Romulus
Member
But for the most part, PS5 and XSX operate consistently apart in performance mode. Their a few frames apart. So, only that's a bug, and everything else is just unoptimized?
Last edited:
-
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.
DF- Devil May Cry 5 SE: PS5 vs Xbox Series X - The First Next-Gen Performance Face-Off
But for the most part, PS5 and XSX operate consistently apart in performance mode. Their a few frames apart. So, only that's a bug, and everything else is just unoptimized?
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
Yeah.. you need to look at the picture you posted again. He's further back in the scene on the PS5 than he is on the XSX. Look at the character position to the pylons in front of him. He's almost past them on the xbox and he's coming to them in the PS5. FOV isn't the same because the character isn't in the exact same spot.
I'm only just into the video, but if they are really claiming the picture on the right has the same rendering setup as the one on the left, then it is no wonder they incorrectly used the word "Frustrum", when they mean "Frustum" in the article text.
In this shot, it shows the PS5 has a wider field of vision and a further draw distance - because the backgrounds are perfectly aligned, but on the PS5 you can see far more of the foreground at his feat, and on the XsX the building on the right is showing another section of glass, because the near/far clip plane relationship is closer. You can also see that the PS5 is showing more balloons and specular highlights - not sure if reflections, but they probably are on each ballon - whereas the balloons on XsX look very flat, like VRS has only fully shaded the full front facing fragments.
It is the same comparison with AC. It is hard to see the differences, but both systems are doing different workloads, and in both cases the PS5 is doing more. So this is a bad start for DF IMHO, but obviously I'm only part way through the video
Japanese games tend to be made on PS principally (which kinda makes sense as the PS dominates the home market) - this would seem to be the case here too as I seem to remember hearing that the PS5 was going to have ray tracing in the game first and Xbox later as a patch. This can be a huge outlier as tehy don't put the level of optimisation in to other platforms (e.g... ACE combat 7 on Xbox one X).
The Xbox high framerate mode issue is going to be a software bug... frame drops by that % are not going to be a hardware limitation, maybe fixed by a Xbox update (like pc video card driver updates) or may just be something the dev has done.
Game should be locked to 60 fps anyway...
I expect both consoles will perform great, console war is super dumb.
The Xbox high framerate mode issue is going to be a software bug... frame drops by that % are not going to be a hardware limitation, maybe fixed by a Xbox update (like pc video card driver updates) or may just be something the dev has done.
Game should be locked to 60 fps anyway...
I expect both consoles will perform great, console war is super dumb.
Majima Everywhere System
Member
I'm only just into the video, but if they are really claiming the picture on the right has the same rendering setup as the one on the left, then it is no wonder they incorrectly used the word "Frustrum", when they mean "Frustum" in the article text.
In this shot, it shows the PS5 has a wider field of vision and a further draw distance - because the backgrounds are perfectly aligned, but on the PS5 you can see far more of the foreground at his feat, and on the XsX the building on the right is showing another section of glass, because the near/far clip plane relationship is closer. You can also see that the PS5 is showing more balloons and specular highlights - not sure if reflections, but they probably are on each ballon - whereas the balloons on XsX look very flat, like VRS has only fully shaded the full front facing fragments.
It is the same comparison with AC. It is hard to see the differences, but both systems are doing different workloads, and in both cases the PS5 is doing more. So this is a bad start for DF IMHO, but obviously I'm only part way through the video
This is unconfirmed, but it also looks like the PS5 is pushing more green balloons than XSX.
Truespeed
Member
Not surprising considering the Time To Balloon (TTB) is faster on the PS5.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
Say it with me slowly.
The other modes don't swing fps as wildly in static scenes while pushing 4x the pixels.
Forget the great 2020 console wars and the need to have the PS5 win something out of this.... you say you are a PC gamer too. How often do you see PC games vary 40 fps in a scene that isn't post effects or ai heavy? Muchless without it being a documented bug?
blastprocessor
The Amiga Brotherhood
Given the power gap is a PS4 between Series X and PS5 l was expecting a bigger difference. PS5 is punching above it's weight indeed.
Last edited:
Aceofspades
Banned
People in the know are fully aware that PS5/XSX are the closest consoles ever created specs wise.
Sony were very clever investing more in SSD and DualSense as differentiators.
Sony were very clever investing more in SSD and DualSense as differentiators.
Caio
Member
Thanks mate for the explanation.
Aceofspades
Banned
Weird how they talk about the game. This exact frame isn’t a great comp, but if you look at the graph Xbox doesn’t dip below 60 in the smoke while ps5 dips into the 40s. You’d think that would deserve a mention
There is a frame were PS5 was at 120fps and XSX was around 55fps
Shouldn't that be a worthy of a mention?!
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
Ahhh I get it. You are a playstation fan I see. Cool. I'm going to explain this in a way you will understand. I am in no way implying any way negative about either console. PS can be 5x the xsx or the xsx can be 5x the PS i literally dont care. This is a launch game not fully optimized for anything. Im not saying this is the best playstation can do with more time effort and budget what I am saying is if you just toss RE engine at these 2 consoles quickly for launch then the xbox should be as it is in 3 modes a bit higher fps then the PS. Im talking zero extra anything just straight port over. Now the only way we get this 120fps 1080p mode discrepancy is with there being an issue in the code or with xbox. Now since we have seen games that during gameplay look close to DMC5 at better fps with way smaller of deviation it leaves only the game having an issue. Again the performance mode issues are most likely due to game issues. I again dont care for either console really and am only coming to the most logical conclusion with the least amount of hoops to jump thru(this being most of the time the case). Now people might be implying something by saying this or they are not, but that does not change the fact that it is most likely the case.
Werewolfgrandma
Banned
vpance
Member
Caches flushing faassst on PS5.
MasterCornholio
Member
I don't know if it's due to that though. Essentially when the GPU needs something new instead of dumping all the cache it can just delete what it doesn't need with the scrubbers. This saves on performance but I'm not sure how much it saves.
Like I don't have any idea on how often the cache gets dumped when playing a game.
Tqaulity
Member
People saying that this is a bad comparison due to the game being "unoptimized" are not looking at this correctly. This is perfect case for comparison for a couple of reasons:
But the key takeaway here: the large drops in performance on the XSX that the PS5 does not have point to a bottleneck somewhere on the XSX that is not present on the PS5. This is the point that Mark Cerny and numerous developers have hinted at for months now: The key principle for the PS5's design was to remove as many bottlenecks as possible and design the most efficient system possible. Whether it's the CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, I/O, or the SDK it is all designed to be balanced, consistent, and accessible.
Rich from DF dismissed the XSX performance drops to not being a hardware issue but probably being an issue with the API/SDK. This is possible, but I wouldn't dismiss the hardware completely, particularly the memory bandwidth. Remember, the XSX RAM is not an even split and it's possible that the way DMCV uses the RAM, there are some performance sensitive data that may have had to extend beyond the 10GB "fast RAM" pool when running at that high of a framerate. Without a local profiling tool, it'd be difficult to say for sure but I'd suggest it's possible. If it is an API issue, then the drops could be fixed by a future update. I guess we'll see in time.
In the meantime, we're seeing pretty much identical performance when both are pushing their framerates limits. XSX is slightly ahead in most cases but PS5 is noticeable ahead in others with the XSX showing a potential bottleneck with high framerates that is not present on PS5. So PS5 "punching above it's weight" based on the theoretical specs and showing better consistency in performance. Pretty much exactly what was suggested
- This is a game that uses a high unlocked frame rate across all modes. This will truly show how far each system can go with this particular workload. Most future comparison will be a lot less interesting since the frame rate will be capped at 30 or 60fps and we will rarely see 120fps modes w/Ray Tracing enabled.
- The performance you get from simply porting your game and adding features says a lot about how accessible the power/performance is for the system which I would argue is more important than raw theoretical power. This says more about how efficient and/or bottlenecked the system may be. This is why many Xbox 360 games looked and ran much better than the PS3 counterpart despite the higher theoretical performance in the PS3.
- Performance on both system is virtually identical and within general margin of error (+/- 5%). The DF video was not a 1:1 frame mapping across both platforms so you can't just freeze a frame of that video and look at the frame rate to compare.
- Neither system appears to be CPU bound at any point (CPU performance looks pretty much identical)
- Yes, XSX had a very slight overall advantage in the default 4K and RT cases. But again, the differences is so small that it is virtually imperceptible during gameplay (especially at 100+ fps). But yes, we knew that all things being equal the XSX might have a slight GPU advantage (much smaller than the 18% theoretical would suggest)
- PS5 has faster performance at times (in gameplay)
But the key takeaway here: the large drops in performance on the XSX that the PS5 does not have point to a bottleneck somewhere on the XSX that is not present on the PS5. This is the point that Mark Cerny and numerous developers have hinted at for months now: The key principle for the PS5's design was to remove as many bottlenecks as possible and design the most efficient system possible. Whether it's the CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, I/O, or the SDK it is all designed to be balanced, consistent, and accessible.
Rich from DF dismissed the XSX performance drops to not being a hardware issue but probably being an issue with the API/SDK. This is possible, but I wouldn't dismiss the hardware completely, particularly the memory bandwidth. Remember, the XSX RAM is not an even split and it's possible that the way DMCV uses the RAM, there are some performance sensitive data that may have had to extend beyond the 10GB "fast RAM" pool when running at that high of a framerate. Without a local profiling tool, it'd be difficult to say for sure but I'd suggest it's possible. If it is an API issue, then the drops could be fixed by a future update. I guess we'll see in time.
In the meantime, we're seeing pretty much identical performance when both are pushing their framerates limits. XSX is slightly ahead in most cases but PS5 is noticeable ahead in others with the XSX showing a potential bottleneck with high framerates that is not present on PS5. So PS5 "punching above it's weight" based on the theoretical specs and showing better consistency in performance. Pretty much exactly what was suggested
Valued Gamer
Banned
I just want someone to tell me why Capcom remade this game in the first place.
nowhat
Member
It seems like when it's a GPU limited part, XSX is slightly ahead, but when the GPU is removed as the bottleneck, the PS5 CPU was having the better of it. I wonder if that unified cache rumour is true.People saying that this is a bad comparison due to the game being "unoptimized" are not looking at this correctly. This is perfect case for comparison for a couple of reasons:
And what did we learn from this first comparison? Not much new...it's just really cool to see the results in action:
- This is a game that uses a high unlocked frame rate across all modes. This will truly show how far each system can go with this particular workload. Most future comparison will be a lot less interesting since the frame rate will be capped at 30 or 60fps and we will rarely see 120fps modes w/Ray Tracing enabled.
- The performance you get from simply porting your game and adding features says a lot about how accessible the power/performance is for the system which I would argue is more important than raw theoretical power. This says more about how efficient and/or bottlenecked the system may be. This is why many Xbox 360 games looked and ran much better than the PS3 counterpart despite the higher theoretical performance in the PS3.
- Performance on both system is virtually identical and within general margin of error (+/- 5%). The DF video was not a 1:1 frame mapping across both platforms so you can't just freeze a frame of that video and look at the frame rate to compare.
- Neither system appears to be CPU bound at any point (CPU performance looks pretty much identical)
- Yes, XSX had a very slight overall advantage in the default 4K and RT cases. But again, the differences is so small that it is virtually imperceptible during gameplay (especially at 100+ fps). But yes, we knew that all things being equal the XSX might have a slight GPU advantage (much smaller than the 18% theoretical would suggest)
- PS5 has faster performance at times (in gameplay)
But the key takeaway here: the large drops in performance on the XSX that the PS5 does not have point to a bottleneck somewhere on the XSX that is not present on the PS5. This is the point that Mark Cerny and numerous developers have hinted at for months now: The key principle for the PS5's design was to remove as many bottlenecks as possible and design the most efficient system possible. Whether it's the CPU, GPU, RAM, SSD, I/O, or the SDK it is all designed to be balanced, consistent, and accessible.
Rich from DF dismissed the XSX performance drops to not being a hardware issue but probably being an issue with the API/SDK. This is possible, but I wouldn't dismiss the hardware completely, particularly the memory bandwidth. Remember, the XSX RAM is not an even split and it's possible that the way DMCV uses the RAM, there are some performance sensitive data that may have had to extend beyond the 10GB "fast RAM" pool when running at that high of a framerate. Without a local profiling tool, it'd be difficult to say for sure but I'd suggest it's possible. If it is an API issue, then the drops could be fixed by a future update. I guess we'll see in time.
In the meantime, we're seeing pretty much identical performance when both are pushing their framerates limits. XSX is slightly ahead in most cases but PS5 is noticeable ahead in others with the XSX showing a potential bottleneck with high framerates that is not present on PS5. So PS5 "punching above it's weight" based on the theoretical specs and showing better consistency in performance. Pretty much exactly what was suggested
Epic Sax CEO
Banned
Than the PS5 is shit, right?
Because on the SeX no matter how much the framerate varies, the frames on screen remain stable.
MasterCornholio
Member
That doesn't make any sense. Something to do with VRR or something else?
Last edited:
TaylorSwiftFan
Member
What does this mean?
ethomaz
Banned
Or just like Xbox One the OS overhead is bigger than PS4 OS... so the CPU even a bit clocked higher delivery less performance than PS4 CPU.
He probably means VRR but with these drops I don’t know if it will works like intented.
Plus you require a VRR compatible TV.
In any case VRR is something PS5 will have too.
Last edited:
Romulus
Member
I think you're the one trying to push an agenda and just trying to play it cool like you're some unbiased participant. I just don't see a couple of wild fps swings as being "omg this mode is broken!" when most of the time it's running at a fairly consistent gap between the two. 40fps when its going up to 130 isn't that huge sorry. Games unlocked on PS4 Pro this past gen would go from 30-60fps, a much larger percentage and that was optimization with patches.
PaintTinJr
Member
What you are observing is a combination of different Frustum setups(FOV, near/far plane ratios) and probably some excellent crop editing by DF to match the backgrounds so that they appear the same, which is the purpose of the comparison - serve up the same scene with the same graphics and just compare the frame-rate.
Even if we go with your suggestion of the ps5 being a little further back in the shot that still doesn't explain why the background sizes and assets match almost identically and yet so many other assets are either cropped from one slither of the view or contradictorily in size or position - if the frustum setups on both shots are the same, which they are not, just looking at the foreground bollards size, distances apart, and the missing right hand window in the PS5 shot would have the window and even more of the building if character/camera are further back in the scene as you are pointing out.
The PS5 is rendering more both in camera setup and in fx judging by the ballons, and the advantage in the performance mode also reinforces that point - because when you eventually have to dial back the lighting/visuals to the bare minimum on both, the PS5 is finishing its frame rendering workloads sooner.
QuantumZebra
Member
I was told in another thread that the power gap between XSeX and PS5 is "huge".
It's like people don't realize that ROI is lower the higher power you go, and design / implementation / optimization matter.
M1chl
Currently Gif and Meme Champion
nice
Interesting
Then we can argue PS5 other modes are broken
MasterCornholio
Member
I'm still waiting for those "staggering differences".
Edit: You know what the framerate reminds me of?
A rollercoaster.
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
Why?
The same reason Xbox being broken on that mode.
MarkMe2525
Member
It is fascinating to watch people cherry pick info from this video and try to put their console choice on a pedestal.
QuantumZebra
Member
I think nobody wants to admit that they're really damn near the same in performance.
Diminishing returns are kicking in. It's not like previous gen where you have some games running at 720/30fps vs 1080/30 or 60fps.
If you have an 8k TV and do some whacky shit you might be able to really see a difference, but I'm not seeing any type of gap worth gloating over on either side.
Tqaulity
Member
Yeah it'd be good to finally get the full rundown on the PS5 system architecture and hardware components. A CPU shared cache can almost certainly make up the difference from 100 Mhz clock speed difference.
The other thing I'd point out is that people need to realize that "time" is a resource the same way CPU power or memory is for a game (from a developer's standpoint). So if 2 systems had identical hardware but one allowed you to make the same game in less time, then that one will have more accessible power and that in and of itself is "powerful". Of course there is a lot that can affect "time to develop" including the actual hardware and software tools but if a system allows you to get more power out of it faster, then that can be just as much a boon for developers as having a few more Mhz of CPU or GPU performance in a raw sense.
With the rising cost of game development and tighter budget and schedule constraints devs simply will not have the resources to devote to learning and optimizing specific idiosyncrasies in a system.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
meh... closer to a mountain I see more mountain, further away I see mountain and sky. Perspective is a big part of what you see and being that both screens are cropped and neither have the character in the exact same spot, seems a bit hard to make the leap you are making. Could it have better FOV.. maybe....but....I don't know how you could be conclusive without uncropped screens and identical positioning.
nowhat
Member
Individual developers (outside first-party), probably not, at least to a large extent. But it's very likely common engines like Unreal will be optimized for any lucrative platform.
Mister Wolf
Gold Member
They did all that talking and still didn't list the average framerate of 4K mode.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
We are just talking in circles at this point. Game runs more consistently in 4k and even 1080P with RT active than high frame rate mode. Mode seems like it has issues. You take me as pointing that out as bias, matters not. To me it seems odd. The game is super close in performance to each other in the other modes, with the exception of a handful of instances.
Yeh, absolutely. The logistics of making games is now the biggest bottleneck, not the console itself. The time, money and talent needed to make games look and feel next-gen matters more than any small differences in the hardware power and speed. And of course the development tools being easier to work with will help a great deal in that process. I think the fact that PS5 has several great looking launch titles is directly the result of a more friendly dev environment.
The more exotic/complex parts of the hardware will eventually be exploited, but mostly by first party developers who have the luxury to take their time and spend as much money as they want.
Last edited:
GHG
Member
Interesting
Well.. they were right about there being a power gap at least.
PaintTinJr
Member
Perspective projection in a 3D game is just a matrix, so these things have to be projected in a coherent way if the frustum setups are equal because the maths demands that to be a truth.
In the PS5 shot we can see more of the foreground and the background at the same size, so the near/far plane ratio is bigger - and therefore bigger frustum /draw distance.
In the foreground the bollards are positioned slightly differently, but not enough to offset the size difference in each shot, even if the PS5 camera was slightly back.
The narrower distance between the bollards in the PS5 shot indicates wider field of vision - because wider field of vision with fixed resolution/aspect ratio means foreground objects will then occupy a smaller area of screen space and concertinaing more to make area for other objects in the scene that were previously out of the FOV.
MrFunSocks
Banned
How do you mean? The Xbox High Frame Rate mode appears broken because it often performs worse than the 4K mode. How do the Normal and 2 RT modes on PS5 relate to that?
Skifi28
Member
Probably the most useless metric of all since it doesn't account for consistency. You can have a lower average framerate that gives a better player experience.
NoMoChokeSJ
Banned
Like I said.. cropped images, not same position. Not sure how you think this is anything conclusive without seeing the actual full screens. The narrower distance between the bollards in the PS5 version are because he hasn't reached them, whereas the XSX version they appear wider because he is walking through them. They aren't narrower because of draw distance, they are narrower because of position and perspective. Like I said before.. closer to a mountain I get the more of it I see. Maybe you can find a better example of a difference in FOV in the video, but the picture you posted seems like a stretch of a claim.
alabtrosMyster
Banned
Do you remember the battlefield 4 DF analysis? It pretty much set the tone for all the gen (going from memory):
I guess we're just going to ignore that DMC5 was built for last-gen consoles.
Lower resolution in the bone
Lower framerate on the bone
Lower quality lighting effects
Now let's say we have pretty close to parity between the ps5 and the series X... I was personally expecting a 15 to 25% delta in general, which I also thought to be borderline insignificant.
Rhazer Fusion
Member
As predicted, the majority of multiplatform games on both consoles will most likely be very close to each other with minor differences here and there. I doubt we will see too many cases of significant performance and visual upgrades between multiplatform games between the these systems.
MrFunSocks
Banned
Might want to hold judgement until we see more than 1 extremely poorly optimized port of an old game.
You're more than likely right, but should hold off before making that assumption.
Similar threads
- Locked