• 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: Chernobylite Ray Tracing Analysis: Gorgeous on PC, but what about PS5?

yamaci17

Gold Member
But reducing RT settings, starts to shift the bottleneck on these GPUs from the RT units, and into normal rasterization.
dont get me wrong, im not defending amd's rt performance. im aware that 3060ti and above can easily use more than medium or high RT settings. but as you can see, 3050 / 2060 needs to use optimized settings. these cards also need to use lower RT settings to get smooth framerates in some of these games and in that aspect, 6600xt can race with them.

dlss is always a factor but it will be a hit and miss at 1080p for most people. for me it is... acceptable. at 1440p it is more than good enough and at 4k it is pristine. but of course it is really hard to bring dlss into discussion since it completely changes the entire way the discussion goes
 

Mr Moose

Member
Thanks !

I can't find any place that confirms Cyberpunk using FSR on console tho.
Added AMD FidelityFX™ Super Resolution (FSR) 1.0 algorithm, replacing Contrast Adaptive Sharpening (CAS). On PC it can be enabled in Settings > Graphics > Resolution Scaling. The option is not configurable on consoles.
I took this to mean it's on console but isn't configurable, could be wrong.
 
I'm sure XSX is super similar to PS5, it's just the fact that PC vs. PS5 gets more clicks on YT. It's all about that algorithm.
PS5 vs XSX gets even more clicks.
They are trying to avoid causing console wars and maybe a game running higher resolution with FSR vs one not was going to cause a heap of "PS5 can't do FSR" comments and then DF will be accused of stoking fan boy wars, which they are trying to avoid.

After seeing the PS5 vs PC comparison he did, I'm kinda glad he didn't do one on the XSX
 

DukeNukem00

Member
PS5 vs XSX gets even more clicks.
They are trying to avoid causing console wars and maybe a game running higher resolution with FSR vs one not was going to cause a heap of "PS5 can't do FSR" comments and then DF will be accused of stoking fan boy wars, which they are trying to avoid.

After seeing the PS5 vs PC comparison he did, I'm kinda glad he didn't do one on the XSX

The entire reason Alex was hired on DF was to cover PC specifically. Because until then near every video was console focused, on ocassion having PC thrown in there with framerate showing at best. They never went deeper into settings or other things that Alex does, probably for lack of time or interest, since all of them are so into consoles. I dont know why people are so surprised here that the employee hired specifically for PC coverage didnt release a video for consoles. Thats literally what all the other members are doing
 
With the exception of Call of Duty and Valhalla which run poor on nvidia, not a single game on the market has exceeded a 2070Super. Every game is between 2060S and 2070S in rare ocassions.
According to NX Gamer you should also include Death Stranding.. He said it performs on par with the 2080 though I have my doubts. I think its fair to say the consoles are somewhat underpowered or at least that they've performed below a lot our expectations set back in 2020. I know that the more savvy among us had perhaps more accurate expectations, closer to the 2060/2070ish actual performance we've seen in most games. I think a lot of people are lying or forgetting if they act like they knew these systems would only be able to run so many cross-gen/last gen patched games at 1440p/60 instead of closer to 4k/60.

Between the hype over the 'revolutionary'SSD, to moving to RDNA2, and finally the fact that console optimization and its efficiency has historically been able to yield greater gains compared to PC, I know I never thought I'd be seeing so many cross gen games struggle to power above 1440p. Uncharted 4 remaster, last of us 2 (even if they make a ps5 patch it won't be greater than 1440p bases off of UC4 remaster), or control ultimate, greedfall next gen version, or AC valhalla/watch dogs legion or Gta V remaster/dying light 1 next gen. 1440p/60 is the average resolution for the majority of games. An RTX 2080 is running these all WAY better.

Then there are the games like Dying Light 2 and Guardians of the Galaxy that are 1080p! Yikes. Well dying light 2 is now 1280p on Series X-no ray tracing. My point is when people act like these consoles are so much better for the time than previous ones, I don't think they are. They are BARELY equipped to handle next gen gaming, which obviously is going to be all about Ray tracing. Components being expensive + inflation means while $500 mightve gotten us good value, as this generation continues these consoles are going to be looking really bad compared to PC, largely due to RT being so far below something like a 2080.

They should've foreseen this and taken more of a loss if they wanted to keep up with PC gaming, that's for sure. Though it probably doesn't matter, they sell just fine. We're really going to need mid gen refreshes though.
 

01011001

Gold Member
And that's why I can't stand Alex, because every damn video he makes is basically him gloating over how much better PC is than console.

where does he do that? he usually uses console settings to see if they are a good template to use on PC... that's mostly what he does... and he also usually covers everything Ray tracing related, which also fits here as the game got RT on consoles too
 
Ray Tracing is very much worth it and reflections are one small part of the entire feature set. Everything can be ray traced, and thats where we're heading now. We also have fast enough gpu's right now for every RT game to run well. The sticking point is that its mostly reserved for 3080 and 90 cards at the moment. Also depends on the games being played. Dying Light 2 in particular, that game is just complete and utter shit without RT. I'd rather take a framerate hit from 144 to 60 than play it without RT. Have a look at these various comparisons:


Chernobylite on the other hand, medium setting as in the video i think its good - it is a game in forest areas after all. It depends very much on the visual makeup of the game in order to see if RT is worth the hit. Guardians of the Galaxy is just phenomenal with RT because of its sci fi nature and having a lof of rough metal surfaces all throuhout:


"RT is worth it if you're rich and can buy above 1000euro gpus and also enjoy lower framerates" lmfao. No, it's not, no matter how much your waste of money looks cool. I have a 2080 and I've played Dying Light 2 with and without raytracing and when you're running around nonstop killing humans and slashing zombies you'll never ever notice the differences, and that case is even worse for games that use reflections. Of fucking course showing it off in screenshots and small clips is nice but realistically when playing the games properly having smooth framerate is far superior.

Imagine spending 2k on a GPU just so you can watch your own reflections in a game at under 60 fps. Amazing.
 
Last edited:

Belthazar

Member
The comparison with high end PCs is so silly, they should compare it to a more varied range of graphics cards, including those that cost $500.
 

01011001

Gold Member
"RT is worth it if you're rich and can buy above 1000euro gpus and also enjoy lower framerates" lmfao. No, it's not, no matter how much your waste of money looks cool. I have a 2080 and I've played Dying Light 2 with and without raytracing and when you're running around nonstop killing humans and slashing zombies you'll never ever notice the differences, and that case is even worse for games that use reflections. Of fucking course showing it off in screenshots and small clips is nice but realistically when playing the games properly having smooth framerate is far superior.

Imagine spending 2k on a GPU just so you can watch your own reflections in a game at under 60 fps. Amazing.

I can run most games with RT at above 60fps on an RTX3060ti, so how exactly would you get a 2K GPU and run below 60fps?

noone in their right mind has a 4K PC monitor for example, and if you run at 1440p, or even 1080p screens you'll be absolutely fine using RT in games.
and even if you have a 4K monitor, that's where DLSS comes in and saves the day for your inage quality on such a screen

Doom Eternal is of course the posterchild of that, which runs at well above 100fps on my PC with almost everything maxed out at 1440p

and in the video he also shows the game reaching 60fps easily on mid range to low end cards like a 2060, and even on a 2060 you can get 60fps with RT settings that are generally better than what you get on consoles.

that's before even talking about DLSS, using DLSS you can easily run this particular game at 1440p60 on a 2060 with RT set to low.
 
Last edited:

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
PS5 having lower quality ray tracing than the low preset on PC is something
 

Arioco

Member
Alex doesn't have an Xbox, ya clown.



If you want to see the differences in consoles, this is the only source from the developers themselves:


-

Both SX and SS version use FSR. SX uses FSR to upscale the same 1512p as the PS5 to 2160p. PS5 version does not have FSR so it has no upscaling from 1512p to 2160p.

First of all I don't understand why you have to insult other members of the forum (does it make you feel better?), especially when, according to Alex himself, everything you just said is wrong. He does have a Series X and he thinks PS5 is using FSR too.

You should apologise to Bo_Hazem Bo_Hazem , honestly.


 

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer
First of all I don't understand why you have to insult other members of the forum (does it make you feel better?), especially when, according to Alex himself, everything you just said is wrong. He does have a Series X and he thinks PS5 is using FSR too.

You should apologise to Bo_Hazem Bo_Hazem , honestly.



adamsapple adamsapple He has an XSX and PS5 uses FSR, ya clown.

Season 6 Showtime GIF by Shameless
 
It's rational to compare a $3000-4000 PC to a $500 console. It's funny how 1660 PC's aren't the PC standard when compared to consoles, when they fucking are! But hey, PC gaming is only true for 1-2% of PC gamers.
It's rational in the sense that you need to figure out what the extra money get you. Graphics cards are just going down to more reasonable prices.

Also what's the matter with Xbox Series X? Why it's not the "standard" of console RT? Seen plenty of so-called xbox influencers talking about how RT is overrated and doesn't matter?
🏆 You need to keep with the times, they only have VRS to yap about by now 🏆.
 
Sigh, stutter claims another UE4 game...

I am really looking forward to the big Digital Foundry video about it which Alex has hinted at. Should hopefully put all these devs and Epic on blast.
 

DarkMage619

Member
Can’t make the Xbox look bad next to his PC.
Nervous Tea Time GIF by VH1
Again the PS5 version of the game offered superior performance and lacked the stutters of the PC version. Is it time to welcome Alex to the PlayStation family? It really put the PC in a bad light. Cerny for the win right guys?
 
The game had way too many jump scares that came out of nowhere, warning for people that try to get into this game but somehow absolutely hate jump scares, I've experienced it firsthand and inform you so you don't have to
 
Last edited:

Dream-Knife

Member
It's rational to compare a $3000-4000 PC to a $500 console. It's funny how 1660 PC's aren't the PC standard when compared to consoles, when they fucking are! But hey, PC gaming is only true for 1-2% of PC gamers.

Also what's the matter with Xbox Series X? Why it's not the "standard" of console RT? Seen plenty of so-called xbox influencers talking about how RT is overrated and doesn't matter?
It's a game comparison, not really a platform comparison.

Majority of PC gamers don't play games like this anyway.

According to NX Gamer you should also include Death Stranding.. He said it performs on par with the 2080 though I have my doubts. I think its fair to say the consoles are somewhat underpowered or at least that they've performed below a lot our expectations set back in 2020. I know that the more savvy among us had perhaps more accurate expectations, closer to the 2060/2070ish actual performance we've seen in most games. I think a lot of people are lying or forgetting if they act like they knew these systems would only be able to run so many cross-gen/last gen patched games at 1440p/60 instead of closer to 4k/60.

Between the hype over the 'revolutionary'SSD, to moving to RDNA2, and finally the fact that console optimization and its efficiency has historically been able to yield greater gains compared to PC, I know I never thought I'd be seeing so many cross gen games struggle to power above 1440p. Uncharted 4 remaster, last of us 2 (even if they make a ps5 patch it won't be greater than 1440p bases off of UC4 remaster), or control ultimate, greedfall next gen version, or AC valhalla/watch dogs legion or Gta V remaster/dying light 1 next gen. 1440p/60 is the average resolution for the majority of games. An RTX 2080 is running these all WAY better.

Then there are the games like Dying Light 2 and Guardians of the Galaxy that are 1080p! Yikes. Well dying light 2 is now 1280p on Series X-no ray tracing. My point is when people act like these consoles are so much better for the time than previous ones, I don't think they are. They are BARELY equipped to handle next gen gaming, which obviously is going to be all about Ray tracing. Components being expensive + inflation means while $500 mightve gotten us good value, as this generation continues these consoles are going to be looking really bad compared to PC, largely due to RT being so far below something like a 2080.

They should've foreseen this and taken more of a loss if they wanted to keep up with PC gaming, that's for sure. Though it probably doesn't matter, they sell just fine. We're really going to need mid gen refreshes though.
NX gamer is frequently wrong on a ton of stuff.

People are forgetting that the consoles were really good hardware when they were announced, especially for the price. It's just that the 3070 and 3080 came out and changed the game. There were a ton of memes in the fall of 2020 about how the 3070 at $500 killed the consoles.

This does make me wonder if the PS4 was really as bad as people say, or if tech just moved quickly like we are seeing here.
 
Last edited:

bbeach123

Member
The consoles are definitely going to need a mid gen upgrade.

Rtx 3060 beats them by quite a bit and it will get worse from here.
Not really , the ps4/xbox one was like 750ti equivalent( there digital foundry video show 750ti + i3 was "better" than last gen console too) . And the console still run rdr2 ,horizon , recent AC game, etc .

The "better" PC i3+750ti nowaday though , literally cant even played these game at the lowest settings .

Give it like 3-5 years and the console will smoke the 3060 in newest game.
 
Last edited:
Not really , the ps4/xbox one was like 750ti equivalent( there digital foundry video show 750ti + i3 was "better" than last gen console too) . And the console still run rdr2 ,horizon , recent AC game, etc .

The "better" PC i3+750ti nowaday though , literally cant even played these game at the lowest settings .

Give it like 3-5 years and the console will smoke the 3060 in newest game.
That's because the 750ti was not better. Edit : well, it was better than Xbox one, not as good as PS4. 2gb vram hurt it as well.

3060 will always be ahead. Even when driver support winds down, it will still have rt cores and dlss.
 
Last edited:
That's because the 750ti was not better. Edit : well, it was better than Xbox one, not as good as PS4. 2gb vram hurt it as well.

3060 will always be ahead. Even when driver support winds down, it will still have rt cores and dlss.
In Death Stranding Director's Cut, PS5 already performs better than RTX 3060 -- it outperforms RTX 2070 Super and goes toe-to-toe with RTX 2080. It's only a matter of time before it becomes more common.

 

Black_Stride

do not tempt fate do not contrain Wonder Woman's thighs do not do not
And that's why I can't stand Alex, because every damn video he makes is basically him gloating over how much better PC is than console.
Thats just your inferiority complex rearing its head.
Hes doing a tech showcase for a game....do alot of games outperform their console counterparts.....sure, its all but a given.
In all honesty if it wasnt for a need for clicks and general "what about console hate he would get if he didnt actually cover console" I would be totally fine if this video was purely just PC to showcase the RT.
Unreal engine is the new unity fuckup
Ohh no.
Unity still exists.
 

DukeNukem00

Member
"RT is worth it if you're rich and can buy above 1000euro gpus and also enjoy lower framerates" lmfao. No, it's not, no matter how much your waste of money looks cool. I have a 2080 and I've played Dying Light 2 with and without raytracing and when you're running around nonstop killing humans and slashing zombies you'll never ever notice the differences, and that case is even worse for games that use reflections. Of fucking course showing it off in screenshots and small clips is nice but realistically when playing the games properly having smooth framerate is far superior.

Imagine spending 2k on a GPU just so you can watch your own reflections in a game at under 60 fps. Amazing.


I mean, you can make anything sound bad if you're exagerating everything like that. You're not spending neither 2000 euros nor playing under 60 with a 3080. Dying Light 2 is a game with one of the most extreme differences between RT on and off. There's no reality where you dont notice:



You're again trying to diminish this aspect by saying you dont notice when you're killing and slashing enemies. Of course you notice. You are looking at the games visuals the entire time you are playing. The entire time you spend in the game, no mather what you do, is looking at it. The idea that one just doesnt have "time" to notice RT in games is just coping when you cant run this well. A 2080 is not adequate enough for RT so its fair that you prefer higher framerates instead. No reason to self convince yourself that its not worth it though, because it totally is.

Once you play enough games with ray tracing and you learn how different effects look you will ALWAYS notice it in every other game. Once your eyes adjust to RT shadows, lightning, reflections, etc. regular games will pop out more and more with how deficient they are and you will start seeing how wrong certain scenes look and how incorrectly they're lit. I kid you not, you go into a game like last of us 2 with its baked lightning and you will scratch your head how people think this looks good. You notice poor and incorrect lightning in almost every scene. You dont do it on purpose, its just your brain thats slowly adjusting to RT and how scenes SHOULD look that it will start identifying all the issues in normal games
 
Last edited:

Filben

Member
I think some people misunderstand DF's goal here. What they do is a mostly objective breakdown of how things are on the technical and visual side of games. Things we can't easily do ourselves because we either don't have access to hardware, don't have the time or means.

Of course PC can look better, but it's often the question of how much. How scalable is the game? Is its settings on par with consoles or does it allow more and if yes how much?

People bringing in the price aspects although that's not DF's job because you can so that easily by yourself. Just google what a 3090 cost and that should be enough and telling. It's not about that. It's also not about creating parity with a PC that has the power of PS5/XSX because this is not a competition and I think that's what some people get wrong. Because PCs are relatively open there's no bottom end; to stick to a car equivalency one guy used here, it's not like testing a Ferrari against and old Ford, it's more like you race where the ford has fixed regulations and the Ferrari can be upgraded at will... if you got the money. Like everyone in GT7 has to adhere to the PP700 limit but you don't, you can just use your 1200 car. The result is clear without seeing the race.

This is inherently not fair by the very nature. that's not something to be "solved" and not by DF.

However, some games allow more utilisation of said power and some don't.

Everyone knows that a PS5 cost 500 and some GPUs cost that alone. This doesn't need to be pointed out. What I don't know is what graphics settings are possible, what ray tracing features are in and how they look, what performance to expect with each and individual settings.

You could then say leave out the console version when it's about PC. but it's not entirely true. first, console people also want to know what performance and visuals to expect, especially with the increase of visual options on console, even if it's only two modes. Also, some console versions aren't that far off from PC because of settings limitations on PC. And for that to show you need the console versions side by side. Let's say Outriders, rather dull looking compared to what's possible; max graphics settings on PC isn't a different league than on PS5 and with all the stuttering going on you may want to go for the PS5 version instead.

Tired of games using perfect reflections for every surface when in real life most reflections are rough and blurry.

The glass window on that jeep was old and dirty yet on ultra the leaves are perfectly shaped and the window seems to reflect perfectly like a mirror.
I remember "that car" in these BF5 RT promotion screenshots. Totally banged up and shot up yet with a perfect black livery so shiny it reflects explosions perfectly.

It works well in Control due to the clean office aesthetics, but it shouldn't apply in all games.

I remember when games gave you that ultra sharp shadows on high settings and blurry ones on medium/low, yet the sun rarely gives this "standing in front of headlights" like sharp shadows, especially when hitting things far off the ground where shadow is casted to or on cloudy days or when it has to travel other mediums first.
 

solidus12

Member
Alex doesn't have an Xbox, ya clown.



If you want to see the differences in consoles, this is the only source from the developers themselves:


-

Both SX and SS version use FSR. SX uses FSR to upscale the same 1512p as the PS5 to 2160p. PS5 version does not have FSR so it has no upscaling from 1512p to 2160p.
Actually, he does.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
These videos just highlight what you are getting with PC vs the most popular console in mind share.

Yes, pcs cost a lot more but a console still can't hold a candle to them when running the bleeding edge tech. Consoles will always be the best low cost barrier to entry to get a pretty balanced experience in your front room but they aren't going to deliver the latest technologies like Ray tracing at high resolutions or frame rate and will need to have bespoke options that are probably lower than the lowest settings on PC and ignore other settings entirely.

The good thing is we can finally get good standard rastorised games especially at like 1440p and 60fps. I'm happy with that.
 
Last edited:

FUBARx89

Member
You're right, John thinks it's FSR but not 100% sure, and there's no other mention online.

You'd think more developers would want to highlight it as a feature.







Thanks !

I can't find any place that confirms Cyberpunk using FSR on console tho.



Freesync is also VRR. It's just not the HDMI forum's version of VRR.

Some people are able to get VRR working on PS5 where their displays only support Freesync Ultimate, not the HDMI standard VRR. So it's still a mixed bag there.


I think it depends on the port set up of the TV. My TV uses freesync on an enhanced HDMI 2.0B port (samsung stopped short of full 2.1 hdmi capabilities for some dumb arse reasons). So I'd imagine TV's that can't use freesync don't have an "ehanced port" so to speak
 

Kupfer

Member
.

Yep, it's fucking ridiculous about some of these comparisons videos, Let's start with a graphics card that costs 4 times more than the console, then go into detail about how many sacrifices the console has made to reach its raytracing target.

Like no shit Sherlock,


If they are going to make comparisons, stick to console vs console and have PC as its own platform.

God damn digital foundry, you have one job, do it correctly.
Unsubscribed some days ago because shit like this.

Since DF is considered the holy grail of techanalysis, I think the guys have gotten a little too comfortable. It takes too long for videos to come out and sometimes I only see 80% of the voice actors' faces and no gameplay/analytics/comparisons. There are other channels that get to the heart of the content better and don't present themselves as scene heroes.
No DF hate here, when they make an interesting video I still like to watch it but they have slacked off.
 

winjer

Member
Unsubscribed some days ago because shit like this.

Since DF is considered the holy grail of techanalysis, I think the guys have gotten a little too comfortable. It takes too long for videos to come out and sometimes I only see 80% of the voice actors' faces and no gameplay/analytics/comparisons. There are other channels that get to the heart of the content better and don't present themselves as scene heroes.
No DF hate here, when they make an interesting video I still like to watch it but they have slacked off.

No, they are not the holy grail of tech analysis. The only thing they do well is frame rate analysis. But their technical knowledge is limited. And Alex's benchmarking methodology on PC, leaves a lot to be desired.
They also have some contacts in the industry, so they can interview some devs. This allows them to fill some gaps in technical know how.

When Alex joined the team, I tough it would be a positive thing. But the guy is a massive nVidia fanboy, making PC comparisons very skewed.
And since consoles don't use nVidia hardware, it also shows whenever he makes a comparison.
 

GymWolf

Gold Member
Shader compilation deserve a painful death.

Hopefully new engines are not gonna suffer from this shit.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom