• 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.

[IGNxGamer] Matrix Awakens, Hellblade and the Power of Unreal Engine 5 - Performance Preview

Status
Not open for further replies.

FrankWza

Member
To what extent? How many people? How much time? At what point in this 1 year to make the demo did they come help? What exactly did they do?
When Epic reached out in 2021, The Coalition had been working with Unreal Engine 5 “Early Access” for almost a year. The team had been collaborating and providing feedback to Epic about their experiences with UE5, which especially helped to push it forward for Xbox Series X|S and Windows PCs. With their track record of creating games that are technical showcases for Unreal and Xbox, along with their collaboration and early experience with UE5, The Coalition was positioned well to jump in and help optimize and polish The Matrix Awakens: An Unreal Engine 5 Experience with Epic.

So what exactly did the team at The Coalition do? A primary focus for them was on memory and performance optimizations to fully take advantage of both Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S. Because the experience features an incredibly large and dense world with a staggering amount of content, the first step was working on memory optimization. In that area, they worked with Epic to ensure the assets in the demo were set up to fully leverage virtual texture streaming and nanite wherever possible and tuned internal memory systems, especially on Xbox Series S, to ensure it all fit in the memory.


Also, in the DF article they called it a “gargantuan effort”
 

onQ123

Member
You were responding to me and I didn't say that. Again this team has had twice the time with the ps5. The team that made the the matrix demo. It's quite simple.

To what extent? How many people? How much time? At what point in this 1 year to make the demo did they come help? What exactly did they do?


Show the numbers


Twice the time would mean that Epic had the PS5 devkit over a year longer than they had the Xbox Series devkits


for example if they had Xbox Series devkits for a year & a half they would have to have the PS5 devkit for 3 years
 

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
And coalition had experience specifically with UE5. Which helps make up any difference. You’re saying that coalition came in to add bodies. The article states that they were brought in because they had access to the engine itself. Either way, the familiarity helped both ways. PS5 AND series consoles.


Again you’re missing the point and then resorting to this condescending comment or joke posts like Sosokrates Sosokrates -founder of western console warring- is doing.

Hey, theres always time for a lil fun Frank.

On a serious not , I was talking about wanted some examples in the road to PS5 about the advantages of higher clocks and people went all console warish and started to draw parallels with xbox and then you want on some weird rampage about which company is better at talling about console power.

Sony + Microsoft are going to say what they think will sell there products, who cares lol.
 

adamsapple

Member
NX gamer found that the PS5 had better ray tracing in Control compared to the xsx.

Timestamped: PS5 has dual reflections.



Actually, the PS5 version has multiple versions of incorrect RT reflections too:




Alex also covered this in B3D and on Era, every now and then there is an isolated case or two of streaming delays that can cause things to not appear at the same time.


--
Also, in the DF article they called it a “gargantuan effort”

Didn't we already cover this Frank ? can we not bring up FUD please.

This is the full quote:

Multi-core and bloom optimisations were noted as specific enhancements from The Coalition, but this team has experience in getting great results from Series S too, so don't be surprised if they helped in what is a gargantuan effort.

It's both a speculation and a commentary of The Coalition's help on the demo as a whole, not a specific gargantuan effort to bring the game to any single platform.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
Show the numbers


Twice the time would mean that Epic had the PS5 devkit over a year longer than they had the Xbox Series devkits


for example if they had Xbox Series devkits for a year & a half they would have to have the PS5 devkit for 3 years

I dont get the need to be so pedantic, weather its 6,12,18months is really beside the point, the point is epic had early access to ps5 devkits.

 
Last edited:

onQ123

Member
I dont get the need to be so pedantic, weather its 6,12,18months is really beside the point, the point is epic had eraly access to ps5 devkits.


It means a lot because someone is claiming that Epic had the PS5 devkit 2X as long as they had the Series devkits.




The consoles been out over a year now so if it was just a case of Epic having the PS5 devkit like 3 months before they got the Series devkits it's nothing now but would have made a big difference back when the old demo was shown.
 

SlimySnake

Member
Realistically this is the only way Microsoft could achieve 12 TF, by added more WGPs or add another Shader engine.

Imo it's the only explanation I can think of as to why the PS5 can outperform the XBSX in some cases, that plus the high clocks.
I wonder what GPU MS sent in devkits because in December 2019 when Phil announced the xsx, Jason heard this from devs.


Similar, not better, but MS continued to push the most powerful console narrative for months after that. The Aaron Greenberg tweet was in May of 2020.
 

Dodkrake

Member
Alex also covered this in B3D and on Era, every now and then there is an isolated case or two of streaming delays that can cause things to not appear at the same time.

The same Alex that was using Photomode as a benchmark tool? The same alex that waved away the obvious issues with the graphics and presentation on the Halo Infinite first gameplay as "just lighting, bro"? Or the same alex that failed to detect the also obvious differences in RT between Matrix on XB and PS5?

Ah, that Alex. Such a nice source for anything tech related.
 

Darsxx82

Member
I never said that.

So I do not understand that you criticize and censure that they can make such a statement if you do not understand that they are lying ..

Like I said, I (mark Cerny) would prefer to let my console do the talking. Especially after the doubt and ridiculous claims SlimySnake SlimySnake refers to a few posts ^^^
I would believe that possibility if there were no antecedents to the contrary. Sony has squeezed the message of "the most powerful console" to the extreme whenever it has had a minimum of possibility and I have no doubt that it would do the same with PS5 if it were in the situation.

In the end, each company plays its cards the best it can. As much as the differences in power are ridiculous or minuscule or are not reflected in all games, just having a basis to affirm it is understandable. Especially when your competitor has done the same thing whenever he could as well (for example Sony did it with PS3 when most multiplatform games performed better on X360).
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
It means a lot because someone is claiming that Epic had the PS5 devkit 2X as long as they had the Series devkits.




The consoles been out over a year now so if it was just a case of Epic having the PS5 devkit like 3 months before they got the Series devkits it's nothing now but would have made a big difference back when the old demo was shown.

If Stephen is correct and the reason why there was no valley demo on xsx was because they did not get the dev kits early enough it must of been significant enough not to release the demo.

I guess it could of been 3months, which would mean that extra time was meaningless for the matrix demo, but as I said from the start its pretty pointless talking about why the performance difference is happening when we have no information.
 
Last edited:

Lysandros

Member
However, from what we can assess there is an important difference between the XSX and the PS5 here. On the XSX the CPU cache is not addressable by the GPU so the CPU output needs to me moved/copied to the GPU cache to be utilised while on the PS5 the GPU can (seemingly) utilise information directly in the CPU cache.
Very interesting. What is the source for this, sounds like Onion+ bus of PS4.
 

FrankWza

Member
It's both a speculation and a commentary of The Coalition's help on the demo as a whole, not a specific gargantuan effort to bring the game to any single platform.
The Series is NOT a single platform. That’s the point. The coalition was brought in to help with 2 consoles that, despite the narrative that was thrown around here for a year, are not similar enough when developing to just “slide or scale down”
Sony + Microsoft are going to say what they think will sell there products, who cares lol.
sure. I was just referring to how embarrassing it is to make a boast like most powerful console and then have to pull it weeks later because it’s false. If you’re going to brag about your size, you better make sure the one you’re bragging to has trouble walking the next day.
 

Darsxx82

Member
NX gamer found that the PS5 had better ray tracing in Control compared to the xsx.

Timestamped: PS5 has dual reflections.

That was proven to be wrong.
In fact, his statement implied that on PC it was worse than on PS5 and that is why then he spoke of a different implementation (never worse) 🤗

You have the thread in Beyond3d on the matter in PS5 it is less precise while in XSX and PC they have dual reflections and they coincide.
 

FrankWza

Member
So I do not understand that you criticize and censure that they can make such a statement if you do not understand that they are lying ..
I’m not following. Sorry.
Especially when your competitor has done the same thing whenever he could as well (for example Sony did it with PS3 when most multiplatform games performed better on X360).
I didn’t know they made that claim on PS3. Did they? But I was and we were talking about Cerny. He didn’t lead console development until PS4 and only had some input on PS3.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Founder of western console warring.
I wonder what GPU MS sent in devkits because in December 2019 when Phil announced the xsx, Jason heard this from devs.


Similar, not better, but MS continued to push the most powerful console narrative for months after that. The Aaron Greenberg tweet was in May of 2020.
Rumors were early on that the PS5 was more powerful, there were a lot of "10tflop" talk for Scarlet.
But these consoles are planned years ahead

Infact this was one of the first rumours from 2019 and it got the xbox series specs pretty spot on.
 

Fafalada

Fafracer forever
not a specific gargantuan effort to bring the game to any single platform.
By and large - demos of this type are nearly always a death-march. It doesn't matter if the end results are good, great, terrible - you can almost guarantee the teams involved were dragged over coals to put it over the finish line, sometimes worse (also yes, I'd argue it tends to be worse than final-crunch involved with shipping products).
That said - if any of the platforms was lagging at the onset, that would obviously make the effort involved that much harder.
 
When Epic reached out in 2021, The Coalition had been working with Unreal Engine 5 “Early Access” for almost a year. The team had been collaborating and providing feedback to Epic about their experiences with UE5, which especially helped to push it forward for Xbox Series X|S and Windows PCs. With their track record of creating games that are technical showcases for Unreal and Xbox, along with their collaboration and early experience with UE5, The Coalition was positioned well to jump in and help optimize and polish The Matrix Awakens: An Unreal Engine 5 Experience with Epic.

So what exactly did the team at The Coalition do? A primary focus for them was on memory and performance optimizations to fully take advantage of both Xbox Series X and Xbox Series S. Because the experience features an incredibly large and dense world with a staggering amount of content, the first step was working on memory optimization. In that area, they worked with Epic to ensure the assets in the demo were set up to fully leverage virtual texture streaming and nanite wherever possible and tuned internal memory systems, especially on Xbox Series S, to ensure it all fit in the memory.


Also, in the DF article they called it a “gargantuan effort”
The DF part was them assuming making it run on XSS was a big effort. They had no facts for that. The rest seems like general optimizations.
Show the numbers


Twice the time would mean that Epic had the PS5 devkit over a year longer than they had the Xbox Series devkits


for example if they had Xbox Series devkits for a year & a half they would have to have the PS5 devkit for 3 years
Again you are not listening. I'm not saying anything about epic and dev kits. Read my posts again. I'm not going to explain it a 3rd time because you refuse to move on from whatever it is you are stuck on.
 

Darsxx82

Member
I’m not following. Sorry.
Simple, if you do not think that PS5 is more powerful, I do not understand that you censor and criticize that MS can claim that XSX is if you cannot prove that its basis for doing it is false ... It seems that you are more bothered that they can take advantage of it for marketing purposes than it may imply for practical purposes for games.

I didn’t know they made that claim on PS3. Did they? But I was and we were talking about Cerny. He didn’t lead console development until PS4 and only had some input on PS3.
Yes, they did, and with such creepy statements as calling X360 "Xbox 1.5". With Cerny as designer Sony has squeezed the "most powerfull" in just as much. From that time they have read and heard things like "supercharged PC" or calling PRO "the most powerful console in history" *** until Nov 2017 ***. Come on, clear example that if there was a minimum base, Sony would have already launched the message with PS5. The reality is that it does not ..... As I was saying, the end is to criticize MS for doing what everyone does, including Sony.
 

onQ123

Member
The DF part was them assuming making it run on XSS was a big effort. They had no facts for that. The rest seems like general optimizations.

Again you are not listening. I'm not saying anything about epic and dev kits. Read my posts again. I'm not going to explain it a 3rd time because you refuse to move on from whatever it is you are stuck on.

Huh? how are you not talking about Epic & Devkits if you said they had the PS5 devkit 2X longer?
 

SlimySnake

Member
We are still having the conversation what a good GPU is.

When the specifications were leaked re PS5 and XSX the majority of the internet and the MS marketing machine proclaimed hardware superiority.

We were many pointing out that it was not as simple as stating that 12 TFLOPs > 10 TFLOPs - that is not what single handedly will define good graphical performance gong forward.

A short memory lane: Last generation was all about TFLOPs across platforms. Every additional TFLOP generated higher resolution and/ or frame rates. That lead people to believe that this relationship would be forever despite evidence of the contrary. There is a brutal diminishing return curve for resolution/ FPS for TFLOPs at around high single-digit TFLOP numbers unless you run a dated game with poor visuals.

What causes this diminishing return? I/O. With more advanced graphics such as procedurally generated pieces (by the CPU), high resolution textures and RT the speed by which information can be moved and utilised between various storage units (SSD, RAM, VRAM, caches) and computational hardware pieces such as the GPU and the CPU also become rate-limiting rather than only the raw computational power of either the CPU or the GPU itself.

Sony made the prediction that investing extra money into I/O would pay off better than adding additional TFLOPs at around the 10 TFLOP number. That is the main difference between the two consoles - higher TFLOP number vs faster I/O.

That it already this early in this generation starts to perform this well is a good sign that Sony were right - and it means that the hardware specifications of the PC platform needs updating since the I/O reference pieces are archaic and poor. The PC platform is currently quite poor at moving information between the devices connected together on a motherboard - both hardware specifications and the Windows software holds it back.

Interesting times for a lover of graphics and hardware.
While I agree with you on most things here, I'm gonna push back on the TFLOPs diminishing returns claim. We just dont see that on PC even with RDNA 2.0 cards.

Here is a comparison of a 13 tflops 6700xt, a 20 tflops 6800xt and a 23 tflops 6900 XT.



You get 54, 82 and 91 FPS respectively. Thats a 51% increase in performance for a 53% increase in tflops from 6700xt to 6800xt. The 6900xt is a 10% increase in performance for 15% increase in tflops, but thats a card that is clearly ducktaped together and those rtx 3090 and 6900xt cards never offer 1:1 performance increases.

The point is that tflops vs performance differences between the same family of GPUs typically offer similar performance boosts. Now it's possible like you said that the PS5's IO is helping the PS5 close the gap especially in some scenarios where there is lots going on or when you are traversing the environment really fast. I am with you on that, and yes, AMD knew something had to be done about simply increasing CUs which is why they added infinity cache on the GPU. So again, agree 100% on that, but there is something off with the xsx because we have seen in several games like Metro, Hitman and Control that when it wants, it CAN perform like a 12 tflops GPU and offer at least a 16% boost. In Metro I believe it was around 25% in areas where you are just exploring. It's just that the tflops difference doesnt always manifest into better performance which is why I keep going back to the XSX being bottlenecked somehow. I would discourage dismissing tflops based on the xsx underperforming its tflops number because that seems to be a one off.

I will leave you with a comparison of a 10.6 tflops 6600xt and a 13 tflops 6700xt. Notice how the less powerful GPU never outperforms a GPU with more tflops.

 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member

adamsapple

Member
The same Alex that was using Photomode as a benchmark tool? The same alex that waved away the obvious issues with the graphics and presentation on the Halo Infinite first gameplay as "just lighting, bro"? Or the same alex that failed to detect the also obvious differences in RT between Matrix on XB and PS5?

Ah, that Alex. Such a nice source for anything tech related.

Damn man some of you guys really hold a grudge against individuals lol

He provided demonstrable examples and commentary on b3d and likely on Era as well (I can't be arsed to search the entire forum to find his specific posts, I hope you understand).

It means a lot because someone is claiming that Epic had the PS5 devkit 2X as long as they had the Series devkits.




The consoles been out over a year now so if it was just a case of Epic having the PS5 devkit like 3 months before they got the Series devkits it's nothing now but would have made a big difference back when the old demo was shown.

Where did anyone say that Epic had the dev kits 2x long ?

We just know there's *SOME* time difference between the developers receiving Series devkits, we just don't know how long, could have been 6 months, could have been a year. We simply don't know.



The Series is NOT a single platform. That’s the point. The coalition was brought in to help with 2 consoles that, despite the narrative that was thrown around here for a year, are not similar enough when developing to just “slide or scale down”


My hats off Frank, somehow you managed to bring your favorite Series S talking point in this topic .. somehow .

Unless either party (Epic or Coaliton) state otherwise, it's just a lot easier to speculate that Epic handed off the demo development to Coalition simply because of Epic's unfamiliarity and/or Coalition's more familiarity with the GDK environment.

We already know from confirmed sources that Epic has created demos only on the PS5 environment because they had more time/dev kits earlier.
 

FrankWza

Member
Rumors were early on that the PS5 was more powerful, there were a lot of "10tflop" talk for Scarlet.
Where?
Simple, if you do not think that PS5 is more powerful, I do not understand that you censor and criticize that MS can claim that XSX is if you cannot prove that its basis for doing it is false ... It seems that you are more bothered that they can take advantage of it for marketing purposes than it may imply for practical purposes for games.
I’m not bothered at all. I find it amusing. They didn’t take advantage of anything. They had to back off of their claim. Remember, the consoles launched at the same time(series x and PS5)
Yes, they did
where?
calling PRO "the most powerful console in history" *** until Nov 2017
the one x came out 1 year later. Again, the x and PS5 launched at the same time.
Sony would have already launched the message with PS5. The reality is that it does not
Hes not claiming anything because of the BS and doubters that were shit talking before launch. Even after he explained himself. He let Microsoft make the boastful claims and let them embarrass themselves.

I mean, look where we are one year later. People are making posts about how the PS5 I/O is not necessary to run UE5 like it’s a negative against it. When the fact is, it outperforms the x here AND doesn’t even need the single biggest advantage it has.
 

onQ123

Member

FrankWza

Member
My hats off Frank, somehow you managed to bring your favorite Series S talking point in this topic .. somehow .

Unless either party (Epic or Coaliton) state otherwise, it's just a lot easier to speculate that Epic handed off the demo development to Coalition simply because of Epic's unfamiliarity and/or Coalition's more familiarity with the GDK environment.

We already know from confirmed sources that Epic has created demos only on the PS5 environment because they had more time/dev kits earlier.
There’s no speculation. It’s in the article. The brought them in to:
A. Help make up time of the dev kits were handed over later since they were familiar with the engine.
B. Help get the series s running which required a gargantuan effort.
C. Epic reached out in 2021, The Coalition had been working with Unreal Engine 5 “Early Access” for almost a year.
D. All of the above.

-With their track record of creating games that are technical showcases for Unreal and Xbox, along with their collaboration and early experience with UE5, The Coalition was positioned well to jump in and help optimize and polish The Matrix Awakens: An Unreal Engine 5 Experience with Epic.
-
“We worked with Epic on the initial Unreal Engine 4 support for Xbox Series X when the new console was revealed back in March 2020,” says Kate Rayner, Studio Technical Director at The Coalition. “We later shipped a native update to Gears 5 on Xbox Series X|S that added visual enhancements like SSGI, increased material & texture details, and pushed our 4k real-time cinematics to 60fps, all while boosting Multiplayer to support a 120FPS performance mode. Through this we learned how to optimize for that hardware to push visual and performance.”

When Epic reached out in 2021, The Coalition had been working with Unreal Engine 5 “Early Access” for almost a year.


 

FrankWza

Member
The DF part was them assuming making it run on XSS was a big effort. They had no facts for that. The rest seems like general optimizations.
Why would they need to make assumptions? They spoke to them for the coverage:


-Digital Foundry has had unfettered access to experience for a few days now, along with the opportunity to talk in depth with key personnel at Epic.

 

adamsapple

Member
Why would they need to make assumptions? They spoke to them for the coverage:

Because they said so themselves:
Multi-core and bloom optimisations were noted as specific enhancements from The Coalition, but this team has experience in getting great results from Series S too, so don't be surprised if they helped in what is a gargantuan effort.

The bolded part reads like speculation, "don't be surprised" is not a statement of fact. And once again, they are not talking about the Series (S or X) version specifically in that quote. It's a footnote in a statement about Coalition's help in optimizing the engine.


When Epic reached out in 2021, The Coalition had been working with Unreal Engine 5 “Early Access” for almost a year.

Right, early access is not the current builds. Nanite was also software based earlier in UE5, now it's hardware based. Things change, engines iterate and Epic asked Coalition to come in to help both with the engine and the Series conversion of the demo.


What's the point you're trying to make here, again ? You've already agreed with me multiple times over that the Coalition was brought over to help with the Series version, i-e Epic most likely only handled the PS5 version, or a bigger part of it, in-house ... which again corroborates the dev-kits not being available for longer we've been talking about.

We're just going in circles trying to split hairs in the central talking point almost everyone agrees to.



The user is clearly saying its their assumption.

We *KNOW* there was a time differential between developers receiving dev kits for either console, we just don't know how long.
 
Last edited:

onQ123

Member
The user is clearly saying its their assumption.

We *KNOW* there was a time differential between developers receiving dev kits for either console, we just don't know how long.

It could only be a assumption , all I did was point out why that assumption was far fetched.
 

Darsxx82

Member


and even go so far as to say that X360 was a console with a simple architecture that would be good only for applications. They were other times 😅😂

I’m not bothered at all. I find it amusing. They didn’t take advantage of anything. They had to back off of their claim. Remember, the consoles launched at the same time(series x and PS5)
LOL. What advantage do you want them to use if there are hardly any games using new technologies? It's funny that for PS5 you are more patient and understandable.

where?

the one x came out 1 year later. Again, the x and PS5 launched at the same time.

It came out 1 year later but the technical data of XBO X was already known and even so Sony squeezed the message of the most powerful console until the ridiculous use of ***. Which leaves you a sample of the importance of the message for Sony and what a sign that if they had a minimal opportunity they would be using it **
Hes not claiming anything because of the BS and doubters that were shit talking before launch. Even after he explained himself. He let Microsoft make the boastful claims and let them embarrass themselves.
Then, I repeat that what you say is false. They have never backed down because "the most powerfull Xbox" has existed since the first day of its announcement and expressed by P. Spencer himself. Also in the advertising campaign before any game was seen running on any console. Of course they have not changed from seeing the results of the first games as you want to believe 😂
As I was saying, it is true that sometimes they have felt comfortable affirming "the most powerfull console". And this remains the same today.
I mean, look where we are one year later. People are making posts about how the PS5 I/O is not necessary to run UE5 like it’s a negative against it. When the fact is, it outperforms the x here AND doesn’t even need the single biggest advantage it has.
LOL, what has been seen is that Sony went too far in exaggerating the qualities of SSD as much as MS could do with Tflops. It's funny how you criticize MS for not demonstrating the advantages of the XSX hardware that they proclaim and yet defend being patient with the hardware advantages that Sony proclaims 🤔

And all this discussion based on a technical demo of an engine in development and whose XSeries version is a port of the PS5 version.

I think that you cannot criticize and censure a company and try to denounce the other when it also does the same. And regarding the hardware, I think the best thing to do is wait for the final NextGen games to be released and then draw conclusions from who is lying or exaggerating the most.
 
Last edited:

FrankWza

Member
The bolded part reads like speculation, "don't be surprised" is not a statement of fact. And once again, they are not talking about the Series (S or X) version specifically in that quote. It's a footnote in a statement about Coalition's help in optimizing the engine.
When you cut off the quote that begins with a shift that covers the series s and mentions that there may have been spill over in their work helping out PS5 because of “general in nature” optimizations. Thats what the “don’t be surprised” part means.

-
Platform comparisons? In the wake of our initial head-to-head screenshots, isolated scenarios were highlighted in social media to show geometric detail favouring PlayStation 5 over Xbox Series X. Revisiting The Matrix Awakens, there appears to be a certain level of dynamism here: some scenes saw Xbox Series X resolving more far-off detail, something that may even change on a run-by-run nature. It's Xbox Series S where there's a real story here - just how did the junior Xbox with just four teraflops of compute power pull this off?

First of all, Epic enlisted the aid of The Coalition - a studio that seems capable of achieving results from Unreal Engine quite unlike any other developer. Various optimisations were delivered that improved performance, many of which were more general in nature, meaning that yes, a Microsoft first-party studio would have helped in improving the PlayStation 5 version too. Multi-core and bloom optimisations were noted as specific enhancements from The Coalition, but this team has experience in getting great results from Series S too, so don't be surprised if they helped in what is a gargantuan effort.
 

Ezekiel_

Member
The point is that tflops vs performance differences between the same family of GPUs typically offer similar performance boosts.
I think the TFlops comparaison fail in the case of these consoles, because we don't know the full extent of the customization for the APUs.

If Xbox Series and PS5 APUs were exactly the same except for clocks, with same APIs and everything else equal, we would see one objectively and consistently superior than the other.

But in this case, we have two different custom APU based on RDNA2.

I think we can appreciate that Sony engineers and Mark Cerny did the necessary customization work to improve the performance of their APU design, wether it's cache scrubbers, seperate Tempest chip for audio offloading, I/O complex (2 decompression co-processors), low-level APIs, unified memory pool, etc.

The TFlops comparaison is simply void because there's too many differences between these two systems.
 
Last edited:

FrankWza

Member
and even go so far as to say that X360 was a console with a simple architecture that would be good only for applications. They were other times 😅😂
Where did he say it was the most powerful console?
LOL. What advantage do you want them to use if there are hardly any games using new technologies? It's funny that for PS5 you are more patient and understandable.
The advantage of being “the words most powerful console”
It came out 1 year later but the technical data of XBO X was already known and even so Sony squeezed the message of the most powerful console until the ridiculous use of ***. Which leaves you a sample of the importance of the message for Sony and what a sign that if they had a minimal opportunity they would be using it **
But they didn’t lie and have to pull it back while launching simultaneously. I don’t see your point.
LOL, what has been seen is that Sony went too far in exaggerating the qualities of SSD as much as MS could do with Tflops. It's funny how you criticize MS for not demonstrating the advantages of the XSX hardware that they proclaim and yet defend being patient with the hardware advantages that Sony proclaims
this demo or the UE5 engine doesn’t favor I/O. That’s the point.
 

adamsapple

Member
When you cut off the quote that begins with a shift that covers the series s and mentions that there may have been spill over in their work helping out PS5 because of “general in nature” optimizations. Thats what the “don’t be surprised” part means.



First of all, Epic enlisted the aid of The Coalition - a studio that seems capable of achieving results from Unreal Engine quite unlike any other developer. Various optimisations were delivered that improved performance, many of which were more general in nature, meaning that yes, a Microsoft first-party studio would have helped in improving the PlayStation 5 version too. Multi-core and bloom optimisations were noted as specific enhancements from The Coalition, but this team has experience in getting great results from Series S too, so don't be surprised if they helped in what is a gargantuan effort.

First quote is just an assumption on our part, if DF had unfettered access and knew the Coalition's extent in developing the demo, I don't see any reason why it wouldn't have been stated more clearly in their written article or video.

And please don't bring up the "but that's because they're bought out by MS" arguments here.

The second paragraph you're quoting, where they're actually talking about the Coalition's involvement read that how most of it is talking about how the Coalition helped the engine as a whole and the PS5 with their optimizations directly or indirectly.

Did the Coalition help more on the Series versions ? Of course.
Did that mean they had to do extra optimizations on Series S ? possible.
Does this all confirm that Epic may have pawned off the Series versions of the demo to Coalition while they focused on the environment they're directly more well-versed in, i-e the PS5 ? Seems like it.
 
Old buddy Ockham is depressed with these threads.
The explanations became so complex and convoluted and esoteric that they lost all meaning. People just need to calm down and accept the reality already, that the SeX is not as strong as the numbers make it seems neither the PS5 is as week as the numbers suggested.

And also, in the long run this will also become meaningless, because no matter what each one does best developers will learn and adapt, making both do more with less.
The differences will be negligible, we aren't we will not see differences as big as we see with the Virgin, it'll not be easily noticeable.
 

Elog

Member
While I agree with you on most things here, I'm gonna push back on the TFLOPs diminishing returns claim. We just dont see that on PC even with RDNA 2.0 cards.
I agree that I oversimplified the story. However, in this case you are comparing three identical architectures with various degree of power as measured by TFLOP and see a correlation.

Look at two cross-generational games @1440p with high graphical settings and compare a 1080 Ti with a 6700 XT - 12.06 TFLOPs (EVGA 1080 Ti) vs 13.21 TFLOPs (so +9.5%).

Hitman 3: 70 FPS vs 130 FPS (+86%)
AC Valhalla: 54 FPS vs 81 FPS (+50%)

Point is that there is alot apart from TFLOPs that determine performance when adding graphical effects and fidelity to an application. So let's say that you are a console manufacturer. Then you should clearly focus on those features that allow a perfomance boost of 86% and 50% respectively instead of adding a few more CUs. TFLOPs will always be good - and everything else equal you will get benefit from them. But somewhere when you can handily render 1800p @ 60 FPS computationally you should rather get all your other ducks in a row before adding more TFLOPs for best bang for the buck of your silicon.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
I swear we’ve had a year of the same old posts and same images Being shared. Hell even more than a year and still when you think of the actual games that have released. There’s no real major difference between the consoles.

its a shame. I think the only games we have seen large discrepancies on are tiny Indy games with small teams that haven’t had the resources to support all platforms or have outsourced development.

I bet they all will be more or less identical with little sways either side and we can all just play the games on whatever platform we want.

can’t wait to see real unreal engine 5 games released on these consoles.
 
Why would they need to make assumptions? They spoke to them for the coverage:


-Digital Foundry has had unfettered access to experience for a few days now, along with the opportunity to talk in depth with key personnel at Epic.

Yes its very much an assumption.
what current assumption? I was just telling you that they couldn't have had the PS5 devkit 2X longer unless they didn't receive the Xbox Series devkit until after the console was released.
I didnt say they had devkits 2x longer. Again read what I said without thinking that. Its very clear. Heres a hint I already said as well. This team made Lumen in the Land of Nanite. Now put 2 and 2 together please.
 

onQ123

Member
Yes its very much an assumption.

I didnt say they had devkits 2x longer. Again read what I said without thinking that. Its very clear. Heres a hint I already said as well. This team made Lumen in the Land of Nanite. Now put 2 and 2 together please.

You need to read what you said because you said they been working with PS5 for the greater part of 2 years & only 50% of that time with Series consoles
 

Darsxx82

Member
Where did he say it was the most powerful console?

LOL. How old are you? Maybe you didn't know that period? Look for some information man, even in that link they already detract and ridicule the power of X360.
"The next gen starts when we say so." You really don't remember or you just want to rewrite history?
The advantage of being “the words most powerful console”
Being the most powerful does not have to mean always having the best version of the games. As much as a 2060 or a 5700XT can at times perform better than the XSX or PS5. The important thing is to have a base to make that claming and they have it. Perhaps the question for you is why Sony does not do it if you believe that MS is lying or you can legally report it.

But they didn’t lie and have to pull it back while launching simultaneously. I don’t see your point.

My point is that Sony has shown to give a capital importance to the message of power and to the point of bordering on the ridiculous with heavy names and abuse of ****
That is, if Sony had a way to affirm PS5 the most powerful there is no doubt that it would have already affirmed it even if it ran out of *****

this demo or the UE5 engine doesn’t favor I/O. That’s the point.
That demo is also very far from taking advantage of the XSeries SSD and IO and it also does not use features like SSF, VRS and other technologies that could help improve performance.
The point is that you are only patient with the hardware advantages of the PS5 but not the XSeries. Not to mention that in gaming performance there are more factors than the SSD 😉

PS. Happy new year and health to all.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom