FingerBang
Member
Can someone sum for me what was discussed in the 21 pages until here? All I got is "WAAAAAAAAA" "OH YOU'RE SUCH A CRYBABY" "NO YOU" "I'M MARIO AND YOU'RE PRINCESS BEACH"
-
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: Heard that Xbox Series S Is A "Pain" For Developers Due To Memory Issues
- Thread starter IbizaPocholo
- Start date
- Opinion Hardware
- Status
dcmk7
Banned
People don't care about impressive graphics and visual effects instead they are more concerned about resuming a game or two from a suspended state? Ok
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
That got him an extra pair of socks.People don't care about impressive graphics and visual effects instead they are more concerned about resuming a game or two from a suspended state? Ok
vaibhavpisal
Member
People don't care about impressive graphics and visual effects instead they are more concerned about resuming a game or two from a suspended state? Ok
Pay more and voila, you get better graphics.
Series S thread tend to be deprived of common sense.
abacab driver
Banned
Until something eclipses Hellblade 2, I don't wanna hear shit, respectfully.
Riky
$MSFT
Yeah the Series S version is pretty impressive for something drawing like 80w of power, it's yet another example of people having no clue of the resolution due to the TSR, they only became outraged when somebody else told them.
It's also proof of the machines next gen credentials as last gen consoles wouldn't have a hope of running it.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
It's all cool. We should just be able to discuss stuff. I am fine with disagreeing and even when things get heated. It's why I have to resort to defend VFX from time to time even though I disagree with every fucking thing he says. Because at the end of the day, if we shut down discussion, this forum would be a sad fucking place like era where nothing gets discussed because of their potential to hurt feelings.I have edited my post to remove "attack" and replaced that with "point of derision". Hope that helps. I wouldn't want to keep anyone up at night with my poor word choices.
It's not that deep Slimy, we just have differing opinions here and like to let them be known.
I brought up the PS5 here multiple times because no one seems to want to talk about some of the bottlenecks in this machine. Not devs, not DF and not gaf. It's a fantastic console like the XSX, but you gotta wonder why it's struggling to do 1080p 60 fps in some games when it can easily do native 4k 30 fps in the same game. I was looking at some benchmakrs for guardians and the 10 tflops 6600 xt was running the game at 80-110 fps even in action at 1080p at ultra settings. Then why the hell are the console versions struggling to run at even 50 fps at 1080p with downgraded settings compared to native 4k where they use ultra settings? Just want to be able to discuss these things. The 13 tflops 6700xt can do 45 fps at 1080p in the Matrix yet the 12 tflops XSX struggle to hit 25-30 fps. Why is a 9% tflops gain resulting in a 50-70% performance uplift? If higher clocks are holding back consoles then I hope devs realize this and design around the console clocks to ensure the game is not bottlenecked and the GPU is fully utilized.
Last edited:
SportsFan581
Member
GotG is a strange one. In most games the 3060 is almost perfectly matched to what the consoles are doing whether it is at 4k or 1080p, etc. but in GotG the 3060 seems like it is just about 120fps in most of the videos (like you mention with the 6600XT). Maybe it is a CPU issue where the small caches on the consoles are a problem and the graphics cuts are more a desperation issue, trying to snatch every last possible frame.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I wish GOTG was the only one. HFW looks atrocious in its 60 fps mode at 1800cb which is 2.8 million pixels. Very close to 2.1 million pixels of the 1080p resolution. And Im pretty sure someone mentioned its a dynamic 1800cb implementation because Days Gone And ghost of tsushima ran at 1800p 60 fps in the BC mode and they did not look like that.GotG is a strange one. In most games the 3060 is almost perfectly matched to what the consoles are doing whether it is at 4k or 1080p, etc. but in GotG the 3060 seems like it is just about 120fps in most of the videos (like you mention with the 6600XT). Maybe it is a CPU issue where the small caches on the consoles are a problem and the graphics cuts are more a desperation issue, trying to snatch every last possible frame.
Dying Light is also 1080p in its 60 fps mode and im like what? 10 tflops and just 1080p? I hope we can get some answers because if its a hardware bottleneck then hopefully the mid gen consoles can address this. No point in investing in a giant GPU if the smaller CPU caches on consoles are the bottleneck.
FrankWza
Member
Especially since DF were given access to the details of the demo and I believe the same person referred to here is the one who wrote the companion article for the demo. It’s very possible the coalition is one these developers he’s referring to.
SlimySnake
quote went haywire
Last edited:
yamaci17
Member
i dont now about gotg but dl2 runs at 1080p 80-110 frames with VRR unlocked mode on xbox series x
a very similar performance profile to that of 3060ti-600xt-6700xt's (i won't say exact matchings otherwise it all goes to hell)
in GOTG's case, it may be dynamic resolution being whack. it does not even properly function on PC, i can assure you that. example: i pushed my gpu clocks back to 1200 mhz, set the game to 4k, i was getting 40 fps. i specifically stated 60 fps target for its dynamic resolution scaler. guess what? the damn thing deos not work. the game renders exact same native 4k and keeps on with 40 fps. at least in other games, i can confirm res. scaling working.
also, it is possible that frame drops may be related to CPU. though im doubtful, since i played the game with a 60 fps lock on my 2700x @4k+dlss performance. but since i have a vrr and not play with the stats on, maybe it dropped. but it never bothered me. i have no idea
Last edited:
Lysandros
Member
I heard extreme teraflop worship causes blindness.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
lol i was like these words read like mine.
Whats the full context of this quote? Is Alex saying porting to Series S was a gargantuan effort or was the Matrix demo itself a gargantuan effort?
Either way, DF has been talking about these devs making noise going back to E3 2019 or was it E3 2020? I believe they flew out to LA and had a podcast from there so must have been 2019. They talked abut devs telling them that lockhart was a pain in the neck.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Another example of the resolution difference is the Maz's Castle level where PS5 seems to often render at 1080p in the 60fps Mode and Xbox Series X seems to often render at 1440p in the 60fps Mode.
Entire levels often render at 1080p on the PS5. I'm not posting anything that isn't written in black and white.
No one is saying they're on par in general.
I'm just using the example of one game where it seems to be the case, for whatever reason, bad optimization, engine favoring one console or whatever the case might be.
Why would the engine even favor the Xss if that's on your list of possibilities?
FrankWza
Member
New gaf is jumpy and for some reason the quotes disappear sometimes and have to be redone.Here’s the full article.
The Matrix Awakens vs the original movie - and it's shockingly close
The Matrix Awakens has been with us for a week now and slowly we're gaining much more of an understanding on the scale …
www.eurogamer.net
He’s referring to the coalition coming in to help with the s version.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Going by how heavily the Series X version outperforms PS5 in both resolution and frame time, it makes sense to think SS also benefits from it, owing to them both being on the same infrastructure and Series S inheriting the great performance profile Series X has.
There's more things in favor of that than against it is what I'm saying.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
lol I’m glad someone has a 2700 here because it’s the perfect match for the ps5 and xsx CPUs. It is clearly holding back your 3070 here. Dlss performance at 4k uses an internal 1080p resolution so your 3070 is barely doing 60 fps at 1080p. No wonder the consoles are struggling. 3070 is equivalent to a 2080 ti which was 35% better than the 2080 which is basically on par with these consoles.
Did you ever run death stranding with your 2700? We had a thread on it where we did some really interesting benchmarks comparing the ps5 version. The ps5 gpu was definitely punching above its weight there.
MasterCornholio
Member
Not sure what aspects of the XSS hardware the game will like better. On paper everything seems inferior to me so it really doesn't make much sense.
SportsFan581
Member
That's true. I tried looking for YT videos that featured one of the G series ryzen processors paired with a GPU in this range, just to see if there was a loss from a 3600 or 5600x, couldn't find any videos that featured GotG though. Who knows what the issue is.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
We've already gone through it on the last page but Series S is seemingly running the game around the same ball park as the PS5 and has a performance advantage.
That's what I'm referring to. The performance stats can be seen in VGTech's stats page here
But like has been said, this is one exception. PS5 should not be trading blows with Series S in general.
MasterCornholio
Member
I don't think it's the hardware then if that's the case.
Topher
Identifies as young
I think he is right that the game engine favors Xbox Series over PS5. But there is still not a case where PS5 and XSS are at the same resolution. Even in the quote:
"Another example of the resolution difference is the Maz's Castle level where PS5 seems to often render at 1080p in the 60fps Mode and Xbox Series X seems to often render at 1440p in the 60fps Mode."
For this assertion to be correct that XSS and PS5 run at the same resolution even in this single level, it would require the assumption that XSS runs at or near its highest recorded resolution while both XSX and PS5 drop significantly. Why would anyone make such a wild assumption?
Last edited:
vaibhavpisal
Member
All those trolling the little beast will be out and running to buy one come 12 June and Starfield reveal.
I will be smugly watching the furore.
I will be smugly watching the furore.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Really? Tiny Tina's is an example of such a drasticdowngradecompromise that's so damning against the Series S? Really?
This was the worst example provided by DF in their review of grass being more barren. That's it. Is this really that problematic that it's holding back a generation? Lmfao. The concern is through the roof.
No shit 120 hz isn't going to be available in all games. There's only so much you can do with 4 TF to hit 8.33ms frametimes, especially in a UE4 shader and particle heavy game like Wonderlands.
MasterCornholio
Member
If we are talking about the XSX I can understand why it would like the hardware better. But not with the XSS is all I'm saying from what I understand of the XSSs hardware configuration.
OmegaSupreme
advanced basic bitch
Or we'll be playing it on our pcs's but sure. Keep the dream alive.
FrankWza
Member
You would think that alex from df would play on pc. No?
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Really ? I thought it was pixel fill rate ...
Last edited:
SportsFan581
Member
I think he's just saying that it's normal for the XSS and PS5 to be pixel by pixel closer than they normally would be in this example, because the engine seems to agree with the series architecture better for whatever reason. Basically if there was a little 1080p PS5 lite, it would perform significantly worse than XSS, likely in a linear fashion with the PS5. That can be true without the XSS literally outperforming the PS5. The pixels per TF on the XSS might be a bit higher here so to speak.
Speaking of this specific game of course.
Last edited:
FrankWza
Member
MasterCornholio
Member
Doesn't sound like it's a hardware IMO. More like there's something going on with the code on the PS5 thats bringing it close to the XSS. From a hardware point of view that really shouldn't happen.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
No one ever said it's a hardware issue. It's only been brought up as an outlier example.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
Well hopefully nobody ever does because it just doesn't make any sense.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Don't forget the color ROPs, the true bottleneck in console gamingReally ? I thought it was pixel fill rate ...
yamaci17
Member
no mate your conclusions are all wrong. gpu is maxed out at %99 usage all the time in that sample video of mine. ray tracing is taxing on these mid tier ray tracing GPUs. additionally, 4k+dlss performance is more costly than native 1080p, so your logic there is also hugely flawed
watch the video again, gpu is at max utilization all the times. its actually respectable that 3070 manages to hold on to 60 fps with such a setup. the point of the video was to show that 2700 has no troubles hitting a consistent 60 fps, therefore, consoles should also lock to 60 fps cpu bound. take heed that 4k+dlss performance looks like 1500p+ in terms of image quality and crispness.
running a game at native 1080p and running a game at 4k+dlss performance is different. 4k+dlss performance uses 4k lods, textures and assets, which causes a huge performance drop.
here you can see the example below,
at native 1080p, gpu renders 118 frames at %94 gpu utilization
with 4k+ DLSS performance (logically, you would think its 1080p, but as i said, its not), gpu renders 94 frames at max, %99 utilization. %25 performance drop is completely on GPU, DLSS overhead and 4K LODs. you can see that 4k+dlss performance looks miles better than native 1080p, so it should tell you they won't have a similar performance cost on GPU
another similar comparison from GoW;
you can see that running the game at 4k+dlss performance takes away %23 performance (but it looks miles better, so its worth it)
i can download the damn game and do the same benchmark at native, ugly, blurry 1080p if you want. i'm easily getting 90+ frames there. 4k+dlss performance is a different beast. it nearly looks like native 4k, and rightfully needs more GPU budget.
so no, my 2700 does not hold back the 3070 @4k dlss performance + ray tracing. it is the 3070 that holds me back. if i had a 3080, i would have even more frames
this post is to teach you some stuff. obviously you have no clue. i hope you dont take it offensive
finally: ps5 is not punching above its weight. ps5 is a literally 6600xt. and 6600xt runs very near to the 3060ti 3070 in some specific games like death stranding and ac valhalla. so no, 6600xt runs the death stranding just like ps5 in the exact same scene.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Ah i thought that was the regular mode, not the ray tracing mode. The perf makes more sense now.no mate your conclusions are all wrong. gpu is maxed out at %99 usage all the time in that sample video of mine. ray tracing is taxing on these mid tier ray tracing GPUs. additionally, 4k+dlss performance is more costly than native 1080p, so your logic there is also hugely flawed
watch the video again, gpu is at max utilization all the times. its actually respectable that 3070 manages to hold on to 60 fps with such a setup. the point of the video was to show that 2700 has no troubles hitting a consistent 60 fps, therefore, consoles should also lock to 60 fps cpu bound. take heed that 4k+dlss performance looks like 1500p+ in terms of image quality and crispness.
running a game at native 1080p and running a game at 4k+dlss performance is different. 4k+dlss performance uses 4k lods, textures and assets, which causes a huge performance drop.
here you can see the example below,
at native 1080p, gpu renders 118 frames at %94 gpu utilization
with 4k+ DLSS performance (logically, you would think its 1080p, but as i said, its not), gpu renders 94 frames at max, %99 utilization. %25 performance drop is completely on GPU, DLSS overhead and 4K LODs. you can see that 4k+dlss performance looks miles better than native 1080p, so it should tell you they won't have a similar performance cost on GPU
another similar comparison from GoW;
you can see that running the game at 4k+dlss performance takes away %23 performance (but it looks miles better, so its worth it)
i can download the damn game and do the same benchmark at native, ugly, blurry 1080p if you want. i'm easily getting 90+ frames there. 4k+dlss performance is a different beast. it nearly looks like native 4k, and rightfully needs more GPU budget.
so no, my 2700 does not hold back the 3070 @4k dlss performance + ray tracing. it is the 3070 that holds me back. if i had a 3080, i would have even more frames
this post is to teach you some stuff. obviously you have no clue. i hope you dont take it offensive
Don’t bother installing the game again. I’ve seen other benchmarks on PC. Games run very well on PC in the standard mode at 1080p,1440p and native 4k.
I guess we are left with no real inclination as to why the console versions are underperforming in the 60 fps mode.
ChiefDada
Member
Can't you recognize the inherent fallacies in your statements? The "Only some explosion reflections" delta (not to mention resolution) is artificially limited by Epic's decision to have parity between all three consoles. If the demo was further enhanced to take advantage of PS5 and Series X RAM capacity then the differences would've been that much more pronounced.
SportsFan581
Member
True, the lego game is an outlier, there generally isn't this much of a difference. Whether it is a bug or just this particular engine or this particular game, who knows.
Kssio_Aug
Member
I might not have bought a Series S for the suspend state, but it sure as hell is one of my favorite functionalities this gen. Love booting the console and start RDR2 in a matter of seconds. And indeed I don't care about the top notch graphics people praise all the time. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯People don't care about impressive graphics and visual effects instead they are more concerned about resuming a game or two from a suspended state? Ok
Last edited:
yamaci17
Member
i hope you also understood that running the game at 4k+dlss performance is not comparable to running them at native 1080p, hopefully. that's very crucial, otherwise it would undermine all my performance videos
for the ps5 and death stranding case, it is indeed true that ps5 performs like a 3060ti and nearly a 3070 in that game. but its not about ps5 being good at that game, its about rdna2 being good at that game, another AC:Valhalla case;
you can see that 3060ti is usually %19 faster than the 6600xt
so its not particularly a ps5 success story, but it is more of a rdna2 success story there.
it is very possible that on well optimized rdna2 ports, ps5 may regularly match 3060ti. i'm pretty sure both xbox sx and ps5 easily matches 3060ti-3070 on ac:valhalla as we..
don't believe me? check out how 3060ti performs at ultra maxed out @1440p in that game. its not even giving a stable 60 fps. and yes, ps5 and sx runs that game to their max. as a matter of fact, consoles had "higher than high" settings, so you cannot even realistically match console IQ on that game on its PC port
you would be quick to understand that 3060ti would need exact DSR scaling that consoles use to get a consistent 60 fps @1440p ultra settings.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
That's patently not true, epic seemingly off loaded porting the engine and demo to Coalition for Series S.
They made the demo on the other consoles to the highest of their specs.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Nope the demo runs @1.5gbps which is closer to the XSX/xss capabilities and far from the PS5's capabilities.
ChiefDada
Member
Lol absolutely not, especially the bolded, and God help us if it were true.
Faithless83
Banned
XSS is all fun and giggles with the optimized crossgen crap.
I believe next year it will start to struggle... hard.
I believe next year it will start to struggle... hard.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
er ... no.
Neither console SSD is close to maxed out and the Xbox SSD's can do far in excess of 1.5Gbps, so that's not anywhere close to being an issue at all.
The Coalition helped Epic in Unreal Engine development in general, but they are especially name dropped when talking about Series S for the demo on both Xbox's official website and Digital Foundry.
But regardless, the tech demo isn't held back by Series S. If it were, it wouldn't be struggling to hit 30 FPS as it is.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
You said.....
"They made the demo on the other consoles to the highest of their specs."
Which is not true.
XSX SSD runs at 2.4GBps which isn't much faster than the demos 1.5
PS5's SSD runs @5.5GBps which way faster than the 1.5
It's obvious Coalition built the demo around the Xbox
DarkMage619
$MSFT
Would be the first time in history that devs would get worse at optimization for a platform as time went on. I suppose we'll see, afterall people are claiming XSS will hold back the entire generation.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked