interfreak
Member
I guess the next question is can the traffic stuttering (particularly on PS4) be fixed with a patch?
Digital Foundry: GTA V PS4 and Xbox One compared in new frame-rate stress test.
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
I guess the next question is can the traffic stuttering (particularly on PS4) be fixed with a patch?
They went to 20, high teens at worst. They rarely actually hit 30 during regular gameplay, regularly hovering in the mid to upper 20's. It's a categorical improvement in framerate in every regard for the new systems.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fbYyMq4cGU
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
It's a fair trade off as far as I'm concerned. I'll take extra assets and lose 1 - 2 frames here and there thanks.
How many articles is DF going to release on GTAV?
The performance seems good enough but it still feels underwhelming to play a remaster that drops from 30fps. Most remasters should really be shooting for a locked 60fps but this is GTA so I'll give them some leeway here. A locked 30fps should have been achieved though. Locking the framerate should have been the first priority and the rest of the visuals designed around that. Driving at high speeds definitely has a noticeable judder/lag to it.
The performance seems good enough but it still feels underwhelming to play a remaster that drops from 30fps. Most remasters should really be shooting for a locked 60fps but this is GTA so I'll give them some leeway here. A locked 30fps should have been achieved though. Locking the framerate should have been the first priority and the rest of the visuals designed around that. Driving at high speeds definitely has a noticeable judder/lag to it.
Green Yoshi
Member
Rockstar said GTA V supports 4K on PC. Does it also support a 60 fps lock at 1080p? If CPU is crucial for the framerate, a Core i7 with >3,5 Ghz should be enough for 60 fps.
I'll take better performance over a blade of grass.
They've actually only done two articles, a framerate analysis and a grass comparison. The framerate analysis article has been updated several times as they continued to test it. There's been more threads about DF articles on GTAV than DF has actually written articles on GTAV.
Muppet of a Man
Member
So why don't you take better performance and more blades of grass by that logic? Seems like the game performs better on PS4 most of the time.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Yeah, performance is great. I've just watched the video and from what I've just watched, the XB1 doesn't perform anywhere near as consistently as the PS4 version. I'm completely baffled by this and the way this thread has gone. At one point the XB1 dropped to 25fps and the PS4 held 30fps throughout. Is this a case of selective thinking?
I'll take the higher detail thank you. I'm not bothered about silly fluctuations that both versions have. And by all accounts it actually performs better on the PS4 most of the time.
THIS IS GETTING NUTS.
I bought the PS4 version. Just stating that performance always trumps graphical flourishes.
I wouldn't be so sure. There are so many variables in games like this that can impact framerate. So we'll just have to wait and see, but generally games like this have performance that varies greatly on PC when the framerate isn't locked to 30.
Can't really blame people. Reading the article it would seem that the XBO version performs better it just so happens that the article is a steaming pile of biased shit. Even their own videos show a very different picture.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
Yes, that's what I'm baffled by.
Beerman462
Member
I find it weird some people holding up the XB1 as the superior performer.
Just reading the OP quotes shows that they both drop frame rates in city junctions, but the XB1 does so to "a consistently lesser degree"
XB1 drops frames in driving outside these areas as well, while the PS4 does not.
XB1 also drops frames during explosive missions, while PS4 does not.
So one scenario where both drop, but PS4 does it more, but isn't born out in the video and 2 more where XB1 drops and PS4 doesn't. The article is terrible.
Just reading the OP quotes shows that they both drop frame rates in city junctions, but the XB1 does so to "a consistently lesser degree"
XB1 drops frames in driving outside these areas as well, while the PS4 does not.
XB1 also drops frames during explosive missions, while PS4 does not.
So one scenario where both drop, but PS4 does it more, but isn't born out in the video and 2 more where XB1 drops and PS4 doesn't. The article is terrible.
Do you think you might be overreacting just a tiny bit here?
This is a reasonable description of what I saw in the video. Both versions dropped frames in busy intersections, but the PS4 drops a few more. XB1 sometimes drops for explosions, flames, particles, etc. but the PS4 doesn't. Where does "pile of biased shit" enter the picture?
In before I get accused of being an Xbox fanboy when I don't own an Xbox One and just took a break from the PS4 version to make this post.
interfreak
Member
So guys, do you think Rockstar can patch these issues?
Potentially, depending on what's causing them. Considering the average framerate of their games, however, Rockstar actually caring is probably a bigger obstacle than anything technical.
Ozzy Onya A2Z
Member
Happy to hear each have their advantages/disadvantages but I'm more curious what DirectX12 is going to do for X1 next year. I could care less about some small increments or discrepancies but I have a feeling there will be a marked improvement for X1 with DX12 and games optimised for it.
Indeed. Look at how much improvement new, optimised drivers can make on the PC.
There's no such thing as a "locked" framerate. You don't "lock" a framerate. It's a phrase that just doesn't make any technical sense. The only thing that kind of does that is games with a dynamic framebuffer (like Wolfenstein:TNO).
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Not when you keep increase visual fidelity to the likes of AC:U.
The entire article is written in a way that implies both console versions are on equal footing when they are in fact not. Their own video shows that one has more graphical detail via higher resolution shadows, increased environmental detail and larger draw distance in vast open areas. The same version offers a consistent 2-4fps advantage across almost every performance scenario except a single instance in which the other version is slightly higher. That is not about equal like the actual written article would have people believe.
The PS4 version not only has more graphical flourish it also performs better 99% of the time offering a slight (2-4 frame per second) advantage in situations where both versions falter and offering a solid 30fps in many scenarios where the XBO is dropping to 24-26fps. There is only a single instance where that performance advantage shifts to the other version and yet the article makes it seem that is more important than every other example they themselves provide. It's absurd.
As far as actual quotation from the article goes:
This is in direct contradiction of their own performance analysis videos wherein the XBO actually produces 24 FPS in high speed chases and the PS4 produces 26fps. But they would have you believe that this completely bullshit "advantage" on the XBO is good enough to offset the frequent and stark performance gap shown when in shootouts (solid 30 vs sustained 24fps). How is that anything but misleading. They even go so far as to insinuate the minimal difference in performance in this extremely limited scenario is due to the small 150mhz speed bump on the XBO cpu when in reality it's far more likely to be due to porting a last gen engine to current gen hardware.
So yes, to put it bluntly, it IS biased bullshit.
Then, if you're like me you might want to ask "why bother?" But then you read stuff like this in this thread and it becomes fairly obvious why they would minimize the advantages of one console in order to make them both appear as though they are on more equal footing
All the sudden the dialogue is shifting to the idea that the XBO can overcome the performance gap that has existed this far due to actual hardware disadvantages. When you have the leading publication for performance analysis minimizing graphical and performance advantages something is wrong. The only explanation is bias with an intent to muddy the water around the existing hardware and the ensured performance gap between the two consoles going forward.
Exactly, isn't the cell more powerful than both of the CPUs in the new consoles?
Shouldn't be any difference, both new consoles install disc games to the hard drive and run them off of there.
Games this gen are all played straight from the HDD I believe. The disc is just used as a check.
Ah, gotcha. I haven't used either in a while and completely forgot about that bit of information. Thanks!
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
No, there's just a discrepancy between what they're saying and what they're actually showing.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
How about you wait a couple of years before you call either consoles weak.
Well, it's just that the words of the article and the actual video don't match up. Happened a few times lately. I just watch the videos and make my own mind up, it's really only the frame rate part I ever care about in their articles anyway - I don't notice shadows, aliasing, etc.
GribbleGrunger
Dreams in Digital
The article even says that the PS4 version performs better overall but highlighted text seems to convince people otherwise. And then you look at the rare times the XB1 is supposed to have the advantage and it doesn't appear to be true in most cases. Odd.
In that test PS3's absolute rock bottom was 18 FPS.
Xbox 360's rock bottom was 16 FPS.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
Depends on what you think of clear and superior.
The frame drops during the city driving parts seems to be heavily influenced by the loading/streaming of assets rather than scene complexity.
I can walk through areas where the frame rate tanks while driving at a perfectly locked 30fps, indeed I can drive through an area with low frame rates chuck a u turn and drive through the same area again with a much improved frame rate.
Perhaps this is something that could be optimised.
I can walk through areas where the frame rate tanks while driving at a perfectly locked 30fps, indeed I can drive through an area with low frame rates chuck a u turn and drive through the same area again with a much improved frame rate.
Perhaps this is something that could be optimised.
Duh, you don't say and that's why they cost under 400 dollars numbnuts
I can't watch the video but I'll take your word for it. I still think DF does good work on the whole, and it gets tiring to hear bias accusations from all sides for every one of their articles.
As far as multiplatform goes the consoles are always going to under perform compared to PC. That's been the case for a decade now. And that's fine, because consoles have other advantages, such as affordability, longevity, consistency, and ease of usage.
gioGAF
Member
There is, the PS4 version is the clear winner. The DF article is nothing more than a ridiculously biased MS PR stunt. Leadbetter has chosen ONE instance in which the xbone performs marginally better and used that to say the whole comparison is a wash. Their stupid video comparison clearly demonstrates an edge for the PS4.
Like I said earlier, either Leadbetter is a shill (which I guess is fine, though that should be disclosed) or he is a complete IDIOT.
If you are at all concerned with getting the "better" version, get the PS4 now or wait for the PC release.
Not sure if this has been posted yet...from and article on Guardian UK.
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/20/grand-theft-auto-5-look-best-playstation-4
http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/20/grand-theft-auto-5-look-best-playstation-4
Kleegamefan
K. LEE GAIDEN
I watched the video and it was obvious to me that the PS4 was the superior version, both in graphical detail and framerate.
The text paints a different picture though. Dunno why.
Bam Bam Baklava
Member
In many ways, the two consoles are closer than ever mostly because Microsofts biggest differentiator, the Kinect motion sensor, is no longer in the box., says Digital Foundrys Rich Leadbetter. Id venture to say that from a gaming perspective, thats pretty much dead in the water. At their core, the two consoles are remarkably similar: the same CPU architecture, the same graphics tech. There are far more similarities than there are differences. Xbox One has less graphics processing power and is considered more challenging to develop for, but things seem to be changing there.
Things are changing because of reasons. Maybe they finally patched in that extra GPU.
Things are changing because of reasons. Maybe they finally patched in that extra GPU.
Fix The Scientist
Member
Pretty bloody disappointing they couldn't get it locked at 30. God help us with GTA6, it's going to be a slideshow.
serversurfer
Member
Actually, AI routines typically spend about 90% of their time doing pathfinding and determining visibility what the actor can see and hear. The GPU happens to be really good at those particular calculations, so they can be offloaded to reduce the burden on the CPU by an order of magnitude.
Yes, GPUs are good at number crunching, and CPUs are good at branchy decision making. The problem is, because it's easy and they're used to it, a lot of devs still do a lot of their number crunching on the CPU, leaving little time for the branchy decision making. Plus, on most PCs, it's a little harder to get data back and forth between the CPU and GPU, which limits what you can do if you need to support PCs without unified memory.
Jawbreaker
Member
Well, if anything, Leadbetter certainly chooses his words carefully. His bit about the cpu is simply conjecture. It feels like he's trying to make the two versions seem closer than they really are, but why? It's quite curious.