oldergamer
Member
I liked df commenting on the people that made the "tools" a meme when it literally was the tools that needed improvement.
No he doesn't and Alex is dead wrong. Matt is saying it is engine dependent and it is. Alex also has it wrong because a lot of engines actually rely heavily on compute on PS5 whereas there are fixed function alternatives on xbox.Alex actually thinks the opposite to what matt says here.
"According to Digital Foundry's testing, PS5 does have a slight advantage in sticking to a stable 60 FPS when playing in Performance mode. "
Control Ultimate Edition PS5 and Xbox Series X performance comparison puts them side by side
One has a slight edgewww.gamesradar.com
Do you have a new VIDEO from them showing this to be the case?Soulz please don't turn into the next Frank, lol
That article is referencing the first digital foundry article, they have done two more follow-ups since then where they say and show that the series X version is now improved. All the launch issues are gone.
Isn't that exactly what we've been getting so far though? Just comparing last gen games so far.Stooping to the level of comparing last gen games is pretty desperate
The UE5 demo is the only "next-gen" software that we can realistically compare, but we're going to ignore that for nowIsn't that exactly what we've been getting so far though? Just comparing last gen games so far.
Yes and this is why nobody should get hung up on any of this crap.Isn't that exactly what we've been getting so far though? Just comparing last gen games so far.
It’ll be more interesting to see an actual retail game running ue5 and its lumen/nanite features rather than a tech demo imoThe UE5 demo is the only "next-gen" software that we can realistically compare, but we're going to ignore that for now
Do you have a new VIDEO from them showing this to be the case?
Regardless it's a last gen game with terrible optimizations from a overrated lazy dev team.
The Matrix demo runs like crap on both XSX and PS5 and people are essentially basing their arguments on which one is less bad. If you're using that stutterfest to benchmark how games are going to run better on one console vs another going forward then I don't know what to say. If what we see in the performance of the Matrix demo is what we can expect from UE5 in the future then they should probably just toss it in the garbage. I don't want games that run that poorly.This is wishful thinking not based on reality. The reality is that we already have a next-gen engine heavily using compute and showing high number of polygons / assets with UE5.
Matrix demo (high poly / assets/ high compute + RT use) is what all UE5 games will be based on. And for now PS5 actually performs better than XBox using that engine that using the old gen engine (UE4) where the Xbox had actually a slight advantage in most cases.
Yes, I posted it on the first page:
This is from one of their earlier DF Direct episodes, I don't know which one, but someone was kind enough to separate this portion.
--
The Control segment from today's video is below timestamped:
Noteworthy quotes:
John "People talk about 'oh the tools' but that *was* the actual real thing, the tools"
Rich says "Control on the Xbox Series X now does have a slight edge on the PS5 version"
Ultimately it's a very slight advantage, they don't do a side by side so we don't know what, as this is a retrospective video, not a comparison video.
So make of that what you will.
Did they mention anything about the memory usage in these consoles and are SX and PS5 using 13 or 13.5gb RAM ?
I wonder if the control stutter had to with CPU usage or memory for OS. Since SX has 4K UI like PS5 but at launch it was only 1080P probably also debunks that 4K UI takes unwanted memory or CPU usage.
What's so funny Sosokrates ? He is dead wrong. DirectX and XSX has a lot of fixed function hardware. DXR, VRS, SFS etc whereas a lot of engines currently use compute to achieve the same thing on PS5. UE5 uses hyper-optimised compute shaders instead of the Mesh shaders for example. What Alex is suggesting is wrong plain and simple. Current engines aren't using more fixed function hardware on a PS5 and there is no "RDNA 2 compute" secret sauce. He predicts this will change with new engines even though he has a prime example in UE5 not performing any better.
He’ll be back and ready to rumble soon enough
Other than being concerned about the XSeS memory, they didn't really touch upon on Sx/PS5.Did they mention anything about the memory usage in these consoles and are SX and PS5 using 13 or 13.5gb RAM ?
I wonder if the control stutter had to with CPU usage or memory for OS. Since SX has 4K UI like PS5 but at launch it was only 1080P probably also debunks that 4K UI takes unwanted memory or CPU usage.
How the fuck do you people manage to turn a rather interesting year in review video into a console circle jerk?
They discussed the face offs and mentioned how surprised they were at the initial comparisons and how those initial comparisons became the norm as the year went on. The topic is rather loaded. It was always going to invite console wars.How the fuck do you people manage to turn a rather interesting year in review video into a console circle jerk?
still watching it. major comments till 24min in:
* XBOX was not able to show the power difference in games against PS5
Precisely, making certain commments ignoring that the only factual example we have is already disproving it. Professional analysis indeed.The UE5 demo is the only "next-gen" software that we can realistically compare, but we're going to ignore that for now
Oh well at least the obvious has been finally admitted after a year
Although it's already the time for some wishful thinking about future engines favouring the XSX, of course totally ignoring that what is going to be the biggest and most widely adopted next gen engine is already pointing to a different outcome.
The compute part was super weird because last gen consoles were compute based with really low clock speeds. If anything, the engines don’t fully utilize the higher clocks or take advantage of the benefits provided by higher clocks.What's so funny Sosokrates ? He is dead wrong. DirectX and XSX has a lot of fixed function hardware. DXR, VRS, SFS etc whereas a lot of engines currently use compute to achieve the same thing on PS5. UE5 uses hyper-optimised compute shaders instead of the Mesh shaders for example. What Alex is suggesting is wrong plain and simple. Current engines aren't using more fixed function hardware on a PS5 and there is no "RDNA 2 compute" secret sauce. He predicts this will change with new engines even though he has a prime example in UE5 not performing any better.
I've mentioned several times The special projects team have made 2 ps5 projects vs 1 Xbox project. Having twice the experience should be considered.Oh well at least the obvious has been finally admitted after a year
Although it's already the time for some wishful thinking about future engines favouring the XSX, of course totally ignoring that what is going to be the biggest and most widely adopted next gen engine is already pointing to a different outcome.
Precisely, making certain commments ignoring that the only factual example we have is already disproving it. Professional analysis indeed.
Mind telling me where you think I've misunderstood what he said?Did Watch the video? Or at least read my quote of alex?
Hes refering to the higher clock speed of the PS5s GPU.
You think hes dead wrong, great, why are you telling me this?
Really? This was a belated Christmas present to me. 1.5 hours of graphics talk. Watched every minute. Came twice.This video? Fuck no, I am not watching 1 and a half hours of them chatting. It wasn't locked in their other video, from what I remember.
Hopefully he learns from it but outlook is not great.
Mind telling me where you think I've misunderstood what he said?
Your quote is what I read. Here it is again:
"so that one's uh in the way RDNA2 works there's a lot of compute thats going on there, other cross gen games where we might of seen s more wish washy performance and it was really hard to say which one was better or even ps5 was winning , in a lot of these ways winning quote unquote I mean its really not that important at the end of the day, um but you know when I think when compute is going to be leveraged more and I think that is the general tendency in graphics these days over time is more compute being leveraged and less so the speed of fixed function hardware which is the advantage the PS5 has, I think we'll start to see some more returns on the XSX side."
What have I misunderstood?
We haven't had a single retail game come out in either console running UE5 (unless you count Fortnite, which actually favors SX more). One tech demo is not an indicative of a whole 8~10 year generation.
Nothing is pointing to anything right now, we're still in the 'almost everything is developed cross-gen' phase this gen so far.
It obviously isn't a full a game but thinking that it's not representive of the future is absolutely disingenous.
What's that got to do with what I said? The PS5 uses compute for a lot of things that XS has fixed function hardware for. He is wrong in thinking that PS5 is currently using super fast fixed function hardware and this will change with games starting to use compute because if anything PS5 is currently using compute shaders for things that XS has fixed function hardware for.He never said the xsx does not have fixed function hardware, though.
They shit on quick resume and call for Xbox to use the PlayStation way of not including the cutscenes after the first load up.
How the fuck do you people manage to turn a rather interesting year in review video into a console circle jerk?
But the PS5 is using faster fixed function hardware, its GPU!What's that got to do with what I said? The PS5 uses compute for a lot of things that XS has fixed function hardware for. He is wrong in thinking that PS5 is currently using super fast fixed function hardware and this will change with games starting to use compute because if anything PS5 is currently using compute shaders for things that XS has fixed function hardware for.
Thinking 1 demo is representative of the future is also absolutely disingenuous.
We simply need more multi platform games using newer technology, and not just being better cross-gen games, to get any idea of it realistically.
Nothing disingenous, the demo is totally and absolutely representative of how UE5 based next gen games will run on both.
All the major next gen features of the engine are already active, the context is a realistic open world setting so not a corridor, not a specially scripted cutscene, not a single face rendering. They provided a totally realistic context.
It can't be representative of what is going to happen with all the other possible next gen engines but given that UE5 will be the most widely adopted one in a couple of years from third parties....yeah how UE5 runs on both wil decide how a LOT of the tech comparisons will go in the future.
What is absolutely disingenous is that a ''professional tech journalist'' is talking about future engines, he let himself go in some wishful thinking while purposely ignoring the only factual evidence we have, of course because it goes against his point already.
What is absolutely disingenous is that a ''professional tech journalist'' is talking about future engines, he let himself go in some wishful thinking while purposely ignoring the only factual evidence we have, of course because it goes against his point already.
Damn those green rats!