Support NeoGAF

[pawel86ck]

The point was that it had to go to low settings to get 60fps on a 1060, and for my standards it just means a crappy port.

This is another video, he also is in mostly low settings and he is on 40-50fps, could be worse I guess:

I can understand when games are extremely demanding at ultra details, but when even lower settings destroy performance it simply optimisation to blame, and especially when you consider RDR2 was made with current gen consoles in mind. PS4 with 7850/7870 can run RDR2 at 30fps, so I would expect something like GTX 980 or 1060 to provide much better results like for example in GTA5.

At ultra settings RDR2 is maybe the most demanding game currently, 1080ti results even at 1080p looks really low (46 fps min 49 fps average according to gamegpu benchmark results). On turing performance is better, but you still need 2080 super in order to play at 60fps maxed out at 1080p. If people say RDR2 optimisation is fine and that's just current gen game, then I wonder what will happen when PS5 games will be ported to PC.

 

[Shangounchained]

I can understand when games are extremely demanding at ultra details, but when even lower settings destroy performance it simply optimisation to blame, and especially when you consider RDR2 was made with current gen consoles in mind. PS4 with 7850/7870 can run RDR2 at 30fps, so I would expect something like GTX 980 or 1060 to provide much better results like for example in GTA5.

At ultra settings RDR2 is maybe the most demanding game currently, 1080ti results even at 1080p looks really low (46 fps min 49 fps average according to gamegpu benchmark results). On turing performance is better, but you still need 2080 super in order to play at 60fps maxed out at 1080p. If people say RDR2 optimisation is fine and that's just current gen game, then I wonder what will happen when PS5 games will be ported to PC.

If the ssd would be used as vram kind of like the ssG Radeon card and if the 24gb vram rumours are real on next gen consoles then I'm afraid a 2080ti is worthless you'd need a rtx titan with 24gb similar to be on par with next gen consoles, the 2080ti is a fast card but the vram size would be a problem I can see next gen games needing 16-20gb of vram minimum easily! And a 2080 only has 11!

 

[Rolling_Start]

Your talking monkey manure now!

Textures are assets. Probably the single biggest consumer of memory, in most games.

You really don't seem to understand any of this.

 

[Shangounchained]

Textures are assets. Probably the single biggest consumer of memory, in most games.

You really don't seem to understand any of this.

I never said textures weren't assets, mate I said the difference of the textures on pc to consoles is a minimal silly difference not deserving a discussion, the games Simply look similar! So please focus on the topic and not this kiddish texture discussion!

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

If the ssd would be used as vram kind of like the ssG Radeon card and if the 24gb vram rumours are real on next gen consoles then I'm afraid a 2080ti is worthless you'd need a rtx titan with 24gb similar to be on par with next gen consoles, the 2080ti is a fast card but the vram size would be a problem I can see next gen games needing 16-20gb of vram minimum easily! And a 2080 only has 11!

Yes...they're totally going to be using tech that currently only exists in a single $7000 GPU in your $500 console.

 

[MilkyJoe]

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

I never said textures weren't assets, mate I said the difference of the textures on pc to consoles is a minimal silly difference not deserving a discussion, the games Simply look similar! So please focus on the topic and not this kiddish texture discussion!

Minimal and silly...yet noticable enough for me to see it despite the shit quality of screenshots you posted

 

[Shangounchained]

Minimal and silly...yet noticable enough for me to see it despite the shit quality of screenshots you posted

if u like the bells and whistles a few upgrades on resolution and texture quality good for you mate but to me that's not a generational or a spectacular upgrade to even talk about to me playing a current game at 1080p on pc or console just looks the same! And again thanks for Ur concern now bk to the topic about next gen graphics improvements! Please I'm getting tired and bored.

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

now bk to the topic about next gen graphics improvements!

You're in the wrong thread.

 

[Shangounchained]

Yes...they're totally going to be using tech that currently only exists in a single $7000 GPU in your $500 console.

It's not 7000$ simply because of the vram size it's alot of things and comparing prices is silly because it's different markets 7000$ is pricing for workstations and professionals which it's a few of them, probably less than a couple 1000 people,. A game console is sold to 100 million people so pricing can be minimised,

It's the same way people couldn't believe ps4 could have 8gb gddr5 and people still can't believe next gen consoles will have hardware raytracing proprietary SSDs used as vram which both Sony and Microsoft have said. And every rumour points to 24gb vram so I don't know what your on about!

 

[Shangounchained]

You're in the wrong thread.

We both are in the wrong thread! Apparently

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

proprietary SSDs used as vram which both Sony and Microsoft have said

They've literally never said that.

And every rumour points to 24gb vram so I don't know what your on about!

lol no. 24GiB total shared RAM I can see. 24GiB VRAM? Not a fucking chance. Even if they were to do that...you don't need an SSD for that, just a crap ton of memory modules.

 

[GamingKaiju]

24GB of ram in next gen consoles yeh if it’s DDR2.

Is it going to be GDDR6x for that extra secret sauce as well.

 

[Shangounchained]

They've literally never said that.


lol no. 24GiB total shared RAM I can see. 24GiB VRAM? Not a fucking chance. Even if they were to do that...you don't need an SSD for that, just a crap ton of memory modules.

Here read the article don't just blabber about,. https://www.gamesradar.com/uk/ps5-specs/

And here is a video of Scarlett's reveal where by Microsoft say they are using the ssd as vram.

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

Here read the article don't just blabber about,. https://www.gamesradar.com/uk/ps5-specs/

And here is a video of Scarlett's reveal where by Microsoft say they are using the ssd as vram.

That article says an awful lot of nothing. It doesn't confirm the RAM capacity, nor the VRAM capacity (...which c'mon...it's just gonna be a portioned off bit of shared RAM...)
As for the video...He said "we're using the SSD as virtual RAM." Not VRAM, that's video RAM. In otherwords all they did was stick a pagefile on it. PCs have been doing that for...ooooh...atleast 20 years. And it's not remotely comparable to actual RAM...you dummy.

 

[Rolling_Start]

Here read the article don't just blabber about,. https://www.gamesradar.com/uk/ps5-specs/

And here is a video of Scarlett's reveal where by Microsoft say they are using the ssd as vram.

He said using the ssd as virtual ram, not as vram (video ram).

You've got two completely different types of memory (and uses of memory) completely mixed up.

You're not having a good day.

 

[pawel86ck]

If the ssd would be used as vram kind of like the ssG Radeon card and if the 24gb vram rumours are real on next gen consoles then I'm afraid a 2080ti is worthless you'd need a rtx titan with 24gb similar to be on par with next gen consoles, the 2080ti is a fast card but the vram size would be a problem I can see next gen games needing 16-20gb of vram minimum easily! And a 2080 only has 11!

Agree, VRAM alone will be a problem. I bought GTX 680 2 GB version just before PS4 launch. Back then it was high end GPU and I thought 2 GB is insane amount of VRAM, yet my 680 was soon VRAM limited in more and more games. I still could get 60fps in many games, so performance was really good, but stuttering and pauses because of low amount of VRAM was ruining the whole experience. I can totally see the same scenario happening again when PS5 will launch. PS5 should not be faster than RTX 2080, but sony will probably build console with around 24GB, so games will use insane amount of VRAM, easily above 10GB.

 

[Rolling_Start]

That article says an awful lot of nothing. It doesn't confirm the RAM capacity, nor the VRAM capacity (...which c'mon...it's just gonna be a portioned off bit of shared RAM...)
As for the video...He said "we're using the SSD as virtual RAM." Not VRAM, that's video RAM. In otherwords all they did was stick a pagefile on it. PCs have been doing that for...ooooh...atleast 20 years. And it's not remotely comparable to actual RAM...you dummy.

I think it's going to have to be more carefully managed than a PC swapfile. Probably with the ability for the developer to take full control, at least for what you put there, and when you access or copy stuff back out of it.

But yeah, not video ram.

 

[Makoto-Yuki]

Here read the article don't just blabber about,. https://www.gamesradar.com/uk/ps5-specs/

And here is a video of Scarlett's reveal where by Microsoft say they are using the ssd as vram.

you do know that SSD is far too slow to act as RAM, right?

the best SSD out today can do maybe 5-6GB/s. RAM can do way more than that. we're not talking a few GB's but tens of GB's per second. my RAM can do up to 25GB/s. DDR5 can do up to 32GB/s. my £400 nvme SSD can only do 3.4GB/2.9GB.

so you see how using the SSD for VRAM would be a HUGE bottleneck?

there is such a thing as VIRTUAL ram. say i was doing something that needed more RAM than i physically had. my PC could start using some of my SSD capacity to act as RAM. this is virtual RAM. because the SSD is significantly slower the performance would tank severely.

you see it in games all the time if you have settings way too high. my old GPU only had 4GB VRAM and games could use that up no problem. so what happens then? the framerate starts to shit the bed because it's having to wait longer for my storage to respond.

so yeah sure next gen could use virtual ram but even if they use PCIE 4.0 Speeds (5-6GB/s) it's gonna bottleneck RAM speeds.

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

I think it's going to have to be more carefully managed than a PC swapfile. Probably with the ability for the developer to take full control, at least for what you put there, and when you access or copy stuff back out of it.

But yeah, not video ram.

Honestly...the idea terrifies me. Not because it's going to be blazing fast...but because those drives are going to be blazing fast to get into the grave. There's no way they're not using QLC...as a scratch disk? How long are they actually expecting it to last?

 

[ethomaz]

Game made for consoles having issues on PC... shocked.

And some guys wants believe in the it is just scale the game bullshit... that magic doesn't exists... you need hard work with optimizations for each hardware you want to release.

 

[Makoto-Yuki]

this is what happens when sony/ms come out with marketing....

console owners who have no idea how computers work fall for the hype and start talking about things they don't understand. all i ever see is how SSD is gonna be a game changer next gen and i'm just sitting here thinking "ssds? is this 2008?"

 

[Makoto-Yuki]

Game made for consoles having issues on PC... shocked.

And some guys wants believe in the it is just scale the game bullshit... that magic doesn't exists... you need hard work with optimizations for each hardware you want to release.

i bet you'll be shocked to learn that developers make, run, and test games on a PC before they even stick a disc into a console.

also it's not surprising that there are issues on PC. a console is designed to play a game. every PS4 out there has the exact same specs and runs the exact same software. every PS4 pro has the same specs and runs the same software. same for Xbox. on PC there are so many variables which could cause shit to happen:

- operating system. windows 7, windows 8. windows 8.1. windows 10. and then what build is it? 1507, 1511, 1607, 1703, 1709, 1803, 1809, 1903, 1909.
- what CPU? amd or intel. ryzen 3? ryzen 5? ryzen 7? ryzen 9? intel celeron? pentium? i3? i5? i7? i9?
- RAM. 8/16/32GB? 1333-4000+Mhz
- GPU....there are shit load of gpus.
- other hardware installed
- what software is installed

it's impossible for even Rockstar to test every single possible configuration of PC. so yeah. no shit that bugs happen when a game is released on PC.

 

[ethomaz]

i bet you'll be shocked to learn that developers make, run, and test games on a PC before they even stick a disc into a console.

also it's not surprising that there are issues on PC. a console is designed to play a game. every PS4 out there has the exact same specs and runs the exact same software. every PS4 pro has the same specs and runs the same software. same for Xbox. on PC there are so many variables which could cause shit to happen:

- operating system. windows 7, windows 8. windows 8.1. windows 10. and then what build is it? 1507, 1511, 1607, 1703, 1709, 1803, 1809, 1903, 1909.
- what CPU? amd or intel. ryzen 3? ryzen 5? ryzen 7? ryzen 9? intel celeron? pentium? i3? i5? i7? i9?
- RAM. 8/16/32GB? 1333-4000+Mhz
- GPU....there are shit load of gpus.
- other hardware installed
- what software is installed

it's impossible for even Rockstar to test every single possible configuration of PC. so yeah. no shit that bugs happen when a game is released on PC.

The opposite happens too... PC to console port is in most cases crap due the dev not taking time with optimizations.

If PC needs more optimization time to run well in most hardware then devs should waste time and money with that instead to believe in the magical it to s scale for your hardware.

Devs should do their job right.

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

it's impossible for even Rockstar to test every single possible configuration of PC. so yeah. no shit that bugs happen when a game is released on PC.

It can be done, it just costs a shit-ton of time and money. Microsoft used to do it with Windows. They'd have developers etc all running indev builds on their PCs, at home and the like, to get as large a sample size as possible. They had a dedicated team for finding and replicating the bugs. Why is every build of Windows buggy as shit now? They scrapped it all and do their bug testing on identical virtualized systems now. Good job Microsoft!

 

[Rolling_Start]

Honestly...the idea terrifies me. Not because it's going to be blazing fast...but because those drives are going to be blazing fast to get into the grave. There's no way they're not using QLC...as a scratch disk? How long are they actually expecting it to last?

Yeah, I think they'll have to be careful. Writes are the killer, so I think they'll be taking steps to control writes. I'm expecting TLC if it's large (e.g. 1TB) or DLC if it's small (e.g. 512 GB, used to supplement a primary storage disk).

If all you're doing is swapping some of the dash to flash, and reading game data from it like it was from a HDD, then endurance shouldn't be an issue. TLC should get you at least 30,000 installs of a 100 GB game, or about 8 installs every day for 10 years.

But if games are swapping several tens of GB of data per day .... well, it ain't going to last more than a year or two.

It will be interesting to see what the final implementation is!

this is what happens when sony/ms come out with marketing....

console owners who have no idea how computers work fall for the hype and start talking about things they don't understand. all i ever see is how SSD is gonna be a game changer next gen and i'm just sitting here thinking "ssds? is this 2008?"

The real game changer will be in base speeds for streaming. Even a SATA 3 SSD with 10k IOPs as the base model would radically change the way game streaming engines work.

In terms of taking SSDs further than PCs currently allow, consoles have the freedom to use a different interface and different controllers than PC SSDs. A highly integrated approach might allow them to handle a number of reads that PC's can't manage, so you could, for example, read hundreds of thousands of texture samples or individual bytes of data with little overhead and greatly reduced latency.

The controller and the bus the SSD is on could make a huge difference in terms of how like traditional addressable ram you can treat the flash memory.

 

[azz0r]

Can someone whos played both versions tell me if the input lag is less severe on PC?

 

[Arun1910]

Well I just read through 2 pages of crap trying to find out if any of these launch issues were addressed.

 

[pawel86ck]

you do know that SSD is far too slow to act as RAM, right?

the best SSD out today can do maybe 5-6GB/s. RAM can do way more than that. we're not talking a few GB's but tens of GB's per second. my RAM can do up to 25GB/s. DDR5 can do up to 32GB/s. my £400 nvme SSD can only do 3.4GB/2.9GB.

so you see how using the SSD for VRAM would be a HUGE bottleneck?

there is such a thing as VIRTUAL ram. say i was doing something that needed more RAM than i physically had. my PC could start using some of my SSD capacity to act as RAM. this is virtual RAM. because the SSD is significantly slower the performance would tank severely.

you see it in games all the time if you have settings way too high. my old GPU only had 4GB VRAM and games could use that up no problem. so what happens then? the framerate starts to shit the bed because it's having to wait longer for my storage to respond.

so yeah sure next gen could use virtual ram but even if they use PCIE 4.0 Speeds (5-6GB/s) it's gonna bottleneck RAM speeds.

I doubt SDD will be used as VRAM on PS5, but developers will be able to stream data much faster, and therefore save big amount of VRAM.

 

[lukilladog]

With all due respect...I think your standards are stupid. Especially when we're talking about a GPU that was mid range 3 years ago. Now it's basically low end. Of course it's gonna struggle a little. That's how things go. Settings are also relative. Rockstar has always pushed the boundaries a little. GTA5 has the infamous grass setting that enables extremely taxing grass shadows that will still bring GPUs to their knees, as well as the extended draw distance settings, which equally are no pushover. This is no Arkham Knight situation, it's just a case of people being far too used to being able to push max settings with no problems. In other words it's a Crysis 2 title, one that is built with future hardware in mind.

Compared to console hardware the 1060 is high end, and its performance in most games reflects that. Gta 5 used to fly on high settings on things like the gtx 950, this game on the other hand has literally doubled or tripled hardware and memory requirements... but only on the pc side, you are not seeing the game going for constant 15 or 10 fps on consoles. What´s the excuse for that?... oh I see, the typical "built for the future" lol.

Ps.- And Crysis 2 had excellent performance in a wide range of hardware as long as you avoided the ridiculous nvidia sponsored stuff, this on the other hand starts choking cards once you start activating normal gfx, because it´s a crappy port.

 

[Lister]

Because it runs at 4K (fauxK you mean) 30 (20 to 30 you mean) on a $400 console and in many ways looks almost exactly the same

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[Lister]

This is a pretty shitty showing, and I can't say I'm surprised given this is fucking Rockstar. Thankfully the game is being beta tested for its official Steam release

The question remains: will Rockstar fix the damn thing.

 

[Shangounchained]

I doubt SDD will be used as VRAM on PS5, but developers will be able to stream data much faster, and therefore save big amount of VRAM.

They've used ssd as vram before Google SSG solid state graphics, its a GPU tech from AMD, the same people designing consoles for Sony and Microsoft, and they showed it rendering a frame of 200+ billion polygons in realtime and it's not a procedural shader trick like Nvidia showed recently,

basically the ssd on next gen consoles doesnt work like your usual pc ssd it's simply the ssd soldered close to the gpu and the GPU can access it directly without consulting the CPU or other silly interfaces it dramatically reduces latency!

AMD's Solid State Graphics sports a whopping 1TB of capacity

More memory means big things for visual computing.

www.pcgamer.com

 

[cryogenic7]

Can someone whos played both versions tell me if the input lag is less severe on PC?

The input lag is night and day better

 

[azz0r]

The input lag is night and day better

Thanks I will pick it up then

 

[888]

Can someone whos played both versions tell me if the input lag is less severe on PC?

Totally different game now. Granted he still has a weight to him but he responds better.

 

[DynamiteCop!]

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

No, it's native 4k and a pretty damn solid 30 FPS. What kind of dumb post is this?

 

[Shangounchained]

No, it's native 4k and a pretty damn solid 30 FPS. What kind of dumb post is this?

Rdr2 is native 4k and solid 30 on Xbox one X.

 

[GymWolf]

This is a pretty shitty showing, and I can't say I'm surprised given this is fucking Rockstar. Thankfully the game is being beta tested for its official Steam release

The question remains: will Rockstar fix the damn thing.

They haven't fix the blurry shit that is the ps4 pro version or a proper top tier hdr on console for a game of this magnitude so i'm gonna go with a noooo.

Rockstar is not exactly a consumer comes first type of company...

 

[Lister]

No, it's native 4k and a pretty damn solid 30 FPS. What kind of dumb post is this?

But not anywhere near Ultra settings on PC. And this is the experience for a tiny, tiny minority of console gamers. 99% of them are running base PS4's base Xbox Ones, and then a small minority the Ps4 Pro version, and then an even smaller minority the X version.

 

[Shangounchained]

But not anywhere near Ultra settings on PC. And this is the experience for a tiny, tiny minority of console gamers. 99% of them are running base PS4's base Xbox Ones, and then a small minority the Ps4 Pro version, and then an even smaller minority the X version.

It's an even smaller minority of people with pcs that can even push medium 4k 30 on this game and even a smaller 1 percent who can achieve 4k ultra on pc!

 

[Screamer-RSA]

 

[Mendax89]

Good. Rockstar treats PC players like shit, create a shitty launcher, Epic exclusive and people still buy this? Enjoy the broken game. Well deserved.

 

[DeceptiveAlarm]

Did anyone mod out the terrible movement yet?

 

[DynamiteCop!]

But not anywhere near Ultra settings on PC. And this is the experience for a tiny, tiny minority of console gamers. 99% of them are running base PS4's base Xbox Ones, and then a small minority the Ps4 Pro version, and then an even smaller minority the X version.

Whatever the settings on console may be in appearance don't look far off from Ultra on PC, it's mostly nuanced difference which just crumbles the PC computationally. Also it's not 99% who have base hardware, it no doubt in the 80% range with both the Pro and X making up about 20%.

 

[Lister]

How would you even know? Let me guess, looking at compressed youtube videos?

And it's MUCh less than 20%. The Pro was accounting for around 20% of sales 4 years AFTER the release of the base PS4, and that's the Pro, which experiences frame drops and definitely doesn't run at 4K. I don't know the share of sales the X has gotten, but considering how poorly the xbox has been selling overall, I doubt it's responsible for more than a tiny drop of total console sales.

 

[MeatSafeMurderer]

Compared to console hardware the 1060 is high end, and its performance in most games reflects that. Gta 5 used to fly on high settings on things like the gtx 950, this game on the other hand has literally doubled or tripled hardware and memory requirements... but only on the pc side, you are not seeing the game going for constant 15 or 10 fps on consoles. What´s the excuse for that?... oh I see, the typical "built for the future" lol.

Ps.- And Crysis 2 had excellent performance in a wide range of hardware as long as you avoided the ridiculous nvidia sponsored stuff, this on the other hand starts choking cards once you start activating normal gfx, because it´s a crappy port.

And that difference bears out in the settings you can push, which you can push far beyond consoles, even if it's not actually terribly noticable (diminishing returns always hits hard on ultra...always), just not necessarily the framerates you can achieve. I'll give you this though, Pascal specifically seems to fall behind in terms of performance in this game. It's not really an issue on the Turing cards, but when you look at normally comparable cards, for example the 2080 and 1080ti, you see the Pascal card isn't quite up to snuff. I think this probably has to do with DX12 (which Pascal has never been particularly good at, with Turing being much better) and Vulkan (which in this game seems to be a little...broken) being the only two APIs available.

 

[base]

They haven't fix the blurry shit that is the ps4 pro version or a proper top tier hdr on console for a game of this magnitude so i'm gonna go with a noooo.

Rockstar is not exactly a consumer comes first type of company...

 

[base]

24GB of ram in next gen consoles yeh if it’s DDR2.

Is it going to be GDDR6x for that extra secret sauce as well.

DDR2 would be much more expensive than DDR6X. Newer modules are not only faster but cheaper to produce.

 

[Justin9mm]

Running this at 4k @ 80% resolution with everything on medium adn textures on high with 55-60fps on my Ryzen 5 2600 and RTX 2060 Super.

Looks very good and feels so smooth compared to the One X version last year. 4k @ 100% gave me only 35-40 fps.

LOL... And the price difference vs performance between the X and your PC is....? I assume 4 x the price for an extra 20-25fps.

I'm not saying PC isn't superior but this whole shitting on console power thing is ridiculous, of course if I buy a Mercedes, I'm going to expect it to perform better than a Toyota. In other news sky is blue!