-
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.
- Status
Bo_Hazem
Banned
It's only a good thing if nVidia is upscaling from 900p to 4K. They go the extra mile and call it (4K Ultra DLSS). Even Demon's Souls you can't tell as it looks miles sharper than any other native 4K game in performance mode.
Last edited:
saintjules
Gold Member
Mr Moose
Member
I don't think PS5 version doesn't supports VR.
Do you get both versions (PS4/5) if you get the PS5 version?
Last edited:
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Last edited:
kyliethicc
Member
Polyphony Digital are Sony owned 1st party developer and have been for 27 years.
Last edited:
IntentionalPun
Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
How many new studios has MS even created?
They've mostly bought studios and kept them generally in tact culture wise.
(although some of them are kinda... mediocre TBH)
kyliethicc
Member
The legendary 343 (the creators of Craiglo) and the devs who make the bad gears of war games. So 2 very mediocre studios there.
And now the perfect dark dev.
carloseduardocd
Member
There's a little error. My mistake. The loading from SSD is 8 seconds. This 18 seconds loading is from USB external drive using PS5.
But, it's 8 seconds in BC mode to 1 second in remastered mode. Using the same SSD speed.
Last edited:
Rudius
Member
You get both versions. To play in VR you must run the PS4 version through backwards compatibility. It's the Pro version and looks nice and sharp in VR.I don't think PS5 version doesn't supports VR.
Do you get both versions (PS4/5) if you get the PS5 version?
SSfox
Member
Oh yeah i remember some people stating that Dream Cast was more powerful than PS2, of course there are areas where dreamcast was better, but there were also areas were ps2 was better (for some reasons folks decided to ignore latest), and in the overall PS2 was much better hardware. There are aspects that i think even GC and Xbox would be beaten by PS2, i actually always belived that games like Shadow of the colossus and God Of War 1 and especially 2 couldn't run properly in Xbox and GC if ported (of course not happened cause Sony games), heck even MGS2 on Xbox has slowdowns in Xbox (Tanker mostly) that of course didn't exist on PS2.You are wasting your time... Even the dreamcast was more powerful... Oh boy, the magic of powervr tile based deferred rendering... LoL J/K
I believe you do, otherwise that would be walling out PS5 owners who own a PSVR.I don't think PS5 version doesn't supports VR.
Do you get both versions (PS4/5) if you get the PS5 version?
ethomaz
Banned
You have access to both version on PS5 so when you want to play in VR you need to launch the PS4 version.I don't think PS5 version doesn't supports VR.
Do you get both versions (PS4/5) if you get the PS5 version?
Physiognomonics
Member
Dreamcast had better textures thanks to hardware textures compression and 8MB of vram. I think that's about it.
Lysandros
Member
Yes for a late 1998 (!) machine Dreamcast was indeed very impressive and well balanced. It had advantages over PS2 like texture clarity and overall image quality. But for actual processing power and raw throughput it was naturally well behind PS2.
Agent_Nobody
Banned
The only thing that matters were the games, but the thing is the only game that mattered on Dreamcast was the game Seaman:
Everything after after that doesn’t matter anymore, that’s why the Dreamcast ended and Sega got out of the hardware market ...the goal was reached.
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
I just watched that segment. They said 3-4GB per second, and not only that, they are streaming in data much more frequently because of the fast ssd. They mentioned how typically they would load data right as turn around a corner instead of what they would do on the ps4 when they would start to load in data half way down the hallway before you get to the corner. that allows them to push more detail and up the textures in every scene.
So this is one way where the ssd speeds actually do make graphics better.
Timestamped:
Last edited:
MasterCornholio
Member
TheRedRiders
Member
MasterCornholio
Member
Mark Cerny rn:
Basically why I think Epic chose the PS5 to show Unreal Engine 5 instead of the XSX. We all know the GPU is stronger in the XSX but what Epic wanted to show was the streaming in of extremely high quality assets. This is something the PS5 does best according to the paper specifications.
I know some people claim that Sony bribed Epic for the demo but I don't think that's true. Nor did Epic do this because Tim doesn't like Microsoft.
TheRedRiders
Member
I never really brought into the rumours that Sony somehow bribed Epic. Tim Sweeney was very clear about why they partnered with Sony for the Unreal Engine 5 demo and it was largely because they wanted to revolutionise storage architecture. In fact it was implied multiple times that PS5 as well as UE5 influenced one another's development and design. Also the Series X being slightly ahead of the PS5 in raw compute performance doesn't really mean much, especially when we consider the innovations and advancements next-gen is bringing.
Both Microsoft and Sony chose to go very different routes with the design choices of their consoles, Microsoft played it safe which is why Series X/S closely resemble the current desktop implementation of RDNA 2. Sony decided to go in a different route and prioritise the SSD storage architecture (following feedback from developers including Epic), which was risky, was it the right choice? we'll see towards the end of this generation but people seem to forget that the gaming hardware industry requires risk taking by it's very nature, it's why AMD have been successful in recent years especially with GCN and RDNA and likewise Nvidia when introducing real time ray-tracing into their GPU's.
I was literally typing up a response to this same effect, you took the words out of my mouth!
I agree wholeheartedly. Unreal Engine has produced some of the most cutting edge visuals but its achilles' heel has always been asset streaming. This was particularly bad during the UE3 era with games like Gears of War and Mass Effect famously having a lot of pop-in. Even now this is a problem. I played a little bit of Gears 5 on PC and multiple times I walked into a scene where half the characters' models didn't load properly and they looked like PS1 models for an entire conversation. Another example is FF7 Remake with it's terribly low res textures in the town areas.
I'm willing to bet that Sony and Epic worked closely, not just on that demo, but on the architecture of PS5 from the beginning. I think Sony specifically designed the system to be better suited to solve this streaming challenge and get the most out of UE5, which is most likely going to become the predominant engine of this generation and probably herald the first wave of truly 'next-gen' games in about 3-4 years time. If everything Epic said about Nanite and Lumen turns out to be as good as it looked in that demo, then few other engines will be able to rival UE5 for that next-gen quality.
TheRedRiders
Member
That's interesting. I was wondering what Matt thought of this. I definitely agree with him on the comment about unoptimised engines. Remedy's next game will look much better and probably still perform similar to Control on these consoles, because they will rework their engine to better scale with the new hardware. These next-gen ports we getting are quick and dirty jobs from small teams, especially when it's multiplatform like this game, they have no time to optimise the tech properly.
I like how he refers to PS5's architecture as 'deep'.
MasterCornholio
Member
So he's definitely saying the PS5 outperform some XSX games in the future.
I'm wondering what kind of games those will be like?
Garani
Member
Still meaningless. Photo mode looks better on PS5 and frame rate doesn't matter.
Last edited:
We've already had several examples. The biggest one being AC Valhalla. Which is an interesting case, because not only is it an AMD sponsored game that scales really well with RDNA2 but it's also generally a rather heavy engine. And for whatever reason it likes PS5 more than XSX, to the effect of around 30% or more.
carloseduardocd
Member
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Higher clocks are normally enabled by deeper execution pipelines, as in each piece of work is broken in more than one stage, the more stages the less work per clock and thus the higher the clocks speed (depending on the design and the manufacturing process you can maintain high frequency and still a shallow pipeline).
At N cycles, if the pipeline has N stages, you start delivering a result per clock (one of the bigger problems of deep pipelines would be branch prediction potentially causing extra pipeline flushes where the processor has to correct course, flush away the work it predicted it would take on, and start again loading the new one... not too much a problem for GPU as speculative execution and branch prediction are not strategies often employed... it is kind of preferable to execute both sides of a branch and throw away the result so to speak, but you could also switch to a different “thread” when you detect an instruction like a branch or a load from memory that you do not want to predict but wait for the condition to be solved). See: http://ece-research.unm.edu/jimp/611/slides/chap3_1.html
I think he is kind of referring to this when he talks about a deep/fast and narrow approach vs shallow/slow and wide approach.I am not sure if the two GPU’s were redesigned to this level, but that is one thing you could do to allow the design to reach high clocks.
Last edited:
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
It wasn’t even rumor, just made up fanatic shit.
TheRedRiders
Member
Agreed, I gave it too much credence just by calling it a rumour.
Lysandros
Member
I got the impression he is essentially saying that this "benchmark" is meaningless, not very indicative of future reality in a soft manner.
MasterCornholio
Member
He definitely did call it a last gen engine. We haven't seen much of next gen engines but I think the Unreal Engine 5 demo is an indication of what they will be like.
PaintTinJr
Member
In that short video it is interesting to see that the XsX version has a smaller frustum, as far as I can tell, because either the frustum setup is different or the PS5 version or the resolution of the cropped views are different because lots of things from the foreground towards the background don't line up in the shot - the ones I've marked in yellow. The size of the character is smaller on screen in the PS5 version and its foreground geometry is occluding far less of the other items in the scene, as easily visible at the box around the tree.
I guess It is possible that the camera angle is different, but such a change should throw out the alignment of the far plane too IMHO, so I think it is a lower precision frustum on the XsX version, or smaller near/far plane ratio.
Lysandros
Member
Can be near any type of game just like today. But large open world games with higher density geometry and textures should benefit the most from PS5 architecture "in theory".
MasterCornholio
Member
Definitely any game that relies heavily on asset steaming. From what I've understood from Cernys presentation that isn't just limited to large open world games. Essentially any games that rely on loading assets that are just in the players view should benefit from this.
Thirty7ven
Banned
Tests controller latency/input lag. Very interesting, and not shocking that PR and real results are... check for yourself
Chris_Rivera
Member
Interesting, this is from a pc perspective. Seems like polling updates are higher on Dual Sense.
Pedro Motta
Gold Member
It's logical. The XSX will simply not run games with the same fidelity of graphics than the PS5. I'm not saying it won't run gorgeous game cuz it will, but the PS5 will stand out more and more as the years go by.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
Fake news. This is only possible on the PS6.
Last edited:
Kinda yeah. The way I see it. is that he's turning what DF said upside down. He's saying you are not benchmarking the hardware , you are benchmarking the engine.
So Control engine favours parallelism (more CU's) .
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Google Stadia is collapsing, and Amazon Luna is shit as well. Microsoft is competing with failures, not Sony and Nintendo.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Have you been around lately? PS5 already outperforms XSX in Control, COD Cold War, AC Valhalla, Immortal Fenyx Rising, Dirt 5 and a lot more. Even in Hitman 3 it's a tie with XSX pushing 44% resolution and PS5 having 46.4% FPS advantage. By large it's around 18-20 games performing better on PS5 vs 1-2 games better on XSX.
So PS5 will only continue its dominance going forward as it has much more perks that are left on the table.
Microsoft lied again? Who would've thought...
Yes he should update the DualSense on PS5 first, it already received 2 updates on PS5, and seems it'll continue to get fine updates to keep it tight.
Last edited:
BigLee74
Member
Ok. I’ve made my mind up. You ARE a joke account/purely on the wind up.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
onesvenus
Member
One thing that having an off-the-shelf RDNA2 GPU enables is making multiplataform ports easier. I'm sure that was largely MS rationale between that. They seem to focus on wanting to remove differences between Xbox and PC development. Their dream seems to be able to program your game once and then run it in PC and Xbox without any optimization whatsoever.
It's a good strategy IMO, seeing it's quite difficult to keep up with Sony in regards to sales number. If they can show Xbox/PC as a single market to third parties, most of them wouldn't leave an Xbox port on the table.
The thing is that UE5 primary focus is on PC and I don't think that will change in the near future. That means that all the big developments they do on the engine will need to work on PC. This will make Sony studios engines shine brighter.
He is talking about last-gen engines.
Yeah, let's wrap his words because they doesn't fit your narrative. Classic. He is saying what he is saying: the DF comparison is a good benchmark of how both GPUs perform on that engine. Does that mean that will translate to game performance? No. Does that mean one GPU is better than the other? No. Does that mean that one console hardware is better than the other? Not at all.
To better compare both GPUs, and only GPUs and not whole systems, we would need more benchmarks like this, where the CPU is not being taxed at all. That's why he is wishing for more.
You are benchmarking how that engine performs on the GPU only.
Bo_Hazem
Banned
Ok I've finished Control UE on performance mode on PS5 with all the side missions + DLC's:
-The plot/lore is great, feels strange and interesting, 10/10.
-Story? Probably ok, acting is good like 7/10 but story itself doesn't really click nor the characters seem to make sense nor you feel anything towards them. But as said, the overall lore/story is 10/10 but how it's represented is 7/10.
-Facial animations feel like they all came from a dental clinic before having a convo.
-Graphics are decent, 8/10.
-Gameplay is solid, 9/10, love the idea of the shifting gun but having only 2 guns and needing to stop to load another type is stupid and immersion killer. A weapon wheel would've made much more sense.
-It gives me MGS1 vibes of massive indoor gameplay.
-Most of the enemies look mediocre, not impactful or fearsome. Only creepy one was that Dr. Hartman in the DLC, I think.
-Environment is very dynamic and destructible.
Overall it was a very unique experience, a solid 9/10 for the game. I think Remedy has so much potential to make even more better games in the future.
Note: Quality mode has input lag issues and feels choppy, probably bad motion blur implementation?
-The plot/lore is great, feels strange and interesting, 10/10.
-Story? Probably ok, acting is good like 7/10 but story itself doesn't really click nor the characters seem to make sense nor you feel anything towards them. But as said, the overall lore/story is 10/10 but how it's represented is 7/10.
-Facial animations feel like they all came from a dental clinic before having a convo.
-Graphics are decent, 8/10.
-Gameplay is solid, 9/10, love the idea of the shifting gun but having only 2 guns and needing to stop to load another type is stupid and immersion killer. A weapon wheel would've made much more sense.
-It gives me MGS1 vibes of massive indoor gameplay.
-Most of the enemies look mediocre, not impactful or fearsome. Only creepy one was that Dr. Hartman in the DLC, I think.
-Environment is very dynamic and destructible.
Overall it was a very unique experience, a solid 9/10 for the game. I think Remedy has so much potential to make even more better games in the future.
Note: Quality mode has input lag issues and feels choppy, probably bad motion blur implementation?
Last edited:
- Status