• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Analysis Review [IGNxGamer] Call of Duty Vanguard - PS5 & PC Performance Review

PaintTinJr

Member
Jan 30, 2020
1,263
2,754
475
Oxfordshire, England
That is not on me, anyone thinking or perpetrating that is either wilfully ignorant or has an agenda.
I completely agree.

I'm not a CoD player - but did impulse buy Cold War for PS5, my first CoD since borrowing blackops on ps3, and enjoyed the campaign so was only ever mildly interested in this one - but I watched your video and felt the raft of versions you showed really did show the trend of diminishing returns in IQ - for neighbouring versions - all the way from the lowly PS4 @ 960x540 native, all the way up to 3840x2160 native, while still showing the differences where possible.

IMO your video just gives off the impression that for IQ between PS5 and PC, you could have been comparing CD to Super Audio CD, and that with 4K screens arguably being overkill - for the vast majority of the public - how those big differences between the two versions could be shown off is the real limiting factor.
 
Mar 27, 2020
14,691
37,675
725
Uncharted bunghole
That is not on me, anyone thinking or perpetrating that is either wilfully ignorant or has an agenda.

I think some people are just mad that you're saying that the PS5 can have very similar image quality to a 3090 running this game at a Native 4K. But what they always fail to mention is that the PS5 is using reconstruction to do that. If the PS5 ran this game at a Native 4K I'm pretty sure most people know it's not going to compete with the 3090 especially when it comes to framerate.

Anyways I found the video to be interesting and its impressive how good the reconstruction is. Many times we get horrible reconstruction in games which results in a poor IQ. I'm happy that's not the case here.

And before anyone flips I believe the reconstruction will be just as good on the Series consoles. With the Series X I would be surprised if it had a higher framerate or reconstructs from a higher base resolution.
 

SlimySnake

Member
Feb 5, 2013
13,761
39,303
1,260
Come on, you have too much experience to not know you're lighting a fire with quotes like these.

I'm not saying you're wrong with facts, I'm disputing the methodology you use to compare both platform and the often misrepresentation of some PC features.
So what you are saying is that FACTS hurt the feelings of snowflake fanboys and we should instead lie to ensure these losers dont get triggered?

Absolute fucking nonsense.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
5,336
17,311
655
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
I think some people are just mad that you're saying that the PS5 can have very similar image quality to a 3090 running this game at a Native 4K. But what they always fail to mention is that the PS5 is using reconstruction to do that. If the PS5 ran this game at a Native 4K I'm pretty sure most people know it's not going to compete with the 3090 especially when it comes to framerate.

Anyways I found the video to be interesting and its impressive how good the reconstruction is. Many times we get horrible reconstruction in games which results in a poor IQ. I'm happy that's not the case here.

And before anyone flips I believe the reconstruction will be just as good on the Series consoles. With the Series X I would be surprised if it had a higher framerate or reconstructs from a higher base resolution.

The benefit of the reconstruction techniques for consoles is by far the most important take away from this video. This "how dare he compare PS5 to 3090" knee-jerk reaction is just silly. That clearly wasn't the point at all and no matter how many times he says it folks keep responding with this irrelevant response for some reason. I don't get why this is controversial at all, frankly.
 

Lysandros

Member
Jul 28, 2020
1,167
4,126
370
The benefit of the reconstruction techniques for consoles is by far the most important take away from this video. This "how dare he compare PS5 to 3090" knee-jerk reaction is just silly. That clearly wasn't the point at all and no matter how many times he says it folks keep responding with this irrelevant response for some reason. I don't get why this is controversial at all, frankly.
Even daring to put PS5 side by side the holy 3090 is enough to hurt PC master race sensibilities apparently. 'Such a blasphemy'. Reactions in PC centric sites like beyond3d are even more hilarious.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Jan 27, 2017
2,250
1,485
530
Brazil
The benefit of the reconstruction techniques for consoles is by far the most important take away from this video. This "how dare he compare PS5 to 3090" knee-jerk reaction is just silly. That clearly wasn't the point at all and no matter how many times he says it folks keep responding with this irrelevant response for some reason. I don't get why this is controversial at all, frankly.
And why not also show the benefit of reconstruction techniques for the PC version?
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2016
3,047
4,077
800
I think some people are just mad that you're saying that the PS5 can have very similar image quality to a 3090 running this game at a Native 4K. But what they always fail to mention is that the PS5 is using reconstruction to do that. If the PS5 ran this game at a Native 4K I'm pretty sure most people know it's not going to compete with the 3090 especially when it comes to framerate.

Anyways I found the video to be interesting and its impressive how good the reconstruction is. Many times we get horrible reconstruction in games which results in a poor IQ. I'm happy that's not the case here.

And before anyone flips I believe the reconstruction will be just as good on the Series consoles. With the Series X I would be surprised if it had a higher framerate or reconstructs from a higher base resolution.
No one seemed mad. Just more the lack of consistency is a bit off putting. I don't think it's so much nxg and more the dumb shit his viewers say.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

rickybooby87

Member
Nov 2, 2020
585
1,798
390
I believe some of us are missing the main takeaway here: A $399/$499 PS5/XSX can produce, nearly imperceivable results visually (When not under the microscope) compared to high-end GPUs. This was never an FSR vs DLSS comparison as we know that DLSS is far superior, it's the fact that consoles have lessened the gap that once existed (Between consoles and PC) using clever pixels over more pixels.
 
Jun 1, 2016
3,047
4,077
800
I believe some of us are missing the main takeaway here: A $399/$499 PS5/XSX can produce, nearly imperceivable results visually (When not under the microscope) compared to high-end GPUs. This was never an FSR vs DLSS comparison as we know that DLSS is far superior, it's the fact that consoles have lessened the gap that once existed (Between consoles and PC) using clever pixels over more pixels.
Well not in the framerate department.
 
Mar 27, 2020
14,691
37,675
725
Uncharted bunghole
The benefit of the reconstruction techniques for consoles is by far the most important take away from this video. This "how dare he compare PS5 to 3090" knee-jerk reaction is just silly. That clearly wasn't the point at all and no matter how many times he says it folks keep responding with this irrelevant response for some reason. I don't get why this is controversial at all, frankly.

Honestly those reconstruction techniques can be brought over to PC and you can achieve even better results there. I don't think anyone should be mad that reconstruction can allow great IQ with good performance. In the end it's all about working smarter and not harder.
 
Mar 27, 2020
14,691
37,675
725
Uncharted bunghole
No one seemed mad. Just more the lack of consistency is a bit off putting. I don't think it's so much nxg and more the dumb shit his viewers say.

More like dumb shit people not watching his videos say. Anyone watching his videos can see that he's not saying the PS5 is on par with a 3090. I believe NXGamer NXGamer made that point pretty clear.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Jan 27, 2017
2,250
1,485
530
Brazil
I believe some of us are missing the main takeaway here: A $399/$499 PS5/XSX can produce, nearly imperceivable results visually (When not under the microscope) compared to high-end GPUs. This was never an FSR vs DLSS comparison as we know that DLSS is far superior, it's the fact that consoles have lessened the gap that once existed (Between consoles and PC) using clever pixels over more pixels.
The "problem" is that the $399 machine is producing the nearly imperceptible result with fake 4k. If the 3090 uses its (superior) fake 4k, it will go to 200+ fps, and not only 60. So we can't have the same 3090's performance for $399.
 
Last edited:
  • Triggered
Reactions: Rivet
Mar 27, 2020
14,691
37,675
725
Uncharted bunghole
It could of been more clear by not comparing performance at all.

I don't know all you have to do is watch the video to understand what he's saying.

All that you have quoted is true, but you also missed the other bits on the PC side when I said.

"Due to the higher resolution all framebuffer related effects are much higher, Screen space reflections have far less dithering, edges of ears, depth of field, Volumetrics, alpha effects are all much higher and sharper. As is the tessellation levels and POM being further out. The PC is pushing far more pixels here but side by side it can be hard to notice".

This is not the gotcha you think it is, I have stated the PC is pushing more, and in this games, in these tests, they are very close. I can only test a game at a time and this only relates to this title and is evidenced and displayed on screen. No matter what I test someone always will dislike the outcome, that is not my concern, if my next test shows a huge gap to PC, I will show it and say it, then the circle repeats.

In the end I had a couple of days (in-between my full time job) to cover 4 versions with Destin's help on the PC side. I had to cover all this in a 14-15 minute video. Many things i left out due to focus on content and time etc. This is not a deep dive but a multi-platform comparison that gives as much info for all as possible, including the PC resolution options such as DSR, DLSS and FSR.

Maybe, just maybe, I present the facts and data as they are and the viewer may not like them, but that is not my concern or aim only the results as they are presented.

Seems pretty clear to me.
 

yamaci17

Member
Jan 3, 2021
521
812
315
here's my takeaway then. rtx 3060 (equivalent to 2070s from 2018) is able to match or beat a ps5 at 330 dollars msrp. remember that generally PCs always cost more than consoles due to having cost of other parts, but the freedom and the abilities a PC can deliver far outpaces a console and will usually make the extra price you pay worthwhile. on the other hand, you don't pay console tax every month to xbox live / ps plus, you have free multiplayer (but cheaters are rampant, which is a legit concern and can be perfectly viable reason to pick console over PC, which I openly admit), better game prices, better game availability, more competition between stores (epic games and steam and so on). all old games are instantly remastered to your own whims (put them to 4k, push 16x AF, push 120 fps, push ultra settings, do anything you want with them, mod the hell out of them, no need for special "game boost patches".) being able to play all xbox titles day one with game pass (if you're into it), more and more ps titles are going to land on PC as well


so rtx 3060/2070s gets 4k-esque image quality with DLSS performance and renders 65-85 frames with ultra settings, way above what ps5 is currently punching (not that it cannot punch more frames), perfectly playable and smooth with a VRR screen without the need of waiting for a VRR patch

if there were ample stocks, this gpu can be head for 350-360 dollars and would easily fit into a budget regular PC build. yes, the overall PC will still cost more, but that was always the case.


on top of that, I'm fairly sure that 3060 will always have ample vram for nextgen textures, and its Ray Tracing performance is way above ps5/xbox series x, so it will provide a better Ray Tracing performance in applicable games.


(note, don't attack from the CPU fronts. a cheap 11400f will easily be enough for the same performance)

rtx 3060 = 4k + dlss balanced + ray tracing + maxed settings (unnecessary but yes) + 60-100 frames depending on the scene

consoles = dynamic res between 1300-1800p + ray tracing + at least high settings + 60 frames

overally, 4k dlss balanced will look better than 1300-1600p which the consoles stay at usually (according to the knowledge I gathered from vg tech, DF and other sources). you also have more frames, higher settings, freedom to run above 60+ fps, freedom to tweak settings to get more frames, an alternative option in DLSS performance for more frames and list goes on. oh, the ability to enjoy the Doom Eternal with mouse and keyboard)

ps5/xbox sx devs may manage to push RT performance near a 2070s/3060 by the end of the generation, but its clear that they are currently on the 2060/2060s levels, whether you like it or not. the disperancy between rtx 3060 and consoles in terms of RT performance proves my point. you may nore care about it, but its a nextgen feature and 3060 is simply better at it.

so yeah. a 350-360 dollar rtx 3060 will provide tons of benefits over consoles, with its way stronger RT performance and with its superior reconstruction techniques. only problem that none of these Ampere GPUs can be found on stocks with humanely prices, which even forces me to suggest consoles over PCs due to overexaggerated prices. But the extraordinary situation does not change the fact that 3060 provides more bang for buck than a ps5 or series x if it can be found for normal prices
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
3,016
5,345
430
And why not also show the benefit of reconstruction techniques for the PC version?

My point entirely! The platform with the best reconstruction technology should have it highlighted and show the benefits. Why go on about native 4k being pointless, then you run the PC at native 4k when you have DLSS 2.0?

Weird.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
5,336
17,311
655
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
And why not also show the benefit of reconstruction techniques for the PC version?

In that case, why not cover every single setting and their corresponding frame rates and multiple GPUs for PC? He states above this wasn't a comprehensive review and that higher frame rates will be achieved with DSR and DLSS. He's covering multiple platforms in a 14 minute video. I think NXGamer NXGamer would fully admit that those wanting a more thorough evaluation of everything PC has to offer will want to look elsewhere.
 
Last edited:

rickybooby87

Member
Nov 2, 2020
585
1,798
390
The "problem" is that the 399 machine is producing the nearly imperceptible result with fake 4k. If the 3090 uses its (superior) fake 4k, it will go to 200+ fps, and not only 60.

Again, all valid points. But, from a console perspective, you're getting those nearly imperceptible results for $399 on the low-end, $499 on the high-end. An RTX 3090 is what? Like $1500 on a REALLY good day? (Mostly north of 2K). Also, who games at 200FPS at 4K? Anyone wanting/needing 200+ FPS is usually people who play competitively, and they select monitors in the 165hz-240hz, typically with resolutions of 1440P or lower.

For 99.9% of people, it's a GOOD day to be a console gamer as the price-to-performance ratio is as good as ever.
 

rodrigolfp

Member
Jan 27, 2017
2,250
1,485
530
Brazil
In that case, why not cover every single setting and their corresponding frame rates and multiple GPUs for PC? He states above this wasn't a comprehensive review and that higher frame rates will be achieved with DSR and DLSS. He's covering multiple platforms in a 14 minute video. I think NXGamer NXGamer would fully admit that those wanting a more thorough evaluation of everything PC has to offer will want to look elsewhere.
Why not at least a single one that is in the video? Easier for him.
Again, all valid points. But, from a console perspective, you're getting those nearly imperceptible results for $399 on the low-end, $499 on the high-end. An RTX 3090 is what? Like $1500 on a REALLY good day? (Mostly north of 2K). Also, who games at 200FPS at 4K? Anyone wanting/needing 200+ FPS is usually people who play competitively, and they select monitors in the 165hz-240hz, typically with resolutions of 1440P or lower.

For 99.9% of people, it's a GOOD day to be a console gamer as the price-to-performance ratio is as good as ever.
Those who want and can. The same who want and can to spend $1500+ on a 3090. Plus if the console version doesn't have the same or less input lag and mouse+kb support, more it is inferior...
 
Last edited:
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: DonJuanSchlong

PaintTinJr

Member
Jan 30, 2020
1,263
2,754
475
Oxfordshire, England
My point entirely! The platform with the best reconstruction technology should have it highlighted and show the benefits. Why go on about native 4k being pointless, then you run the PC at native 4k when you have DLSS 2.0?

Weird.
Probably because everything is working against it.

If you have a large screen to distinguish the detail reconstructed at 4K, then you would be capped at 120hz or 60hz. And if you've got a screen that is 4K and higher frequency than 120hz, then it is likely smaller and will still look the same as 1080p DRS.

He tested the situation in which lots of people with a 3090 - in a PC eg in a lounge -and a 4K screen would get to experience the benefit - because all large 4K screens can do 60Hz. And that's not even taking into account that DSP panel technology for improving IQ gets better as you increase the screen size/cost, because flagship TVs are 65" or bigger, and that's the starting size for each manufacturer's best DSP technology - which is absent from PC monitors, so a professional reference monitor would be needed to get that in smaller size.

You can test whatever, but it has to have an audience that can experience it to make it worthwhile IMO.
 

Edgelord79

Member
Sep 24, 2020
1,536
1,974
440
So he goes on about how good upscaling is then doesn't test fsr or dlss. Talks about how the graphical difference between ps5 and pc are not really noticable then doesn't give us any info on how it runs on pc on settings below maximum in a performance review. He's clearly not interested in covering pc so he should just not bother with the 2 minutes he gives to it.
There is no DLSS to test on the PC version.
 

Pedro Motta

Member
May 19, 2020
897
3,568
390
Why not just do a ps5 analysis and go in depth with it.. including a comparison to a 3090 seems rather pointless especially since some users on here get the wrong idea and now think ps5 can go toe to toe with a 3090.
This is silly beyond words. Did you even see his video? Are you dumb on purpose?
 
  • Praise the Sun
Reactions: Truth Be Told

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
5,336
17,311
655
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Indeed the existence of this review is incomprehensive.

Sure Jan GIF
 

onQ123

Member
May 1, 2010
17,991
11,483
1,560
So no big sites tested the Xbox Series X version yet?

NX doing PS5 vs PC & DF just want to test Halo Infinite & Forza Horizon 5 over & over again.
 

Topher

Gold Member
Sep 25, 2020
5,336
17,311
655
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Sep 22, 2020
727
1,126
385
There can be tons of shimmering on PS5 on anything with fine detail like metal grills or hair or stuff like metal stairs with specular highlights and the shadows are very distracting with a lot of noise. At times it is very convincing but it is very scene dependant and can look really poor too as it can be really obvious in motion. The first daylight level looks awful too but that might be the game and nothing to do with reconstruction.

I've not played it on PC but I would bet DLSS looks a lot cleaner in both stills and in motion but happy to be proven wrong if anyone is able to do a comparison.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Werewolfgrandma

Lysandros

Member
Jul 28, 2020
1,167
4,126
370
here's my takeaway then. rtx 3060 (equivalent to 2070s from 2018) is able to match or beat a ps5 at 330 dollars msrp. remember that generally PCs always cost more than consoles due to having cost of other parts, but the freedom and the abilities a PC can deliver far outpaces a console and will usually make the extra price you pay worthwhile. on the other hand, you don't pay console tax every month to xbox live / ps plus, you have free multiplayer (but cheaters are rampant, which is a legit concern and can be perfectly viable reason to pick console over PC, which I openly admit), better game prices, better game availability, more competition between stores (epic games and steam and so on). all old games are instantly remastered to your own whims (put them to 4k, push 16x AF, push 120 fps, push ultra settings, do anything you want with them, mod the hell out of them, no need for special "game boost patches".) being able to play all xbox titles day one with game pass (if you're into it), more and more ps titles are going to land on PC as well


so rtx 3060/2070s gets 4k-esque image quality with DLSS performance and renders 65-85 frames with ultra settings, way above what ps5 is currently punching (not that it cannot punch more frames), perfectly playable and smooth with a VRR screen without the need of waiting for a VRR patch

if there were ample stocks, this gpu can be head for 350-360 dollars and would easily fit into a budget regular PC build. yes, the overall PC will still cost more, but that was always the case.


on top of that, I'm fairly sure that 3060 will always have ample vram for nextgen textures, and its Ray Tracing performance is way above ps5/xbox series x, so it will provide a better Ray Tracing performance in applicable games.


(note, don't attack from the CPU fronts. a cheap 11400f will easily be enough for the same performance)

rtx 3060 = 4k + dlss balanced + ray tracing + maxed settings (unnecessary but yes) + 60-100 frames depending on the scene

consoles = dynamic res between 1300-1800p + ray tracing + at least high settings + 60 frames

overally, 4k dlss balanced will look better than 1300-1600p which the consoles stay at usually (according to the knowledge I gathered from vg tech, DF and other sources). you also have more frames, higher settings, freedom to run above 60+ fps, freedom to tweak settings to get more frames, an alternative option in DLSS performance for more frames and list goes on. oh, the ability to enjoy the Doom Eternal with mouse and keyboard)

ps5/xbox sx devs may manage to push RT performance near a 2070s/3060 by the end of the generation, but its clear that they are currently on the 2060/2060s levels, whether you like it or not. the disperancy between rtx 3060 and consoles in terms of RT performance proves my point. you may nore care about it, but its a nextgen feature and 3060 is simply better at it.

so yeah. a 350-360 dollar rtx 3060 will provide tons of benefits over consoles, with its way stronger RT performance and with its superior reconstruction techniques. only problem that none of these Ampere GPUs can be found on stocks with humanely prices, which even forces me to suggest consoles over PCs due to overexaggerated prices. But the extraordinary situation does not change the fact that 3060 provides more bang for buck than a ps5 or series x if it can be found for normal prices
Is PS5 only a GPU part?
 

Midn1ght

Member
Nov 4, 2013
590
731
670
So what you are saying is that FACTS hurt the feelings of snowflake fanboys and we should instead lie to ensure these losers dont get triggered?

Absolute fucking nonsense.

Never said we should lie, relax.

Funny thing is that if DF were to compare a 2060 DLSS results with a 30 fps console native quality mode, you'd be all out with pitchforks asking for their heads.
But when someone with a PC is pointing the same issue the other way around, this is nonsense.

I already said your beloved console reconstruction progress was great and that its value vs PC in the current market was amazing. Stop crying.

A $399/$499 PS5/XSX can produce, nearly imperceivable results visually (When not under the microscope) compared to high-end GPUs.

PS5 and 3090 closer than ever. FACTS.

Pew Pew Reaction GIF by SpongeBob SquarePants


This thread has both side flipping each other off now and for that reason:

Im Out Shark Tank GIF by ABC Network
 
  • Strength
Reactions: DenchDeckard

Loope

Member
Dec 7, 2020
957
1,185
335
Exactly.They know a lot more than myself, i understand they can make mistakes like everyone else, but when they make a mistake they're dragged over the coals. You can say you don't agree with something and still don't act like an asshole. I don't agree with NXgamer comparing a console to a 3090, acknowledge the difference in rendering resolution and then say they look similar, but i don't need to be a dick about it. The implication by some forum members here towards DF is way worse than bias many times, many times they're tagged as MS shills etc.
Case in point:

Nothing of value was lost tbh, there are plenty of other shill channels on youtube

I'd bet its a disgruntled Halo fan.

Can't see it being a platform warrior because, lets face it, DF's biases have always been consistent. They didn't get the exclusive access from MS for nothing!

So, quite why some rando Playstation fanboy would decide to attack now -with no real point of controversy to have their jimmies rustled by- is unclear. On the other hand Alex being slightly uncomplimentary about Halo Infinite's graphics I can imagine might upset a certain type of idiot.

Yeah because before shill foundry's report devs didn't know about framerate issues lol

Of course they are good for industry, they are free PR division.
This was what i was referring to.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Werewolfgrandma