Physiognomonics
Member
On the first comparison TSR is actually better than DLSS! And what about textures high frequency details tests? We know DLSS fares very badly here (always blurry).
Last edited:
-
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.
Lords of the Fallen quality and perf modes: 1440/30 and 1080/60
- Thread starter ManaByte
- Start date
On the first comparison TSR is actually better than DLSS! And what about textures high frequency details tests? We know DLSS fares very badly here (always blurry).
simpatico
Member
If you told people that right before the gen started, that all they could expect from their PS5 is 1080p/60, I think there would be uproar. If you recall, PS360 was supposedly the 1080p generation. We're still getting games that aren't even able to lock in the 60fps @ 1080p with reduced graphics settings vs the "quality" mode. idk to me that's unacceptable.
Yeh it looks like they turned off vsm by default and reduced the density of some of the particle effects across the board. Pretty sure the consoles got that patch when they nerfed DR and increase scrap etc. I've got no idea if vsm is off on console now in performance and on in quality or how much uplift they got from that. was bout a 30% uplift on pc at high, turning advanced shadows back on reduced it to like 15% improvement. Not sure that will be enough to lift the consoles out of 720p bottoms but it should move the framerate to the 40-50 range instead of 30-40 range.
TrebleShot
Member
Not that I disagree with you but actually a lot of people were saying these boxes would be 1080/60 machines with upscaling.
The writing was on the wall from the PS4 gen when we had to wait till the pro to get 1440p/60.
I don't know if its just my habits now but I am increasingly disappointed with the performance of these machines.
UE5 was before PS5 launched with promises of incredible streaming and performance, not a chance these machines run these games at 60 in a world of large flat panel TVs and 8k/4k just looks like crap a lot of the time.
People say get a PC, I have a PC at the top end and its an utter ball ache playing modern games that you haven't already rinsed on consoles.
Like playing Jedi Survivor, have to restart the game often, sometimes launches from steam in the background, have to manually select it, then haptics only work when plugged in another annoyance. Ive modded it with DLSS which causes most of the restarts but I understand looks and plays like shit without it.
Get a PC is not a good rebuff for poor spec on Consoles, chasing the dream of a sub £500 box that gives us top level visuals does.
I think that's also one of the reasons streaming will kick off, remove the cost and reliance on local hardware.
Last edited:
winjer
Gold Member
The advanced shadows setting is r.Shadow.Virtual.Enable And this was probably the main culprit for the performance drops.
I'm pretty sure that they reduced the amount of surfaces that are casting shadows with virtual shadows. The issue with nanite is that it creates so many polygons, that if everyone of them is casting a shadow, it bogged down performance.
I remember in some situations that had a lot of ground geometric detail, turning on the flashlight and seeing the fps dropping hard.
120hz allows a "smooth" 40fps since u can divide easily by 40. You change the frame every 3 frames and therefore have equal amout of time for each frame. @ 60 you cant go higher then 30fps with equal frame times on the display side. You could do every 3rd frame as well but 60/3 = 20. We dont want that x) So 120fps allows for 40fps which is already substantially better then 30fps and doesnt take that much more power. its a compromise
Thick Thighs Save Lives
Gold Member
It did get a big patch a few days ago on PS5, but there's still massive framerate drops in certain scenarios and on certain worlds like N'Erud and Labyrinth.
I also did the final boss fight (Annihilation) after the patched dropped, and on balanced mode it dropped to low 30s on numerous occasions; had to switch to performance mode to at least have a somewhat playable experience in this boss encounter (I think it hovered around high 40s low 50s in the most demanding moments) .
Last edited:
Dream-Knife
Banned
At these lower resolutions, the bandwidth doesn't seem to matter as much.
winjer
Gold Member
In the Labyrinth it's normal to get frame rate drops when looking through the portals. This is quite heavy, as it's rendering 2 scenes at the same time.
But asides from that, it runs pretty well on PC.
I have only done a bit of N`Erud with the last patch and didn't have any big frame rate drops. I even fought against Abomination, but now it runs much better.
I remember having big performance drops in Vault of the Formless, in the part where there are those big machines moving pods around. Haven't gone on it after the patch.
With Annihilation, at launch, it would drop into the 40's. But after the patches it's close to the 60-70 fps.
Still not great, as I can do most of the Corrupted harbor close to 100 fps. But much better than at launch.
Thick Thighs Save Lives
Gold Member
There's still big frame-rate dips there, just cleared the zone yesterday after I rerolled N`Erud on adventure mode. Btw, I'm playing on PS5 and not on PC. As for the Annihilation boss fight, I shudder to think how the perf was at launch on PS5...
Happy to see the improvements on PC though, and hopefully the devs will do some further optimization passes for consoles as well.
winjer
Gold Member
They have been releasing patches regularly, with good improvements, since launch.
So it's probably going to improve even more. But it's sad to have another game with a launch troubled by performance issues.
At least, they are working much better and faster than Respawn with Jedi Survivor.
onnextflix5
Member
Original demo was like 200gb compressed lol, so we won’t be seeing games like that anytime soon,
Lokaum D+
Member
available doesn't mean affordable, to sell consoles u need to have a nice price point, if u go to crazy u end like Sony's PS3, selling consoles at a huge loss.
Not sure I agree with that, the 2nd slice is native no upscaling and dlss looks much closer to that. The tsr has the typical pixeled looking breakup we get with tsr on things like hair and the edges of some alpha effects.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
I never said we would, but their internet temporal and other techniques to reconstruct are at engine level for devs to use.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
That's 4x the resolution. So no. The Pro will not have that much more GPU power over the current PS5. Something around 1600p (although that isn't an actual 16:9 resolution) would be more realistic, that's about 2x the resolution of 1080p.
Last edited:
JackMcGunns
Member
In here for the Series S numbers.
That will be a fun take, but that being said, this game was made in a way that seems to be bringing PS5 and Series X to their knees, so there goes the theory that Series S is holding games back. Imagine PC gamers on GTX 4080s and 4090s caring so much about 4060 numbers. When you have a game like Witcher 3 running on the Nintendo Switch, it just goes to show how it's possible to scale games down, clearly the devs that complain have to do extra work and no one likes extra work. Only those drinking the cool-aid believe PS5/Series X games are affected directly by Series S. Pro consoles shouldn't even be a thing then since PS5/SX will move to the laughable space that Series S occupies, amirite?
March Climber
Member
Rumor said ‘8k native’ I worded it wrong.Rumor? It says 8K on the regular PS5 box.
Last edited:
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
I have been playing Evil West at 1080/60 on Series X, looks fine tbh. That it has brilliant anti aliasing goes some way to improving image quality, but undeniably the image looks soft. TBH, I'm not sure I can muster up the enthusiasm to be disgusted at this resolution. As long as there's a 60fps option, then I'm sure it'll be fine.
yamaci17
Member
thats the problem them games look so soft even at 1440p
i wish they targeted 4k and used fsr performance. then the games do not look that soft anymore. but have artifacts and whatnot. people do not like that either. at least on PC I have the freedom to do that. it will be hard to have that on consoles
Mr Reasonable
Completely Unreasonable
Eh, it is what it is.
willothedog
Member
You also need a reasonable power envelope. Don't think a 500w console would sell well.
Bojji
Member
Yeah that's the worst thing about consoles, lack of choice - devs decide that X image reconstruction is the best when on reality it looks like shit (like fsr 1.0 in FFXVI).
Same goes for Vaseline filter, piss filter, chromatic abberation, motion blur etc.
Every game should have option to turn this shit off plus sharpness slider.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
Devs to graphics "whores":
Fbh
Member
Hey if it's real 1080 and locked 60fps that's actually an upgrade compared to the likes of Jedi Survivor which is like 720p 45fps.
Devs to graphics "whores":
It's funny because we are finally getting the "next gen" games everyone wanted but not only are they offering the same old game design, I'd argue in many cases they look worse than last gen games.
Slightly worse graphics at native 1440p and locked 60fps looks nicer than better graphics at upscaled 720p 45-60fps.
Last edited:
Physiognomonics
Member
Matrix demo is 1080p-1200p and is fine resolution wise. The problem in that demo was the 30fps which wasn't great with TSR. But at 60fps it should be much better with significantly reduced ghosting.
Last edited:
Portugeezer
Member
On the bright side, it shits on most 2023 games graphically. But yes, let's just focus on numbers.
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
proandrad
Member
Devs are using the extra power of the new consoles and FSR upscaling to not optimize their games.
One of the biggest reasons they want to push ray tracing is because it’s less work than prebaked lighting.
Last edited:
Fbh
Member
I think it's just diminishing returns.
These games are pushing new tech that's impressive on paper (like "ray tracing" and "lumen") but the actual end result you see on screen just doesn't look that much better and it's costing a ton in terms of performance and resolution.
I think game graphics are reaching a point of "maturity" where upgrades will be slower and smaller while still requiring a lot of extra hardware power.
During the early days of 3D graphics we'd see fast and massive improvements. In 10 years we went from OG FFVII to Bioshick and Crysis.
Now we need Digital Foundry videos to zoom in on water reflections and tell us how impressive they are
Last edited:
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Yes!!!
Not just that, but the truth of the matter is what most of these devs have been putting out, hasn't really impressed. look at the lumen/nanites PS5 demo. No one had an issue with the fact it was natively 1080p TSR`ed to 2160p running at 30fps. If devs gave us stuff that looked that good and detailed, no one would care about those other specs. A lot of these games instead feel like they are just coming in hot and uncooked. And that's what I find disappointing.
I mean, it took a DF retro video to drive in a shocking fact, The Order 1886, without any of these super high-end next-gen features, is a better-looking game on a 1.8TF console than 90% of everything released this gen. There is something very very wrong with that.
We have come full circle. It is clear to me these devs are not using the available power to make the games look better or push the envelope, they are using it to make their development lives easier. Thats the only logical explanation. Come on, lt not pretend we have not seen what was possible on 1.8TF GPUs with Jaguar CPUs. We have 10TF consoles now for crying out loud.
Last edited:
Bojji
Member
I agree. The Last of Us Part 2 is just PS4 code in 1440p and 60FPS and game looks excellent, better than something like Remnant 2 for sure, even PS5 only TLoU Part 1 is not much better looking, only in textures.
Something is wrong. We will see big jump with PS6 when Ray Tracing GI will be common in games but this gen is just Gen 9+ so far (and PS5 Pro will be G9++) but sometimes with lower resolution...
DavidGzz
Member
LMAO. THIS! I was always saying cross-gen means almost 4k and 60fps on current gen consoles. Proper next gen graphics and you not hittting anywhere close to 4k if you want 60fps. That's why I made the decision to buy a PC when I saw how the Matrix demo ran. And people talking shit about Series S...Your PS5 and X are also looking pretty shitty, so quick to deflect to the S lol
Last edited:
MALpractice311
Member
Once more for the people in the cheap seats...
Fuck ray tracing.
Fuck UE5.
Fuck Nanite.
Fuck Lumen.
You want that shit on a $2k PC, sure. Sounds great. Knock yourself out. Trip the light fantastic. I love that journey for you.
But $500 plug and play consoles CAN NOT HANDLE THAT SHIT. Stop it.
Fuck ray tracing.
Fuck UE5.
Fuck Nanite.
Fuck Lumen.
You want that shit on a $2k PC, sure. Sounds great. Knock yourself out. Trip the light fantastic. I love that journey for you.
But $500 plug and play consoles CAN NOT HANDLE THAT SHIT. Stop it.
Thick Thighs Save Lives
Gold Member
Even PCMR people are crying about how heavy UE5 is on their $2000 rigs. Just look at this reddit thread on Remnant 2 (do note that since then they did ship a big update that brought some optimizations to the table).
Oh and that person who said their RTX 3080 will eat this game will be in for a rude awakening once this game launches later this year
.
Last edited:
MALpractice311
Member
Even PCMR people are crying about how heavy UE5 is on their $2000 rigs. Just look at this reddit thread on Remnant 2 (do note that since then they did ship a big update that brought some optimizations to the table).
Oh and that person who said their RTX 3080 will eat this game will be in for a rude awakening once this game launches later this year
Jesus. This is why I gave up on PC gaming long ago. This looks too much like work.
Rendered Tangent
Banned
You mean having a screen with 120hz refresh rate allows you to enable a 40fps mode?
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yes. If the game supports that mode.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
The fact that you can even do all of that is a good thing, not a bad one. PC has enough freedom to allow the players to bypass devs incompetence. On consoles, you're pretty much at their mercy. If it's too much work, set all settings to Medium except for textures and AF and you should get a console-like experience without a hassle.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
17GB.
DavidGzz
Member
I really love that they took the parry system from Sekiro and put it in this. Once for weaker enemies and multiple parries required for boss characters. Also being able to use ranged weapons or the lantern on the fly without having to switch weapons. It also has 'withered' dmg which is kind of like the damage you can regain like in Bloodborne but without the time limit. Add the best graphics of any game in the genre and I'm pretty stoked for this!
upgrades are only bad for the budget conscience.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Yours is a nice way to put it. Budget-conscious people shud not feel bad about getting what they pay for and opting out of what they feel they can't afford.
Upgrades are only bad for the cynically insecure, jealous, and petty.
Yoshichan
And they made him a Lord of Cinder. Not for virtue, but for might. Such is a lord, I suppose. But here I ask. Do we have a sodding chance?
i still have that sticker on my $5500 Sony Bravia 40" 1080p TV from 2005.The return of the king :
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Not really feeling why anyone would be upset. Have y'all seen Unreal 5's TAAU? It looks pretty fucking good, this is a far better solution than aiming for higher native pixel count and not having a performance mode, or a shitty performance mode, on fixed-spec console hardware.
UE5 TAAU at 1080p likely looks comparable, or better, to most games 1440p with other AA solutions.
UE5 TAAU at 1080p likely looks comparable, or better, to most games 1440p with other AA solutions.
Last edited: