly at higher resolutions.

This applies to all versions of the game, so what's new with PS5 and Xbox Series consoles? According to publisher 505 Games, current-gen Competizione comes with support for 30-driver races, 60fps gameplay, 4K resolution, and faster load times. That's a slightly scant list for a next-gen upgrade but there are some surprises here - such as a new bokeh depth of field blur that kicks in before racing, up against a more basic gaussian blur on Xbox One X. Bushes and trees are differently placed on the new consoles, and are more numerous than on last-gen, while shadows are improved on PS5 and Series X, with the Sony console curiously receiving a slightly higher grade effect.

Xbox Series S gets most of the available upgrades, with some exceptions. Grass density takes a hit, as does texture filtering quality, most noticeable on road surfaces and the detailing on car roofs - though this reduction may simply reflect the overall lower rendering resolution. Interestingly, shadow quality is a match for Xbox Series X, effectively slotting into a mid-point between Xbox One X and PS5. On the whole, from a visual perspective at least, the graphical features are very similar overall, but perhaps the biggest issue for me is that many of the last-gen version's issues remain problematic here: rear-view mirror lighting isn't a match for standard game lighting, while car models still leave behind streaky screen-space reflection artefacts on we tracks. Camera angle transitions in event replays often load in with scene geometry missing for a frame or two, or momentarily flash to the wrong shot entirely. These aren't huge issues, but they do distract at times and convey an unfortunate lack of polish.

In terms of image quality, Series X targets a full 4K and reaches that figure most of the time. The full dynamic resolution range here seems to be 1440p to 2160p, although Assetto Corsa is almost always at 4K output or very close to it. Even in relatively intense scenes, we see 2160p or 2016p as the typical counts. Meanwhile, PS5 has a somewhat looser grip on 4K. The target is still 2160p, but there's somewhat more variance and the new lower bounds in my testing is 1152p. Many shots still resolve at a full 4K but busy shots with lots of cars and weather effects tend to bring resolution down to the 1800p range, and one particularly demanding shot came in at 1152p, though this was an extreme outlier. Ultimately, both games look good on a 4K display. Series S? On paper you can call it a dynamic 1440p, but the resolution mostly sticks to 1080p or very close to it - the outlier being the car viewer screen, which operates at full 4K, with the performance hit to match.

Performance-wise, 505 Games is promising 60fps gameplay - seemingly a big upgrade from the unstable, unlocked last-gen experience. However, 60fps isn't really what we're getting here. PlayStation 5 takes point, with most races delivering a virtually locked 60fps, just with the occasional one-frame drop. In stress tests with 26 or more AI vehicles and heavy rain, while intentionally driving to maximise the number of onscreen cars, I was able to drop the fram-erate to the high 50s for extended periods, with a low of 55fps. This is an atypical situation though and in races with slightly fewer AI drivers or lighter weather effects, Assetto Corsa Competizione offers a very solid 60fps update on PS5, feeling appropriately responsive and smooth.

Series X mostly holds 60fps with lower car count races in clear conditions, with some occasional dips. Amp up the complexity a little by adding some heavy weather, however, and frame-rates hover in the mid to low 50s with occasional drops to the 40s, with replays that can hit performance levels as low as the mid 30s. Dialling up complexity by maxing out every option in a stress test scenario sees frame-rates drop down further still. Series S offers broadly similar performance to the Series X, but it is a bit shakier. Smaller races in clear conditions tend to straddle 60fps, with frequent runs into the high 50s. More intense races and stress tests hold pretty close to Series X, but with a small performance deficit in similar footage. Replays run especially poorly, outputting in the 30fps range for long stretches. Neither Series X nor S offers a particularly solid presentation and the junior Xbox is noticeably worse.

Ultimately, all of the current-gen console releases have improved performance compared to the last-gen game - as judged by the game's showing on Xbox One X - but whether it's down to a more aggressive dynamic resolution scaling or some other factor, only PlayStation 5 really feels solid.

There are some controller differences worth noting here too. Assetto Corsa controls nicely with a wheel, which is my preference, although it works well enough on a gamepad, especially playing with more of the assist features enabled. The Xbox Series pad is serviceable here but the DualSense really stands out, with precise tactile feedback that makes every gear shift, curb, and chicane feel distinct. The resistance triggers are used sparingly, which feels like the right call, though the left trigger does bite and kick back when you brake at speed. It's a thoughtful implementation that makes you feel more in tune with the vehicle.

Finally, a word on load times. Loading on the last-gen Xbox One X is a slightly painful experience - an AI race on the Zandvoort circuit here takes 31 seconds before you see the track. Every time you want to start a new race, you'll have to wait roughly this long, which gets a little tedious. Current-gen consoles power through this load much more quickly: both Series consoles take around 8 seconds, with the PS5 curiously a few seconds behind. It's a big improvement and makes for a more fluid experience.

In summary, Assetto Corsa Competizione is an attractive last-gen racer with a few key enhancements on current-gen machines: the most significant of those enhancements - a new 60fps frame-rate target - greatly improves the gameplay experience on the PS5. Both Xbox Series consoles can't quite keep up, though, resulting in near-constant judder in many scenarios. All consoles benefit from the suite of visual enhancements, with the settings tweaks plus resolution boosts improving the visuals mostly noticeably on PS5 and Series X. Performance drops on Xbox are problematic, however, and we'd hope to see this addressed in a future update.
 
Last edited:

Lysandros

Member
Performance disparity can be pretty huge at points in favor of PS5 apparently. It drops as low 35 FPS on XSX compared to 55 FPS for PS5.

Edit: With typical resolution as being 2160P as stated in the video, either DRS isn't working properly on XSX or it isn't agressive enough even with reduced shadow quality. Edit 2: If it's a deliberate choice in order to rely on VRR, i think it's a pretty poor choice.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Banned
the game seems to be very unrefined.

strangely lower shadow settings on Series X,
lower resolution on PS5,
worse framerate on Series X,
slower loading on PS5

none of that makes any sense really. why is the resolution higher on average on Xbox when the framerate clearly suffers? why are shadow settings different? why does the PS5 load slower?

you could argue the PS5 loads slower because the consoles only use the CPU to decompress, and the Series X has a faster CPU... but that wouldn't explain the Series S loading faster as well with it slower clocks... weird
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
the game seems to be very unrefined.

strangely lower shadow settings on Series X,
lower resolution on PS5,
worse framerate on Series X
slower loading on PS5

none of that makes any sense really

Why? Except for the load times, this has been pretty typical in most games this gen.
 

Ezekiel_

Banned
Episode 12 Snl GIF by Saturday Night Live
 

Leyasu

Banned
The fuck is that frame rate on the XsX? They should have lowered the res to match the PS5s

I wouldn't be worried about replay frame rates as I don't generally watch them.

The shadow difference was instantly noticeable
 
Last edited:

Markio128

Gold Member
I tried the game with the update (PS5) and it is very difficult to judge corners because of the grainy look to the visuals. That’s without mentioning how poor the content in the game is in general. I just about forgive myself for the purchase, only because it was pennies at the time.
 

01011001

Banned
Why? Except for the load times, this has been pretty typical in most games this gen.

well it contradicts itself.
higher shadow settings + lower resolution + better framerate + slower loading
VS
lower shadow settings + higher resolution + worse framerate + faster loading

and especially the loading part is weird. + why have a clearly differently managed dynamic scaler in place? the fact that the Series X runs at a higher res even tho it has a worse framerate means that the devs somehow fucked up how the scaler reacts to GPU load.
 

Leyasu

Banned
Performance disparity can be pretty huge at points in favor of PS5 apparently. It drops as low 35 FPS on XSX compared to 55 FPS for PS5.

Edit: With typical resolution as being the same as stated in the video, either DRS isn't working properly on XSX or it isn't agressive enough event with reduced shadow quality.
Wasn't that in replays?
 
You "forgot" to mention that XSX pushes 25+% higher resolutions. And that the game loads slower on PS5.

Except it doesn't.
He found just one situation when the resolution on the PS5 dropped to that low that it's lower than the SeX, but overall they average around the same resolutions. He didn't said that the PS5 was dropping to that low during those moments when it had much higher performance than the SeX, the PS5 didn't needed to go to it's lower to reach those framarates. The SeX on the other hand surely needed to drop lower to keep up with PS5 framerates.
 

ethomaz

Banned
Another one to the trend.
This years is being a good year for PS5 multiplats.

That said... it is just me or DRS doesn't work that well on Series consoles? Well it should drop the resolution if the framerate is not stable but it keeps the high resolution and drop the framerate... it is not the first game to have this behavior.
 
Last edited:
well it contradicts itself.
higher shadow settings + lower resolution + better framerate + slower loading
VS
lower shadow settings + higher resolution + worse framerate + faster loading

and especially the loading part is weird. + why have a clearly differently managed dynamic scaler in place? the fact that the Series X runs at a higher res even tho it has a worse framerate means that the devs somehow fucked up how the scaler reacts to GPU load.
Shadow settings are apparently the same on Series X and S. This happened on other games too, devs were too lazy to adjust it.
 

ethomaz

Banned
you could argue the PS5 loads slower because the consoles only use the CPU to decompress, and the Series X has a faster CPU... but that wouldn't explain the Series S loading faster as well with it slower clocks... weird
Series S actually has higher clock clocks on CPU… 3.6 vs 3.5.

Edit - Corrected:
 
Last edited:
Except it doesn't.
He found just one situation when the resolution on the PS5 dropped to that low that it's lower than the SeX, but overall they average around the same resolutions. He didn't said that the PS5 was dropping to that low during those moments when it had much higher performance than the SeX, the PS5 didn't needed to go to it's lower to reach those framarates. The SeX on the other hand surely needed to drop lower to keep up with PS5 framerates.
Nope. He says during rain Xbox is around 2016p while PS5 is around 1800p.
 

GHG

Member
I tried the game with the update (PS5) and it is very difficult to judge corners because of the grainy look to the visuals. That’s without mentioning how poor the content in the game is in general. I just about forgive myself for the purchase, only because it was pennies at the time.

You play this game for the driving experience with a wheel, not the content.

For GT3/4 racing this is the best sim out there at the moment.

That said, they reportedly fucked up the FFB on the console versions and left it with an older version compared to the PC. So yeh... On console I'm not sure it's really worth it unless you're desperate, especially considering the fact that online will be a barren wasteland.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
BTW it is a passable game on consoles... sorry these that think you have the same ACC that is found on PC but everything here is downgraded like graphics, physics, force feedback, etc.
With GT7 it makes no sense to buy it at least on PS5.
 
Last edited:

Arioco

Member
TL;DR


- Better settings than last gen version (more assets and better shadows). PS5 has the edge in shadow quality over Series consoles. Grass density is lower on Series S and it has worse anisotropic filtering.

- Resolution: Series X targets 4K and reaches that rez most of the time. The range is 1440 to 2160p. On PS5 the target is still 4K but there's more variance and the lower bound is 1152p. Both versions holp up very well on a 4K display, since their resolutions here are native 4K or close enough. Series S is mostly rendered in 1080p, but it selected scenes can go higher up to 1440p.

- Performance: PS5 is the best performer of the bunch with almost locked 60 fps (only one-off dropped frame every so often). In the stress test they could make it drop to the high 50s (55-58 fps). Series X mostly holds 60 fps with lower car count races in clear conditions, with some occasional dips into the 50s. If we race in heavy weather conditions the frame rate will dip to mid to low 50s with occasional dices into the upper 40s, and replays can hit frame rates as low as mid 30s. In the same stres test that brought PS5 to 55 fps frame rate dips even more to 30 fps. Series S offers broadly similar performance to Series X, but it's a bit shakier. Only PS5 feels very solid, Series consoles just can't maintain 60 fps.

- Loading times: this is a great improvement over the last gen versions. Series consoles take around 8 second with the PS5 curiously a few seconds behind.


And that's it. Frame rate on Series consoles seems too variable for VRR to save the day, but I guess it can help a bit when the dips are into the 50s or high 40s.
 

DJ12

Member
Why reply to me with the pathetic console war nonsense? I am not interested. Save it for those they want to argue with you please
Firstly it was an answer to your question, that you took as console warring when its actually a pretty factual remark and secondly pretending you aren't a warrior still. Do us a favour.
 
25%?

"PS5 - Many shots still resolve to a full 4K, but busy shots with lots of cars and weather effects tend to bring the resolution down to the 1800P range, and in one particular demanding shot came in at 1152P (393 seconds in review, looks to be during a replay?) but is considered an extreme outlier"

  1. So, for XSX "It's either close to, or at full 4K"
  2. So, 2016P is the average for XSX, 1800P is the average for PS5.
  3. Your 25% is more like 11.32%.
  4. VRR can't save anything if it dips below 40hz (Some TVs may have wider ranges)

As load times go, you got me there, not everyone is using Sony's storage API to its fullest.
2016p is roughly 25% higher resolution than 1800p. Simple maths. And VRR helps most of the time at least.
 

Tripolygon

Banned
PS5 really putting in work maintaining high FPS in games at near 4K resolutions. Can’t wait for VGTech data to get a more clearer picture.
 

Leyasu

Banned
Firstly it was an answer to your question, that you took as console warring when its actually a pretty factual remark and secondly pretending you aren't a warrior still. Do us a favour.
You know full well that talking about vrr will ignite the powder keg. Don’t pretend that you didn’t mate.
 

JLB

Banned
the game seems to be very unrefined.

strangely lower shadow settings on Series X,
lower resolution on PS5,
worse framerate on Series X,
slower loading on PS5

none of that makes any sense really. why is the resolution higher on average on Xbox when the framerate clearly suffers? why are shadow settings different? why does the PS5 load slower?

you could argue the PS5 loads slower because the consoles only use the CPU to decompress, and the Series X has a faster CPU... but that wouldn't explain the Series S loading faster as well with it slower clocks... weird
You are out of the loop. It was established on Elden Ring thread that ps5 ssd actually helps pushing framerrate but not necesarily load times. This kind of confirms it.
 

Arioco

Member
none of that makes any sense really. why is the resolution higher on average on Xbox when the framerate clearly suffers? why are shadow settings different? why does the PS5 load slower?


Because probably DRS is not working as it should on Series consoles, but that should be easily fixable is devs want to, and I hope they will.

As for loading times... well, I can't even imagine the reason for that weird results. Maybe Series X and PS5 have to load higher quality (and heavier) assets. That would explain the fact that Series X load faster than PS5 (since it's CPU is slightly faster) and Series S edging PS5 too (because even though its CPU is a bit slower than PS5's it has to load fewer GB to fill the RAM). I'm just speculating, of course. It's not too bad on any current gen console anyways, but you're right, it doesn't make much sense.
 
2016p is roughly 25% higher resolution than 1800p. Simple maths. And VRR helps most of the time at least.

You're right, I can't do maths this morning, for some reason I only looked at 1800P vs 2016P and completely ignored the fact that there is two axis to resolution, lol.
 

DJ12

Member
You know full well that talking about vrr will ignite the powder keg. Don’t pretend that you didn’t mate.
But it's not console warring to suggest a lazy dev would use it as a rationale for piss poor performance.

I'm sorry you feel triggered by a factual comment that was a direct response to the question you asked.
 
Top Bottom