• 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.

Next-Gen PS5 & XSX |OT| Console tEch threaD

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bo_Hazem

Banned
I think Dirt 5 is much more impressive, since its 120FPS, also looks amazing:

Norway_3W.jpg

Driveclub had a very low 30fps count. For a RACING GAME speed/ FPS is crucial. 120fps vs 30fps is a HUGE difference.

That's PC though.
 
Neither is 50%. You can't discredit someone else's number with a bullshit number of your own.

There’s a difference between bullshit numbers out of my ass vs misquoting and correcting a source.

30% 4K ownership in 2018 is a fact, and 50%+ ownership by gamers/console owners is not an unthinkable number 2 years later given sales trends.

2% is ass tales in an attempt to justify a marketing point. Regardless of how many people own 4K sets, the question should be “is the difference worth $200?”
 
Last edited:

Pantz

Member
Ok, reality check time.

I watched quite a lot of dirt 5 gameplay last night on the new xbox and i am not feeling this game at all.
this game is releasing on both consoles and i must admit i am very disappointed in what i have seen.

Is this really a next-gen game, perhaps the game plays really well and the handling is superb but in terms of graphics map design, it feels to me very bland.

Granted i am not a racing fan and perhaps others are really happy with what they are seeing, when i saw Demon souls i like fuck yer that is incredible, i watch dirt 5 and sometimes i am not sure i am even watching a next-gen game.

no disrespect to Codemasters but the last Forza game looks so much better to me, am i missing something?

Try looking at the overall picture in DiRT. One thing I find unique to the series is the long draw distance views and nice sights to see all around the track. Even the first game on the 360 wasn't pretty but the views around the track were pretty amazing. It's also a game more focused on the terrain of the track with deformations and all that. What I'm trying to say is they have their graphics budget spread out on a wide spectrum here.
 
So if fallout4 Runs at 60 on xbox series s how about xbox series x? i finally will get to beat it the slow down was horrible when the brotherhood planes started to fly around the city.
 

Nowcry

Member
IQ = Image Quality



What TV does this?
I think many, Samsung calls it HDR + or something like that. LG calls it HDR mode in its mode settings. LG's is not bad at least the C8 and C9.

This is such a deep question because HDR is more complex then what most consumers think.

To begin would need to know exactly what TV you have and if its real HDR or a simulated HDR.

Then would need to see the difference real HDR makes in games designed around that feature.
I suppose it will be necessary to make a direct comparison in some lab. Hopefully one comes out.
I love the HDR effect and more in OLED that is very good.

Is it the exact same technique? Because apparently Microsoft used machine learning models to learn how HDR is applied on new games, to then do the same to old games that don't support it. I always thought that TV's just used more of an IFTTT approach.
I honestly don't know, that's why I ask.

Your TV also probably can do AI upscaling however it's kinda shit at it. The difference in performance is moving away from hardware feature and more towards software. I don't know if there is a nice way to test auto-hdr via directml vs tv specific ones and it would also depend on the tv manufacturer.
The C9 also has a pretty good arm processor, why couldn't I run an AI for this?
 

Sinthor

Gold Member


Well, I have to say that Valhalla looks pretty damn good. Definitely a step up from Odyssey, and Odyssey is impressive. Especially for open world type games. Though...kinda funny...I was watching it in the small window at first and with the people walking into camp for just a second I was thinking "Wow, that looks REALLY realistic!" till I realized that it was live action footage. :)

Still, overall Valhalla looks like a good jump upwards and with 60fps as well....very nice. I'm curious to play it and see how it is.
 

sircaw

Banned
Well, I have to say that Valhalla looks pretty damn good. Definitely a step up from Odyssey, and Odyssey is impressive. Especially for open world type games. Though...kinda funny...I was watching it in the small window at first and with the people walking into camp for just a second I was thinking "Wow, that looks REALLY realistic!" till I realized that it was live action footage. :)

Still, overall Valhalla looks like a good jump upwards and with 60fps as well....very nice. I'm curious to play it and see how it is.

Why can i not view this sigh
 

J_Gamer.exe

Member
It's legit, a clip from a live stream of the game and every race he loaded was a few seconds just like that.

The 15 seconds thing was FUD.

So its not FUD at all, also @X-Fighter and Riky Riky as you guys liked his post.

So here is the 4k image quality mode loading kalabaka, Greece. 15 seconds.



And here is the upto 1440p 120fps mode for a map in china. 9-10 sexonds. So upto 1440p (half the res or more) and less assets and visual quality it loads quicker but still not anything amazing.




Here is the twitch version loading that stadium with one car. 4-5 seconds load on that on reflection isn't particularly impressive. The crowd look 2d and its not loading anything special here. Not sure of the graphics mode either.

Stay in your bubble, XboX Series X got the whole package, even the loading crown. :messenger_bicep: :messenger_alien:



This one below shows 11 seconds and Tom is running it in 1440p aka 120fps mode. So its loading a lesser version at less res upto 1440p and 11 is a pretty long time for next gen at this res etc.

I watched the stream from Tom Warren playing it yesterday and I clocked the load from selecting a car to level being shown at 11 seconds.




Just to mention also as this is the same tech pc will use, aka direct storage etc, so pc guys should not expect to beat PS5 either IMO, we can see why Tim Sweeney said PS5 is far ahead now of anything.

What sony has done with the io hardware seems to have gained a HUGE advantage in loading and streaming. This is not 18%, if PS5 is about 2 seconds and xbox is 15 thats a ridiculous lead in io.

The worry for xbox is that when the tracks and number are cars are bigger it takes longer. PS5 should be 2 seconds, there or there abouts, with the whole ram loaded. It should be even less time at 1440p.
 
Last edited:

sircaw

Banned
So its not FUD at all, also @X-Fighter and Riky Riky as you guys liked his post.

So here is the 4k image quality mode loading kalabaka, Greece. 15 seconds.



And here is the upto 1440p 120fps mode for a map in china. 9-10 sexonds. So upto 1440p (half the res or more) and less assets and visual quality it loads quicker but still not anything amazing.




Here is the twitch version loading that stadium with one car. 4-5 seconds load on that on reflection isn't particularly impressive. The crowd look 2d and its not loading anything special here. Not sure of the graphics mode either.



This one below shows 11 seconds and Tom is running it in 1440p aka 120fps mode. So its loading a lesser version at less res upto 1440p and 11 is a pretty long time for next gen at this res etc.




Just to mention also as this is the same tech pc will use, aka direct storage etc, so pc guys should not expect to beat PS5 either IMO, we can see why Tim Sweeney said PS5 is far ahead now of anything.

What sony has done with the io hardware seems to have gained a HUGE advantage in loading and streaming. This is not 18%, if PS5 is about 2 seconds and xbox is 15 thats a ridiculous lead in io.

The worry for xbox is that when the tracks and number are cars are bigger it takes longer. PS5 should be 2 seconds, there or there abouts, with the whole ram loaded. It should be even less time at 1440p.



Reported for spreading Fud, that's not the load times we want to see. "lollipop_disappointed:
 
Last edited:
we can see why Tim Sweeney said PS5 is far ahead now of anything.

What sony has done with the io hardware seems to have gained a HUGE advantage in loading and streaming. This is not 18%, if PS5 is about 2 seconds and xbox is 15 thats a ridiculous lead in io.

The worry for xbox is that when the tracks and number are cars are bigger it takes longer. PS5 should be 2 seconds, there or there abouts, with the whole ram loaded. It should be even less time at 1440p.

Are Sony paying you for this?

Nobody gives a shit if it's 2 seconds, 4, 11 or 15. It's an early preview build and we'll see in a few weeks. Well, PS5 won't, it's not launching on the system until later this year.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom