-
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: Doom Eternal's Ray Tracing Upgrade Analyzed - Best PC Settings + PS5/Xbox Series X Comparisons
- Thread starter Arioco
- Start date
HeisenbergFX4
Member
Or when you pause a fast moving shooter game and zoom in 400%.
Wonder how many "gamers" could actually tell a difference when playing these games
Tripolygon
Banned
I don't know why people act surprise when VRS does what it is created to do. You trade internal resolution of some surfaces and effects for increased performance. Sometimes it is less noticeable but the end result is always the same, lower the shading rate to increase performance. Makes a lot of sense for VR games where only the center of the frame needs to be rendered at higher resolution and you can afford to greatly reduce the shading rate of the periphery as it is not in focus.
Last edited:
Truespeed
Member
Oh shit, someone brought out the Vaseline. The Quincunx memories are starting to flow.
AnotherOne
Member
Have to wait for VG tech to give us the performance breakdown to see what the gains (if any) xsx has over ps5 because of VRS.
blastprocessor
The Amiga Brotherhood
This has got to be the dullest generation of comparisons yet when 400% zoom is needed 
CrustyBritches
Gold Member
I took it as meaning PC vs PS5+XSX comparison, of which there was plenty of footage.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
1% of gamers in real life.
99% of gaffers in Digital Foundry/NX Gamer/VG Tech threads.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Nvidia beating both consoles at 900p native. This TAA derivative is going places.
I also wonder how much performance gain we can expect with VRS2. Maybe we'll get a proper console comparison soon.
I also wonder how much performance gain we can expect with VRS2. Maybe we'll get a proper console comparison soon.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I miss the days when you wouldnt even get Doom and Half Life ports on the PS2. Or when tearing was so bad on the PS3 versions it even affected ps exclusives like Heavenly Sword and Uncharted.This has got to be the dullest generation of comparisons yet when 400% zoom is needed
I'd argue that the comparisons got boring mid gen in the PS360 era when devs figured out vsync and MLAA on the PS3. Everything since then has been the same. Though I wont lie the first few 720p vs 1080p comparison in the PS4/x1 gen were a lot of fun. Sadly, everything evened out as devs figured out how to use the ESRAM and comparisons turned into flat 900p vs 1080p face/offs essentially mimicking the tflops differences and its only gotten more boring since now that the tflops difference is so small.
Last edited:
SLB1904
Banned
fuck no. ps5 is amazing. just wait for the pro version if blurriness at 400% zoom bothers you...maybe the consoles should've come out a year later.
Kholinar
Banned
It's moreso the fact that 2060 is getting better IQ than consoles at DLSS performance, let alone balanced or quality. Kinda makes me wonder what could've been.
JerryinSoCal
Member
DF will never admit that they basically are only in business because of console warriors. If you have to zoom in to tell a difference it doesn't matter but they'll spend 5 minutes talking about that or about 2 dropped frames lol.
SLB1904
Banned
dude follow PC is a fool's errand. pc gets a new feature every quarter.
Insane Metal
Member
I agree.This has got to be the dullest generation of comparisons yet when 400% zoom is needed
Although anyway with the Series X having a much larger GPU many people expected the difference to be a lot bigger. And in favor of the XBox, not the contrary.
JerryinSoCal
Member
Those people were wrong to expect anything significant with such a small difference plus the fact that the PS5 has some advantages too.
MasterCornholio
Member
Definitely not the massive differences that some were expecting. With the two being so close spec wise why would anyone expect that?
Your certainly not comparing a PC with a 1060 to a PC with a 3080 or anything close.
Md Ray
Member
Why?...maybe the consoles should've come out a year later.
EDIT: Oh, because of DLSS... No, NVIDIA is just so ahead with their AI upscaling that I don't think even a year late release of the consoles would have made any difference.
Last edited:
Skifi28
Member
Considering it was basically a PC video, a little odd there wasn't even a mention of AMD GPUs. Surely, they are supported? They would also make for a far more interesting comparisons to how the consoles stack up rather than comparing them to DLSS and hardware with dedicated cores for RT.
Last edited:
ABrokenToy
Member
Wouldn't one of the gains be XSX at 1800p 120fps, PS5 at 1560p 120fps
skit_data
Member
Only in performance mode, in all other modes they have the same resolution.
I can see it being a benfit in that mode though, but that’s not the one tested in the DF video.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
True and probably a higher average resolution in the other modes. But it's not massive difference or anything. The WeakStation 5 train crashed a long time ago.
Last edited:
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Exactly. People here are so dumb sometimes. Of course if you zoom in on the side of the screen you will notice VRS. If it's good you can't notice it while playing. No one ever said VRS wasn't noticable in a screenshot zoomed in 4x.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Size doesn't matter. Tflops matter.
Last gen the X1X had 40 CUs, the PS4 Pro had 36 CUs. With only 10% more CUs, x1x was able to consistently offer 40% more performance. Why? Because they had a huge clockspeed advantage. 1172 mhz vs 911 mhz. 28% higher clocks on top of the 10% more CUs gave them 40% more tflops which offered them 40% more performance 99% of the time.
I am not saying this to you btw, but I saw this a lot beginning of the gen when the CU counts were revealed and the xsx had 44% more CUs and people assumed that meant 44% better ray tracing performance. thats not how any of this works, but those folks just refused to listen.
You would think that people would look at previous gens and even PC GPUs from the same GPU family scaling performance 1:1 with tflops, and just use some common sense but nope. Tflops are tflops as long as there is sufficient memory bandwidth feeding it. Higher clocks CAN help in some instances, but even thats very situational. And to be fair, even I fell for the I/O marketing thinking it would help with the GPU rendering but apart from some exceptions, resolution differences have fallen in line with the tflops gap.
The only differences left are hardware VRS and RDNA 2.0 features like mesh shaders, and with VRS being a dud so far, mesh shaders vs primitive shaders are going to be the final frontier. UE5 performance targets for both the PS5 and XSX being literally identical doesn't bode well for any future surprises on the front. I am hoping MS ditches the vapor chamber cooling, embraces the giant PS5 heatsink design and goes for variable clocks to really push the mid gen consoles way above the 20-24 tflops we are expecting.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Hardly any noticeable difference when not zoomed in on.. Probably definitely worth the performance bump it affords.
People don't seem to understand the purpose VRS exists lol. It isn't meant to be zoomed in on 400x. It achieves virtually no change in perceptible image quality while offering a bump in performance. Translation it's a win, win because nobody is playing the game while zoomed in 400x. Welcome to game development and its tricks.
Last edited:
SenjutsuSage
Banned
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
There was a rumor recently where an nvidia APU die was leaked with 2000 cuda cores and 12 cpu cores. People dismissed it because the switch would never have 12 CPU cores, but if Nintendo goes with 2000 cuda cores they would have 2060 equivalent performance. We have already seen the 2060 keep up with the ps5 and xsx in watch dog's ray tracing mode.
I think this is Nintendo's best chance to keep up with the PS5 and XSX. Though, the 2060 is nothing without its tensor cores and rt cores and those might increase the GPU size (not sure by how much). I hope they ditch the handheld requirement and just go for a docked only $399 console. you can easily get a 2060 fabricated on a 7nm chip within Nintendo's $399 budget and make some profit at launch.
Even in traditional games that dont use ray tracing, the 6 tflops 2060 should offer at least 1.5x better performance than the xss. If they make DLSS mandatory, we could easily see 2x improvement over the xss.
Dave_at_Home
Member
No way they would ditch the portable aspect. Gonna be pretty sweet anyway. Mario gonna look crispy in 4K.
Rikkori
Member
Absolutely. Even on PC where I have more than enough performance I use at least VRS quality in Gears 5 (& on in Tactics).
Moving Gears to Tier 2 Variable Rate Shading - DirectX Developer Blog
The team at The Coalition haven’t stopped innovating since bringing Tier 1 VRS to Gears Tactics, and have brought Tier 2 VRS support to both Gears 5 and Gears Tactics. The team saw similarly large perf gains from VRS Tier 2 –
devblogs.microsoft.com
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Another one.... for pc
FatKingBallman
Banned
And bigger amount of RAM and bandwidth speed
Schmick
Member
Random guy 1 (playing PS5 version): "PS5 clearly wins over Xbox!"
Random guy 2 (sitting next to guy 1 playing Xbox SX version): "Huh? How can you tell?...."
Random guy 1: "well if you pause the game"
Random guy 2: "ok.... i dont see any difference...."
Random guy 1: "hang on a minute! now, zoom in on the image by about 400%...."
Random guy 2: "you're having a laugh.... right?"
Random guy 1: "no seriously, 400%"
Random guy 2: "o shit you are serious! Is this really a win?"
Random guy 1: "Dont you dare take this away from me!!!!"
Random guy 2: "Fuck you, im off. Gonna play somewhere else where the normal people play"
Random guy 1: "Sore loser!" *logs on to GAF and posts "Another One.gif".
Random guy 2 (sitting next to guy 1 playing Xbox SX version): "Huh? How can you tell?...."
Random guy 1: "well if you pause the game"
Random guy 2: "ok.... i dont see any difference...."
Random guy 1: "hang on a minute! now, zoom in on the image by about 400%...."
Random guy 2: "you're having a laugh.... right?"
Random guy 1: "no seriously, 400%"
Random guy 2: "o shit you are serious! Is this really a win?"
Random guy 1: "Dont you dare take this away from me!!!!"
Random guy 2: "Fuck you, im off. Gonna play somewhere else where the normal people play"
Random guy 1: "Sore loser!" *logs on to GAF and posts "Another One.gif".
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Isn't the point of VRS to keep things at high quality at the center of the frame? Or in VR, where the person's eyes are looking?
SenjutsuSage
Banned
To decrease shading resources in the parts of the image where it would be least noticeable in order to give some extra performance. It's an excellent feature.
The zoom in is the perceptible difference it's not much but that's what most of these resolution comparisons boil down to anyway. Small often very minor differences in clarity.People don't seem to understand the purpose VRS exists lol. It isn't meant to be zoomed in on 400x. It achieves virtually no change in perceptible image quality while offering a bump in performance. Translation it's a win, win because nobody is playing the game while zoomed in 400x. Welcome to game development and its tricks.
No. It's to selectively reduce rendering quality based on type of texture or distance. It makes whatever was selected for VRS look a little blurry or blocky though.
Craig of War
Banned
TyphoonStruggle
Member
Didn't Alex specifically say this video was NOT to compare the PS5 and XBOX versions? His focus is on PC RT + DLSS of Doom Eternal. Can't the console frogs just stop with their nonsense?
Last edited:
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
Another DLSS showcase.
Exanthus
Banned
So accurate
RoadHazard
Gold Member
...maybe the consoles should've come out a year later.
Why? I mean, sure, for every year you wait tech gets better/cheaper, but the consoles are vastly outperforming anything you could build for $500, so.
Apollo Helios
Member
So we should wait for a frame rate comparison between the consoles to see if the VRS feature is worth its salt. If both consoles hit 60fps most of the time, good. 400x zoom Image quality shots are unnecessary for a fast paced frenetic game.
But then again we shouldn't forget if that happens it is another showcase for narrow+fast>wide+slower because 10.2TF+'no VRS' is catching up to 12TF+VRS Tier 2 DirectX 12 Ultimate BONANZA...
But then again we shouldn't forget if that happens it is another showcase for narrow+fast>wide+slower because 10.2TF+'no VRS' is catching up to 12TF+VRS Tier 2 DirectX 12 Ultimate BONANZA...
Portugeezer
Member
TBH he shouldn't even have bothered with consoles in this video. Seemed pointless as I assume they'll be doing a full comparison at some point.
TGO
Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
I kinda agree, hardly a noticeable difference.Hardly any noticeable difference when not zoomed in on.. Probably definitely worth the performance bump it affords.
But let's not pretend on 4k screen and probably at 1080p as the capture is lower resolution you can't see it with, because you can, you don't need to zoom in 400%
Apollo Helios
Member
Oh friend I like how you messed up the lineup of the last two pictures to screw up the comparison.. /s
We get some minor minor VRS tier 2 artefacts (Battaglia speculation) but to see it well you need to zoom on a zoomed image. Not sure if it makes for any extra surface shimmering. Looks like a great console version on both but sure you can build a PC today with better looking visuals.
TOP
XSX Left, Blurry - PS5 Right, LESS Blurry
But for whatever reason, you go 'oops' and at the BOTTOM when Series X should be on the Left to keep the comparison clear you puy it on the RIGHT side....
PS5 Left, LESS Blurry - XSX Right, Still Blurry
