What other option does DF have to do a true RT test between consoles? Does the result hurt your feelings or something?I have a pretty serious pc and all consoles, I’ve never benchmarked photo mode.
Should be in the OP. Clears everything up in one image.
Actually it's just the map that is not reflecting, whilst more distant objects are.
More evidence of XSX being an unbalanced design. Bottlenecked that 12TF once actual game logic is running.
Have you every hard of a FLYBY benchmark? it's done to benchmark the GPU alone without accounting for CPU calculations, perfect scenario here since the common denominator in PS5 and XSX is the CPU, albeit a slightly higher clocked CPU on Series X.
What other option does DF have to do a true RT test between consoles? Does the result hurt your feelings or something?
Let’s be grown ups, benchmarks are supposed to be representative of your gameplay experience. This “benchmark” is misleading.What other option does DF have to do a true RT test between consoles? Does the result hurt your feelings or something?
The game just needs to be patched/improved on Series X. No bottleneck at all.
Run actual gameplay tests with RT enabled, as they did with the previous Control video?What other option does DF have to do a true RT test between consoles?
This is a wild, wild idea, but hear me out ... Perhaps they could test the consoles in real-world gaming performance?What other option does DF have to do a true RT test between consoles? Does the result hurt your feelings or something?
I think it's probably just you, not them.So let me get this straight...
The "corridor of doom" is "not representative of load" because the PS5 draws uncomfortably close to the PS5 in that scenario (must be a bug, or tools right?)?
However the whole scenario of doing a "benchmark" in static photomode scenes is somehow representative of load?
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
BTW that leave us with some questions.
In Phone Mode where the CPU is doing basically nothing the X GPU shows it power but when in gameplay where the CPU is doing physics and all the things related to gameplay PS5 match or pull ahead.
We are seeing that Series X being CPU bottlenecked? Makes sense if you look at most 120Hz comparisons where the CPU is used way more than on 60Hz and PS5 pull again ahead.
The train departed years ago man...So let me get this straight...
The "corridor of doom" is "not representative of load" because the PS5 draws uncomfortably close to the PS5 in that scenario (must be a bug, or tools right?)?
However the whole scenario of doing a "benchmark" in static photomode scenes is somehow representative of load?
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
I think it's probably just you, not them.
The Series X gives higher performance on average in this test. ~15% on average.
But for you the only result that is relavent in the one with near parity,
See how it works ?
The game, or just photo mode? There is a subtle, yet important, difference.
Too bad Remedy wants parody at the detriment of people with next gen displays paired with their next gen consoles.
They're getting experience. Everything they are experiencing and learning now will aide them in their efforts later. They'll release patches and updates. All of what they learn will obviously not benefit this release, I'm assuming, but this is how things work. They will get better. So I even look at these early port efforts with a positive outlook.
I do not think this game is optimized well and the console are probably more capable than what this game has shown. SX has 18% compute advantage on paper so you would expect it to do better on synthetic benchmarking like this one. But in real world case it is not able to keep up the advantage.
Same goes for the RAM and CPU as well. On paper SX CPU should be faster ? as PS5 has variable frequency and it max is still 100mhz slower than SX. However depending on how the console manage the task like i/o, sound etc. PS5 as some other said does on par if not better on 120fps mode as well. SX should have advantage if games uses 10gb or less RAM but since PS5 has uniform 448gb/sec BW and faster SSD it will have advantage otherwise.
The other options are locked to 30fpsThere's a reason those benchmarks are not used anymore. They are not applicable to real world performance.
I don't know... maybe in an actually gaming scenario just as you would always do when benchmarking hardware?
There isn't a gameplay experience with an unlocked frame rate currently.Let’s be grown ups, benchmarks are supposed to be representative of your gameplay experience. This “benchmark” is misleading.
Exactly, im surprised df have fallen into this obvious mistake. You don't say look at photomode doing so well so clearly the game could be pushed higher when you have seen gameplay struggling.He is right if the performance in Photo Mode is the same as in Gameplay.
That we know it is not.
So let me get this straight...
The "corridor of doom" is "not representative of load" because the PS5 draws uncomfortably close to the PS5 in that scenario (must be a bug, or tools right?)?
However the whole scenario of doing a "benchmark" in static photomode scenes is somehow representative of load?
They aren't even trying to hide it anymore.
What game is there to test? All the games are locked at 30fps or don't have ray traced reflections. This is a special case, and absolutely worth the video.This is a wild, wild idea, but hear me out ... Perhaps they could test the consoles in real-world gaming performance?
The other options are locked to 30fps
Taking pictures?so its better on the X?
so its better on the X?
. The game is simply better optimized for the Playstation 5 than it is for the Series X,
haven't read the whole thread but I seen the 16% better performance? whats that in?Taking pictures?
Well it looks like you don't have a better option. I'm sorry the video upsets you. I like the video.Yes because the developers did not optimise that mode above 30fps on consoles. Nobody knows how that mode will perform in a real-time gaming scenario.
Unless you're going to tell me that because this photomode scenario which isolates the GPU (artificially by the way because the scenes are completely static so it's only stressing certain components within the GPU, not the GPU as a whole) is somehow going to be representative of how it would perform in-game? In which case, congratulations, we are right back to where we started before launch where everyone was looking at certain numbers in isolation and drawing conclusions.
haven't read the whole thread but I seen the 16% better performance? whats that in?
Yes because the developers did not optimise that mode above 30fps on consoles. Nobody knows how that mode will perform in a real-time gaming scenario.
Unless you're going to tell me that because this photomode scenario which isolates the GPU (artificially by the way because the scenes are completely static so it's only stressing certain components within the GPU, not the GPU as a whole) is somehow going to be representative of how it would perform in-game? In which case, congratulations, we are right back to where we started before launch where everyone was looking at certain numbers in isolation and drawing conclusions.
A safe bet would be to say it will continue to swing per game or even per area and scene in a game.This is easily my favorite gen in decades. The XSX and PS5 have already provided more entertainment value than the Xbone and PS4 ever could.
We need a 120Hz mode in the photo mode now. Please, Remedy, do it. Static photos at buttery-smooth frame rates!Photo mode only
Taking pictures. Only represents photomode, not gameplay. PS5 has a slight advantage in gameplay, which is exaggerated by the stutter that occurs on Series X.haven't read the whole thread but I seen the 16% better performance? whats that in?
Nah I don't think that's the case. It simply API difference, until it's going to be proven by die shot (where is it???). Because I don't believe you can easily do some Zen 2.5 and API overhead (especially CPU) is well documented difference between Playstation and Xbox...It’s been widely rumored that PS5 CPU has Zen3 like cache optimizations, where XSX doesn’t, so it should be running notably faster. The 100mhz is insignificant in comparison.