AnotherOne
Member
Last edited:
Hitman 3 PC Analysis : PS5/Series X Comparisons
- Thread starter AnotherOne
- Start date
- News
DonJuanSchlong
Banned
So ps5 is a little better than 5700, with raytracing capabilities? I'd like to see comparisons with the series X GDK, as that was the better console version. I don't see why some people don't like DF? Series X is starting to come out the womb like I claimed a while back.
Tickle My Tendies
Member
Interesting...
Back in the summer, after the spec reveals, a lot of people compared these consoles' GPU to a 5700 XT. I guess it's basically a 5700 XT+, with the + being higher clock and extra RDNA 2 features? I would have liked to see both consoles at least be on par with a 2070 Super, but I guess that could vary game to game as well (didn't PS5 beat a 2080 in Valhalla?).
HundredThousandTrillion
Member
It was inevitable. There's still a lonnnngggggg way to go in this generation. The XSX is only going to continue to separate itself.
For gamers that have the money the XSX for 3rd party games and Microsoft exclusives ALONG with the PS5 for Sony's untouchable first party games is the way to go. This is the first generation where there is a clear case to be made about owning both.
Last edited:
Pedro Motta
Gold Member
LOL OMG, one game people, one game.
Xaero Gravity
NEXT LEVEL lame™
So those next gen box can barely maintain a mix of medium/low with just the textures on ultra ???
Rean no Kiseki
I'm now even more offended that you said this was my alt, even with the "/s"
Tickle My Tendies
Member
I have no reason to suspect this, purely speculating on my part, but I would bet that when ray tracing is added to the PC version later in the year, PS5 and XsX will get a 4k/30/RT mode, ala Spider-Man Remastered and Miles' Fidelity Mode.
Rikkori
Member
If the situation looks like this now, on old-gen games, just imagine how it's going to look in 2 years when yet ANOTHER GPU gen gets launched and the games will push the hardware harder with all the DX12U implementations, nevermind counting RT + DLSS.
The UE5 demo being 1440p/30fps on PS5 will have been quite prescient.
The UE5 demo being 1440p/30fps on PS5 will have been quite prescient.
01011001
Banned
oh no, I watched the video earlier and the ending will surely spark another 50 page fanboy war.
@topic: interesting point brought up at the end there, shared memory hindering performance, I wonder if either first party ever thought about having dedicated CPU memory. I wonder how much more expensive that would make a system like the new consoles
@topic: interesting point brought up at the end there, shared memory hindering performance, I wonder if either first party ever thought about having dedicated CPU memory. I wonder how much more expensive that would make a system like the new consoles
Great Hair
Banned
lukilladog
Member
I do not know why some people are happy about this?, I remember when running at console frame rates/resolution/settings was the job of shity IGP and low end cards, now you have to pay whole console price just for the card, nvidia and amd should throw you an elite controller or something for conforming like this lmfao.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
I don't believe this game is well-optimized for any console. If we believe it is, why does PS4 Pro outperform Xbox Series S? It doesn't make any sense.
PS5 should also be performing much better than it did in this game. But it can't even reach 2060 Super? That doesn't sound right either.
PS5 should also be performing much better than it did in this game. But it can't even reach 2060 Super? That doesn't sound right either.
Tchu-Espresso
likes mayo on everthing and can't dance
He says XSX his a low of 32fps, supported by the graph but then calculates the difference as if it hit only a low of 38fps). That's not what the graph says.
So why does the PS5 exhibit a much smoother overall frame rate overall as evidenced by DF themselves, whereas it is not limited in areas the XSX is? This test seems purposely misleading.
So why does the PS5 exhibit a much smoother overall frame rate overall as evidenced by DF themselves, whereas it is not limited in areas the XSX is? This test seems purposely misleading.
Last edited:
AnotherOne
Member
Ps5 1800p
Xsx 4k
Bboy AJ
My dog was murdered by a 3.5mm audio port and I will not rest until the standard is dead
Tchu-Espresso
likes mayo on everthing and can't dance
He is saying the XSX runs better at 4K than PS5 does at 1800p when their other video completely contradicts that.
Md Ray
Member
I think Hitman games are compute-heavy and likely why it performs better on GCN (PS4 Pro) than RDNA 2 (XSS) with similar computational power (and GCN is a compute-centric architecture, remember?).
PS5 does outperform 2060 Super though just not in the minimums. And generally, minimums are bound by the GPU's memory bandwidth and 2060S and PS5 have the same amount of bandwidth, in fact, it's lower than 448 GB/s due to it being shared with the CPU.
Last edited:
GaviotaGrande
Banned
I don't know about 2000 series cards but Hitman III runs like an absolute dream on 3080.
Shame they couldn't deliver RT on launch day.
Shame they couldn't deliver RT on launch day.
Physiognomonics
Member
Get used to it. DF are going to talk about that game for the whole generation. They finally found one game where the XSX is winning (using their biased methodology). This is already their 3rd article about it. And when they are going to talk about XSX (and PS5) specs, they are exclusively going to use this benchmark for the years to come. A up-resed cross-gen game running at 60fps on a Jaguar, yep.
Riky
$MSFT
Makes sense having a bigger GPU, now the rush for launch is gone I'd expect these sort of results consistently going forward.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
You sure?
As soon as another game (inevitably) comes very soon in which PS5 outperforms XSX again, the narrative will shift back to 'immature tools and late dev kits'.
Riky
$MSFT
You sure?
Get back to me when a PS5 game has higher settings and a 44% constant resolution advantage over Series X, I'll wait.
Physiognomonics
Member
Get back to me when XSX doesn't drop 20 or more frames compared to PS5 in some scenes. It's easy to make benchmark using cherry picked scenes. But that doesn't look like a fair comparison to me.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Uh, Alex made a huge mistake by setting the PC resolution to 83.3% of 4K? That'd be 6.8m pixels, while 1800p is actually 5.7m pixels.
The correct scaling would be 69.4% of 4K. Huge blunder by Alex.
The correct scaling would be 69.4% of 4K. Huge blunder by Alex.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
XSX pushes 44% more pixels 100% of the time. PS5 has better frame rates 0.1% of the time.
Hope she sees this, bro.
Physiognomonics
Member
I get that XSX is the best version here (native 4K 99% of the time or so) but that's not how you benchmark and compare hardware. Do you often see banchmarks with capped framerate against uncapped framerate in order to compare two machines? You can only used fluctuating framerate to bench some hardware.
Last edited:
Popup
Member
The whole video is pretty much about a single frame. It had to be as it was a rare, single point that allowed for a comparison between platforms but I can't see how you can get anything too authoritative from this.
Alex does point some of the issues of such a comparison out in the video but it does make a case for wondering what the point is in the first place. Optimising for a particular platform is about far more than just altering graphics settings and resolutions.
It must be fun to test stuff like this and make the videos but they need to be careful in how they are presented and what, if any, real conclusions can be drawn.
Mind you, some people just cherry pick what they want from information and make their own facts up these days!
Alex does point some of the issues of such a comparison out in the video but it does make a case for wondering what the point is in the first place. Optimising for a particular platform is about far more than just altering graphics settings and resolutions.
It must be fun to test stuff like this and make the videos but they need to be careful in how they are presented and what, if any, real conclusions can be drawn.
Mind you, some people just cherry pick what they want from information and make their own facts up these days!
Last edited:
longdi
Banned
While everyone spill their spaghetti all over the percentages with the GPUs we have actual settings:
And this is not a small difference.
PC still king.
Im really questioning the 'to the metal' console fanboys love to hype.
Maybe it gives 5-10% more performance, but dont seem so special these days.
Tchu-Espresso
likes mayo on everthing and can't dance
This was the epitome of cherry picking.
Codeblew
Member
To the metal only works for exclusives. Devs don't have to worry about getting the game to work on 4+ platforms and can use more low level API's or make their own "to the metal" code for the specific harware.PC still king.
Im really questioning the 'to the metal' console fanboys love to hype.
Maybe it gives 5-10% more performance, but dont seem so special these days.
Md Ray
Member
Uh, no. 3200x1800 is 83.33% of 3840x2160 just like 900p is 83.33% of 1080p. You're either misinformed or purposefully misleading others with that wrong math.
69.4% of 2160p is 2665x1499.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Dirt 5. 1440p on PS5 + higher settings and 1080p on XSX with lower settings.
Assassin's Creed Vahlalla. 1440p on PS5 and 1080p on XSX.
Immortals Fenyx Rising. 2160p on PS5 and 1800p on XSX.
Also, don't forget that Series X drops frames in Hitman 3 while PS5 doesn't.
J_Gamer.exe
Member
Why was the ps5 used for comparison to pc when surely using series x would have been better given it runs at 4k and slightly higher shadows. Unless there is lower reflections on series x afterall?
Also would have like to see some of comparison of the gameplay drops on sx in the grass but I guess getting like for like in that scenario is hard.
Hopefully this is revisited post patches, I know the valhalla comparison was done post patch when I think performance was actually worse.
Also would have like to see some of comparison of the gameplay drops on sx in the grass but I guess getting like for like in that scenario is hard.
Hopefully this is revisited post patches, I know the valhalla comparison was done post patch when I think performance was actually worse.
Low Moral Fibre
Member
I'm surprised the console settings are so low.
To be fair though the only settings I really noticed myself were SSAO which looks really poor on console with the haloing, shadows on PS5 (but it's not like they are miles better at max anyhow) and simulation quality which is pretty obvious on some levels with so many NPCs moving around (but surely could be on max with the much stronger CPUs the consoles now have). SSR doesn't look amazing even at max so that's not a huge loss imo. I normally have motion blur off so wouldn't miss that. I guess you would notice LOD if you are really paying attention.
To be fair though the only settings I really noticed myself were SSAO which looks really poor on console with the haloing, shadows on PS5 (but it's not like they are miles better at max anyhow) and simulation quality which is pretty obvious on some levels with so many NPCs moving around (but surely could be on max with the much stronger CPUs the consoles now have). SSR doesn't look amazing even at max so that's not a huge loss imo. I normally have motion blur off so wouldn't miss that. I guess you would notice LOD if you are really paying attention.
Fess
Member
It was probably just a way to publish a negative report on PS5 performance. NX does the same whenever he can but for negative XSX reports. GamerNexus does it for negative console reports. Everyone is biased, you and me too. Always take performance comparisons with a grain of salt or don't take them so serious that small details becomes important. The reality is that most of the differences shown in these comparisons wouldn't even be noticed unless DF/NX showed them paused and zoomed in.
Last edited:
Md Ray
Member
It's essentially last-gen console settings (with minor tweaks) running at 2160p-1800p resolutions while targeting 16.67ms (60fps) on current-gen consoles.
This shows their priority was to hit max possible resolution, and not the visual settings. They could have perhaps increased the simulation quality but it likely comes in the way when targeting 60fps or they simply didn't bother changing it.
Last edited:
cyen
Member
AC you should point that you are talking about the minimums on dynamic resolution the game is not 1440p on PS5 nor 1080p on XSX. The other user asked for constant which are not the case in your example.
Mister Wolf
Member
I dont understand how he got 83.33%, 1% of the pixels of 3840 x 2160 is 82,944. (3200 x 1800)/82944 = 69.444% What am I doing wrong? How do you end up with 83.33%?
Last edited:
Riky
$MSFT
Completely wrong, as that's the lower bounds for like seconds, 95% of the time the games you mentioned are running at higher resolutions. Also Dirt 5 now has all the settings restored on 120hz and a higher framerate by up to 30fps on Series X
Valhalla drops down to low fifties with tearing on PS5, doesn't happen on Series X
Hitman 3 does drop frames on PS5 on the Miami level, they just showed you that on this very video
even at 1800p.So again when you have a PS5 game with a CONSTANT 44% resolution advantage and higher settings than Series X get back to me, I'll wait.
Skifi28
Member
Barely maintain? 1800p / 4k are pretty taxing at 60fps. Also, even the optimised settings for PC were pretty much medium. Why? Because ultra might sound nice, but it's not worth the performance drop if you can't even tell without zooming in 800%.
Bernd Lauert
Banned
Uh, no. 3200x1800 is 69.4% of 3840x2160. Do the math.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
OOFFWhile everyone spill their spaghetti all over the percentages with the GPUs we have actual settings:
And this is not a small difference.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
The only way to get 83.33% is to add the horizontal and vertical resolutions then calculate the difference. Basically butchering maths to try and spin a narrative.
Mister Wolf
Member
So the 83.33% is bullshit?
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
Unless you want to believe pixel counts are just horizontal+vertical resolution, yes.
Similar threads
- Locked