Markio128
Member
You must have watched a different video than the one I did because the series x dropped frames far more often. And please stop papering over the cracks with VRR. Not everybody has a VRR TV ffs.
-
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] Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition: PS5 vs Xbox Series X - Image Quality + Performance Tests
- Thread starter 3liteDragon
- Start date
- Analysis
Insane Metal
Member
The fact that this game takes 44 seconds to load on XSX and 47 (!) seconds on PS5 shows that this has just been updated. It's not a nextgen game.
Gordon Freeman
Member
PS5 has black crush, gamma issues, sub-1080p resolution at times and slower loading times. The only advantage is a few extra frames you barely will notice, while everything else is something you will notice immediately. Also no VRR support at this time so you are stuck with the framerate drops.
Series X has faster load times, proper gamma and no black crush, no sub 1080p resolutions with a 20% advantage in resolution at all times and faster loading times. It has framerate drops similar to PS5 but more frequent but the console has VRR support to make those drops irrelevant.
Pretty clear here that the Series X version is the better one and if you have a VRR display then you’re laughing.
Series X has faster load times, proper gamma and no black crush, no sub 1080p resolutions with a 20% advantage in resolution at all times and faster loading times. It has framerate drops similar to PS5 but more frequent but the console has VRR support to make those drops irrelevant.
Pretty clear here that the Series X version is the better one and if you have a VRR display then you’re laughing.
Last edited:
SmokSmog
Member
This, people here can't even calculate percentages and they don't know how resolution works.
Lol just cause not everyone has it doesn’t mean it’s not a advantage on XSX! Not everyone has a 4K tv so no advantage of ps5 over XSX hmm? Lmao
Markio128
Member
You are guessing without actual facts, so please vacate the premises.
Zathalus
Member
That is not how the math works.
2688x1512p = 4064256 pixels.
2304x1296p = 2985984 pixels.
A increase of 36%.
Using the like for like given in the video for the combat:
Xbox 2016x1134 = 2286144 pixels
PS5 1804x1015 = 1831060 pixels.
A increase of 25%.
So Xbox is delivering 25%-36% more pixels while having a few more frame drops. Xbox has a few more frame drops in traversal, while some areas run better on one machine vs the other.
Gordon Freeman
Member
So basically:
If you have a VRR set then you don’t need to decide.
FatKingBallman
Banned
Does it? How much? Maybe is 1000p?? XSX isn't that far off.
carloseduardocd
Member
As you know, it's dynamic. Even Xbox Series X reaches 1080p in some heavy frames.
But suppose we find some specific frame that was 1296p for PS5 and 1512p on Xbox Series X, and we got your 36.1% pixel difference. What was the frame time? PS5 has general smooth experience, and it's a important thing here.
assurdum
Banned
It's not conspiracy.
It happened the same thing in the reverse front with Tony Hawk and AC Valhalla. We have to worried about series X too? And people has the courage to call conspiracy. All the people talked about a dynamic difference with an higher average talking of something of worrying and noticeable. VRS did it in purpose on series X via hardware but they call it a majestic RDNA2 feature. DRS has a purpose. Better performance not better resolution.
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
it's a native app on both consoles... so it is a next gen game. just because the loading is CPU heavy doesn't mean it's not next gen.
you can't just point at a game that's not 100% optimised to load fast and say it's not next gen.
this might be the most next gen game released yet, it has no baked lighting whatsoever and is relying 100% on RayTracing to light the game.
Mr Moose
Member
It doesn't go to 512p.
Chukhopops
Member
To be honest I don't think it is really that bad but that's the only direct numbers DF put in the video so there's nothing else to calculate.
Also remember that the lower the edge you take on both sides, the larger the difference percentage will be. For example if you take the upper edges from the same comparison, the difference is "only" 30.6%.
Last edited:
01011001
Banned
It's not English.
Strider Highwind
Banned
After trying it on ps5 and series x this week I feel like both versions need a patch or two to iron some things out. Its lots of frameskips, jumps, lighting looking weird, and sound issues happening on both in diff places. I played the first couple hours on both and noticed it
abel empire
Banned
Who cares what alex prefers, man people can be so childish in here, the game is upscaled 4k can go from anything from 1080p to 4k diping more on ps5 than series x because first it isnt a native game its still running legacy ps4 code with enhancements above it. I mean the game loads in 40s when other triple a games load in 2 seconds on ps5
And we all know series x has better engineered bc capabilities hence why, it outperforms ps5 in some bc crossgen games,
As we saw in alot of comparisons earlier that have been patched star wars ran with low res on ps5 than series x and the new patch runs with higher res, cod warzone ran without 120fps amd now runs with a 120fps on ps5, this games arent native at all n theres nothing so expensive in this game to run 1080p upscaled on series x or ps5 it just seems to be a technical difficulty because of legacy code.
And we all know series x has better engineered bc capabilities hence why, it outperforms ps5 in some bc crossgen games,
As we saw in alot of comparisons earlier that have been patched star wars ran with low res on ps5 than series x and the new patch runs with higher res, cod warzone ran without 120fps amd now runs with a 120fps on ps5, this games arent native at all n theres nothing so expensive in this game to run 1080p upscaled on series x or ps5 it just seems to be a technical difficulty because of legacy code.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
I love when people say "just use VRR". Ok, BRB, just gonna go get a new $2000 TV to replace the very nice 4K HDR TV I already have.
Last edited:
Markio128
Member
The PS5 version doesn’t need VRR. The fact is that series x hardware can’t handle the additional resolution without dropping regular frames.
Team Andromeda
Member
Amazing to me that Alex as an ultimate PC set up, but not a TV with VRR?. I see no drops at all on the Series X thanks to VRR.
anthony2690
Gold Member
I do wonder though, how good is VRR before it stops feeling smooth? As in how low does the fps how to drop before it becomes not a good experience.
Maybe games could implement a VRR mode on series x & ps5 (it is still getting VRR in the future right?) , where they maybe push things just that little bit further.
But ONLY if VRR keeps the experience smooth.
How would you guys feel about this?
Maybe games could implement a VRR mode on series x & ps5 (it is still getting VRR in the future right?) , where they maybe push things just that little bit further.
But ONLY if VRR keeps the experience smooth.
How would you guys feel about this?
It’s mostly 60fps with minor drops apprarently you didn’t watch video. It’s rare occasions it drops a frame or two mostly due to loading or something as Alex says
ps5 could use it dropping FPS on top of crane shows and other areas too
assurdum
Banned
Alex found in the combat ps5 stay between 1250-1580p I don't remind the precise number where on series X stay more at 1580p. How you can notice it that easily to call it dramatic? That's trolling.
Last edited:
fatmarco
Member
I still don't quite understand how we can keep having games where Xbox averages slightly higher resolution but the PS5 average slightly more consistent FPS.
You'd assume the DRS would simply scale down resolution to get a locked framerate if it has enough performance to get those higher resolutions right? Or they've just incorrectly set the DRS?
If it's the former, you do wonder if there's something at OS level that's causing it perhaps. How isolated are the parts of the system dedicated to the OS from the rest of the system dedicated to running the game? Is there a performance cost to having Quick Resume etc. What about an issue related to the SSD? Or could it just be a consequence to the set up of each systems GPU?
You'd assume the DRS would simply scale down resolution to get a locked framerate if it has enough performance to get those higher resolutions right? Or they've just incorrectly set the DRS?
If it's the former, you do wonder if there's something at OS level that's causing it perhaps. How isolated are the parts of the system dedicated to the OS from the rest of the system dedicated to running the game? Is there a performance cost to having Quick Resume etc. What about an issue related to the SSD? Or could it just be a consequence to the set up of each systems GPU?
Last edited:
Zathalus
Member
And what does the PS5 drop to in that scene? They didn't get the number as they did not get that far into the game, but since the PS5 is dropping to 1015p in scenes where the Xbox was 1134p, that means it can likely drop to 970p on the PS5.
Markio128
Member
Good for you and the other dozens of people. Rather than buy my series x without a VRR TV, I should have just bought a £3000 PC? Haha
nikolino840
Member
Someone can calculate the % difference for the framerate?
assurdum
Banned
Faster GPU better performance. More compute unit higher resolution.
Armorian
Banned
LOL
Clear win for Xbox, looks like the tools meme should die now as we can see that ~20% (on paper) difference between GPUs is starting to be visible in newer games/ports.
mancstheps5fanboy
Banned
it is beautifully smooth on p5 , the guy had a tv that showed the left image on all set bar? the backlight is too high , as i couldn't see the left image on highest.. anyway. enjoy all.
A cut and dried Xbox Series X advantage is mitigated a little when it comes to the matter of performance, where I generally found PlayStation 5 to have a significant advantage in locking to 60 frames per second. Sony's new console delivers a Metro Exodus experience that's super-smooth in combat, and equally robust in traversing the open world. Similar to Xbox Series X, there can be the odd one-frame drop, but where I found PS5 smoother is in areas where I saw some significant stutter on the Microsoft machine. Quite why the Xbox version has this issue isn't immediately clear, but I'd hope to see this addressed by the developer as there's little evidence that it's directly caused by GPU load.
A cut and dried Xbox Series X advantage is mitigated a little when it comes to the matter of performance, where I generally found PlayStation 5 to have a significant advantage in locking to 60 frames per second. Sony's new console delivers a Metro Exodus experience that's super-smooth in combat, and equally robust in traversing the open world. Similar to Xbox Series X, there can be the odd one-frame drop, but where I found PS5 smoother is in areas where I saw some significant stutter on the Microsoft machine. Quite why the Xbox version has this issue isn't immediately clear, but I'd hope to see this addressed by the developer as there's little evidence that it's directly caused by GPU load.
Last edited:
Markio128
Member
They clearly stated that the PS5 version was smoother and I got the distinct impression that it was the most fun version to play.
anthony2690
Gold Member
4K TVs, with VRR, hdmi 2.1, 120fps are very affordable now imo.
My Samsung qled q80t, cost £899 and came with a free Samsung q60t sound bar too.
Love it, I can imagine there is even better deals going now as I got mine last year
FatKingBallman
Banned
But also maybe you should listen what they are saying too. Like...
Yeah, regarding XSX, Alex said :
"...Image quality suffers the most. Maybe you'll get something like sub 1080p counts more often..."
So, sub 1080p on XSX too. And still performing worse and stutters more.
Last edited:
carloseduardocd
Member
It's funny to see this resolution differences in analysis. This image is from "El Analista de Bits"
Of course it's dynamic, but maybe DF likes to find outliers, or "El Analista de Bits" is not a trustable measure.
Or ... errr ,,, both alternatives
assurdum
Banned
Why it's that important if ps5 drop lower? Can someone post a picture which show that difference in resolution? Out of my curiosity.
yamaci17
Member
hmm interesting
they exposed 512p and 1080p taiga with series s/x
for some reason they didn't expose what resolution PS5 played at those SPECIFIC locations.
this is atricious. surely, ps5 would fall below 1080p in those instances. for some reason, they never stated this. hyporcisy much?
they exposed 512p and 1080p taiga with series s/x
for some reason they didn't expose what resolution PS5 played at those SPECIFIC locations.
this is atricious. surely, ps5 would fall below 1080p in those instances. for some reason, they never stated this. hyporcisy much?
assurdum
Banned
It exposed the reality of the things. A common person cannot perceive the difference in the IQ and still people here debate as it is a dramatic difference. Such channel is a bless from this point of views because prove how false is the narrative of some person about the resolution perceived.
It's funny to see this resolution differences in analysis. This image is from "El Analista de Bits"
Of course it's dynamic, but maybe DF likes to find outliers, or "El Analista de Bits" is not a trustable measure.
Or ... errr ,,, both alternatives
Last edited:
Can we for a minute celebrate that the ray tracing is identical for both platforms. I assume that the case since I didnt hear that come up.
I know they said the dark level was off on PS5...but....it looks washed out to me on Series consoles....
I know they said the dark level was off on PS5...but....it looks washed out to me on Series consoles....
Mr Moose
Member
I'd wait for VGTechs video to get a better overall look at things (res/fps).
It's funny to see this resolution differences in analysis. This image is from "El Analista de Bits"
Of course it's dynamic, but maybe DF likes to find outliers, or "El Analista de Bits" is not a trustable measure.
Or ... errr ,,, both alternatives
Fredrik
Member
Well the power is wasted. My takeaway is that devs ruin the XSX version by going too high in resolution. I don’t think anyone would spot the resolution difference but I think most would notice the fps drops unless you have a VRR TV.
Maybe it because SX has VRR enabled, which means devs can push higher resolution knowing VRR can cover the dips in fps. Honestly, with VRR being fairly knew I would rather devs lower the resolution to keep the frames higher/stable. The majority of gamers don't have a hdmi 2.1 capable tv.
yamaci17
Member
if u have LFC, infinite range
i practically play most of my games like this, and never compromise on resolution/graphics
most 60 hz vrr screns will have a range between 48-60, but 120 hz vrr screens have 0-120 range (even if they state 48-120)
lfc increases the range of VRR, say you get 40 fps, screen syncs it to 80 hz, say you get 35 fps, screen syncs it to 70 hz and so on
this way, LFC+VRR sreens can cover entire range of frame rates between 0-120
sadly, i think developers would never provide such an additional mode...
Last edited:
