• 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.

Outriders Demo - PS5 and Series X graphics and performance comparison

Heres what the creator of claybook said.. another's dev among a dozen who've said the same thing, teraflops aren't everything.
iumqTfw.jpg
mmAn0KQ.jpg

I think here the main idea is simply wider against deeper GPU. And you'll see, in the futur, with optimized games for the next-gen consoles (not crossgen/BC), some will work better on XsX, some others on PS5, because they have their advantages (and their drawbacks) on each sides.
 
Heres what the creator of claybook said.. another's dev among a dozen who've said the same thing, teraflops aren't everything.
iumqTfw.jpg
mmAn0KQ.jpg

Makes sense. I know that it isn't as simple as " more CUs= Superior performance". That does work to an extent but there's many other factors that influence the performance of a game.

I think the main issue is that people only focus on one part instead of the whole package. It's why they are confused when they don't get one system vastly outperforming the other.
 

assurdum

Banned
DRS not working as intended I think on XsX, simply need to be more agressive, I'm pretty sure finally XsX=PS5 with this game
It's only that. If you look to the lowest res, there isn't absolutely that gulf in pixels counts. 14% of more pixels at the lowest and 32% at the higher? The fuck?
 

RobRSG

Member
The regret I have is that I downloaded this turd twice. :) The Series X version didn’t even let me in game, as the server connection seemed to be broken when I tried.

Tested it on the PS5... Game looks ugly as fuck, generic as fuck and boring as fuck.

Everyone should avoid this shit.
 

Fredrik

Member
Sometimes but not always. Anyway, almost nobody in the world cant notice the difference of between 55-60 fps and less with VRR. But I’m pretty sure that everybody can notice a lower resolution in 65 or more inches.
I can barely see the difference between 1080p and 4K on my 65 inch TV about 3 meters away. 🥸
Well I see the resolution figures at the corner of the screen...

As far as I’m concerned it’s a waste.

And like I said, I’m above 100fps at all times with everything set to ultra on my PC just because I still have 1080p screens.

I don’t see why XSX shouldn’t be able to do something similar, this PC is not a beastly rig at all - 1080Ti, 3800x, RAM is nothing special and the SSD is 2GB/s.

But the devs are constantly going bananas with the resolution and everything else gets a lower priority.
 

huraga

Banned
In a dynamic res setup? Are you at least rereaded what are your trying to argue? Thanks to God only the others are fanboys there.
Everybody can notice 300px more in a vertical line. But even between 55-60 without VRS is almost imposible. Even i can tell more, almost nobody in the world can notice more than 60fps.
 

huraga

Banned
I can barely see the difference between 1080p and 4K on my 65 inch TV about 3 meters away. 🥸
Well I see the resolution figures at the corner of the screen...

As far as I’m concerned it’s a waste.

And like I said, I’m above 100fps at all times with everything set to ultra on my PC just because I still have 1080p screens.

I don’t see why XSX shouldn’t be able to do something similar, this PC is not a beastly rig at all - 1080Ti, 3800x, RAM is nothing special and the SSD is 2GB/s.

But the devs are constantly going bananas with the resolution and everything else gets a lower priority.
If you cant notice a clear diference between 1080p and 4k at 3m then I recomend you use glasses.

For me 100fps doesnt make sense except only to sell graphics cards, thats why the new trend of 120fps. It remember me this Megapixels in a Camera.
 

quest

Not Banned from OT
I can barely see the difference between 1080p and 4K on my 65 inch TV about 3 meters away. 🥸
Well I see the resolution figures at the corner of the screen...

As far as I’m concerned it’s a waste.

And like I said, I’m above 100fps at all times with everything set to ultra on my PC just because I still have 1080p screens.

I don’t see why XSX shouldn’t be able to do something similar, this PC is not a beastly rig at all - 1080Ti, 3800x, RAM is nothing special and the SSD is 2GB/s.

But the devs are constantly going bananas with the resolution and everything else gets a lower priority.
Because the series x is an after thought to teams at this point until Microsoft can increase mindshare then marketshare. Until then it will be spend 80% of their time on the PS5 version to make sure it runs great. With any time left over quick port over a version to the series x and if runs with out issues ship it. No optimizations or using things like sfs.
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Banned
Higher res for a few less frames or lower res for a more stable perf...

It is a demo of build that nobody knows the age of. The full release could either replicate todays results or rectify everything.

Until then, this thread should be closed to stop the bickering.
 
I think here the main idea is simply wider against deeper GPU. And you'll see, in the futur, with optimized games for the next-gen consoles (not crossgen/BC), some will work better on XsX, some others on PS5, because they have their advantages (and their drawbacks) on each sides.
Exactly this isn't new it's been a thing for decades it's just recently that people consider teraflops as everything. They forgot PS3 had more gigaflops on its gpu than x360 and the cell cpu actually had 2 teraflops which was more than ps4s tf but it couldn't beat the Xbox 360 for almost all multiplayer titles. Because of its bandwidth bottleneck and the complexity of the cell. There's more to engineering than paper specs.
 

Leyasu

Banned
Bizarely some Xbox fans defend tooth and nail resolution over performance. I guess devs are catering to their preference. Yeah, it’s crazy, but what you going to do.
Yeah, because devs are getting their nods from the rabid fanboys on gaf... Both sides.
 
Makes sense. I know that it isn't as simple as " more CUs= Superior performance". That does work to an extent but there's many other factors that influence the performance of a game.

I think the main issue is that people only focus on one part instead of the whole package. It's why they are confused when they don't get one system vastly outperforming the other.
This has always been the case since ever, I've seen this comparisons as far as I can remember it's the old x360 vs PS3. X360 efficiently engineered PS3 more gigaflops with a 2 teraflops cpu faster than PS4 gpu but still couldn't beat x360 in multiplats.

Engineering matters a lot not paper specs.
 

huraga

Banned
This has always been the case since ever, I've seen this comparisons as far as I can remember it's the old x360 vs PS3. X360 efficiently engineered PS3 more gigaflops with a 2 teraflops cpu faster than PS4 gpu but still couldn't beat x360 in multiplats.

Engineering matters a lot not paper specs.
Well, in the end of the generation PS3 was at the same level of X360 in multis and PS3 was above in graphics in their exclusives. Tflops matter but it´s not the most important. There are more things in the ecuation, same than with cars. we can´t be extremists
 
Last edited:

Fredrik

Member
If you cant notice a clear diference between 1080p and 4k at 3m then I recomend you use glasses.

For me 100fps doesnt make sense except only to sell graphics cards, thats why the new trend of 120fps. It remember me this Megapixels in a Camera.
Lol oh I definitely have glasses but I just had to tell my story since you said everybody would see a resolution difference.

Regarding the framerate, 60fps is great but 100fps is better, with mouse controls it feels snappier and looks smoother.
But I absolutely agree that 55 or 60fps makes no difference with VRR.
 

01011001

Banned
If you cant notice a clear diference between 1080p and 4k at 3m then I recomend you use glasses.

For me 100fps doesnt make sense except only to sell graphics cards, thats why the new trend of 120fps. It remember me this Megapixels in a Camera.

you can't shittalk someone about resolution and then come with that shit about 120fps not making sense.
120fps+ is way better than 60fps.
 
Higher res for a few less frames or lower res for a more stable perf...

It is a demo of build that nobody knows the age of. The full release could either replicate todays results or rectify everything.

Until then, this thread should be closed to stop the bickering.

Ehhh I’d say let them bicker, unless it get’s overly hostile.

I’m more interested in the tech, and we still get the odd bit that isn’t complete bullshit. The system warriors can make good entertainment in between though.
 

Mr.ODST

Member
Ehhh I’d say let them bicker, unless it get’s overly hostile.

I’m more interested in the tech, and we still get the odd bit that isn’t complete bullshit. The system warriors can make good entertainment in between though.
Dont think alot of people on here who think they are "Industry Insiders" understand these demo builds are normally built and finished 2-3 months before their release and go through testing but also are a rebuilt version of the actual game code.

Ill be picking it up on my PS5 due to my friends playing on there more
 
Well, in the end of the generation PS3 was at the same level of X360 in multis and PS3 was above in graphics in their exclusives. Tflops matter but it´s not the most important. There are more things in the ecuation, same than with cars. we can´t be extremists
We could argue a lot buyback even at the end it couldn't beat x360 games like GTA 5 and call of duty always had better fps and res on x360 and about the exclusives Sony always have better or talented devs than Xbox infact in the industry so that matters too.
 

huraga

Banned
Ehhh I’d say let them bicker, unless it get’s overly hostile.

I’m more interested in the tech, and we still get the odd bit that isn’t complete bullshit. The system warriors can make good entertainment in between though.
Well, maybe the doctors knows a little bit more about it than the people in this sector. Some experts says that for human eye is impossible notice more than 60-75fps/s. Maybe you prefer believe in devs or graphics cards companies.

https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps#how-vision-works
 
Last edited:

huraga

Banned
We could argue a lot buyback even at the end it couldn't beat x360 games like GTA 5 and call of duty always had better fps and res on x360 and about the exclusives Sony always have better or talented devs than Xbox infact in the industry so that matters too.
That is a myth, there are many great developers in third and first parties and there isn´t that big difference of talent.. Developers can be very talented but they need power and time to show it. First Party studios know more about their system and how to get more power from it and they have more time to do it. Third Parties studios the time is their first problem and they need to launch the product asap.
 
That is a myth, there are many great developers in third and first parties and there isn´t that big difference of talent.. Developers can be very talented but they need power and time to show it. First Party studios know more about their system and how to get more power from it and they have more time to do it. Third Parties studios the time is their first problem and they need to launch the product asap.
It's not a myth, and also your right first party devs have all the time and money to make games for one platform so that also answers ur question it wasn't about ps3s teraflops. First party devs had time and money to invest on it n if the same devs made a game say uncharted on x360 it would look just as good as it did on PS3.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
What BC titles? Most titles use the full power of the PS5.
Ok, I think its time for you to step away from the keyboard....


There is a thread for FF7R where the ....devs.....say folks are gonna have to wait for the next chapter to see the PS5 being used to its fullest. I'm assuming a next gen version or PS5 only.

It should be clear by now that BC games dont do as well on PS5 vs next gen versions. And when the cross gen period ends.....look out.

If you cant tell the difference between a BC game vs a next gen version....you are really wasting ppl's time in comparison threads. But there is a solution for that.....
 
Last edited:
Exactly this isn't new it's been a thing for decades it's just recently that people consider teraflops as everything. They forgot PS3 had more gigaflops on its gpu than x360 and the cell cpu actually had 2 teraflops which was more than ps4s tf but it couldn't beat the Xbox 360 for almost all multiplayer titles. Because of its bandwidth bottleneck and the complexity of the cell. There's more to engineering than paper specs.

This has always been the case since ever, I've seen this comparisons as far as I can remember it's the old x360 vs PS3. X360 efficiently engineered PS3 more gigaflops with a 2 teraflops cpu faster than PS4 gpu but still couldn't beat x360 in multiplats.

Engineering matters a lot not paper specs.

It's not a myth, and also your right first party devs have all the time and money to make games for one platform so that also answers ur question it wasn't about ps3s teraflops. First party devs had time and money to invest on it n if the same devs made a game say uncharted on x360 it would look just as good as it did on PS3.

I dunno what are you smoking, but PS3 never had 2 teraflops. That was marketing crap.
 

huraga

Banned
It's not a myth, and also your right first party devs have all the time and money to make games for one platform so that also answers ur question it wasn't about ps3s teraflops. First party devs had time and money to invest on it n if the same devs made a game say uncharted on x360 it would look just as good as it did on PS3.
We will never know it... Anyway I'm pretty sure that both systems from current generation will surprise us with their exclusives more than ever.
 

Fredrik

Member
Well, maybe the doctors knows a little bit more about it than the people in this sector. Some experts says that for human eye is impossible notice more than 60fps/s. Maybe you prefer believe in devs or graphics cards companies.

https://www.healthline.com/health/human-eye-fps#how-vision-works

TLDR
Gamers are awesome and while it differs from person to person most gamers will start thinking it’s enough at around 200fps. Personally I’m fine with about 100fps in a mouse controlled game as long as I have gsync to hide micro stutters. 60fps on PC is the absolute minimum since you have snappier controls than on consoles that will make fast movements look and feel like crap in a low fps. 30fps is unplayable on PC.
 
I dunno what are you smoking, but PS3 never had 2 teraflops. That was marketing crap.
The cell cpu had 2 teraflops it's not marketing the cell was a complex processor a kind of a hybrid of a gpu and a cpu and cell processors by nature have More teraflops than traditional cpus like x86 ones I wouldn't be surprised if a cell processor made in 2020 would have 20 teraflops. The problem isn't the cell processor is complex to design code for atleast for games it's basically good as a super computer not very good in gaming. There's things that cpu could do that some modern cpus can't.
 
The cell cpu had 2 teraflops it's not marketing the cell was a complex processor a kind of a hybrid of a gpu and a cpu and cell processors by nature have More teraflops than traditional cpus like x86 ones I wouldn't be surprised if a cell processor made in 2020 would have 20 teraflops. The problem isn't the cell processor is complex to design code for atleast for games it's basically good as a super computer not very good in gaming. There's things that cpu could do that some modern cpus can't.

It had around 10 times less. Around 230 GFlops.

Btw. for the record, 1.8 TF ( LOL) was for the RSX, not the Cell. You've mixed up things. But of course, RSX didn't have so much TFLOPS either
 
Last edited:

Elios83

Member
The cell cpu had 2 teraflops it's not marketing the cell was a complex processor a kind of a hybrid of a gpu and a cpu and cell processors by nature have More teraflops than traditional cpus like x86 ones I wouldn't be surprised if a cell processor made in 2020 would have 20 teraflops. The problem isn't the cell processor is complex to design code for atleast for games it's basically good as a super computer not very good in gaming. There's things that cpu could do that some modern cpus can't.

You're remembering it wrong.
Cell as used in PS3 with 7 SPEs activated had 230 Gigaflops.
It was nVidia that claimed that RSX was a 1.8TF GPU (so the whole PS3 was a 2TF system) but it was typical nVidia bullshit because that was not the throughput of the programmable floating point units which was in the 200-250 Gigaflops range as well.
On paper PS3 had a much more powerful CPU than 360 and a slightly less powerful GPU. Overall PS3 was the more powerful system on paper but to translate that superiority in real world games developers had to fully learn how to use Cell to offload graphical tasks from the GPU. Only first party developers focused on that since the beginning while third parties basically reached that result towards the end of the generation (2012-2013).
 
Last edited:
You should have put some Chinese kid there. I'm so bad, someone cancel me before I do it myself.
I think here the main idea is simply wider against deeper GPU. And you'll see, in the futur, with optimized games for the next-gen consoles (not crossgen/BC), some will work better on XsX, some others on PS5, because they have their advantages (and their drawbacks) on each sides.
I could not have said it better, they can close the thread now.
 

93xfan

Banned


Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3456x1944 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2261x1272. On Xbox Series X a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3008x1692 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2112x1188. On PS5 a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.
 
Last edited:


Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3456x1944 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2261x1272. On Xbox Series X a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3008x1692 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2112x1188. On PS5 a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.

i thought something was off about the ps5 version......running at lower settings
game holds a more steady framerate but the ps5 version looks washed out...as people have mentioned its still only a demo so hopefully both versions get some boosts
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Member
Everybody can notice 300px more in a vertical line. But even between 55-60 without VRS is almost imposible. Even i can tell more, almost nobody in the world can notice more than 60fps.
Not when the game is reconstructed to 4k surely.
 

Dlacy13g

Member
Taking a demo and doing a comparison video like its final code trying to get console war hits on the video (despite the cloim he is not tying to do that is stupid.
 
A stronger console that cant keep up with frame rates. One chart also says PS5 have better texture filtering.

So sacrifices have to be made for the XSX to have better frame rates.
Let me dumb this down for you: if PS5 pushed the same resolution as the XSX, it would perform even worse.
 

Shmunter

Member
I don't want to disturb your cope but the image is sharper when you reconstruct from a higher base resolution like the XSX does in this case.
When your looking at the sky or feet?

I can’t imagine XsX is running higher rez while dropping frames like knickers at a Beatles concert.

Unless it is, then it would clearly be broken.
 


Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3456x1944 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2261x1272. On Xbox Series X a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 3008x1692 and the lowest native resolution found being approximately 2112x1188. On PS5 a form of temporal reconstruction is used to increase the resolution up to 3840x2160.


Riddle me this...when is a “win” not a “win”? When the better-performing version looks like garbage and takes shortcuts to get there?
 
i thought something was off about the ps5 version......running at lower settings
game holds a more steady framerate but the ps5 version looks washed out...as people have mentioned its still only a demo so hopefully both versions get some boosts

-The PS5 and XSX versions have graphical improvements over the XSS such as additional trees, higher foliage density, better textures and improved view distance for certain shadows.
-Texture filtering is better on PS5 compared to XSX.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
Are we really doing comparisons on a Demo now?
It's a step up from battling which game has smaller patch size.

 
Top Bottom