ToTTenTranz
Banned
Isn't this the console's first raytracing implementation ever, though?
-
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] Fortnite's Unreal Engine 5 Upgrade Reviewed - Lumen/Nanite at 60FPS - PS5 vs Xbox Series X/S + PC!
- Thread starter Lunatic_Gamer
- Start date
- Analysis Review
Isn't this the console's first raytracing implementation ever, though?
Hugare
Gold Member
And people still say that Series S is pretty much equal to the big consoles but at a lower resolution
Its obviously an anchor to next gen development
John Wick
Member
You can't blame MS as they needed two consoles to counter the two separate PS5 consoles/Sku's.........
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Last edited:
AGRacing
Member
Yeah. The trees aren't the same definition as the Matrix Demo branches or chain link fence... But calling them "low poly" is totally disingenuous. They're very well rendered trees, appear very "full" from all angles and react very well with lighting.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
I suck at percent, but if it's rendering 115% pixels, does that mean that is exactly the percentile difference in TFLOPs between PS5 and XSX?
Zathalus
Member
It's 15% difference in resolution, almost exactly in line with the compute difference between the two.
Hugare
Gold Member
I can totally blame MS
They needed two SKUs to counter Sony, but they could have done just like Sony and removed the disc driver.
But bo, they chose to make an underpowered console.
Its selling well, so economically, itnwas a smart decision. But to next gen development, dont think so .
clampzyn
Member
The reason Series S is selling well is because its affordable for "casual" gamers that just wants to play games because as far as I know not every game is triple A ultra realistic graphics game that'll need a beefy hardware to run. If you're talking about Series S holding next-gen development then why don't you go back to how many PC gamers that has way inferior hardware than series s that developers still needs to cater to.
Last edited:
Xdrive05
Member
The TSR is upscaling from 72%, and using High Lumen options instead of Epic Lumen. Give it a try and your 3080 will be well into the high refresh rate experience I imagine. My 3050 stays over 60fps at that config.
Spyxos
Member
Fsr2 is a lot better than Tsr. Sure, it looks good on my xsx, but when i can compare those 2 on PC there is a pretty significant difference.
Thirty7ven
Banned
PS5 and XSX versions are indistinguishable but I love the fact some people have no qualms about making fools of themselves.
alabtrosMyster
Banned
I kind of agree with your point, but I think casuals Play NFL\NBA\CoD\Fortnite, etc.
Those who play indies are often hardcore in the sense that they pay attention to a different portion of the gaming eco system. The small indie games could and probably should be released on PS4\xbone consoles for years and years since there is no technical reason to have them on more powerful hardware.
As for the Series S, it's not fulfilling its original promise of delivering full HD next gen games without other compromises, this is why a lot of games use lower quality textures, shadows and lighting as well as sub 1080p resolutions on this machine. MS may call their BS a success, but from a customer point of view it's hard to see it as good as it basically lives on a lie. Add to this the prohibitive cost of extra storage for it and it makes zero sense to buy one, no matter how "hardcore" you plan to be.
clampzyn
Member
People often think Series S will run majority of the games if not all at 1080-1440p because people misunderstood the way it was advertised, Series S supports display output upto 1440p and it doesn't mean it'll run all of current gen and next gen games at that resolution, MS didn't specifically said that. Just like the case of Series X, the tech specs says it supports 4k || up to 120 fps, doesn't mean that all of the games will run at native 4k or 120fps. It's all about game design, how the devs will utilize each consoles hardware and what is the optimal settings is needed for the console to have a stable performance.
Even if you look at Series S tech page here: https://www.xbox.com/en-US/consoles/xbox-series-s , you won't find anything that says it'll run current/next gen games at 1080p/1440p @ 60/120fps.
Why even say its a next-gen console then? Because its indeed a next gen console, the hardware inside it during its time of release is the latest tech available although Series S was just the weaker version of X but it literally has the same chip and architecture.
People also have to consider a lot of games isn't really visually demanding that even Series S can do 4k native, 120fps on that game. So did MS lied? No.
You saw Series S running A Plague Tale Requiem which is considered a next-gen game, even if its sub 1080p (but uses upscaling technique), because its technically a visual demanding game even on PC, it was still able to deliver almost the same experience as Series X but ofc visual downgrades will be there.
Last edited:
clampzyn
Member
People always use triple A games as a basis to downplay Series S because it can only run at low resolution/fps like there's only triple A games in the market LOL, need to remind people that fun games exists that are not triple A visual and isn't exactly needing a beefy console/pc to run at high res/60-120fps.
Fortnite is a competitive game, series s can run it at 1080/60 and also supports 120fps as long as RT is disabled because everybody knows RT takes big perfomance, and no don't talk like everybody has like 3080/3090/4080/4090 gpu. Did MS lied? No.
Last edited:
Hugare
Gold Member
lol, developers dont give a damn about PC minimum system requirements
Consoles are their goal first and foremost.
Series S wasnt holding them back because we were in the cross gen phase (still are). But as soon as cross gen dies, the S will be the baseline for developers.
And if it werent for the S, devs would be pushing way beyond what they will deliver, and minimum system requirements on PC would be way higher.
Last edited:
Fortnite is already pushing the consoles extremely hard. PS5's average resolution is only 21% above 1080p.
Last edited:
See 01011001's posts in this thread. They used per axis scaling, so it yields different results.
Hugare
Gold Member
Consoles will always be the baseline with the exception of competitive multiplayer games (Fortnite, LoL, PUBG and etc.)
Do you think that Ubisoft give a fuck about low end PCs when making the next Assasins Creed game? Rockstar when making the next GTA?
If you think so, you are delusional
Physiognomonics
Member
Here we have lower resolutions and also less features possibly caused by lack of memory. It's not the first game with lack of RT (here software RT) only on XSS. All of this optimisation means way more work for the developers. They have more work than reducing the resolution.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
It retains the GI. The only thing it lacks is the Lumen RT reflections.
Rykan
Member
They don't need to cater to lower specced PC's. That is a choice made by the developer or the publisher. Developers do have to cater to Series S if they want to be on the Xbox platform at all. Big difference.
Last edited:
From the user's perspective, there is more of a difference feature-wise between the Series S and the XSX than there was between the One S and the One X. But if you're upgrading from the One S, everything is additive, and with Fortnite they seemed to have retained the core visual identity of Nanite + Lumen on the S.
Moreover part of the reason why the S version had to be scaled back is that the XSX/PS5 versions were pushed so hard, so there was only a 2.6X resolution advantage on the bigger console. So in some sense, the cutbacks reflect the fact the developers focused heavily on maximising the visual fidelity of the PS5/XSX versions.
Last edited:
I’m not sure why you posted this or what it has to do with things.
But I like it. I like it a lot.
Ezekiel_
Banned
The user tagged often writes summaries for Digital Foundry videos
the Cerny dong riding with inaccurate numbers never stops being amusing
SF Kosmo
Al Jazeera Special Reporter
Good to see UE5 flexing its advanced features at 60fps. I remember the guys were initially skeptical that would be possible on consoles, but it seems like the new improvements (and TSR) have made that more possible.
I notice some of the decals are missing with Nanite on. I wonder if this is an artistic choice or a technical issue.
I notice some of the decals are missing with Nanite on. I wonder if this is an artistic choice or a technical issue.
Imtjnotu
Member
Decals are extremely hard to render if I rememeber correctly.
Arm chair dev here with 10+ years of gaming forum experience
bitbydeath
Gold Member
Imtjnotu
Member
Bro I've been gaming since before your parents realized they accidentally got pregnant with you
clampzyn
Member
No one here is delusional but you, you think if developers made their games minimum requirement a rtx 3070 will make them a good profit? LOL you are dreaming, just look at steam hardware on how many people only has a 3070. Majority of the pc builds are always on the low-mid end that's why developers always try to cater the minimum as they can for their game.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
4% is huge difference.
The_Mike
I cry about SonyGaf from my chair in Redmond, WA
25 : 04
I strongly suspect this guy blindly put people who prove him wrong on their ignore list and continue the mad takes.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I actually did some math on this and didnt come up with 15%.
If PS5 is 55% of 4k, it is 55% of 8.2 million pixels = 4.51 million pixels
If XSX is 59% of 4k, 55% of 8.2 million pixels = 4.83 million pixels
4.83/4.51 = 1.07 or 7% more pixels. I dont see how you get 15%. It's way below the 18% theoretical difference in tflops.
Zathalus
Member
The percentages are for each axis, so 55% of 3840 and 55% of 2160 which makes it 2112 x 1188 for PS5 and 59% makes it 2266 x 1274 for Series X.
2509056 pixels for PS5 vs 2886884 pixels for Series X. Just a hair over 15% difference.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
Yep. But pre-launch when insider devs said this, the notion about it being the closest in power out of any gen, was laughed at. That Next-Gen OT was a hoot of cope. Glad it's accepted now.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Thats a weird way for them to put it.
01011001
Banned
that's the usual way of how most engines define their resolution scale. I don't like that but it's technically easier to grasp what res you're running at I guess since you can just take the vertical axis and do the math on that to get your resolution.
calculating 50% of 2160 and 50% of 3840 and get the correct final resolution is easier than calculating 50% of 3840x2160
Last edited:
ANIMAL1975
Member
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Awesome that the consoles are performing exactly as expected with a full fledged unreal engine 5 release.
15 percent more resolution and the same performance. Basically the same to the naked eye.
Bodes well for when unreal engine 5 games start launching. The next gears is going to look insane.
15 percent more resolution and the same performance. Basically the same to the naked eye.
Bodes well for when unreal engine 5 games start launching. The next gears is going to look insane.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
At this point, what is the next or should I say first big unreal engine 5 game that's coming soon? 2 was supposed to come out in 2022 but no way it was going to be able to use all these features like lumen and nanite at its original window.
DenchDeckard
Moderated wildly
Hopefully they can squeeze it in somehow. Hopefully coalition will sort it out.
Imtjnotu
Member
Star wars Jedi survivor is the first big UE5 title.