• 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- Devil May Cry 5 SE: PS5 vs Xbox Series X - The First Next-Gen Performance Face-Off

Bo_Hazem

Banned
V-SYNC (found on most current gen and probably before) emulates VRR but does the work internally, so the TV's has no extra work to do.

VRR/Freesync/G-Sync is freeing up the console/PC from that work and throw whatever to the TV/monitor and it does the same processing work, which could result in higher fps/better performance when you got a compatible TV/monitor.

Got it?
 
Last edited:

J_Gamer.exe

Member
Just to throw out this theory.... we've heard people say "oh xbox can do this when having issues" but think of this, if you flip that.... ps5 seems easier to get it up and running meaning less time may have been spent on it.... like ok its up and running fairly well thats good enough. Now onto the series x version which needs more time due to the documented issues at the moment. So more dev time spent figuring out how to push it.

So you could argue the seriex x might be having more time spent on it to push it. Wait until Ps5 gets more time spent to unlock its advantages. Just a theory could be totally off.

 

anothertech

Member
fQukxBC.jpg


Dam. And $100 less. It's over boys.
 

Md Ray

Member
If someone could reach John and ask if PS5's other modes use V-Sync, as that usually tanks the FPS but avoids tearing on TV's that don't support VRR. Having the option to turn it off like XSX could bring in more interesting results.
All of the modes on PS5 and XSX use V-Sync in this game. Otherwise you'd have seen tearing in their framerate graph and they would have mentioned it too.
 

GenericUser

Member
I (as a playstation gamer) am happy to see that the PS5 will probably not be lacking far behind the xbox when it comes to multiplatform games. Cool news, I actually expected a much bigger difference between the two consoles, but maybe future games will show them. After all, this game is just a port of a last gen game.
 
Last edited:

J_Gamer.exe

Member
Just to throw out this theory.... we've heard people say "oh xbox can do this when having issues" but think of this, if you flip that.... ps5 seems easier to get it up and running meaning less time may have been spent on it.... like ok its up and running fairly well thats good enough. Now onto the series x version which needs more time due to the documented issues at the moment. So more dev time spent figuring out how to push it.

So you could argue the seriex x might be having more time spent on it to push it. Wait until Ps5 gets more time spent to unlock its advantages. Just a theory could be totally off.



Is matt basically teasing /confirming the advanced caching system here, unified ala zen 3 and maybe more?
 

Md Ray

Member
So some people keep saying, yet the framerate and tearing video that we have a thread about here has a locked 60fps and zero screen tearing. We also don't know how it plays on PS5, so the Xbox version potentially having some minor tearing somewhere is irrelevant at this stage.
There's plenty of screen tearing on XSX.
 
This really isn't a win for either system as the performance is all over the place on both. XSX had better performance in 3/4 modes and looked broken in the one it lost. Doesn't mean too much at this point. If I was buying the game I'd play on Xbox and lock at 60 as PS5 was dropping more frequently in the modes I'd play in. Still impressed with the raw performance of both though.

A lot of people trying to draw conclusions without knowledge of so many variables.

i.e. Did the game have a lead platform, how long the devs have had access to kits, how many new features have been utilised from the respective API's, learning curve involved in porting games across to the new systems etc...

These early comparisons are interesting but not indicative of much other than how easy it was to port a game across which varies developer to developer and engine to engine on a per system basis. I'm simply tying to confer that this may not be the apples to apples comparison that we all would like to see.
 

mrmeh

Member
V-SYNC (found on most current gen and probably before) emulates VRR but does the work internally, so the TV's has no extra work to do.

VRR/Freesync/G-Sync is freeing up the console/PC from that work and throw whatever to the TV/monitor and it does the same processing work, which could result in higher fps/better performance when you got a compatible TV/monitor.

Got it?

V-sync should not be that computationally expensive, It uses more memory e.g triple buffer but that is probably not an important factor when implementing it.

The problem is that games can output frames at a very variable rate. Faster than the display device refresh gives you screen tearing, slower dropped frames, both visually jar.

The big downside to v-sync is that if the game engine is running much faster (or is all over the place) it can feel laggy and not as responsive.

VRR just allows the tv/monitor refresh to be sync'd to the pc/console rather than the other way around so you keep the responsiveness and is the best way of mitigating the issue (..though in reality few have access to it)

As Valhalla has a dynamic engine it would just adjust the res if it needed to to keep a steady framerate. So a choice they made but probably not one made due to computational budget as you previously put it.

It's apparently there on both consoles and I would expect a patch to fix the tearing (maybe, Ubisoft..).
 

Bo_Hazem

Banned
V-sync should not be that computationally expensive, It uses more memory e.g triple buffer but that is probably not an important factor when implementing it.

The problem is that games can output frames at a very variable rate. Faster than the display device refresh gives you screen tearing, slower dropped frames, both visually jar.

The big downside to v-sync is that if the game engine is running much faster (or is all over the place) it can feel laggy and not as responsive.

VRR just allows the tv/monitor refresh to be sync'd to the pc/console rather than the other way around so you keep the responsiveness and is the best way of mitigating the issue (..though in reality few have access to it)

As Valhalla has a dynamic engine it would just adjust the res if it needed to to keep a steady framerate. So a choice they made but probably not one made due to computational budget as you previously put it.

It's apparently there on both consoles and I would expect a patch to fix the tearing (maybe, Ubisoft..).

There is no tearing on PS5. Yes it's not expensive but it has a hit on performance:





So for PS5 reporting no tearing, it has V-Sync enabled.
 

thelastword

Banned
So they say that on average the Xbox runs with an 8% better framerate, and runs better in 3 of the 4 modes, yet they're equal? Weird conclusion to come to.
So two modes where XSX wins, about par in another mode and crushed in a third where the framerate is better on PS5 by all the modes XBOX wins in twice combined....This is your big win?

Clearly this game needs to be patched and there are some issues even on PS5 which needs to be sorted, like the game defaulting to 120fps and limiting your resolution....I'm sure this game will be tested again...I think the conclusion from Leadbetter that XBOX has an API issue is wrong. This is just not the best port so far, both versions can improve......PS5 in the other modes and perhaps XBOX in the high framerate mode if it's not running into a bottleneck...

fQukxBC.jpg


Dam. And $100 less. It's over boys.
Yes, the general framerate disparity is huge in this mode, but to make it even clearer, I wish they showed average framerates to show the overall picture....Can't wait for Vgtech for the official stats....I think that will be very interesting......Is the disparity that big on XBOX and how big is the difference in high perf mode between the two...
It's quite clear you pretty much never have any understanding of the things you write on here.

You say "XSX had to turn off V-Sync to free its computational budget" do you have a link to back this up?
It maybe be some odd glitch, but I saw some mild tearing in the XBOX version during a cutscene. It may be some other weird inconsistency at the right top of the screen, but besides that I've also seen some small differences in background clarity and detail between the two....Hopefully we get an analysis that's a bit more thorough, instead of all the giggling and "I can't believe it's so close" shockism from Richard...
 

PaintTinJr

Member
All of the modes on PS5 and XSX use V-Sync in this game. Otherwise you'd have seen tearing in their framerate graph and they would have mentioned it too.
Is that confirmed? You can double buffer with perfect frame-pacing by manually flipping the backbuffer on a refresh, or you can triple buffer which makes hitting the vsync timing manually much easier, which saves the loss in performance associated with vsync, but at the expense of input latency - but higher FPS means latency gets partially offset by briefer time-slices for each frame. So an ideal future beyond hardware limitations is: manual triple buffer flipping at hundreds of frames per second (IMHO).
 

thelastword

Banned
1 minue 32 seconds for xsx vs 49 seconds for ps5 . Loads are not identical while starting the game .
That's pretty huge and these are cross gen games, not really taking advantage of the unique hardware....Cache scrubbers etc....
Found the culprit....hdmi cable was faulty...swapped it with my xbox one and no more juddering

weird...normally u would just get no signal if the hdmi cAble was bad but it still worked and made it look and run like crap

I’m happy now
Good, because from the footage I saw of both. PS5 seems to run slightly smoother....It's funny that when you posted that some posters who were already creating a storm in a teacup ignored this post entirely, but your prior posts were used as a war waging blade...
XBOX brigade is out in full force today!
@MrFunSocks and Stuart360 Stuart360 doing old Uncle Phil's work diligently.



Bruh, the controller is getting praised left and right, more so than the console itself.
You're so blinded by your obvious fanboyism that you can't accept that some of the features are truly revolutionary and not "gimmicks". Don't even get me started on that stick placement.

Same design on that xbox controller for 10 years. Smh.
Don't understand, they have 4000+ games to play......Even now people resort to calling Dual Sense a gimmick when it has gotten universal praise that it is not. Some folk won't even concede a point sometimes, even when the evidence is overwhelming...
 

Md Ray

Member
Is that confirmed? You can double buffer with perfect frame-pacing by manually flipping the backbuffer on a refresh, or you can triple buffer which makes hitting the vsync timing manually much easier, which saves the loss in performance associated with vsync, but at the expense of input latency - but higher FPS means latency gets partially offset by briefer time-slices for each frame. So an ideal future beyond hardware limitations is: manual triple buffer flipping at hundreds of frames per second (IMHO).
According to DF vid/article, there's no tearing. That much is confirmed. So that means Vsync is fully engaged, no? They've upped the display refresh rate support from the usual 60Hz to 120Hz and have enabled Vsync, as to whether it's double-buffer or triple-buffer, I don't know. Without Vsync we'd have seen frame-rates above 120fps. To my knowledge the only console game where you can disable Vsync completely is Rainbow Six Siege on both PS4/Xbox consoles and on Series X it can go over 120fps in that game.
 
Last edited:

mrmeh

Member
There is no tearing on PS5. Yes it's not expensive but it has a hit on performance:

So for PS5 reporting no tearing, it has V-Sync enabled.

From the Valhalla thread

Been playing both series x version and ps5
There is definitely a noticeable difference in the series x version...I’m running them both on a lg oled and the series x is much smoother and much clearer than the ps5 and I suspect the comparisons will show

there is also tearing on both versions

Hmm ?
 

Lysandros

Member
.
I think the differential in 4K mode is less than what you’d expected to see in a machine 20% slower as the PS5 is, hence what Leadbetter quote of PS5 punching above its weight. I’m glad this comparison finally closes the “9TF machine” narrative. All in all 4K mode is no news, since it was already obvious that the Xbox is more powerful. The high performance mode is the mystery here.
PS5 isn't 'punching above his weight' it performs as it should. That's Richard who can't see past CU count. He also stated that XSX has 'much more' memory bandwidth which is simply wrong. His comparison is at caveman level.
 

assurdum

Banned
.

PS5 isn't 'punching above his weight' it performs as it should. That's Richard who can't see past CU count. He also stated that XSX has 'much more' memory bandwidth which is simply wrong. His comparison is at caveman level.
I can't agree more. This game seems far from a refined optimized experience and I can't think anything of better as benchmark for both hardware. What you get it's what both can offer in pure terms of hardware difference.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Banned
Looks like 2tflops, huge memory bandwidth advantage for the video memory and a faster CPU were important after all.

Can't wait to see what those RDNA2 performance saving features add to the mix.
I'd like to understand were you see all that importance in the hardware specs difference when from the same video the perfomance gain seems almost ridiculous.
 
Last edited:

Alphagear

Member
Who can even tell the difference between 90fps and 100fps.

No real noticeable difference between the 2 consoles.

Both will have the same resolutions and FPS in Multiplatform games.

I expect XSX to have more stable framerates and maybe better RT at best.

XSX is more powerful but not powerful enough to see a noticeable difference.
 

J_Gamer.exe

Member
From the Valhalla thread



Hmm ?
Looks like 2tflops, huge memory bandwidth advantage for the video memory and a faster CPU were important after all.

Can't wait to see what those RDNA2 performance saving features add to the mix.


He corrected that due to a faulty hdmi cable... maybe try again with the fud?

Found the culprit....hdmi cable was faulty...swapped it with my xbox one and no more juddering

weird...normally u would just get no signal if the hdmi cAble was bad but it still worked and made it look and run like crap

I’m happy now
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
So they say that on average the Xbox runs with an 8% better framerate, and runs better in 3 of the 4 modes, yet they're equal? Weird conclusion to come to.
Can you read? That is what MS said.
Quoting myself from a second page post.

Article with overall impression from all modes.


Normal mode: Xbox with very small advantage (around 5-8%?)
High framerate mode: PS5 with huge advantage
Ray-tracing performance mode: tie
Ray-tracing quality mode: Xbox very very small advantage even lower than Normal mode (around 2-3%?)

Overall conclusion: In the meantime, the results seen here in the cross-platform comparison are fascinating. In terms of correlating on-paper specs to the actual experience on-screen, PlayStation 5 is either punching above its weight, or Xbox Series X isn't delivering on the full potential promised by a bigger silicon investment and a much more substantial memory interface. It'll be interesting to see to what extent the results seen here extend to other titles, and we'll be reporting on that as soon as other games are available.

PS5 again shocking the non believers... on machines shows better results than paper specs while another below paper specs? I did not called it before launch... never.
 

olga_kurylenko

Neo Member
I wonder XSX test enabled VRR option. They cleary tried this option during testing. It will boost XSX performance than PS5 slightly.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
I wonder XSX test enabled VRR option. They cleary tried this option during testing. It will boost XSX performance than PS5 slightly.
VRR doesn't boost performance... it continue the same.
The TV that works to shows the framerate as a smooth experience.

Dark said that VRR really makes the 120Hz experience in a 120Hz TV pretty good but that is on Vanalla.

DMC framerate is too sparse that makes VRR not works.
 
Last edited:

vkbest

Member
o.....k....?

Then you mentioned screen tearing.......for what? Like I asked, do you think that screen tearing means the devs are having problems with the hardware? Did you think that no games would have screen tearing or framerate drops this generation? Do you think the PS5 will have every game locked at 30/60/120 with no tearing?

Stop dancing around and just say what you mean.

Screen tearing means Vsync off, Vsync off means 5-10fps advantage. PS360 gen was shit because tearing on the many games.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
Screen tearing means Vsync off, Vsync off means 5-10fps advantage. PS360 gen was shit because tearing on the many games.
That is not true.

No tearing can happen for some reasons:
  • VSYNC (when framerate not match the TV refresh rate)
  • Adaptive SYNC like VRR (when framerate not match the TV refresh rate)
  • Framerate matching the TV refresh rate
  • Framerate being a divisor of the TV refresh rate (eg. solid 30fps games won't have tearing in 60Hz TVs because the TV will duplicate equal every frame)
Screen tearing can happen for a series of reasons including the lack of VSYNC.

Both games looks to have VSYNC in the DF video (it is obvious not matching the TV refresh reate and VRR won't work in the so big fluctuations like the 120Hz mode)... I have not see any screen tearing.
 
Last edited:

vkbest

Member
I have seen 2 stream from Japan on AC Valhalla, and looks like there is no tearing, but they have implemented double buffering, so when drop some frame, you get 30fps but could be too the streaming was crap.
 
Last edited:

ethomaz

Banned
I have seen 2 stream from Japan on AC Valhalla, and looks like there is no tearing, but they have implemented double buffering, so when drop some frame, you get 30fps
Somebody said on AC comparison that he has both version and the PS5 has tearing too... so is he lying?
I mean all AC PS5 videos (very few indeed) I saw until now has no tearing.

PS. I just saw screen-tearing in a suppose PS5 video... in one second and I had to look for minutes to find it but it was there.
 
Last edited:

Stuart360

Member
Somebody said on AC comparison that he has both version and the PS5 has tearing too... so is he lying?
I mean all AC PS5 videos (very few indeed) I saw until now has no tearing.

PS. I just saw screen-tearing in a suppose PS5 video... in one second and I had to look for minutes to find it but it was there.
Did you miss the vid i posted a few posts up?, PS5 also has tearing.
 
Last edited:

vkbest

Member
I thought you were on about DMC sorry. This is the DMC thread lol.

My bad, I commented here because I had 2 tabs on Safari and though was the next gen topic.

Somebody said on AC comparison that he has both version and the PS5 has tearing too... so is he lying?
I mean all AC PS5 videos (very few indeed) I saw until now has no tearing.

Or is pretty occasional or happens on other location (I have seen only the beginning of the game) or he is lying, because you cant see tearing even to 0.5 reproduction speed on gameplay (Im skipping cutscenes, because I dont want spoilers, so maybe there are tearing on cutscenes).
 
Last edited:

Mister Wolf

Member
Let's all just be happy that Mr. Socks is happy with the result. I hope he has a smile on his face while he plays his Xbox knowing that his Xbox is nearly imperceptibly better at multiplats than PlayStation. If that is what makes his day, who are we to take than from him?

We don't even know how much better it is because John wouldn't list the average framerates, something every single tech channel on youtube (gamers nexus, jay2cents, hardware unboxed, wccftech, etc) does when testing and comparing hardware. Almost seems intentional. None one gives a shit about seeing some graph running in realtime going up and down, just the final results of the benchmark which he didn't provide for its standard 4K mode or any other mode.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom