• 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.

[GamingBolt] WRC Generations Dev: Xbox Series X’s Raw GPU Performance is Better Than PS5’s, but Harder to Exploit

Lysandros

Member
The PS5 has a higher fillrate and triangle rate and the XSX has a higher texture rate and more bandwidth and compute. So which ends up faster depends on the bottleneck in a given frame.
Well i don't necessarily agree with the bandwidth part, especially at whole system level, since this common assumption doesn't take PS5 hardware specifics like 60% more GPU L1 cache bandwidth available per CU and the Cache Scrubbers into account and also the split RAM bandwidth pool on XSX. I wholeheartedly agree with the second statement.
 
Last edited:

Romulus

Member
Pretty much why most multiplatforms will continue to perform slightly better on ps5. Developers are overworked, no need to max out each set of specs. Just get it running well and move on.
 

twilo99

Member
It means nothing if it isn’t taken advantage of.

To a lesser extent look at the Microsoft marketing lately, it’s all about the Series S these days. All that talk of the most powerful console , it’s never mentioned now

To a less informed consumer they would be forgiven for thinking the Series X didn’t exist.

One thing is certain I will definitely be holding off any future Xbox console purchase until at least the second year of its release after my experiences with this console.

True, but luckily they have their own studios who can/should presumably take advantage of what both machines have to offer. You can sort of see it with Gears 5 and forza horizon, but I think there is more to come.
 
Also, if what developers says is true, then the gap between Xbox Series and Playstation will be bigger than is right now. This reminds me the unreal demo that only was possible to run in PS5, because of the SSD, lol.
Noppe it had nothing to do with the SSD its was about how fast data could be transfert from the SSD trough the I/O and then to the rest of the hardware, so your lol is just cous you dont know the true advantage....
 

tygertrip

Member
From what I remember was about 10 of us or so that was the regular group who gamed together and just mainly remember Mike kept saying "they fucked up" in regards to Sony trying to get "cute" with the SSD and should have gone with more power.

I do remember them saying we will never see any real world in game differences as what that SSD tech would do as compared to the Xbox option

Maybe people don't find my little stories interesting and maybe I should stop since I am name dropping and all :)
No way buddy. As long as it is true, it is very interesting!
 

solidus12

Member
Aside from that, why haven't we seen technical masterpieces from Xbox?
PlayStation Studios has been releasing technical juggernauts since the PS3 days, so what's up with that?

Looking at the DF thread of best graphics, there's rarely an Xbox game.
 

tygertrip

Member
The console warring on Gaf is some of the most pathetic I've seen. I saw guys going back and forth for pages, arguing over a 4% difference in pixel count, and timestamping DF vids for drops of 1-2fps for 1 second. I honestly couldn't believe my eyes.
‘Tism. Gotta be.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Aside from that, why haven't we seen technical masterpieces from Xbox?
PlayStation Studios has been releasing technical juggernauts since the PS3 days, so what's up with that?

Looking at the DF thread of best graphics, there's rarely an Xbox game.

You really think there haven't been graphically impressive games on Xbox patforms since the 360/PS3 days ?

really ?
 

tygertrip

Member
Like the days of Pro Vs X where the differences were much larger. Sad to see some people praying that they return and then get mad when the comparisons are close. If anything this is good for the industry.
I miss the days where systems were drastically different. Like Genesis/MegaDrive vs. SNES. Neither one was flat-out superior to the other. Instead, they both excelled at different things. Even then, I never understood console warring. Ok, I admit, I console warred for the Genesis, but in my defense I was a teenager! Anyway, after Street Fighter 2 came out as a timed exclusive to the SNES, I immediately sold enough comic books to go buy one. What else was I going to do, not play SF2 at home??? That would have been insane! That was the end of my console warring, I enjoyed the best of both worlds for the rest of the 16-bit generation!
 

Topher

Gold Member
True, but luckily they have their own studios who can/should presumably take advantage of what both machines have to offer. You can sort of see it with Gears 5 and forza horizon, but I think there is more to come.

That’s always the case with first party games. They are willing to go the extra mile and squeeze these machines for all they are worth
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Aside from that, why haven't we seen technical masterpieces from Xbox?
PlayStation Studios has been releasing technical juggernauts since the PS3 days, so what's up with that?

Looking at the DF thread of best graphics, there's rarely an Xbox game.
Gears 4 and 5 were the only exceptions IMO.
 

NahaNago

Member
9gCFZ4S.png
Grinch Smile GIF
 

Umbasaborne

Banned
The console warring on Gaf is some of the most pathetic I've seen. I saw guys going back and forth for pages, arguing over a 4% difference in pixel count, and timestamping DF vids for drops of 1-2fps for 1 second. I honestly couldn't believe my eyes.
Tribalism is something else
 

Crayon

Member
Maybe I missed apart but did he mention how this raw performance actually manifests? The the cases we know of with df wins or something potentially more significant?
 

ManaByte

Member
https://gamingbolt.com/xbox-series-...s5s-but-harder-to-exploit-wrc-generations-dev



Neither the topic nor the sentiment is new, but it's always nice to hear input from 3rd party developers on platform comparisons. My question as it relates to the future is how far MS first party is able to extract Series X GPU parallelism while also developing for the more popular Series S, which has significantly less CUs (~65% less) not to mention lower clock speed.
I’ve been playing MWII and Callisto on a Series S for the last two days and neither feel held back by the little $250 box.
 

ChiefDada

Gold Member
I’ve been playing MWII and Callisto on a Series S for the last two days and neither feel held back by the little $250 box.

I would hope not; they're both cross-gen games. But yeah I'm more interested in comparisons for XGS games in particular.
 
I miss the days where systems were drastically different. Like Genesis/MegaDrive vs. SNES. Neither one was flat-out superior to the other. Instead, they both excelled at different things. Even then, I never understood console warring. Ok, I admit, I console warred for the Genesis, but in my defense I was a teenager! Anyway, after Street Fighter 2 came out as a timed exclusive to the SNES, I immediately sold enough comic books to go buy one. What else was I going to do, not play SF2 at home??? That would have been insane! That was the end of my console warring, I enjoyed the best of both worlds for the rest of the 16-bit generation!

Well it's a good thing we still have Nintendo. I always find their systems to be very different than the other two. But your right that the other two are extremely similar and in many cases you can manage with just one of them. I always find a need to have a Nintendo system though.
 
The XSS plays the next gen versions of any cross gen game.

Technically it would play the Series S version. Which isn't necessary a bad thing BTW. When it comes to the games its the same game but tweaked to fit the Series S hardware profile.

Edit: I'm pretty sure your talking about something else though.
 
Last edited:

ChiefDada

Gold Member
The XSS plays the next gen versions of any cross gen game.

Okay? I don't know what you're getting at and/or why you quoted me in the first place so maybe it's time to move on? I think Series S is a legit current gen machine if that's what you're driving at. My question has always been about development implications for Series X with 1st party studios having to support both. That's not something you could determine by analyzing how it runs Callisto, MW2, or any other shipped game because any such hypothetical game feature that couldnt achieve acceptable parity between S and X would of course be cut out. The only way to know this is via candid developer commentary. Some have been gracious/brave enough to do so.
 

I Master l

Banned
This is a picture from plague tale requiem from DF, about a very specific stress point with large framerate drops. The next second of the video showed huge improvements after the patch, but it wasn't that good for console warring I'm afraid. I discovered it randomly looking through the video thinking of buying the game when I remembered this thread, fun times!

After the patch it's still huge gap "23%" game perform much better on the Series X overall
 

CamHostage

Member
I don't trust anything this developer says about technical matters after what they did with WRC on Switch:



Switch version of WRC Generations is better, some very noticeable pop-in but less of the misery of WRC 10.



It is what it is: they're scaling down to an under-powered platform for a niche audience that doesn't buy a lot of sports/racing games. They are customizing it as much as is reasonable for the audience (and with results as bad as WRC 10, they probably should have abandoned or delayed the port,) but from a business perspective it's not the version of the game which is most vital to get right.
 
Last edited:

Jboemios

Banned
Noppe it had nothing to do with the SSD its was about how fast data could be transfert from the SSD trough the I/O and then to the rest of the hardware, so your lol is just cous you dont know the true advantage....
Oh yea. I remember when Godfall only could run in PS5 ( this year was released in PS4) and that unreal demo, was confirmed later that could run in a xbox and a portatil.
 

LordOfChaos

Member
The same design that plagued the PS3 in extracting its potential. It requires workflows and process to be executed in a more parallel manner to take advantage of the higher CU count. On top of PS3's dual core CPU setup, it also had 8 additional co-processors.

The PS3 had one PPE (regular-ish core) and seven SPEs (one of eight was disabled to increase chip yields, chips with one defunct core could be used), one of which was reserved for the OS so 6 game SPEs, not 2 and 8.

The PPE had hyperthreading, but especially back then, that's not near another core


Also the rest of your comment is not the case
I feel like most of this thread is talking about GPU cores as if they're CPU cores and you have to program explicit multithreading or the extra ones just don't work. It doesn't really work like that, and I maintain that the application of the term "cores" to GPU groupings of ALUs was a mistake that continue to fool uninformed people.

GPUs and GPU programming are "embarrassingly parallel" machines, the parallelism is inherent in their nature. You're not sitting there going, oh fuck, I have to make a thread for CU 51 now. If there's an issue scaling up to a higher CU count, there's something bottlenecking it or not moving fast enough to feed it. The PS5s GPU simplified as being weaker because people take the shaders * clock speed = Tflops as everything they need to know, but the higher clock speed actually clocks other parts of its logic higher, for example its pixel fill rate of 142Gpixel/s vs 116 on the XSX, and then all the Compute Unit command processor logic etc.

It sounds like maybe these bottlenecks are being worked around and gradually showing more of the XSX's higher peak shader performance, and the APIs and OS and toolset are surely getting better to do so as well. The XBO generation also showed their API was heavier despite being among the "low level" ones, maybe some of that still going on and improving as well. The PS5 for its part has its own leads in hardware as well, Gflops are the simplest baseline paper calculation, it's like comparing CPU speeds just by clock speeds.
 
Last edited:

clampzyn

Member
Just you wait for when the tools arrive in 2032!
Nah, its already available, now who from the 3rd party devs actually used it properly? As far as I know, most of the time, even Sony, first party devs are usually the one who pushes their consoles hardware to the limit. What games so far have fully utilized velocity arch? VRS 2? as far as I know only few games used VRS 1 and none have actually used velocity arch and games that used them are still cross gen titles, none of the current gen titles haven't even touched those features that series s/x offers.
 
Last edited:

twilo99

Member
I hope by the end of their production life we get at least one game that maximizes everything the x/s have on tap so we can just see if it was all marketing or something tangible.
 

sendit

Member
The PS3 had one PPE (regular-ish core) and seven SPEs (one of eight was disabled to increase chip yields, chips with one defunct core could be used), one of which was reserved for the OS so 6 game SPEs, not 2 and 8.

The PPE had hyperthreading, but especially back then, that's not near another core


Also the rest of your comment is not the case

Forget about the technicalities and the specifics. I've had 4 or 5 people say/correct the same mistake forgettable mistake. The point is, which may not be a direct correlation. But the point is, more cores (more CUs in this case) is harder to utitlize to 100% versus less cores or CUs. I'm sure modern game engines (unreal engine 5) do a great job of abstracting this layer of complexity. But to squeeze out the remaining last drop of performance, this would need a custom solution.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom