• 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

assurdum

Banned
The PC version of Watch Dogs also provided the console settings. Both XSX and PS5 had the texture filtering set to ultra. That's how we know it's a bug.
Let's me guess: Dictator is the source, right? They could have used the ultra on both and after lowering a bit on series X because it caused some perfomance issue. It's called customisation.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Banned
Dude, the settings are in the config file of the game. It's not a conspiracy, everyone can look it up.
It's not conspiracy. If they decreased a bit the texture filtering not necessarily appears in the config file if it was ported as ultra setting. Paradoxically such configuration couldn't even exist "officially" in the graphic setting, because it's done specifically for series X on the fly . It's simple logic.
 
Last edited:

WildBoy

Member
Maybe it's time to stop deluding yourself?
XSX has worse framerate, worse texture filtering and just a higher absolute upper bound in the dynamic res range which tells nothing about how much time it manifests and is sustained in actual gameplay situations.

XSX isn't performing better unless you only see what you want to see and even in this case it's just an other title where the two consoles end up doing the same for all practical purposes, which is a big defeat for the narrative that Microsoft wanted to create last year and fans like you wanted to believe.

Do you have both machines?
 

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
I just went off the preview trailer. Looks like a B /C tier shooter. I never play these kinds of games.
yeah, im afraid ive turned into an AAA only snob, but I wanted to give this one a shot since there is pretty much nothing else out at the moment and I like People Can Fly games.

I understand that cross gen games are limited by last gen hardware, but this is a post launch game and surely they can include higher quality assets and other visual upgrades to make it stand out. Just slapping 4k 60 fps on top of a shit looking game is not going to make it look pretty all of a sudden.
 

Haggard

Banned
Please, read the article. It´s reviewed by doctors. Our eye vision has limitations.

Horrendous bullshit!
Our eyes don`t see in "fps" but we can very well perceive the fluidity and clarity higher fps + higher hz provide!
 
Last edited:

Mr Moose

Member
...at identical resolution and graphics settings.

This thread started out as an interesting comparison since both versions were said to run at native 4K, but at this point it’s nothing but pointless console war fuel.
It always turns into console war stuff, even with shit(?) demos like this.
I watched a video on Twitter that had a cutscene just to jump over a gap, such a weird game.
I'll try and find it and update this post lol.
 
Last edited:

kuncol02

Banned
It always turns into console war stuff, even with shit(?) demos like this.
I watched a video on Twitter that had a cutscene just to jump over a gap, such a weird game.
I'll try and find it and update this post lol.

That's how you start that specific side mission. In this game everyone in team needs to agree to start mission so they are on separate arenas (behing doors, etc). It's milions times better than how Warframe handle that when you could just load map and rest of your team was already fighting boss.
 

StreetsofBeige

Gold Member
It always turns into console war stuff, even with shit(?) demos like this.
I watched a video on Twitter that had a cutscene just to jump over a gap, such a weird game.
I'll try and find it and update this post lol.

Walks up to gap carrying rifles and holsters at the hip

Jumps over gap without guns

Continues into dark corridor with guns
 

Mr Moose

Member
That's how you start that specific side mission. In this game everyone in team needs to agree to start mission so they are on separate arenas (behing doors, etc). It's milions times better than how Warframe handle that when you could just load map and rest of your team was already fighting boss.
Oh? That's not that bad then, I thought it was so weird seeing a loading cutscene just for a jump lol.
 

Loope

Member
Is this supposed to be a very dumb joke?
Episode 2 Comedy GIF by Everything's Gonna Be Okay


At this point i don't know anymore.
 

Loope

Member
Why you care so much to have higher resolution with such perfomance? I don't get it. Because it's higher of the ps5? Higher dynamic resolution it's very deceiving. VGTECH said there isn't an average resolution, it's extremely dynamic on both. No one would notice a shit. More easily they will feel the FPS difference.
Well resolution does affect performance, but i agree with you. Why push more pixels if the performance won't be solid.
 

IntentionalPun

Ask me about my wife's perfect butthole
Please, read the article. It´s reviewed by doctors. Our eye vision has limitations.

Aside from being kind of bullshit from a visual perspective (just try it w/ a 120hz monitor and a machine that can render a game at 120hz)... framerate is also tied to the responsiveness of a game's controls. So even if you couldn't visually notice the difference, you'll feel the difference.
 

Fredrik

Member
yeah, im afraid ive turned into an AAA only snob, but I wanted to give this one a shot since there is pretty much nothing else out at the moment and I like People Can Fly games.

I understand that cross gen games are limited by last gen hardware, but this is a post launch game and surely they can include higher quality assets and other visual upgrades to make it stand out. Just slapping 4k 60 fps on top of a shit looking game is not going to make it look pretty all of a sudden.
I like how it plays on PC at least, I’ve only played to old Shira but so far it reminds me of Gears of War with the cover mechanics, not as distinct though but I certainly don’t think it’s bad. I could do without the gore though, having an off switch in a menu should really be standard by now. And 30fps in cinematics on PC? Looks like shit when gameplay hovers at 120-150fps.
 

Fredrik

Member
It always turns into console war stuff, even with shit(?) demos like this.
I watched a video on Twitter that had a cutscene just to jump over a gap, such a weird game.
I'll try and find it and update this post lol.

Lol I haven’t seen that, even more hilarious with the long pause 😂

For the most part it plays well though.

Biggest problem for me was the cutscene fps, there is severe stutter, I don’t know if it gets worse on a 144hz screen or something, some frame pacing issue when trying to crank it down to 30 maybe, looks insanely bad anyway. Hopefully it’s just a demo problem.
 

Md Ray

Member
I don't know why this topic is such a heated one. There is no debate that by en large, the Series X is more powerful than the PS5.
That doesn't mean that every Series X version of a game will perform/look better than the PS5 version.
You can agree that the Series X is more powerful and at the same time accept that not every Series X game will be better. An inferior Series X version isn't proof that the Series X hardware is less capabable, because it factually isn't. Why is that such a tough pill to swallow?
 

Schmick

Member
XSX is a 4K machine? How is PS5 holding back XSX?
Why are you answering my question with more questions? I have no idea if the PS5 is holding back the XBX? Is it?

Both the PS5 and XBX are billed as 4K machines are they not?
 

Md Ray

Member
Bandwidth is everything IMO. Nothing else comes close to being so critical. In consoles, they are bandwidth starved for just about everything. Nothing is free.
Do you have any data/screenshot from the profiling tools and such like the one shown in that tweet that proves this? Would like to see it. Thanks.
 

kuncol02

Banned
Do you have any data/screenshot from the profiling tools and such like the one shown in that tweet that proves this? Would like to see it. Thanks.
Just fact that on PC 16xAF is standard for like 20 years should be enough proof for that.
 

Md Ray

Member
Also no FPS difference with a VRR capable TV.
This is nonsense. The fps difference is there, you just don't get the judder that happens on a display with a fixed refresh rate. The input lag that comes when frame-rate drops occur is also there, VRR isn't some magic that magically fixes that issue. In this case, PS5 would feel more responsive on the stick due to consistent, actual 60fps. The way it should be.
 
This is nonsense. The fps difference is there, you just don't get the judder that happens on a display with a fixed refresh rate. The input lag that comes when frame-rate drops occur is also there, VRR isn't some magic that magically fixes that issue. In this case, PS5 would feel more responsive on the stick due to consistent, actual 60fps. The way it should be.
Dropping from 60 to say 57 fps increases the input lag by a whopping 1 (one) millisecond. The controller lag alone is several times that. You won't feel the difference.
 

Md Ray

Member
20% more graphics performance
Resolution =/= graphics

Two very different things.
Dropping from 60 to say 57 fps increases the input lag by a whopping 1 (one) millisecond. The controller lag alone is several times that. You won't feel the difference.
Looking at the 1st percentile there's close to a 15% difference in fps between PS5 and XSX. Enough to feel the difference in input lag due to lower frame-rate. PS5 clearly wins here.
 
Last edited:

Fredrik

Member
This is nonsense. The fps difference is there, you just don't get the judder that happens on a display with a fixed refresh rate. The input lag that comes when frame-rate drops occur is also there, VRR isn't some magic that magically fixes that issue. In this case, PS5 would feel more responsive on the stick due to consistent, actual 60fps. The way it should be.
A framerate difference between 55 VRR and 60 nonVRR won’t be felt in this game. It’s 1.5ms.
The problem here is that a VRR TV cost like $2k... I think I prefer the fix where the devs simply lower the resolution.
 

Stuart360

Member
Jesus, 12 pages for a fucking demo. A demo that is probably months old. A demo for a game that, judging from the impressions thread, most people seem to hate. Its Dirt 5 all over again lol.
I played the demo on PC and it has weird gpu usage problems (frame drops in the hub area, with gpu usage going down with those drops, instead of going up, a clear sign of bad optimization).
At least wait for the finished game guys.
 
Resolution =/= graphics

Two very different things.

Looking at the 1st percentile there's close to a 15% difference in fps between PS5 and XSX. Enough to feel the difference in input lag due to lower frame-rate. PS5 clearly wins here.
Even if I go by your cherrypicked numbers, the difference is below 2 (two) milliseconds. Humans aren't physically able to tell 2 milliseconds apart.

And resolution is a big part of graphics, otherwise we'd still game at 240p. Also it's a 10% difference. Math really isn't that hard.
 

Shmunter

Member
Seriously, would anybody wilfully buy this game on Xbox if the current state doesn’t change?

I do suspect it will be patched, the poor performance is simply too obvious for the devs to brush away, but again fans need to express their disdain. If you support shoddy outcomes, you’ll just get more in the future.
 

VFXVeteran

Banned
Do you have any data/screenshot from the profiling tools and such like the one shown in that tweet that proves this? Would like to see it. Thanks.

This guy is working on the console. I am not. It's very very easy to tell in a game if it's bandwidth starved. Just look at the render to framebuffer resolution. Nearly all of the console games released so far is using some form of upscaling to 4k. That tells you right away that it doesn't have enough bandwidth to write true 4k framebuffers unless the rendering pipepline is overly simplistic (i.e. sacrifices from the norm are removed). Also, look at the RT on the consoles. We all know that RT requires loads of bandwidth. So far, we have not seen a single game implement ALL of the RT features at one time on a console (like Cyberpunk, Metro, or Control does on the PC) and maintain a reasonable target render framerate.
 
We had this with Control Photo Mode and the losing side went into a complete meltdown because "photo mode doesn't count" even though it's basically the perfect GPU benchmark.


It's not a bug, the XSX just pushes up to 32% more resolution.
With both Control and this game ps5 has the edge in actual performance.


-Xbox Series X use dynamic resolution 3456x1944 - 2261x1272.
-PlayStation 5 use dynamic resolution 3008x1692 - 2112x1188.
-Xbox Series S use dynamic resolution too 2304x1296 - 1536x864.
-Resolution : XSX > PS5 > XSS.
-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.
-The PS5 holds the 60fps most of the time unlike the Xbox Series.
-Framerate : PS5 > XSX > XSS.

Overall : PS5 > XSX > XSS.

Agreed.

PS5 advantage
59/53 = 1.113
XSX advantage
2876992/2509056 = 1.14.62

Under load the difference is an 11.3% increase in FPS (near locked fps) which is far more important than a scant (unnoticeable) 14.6% bump in pixels also under load. And with even LG OLEDs unable to handle VRR correctly no one can really take advantage of this yet.
 

sinnergy

Member
With both Control and this game ps5 has the edge in actual performance.

Agreed.

PS5 advantage
59/53 = 1.113
XSX advantage
2876992/2509056 = 1.14.62

Under load the difference is an 11.3% increase in FPS (near locked fps) which is far more important than a scant (unnoticeable) 14.6% bump in pixels also under load. And with even LG OLEDs unable to handle VRR correctly no one can really take advantage of this yet.
You read it here folks, image quality is not important! No need to buy that OLED, CRT will be sufficient.
 
Last edited:

muteZX

Banned
You read it here folks, image quality is not important! No need to buy that OLED, CRT will be sufficient.

First post, fist page : "Both versions are running at native 4k"

For a long time, everyone thought that both versions are running at native 4K and no one noticed that this was not the case or which version was better. Even simply implemented DRS is enough for no one to notice anything. However, the XSX version has a very unstable framerate /"tearing", "stuttering"/ and tearing is part of the image quality. Amen.
 
Interesting. I know that with Watch Dogs it was a bug, so maybe it's the same bug in the demo.
It's only a bug because DF said it was a bug. They also said the XSX missing some effects in COD was also a bug.

But I think they would not talk about a bug if those problems were found on PS5. PS5 having worse texture filtering? I can already heard them saying the PS5 bandwidth is too weak to handle AF. But for XSX is clearly a bug (as it couldn't be a hardware limitation).

They don't know shit.
 
With both Control and this game ps5 has the edge in actual performance.

Agreed.

PS5 advantage
59/53 = 1.113
XSX advantage
2876992/2509056 = 1.14.62

Under load the difference is an 11.3% increase in FPS (near locked fps) which is far more important than a scant (unnoticeable) 14.6% bump in pixels also under load. And with even LG OLEDs unable to handle VRR correctly no one can really take advantage of this yet.
That's the maximum resolution used. But the XSX advantage is only 9% using the minimum resolutions. Do you think the game is spending most of the time in the higher resolutions, notably when the game usually runs at 55fps on XSX and usually 60fps on PS5?
 
Top Bottom