-
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: Baldur's Gate 3 PlayStation 5 vs PC - The Digital Foundry Tech Review
- Thread starter adamsapple
- Start date
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
Ok, it’s been a minute. What’s the hold up
adamsapple
, where them deets!
adamsapple
, where them deets!
Mister Wolf
Member
The City is bringing the PS5 to it's knees. Puts a hurting on my PC as well. I will be surprised if Larian ever gets Act 3 running with a similar performance as Act 1.
darrylgorn
Member
Have no problem playing Act 3 at 1080p, 60 fps on a 3070.
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
- "Definitely a good looking game, but not a boundary pushing one"
- Controller control scheme works fine at first but becomes cumbersome as the game goes on.
- Cannot use mouse and keyboard on console.
Visuals:
- PS5 seems to be running at or close to PC Ultra equivalent settings.
- Notable visual difference noted in DoF where PC has a toggle to turn 'denoise' off which is fixed on PS5 and better shadows.
- PS5 has Performance Mode on/off toggle.
- Quality: Fixed 1440p.
- Perf: Looks 1440p but has extra artifacting and ghosting, suggesting FSR2 type up-sampling from 960p.
- DRS is likely but not noticed.
- Perf mode holds up typically very well but some softness is noticed on closeup.
Performance:
- Performance mode targets 60 FPS
- Interior and most exteriors run fine with some little dips.
- Some areas like the Act 3 City buckle the performance into the low 20s
- Tearing in top 20% and bottom 25% of the screen when frame rate drops
- Quality mode targets 30 FPS
- Manages to stick to it very well
- No motion blur makes 30 FPS feel choppier
- Act 3 again causes the frame rate to drop to mid 20s
- V-Sync locked so no tearing in Quality mode
- DF suspects a CPU bottleneck as both Perf and Quality have the same kind of performance when stressed.
- Can have substantially worse performance than a mid-range PC in CPU bottleneck areas
Split Screen:
- Split Screen: Vertical split with each window getting 1280x1440p
- Close to Ultra settings but some minor cutbacks like shadow quality seen, it degrades the farther the split screen players get.
- Performance is locked to Quality mode equivalent including similar drops in the same areas.
Conclusion:
- PS5 version "does the job" for gamers without a high end gaming PC.
- Controller control scheme works fine at first but becomes cumbersome as the game goes on.
- Cannot use mouse and keyboard on console.
Visuals:
- PS5 seems to be running at or close to PC Ultra equivalent settings.
- Notable visual difference noted in DoF where PC has a toggle to turn 'denoise' off which is fixed on PS5 and better shadows.
- PS5 has Performance Mode on/off toggle.
- Quality: Fixed 1440p.
- Perf: Looks 1440p but has extra artifacting and ghosting, suggesting FSR2 type up-sampling from 960p.
- DRS is likely but not noticed.
- Perf mode holds up typically very well but some softness is noticed on closeup.
Performance:
- Performance mode targets 60 FPS
- Interior and most exteriors run fine with some little dips.
- Some areas like the Act 3 City buckle the performance into the low 20s
- Tearing in top 20% and bottom 25% of the screen when frame rate drops
- Quality mode targets 30 FPS
- Manages to stick to it very well
- No motion blur makes 30 FPS feel choppier
- Act 3 again causes the frame rate to drop to mid 20s
- V-Sync locked so no tearing in Quality mode
- DF suspects a CPU bottleneck as both Perf and Quality have the same kind of performance when stressed.
- Can have substantially worse performance than a mid-range PC in CPU bottleneck areas
Split Screen:
- Split Screen: Vertical split with each window getting 1280x1440p
- Close to Ultra settings but some minor cutbacks like shadow quality seen, it degrades the farther the split screen players get.
- Performance is locked to Quality mode equivalent including similar drops in the same areas.
Conclusion:
- PS5 version "does the job" for gamers without a high end gaming PC.
Last edited:
BbMajor7th
Member
It'll probably take me a couple of months to reach act three. Hopefully a few patches will have rolled out by then 
feynoob
Banned
Heisenberg007
It seems I was right. Game is heavy cpu bound. Act 3 is unstable. Same goes with PC.
great game, but is being held back by the cpu.
darrylgorn
Member
Here’s your gold star.
Just playing.
Lol, no worries
I guess I should point out the reason I mentioned is so that PS5 players have additional performance options.
This game looks great at 1080p. Even a 1080p, 48 fps cap option would allow for an excellent experience throughout.
The other thing to note is that this heavy performance dip they point to seems to be only in one small instance of the game. That particular bridge in Act. 3. Tbh, after playing so much of this game, I would say to any PS5 owners, just buy it now. It will be ages before you get there and it's such a small part, that you can deal. This is the game of a lifetime and it's worth experiencing now.
Last edited:
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
I’m sure the game will be heavily patched by the time I get around to playing it. Just needs some optimization patches I think.
I’ll likely play in Quality mode.
I’ll likely play in Quality mode.
Fbh
Member
Seems pretty solid....until Act 3.
For people who have played it, does a large part of act 3 take place in the city? Or are those 20fps locations just places you'll have to go to every now and then?
The city in act 3 seems to be limited by the CPU.
It performs equally bad in performance mode (upscaled 960p) than quality mode (native 1440p) so it's not a case of just dropping the resolution a bit to improve performance.
They'd likely have to do stuff like lowering NPC density in that area to get any FPS gains.
For people who have played it, does a large part of act 3 take place in the city? Or are those 20fps locations just places you'll have to go to every now and then?
The city in act 3 seems to be limited by the CPU.
It performs equally bad in performance mode (upscaled 960p) than quality mode (native 1440p) so it's not a case of just dropping the resolution a bit to improve performance.
They'd likely have to do stuff like lowering NPC density in that area to get any FPS gains.
darrylgorn
Member
Ah yes, you're right it is more about being CPU limited.
There are battles in the city, but it seems that the performance drops are mostly clustered in areas where you're simply running around. Once you enter a battle, dialogue or even stop moving around, the framerate shoots back up to its normal rate. And it should also be mentioned that there are a significant number of indoor environments in the city that have no effect on performance.
Last edited:
Solidus_T
Banned
Same for me but at 120fps, and then I actually moved my cap down to 80fps since this game doesn't really need the super high fps. Act 3 saw some drops into the 40s - it really stresses the CPU, no matter the graphics settings.
I might have to upgrade mine soon.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
This seems like a really good port to me. Needs some polish on the CPU side of things though.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Sounds like a great port, and for those willing to wait till next year, it will only get better.
Portugeezer
Member
Confirms what we knew from other sources, but aside from the crap 60fps mode it seems like a decent port.
Good news! The game is so long most people won't get to Act 3.
It seems I was right. Game is heavy cpu bound. Act 3 is unstable. Same goes with PC.
great game, but is being held back by the cpu.
Zuzu
Member
It's weird how they seem to be using FSR 2.0 to upscale from a lower resolution to 1440p in performance mode but they don't seem to be using it to upscale the 1440p to 4k in the quality mode. Rather it's just a fixed 1440p. I hope they consider upscaling the quality mode as well.
Last edited:
Low Moral Fibre
Member
If anyone actually plays this instead of just using it for console wars that act 3 performance is going to be a rude awakening. Huge chunks will be under 30fps in performance mode and drops to 18fps is Jedi Survivor levels. The whole act is in the city so it's not like it's a 10 minute segment though indoors wil be fine.
As much as I love this game (said many times already it's already my favourite CRPG) it is very basic graphically and I wish the Ultra settings were the Low settings as I have tons of GPU headroom compared to pretty much any modern game I've played.
It's still the best looking CRPG by a huge margin but kinda like being the tallest dwarf.
As much as I love this game (said many times already it's already my favourite CRPG) it is very basic graphically and I wish the Ultra settings were the Low settings as I have tons of GPU headroom compared to pretty much any modern game I've played.
It's still the best looking CRPG by a huge margin but kinda like being the tallest dwarf.
Last edited:
nowhat
Member
In my experience thus far, yeah. Framedrops and tearing.
How-ev-er, it doesn't detract me from playing the game. It's still fucking fantastic.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
That's because Jaguar was all that was available for the APU at the time. You can now upgrade within the same Zen family going from 2 to 4.
Schmick
Member
In that case if there are Pro versions lets hope the CPU are upgraded.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Agreed. Otherwise it would defeat the purpose this go round.
Why? The PS5 has an outdated mobile CPU,not even a mobile version that was current to near current gen.
Horseganador
Member
Well, it's pretty good on PS5, settings like on PC ultra, 60 frames stable most of the time, split screen with minimal loss, only act 3 drops too much (but it's a problem that's also on PC) I don't know why it asks so much power at that point, it is far from the disaster that they have tried to sell these days... who knows why xDD.
It might be a stretch,but why not an enhanced the PS5 CPU to be like a desktop 2700x? Add a bit more frequency and up the cache.
Denton
Member
Solidus_T
Banned
Lol what? It has the same CCD layout as a Ryzen 7 3700...
Vroadstar
Member
Visuals:
- PS5 seems to be running at or close to PC Ultra equivalent settings.
"Definitely a good-looking game, but not a boundary-pushing one"
Performance:
- Interior and most exteriors run fine with some little dips.
- Perf mode holds up typically very well but some softness is noticed on closeup.
Conclusion:
- PS5 version "does the job" for gamers without high-end gaming
Someone got too excited posting that "other" performance thread.
Robbinhood
Banned
Lol gotta love the attempt to shit on the game.
Great results for PS5.
Great results for PS5.
winjer
Gold Member
The CPU on the PS5 only has 4MB + 4MB of L3 cache.
Shake Your Rump
Banned
Please tell me we aren't going to start accepting screen tearing on PS5 games.
Last edited:
Low Moral Fibre
Member
Yes it looks like shit on PS5 as FSR is used which is more an image destroyer with a sharpening filter than an upscaler. It nicely simulates a failing GPU with all the noise and artifacts so you get to feel a little like a PC gamer that has overclocked too far I guess.Visuals:
- PS5 seems to be running at or close to PC Ultra equivalent settings.
"Definitely a good-looking game, but not a boundary-pushing one"
Performance:
- Interior and most exteriors run fine with some little dips.
- Perf mode holds up typically very well but some softness is noticed on closeup.
Conclusion:
- PS5 version "does the job" for gamers without high-end gaming
Someone got too excited posting that "other" performance thread.
And it drops to 18fps in this video and will sit below 30fps for much of act 3 and chunks of act 1 and 2 which DF skipped. That is terrible performance and not something I would accept in a visual novel nevermind anything with direct character movement.
If you are happy with that fine but I wouldn't touch this version and thankfully I don't have to.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Looks like a really good port until act 3 and then its dropping seriously hard.
I dont think theres anything they could really do with the CPU intense area. overall GG
I dont think theres anything they could really do with the CPU intense area. overall GG
twilo99
Member
- PS5 version "does the job" for gamers without high-end gaming
This is a great quote that can be applied to a lot of games running on console.
You accept the compromises because you payed less for the hardware, be happy that you can actually play the game at all and move on.
Expecting to pay less but have an equivalent experience to those who payed more is not realistic.
This is a great quote that can be applied to a lot of games running on console.
You accept the compromises because you payed less for the hardware, be happy that you can actually play the game at all and move on.
Expecting to pay less but have an equivalent experience to those who payed more is not realistic.
Kataploom
Gold Member
I it won't if they have enough GPU overhead for FSR3 FMF but yeah, that would just be a workaround rather than an actual solution lol
Game's running well, it just seem to have issues in all platforms... This clarifies the XSS problem, they just don't had resource to optimize the base game (PC) before release since it's a clear performance mess in Act 3... I wonder how the splitscreen runs in Act 1 on it. MS and Larian seem to compromise themselves to release that mode later so maybe they mean "whenever we have base game running at decent performance".
Last edited:
Is it? I know the PS5 CPU is based on the renoir mobile CPU, which is just Zen 2. I believe it was Zen 3 where the CCDs were unified.
Last edited:
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Low 20s is not "doing the job". Not acceptable, not buying until I can at least get a solid 30.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Will pick this up next week. Version looks stunning in places.
Yeah,that doesn't mean the lay couldn't be the same which it isn't since the PS5 has CCXs vs CCDs, minus cache size differences.
Krappadizzle
Member
Solidus_T
Banned
Yes, but saying it's an "outaded mobile CPU" is dishonest - it was certainly fine especially for the year it released. It uses the same layout as a 3700X with some minor tweaks, with same core count and 100 mhz slower clock speed compared to the 3700. The result is that it performs more like a 3600X.
Honey Bunny
Member
Wow, this sounds much better than the other thread about the PS5 port