Lol oh
-
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: The Touryst PS5 - The First 8K 60fps Console Game
- Thread starter Bullet Club
- Start date
Darlingcognito
Member
.
Last edited:
I know they made changes to the game but it's still a pretty good resolution bump ,
Orta
Banned
That games deserves a much bigger audience than the one it is confined to on the Switch. It absolutely wipes the floor with Wipeout imo.
Rossco EZ
Member
coffinbirth
Member
I liked Fast RMX as much as the next guy, but "absolutely wipes the floor with Wipeout" is not a take I've seen before....and must heartily disagree. It isn't anywhere near as good as either game it rips off.
Fast RMX is good. Wipeout is GREAT. F-Zero is God-Tier.
Obviously all opinions and down to personal preference, not trying to start a futuristic racer debate, lol.
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
I really miss the last time I played WipEout… one of the most enjoying Platinum I got.
This franchise needs a reboot ASAP.
F-Zero was a hit or miss to me… I did not like the SNES one but loved the N64… sadly I never played another one after that (my Wii to go racing was Mario Kart Wii).
Last edited:
Lognor
Banned
But had to give up a lot to get it. Apples and oranges
MasterCornholio
Member
Well the XSX had to give up resolution for those additional settings.
It all depends on what your preferences are.
Edit: I don't think either version of the game is ideal BTW.
Last edited:
Lognor
Banned
Fair enough. I'll take the slight hit for the added rt. Shrug
MasterCornholio
Member
Well the RT is pretty poor in this game compared to other titles.
FrankWza
Member
Look at his join date and post history. Not worth derailing imo.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
StateofMajora
Banned
Wait when have they said 1800p vs 4k was a big difference? They seem to say it’s not as i recall. And it’s really not noticeable at all if we are talking apples to apples, i.e. same AA.According to DF:
Below HD on PS3 vs 720p on 360 - Big difference
900p on X1 vs 1080p on PS4 - Small difference
1440p on PS4Pro vs 4K on X1X - Big difference
1800p on PS5 vs 4K on XSX - Big difference
6K on XSX vs 8K on PS5 - Small difference
Those returns sure keep diminishing and growing all the time.
Ps3 sub hd resolution could be pretty rough. 900p vs 1080p is noticeable but not huge. 1080p to 1440p is a bigger difference.
1440 to 4k can be a big difference but definitely not bigger than 1080p to 1440p.
Looking at the compute difference alone it would have been accepted as normal if the game was ported from Xbox Series X to PS5 with the same resolution & lower RT settings.
Hoddi
Member
To be fair, it's Shin'en. Their games look way better than they have any right to and The Touryst is a game that runs at 1080p60 on a 2015 mobile GPU.
It's usually not very hard to run Nintendo games at 8k60 in emulators. My 2080Ti runs Mario Kart 8 at 10k60 without missing a beat and Zelda WW and TP can both basically run at 16k. They're admittedly only in the 25-30fps range but still.
Either way, I'm not really impressed that the PS5 can run The Touryst at 8k. I'm more amazed that the XSX can't because what the hell is wrong with it?
Weird memory setup also some shortcuts with the geometry & ROP setup
Lognor
Banned
Looks great to me, but I don't have much experience with RT.
MasterCornholio
Member
I've seen other games do more with RT like Ratchet, Miles or Watchdogs in my opinion. RT seems very basic in this title.
Lognor
Banned
You've seen the RT on the XSX or on youtube videos or what? Gotta see it in action. Very good imo. Gameplay isn't great but RT is very good. Glad to have the rt in this title
MasterCornholio
Member
Mostly in Digital Foundry videos. And from reading their articles the RT implementation seems pretty basic. Which is understandable because they are running two instances of the game at once. If the developers were running only one im pretty sure they could do a lot better with the RT.
This isn't a knock on the Series just a criticism of what the devs did with the game.
Anyways I believe
FrankWza
is right about this derailing the thread. We should move this discussion to the Digital Foundry Medium thread if we want to continue it.
Last edited:
TheTechnician
Banned
So i thought about the Difference between Xbox X and PS5 in The Tourist again..
And how large it actually is..
Xbox X - 6k
PS5 - 8k
6k = 5760 x 3240 = 18,662,400 pixels
8k = 7680 x 4320 = 33,177,600 pixels!
That's 14.5 million pixels more that the PS5 displays here
There are complete Resolutions hiding in that Number...
It is already clear that The Tourist is an indie game and you can't expect 8k for AAA titles. Granted - but that's never been the point.
The 8k from The Tourist are particularly useful for one thing:
Namely to illustrate the advantages that the PS5 can have with new Next Gen Engines.
All titles that have appeared on Xbox X and PS5 so far were either CrossGen titles which basically are only "aware" of the clock and Cu advantages of the new console, as if again a refresh of the same architecture had come out after the Midgen consoles - PS4 Ultra Pro
and Xbox One X^2 if you like.
Or in the case of the few Exclusives, even from Sony, it was engines that were rudimentarily adapted to the next gen.
Nothing that would bring the new architecture and especially all the co-processors of the PS5 to full use.
This is where The Tourist comes in.
An indie title - programmed by a small team, a game which uses a small custom Engine wich compared to Frostbite and other big Game Engines probably is a rather simple engine.
I suspect that their custom engine can be rebuilt and adopted relatively easily since it's so simple (compared to AAA Game Engines) and, due to its simplicity, renders quite efficiently.
So, The Tourist is not an bad omen for any future 6k / 8k duels between the two consoles - but for a general classification of the systems in terms of potential for Next Gen Engines.
Oh and thing with the Xbox - high level, PS5 low level API .. iam afraid I have to claim that one too - if that's actually true then the difference would be bigger than ever between low and high level APIs .. Especially between Playstation and Xbox APIs
If it however IS true that usage of the two APIs brings a difference of 14Million Pixels then future Comparisions (after cross gen phase) between Sony and MS Exclusives are already decided...
So Team Xbox - choose you poison..
What should it be :
Horrendous lack of API Efficiency
or
Horrendous lack of architectural Efficiency?
And how large it actually is..
Xbox X - 6k
PS5 - 8k
6k = 5760 x 3240 = 18,662,400 pixels
8k = 7680 x 4320 = 33,177,600 pixels!
That's 14.5 million pixels more that the PS5 displays here
There are complete Resolutions hiding in that Number...
It is already clear that The Tourist is an indie game and you can't expect 8k for AAA titles. Granted - but that's never been the point.
The 8k from The Tourist are particularly useful for one thing:
Namely to illustrate the advantages that the PS5 can have with new Next Gen Engines.
All titles that have appeared on Xbox X and PS5 so far were either CrossGen titles which basically are only "aware" of the clock and Cu advantages of the new console, as if again a refresh of the same architecture had come out after the Midgen consoles - PS4 Ultra Pro
and Xbox One X^2 if you like.
Or in the case of the few Exclusives, even from Sony, it was engines that were rudimentarily adapted to the next gen.
Nothing that would bring the new architecture and especially all the co-processors of the PS5 to full use.
This is where The Tourist comes in.
An indie title - programmed by a small team, a game which uses a small custom Engine wich compared to Frostbite and other big Game Engines probably is a rather simple engine.
I suspect that their custom engine can be rebuilt and adopted relatively easily since it's so simple (compared to AAA Game Engines) and, due to its simplicity, renders quite efficiently.
So, The Tourist is not an bad omen for any future 6k / 8k duels between the two consoles - but for a general classification of the systems in terms of potential for Next Gen Engines.
Oh and thing with the Xbox - high level, PS5 low level API .. iam afraid I have to claim that one too - if that's actually true then the difference would be bigger than ever between low and high level APIs .. Especially between Playstation and Xbox APIs
If it however IS true that usage of the two APIs brings a difference of 14Million Pixels then future Comparisions (after cross gen phase) between Sony and MS Exclusives are already decided...
So Team Xbox - choose you poison..
What should it be :
Horrendous lack of API Efficiency
or
Horrendous lack of architectural Efficiency?
Last edited:
Tchu-Espresso
likes mayo on everthing and can't dance
Riky told me that if you grab a potato and hold in the air, squint while tilting your head 45 degrees, the 15 million pixel differential is negligible and you will be +1 potato.
MrFunSocks
Banned
Unless the Touryst was completely remade from the ground up for the Series X like it was for the PS5 then it doesn't show any advantages of the PS5 design or anything like that because you've got nothing to compare it to. It wasn't, BTW.
And let's not start this "high level /low level" api console warrior garbage.
Last edited:
Either these devs learned to code so much better in the last 10 months that they was able to get almost 2X the resolution & better depth of field out of their game or PS5 has an advantage when it come to rendering this game at high resolutions.
Mr Moose
Member
They just made it work properly with the PS5s APIs, it wasn't remade from the ground up.
Where's the proof they didn't for the Series? You can back your claim up, surely?
It's using the GDK and is a fully native app.
Edit: Here you go, I'll save you some time:
Inside Xbox Series X|S Optimized: The Touryst - Xbox Wire
One of the biggest benefits of all that power is giving developers the ability to make games that are Xbox Series X|S Optimized. This means that they’ve taken full advantage of the unique capabilities of Xbox Series X|S, both for new titles built natively using the Xbox Series X|S development...
news.xbox.com
Last edited:
ethomaz
Banned
Def already said that what made they reach 8k on PS5 and not Series X was the higher clocks of the GPU and the better memory setup.
Let’s not start that crying spin garbage.
Last edited:
Clearly the game is just running on the Switch emulator on Xbox Series X but built from the ground up for PS5.
MrFunSocks
Banned
The thread that we’re posting in says the engine was changed specifically for for the PS5. They didn’t say any such thing for the Xbox version, did they?They just made it work properly with the PS5s APIs, it wasn't remade from the ground up.
Where's the proof they didn't for the Series? You can back your claim up, surely?
It's using the GDK and is a fully native app.
Edit: Here you go, I'll save you some time:
Inside Xbox Series X|S Optimized: The Touryst - Xbox Wire
One of the biggest benefits of all that power is giving developers the ability to make games that are Xbox Series X|S Optimized. This means that they’ve taken full advantage of the unique capabilities of Xbox Series X|S, both for new titles built natively using the Xbox Series X|S development...
Using the GDK and rewriting your engine specifically for the PS5 are 2 very different things.
Last edited:
SenjutsuSage
Banned
Actually, many more cores more than makes up for slower clock speed in the GPU space pretty much all the time with similar enough architectures. And as for the split memory, that's where a heavier re-architecting for better memory management comes in, and it's also what Sampler Feedback Streaming is for in the relevant situations.
Let's use an extreme case where a developer wants, say, 12GB worth of visible texture data on screen. With Sampler Feedback Streaming in play that 12GB amounts to just 4.8GB. That would make the 10GB portion of Series X's asymmetric memory behave more like an effective 17.2GB before counting the slower 3.5GB leftover for games.
But what if a developer doesn't go and do something so extreme with the memory savings from Sampler Feedback Streaming? What if a game uses 6GB of texture data without SFS? With SFS that 6GB becomes just 2.4GB. In this scenario the 10GB of GPU optimal memory on Series X behaves like an effective 13.6GB - 100MB more than the entire system's usable RAM for games. Again this is ignoring the remaining 3.5GB of slower memory.
If SFS allows a developer to fit even more data inside that 10GB, that by definition is "fixing" the split memory setup. So, yes, Xbox Series X does indeed have the tools and means to allow developers to get even more from Series X's memory setup. And Microsoft has been advertising it since day one, but it's something that must be designed into a game.
Xbox Velocity Architecture: A Closer Look at the Next-Gen Tech Driving Gaming Innovation Forward on Xbox Series X - Xbox Wire
When we set out to design the Xbox Series X, we aspired to build our most powerful console ever powered by next generation innovation and delivering consistent, sustained performance never before seen in a console with no compromises. To achieve this goal, we knew we needed to analyze each...
news.xbox.com
So tools indeed are available for precisely the situation you cited. Now maybe that means nothing in this particular game because I'm not entirely sure of the implications of its heavy voxel use that's so fundamental to its art style, but even so on the base assumption alone that there is NO tools or development related solution to alleviate any concerns regarding the Series X memory setup, any such assumption would appear to have no basis in fact based on what Microsoft has announced and revealed about their architecture and the way the GPU was designed. Going further, Sampler Feedback Streaming combined with the Series X GPU is a major game changing element for games.
SenjutsuSage
Banned
I've been saying exactly this from the start. Using the GDK to make it a native Series X app doesn't automatically constitute an engine rewrite specifically for the Series X's strengths. It can be on GDK and still be an Xbox One X port that's been enhanced for the Series X in areas specific to resolution, fps etc. But without an actual engine rewrite for Xbox Series X, a native Series X app alone isn't saying much and almost certainly doesn't represent a full rewriting of an engine to work on Xbox Series X hardware.
Rea
Member
The coping mechanism of some posters are astonishing. Is this game on PC or Xbox is running with DirectX 12U? If so, then there's no need to rewrite the game engine. DirectX 12U API itself can take full advantage of Xbox and PC'S hardware. Microsoft will make sure of it. That's the beauty of Xbox and PC with DirectX api.
FranXico
Member
This developer did. That's the exception though. Most developers write their engines for DirectX and then port to PS5 using GNMX as a bridge, leaving performance on the table.
Rea
Member
Exactly, there is no such thing as exclusive Xbox series X/S game engine. All games running on Xbox comes from DirectX API. Which can run on any hardware on PCs and will take full advantage of the hardware. That's the beauty of DirectX and Microsoft is very proud of it. Playstation doesn't enjoy such benefits, that's why most devs have to rewrite their engine for PS platform and ICE team from PS will assist them.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Up until on both consoles, with PRT/SFS the GPU is still writing and reading more than 10 GB of data. Not using SFS/PRT would make this situation worse of course.Actually, many more cores more than makes up for slower clock speed in the GPU space pretty much all the time with similar enough architectures. And as for the split memory, that's where a heavier re-architecting for better memory management comes in, and it's also what Sampler Feedback Streaming is for in the relevant situations.
Let's use an extreme case where a developer wants, say, 12GB worth of visible texture data on screen. With Sampler Feedback Streaming in play that 12GB amounts to just 4.8GB. That would make the 10GB portion of Series X's asymmetric memory behave more like an effective 17.2GB before counting the slower 3.5GB leftover for games.
But what if a developer doesn't go and do something so extreme with the memory savings from Sampler Feedback Streaming? What if a game uses 6GB of texture data without SFS? With SFS that 6GB becomes just 2.4GB. In this scenario the 10GB of GPU optimal memory on Series X behaves like an effective 13.6GB - 100MB more than the entire system's usable RAM for games. Again this is ignoring the remaining 3.5GB of slower memory.
If SFS allows a developer to fit even more data inside that 10GB, that by definition is "fixing" the split memory setup. So, yes, Xbox Series X does indeed have the tools and means to allow developers to get even more from Series X's memory setup. And Microsoft has been advertising it since day one, but it's something that must be designed into a game.
Xbox Velocity Architecture: A Closer Look at the Next-Gen Tech Driving Gaming Innovation Forward on Xbox Series X - Xbox Wire
When we set out to design the Xbox Series X, we aspired to build our most powerful console ever powered by next generation innovation and delivering consistent, sustained performance never before seen in a console with no compromises. To achieve this goal, we knew we needed to analyze each...
So tools indeed are available for precisely the situation you cited. Now maybe that means nothing in this particular game because I'm not entirely sure of the implications of its heavy voxel use that's so fundamental to its art style, but even so on the base assumption alone that there is NO tools or development related solution to alleviate any concerns regarding the Series X memory setup, any such assumption would appear to have no basis in fact based on what Microsoft has announced and revealed about their architecture and the way the GPU was designed. Going further, Sampler Feedback Streaming combined with the Series X GPU is a major game changing element for games.
Then again not sure why this is controversial, we have always accepted neither architecture was a clear winner in all areas versus the other right? Depending on the kind of code you are running, less but faster units might have an advantage (think lots of dynamic if branches and calculations dependent on previous data, situations with less parallelism).
Also, there are areas of the GPU where the two consoles seems to have the same resources in terms of unit counts but one runs the same resources at higher clocks (geometry engine, ROPS [same per clock output], rasterisers, etc…) or areas where data streaming might cause unnecessary data trashing in the caches or caches face more pressure (more CU’s feeding on the same sized Shader Array cache).
Would the dev be able to close the gap further? If they can they will, they are not doing a favour to Sony, so if they do not it is worth asking why not. Still even in that case the refusal to entertain one console might still come out on top seems more of an echo of a time where one of the two would just have to obliterate the other in each and every metric.
Who knows, without more devs speaking out, maybe GDK makes cross platform ports a bit saner to do but abstracts things a bit more and throws away some performance in some key areas making the difference to some devs
. This would be just baseless speculation of course.
Last edited:
Mr Moose
Member
Just like every PS5 game should.
People need to stop acting like they just ported the Xbox One version and called it a day.
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
It is built on GDK, not the old SDK for Xbox. The engines have be to tweaked accordingly for SDK > GDK. What else do you want it to be built on?
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
For PS5, the game is built on the PS5 API. For XSX, the game is built on XSX's API / GDK). Both consoles received literally the same treatment.
Quick question: do you believe the developer when he says that PS5's memory setup and higher clock speeds helped him achieve 8K/60?
Last edited:
StateofMajora
Banned
When I think about it, (and tell me if i'm missing something here) on paper MS's memory solution should be better for most games this gen, once cross gen is done. At least "AAA" games that need ample ram for cpu tasks. When properly utilized ; ps5 has the advantage in simplicity but tbh this should not be that hard for devs. It's not like an edram situation where utilization can vary so much. Both reserve 2.5GB for OS, and for MS's portion, that 2.5 comes out of the slower pool.Up until on both consoles, with PRT/SFS the GPU is still writing and reading more than 10 GB of data. Not using SFS/PRT would make this situation worse of course.
Then again not sure why this is controversial, we have always accepted neither architecture was a clear winner in all areas versus the other right? Depending on the kind of code you are running, less but faster units might have an advantage (think lots of dynamic if branches and calculations dependent on previous data, situations with less parallelism).
Also, there are areas of the GPU where the two consoles seems to have the same resources in terms of unit counts but one runs the same resources at higher clocks (geometry engine, ROPS [same per clock output], rasterisers, etc…) or areas where data streaming might cause unnecessary data trashing in the caches or caches face more pressure (more CU’s feeding on the same sized Shader Array cache).
Would the dev be able to close the gap further? If they can they will, they are not doing a favour to Sony, so if they do not it is worth asking why not. Still even in that case the refusal to entertain one console might still come out on top seems more of an echo of a time where one of the two would just have to obliterate the other in each and every metric.
Who knows, without more devs speaking out, maybe GDK makes cross platform ports a bit saner to do but abstracts things a bit more and throws away some performance in some key areas making the difference to some devs
So basically i'm thinking that slower pool on series x should be occupied by game logic mostly, not gpu tasks, and the same would be true for ps5. So unless a game needs more than 10gb for graphics alone (and for perspective the 3080 has 10gb) the series x solution should be better.
***My point is since the touryst has to run on the switch which has less than 4gb total, it obviously used less than 3.5 for system ram. Therefore when they cranked the resolution so high on these machines they could have gone past that 10gb limit on series x, but for ps5 they had more ram at a faster speed.***
This is all academic anyway, and some people ITT are just crazy for caring so much. 6k vs 8k is so not an issue when they are both stupid high resolutions and most games are not going to get that high.
----
In terms of ps5 clockspeed, that is an advantage that can and will show much more often than the ram difference. But then again so will XSX CU advantage. Over simplification here but ps5 should have an edge with polygons an SX with shaders.
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
Oh so it's using Velocity Architecture? SFS? All the other DX12U features and all the xbox specific features? No, it's not.
I can tell none of you are developers lol. Saying that an old game has been ported using the new SDK does not in any way mean that it's now a completely built for that new console game.
What you're essentially saying is that God of War and GT7 are actually full on native next gen PS5 games taking full advantage of the PS5s power, since they're made on the PS5 SDK.
Last edited:
phil_t98
#SonyToo
Wipeout defiantly needs a new game but I would love for it to go darker like the first game was, lots of indie dance tunes and the races dimly lit like they were on the PS1
How do you know it is not using any of the Xbox specific features? How do you know it is using all of the PS5 specific features?
Physiognomonics
Member
Knowing Shinen they have used the lowest API available on XSX (here GDK), because this is what they do. Besides they never implied they could have done better or even used better tools on XSX. They gave 3 reasons, all of them being that PS5 hardware and software are just better fit for their specific engine.
On Series X the average available bandwidth will be decreased when you use the slowest memory. Some believe the average will still be higher than PS5, but not that much anymore (I have seen some say slower by max ~40GB/s so making the 560GB/s only 520GB/s). It is because when the slowest memory is used, the fast memory can't be used simultaneously. It's physically impossible.
On the other hand PS5 has the advantage of fully unifed memory setup but also the bandwdith can be balanced between 8 identical memory pools (easier than 10 different chips) so it's going to be possible to optimize even better the bandwidth accesses in the future. I mean a 8K 60fps 3D game should be really demanding on pure bandwidth alone but that doesn't seem to be a problem for PS5 'only' 448GB/s bandwidth. Probably because the bandwidth can be easily optimized by the devs if they correctly balance the load between the 8 memory modules.
Beware with that assumption. When non cross-gen games are starting to fully use the full power of CPU (and use more than 10GB of memory CPU + GPU) then the slower portion of memory will be much more used on XSX by the CPU tasks. Then the specific problem of added memory contention (because of specific fast/slow memory setup on Xbox Series X) will appear.
On Series X the average available bandwidth will be decreased when you use the slowest memory. Some believe the average will still be higher than PS5, but not that much anymore (I have seen some say slower by max ~40GB/s so making the 560GB/s only 520GB/s). It is because when the slowest memory is used, the fast memory can't be used simultaneously. It's physically impossible.
On the other hand PS5 has the advantage of fully unifed memory setup but also the bandwdith can be balanced between 8 identical memory pools (easier than 10 different chips) so it's going to be possible to optimize even better the bandwidth accesses in the future. I mean a 8K 60fps 3D game should be really demanding on pure bandwidth alone but that doesn't seem to be a problem for PS5 'only' 448GB/s bandwidth. Probably because the bandwidth can be easily optimized by the devs if they correctly balance the load between the 8 memory modules.
Last edited:
MrFunSocks
Banned
It was a Series X launch title, that's how.
Last edited:
By your logic games that don't use all the Xbox Series X / PS5 features are not really Xbox Series X / PS5 games .
At this point you're just throwing foolishness at the wall to see what sticks.
Ok, let's assume it's true he is not utilizing all of the Xbox features (which is probable, but for which there is no confirmation...), how do you know he is fully utilizing all of the PS5 features?
Last edited: