• 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: Guardians of the Galaxy: PS5 vs Xbox Series X - Ray Tracing Upgrades Tested

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shmunter

Gold Member
once again ray tracing is one of the biggest performance hit features with no real big payoff
games are better off just cheesing it to be honest
Screen space sucks big time tho.

Planer reflections more expensive but more stable I believe, still likely infinitely cheaper than RT no doubt. Use those more, or get creative with screen space - keep an off screen buffer to re-project or something…sheesh.
 

SomeGit

Member
To be fair the XSS seems like it could do better than 1080p here at 30FPS, there seems to be a lot of overhead, with it being between 40 and 60 FPS.
I'm gonna guess from the 1080p/60 on PS5 and XSX they are being extremely conservative with the game when it comes to resolution.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Member
All that any reasonable person expects is that people are realistic about the capability of the hardware in question, especially now that we are in a post-release world and can use facts to draw conclusions from. If the hardware is good enough it will sell on it's own merits, no sleazy used car salesmen required, but we can't ignore the data and outcomes not correlating with what has previously been said.

The most interesting thing about all of this is the fact that when people were being reasonable about the capability of the hardware pre-release based on the specs the naysayers cried about "concern" and "shit posters" because everyone must believe Jason Roland and Microsoft's marketing/PR. There were some wild claims going around, to the extent that some people believed the Series S would rival the PS5.

And now that the chickens have come home to roost and people are discussing the reality of the capabilities of the hardware based on real world game releases you have the exact same people crying foul about "concern" and "shit posters". It's got to the point where just discussing the data can result in people attempting to gatekeep who is and who isn't allowed to discuss the Series S' performance in games. Who knew that the mere discussion of performance data could result in such hysteria?

Is it too much to ask to expect people to admit they were wrong, apologise to the people who they insulted prior to the release of the console and be humble? There is no shortage of crow and there is no shame in eating it if you are starving due to self inflicted circumstances.

So in summary, the sequence of events for Series S evangelists has gone like this:

Anyone is free to break the cycle outlined in the gifs above at any point.

P.S. I accept apologies by postcard.
Yeah, a lot of this animosity goes back to last year. We all knew that wasnt a 1440p or even a 1080p console. I remember bringing up hypothetical scenarios where a PS5 or XSX game could target 1080p and wondered what that would mean for xss. Well, with the matrix demo, thats not a reality. some people are ok with a downgraded 720p version and thats ok too. the console isnt aimed at people who care about resolutions.

I am just happy series s isnt holding back next gen consoles.
 

Rykan

Member
To all the series S shit posters. Would you all rather Microsoft and other console manufactures issue mandates for resolution, effects... or would you rather the developer choose what's best? It seems like your argument is trash without Microsoft forcing mandates which you would also argue against.
This is unrelated to this thread, but I would absolutely support a mandate for 60 FPS or a 60 FPS mode for every single game released on current gen (Switch excluded for obvious reasons). Your game can't hit 60fps? Consider a different career.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
Another thread turns into a series s back and forth. It’s strange. Can’t we all just put our hands up and accept that it will be running at resolutions like q quarter to a third of the series x and maybe some more cut effects And move on? It’s still a cool little box.

we are acting like the ps5 and series x are these perfect boxes of power and they are running next gen shit at like 1080p and 24fps (matrix) if there’s rat tracing there’s huge cuts and in the case of like Spider-Man running last gen games at 1440p to hit 60fps.

none of these consoles are groundbreaking incredible boxes, but they do have good cpus this time And offer a great experience for the price.

I honestly think this game could perform better if it was actually worked on dev wise.
1080p tp hit 60fps seems a bit poo.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Another thread turns into a series s back and forth. It’s strange. Can’t we all just put our hands up and accept that it will be running at resolutions like q quarter to a third of the series x and maybe some more cut effects And move on? It’s still a cool little box.

we are acting like the ps5 and series x are these perfect boxes of power and they are running next gen shit at like 1080p and 24fps (matrix) if there’s rat tracing there’s huge cuts and in the case of like Spider-Man running last gen games at 1440p to hit 60fps.

none of these consoles are groundbreaking incredible boxes, but they do have good cpus this time And offer a great experience for the price.

I honestly think this game could perform better if it was actually worked on dev wise.
1080p tp hit 60fps seems a bit poo.
As a Series X owner I would want console led or only titles not to care about the S specs at all, if you want a cheaper box make s version with a smaller SSD and remove the Blu-Ray drive. You are still leaving a single unified HW specs target for devs, it was and remains the opposition I have against multiple console specs… its purpose was to help sandwich PS5 (affordably for MS) and the rest is mostly after the fact rationalisation (including the $299 fine, but $349 target just impossibly high for people on super low income… as if $299 were safe and right to spend when you an extra $50 one time cost breaks your finances).
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Yeah, a lot of this animosity goes back to last year. We all knew that wasnt a 1440p or even a 1080p console. I remember bringing up hypothetical scenarios where a PS5 or XSX game could target 1080p and wondered what that would mean for xss. Well, with the matrix demo, thats not a reality. some people are ok with a downgraded 720p version and thats ok too. the console isnt aimed at people who care about resolutions.

I am just happy series s isnt holding back next gen consoles.
Which is one of the scenario people were mentioning: either it gets left behind at 720p and lower and possibly with other cutbacks in the future (and there is headroom in that demo for the higher powered consoles) or it places a constraint on the other machines in what should be a single spec class scenario on consoles.
 

Kenpachii

Member
As a Series X owner I would want console led or only titles not to care about the S specs at all, if you want a cheaper box make s version with a smaller SSD and remove the Blu-Ray drive. You are still leaving a single unified HW specs target for devs, it was and remains the opposition I have against multiple console specs… its purpose was to help sandwich PS5 (affordably for MS) and the rest is mostly after the fact rationalisation (including the $299 fine, but $349 target just impossibly high for people on super low income… as if $299 were safe and right to spend when you an extra $50 one time cost breaks your finances).

A lower base model results in better performance for the higher model.

This is why PC gaming had it so good for the last decade, because console games put a universal minimum on the market for years on end. Remove that and 3090 is suddently not a 4k let alone 60 fps card anymore, but think more like 1080p ~40 fps if you are lucky at higher settings.

While people want PS5 and xbox series X only focused games and not have anybody foucs on the series S, the reality is. most people want a even worse machine then the series S to be the base model

And the reason why is simple.

Games currently are based on 4k and 60fps ( well dynamic but u get it ) because games are builded for a weaker box called PS4. It makes the PS5 experience feel premium for the simple fact every game runs buttersmooth now and looks shrap on there 4k tv's and have no real performance issue's. ( theoretically )

The moment PS4 dissapears, the PS5 and xbox series X become that PS4 and u will see performance exactly along the line of that.

Matrix demo showcased this wonderful. Now if the series S had only 8gb of memory, at half the speed of the other memory, only 4 cores and 8 threads at half the speed on top of it, and a gpu at atleast half the speed with microsoft demanding 1080p as minimum and 30 fps at minimum.

U will cruise the entire generation with the PS5 and xbox series x at dynamic 1440p+ ( dynamic ) and 60 fps without problems and even 100+ fps experiences in shooters.

So in mine view, they didn't go low end enough with the series S and frankly if they could scraped the cpu and memory a bit more, we could see ~250 focus which even helps people out even more that are on tight budgets.

About the 512gb nvme drive, frankly u don't want to reduce space that much to store games on. Microsoft is heavily investing into digital environment and gamepass, so storage is important.
 
Last edited:
A lower base model results in better performance for the higher model.

This is why PC gaming had it so good for the last decade, because console games put a universal minimum on the market for years on end. Remove that and 3090 is suddently not a 4k let alone 60 fps card anymore, but think more like 1080p ~40 fps if you are lucky at higher settings.

While people want PS5 and xbox series X only focused games and not have anybody foucs on the series S, the reality is. most people want a even worse machine then the series S to be the base model

And the reason why is simple.

Games currently are based on 4k and 60fps ( well dynamic but u get it ) because games are builded for a weaker box called PS4. It makes the PS5 experience feel premium for the simple fact every game runs buttersmooth now and looks shrap on there 4k tv's and have no real performance issue's. ( theoretically )

The moment PS4 dissapears, the PS5 and xbox series X become that PS4 and u will see performance exactly along the line of that.

Matrix demo showcased this wonderful. Now if the series S had only 8gb of memory, at half the speed of the other memory, only 4 cores and 8 threads at half the speed on top of it, and a gpu at atleast half the speed with microsoft demanding 1080p as minimum and 30 fps at minimum.

U will cruise the entire generation with the PS5 and xbox series x at dynamic 1440p+ ( dynamic ) and 60 fps without problems and even 100+ fps experiences in shooters.

So in mine view, they didn't go low end enough with the series S and frankly if they could scraped the cpu and memory a bit more, we could see ~250 focus which even helps people out even more that are on tight budgets.

About the 512gb nvme drive, frankly u don't want to reduce space that much to store games on. Microsoft is heavily investing into digital environment and gamepass, so storage is important.
I can't tell if sarcastic, but it's quite true.
 

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
I can't tell if sarcastic, but it's quite true.
I take my hat off for Xbox for trying something different. I don't know why all the concern from PS fanboys. What with all threads about PS5 sales in consoles on software why worry about what Xbox is doing. I'm curious why Sony have started copying Xbox with putting games on PC and with rumours of a GP equivalent. Why do they need to do this when they are clearly the market leader.
 
I take my hat off for Xbox for trying something different. I don't know why all the concern from PS fanboys. What with all threads about PS5 sales in consoles on software why worry about what Xbox is doing. I'm curious why Sony have started copying Xbox with putting games on PC and with rumours of a GP equivalent. Why do they need to do this when they are clearly the market leader.
It's because video game forums are for shit posts and pot stirring. It's all just to try and get a rise out of people. Good times.
 

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
It's because video game forums are for shit posts and pot stirring. It's all just to try and get a rise out of people. Good times.
I do try and keep out of these threads but its hard with fools bringing up 1440p on SS when the PS5 and XSX not hitting 4k. And then they moan about SS holding back PS5 and SX. Imagine how PC owners must feel about consoles.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
I do try and keep out of these threads but its hard with fools bringing up 1440p on SS when the PS5 and XSX not hitting 4k. And then they moan about SS holding back PS5 and SX. Imagine how PC owners must feel about consoles.
What a nonsense comparison. New consoles dictate next generation standard for AAA from awhile, pc is not hold back by console but by the market sales where console have the lead. Anyway many developers blamed SS hardware to hold back next generation development, not just the "fanboys". PC gamers should blame the market not the consoles.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Member


PS5 and Xbox Series X in the Ray Tracing Mode both use a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being 2560x1440. Pixel counts were often similar for PS5 and Xbox Series X in the Ray Tracing Mode with one exception found being the opening cutscene where pixel counts came in at approximately 3200x1800 on Series X and 2560x1440 on PS5.

Interesting. Unless they covered the entire game, it's likely there may be more similar differences in later busier areas too.
 

GHG

Member
Um the dumb thing was the rival the ps5 part remember. I don't recall saying anything wrong. That comment included.

The context is in that thread for everyone to see. It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. If it were true then this whole discussion doesn't exist.

Yeah, a lot of this animosity goes back to last year. We all knew that wasnt a 1440p or even a 1080p console. I remember bringing up hypothetical scenarios where a PS5 or XSX game could target 1080p and wondered what that would mean for xss. Well, with the matrix demo, thats not a reality. some people are ok with a downgraded 720p version and thats ok too. the console isnt aimed at people who care about resolutions.

I am just happy series s isnt holding back next gen consoles.

Yep, if there is a silver lining in all of this it's the fact that developers are willing to treat the Series S as an afterthought, hence it's getting versions of games where not only are the resolutions lower than anticipated but features are being omitted. If the net result is that they focus on the Series X and PS5 then I'm all for it.

I do try and keep out of these threads but its hard with fools bringing up 1440p on SS when the PS5 and XSX not hitting 4k. And then they moan about SS holding back PS5 and SX. Imagine how PC owners must feel about consoles.

Console baselines dictate PC minimum specs for a generation of games, it's always been that way. The leap from the PS4/Xbox One to the Series S is the smallest leap we've ever seen between generations. My comments on this are in the threads linked in this thread. From a technological advancement perspective it sucks. This is why I'm also 100% against cross-gen games, at some point we need to look forwards.
 
Last edited:

cragarmi

Member
What a nonsense comparison. New consoles dictate next generation standard for AAA from awhile, pc is not hold back by console but by the market sales where console have the lead. Anyway many developers blamed SS hardware to hold back next generation development, not just the "fanboys". PC gamers should blame the market not the consoles.
Mainstream games will always be dictated by the lowest common denominator, so the XSS will be a thorn in nextgen's side for a while yet
 

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
What a nonsense comparison. New consoles dictate next generation standard for AAA from awhile, pc is not hold back by console but by the market sales where console have the lead. Anyway many developers blamed SS hardware to hold back next generation development, not just the "fanboys". PC gamers should blame the market not the consoles.
So its held back by the console either way. I used to be a PC gamer when consoles were not based on PC. PC games were different to consoles then, it was worth having a PC then, different experiences other than just the same games with better fps, resolutions better settings. Now devs are too scared to go outside the box with having to stay safe because of all the consoles.
 

assurdum

Member
So its held back by the console either way. I used to be a PC gamer when consoles were not based on PC. PC games were different to consoles then, it was worth having a PC then, different experiences other than just the same games with better fps, resolutions better settings. Now devs are too scared to go outside the box with having to stay safe because of all the consoles.
Blame the market not the console. It's obvious if you put in the market a console with very low specs, it could lead to low the standard possible for the others console.
 
Last edited:

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
A lower base model results in better performance for the higher model.

This is why PC gaming had it so good for the last decade, because console games put a universal minimum on the market for years on end. Remove that and 3090 is suddently not a 4k let alone 60 fps card anymore, but think more like 1080p ~40 fps if you are lucky at higher settings.

While people want PS5 and xbox series X only focused games and not have anybody foucs on the series S, the reality is. most people want a even worse machine then the series S to be the base model

And the reason why is simple.

Games currently are based on 4k and 60fps ( well dynamic but u get it ) because games are builded for a weaker box called PS4. It makes the PS5 experience feel premium for the simple fact every game runs buttersmooth now and looks shrap on there 4k tv's and have no real performance issue's. ( theoretically )

The moment PS4 dissapears, the PS5 and xbox series X become that PS4 and u will see performance exactly along the line of that.

Matrix demo showcased this wonderful. Now if the series S had only 8gb of memory, at half the speed of the other memory, only 4 cores and 8 threads at half the speed on top of it, and a gpu at atleast half the speed with microsoft demanding 1080p as minimum and 30 fps at minimum.

U will cruise the entire generation with the PS5 and xbox series x at dynamic 1440p+ ( dynamic ) and 60 fps without problems and even 100+ fps experiences in shooters.

So in mine view, they didn't go low end enough with the series S and frankly if they could scraped the cpu and memory a bit more, we could see ~250 focus which even helps people out even more that are on tight budgets.

About the 512gb nvme drive, frankly u don't want to reduce space that much to store games on. Microsoft is heavily investing into digital environment and gamepass, so storage is important.
… and then you get graphics that are stuck. PC have cruised in using their brute force to take console optimised games and pushing all settings to 11, but this was a symbiotic mechanism where every X years the consoles would take a leap ahead and PC’s adjusted the base specs and after a certain period resumed taking the console settings and dialling everything to 11… by that time even cheaper gaming PC’s (cheap for PC standards) would have gotten a lot closer to the consoles top performance or would in 6-10 months after launch.

Having an even lower target than the S as target… well, it seems like you do not want games to go much beyond the capabilities of Xbox One and PS4… that is the ticket, never release the S and that is your cross generation target (which would have been inevitable for the first year)… see you do not want the current S either at all ;).
 

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
The context is in that thread for everyone to see. It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. If it were true then this whole discussion doesn't exist.



Yep, if there is a silver lining in all of this it's the fact that developers are willing to treat the Series S as an afterthought, hence it's getting versions of games where not only are the resolutions lower than anticipated but features are being omitted. If the net result is that they focus on the Series X and PS5 then I'm all for it.



Console baselines dictate PC minimum specs for a generation of games, it's always been that way. The leap from the PS4/Xbox One to the Series S is the smallest leap we've ever seen between generations. My comments on this are in the threads linked in this thread. From a technological advancement perspective it sucks. This is why I'm also 100% against cross-gen games, at some point we need to look forwards.
I think what has been achieved on the Matrix demo is more impressive on SS than PS5 and SX considering what it is. Not that I aren't impressed with it on PS5/SX. If it was a different cpu I would 100% be a hater of it.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
Yep, if there is a silver lining in all of this it's the fact that developers are willing to treat the Series S as an afterthought, hence it's getting versions of games where not only are the resolutions lower than anticipated but features are being omitted. If the net result is that they focus on the Series X and PS5 then I'm all for it.
“Series S owners… get bent”… in all seriousness I do not want either them getting shafted or left behind or the big consoles getting to take a Series S optimised target and push that (which is being held back). Hence why I preferred to have a digital only XSX that halved the SSD and removed the Blu-Ray storage… $349 could have been a sweet target, unified the specs, removed another platform to support, and undercut the base PS5 without cutting key specs.
 

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
“Series S owners… get bent”… in all seriousness I do not want either them getting shafted or left behind or the big consoles getting to take a Series S optimised target and push that (which is being held back). Hence why I preferred to have a digital only XSX that halved the SSD and removed the Blu-Ray storage… $349 could have been a sweet target, unified the specs, removed another platform to support, and undercut the base PS5 without cutting key specs.
That series X will come later on. Xbox are trying something different and people are just going to accept it or are we just going to have people moaning about it in every thread for the next 5 years. So tuff shit and move on to something more constructive.
 

Putonahappyface

Gold Member
This thread took a different direction quickly.

 

GHG

Member
I think what has been achieved on the Matrix demo is more impressive on SS than PS5 and SX considering what it is. Not that I aren't impressed with it on PS5/SX. If it was a different cpu I would 100% be a hater of it.

Considering the cutbacks the Series S version has and the fact that The Coalition needed to step in and help get the Series S version running it's clear Epic didn't build around it in the first place. If that's what we end up with going forwards then I'm 100% ok with it.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Mainstream games will always be dictated by the lowest common denominator, so the XSS will be a thorn in nextgen's side for a while yet

As long as the XSS version is the game being adjusted I don't see how this is relevant. Honestly, you can tell from the Matrix demo that XSX and PS5 are being pushed to the limit (at least with the current level of optimization of that demo) and they aren't even rendering at 4k or 60fps.
 

assurdum

Member
As long as the XSS version is the game being adjusted I don't see how this is relevant. Honestly, you can tell from the Matrix demo that XSX and PS5 are being pushed to the limit (at least with the current level of optimization of that demo) and they aren't even rendering at 4k or 60fps.
The hell of logic is that. Most of the first demo struggle at launch, doesn't means it push already the hardware to the limit. Probably without raytracing, real time GI and nanite, this engine could run easily at 4k.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Member
The channel said specifically it happens just in that cutscene.

Yeah but they don't say if they played through the whole game or not.

You see what I'm saying ? It's probably the only place they were able to capture in their time with it.

There's always a possibility of more cases like this later.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
The hell of logic is that. Most of first demo struggle at launch, doesn't means it push the hardware to the limit.

???

Whatever code is running is unimportant in this context. My point was just that PS5 and XSX didn't have it easy because of XSS, you could wipe XSS off the board and the PS5 and XSX are still below 20fps at moments.
 

assurdum

Member
Yeah but they don't say if they played through the whole game or not.

You see what I'm saying ? It's probably the only place they were able to capture in their time with it.
I see you trying to find a resolution advantage which really doesn't exist. The higher resolution seem more an anomaly than a regular episode which could happen. Two channels has reported there aren't sign about resolution difference for the whole time, I think it's pointless try to fantasize about it
 
Last edited:

Thirty7ven

Sony make cringe trainers.
People using the Matrix demo to defend the Series S, I don’t get it did you watch it on your phone and called it a day or something?

The image quality in the S is awful and you can see artifacts like some low bitrate video or something.

Anyway, I’m happy with the method of simply excluding the S from features, PS5 and XSX are what matter.
 

M1chl

Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I think people largely overestimate the impact of the XSS console. Lowest common denominator is sort of, let's say different as it was years ago. Now it's same architecture and same feature set. That's the very most important thing to have in development (yes you have 2 SDKs, but you write that in generally C, if you want go down and dirty, you can do some form/version of Assembly on PS4/5, not on Xbox).

We've see absolutely massive drop in texture quality/framerate/resolution/AF...very often combined. Which ensure that X/PS5 version gets unshafted versions.

People who are saying it's a problem are stuck in the past, where it actually did make sense, due to different architectures, style of coding, different algorithms for more platforms, etc.

Even on switch you program largely like on PC, you just have to turn everything to -1 because of that p....alright, didn't want to get too far.

In XSS everything is there, SSD, RDNA 2, ZEN 2, reasonably fast I/O system and stuff like that.

So yeah, XSS defense and offense force is really one of the most annoying shit on NeoGaf. Nobody cares if you jerk of about how much great of a machine it is and at the same time others with PCs and PS5s most likely would get the same stuff on screen, would the XSS wouldn't exist.

Still me personally, I think XSS as main console is a bad idea and it's not even cheaper option. You have something like 380GBs, that's laughable space available. And with those overpriced cards, XSS actually cost more than XSX. So why would you not save few more bucks, especially with GamePass, you don't really have to pay much for games anyway and buy XSX. If space as in the room is not concern, there is a no competition between those two systems.

Be a chad buy XSX/PS5

So please drop that shit....
 
Last edited:

Ebidramon

Banned
Imagine how great it will look when technology actually catches up to allow both raytracing, and decent framerate at the same time?
 

DaGwaphics

Member
People using the Matrix demo to defend the Series S, I don’t get it did you watch it on your phone and called it a day or something?

The image quality in the S is awful and you can see artifacts like some low bitrate video or something.

Anyway, I’m happy with the method of simply excluding the S from features, PS5 and XSX are what matter.

I think it's because people with an XSS actually looked at the demo themselves and are judging it individually for what it is vs. comparing it frame to frame with XSX/PS5. It's a very nice looking game, the lighting and level of detail really stand out. regardless of the resolution. Demo has a great sense of scale as well.





 

Darsxx82

Member
I see you trying to find a resolution advantage which really doesn't exist. The higher resolution seem more an anomaly than a regular episode which could happen. Two channels has reported there aren't sign about resolution difference for the whole time, I think it's pointless try to fantasize about it
In all modes that same scene reflects the same situation. In performance mode XSX is 60fps locked while on PS5 it drops to 45fps. I don't think saying it can be an anomaly is better or more logical than saying and wondering if it's something you could see at other times in the game. Knowing your historIial, it is clear that your reaction would have been the same as his if the situation were in favor of PS5 :messenger_smirking:

Also in the different analyses it is not said that there is never a difference in resolution, but that the maximums and minimums are usually the same and "similar".

PD. I want to do a statement in defense of DF and Tom in his analysis. In the other thread some only focused on questioning his conclusions, even to say that DF in its analysis avoids situations to favor XSX. Well, this video from VGTcheh gives Tom the reason in everything (also hitches in fps with the change of visor mode only on PS5) and simply is that millimeter comparisons are not always necessary and less for occasions where the frameate in both is practically blocked always.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom