Windom Earle
Member
spf instead of fps is clearly the better metric for the Xbox One version here.
Digital Foundry Performance Analysis: Fallout 4
- Thread starter amnesiac
- Start date
panda-zebra
Member
Link broken .
Yeah ps4. It's just a horrible coding/engine. But if people didn't expect shoddy work from Bethesda, that's their own fault
thelastword
Banned
Funny enough that last gen games would receive lesser scores on certain consoles when it performed and looked worse. That has certainly died this gen.
Everytime there is a bad port on consoles people use the i3/750ti as evidence of it keeping up or outperforming the PS4. A bad port coupled with a capped framerate is compared to a console version or console versions where the game drops to 0fps whilst walking. An i3/750ti is compared to console versions where a beefier GPU shows lower frames in a scene with heavy alpha, when any non-disingenuous person knows that the better GPU should always perform better in such scenarios.....These type of arguments are truly amazing.
Yet, the lower powered card performs better (750ti) over the superior PS4 GPU and people praise that as a win for PC. I mean come on, hardly any distant shadows on the console versions and basic PC's are doing this with aplomb. Are these guys just not up to console development?
Almost every major open world game I've seen, consoles are just relegated to some of the most basic presets and nobody tries to improve them as the dev cycle goes on. The number of unoptimized games coming to consoles these days are reaching palpable proportions. Yet when persons mention MGSV and it's superb performance and fidelity on consoles people try to knock it down, "saying the world is empty" as if the performance and inconsistent graphics, animations of the Fallout 4, Unity, Syndicate, Cod Campaign are somehow more impressive as a package.........
I've never been in favor of DF just spitting out "consoles use some lows some mediums some highs", with the inevitable "oh, we were able to match console presets on our 750ti", it can hang or even outclass.....Never showing settings of the 750ti setup, never corroborating their stance on console settings..........Looks like there may be some inconsistency in texture streaming, with PC actually coming off worst in this DF comparison.
Yet, they go on with a comparison of a capped console game with an unlocked PC version where the console version is a crappy unoptimized mess.....
Hmmmmm...
Why is this a bug and the deathclaw fight not an even worse form of a bug? How would a weaker GPU ever outclass a superior GPU with heavy alpha all about. At least we know that Bethesda has a history with 0FPS drops but this deathclaw fight is yet another low point in this release. Regardless, we have persons pretending it's some hardware issue on the PS4 at that bossfight, as if the xbox should ever perform better at a similar 1080p to boot......
I was talking about syndicate, NXgamer tried to replicate it on PS4 but he couldn't. If you say it was an issue in Unity as well, I'm sure he was aware so he tested to see if that was eliminated from the engine once and for all...Clearly it was not.
Which one is that exactly?
Kssio_Aug
Member
Sorry, its fixed now!
In the end of the video!
A different time of the day, but in this Gamersyde video the player goes to the exact same area as in that gif, and that hiccup doesnt happen:
Also, it seems to be in the same moment of the game.
Ps.: The video in the link is XB1 gameplay aswell.
I don't understand why the worst case possible are used to prove how weak are the amd processor. I mean The Witcher 3 has a FOV tons of time better of this and still Alien:R and game like Fallout 4 are considered the best example of performance possible with such CPU. Meh.
It's not like the game is purely CPU-bound. These drops into the lower 20ties during some fights with heavy use of alpha effects on the PS4 (see the DF video) are without doubt due to some bottleneck in the graphics rendering.
Kenzodielocke
Banned
For the love of god Bethesda, please fix the 25fps firefights. PLEASE.
The XB1 version seems to run fine in firefights, what the fuck? Why? I am so confused, this game is great, but also annoying as fuck when it comes to performance and inventory management.
The XB1 version seems to run fine in firefights, what the fuck? Why? I am so confused, this game is great, but also annoying as fuck when it comes to performance and inventory management.
WordsintheWater
Member
These consoles borrow so much from PC this go around, it's even more shameful this time for them not to be able to get consistent performance.
An i3 handles 4 hyperthreads, it will have a higher clock speed and a higher IPC.
KurtSloane
Banned
Intel cores are better than AMD, simple.
We still get posts like this in 2015. Amazing.
And we still have people who take them seriously.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
No worries, professional game bloggers will be able to protect consumers where it really matters and take to the task the massive money budget burning hype machine of Shenmue III and tear that game a new one with review scores when it comes out and so much as misses one beat.
Yep and this does not make any sense because on Xb1 there are no dips in these circumstances , unless alpha effect on PS4 are better.
Wuthering_Heights
Banned
The sad thing is this fellow is probably older than 12.
alexandros
Banned
thelastword, at some point you will just have to accept that you are either overestimating the PS4's performance or underestimating the core i3/750Ti's performance. It's been two full years since the launch of the next generation, we've had tens of retail next-gen multiplatform games and the Core i3/750Ti has managed to match or even beat the Playstation 4 in the overwhelming majority of these games. The examples where the PS4 has managed to offer better performance are few and far between, merely a handful of games these past two years. You may not want to admit it but these games are the exception, not the rule. You can't keep on talking about bad ports or lazy developers, the numbers don't lie. The numbers seem to indicate that the "bad ports" aren't the ones where the 750Ti bests the PS4 but the ones where it loses to it.
Interficium
Banned
Congratulations, you won!
smh
I'm going to be honest, I only watched the video to see the 0fps sections. Really puzzling to see that happen.
Also been watching some 4K PC videos and it just looks universally ugly irrelevant of the hardware. Performance is one thing but so much of the much of the art in the game just seems horrible.Given time, much of that will be fixed as seems to happen with Bethesda's games.
Quite surprised by some of the performance issues on consoles. Not sure if it will happen but I'm really hoping that this gets the same supply jay Witcher 3 has had since release.
Even with it's many shortcomings, I'm still looking forward to playing it tomorrow.
Also been watching some 4K PC videos and it just looks universally ugly irrelevant of the hardware. Performance is one thing but so much of the much of the art in the game just seems horrible.Given time, much of that will be fixed as seems to happen with Bethesda's games.
Quite surprised by some of the performance issues on consoles. Not sure if it will happen but I'm really hoping that this gets the same supply jay Witcher 3 has had since release.
Even with it's many shortcomings, I'm still looking forward to playing it tomorrow.
Maybe 2016 will be better.
thelastword
Banned
Not all firefights, I hope this is not what you're getting from this video. This was the only firefight where a frame advantage was highlighted for the XB1 version.
I wonder what the CPU contingent are saying about the XB1 CPU now, here's an open world game where the XB1 stays consistently lower frame-wise in the most dense of cities with the most npc's.
Snkfanatic
Banned
And we still have people that say "lol it was just a joke bro"
Hendrick's
If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
Serious question, GTX570, i5 2500K (OC to 4.70 GHz) PC or Console (PS4 or XB1).
What will run the game better?
What will run the game better?
I find it strange that the 970 holds its own so well at 1440p, shouldn't its bandwidth hamper it somewhat ?
He has the game btw.
You're right that the FX-8150 has a slight advantage in The Witcher 3, but again, it's much faster than the i3 on paper, having twice as many threads (or, to put it another way, four times as many physical cores) and a 700MHz clockspeed advantage. That the 8150 comes out slightly ahead isn't something that should be celebrated, especially considering it's clocked significantly higher than the Jaguars in the consoles, which ties into the crux of my earlier post -- that the i3, despite being something of a "fake" quad core, can overcome the core/thread advantage the consoles have because of Intel's superior per-clock performance.
Isn't that PC master race bullshit bannable? I'm sure I heard it was bannable.
Matrix XII
Member
Yes, you win! Well done!
Astral Dog
Member
20fps? dear god.
Why? There doesn't seem to be anything bandwidth intensive in the things FO4 is putting out.
Windom Earle
Member
I think it depends on context. And the post you quoted doesn't seem mean spirited to me. Let him be. PC version seems hugely superior here.
KurtSloane
Banned
It's not the 750ti providing the win, its Intel core CPU compared to AMD core in the consoles.
Call of Duty Black Ops 3
The frame-rate graph is consistent with a triple buffered presentation and completely skips the torn frames. If it were just the first few lines, I could understand, but tearing appears within the top 20% of the image and should be accounted for. It's a limitation of his tool in that case. It is not an easy game to analyze so I'm not surprised. I just think he should have mentioned it.
I hadn't actually kept up with Syndicate at all. Haven't seen it in action yet on real hardware. Was just thinking of the Unity bug.
It's funny thinking of how some people yesterday were convinced that the XB1 would be the better running console version, after seeing a lot of rough looking PS4 footage, and very scant footage of the XB1 version. Some even citing the Microsoft Fallout advertising deal as proof that it would be the best version. Maybe this kind of baseless reasoning that props up constantly can finally end soon, the more we see the exact opposite happening performance wise.
That said, PS4 version definitely runs a pretty damn rough as well. Disappointing...but the rest of the game seems like that Fallouit fix I'm jonesing for. The general jank outside of performance I just kind of expected. We have to hope PS4 and XB1 versions receive patches to improve the current state.
That said, PS4 version definitely runs a pretty damn rough as well. Disappointing...but the rest of the game seems like that Fallouit fix I'm jonesing for. The general jank outside of performance I just kind of expected. We have to hope PS4 and XB1 versions receive patches to improve the current state.
ShadowsFell
Member
Now I don't know whether or not to cancel my Xbox one preorder.
Kssio_Aug
Member
DF analysis using a similar configuration has shown an advantage to the PC version.
Your configuration is VERY similar to mine by the way. But I don't know exactly how well it will run on our machines.
Omg Thank you so much, was about to ask how well my 970 would fair.
alexandros
Banned
I know. I've been saying this for literally years now, when the popular opinion was still that console optimizations and coding to the metal would somehow allow console hardware to punch way above its weight.
Collateral22
Member
It's people like that who completely turn me off PC gaming. Even online the chats are just toxic and it's a very elitist community. CS:GO and Dota 2 are two of the most toxic online games I've played.
Back to the topic, I think it seems clear. PS4 more consistent framerate for most things bar combat with excessive effects lie emptying a mini gun onto a deathclaw.
I'm seriously thinking about getting this game on PC but I'm terrified about the processor in running.
Videocard wise I think I'm okay, running a GTX 680 but my processor is definitely going to be my bottleneck as I have a Core i5 quad core 750 clocked at 2.81. This is a firstish generation i5 and I have tried over clocking it but it simply hasn't held up. The DF video mentions that the game take more advantage of the processor. Anybody with more computer knowledge think I'm right to fear bottlenecked performance? Even the minimum settings are a higher clock than what I have -_-
Videocard wise I think I'm okay, running a GTX 680 but my processor is definitely going to be my bottleneck as I have a Core i5 quad core 750 clocked at 2.81. This is a firstish generation i5 and I have tried over clocking it but it simply hasn't held up. The DF video mentions that the game take more advantage of the processor. Anybody with more computer knowledge think I'm right to fear bottlenecked performance? Even the minimum settings are a higher clock than what I have -_-
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
No mention by DF about ps4 having horrific frame rate or that it impedes on gameplay. In fact They say It's generally a stable experience.
Yet that topic creator from yesterday saying how the ps4 version is unplayable and not fun getting gaffers to switch preorders to Xbox one. This is why you do not listen to knee-jerk reactions. Especially when you know DF will set the record straight between the two console versions.
Yet that topic creator from yesterday saying how the ps4 version is unplayable and not fun getting gaffers to switch preorders to Xbox one. This is why you do not listen to knee-jerk reactions. Especially when you know DF will set the record straight between the two console versions.
RIP.