Support NeoGAF

[Lunatic_Gamer]

The versions tested were 1.0.5.53243 on the Xbox Series consoles and 1.000.005 on PS5.

PS5 uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 2844x1600. Pixel counts at 2844x1600 seem to be uncommon on PS5.

Xbox Series X uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3840x2160 and the lowest resolution found being 3072x1728. The resolution seems to rarely drop to 3072x1728 on Xbox Series X. Pixel counts at 3840x2160 were found more often on Xbox Series X than on PS5.

Xbox Series S uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 2560x1440 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 1728x972. Pixel counts at 1728x972 seem to be uncommon on Xbox Series S. The resolution seems to usually be below 2560x1440 on Xbox Series S outside of the cutscene mentioned below.

The resolution on Xbox Series S seems to be fixed at 2560x1440 during the cutscene at 3:00

All three consoles appear to be using a form of checkerboard rendering to reach their stated resolutions.

PS5 and Xbox Series X are using an improved geometry detail setting compared to Xbox Series S http://bit.ly/3XFaWo4

Platforms	PS5	Xbox Series X	Xbox Series S
Frame Amounts
Game Frames	34558	34487	33631
Video Frames	34578	34578	34578
Frame Tearing Statistics
Total Torn Frames	0	0	0
Lowest Torn Line	-	-	-
Frame Height	2160	2160	2160
Frame Time Statistics
Mean Frame Time	16.68ms	16.71ms	17.14ms
Median Frame Time	16.67ms	16.67ms	16.67ms
Maximum Frame Time	33.33ms	33.33ms	33.33ms
Minimum Frame Time	16.67ms	16.67ms	16.67ms
95th Percentile Frame Time	16.67ms	16.67ms	16.67ms
99th Percentile Frame Time	16.67ms	16.67ms	33.33ms
Frame Rate Statistics
Mean Frame Rate	59.97fps	59.84fps	58.35fps
Median Frame Rate	60fps	60fps	60fps
Maximum Frame Rate	60fps	60fps	60fps
Minimum Frame Rate	56fps	49fps	42fps
5th Percentile Frame Rate	60fps	59fps	45fps
1st Percentile Frame Rate	59fps	56fps	43fps
Frame Time Counts
16.67ms	34538 (99.94%)	34396 (99.74%)	32684 (97.18%)
33.33ms	20 (0.06%)	91 (0.26%)	947 (2.82%)

 

[Mr Moose]

Framerate is solid on the big boys, decent enough on the S with room for improvement.

 

[Die Namek Ability]

Pretty close overall XsX holds 4k slightly better than PS5 with less agressove DRS while the PS5 is pretty much a locked 60 fps.

This is the typical result we have seen in most comps this gen. I am beginning to believe the PS5 is just more efficient at DRS. The only other explanation is a MS mandate for higher res which imo is tin foil hat talk.

 

[clampzyn]

needs a bit of patching for fps drops on series x but not noticeable during gameplay anyway

 

[DenchDeckard]

Pretty close overall XsX holds 4k slightly better than PS5 with less agressove DRS while the PS5 is pretty much a locked 60 fps.

This is the typical result we have seen in most comps this gen. I am beginning to believe the PS5 is just more efficient at DRS. The only other explanation is a MS mandate for higher res which imo is tin foil hat talk.

I honestly think its more to do with wider gpus usually offer higher resolutions than narrow gpus but the series x gpu is that much slower than the ps5 that the ps5 just nails it's target. So the drs algorithm is sensing the wider gpu but the slower speed is not letting it respond as quickly as ps5.

But I don't really know. 1800 mhz vs 2300? Is a huge difference in speed really.

 

[Riky]

I think they say it's just one cutscene that is locked at 1440p that affects Series S. They show the stats without that cutscene and all three consoles are above 99.7% hitting the frame rate.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Pretty close overall XsX holds 4k slightly better than PS5 with less agressove DRS while the PS5 is pretty much a locked 60 fps.

This is the typical result we have seen in most comps this gen. I am beginning to believe the PS5 is just more efficient at DRS. The only other explanation is a MS mandate for higher res which imo is tin foil hat talk.

The first theory is likely correct. We've seen it too many times. The other explanation is too much conspiracy; I don't think Xbox will do anything like that.

For whatever reason, XSX doesn't drop in dynamic resolution as quickly as it needs to. PS5 drops quicker and favors frame rates. That's why PS5 ends up with lower DRS but better frames rates, and XSX ends up with higher DRS but lower frame rates.

The whole idea of DRS is to drop the resolution before frames do, however. So I think XSX devs would be looking into it. Not a big issue though so wouldn't take priority, of course.

 

[rofif]

I find these big tech performance tables redundant and too late.
Frametimes suck as performance metric. It’s fps backwards.
I just want to see how much fps it runs on average or graph in time like df.
These 50 values are pointless and hard to look at

 

[lh032]

 

[Lysandros]

The first theory is likely correct. We've seen it too many times. The other explanation is too much conspiracy; I don't think Xbox will do anything like that.

For whatever reason, XSX doesn't drop in dynamic resolution as quickly as it needs to. PS5 drops quicker and favors frame rates. That's why PS5 ends up with lower DRS but better frames rates, and XSX ends up with higher DRS but lower frame rates.

The whole idea of DRS is to drop the resolution before frames do, however. So I think XSX devs would be looking into it. Not a big issue though so wouldn't take priority, of course.

I agree. I think it might be because of XSX API being less nimble at this process due to relatively higher overhead specifically.

 

[diffusionx]

Another one etc

 

[Bo_Hazem]

 

[Lysandros]

I honestly think its more to do with wider gpus usually offer higher resolutions than narrow gpus but the series x gpu is that much slower than the ps5 that the ps5 just nails it's target. So the drs algorithm is sensing the wider gpu but the slower speed is not letting it respond as quickly as ps5.

But I don't really know. 1800 mhz vs 2300? Is a huge difference in speed really.

It's 1825 mhz vs 2230 mhz, both are 2 SE/4 SA "wide".

 

[DenchDeckard]

It's 1825 mhz vs 2230 mhz, both are 2 SE/4 SA "wide".

Yeah ps5 has a nice speed bump there.

 

[SLB1904]

When I think khalid gifs can't surprise me

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

I honestly think its more to do with wider gpus usually offer higher resolutions than narrow gpus but the series x gpu is that much slower than the ps5 that the ps5 just nails it's target. So the drs algorithm is sensing the wider gpu but the slower speed is not letting it respond as quickly as ps5.

But I don't really know. 1800 mhz vs 2300? Is a huge difference in speed really.

I've played the full 10 hour trial on both ps5 and series x and I really think DF's pixel countil is not telling the whole picture here. The Series X looks noticeably sharper and I think possibly it has higher AF.

Has anyone who's played both have any opinion on the hdr/color grading? For some reason I feel like the hdr is better on ps5 ...that could be down to personal preference the sx seems to possibly clip the clouds a bit when it's daytime and sunny. I dunno though.

But yeah it's defitwly sharper and honestly the ps5 version is soft in comparison.

I actually think it's a really fun game if you can get passed the awful dialogue.

 

[Feel Like I'm On 42]

The first theory is likely correct. We've seen it too many times. The other explanation is too much conspiracy; I don't think Xbox will do anything like that.

For whatever reason, XSX doesn't drop in dynamic resolution as quickly as it needs to. PS5 drops quicker and favors frame rates. That's why PS5 ends up with lower DRS but better frames rates, and XSX ends up with higher DRS but lower frame rates.

The whole idea of DRS is to drop the resolution before frames do, however. So I think XSX devs would be looking into it. Not a big issue though so wouldn't take priority, of course.

Thr frame drops are barely noticeable though. I think they did the right thing keeping the SX at a higher res. It's noticeable after playing both versions. Reminds me of hitman 3 where the SX version was preferable for me looking really clean and barely dropping frames. I don't even have a VRR tv.

 

[Heisenberg007]

Thr frame drops are barely noticeable though.

But then so is the change in dynamic resolution scaling when lower ends are rare on both consoles. You literally need to count pixels to find any difference; that's how barely noticeable 100px of resolution changes are.

Minimum frame rates from 56 to 49 however are way more noticeable for most people though.

 

[01011001]

The first theory is likely correct. We've seen it too many times. The other explanation is too much conspiracy; I don't think Xbox will do anything like that.

For whatever reason, XSX doesn't drop in dynamic resolution as quickly as it needs to. PS5 drops quicker and favors frame rates. That's why PS5 ends up with lower DRS but better frames rates, and XSX ends up with higher DRS but lower frame rates.

The whole idea of DRS is to drop the resolution before frames do, however. So I think XSX devs would be looking into it. Not a big issue though so wouldn't take priority, of course.

what could have happened here is that the devs had a benchmark run they used to judge performance and tweaked the dynamic res responsiveness according to that.

but since this is an open world game with dynamic traffic and different weather conditions unpredictable scenarios can come up that drop frames.

and also it's not unlikely that both versions were finetuned by different people that didn't necessarily coordinate with eachother and just had the general goal of keeping the framerate above a certain threshold



looking at their test, they both hit their max target more than 99% of the time. so as a dev I bet that was good enough for them, even tho one is slightly less unstable.
if you play this on a VRR screen you would literally be unable to tell the difference. and even without VRR you'd most likely be hard pressed to notice the drops into the mid 50s most of the time.

less than 100 dropped frames out of 34578


edit: additional possible problem here I just noticed. if VG Tech is correct and the game uses CBR, then using a dynamic resolution comes with additional challenges. changing resolutions while using CBR are more noticeable IMO, so the goal could also have been to minimize dynamic resolution scaling as much as possible and only use it when absolutely needed

 

[SkyHighTrees]

the goalposts

 

[Lysandros]

I've played the full 10 hour trial on both ps5 and series x and I really think DF's pixel countil is not telling the whole picture here. The Series X looks noticeably sharper and I think possibly it has higher AF.

If that was really the case Vgtech would be the one to find it, he seldom misses such things.