• 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: Battlefield 2042: PS5 vs Xbox Series X/S - The Digital Foundry Tech Review

Tripolygon

Member
It’s possible they want it this way or because of VRR they just push it and let that do any work to smooth things out. Another reason to look forward to the PS VRR update.
I like VRR as it greatly improves image stability on displays, less screen tearing, and whatnot but I hope devs are not relying on it as many people me included still have TVs that are 3 to 5 years old which do not have VRR. For me, TVs are one of those things where you buy and use them until it stops working. Lol
 

assurdum

Member
I present to you what is commonly referred to as ‘Straw clutching’, in its purest form.

*insert ‘it’s the same picture’ from The Office here*
The hell you are talking about exactly. Even el analist talked of better resolution on ps5 in different circumstances lol but it's just more precise CBR so no one care to check (which it's a shame). Are we trying to deny hardware id buffer can't make a difference when CBR is involved?
 
Last edited:

Rocco Schiavone

I am terrified of Microsoft and am always concerned about them.
Judging by the video the spikes seem to be a lot worse on Series X, but they don't mention the difference,
I know he works for DF. But the GIF remains true.
 
Last edited:

FrankWza

Member
I like VRR as it greatly improves image stability on displays, less screen tearing, and whatnot but I hope devs are not relying on it as many people me included still have TVs that are 3 to 5 years old which do not have VRR. For me, TVs are one of those things where you buy and use them until it stops working. Lol
I don’t if that’s what they’re doing, but it makes sense based on the head to head results we’ve seen. Almost each time the x is ahead in this resolution range, the PS5 is ahead in stability and frame rate. And then there’s also times where PS adds more detail. When they hit the same exact resolution they both have the same frame rate and stability or they’re both negligible differences in each category. Then it’s considered an edge to the series x because of vrr which is true. But they are both fundamentally performing identically in that scenario.
 

Vagos48

Member
Or the x isn’t able to maintain the resolution it tries to push and the frame rate suffers. I’m pretty sure this has happened before and the devs know VRR is present in x. Once PS5 has VRR they may be able up their target as well. There’s been times where the x has a higher resolution but the ps5 has more detail.


It’s possible they want it this way or because of VRR they just push it and let that do any work to smooth things out. Another reason to look forward to the PS VRR update.
It seems that the framerate issues that XSX has in 60 and particularly 120 fps modes, are not GPU related. If they were then they could easily tweak the drs range. There must be some bottlenecks in the system, that some advanced engines expose.
 

FrankWza

Member
It seems that the framerate issues that XSX has in 60 and particularly 120 fps modes, are not GPU related. If they were then they could easily tweak the drs range. There must be some bottlenecks in the system, that some advanced engines expose.
I would still like to see it tweaked to show if that does happen. Are you referring to the split ram? It seems if that’s what it is, then they made a poor decision along with bypassing internal SSD upgrade for an SSD card in order to have a smaller form factor. I think I saw that a reason for the split was to have a 2 sided board vs 2 separate which saves space
 

Vagos48

Member
I would still like to see it tweaked to show if that does happen. Are you referring to the split ram? It seems if that’s what it is, then they made a poor decision along with bypassing internal SSD upgrade for an SSD card in order to have a smaller form factor. I think I saw that a reason for the split was to have a 2 sided board vs 2 separate which saves space
My best guess is that it's difficult to properly feed the GPU, because a wide architecture requires more parallel processing in both memory and IO
 

FrankWza

Member
My best guess is that it's difficult to properly feed the GPU, because a wide architecture requires more parallel processing in both memory and IO
I see. Narrow vs wide. It’s all pretty interesting. There’s never been a precedent for an I/O like the PS5 so this is all new everyone. In the road to PS5, Cerny mentioned offsetting ram with the I/O. So GPU doesn’t access stand memory and has its own? Is it able to be helped out by the PS5 I/O in this case? So it distributes bandwidth where it’s needed on a case by case basis? Or is it limited in narrow or wide?
 
I see. Narrow vs wide. It’s all pretty interesting. There’s never been a precedent for an I/O like the PS5 so this is all new everyone. In the road to PS5, Cerny mentioned offsetting ram with the I/O. So GPU doesn’t access stand memory and has its own? Is it able to be helped out by the PS5 I/O in this case? So it distributes bandwidth where it’s needed on a case by case basis? Or is it limited in narrow or wide?
6900xt has 80cu and it seems to work fine
 

Deerock71

Member
For those interested in the numbers, the Series X has 12% higher resolution when dynamic res kicks in. The way to calculate this is to subtract the smaller number from the bigger one (2016 - 1800) then divide the result with the smaller number (216/1800) and the result is 0.12, so you take the number after the decimal point as your result. In this case 12%. Which is practically in line with the resolution differences we’ve seen in games from other comparisons, in that case, nothing to gloss over as the difference ain’t that big and it’ll still be enjoyable regardless of which of the two consoles you own. If you can ignore the bugs of course.
GIF by Giphy QA
 

Mr Moose

Member
Circle them. I literally see no fences in any picture
Yeah I am not seeing them either.
Towers, maybe?
I do see the soup texture on the right, seems it hasn't loaded it on the PS5 yet, and the distant ground textures on the left on the Series X. Series X seems to be slightly higher res in this shot but lower ground detail overall (due to AF?).

Though no one would be able to tell the difference between res and/or the ground textures unless they really looked for this stuff.

The only three games which have a locked 120fps mode are Gears 5, Halo Infinite and Doom Eternal on Series X. So we can put that theory to bed.
Locked meaning no dips below 120?
 
Last edited:
Yeah I am not seeing them either.
Towers, maybe?
I do see the soup texture on the right, seems it hasn't loaded it on the PS5 yet, and the distant ground textures on the left on the Series X. Series X seems to be slightly higher res in this shot but lower ground detail overall (due to AF?).

Though no one would be able to tell the difference between res and/or the ground textures unless they really looked for this stuff.


Locked meaning no dips below 120?
Could be a lot of things since they different frames. Looks af ish though
 

DarkMage619

Member
Don’t forget the 4tf with the 12tf just used like a pro console res boost at best.

Why does it matter? Instead of eg. targeting 1440p with massive scene complexity on 12tf with maybe 4K reconstruction, you target 1080p within 4tf limits and forget the rest.
What game developers design their games around a GPU? Perhaps you can also tell me how much TF affects game AI and level design. Are you even aware that the XSS is just as capable on the CPU as the PS5?
 

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
Yeah I am not seeing them either.
Towers, maybe?
I do see the soup texture on the right, seems it hasn't loaded it on the PS5 yet, and the distant ground textures on the left on the Series X. Series X seems to be slightly higher res in this shot but lower ground detail overall (due to AF?).

Though no one would be able to tell the difference between res and/or the ground textures unless they really looked for this stuff.


Locked meaning no dips below 120?

They all average over 119fps, they all also use Tier 2 VRS.
 

Mr Moose

Member
They all average over 119fps, they all also use Tier 2 VRS.
Vanguard almost meets that (though has software VRS).
Did we ever get a test of Cold War 120fps in MP? Seems to run pretty well. Shame this game doesn't support it.
 
Finally watched a few videos on this game. 100% a wash once those spikes are cleared up.
Would like to add that they are bf related and not hardware related like some silly people here think.
 
Last edited:

Shmunter

Gold Member
What game developers design their games around a GPU? Perhaps you can also tell me how much TF affects game AI and level design. Are you even aware that the XSS is just as capable on the CPU as the PS5?
Console developers that target closed systems and leverage every aspect of fixed hardware
 

DarkMage619

Member
Console developers that target closed systems and leverage every aspect of fixed hardware
Almost all games on the Xbox hit the PC. Almost all 3rd party games also hit the PC. Developers are making games for multiple platforms and the XSS isn't the lowest speced device they are making those games on. I also didn't see you tell me about developers which make games based on the GPU or how much the GPU affects AI and level design, core components of games. You seem to think the XSS' GPU will be an issue please explain.
 

Shmunter

Gold Member
Almost all games on the Xbox hit the PC. Almost all 3rd party games also hit the PC. Developers are making games for multiple platforms and the XSS isn't the lowest speced device they are making those games on. I also didn't see you tell me about developers which make games based on the GPU or how much the GPU affects AI and level design, core components of games. You seem to think the XSS' GPU will be an issue please explain.
Look at the end of the day there is truth to both positions. Game software has got a certain window or sliding scale to its output. Even character AI can process and animate at half rate at a distance on lower cpu machines.

But while this exists, the sliding scale is not infinite and there is a middle there - a target to meet the developers vision. A high tide raises all ships and vice versa. Min specs matter, etc.

Certainly most of us know that modern gpu’s are not limited to gfx fidelity only, their compute ability can be deployed beyond just pixels. Very apparent in the Jaguar cpu generation.

The more scalability and more general the approach, the less harnessing and push for creative solutions occurs.

It is only the beginning with S, we have a whole generation of it being a reality. 😓
 

MonarchJT

Banned
My best guess is that it's difficult to properly feed the GPU, because a wide architecture requires more parallel processing in both memory and IO
na , is a bug

I see. Narrow vs wide. It’s all pretty interesting. There’s never been a precedent for an I/O like the PS5 so this is all new everyone. In the road to PS5, Cerny mentioned offsetting ram with the I/O. So GPU doesn’t access stand memory and has its own? Is it able to be helped out by the PS5 I/O in this case? So it distributes bandwidth where it’s needed on a case by case basis? Or is it limited in narrow or wide?
no
it's not a wide vs narrow thing...or we wouldn't see that in cod

 
Last edited:

Vagos48

Member
na , is a bug


no
it's not a wide vs narrow thing...or we wouldn't see that in cod

The COD problem is totally different. It happens at specific points only in the campaign where checkpoints are. It never happens in multiplayer. So it's probably a code issue when automatically saves the progress or loads from disk the next assets. In battlefield we are talking of how each machine can handle stress moments. And XSX is the worst performer in that respect, even worse than XSS. It will be fixed , but it's interesting to see what would be the trade off.
 
The COD problem is totally different. It happens at specific points only in the campaign where checkpoints are. It never happens in multiplayer. So it's probably a code issue when automatically saves the progress or loads from disk the next assets. In battlefield we are talking of how each machine can handle stress moments. And XSX is the worst performer in that respect, even worse than XSS. It will be fixed , but it's interesting to see what would be the trade off.
I am really surprised such a problem could even happen on XSX and in the MP game. Battlefield games have always being optimized for Xbox consoles so having 0fps freezes in the multiplater, after launch, is kinda incredible. We actually never had such a problem in a big MP game before.
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Banned
The COD problem is totally different. It happens at specific points only in the campaign where checkpoints are. It never happens in multiplayer. So it's probably a code issue when automatically saves the progress or loads from disk the next assets. In battlefield we are talking of how each machine can handle stress moments. And XSX is the worst performer in that respect, even worse than XSS. It will be fixed , but it's interesting to see what would be the trade off.
what trade off you expect ? lol if PS5 and xss run ok it's clear that is a bug
 

assurdum

Member
Yeah I am not seeing them either.
Towers, maybe?
I do see the soup texture on the right, seems it hasn't loaded it on the PS5 yet, and the distant ground textures on the left on the Series X. Series X seems to be slightly higher res in this shot but lower ground detail overall (due to AF?).

Though no one would be able to tell the difference between res and/or the ground textures unless they really looked for this stuff.


Locked meaning no dips below 120?
Check the tower or the trees in the long distance (it's not on your picture, a bit more on the right, zoom on it at the max). On ps5 are less aliased and with more pixels drawed. Textures in the ground also are sharper and it's not LOD issue but sharper IQ. I'm not saying it's an huge deal, but months ago people cry to the victory for the same thing on XSX because more "native" pixels.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
I don't take one screen that's not identical as any proof of anything, the two analysis would have seen this and at least one of them would have mentioned it if it was a genuine constant advantage, neither did.
Both DF VGtech talked of pixels native counts, they never mentioned sharpness. But again can you provide a picture where better sharpness on XSX is evident? I invite you to use the VGtech channels as I did.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
Let me guess, it's the same on both unless you zoom 400%? :messenger_tears_of_joy:
Ah no XSX has more huge frame rate hiccups due to a bug, poor optimization, tools or whatever?
A year has passed and the big holiday season titles are telling the same story, the two consoles are pretty much the same.
To be fair with zoom 400 % PS5 take the lead in the long distance in different shots. Funny stuff: el analist incompetent as always reported even slightly higher resolution on ps5 the first day, but he edited in better reconstruction later when the other channels found higher resolution on XSX :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
Last edited:

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
Both DF VGtech talked of pixels native counts, they never mentioned sharpness. But again can you provide a picture where better sharpness on XSX is evident? I invite you to use the VGtech channels as I did.

That's what higher pixel counts give you, they don't need to say that as it's obvious that if you've got up to a million more pixels then you get a better image.
 
The COD problem is totally different. It happens at specific points only in the campaign where checkpoints are. It never happens in multiplayer. So it's probably a code issue when automatically saves the progress or loads from disk the next assets. In battlefield we are talking of how each machine can handle stress moments. And XSX is the worst performer in that respect, even worse than XSS. It will be fixed , but it's interesting to see what would be the trade off.
BF has big stutters on a 3090 or 6900xt and has the same stutters on ps5 just shorter. It's an engine issue pure and simple.
To be fair with zoom 400 % PS5 take the lead in the long distance in different shots. Funny stuff: el analist incompetent as always reported even slightly higher resolution on ps5 the first day, but he edited in better reconstruction later when the other channels found higher resolution on XSX :messenger_tears_of_joy:
No, they look the same.
 

assurdum

Member
BF has big stutters on a 3090 or 6900xt and has the same stutters on ps5 just shorter. It's an engine issue pure and simple.

No, they look the same.
Mind you I never talked of huge difference but ps5 is sharper in the texture ground and in elements as tower or similar in the pixels draw, looking at different shot samples. Anyway even El analist noticed it who is far from a ps5 fanboy
 
Last edited:
Nope and neither VGtech or DF said that, but they both noticed the resolution gap.
But the banned guy (and a few gaffers here) actually noticed some parts sharper on PS5 calling it "better reconstruction tech". I already posted about it (thinking it could be lower AF on XSX, but it doesn't look like that actually). It's better seen using the original images. Very obvious when you switch from one pic to the other.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Member
But the banned guy (and a few gaffers here) actually noticed some parts sharper on PS5 calling it "better reconstruction tech". I already posted about it (thinking it could be lower AF on XSX, but it doesn't look like that actually). It's better seen using the original images. Very obvious when you switch from one pic to the other.
I don't think it's AF. Just more precise CBR. Just look the rocks. They are sharper on XSX because more native pixels but long lines and texture sharpness seems more defined on ps5 for the CBR reconstruction.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom