• 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.

[Digital Foundry] Death Stranding Director's Cut: PC vs PS5 Graphics Breakdown

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes

Liar.

His own video shows the 2060 Super running at 1.815 and 1.83 ghz.

zVaDWYK.jpg


Instead he uses the advertised clocks for the 2060 Super which are 1.65 ghz to arrive at the 7.1 tflops number. When in fact at 1.83 Ghz, the tflops are 7.96 tflops.

7.1 2060S Tflops / 10.2 PS5 Tflops = 69%
7.9 2060S Tflops / 10.2 PS5 Tlfops = 77%

mxLBFBH.png


His results for 2060 Super are off by 8%. The 2070 Super and 2080 hit far higher than 1.8 Ghz. Up to 2.0 Ghz on my GPU at times. I will take some screenshots of different games on my RTX 2080 to show how it is DEFINITELY not 1.71 Ghz like nvidia advertised it as.
 

Corndog

Banned
It still amazes me how stout gen 9 consoles are, the gap was MASSIVE in gen 7 and gen 8, now, not so much. Obviously, someone is going to chime in with a (Insert whatever argument about the RTX 3090 demolishing Gen9 consoles).
They will be absolutely buried by the end of the year.
 

Corndog

Banned
At this point, It's impossible to believe he doesn't know he's being misleading. Cerny explicitly stated they designed PS5 under the assumption that AVX 256 code would be used very often. The majority of PS5 games will never see the GPU downclock from 2.23ghz.
Why not make this info publicly available for reviewers?
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
They will be absolutely buried by the end of the year.
2 years later is expected though.

It still amazes me how stout gen 9 consoles are, the gap was MASSIVE in gen 7 and gen 8, now, not so much. Obviously, someone is going to chime in with a (Insert whatever argument about the RTX 3090 demolishing Gen9 consoles).

The 3090 equivalent in 2013 when last gen consoles launched was the GTX Titan which was like 2x more powerful than the PS4 before it even came out. We are seeing pretty much the same thing here with the 3090 especially in ray tracing games where its offering 2.5x more performance than the PS5XSX.

The PS4 and X1 were outclassed because of their shitty CPUs, but this time around AMD had their shit together and managed to put a badass CPU in a APU. Cerny went all super saiyan with the SSD to give the PS5 an edge even the PC doesnt have so overall its a much better package than last gen, but GPU wise I think both gens offered roughly the same.
 

Killer8

Member
Here is another comparison showing the difference in LOD: https://imgsli.com/MTAyMjc5

Note the large rock on the lower right, the number of small rocks in the mid distance, the lights by the road, as well as lower grass density in the foreground below Sam's chest.

Any differences in coloring, lighting and shadow position here are likely due to the dynamic cloud lighting, but the character position is identical.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Took some screenshots of games running on my RTX 2080. All in the 1.95-1.98 range I double checked my MSI Afterburner settings to make sure I wasnt overclocking it and even had my Nvidia settings set to Optimal Power instead of Prefer Maximum Performance which should boost it above 2.0 Ghz. At 1.98 Ghz, this is a 11.6 tflops gpu. Not a 10.06 tflops gpu Alex claims it to be. Thats a difference of 15% he's missing here.

Cyberpunk

gfDdqxk.jpg

Control
gnuv38B.jpg

Mafia
46tAjTW.jpg

Elden Rings
XQ60KBY.jpg


Here is another video of several games running on a founders edition card Alex claims wont go above 1.7 ghz. Every single game runs at 1.935 Ghz or above.

 
Took some screenshots of games running on my RTX 2080. All in the 1.95-1.98 range I double checked my MSI Afterburner settings to make sure I wasnt overclocking it and even had my Nvidia settings set to Optimal Power instead of Prefer Maximum Performance which should boost it above 2.0 Ghz. At 1.98 Ghz, this is a 11.6 tflops gpu. Not a 10.06 tflops gpu Alex claims it to be. Thats a difference of 15% he's missing here.
This is quite normal Nvidia GPU behaviour. The actual boost clock can quite often exceed "rated" boost clock if there is power/temp headroom available (even without any over locking) I wonder if similar behaviour apply for PS5 as well (ie could be boosting above the quoted 2.3ghz) in certain scenarios. This variability highlights an inherent flaw in using TF calculations imo for PC GPU. Max theoretical TFs can vary a lot depending on your system cooling, ambient temp, power delivery etc.
 

Rea

Member
This is quite normal Nvidia GPU behaviour. The actual boost clock can quite often exceed "rated" boost clock if there is power/temp headroom available (even without any over locking) I wonder if similar behaviour apply for PS5 as well (ie could be boosting above the quoted 2.3ghz) in certain scenarios. This variability highlights an inherent flaw in using TF calculations imo for PC GPU. Max theoretical TFs can vary a lot depending on your system cooling, ambient temp, power delivery etc.
The GPU in ps5 is capable of more than 2.3ghz, but Cerny and his team Capped at 2.3ghz due to on chip logic breakdown when above 2.3ghz. So, No, the ps5 gpu won't go above 2.3ghz. Same as for CPU. But the power for GPU can go above maximum budget, If the CPU has the power to share. That means the gpu can have more silicon activity without overclocking.
 

Corndog

Banned
Took some screenshots of games running on my RTX 2080. All in the 1.95-1.98 range I double checked my MSI Afterburner settings to make sure I wasnt overclocking it and even had my Nvidia settings set to Optimal Power instead of Prefer Maximum Performance which should boost it above 2.0 Ghz. At 1.98 Ghz, this is a 11.6 tflops gpu. Not a 10.06 tflops gpu Alex claims it to be. Thats a difference of 15% he's missing here.

Cyberpunk

gfDdqxk.jpg

Control
gnuv38B.jpg

Mafia
46tAjTW.jpg

Elden Rings
XQ60KBY.jpg


Here is another video of several games running on a founders edition card Alex claims wont go above 1.7 ghz. Every single game runs at 1.935 Ghz or above.


How long can it maintain that speed?
 

Shmunter

Member
Pc comparisons are fun and all, but it is the performance of a closed system that gets the geek juice flowing. Having that hard baseline limit for comparison amongst different games is what allows me to appreciate tech achievement. How much can be extracted, how far can things be pushed.

A pc is about as interesting as duct taping a rocket onto a wheelbarrow and proclaiming to have the fastest car in the world, slow clap but yeah. You feel me?
 
Last edited:

Elog

Member
It supports kb and mouse also on ps5
Although this game is perfect for controller
Agree. Just baffling how small the differences are in optimized games when comparing PC and the new gen consoles. Given the current GPU prices it is hard to justify a current PC for playing graphically intense games outside of enthusiast circles.
 

Lysandros

Member
It surprised me a bit too, because Cerny himself told DF (not any other website, DF) that it's not the case that you have to choose between running the CPU at full clockspeed or running the GPU at full clockspeed, since the system is provided with enough power for both CPU and GPU to potentially run at 3.5 and 2.23 Ghz, but that actually depends on how power hungry the instructions used may be. As long as you don't exceed the ~200 watts PS5's cooling solutions can handle you're good. If for some reason your code has a higher power consumption than that the console will underclock to a level in which power consumption is those ~200 watts. I don't think its so hard to understand and I can't believe Alex always fails to get it. I mean, it's not like he doesn't have the knowledge or that Cerny haven't explained it to him.
PS5 can go as high as 230 watts, possibly even higher.
 

yamaci17

Member
r7 2700x + 2x8 3466 cl14 with tight subtimings

open areas, cpu bound around 100-110 fps

this cargo hangar or whatever is around cpu bound 80-90 fps

game favors physical cores and fully utilizes the all 8

LT0rglq.jpg




EQEoWn3.jpg



couldn't force it to drop below 60 no matter what I've tried. maybe in later regions, dunno.
 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
With slow load times like that all round it looks like all the decompression is being done on CPU cores even on the PS5 - running a PS4 port, much like HFW, etc.

That's probably the main reason Alex used the Core i9, is because the load times on a CPU that compares to the PS5 APU's CPU specs probably doubles or triples those loading times on PC.


cold boot into a save file in this location, 10900k loads the game in 13.72 seconds

DBWrXRj.jpg


2700x COLD BOOTS into the very same location in 14 or so seconds (compared to the 10900k's 13.72 sec cold boot time)



soft boot takes 3-5 secs



this is a cpu that is literally %60-70 slower than 10th gen intel CPUs

people really go extremes to downplay PCs lmao
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
Pc comparisons are fun and all, but it is the performance of a closed system that gets the geek juice flowing. Having that hard baseline limit for comparison amongst different games is what allows me to appreciate tech achievement. How much can be extracted, how far can things be pushed.

A pc is about as interesting as duct taping a rocket onto a wheelbarrow and proclaiming to have the fastest car in the world, slow clap but yeah. You feel me?
I am not gonna lie. I have been VERY disappointed by most of these PS5 ports. Death Stranding is an exception, not the norm. Not every game is doing this 8x boost to the pixel budget taking PS4 games from 1080p 30 fps to native 4k 60 fps while offering higher quality PC settings. We just had Uncharted 4 get released and ND basically increased the resolution by 75% and the framerate by 100% and called it a day. Thats not even a 4x increase to the pixel budget. The PS5 should be able to do much more in that game, and unless they butcher the PC version like they did GOW, we should soon find out.

Guardians of the Galaxy runs just fine on PCs at 60 fps. You dont have to go all the way down to 1080p to get 60 fps even that is variable on consoles. On PCs, I have more control and can do far more with my 2080. Horizon not being able to do 60 fps without heavily downgrading the resolution is bizarre and I am a 100% sure my PC should easily be able to run it at native 1440p 60 fps whenever it comes out. Same with Ghost of Tsushima.

Typically I'd agree with you on the benefits of a closed system, but we have rarely seen it this gen. I believe Doom, AC Valhalla, Spiderman, Death Stranding and a couple other dynamic resolution games are the only games that have truly been able to extract every ounce of power from the PS5 and XSX. Those devs settling for fixed resolutions and capped framerates have shortchanged us.
 

hlm666

Member
Wait, did Alex really compare the PS5 to the 1060? A 4.5 tflops GPU?
I believe the statement everyone drags up was him saying at some point that the ps5 is around ~2070s raster and a 2060 with RT. Not sure where the 1060 came from.

edit: ok that's where the 1060 is coming from.
 
Last edited:

kraspkibble

Permabanned.
why wouldn't he use a newer GPU like a 3080/3090 to get the best performance. a 2080 is almost 4 years old lmao? oh yeah it's digital foundry, so can't make the PS5 look bad.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
I am not gonna lie. I have been VERY disappointed by most of these PS5 ports. Death Stranding is an exception, not the norm. Not every game is doing this 8x boost to the pixel budget taking PS4 games from 1080p 30 fps to native 4k 60 fps while offering higher quality PC settings. We just had Uncharted 4 get released and ND basically increased the resolution by 75% and the framerate by 100% and called it a day. Thats not even a 4x increase to the pixel budget. The PS5 should be able to do much more in that game, and unless they butcher the PC version like they did GOW, we should soon find out.

Guardians of the Galaxy runs just fine on PCs at 60 fps. You dont have to go all the way down to 1080p to get 60 fps even that is variable on consoles. On PCs, I have more control and can do far more with my 2080. Horizon not being able to do 60 fps without heavily downgrading the resolution is bizarre and I am a 100% sure my PC should easily be able to run it at native 1440p 60 fps whenever it comes out. Same with Ghost of Tsushima.

Typically I'd agree with you on the benefits of a closed system, but we have rarely seen it this gen. I believe Doom, AC Valhalla, Spiderman, Death Stranding and a couple other dynamic resolution games are the only games that have truly been able to extract every ounce of power from the PS5 and XSX. Those devs settling for fixed resolutions and capped framerates have shortchanged us.
I agree, but being a glass half full guy I reckon on balance things are a bliss this gen on console. Everything is 60 and solid iq irrespective of resolution. I have yet to be offended by any type of obtrusive jaggies like I have been many times in recent gens. My pet peeve.
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
I agree, but being a glass half full guy I reckon on balance things are a bliss this gen on console. Everything is 60 and solid iq irrespective of resolution. I have yet to be offended by any type of obtrusive jaggies like I have been many times in recent gens. My pet peeve.
I had to play Horizon and Guardians at 30 fps because of their sub optimal 60 fps implementations which has definitely left a sour taste. Not a fan of the Miles and Ratchet RT 60 fps modes either. Especially considering how phenomenal they look in native 4k.

it was tech jesus who said ps5 is around 1060 performance

Jesus fucking Christ.
 

Md Ray

Member
why wouldn't he use a newer GPU like a 3080/3090 to get the best performance. a 2080 is almost 4 years old lmao? oh yeah it's digital foundry, so can't make the PS5 look bad.
The point of the video was to find which GPU in the PC space lands around PS5 GPU's perf level.
 
why wouldn't he use a newer GPU like a 3080/3090 to get the best performance. a 2080 is almost 4 years old lmao? oh yeah it's digital foundry, so can't make the PS5 look bad.

Because a 3080/3090 would hit the vsync limit in that cut scene on PC, thus making a comparison pointless. You need a beefy GPU that can't hit that 60FPS target to compare against the PS5.
 

Tqaulity

Member
I am not gonna lie. I have been VERY disappointed by most of these PS5 ports. Death Stranding is an exception, not the norm. Not every game is doing this 8x boost to the pixel budget taking PS4 games from 1080p 30 fps to native 4k 60 fps while offering higher quality PC settings. We just had Uncharted 4 get released and ND basically increased the resolution by 75% and the framerate by 100% and called it a day. Thats not even a 4x increase to the pixel budget. The PS5 should be able to do much more in that game, and unless they butcher the PC version like they did GOW, we should soon find out.

Guardians of the Galaxy runs just fine on PCs at 60 fps. You dont have to go all the way down to 1080p to get 60 fps even that is variable on consoles. On PCs, I have more control and can do far more with my 2080. Horizon not being able to do 60 fps without heavily downgrading the resolution is bizarre and I am a 100% sure my PC should easily be able to run it at native 1440p 60 fps whenever it comes out. Same with Ghost of Tsushima.

Typically I'd agree with you on the benefits of a closed system, but we have rarely seen it this gen. I believe Doom, AC Valhalla, Spiderman, Death Stranding and a couple other dynamic resolution games are the only games that have truly been able to extract every ounce of power from the PS5 and XSX. Those devs settling for fixed resolutions and capped framerates have shortchanged us.
You're right but i think you answered your own question. The vast majority of the 3rd party PS5 "ports" are last gen engines not at all optimized for next gen hardware. The reason why Death Stranding is different is because it is a game and an engine that was designed first and foremost for console then later ported to the PC. The devs then spent some time to optimize the engine a bit for PS5 before porting it over to that platform from the PS4 code. Getting Decima to run well on PC is not trivial and Guerilla had been doing work on optimizing for PS5 for a while now.

Again, when a developer can take time to optimize code for the console hardware, amazing things can happen. This is especially true for AMD aligned titles that will generally run better on RDNA class HW when compared to NV GPUs (i.e ACV, Godfall, Ghostwire Tokyo etc). Ghostwire is another great recent example of a game that runs at dynamic 4K (~1800p native) and 30fps on PS5 with RT enabled but a 3070 can't run 4K/30fps w/RT consistently and a 3060Ti can't run at 1440p/30fps with RT enabled. Being a Sony aligned game that's PS5 exclusive for a year, they spent considerable time learning some of the ins and outs of the console and achieved far better results than other 3rd party games like Control and Guardians of the Galaxy (especially with regards to RT perf).

We just had Uncharted 4 get released and ND basically increased the resolution by 75% and the framerate by 100% and called it a day. Thats not even a 4x increase to the pixel budget. The PS5 should be able to do much more in that game, and unless they butcher the PC version like they did GOW, we should soon find out.
Also, I've said this before on these forums, but folks clearly had unrealistic expectations for Uncharted 4 (and similar PS4 ports) on PS5. Keep in mind that the game runs at 1080p/30fps on PS4 (and 1440p/30 on PS4 Pro). Without making any other changes, getting that game to run at native 4K/60fps would require roughly 8x the power. Well the PS5 is only ~7x the PS4 GPU at best and ~5x the CPU. It's not enough raw horsepower to get a PS4 game running at 1080p/30 up to 4K/60. Sure they could do things with DRS and temporal upscaling to get there but the naughty dog engine does not have DRS built in currently (which is why EVERY release since UC4 has run at a constant resolution on PS4/PS4 pro) and it would have required tweaking the engine to a point that probably wasn't worth it for the remaster. I assume we'll see much of these features added to their full PS5 "next gen" engine in the future, but don't expect miracles on the existing engine given the hardware they're working with.
 
Top Bottom