Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
What is the source for this?
[Digital Foundry] Metal Gear Solid Delta - PS5/ PS5 Pro Tech Review - A Beautiful UE5 Remake With Frame-Rate Issues
- Thread starter Lunatic_Gamer
- Start date
- News Analysis Review
kevboard
Member
yeah, no... this still seems to be exactly how I remember it, even on 1.35 (the final PS4 patch)
it's constantly below 60fps
Bojji
Gold Member
As mentioned above I was talking about base PS5 x2 so 3080ti, 4070 Super or 5070 power level.
Game scales up to 1440p, that 868p is limit for 4k scaling.
Who says that "Pro" consoles can't draw 300W?
Last edited:
Lagspike_exe
Member
Form factor?
Bojji
Gold Member
PS5 v1.0 was the biggest console ever while XSX with similar power draw was much smaller.
Last edited:
roosnam1980
Member
on my playthrough of GOW on ps4pro it was very uneven in performance mode , i switched to quality mode for a consistent experience.
Lagspike_exe
Member
We never had a 300W console. Also, there are various rules about electronics and power draw, particularly in EU, and I am unsure how much that influences the design.
Also, there is a question of how much more GPU power they would get from a ~80W increase, considering the power curve of what is fundamentally a RDNA2 design.
Zuzu
Gold Member
Yeah it needs that too. I'd definitely like a 40fps mode the most.
Bojji
Gold Member
That GPU is a Frankenstein but was designed around times when RDNA3 was done by AMD.
The closest RDNA3 GPU to 2x power of PS5 is 7900GRE
You can see that RDNA2 6950XT is also close to that power level.
Problem is, both of those have L3 cache that helps memory bandwidth a lot. Consoles can't dedicate die space to that and GDDR6 was too slow with 256bit bus. With 320 bit bus this console could do 2x PS5 with RDNA2/3 tech, but of course it would cost more than what we have now.
kevboard
Member
the Series X actually typically draws markedly less power than the PS5
in that scene it has a 20% higher resolution, while running with a 16% lower power draw
Diego Brasil
Neo Member
PC Power
5080
7800x3D
4k DLSS balanced ( 1253p Native)
Ultra
Drop 51 FPS
With the same configuration.. Battlefield 6
Ultra graphics
4K with DLSSS quality
32 players
Destructive environments and lots of particles
as well as several vehicles
Total chaos with spectacular graphics
+100fps
5080
7800x3D
4k DLSS balanced ( 1253p Native)
Ultra
Drop 51 FPS
With the same configuration.. Battlefield 6
Ultra graphics
4K with DLSSS quality
32 players
Destructive environments and lots of particles
as well as several vehicles
Total chaos with spectacular graphics
+100fps
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
PC Power
5080
7800x3D
4k DLSS balanced ( 1253p Native)
Ultra
Drop FPS
With the same configuration.. Battlefield 6
Ultra graphics
4K with DLSSS quality
32 players
Destructive environments and lots of particles
as well as several vehicles
Total chaos with spectacular graphics
Always above +100fps
to UE5 or not to UE5, that's the question
Bojji
Gold Member
the Series X actually typically draws markedly less power than the PS5
in that scene it has a 20% higher resolution, while running with a 16% lower power draw
~Same ballpark
But yeah, XSX cooling is very efficient, it's also dead silent. I bet it could handle regular PS5 power draw - no problem.
kevboard
Member
I honestly always expected Microsoft to firmware update the system down the line to give devs a high power mode.
comparable to the PSP getting that 333mhz overlcock after the GoW devs asked for it.
Forsete
Member
to UE5 or not to UE5, that's the question
Bling bling tech is more important than fps!
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Bojji
Gold Member
Yeah, they stopped caring after releasing this console. Hardware of SX is quite awesome.
Yep, that's beyond PS5 settings. Does this game support hardware lumen on PC?
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Not sure. I haven't seen any comprehensive analysis. However, Mafia 3 with optimized settings can get up to a 48% performance increase on a 4070S compared to Epic. I imagine MGSD on consoles uses similar settings.
The 60fps cap is also incredibly dumb. I hope there is a way to lift it without breaking the game.
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
The point of the pro is PSSR not the hardware specs why even persist with this argument. Prices are became too much higher on pc components too so it's not exactly a sony fault here.
Last edited:
I mean highly probable the cooler solution inside the Series X it's 50 bucks more costly than the cheap solution of the ps5, not exactly surprising.the Series X actually typically draws markedly less power than the PS5
in that scene it has a 20% higher resolution, while running with a 16% lower power draw
Last edited:
Physiognomonics
Member
It already does. XSX can consume near 230W in some cases. XSX is already designed to power and cool max 230W similar to PS5. The cooling solution is as efficient as PS5 one while been quite more expensive.
It's just that PS5 is designed to easily consume 230W in many games. PS4 was more aking to XSX with its static clocks. The way forward is clearly PS5 dynamic clocks and using the number of instructions as limits for the system.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Hard to say. If there are no stutters, you should be able to lock it to 60 with the proper settings and resolution.
Diego Brasil
Neo Member
Dlss balanced ( 1253p Native )
Non-destructive environment
Basic physics
Runner game
Few enemies on screen
the problem is not the ultra.. it's the game
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Oh, absolutely, the game is unnecessarily demanding, but still, cranking everything to max is generally a terrible idea. These days, I'm not sure it's doing anything a lot of the time.
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
the Series X actually typically draws markedly less power than the PS5
in that scene it has a 20% higher resolution, while running with a 16% lower power draw
Almost 40W less power draw and performing more intensively. In terms of engineering SX is a fantastic console. It's also quieter than the PS5 in my own use cases of both being in the same room.
They really spares no expense designing it, you can see why they continued to sell them at a loss for so long.
Diego Brasil
Neo Member
With the same configuration
Battlefield 6...On Ultra... DLSS in high quality... (higher native resolution).... Huge scenario... Multiple players on screen... Destructive scenario... Spectacular graphics... +100fps
Examples on PS5 base?
Demons souls ... It has impressive graphics on par with Metal Gear... wider landscape... native 1440p... 60 fps!
Horizon 2... open world... impressive graphics... multiple NPCs and enemies on screen... 1440p + 60fps
Last edited:
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Delta uses Lumen RT, neither of those have any RT adjacent effects. Neither does the BF beta for that matter.
Not a viable comparison, imo.
Sure but in the first video of DF at release the framerate was around 10fps average lower that the patch they released 2 months after.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
You can't really compare one game's max settings to another game's max settings. Besides them being the highest available preset, nothing tells us how they really stack up against one another.
MGSD uses Lumen. I think it's software-based, but even a software solution is still ray tracing and extremely demanding as a form of lighting. I doubt BF6 is using any kind of RT for now, explaining the big performance advantage to some degree. It would have been better to simply bake the GI for Delta as there is no dynamic time of day as far as I'm aware and the areas are small and constrained.
Last edited:
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Tools arrivedthe Series X actually typically draws markedly less power than the PS5
in that scene it has a 20% higher resolution, while running with a 16% lower power draw
kevboard
Member
it's actually more so that current gen games finally arrived lol. games that actually are designed around DX12U and not DX11 or older DX12 feature sets.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
If it was because of current gen finally arriving the Pro would be faring much better.
blue velvet
Member
Saying Decima doesn't have good lighting is just pure fanboyism.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Compared to modern well-implemented ray-traced lighting, that's true. The pitfalls are glaring, especially since every game is open world and/or uses dynamic times of day.
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
there are almost no games that do have well implemented rt lighting on console tho. it's mainly the iD Tech games.
and I take Decina's lighting over anything any UE5 game ever presented... like easily. especially knowing the performance cost associated with it
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
AC Shadows?
Bojji
Gold Member
Decima games can look beautiful in places and not so much in others, mainly because lighting have to be baked and devs can only do so much manually (and it will never fix dynamic objects)...
Assassin's Creed, metro Exodus and avatar/outlaws all have RTGI.
Last edited:
SKYF@ll
Member
For someone like me who doesn't have a high-end PC, the Decima engine is the best.
UE5 is too heavy to run beautiful upscaled 4K/60fps on consoles.
It's really fun to play a game that runs smoothly in beautiful scenery.
OLED_Gamer
Member
I believe certain Resident Evil games do as well.
Bojji
Gold Member
They can hate or love anything they like. This doesn't change the FACT that game runs like crap on PS5 Pro.
Yes, RE8 and RE2, 3 remakes all have RT lighting. It's not high quality but still looks better than normal raster lighting.
Pipoqueiro
Member
Whats is ps5 graphical settings for hardware comparasion?
Last edited:
yogaflame
Member
Well I feel from the start Alex dont like ps5 pro or consoles. He is a true pc warrior, but I maybe this time he is really right about mgs3. But let us wait and see, maybe a patch is coming up.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Xsx in some games goes up to 210 watts. Check DF's gears footage from earlier in the Gen.
What's likely happening here is that the xsx gpu is not being fully utilized and is underperforming. Maybe because of vram bandwidth constraints or other architectural inefficiencies we have seen time and time again where this console barely manages to match the ps5 despite having 44% more CUs.
Same reason why the pro is offering only 45% better performance despite having 67% more CUs and tflops.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Way to miss the point.
He's making two arguments here. One, the performance mode looked like shit at launch.
And two, the game was cross Gen hence the comparison.
If you don't remember the ps5 performance mode looking like dogshit then you clearly weren't there at launch. It famously took them 5 months to fix it and theyto literally had to rewrite their entire reconstruction tech to fix it. Ridiculous post on all levels. Ignorant and lacking basic reading comprehension.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Sorry but this isn't true. You had gow and sotc with 60 FPS modes and that's it. None of the other big games had 60 fps modes on the pro.
Devs did give us 4kcb or 1440p upgrades which were 75-100% more pixels with some really good AA so yes it was better, but you just didn't get 60 fps modes. If you did then uncharted 4, tlou2, days gone, rdr2, Witcher 3, death stranding Spider-Man, ghosts would've all received 60 fps patches.
Sotc is literally running a ps2 game underneath the graphics and gow was the other rare exception with some drops in the open world. Even the xsx didn't get many 60 fps patches and it was 5x more powerful than the x1s. Because fucking jaguar wouldn't allow it.
The ps5 pro is what it is. The leaks literally told us it was a 45% increase in gpu power. Much smaller than the 125% increase we got for the ps4 pro. Cerny didn't lie either and was upfront about the 45% figure. The only misleading statement he made was promising quality modes at 60 which is only true for Sonys own first party games.
What I'm trying to say is that 45% was never going to give you 100% more performance. People had their heads in the sand in the leak thread especially in regards to pssr being taxing on the gpu. Cerny was mostly honest in his marketing and reviews quickly pointed out that pssr was dogshit in games with realtime lighting. Honestly, people should've made a better decision.
Corporal.Hicks
Member
Based on this screenshot, I would say that MGS Delta is more demanding than typical UE5 games. For example Robocop Rogue City with 4K DLSS-Balance runs at around 90 fps on the RTX5080, so that's 80% as fast and Robocop is using all currently used UE5 features: VSM, Nanite, and Lumen lighting.PC Power
5080
7800x3D
4k DLSS balanced ( 1253p Native)
Ultra
Drop 51 FPS
With the same configuration.. Battlefield 6
Ultra graphics
4K with DLSSS quality
32 players
Destructive environments and lots of particles
as well as several vehicles
Total chaos with spectacular graphics
+100fps
We need to wait for a comprehensive performance analysis of the PC version of the game to really see how demanding MGSDelta is. Perhaps MGS Delta at ultra settings uses some new UE5 features that affect performance (maybe nanite foliage)? Also I need to point out that ultra / Epic settings in UE5 games often take massive hit to performance compared to high settings, while looking almost the same, so I'm guessing the 5080 should be able to run this game at over 60fps anyway, just not with maxed out settings at 4K native. I hope MGS Delta supports DLSS FG, because this feature would eliminate any potential dips below 60 fps, making it seem as though you are playing at 90–100 fps (and more with MFG).
Last edited: