• 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 [ VG Tech] Riders Republic PS5 & Xbox Series X|S Frame Rate Test

SlimySnake

Member
Feb 5, 2013
13,694
39,111
1,260
Lowest game res on XSS so far?
Nah, there have been several games that have hit 720p including Watch Dogs Legion and AC Valhalla.

the lowest was Metro Exodus at 512p.

EDIT: Note that Watch Dogs Legion drops to 720p in the ray tracing mode, while both metro and ac valhalla drop in the 60 fps mode. There have been several more games that have skipped ray tracing (e.g Doom) and 60 fps (Guardians of the Galaxy) modes on the series s. Had they bothered to add 60 fps and ray tracing modes to the series s, we wouldve seen a lot more games below 720p.
 
Last edited:

SpokkX

Member
Nov 18, 2004
3,967
817
1,575
Sweden
This is pretty much identical with a microscopic edge for XSX. 1 FPS difference in minimums and slightly more tearing on PS5. To be added to the list of the vast majority of games having resolution and essentially performance parity between the systems.
Nah currently this plays WAY better on xbox platforms (yes even S plays better/smoother than ps5)

why?

VRR -makes the drops and tearing just disappear

hopefully ps5 catches up soon with vrr support
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Riky

Portugeezer

Member
Dec 11, 2008
21,343
5,810
1,585
London
abload.de
What the hell happened to the Series S version? 900p and drops to 720p? What a joke! We are back to XBOX 360 resolutions, for fuck's sake. Welcome to 2005 guys! And the game does not seem to be a technical marvel, to be honest.

I wish MS would have done with a 6 Tflops machine with higher bandwidth. Or even better, an XBOX Series X digital edition for 400 bucks like Sony with PS5, that would've been so nice. I know it's 100 bucks more than Series S, but I think the difference between those pieces of hardware is more than worth it, right?
We were supposed to be getting 4k X games with ~1440p equivalent on S. If X games are 1600p and dipping to 1440p, then S has no chance of competing there.

It does suck though, hopefully first party games will continue to do better; when I buy Series S for Starfield I hope it will at least look crisp on a 1080p TV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arioco
Dec 6, 2020
209
1,121
395
Another Ubisoft game with rather mediocre performance on all consoles.

Far Cry 6 being the outlier I guess.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
5,082
6,752
570
What the hell happened to the Series S version? 900p and drops to 720p? What a joke! We are back to XBOX 360 resolutions, for fuck's sake. Welcome to 2005 guys! And the game does not seem to be a technical marvel, to be honest.

I wish MS would have done with a 6 Tflops machine with higher bandwidth. Or even better, an XBOX Series X digital edition for 400 bucks like Sony with PS5, that would've been so nice. I know it's 100 bucks more than Series S, but I think the difference between those pieces of hardware is more than worth it, right?

There have been other games with DRS that have hit 720p. Hardly a surprise, quarter res of whatever the big boys are doing is the expected result. The XSS is best used on a modestly sized 1080p monitor/TV, 720p is still an okay res in that scenario (still native res on a lot of 32" sets). I just started the Avengers campaign and chose to play in 60fps mode (which is said to drop to 720p in combat) and on a 24" screen she's still a looker.

On topic, this game looks like the type of game I can be hilariously bad at and still have a good time. I'll be sure to give it a look when it is on sale.
 
Last edited:

cragarmi

Member
Mar 14, 2014
687
1,696
630
The North UK
Nah currently this plays WAY better on xbox platforms (yes even S plays better/smoother than ps5)

why?

VRR -makes the drops and tearing just disappear

hopefully ps5 catches up soon with vrr support
The percentage of people with VRR TVs is miniscule compared to those without, it shouldn't be required to get a smooth experience, vsync is a thing.
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
5,560
6,702
835
We were supposed to be getting 4k X games with ~1440p equivalent on S. If X games are 1600p and dipping to 1440p, then S has no chance of competing there.

It does suck though, hopefully first party games will continue to do better; when I buy Series S for Starfield I hope it will at least look crisp on a 1080p TV.
To me, the issue is that once last gen is left behind 3rd party devs still have to spend time accounting for another system. I know it’s not exactly 50% more time spent but whatever time is needed to get series s playable is time that could be better spent optimizing series x and PS5. It’s a ridiculous compromise so that a subset of people can save $100. The “flip a switch” scenario has been proven wrong across many multiplats so far.
 

SpokkX

Member
Nov 18, 2004
3,967
817
1,575
Sweden
The percentage of people with VRR TVs is miniscule compared to those without, it shouldn't be required to get a smooth experience, vsync is a thing.
No vrr SHOULD not be required

but in REALITY IS required to get 100% smooth 60/120fps on console

So this is just how it is - this game plays better on xbox because of vrr
 

dcmk7

Member
Mar 25, 2020
1,576
4,956
385
Lowest game res on XSS so far?

Oh nah, there has been a few titles which have seen lower numbers.

Off the top of my head.. Metro Exodus was low 500's and The Medium & Watch Dogs were mid 600's.

I am certain there are more too but can't remember. Looks a fun little game.
 
Last edited:
  • Empathy
  • Like
Reactions: Riky and M1chl

cragarmi

Member
Mar 14, 2014
687
1,696
630
The North UK
Source for those who own next-gen consoles and if they have VRR TV's or not?
Seriously? Unless you bought a new TV alongside your new console it's unlikely to have it, come on it's a fairly recent technology, common sense really. I bought my TV a couple of years ago, and it doesn't support it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FingerBang

DenchDeckard

Member
Feb 28, 2021
2,973
5,292
430
I would put money that a lot of people went out and got new tvs with these consoles. Sure its not every person at all but I would comfortably say there are hundreds of thousands of people with vrr displays, if not a couple to a few million. The LG CX C9 B9 C1 B1 etc has been one of the most successful tvs in the last 3 to 5 years. Even samsung q70 etc has one 2.1 hdmi.
 

Mr Moose

Member
Sep 10, 2013
7,023
15,517
985
England
yes with spectacular graphics not enough for a console that costs less than the switch?))
I'm not a Switch fan, if I got one it wouldn't be for the resolution of their games.
Just pointing out that FH5 is (up to) 1440p on Series S in 30fps quality mode, this game is 60fps, to compare them better it would be more fair in the 60fps modes (810-1080p in FH5 to this games 720-900p with 900p being common).
This game has nasty CA, I noticed it in some FH5 shots, but in this game its very noticeable. Hopefully both games have a toggle.
 

Zathalus

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,135
3,017
470
Seriously? Unless you bought a new TV alongside your new console it's unlikely to have it, come on it's a fairly recent technology, common sense really. I bought my TV a couple of years ago, and it doesn't support it.
Tons of TVs support it. LG has supported it since 2019, Samsung has supported FreeSync since 2018, TCL has supported it since 2019, and Vizio has supported FreeSync since 2020. The poll done of NeoGaf users indicated they about half owned a TV that supported it, which makes sense, as those who are early adopters of next-gen consoles would have a much higher likelihood of having newish or good TVs to go along with the new console.

It is also basically a standard feature for any decent TV going forward, so developers can rely on it more and more as time goes on, just as they did with 4k and HDR.
 

cragarmi

Member
Mar 14, 2014
687
1,696
630
The North UK
Tons of TVs support it. LG has supported it since 2019, Samsung has supported FreeSync since 2018, TCL has supported it since 2019, and Vizio has supported FreeSync since 2020. The poll done of NeoGaf users indicated they about half owned a TV that supported it, which makes sense, as those who are early adopters of next-gen consoles would have a much higher likelihood of having newish or good TVs to go along with the new console.

It is also basically a standard feature for any decent TV going forward, so developers can rely on it more and more as time goes on, just as they did with 4k and HDR.
GAF is hardly a good representation of the public buying Nextgen consoles, but if you can afford one along with relatively new TV set, fair play to ya. Clearly we are in different leagues in terms of disposal income during a pandemic.
 

Zathalus

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,135
3,017
470
GAF is hardly a good representation of the public buying Nextgen consoles, but if you can afford one along with relatively new TV set, fair play to ya. Clearly we are in different leagues in terms of disposal income during a pandemic.
I doubt most people snatching up PS5s and XSX/S consoles are the general public. It is generally the dedicated and hardcore that jump on to them first, and they usually (but not always) have newer or up to date sets to go with them.

Also, I bought my C9 back in 2019, way before anybody expected a pandemic to occur.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cragarmi

yamaci17

Member
Jan 3, 2021
521
811
315
There have been other games with DRS that have hit 720p. Hardly a surprise, quarter res of whatever the big boys are doing is the expected result. The XSS is best used on a modestly sized 1080p monitor/TV, 720p is still an okay res in that scenario (still native res on a lot of 32" sets). I just started the Avengers campaign and chose to play in 60fps mode (which is said to drop to 720p in combat) and on a 24" screen she's still a looker.

On topic, this game looks like the type of game I can be hilariously bad at and still have a good time. I'll be sure to give it a look when it is on sale.
720p is not okay with a 1080p monitor. don't make comments until you experienced it yourself. even native 1080p does not look crisp anymore on a 1080p screen and needs supersampling for better IQ, please stop spreading FUD

stop normalizing the 720p target for series s. instead ask for better optimization. there are no justifications for 720p modes in 2021. even 900p looks horrible with a 1080p screen, let alone 720p. a slight %10 resolution dip usually is enough to butcher image quality in majority of games at 1080p. 1080p is not a mythical baseline resolution like 2160p where slight dips like 1600p-1900p looks okay. its native or bust at such low resolutions

here's what you're missing out if you with series s instead of series x even at a 1080p screen.




as I said, native 1080p does not look like actual 1080p anymore due to the emergence of Temporal Anti Aliasing. TAA particularly looks bad at native 1080p and below, and supersampling greatly improves the IQ, hence why I would suggest SX to 1080p users even if they don't plan to get a 1440p/4K screen unless they're severely constrained by their budget

if you can't see the difference, or deem the difference unworthy for 200 dollars more, feel free to get a Series S, all is fine! its still fine if you want to save money. but don't think SX would not enhance your image quality for the additional price. it will, greatly. as evidenced by the above comparison. having higher resolution input is highly beneficial for Temporal Anti Aliasing.

Relevant article;


"Motion in the scene may disrupt a well-designed sample pattern by displacing samples accumulated over frames. With a short recurrent sequence, certain motion speed may cause sample locations from multiple frames to cluster in world space, leading to biased results (blurry or aliased). This is one of the causes of TAA quality degradation under motion (the others are discussed in Sec. 6)"

"Since the history is reprojected in every frame, the filtering error accumulates and quickly result in an objectionable, blurry look"

Relevant GDC source;

 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
5,082
6,752
570
720p is not okay with a 1080p monitor. don't make comments until you experienced it yourself. even native 1080p does not look crisp anymore on a 1080p screen and needs supersampling for better IQ, please stop spreading FUD

stop normalizing the 720p target for series s. instead ask for better optimization. there are no justifications for 720p modes in 2021. even 900p looks horrible with a 1080p screen, let alone 720p. a slight %10 resolution dip usually is enough to butcher image quality in majority of games at 1080p. 1080p is not a mythical baseline resolution like 2160p where slight dips like 1600p-1900p looks okay. its native or bust at such low resolutions

And that is your opinion. LOL

I have a XSS connected to a 24" 1080p monitor this second. If you are a true image whore, don't get the S, simple as that. 720p on a small-ish 1080p screen is not bothersome to me or a lot of other people. It would be more of a problem if a game locked to that res, but so far the titles have run above that at all the moments where you are looking around the world with drops occurring when things get frantic.
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
3,721
7,290
1,635
Blame ubisoft. Not Microsoft.... or the console itself.
Every single time without fail if there is a poorly optimized 3rd party title on the XSS people blame the XSS hardware. People are silent when games like Forza Horizon 5 hit and it has better detail and performance than the X1X. The more expensive consoles aren't running this game at native 4k no one has a problem with that at all though. Oh well hopefully after the cross gen period ends we'll see non MS developers fully utilize the hardware.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Dec 29, 2019
5,082
6,752
570
Every single time without fail if there is a poorly optimized 3rd party title on the XSS people blame the XSS hardware. People are silent when games like Forza Horizon 5 hit and it has better detail and performance than the X1X. The more expensive consoles aren't running this game at native 4k no one has a problem with that at all though. Oh well hopefully after the cross gen period ends we'll see non MS developers fully utilize the hardware.

There will always be lower budget titles that don't utilize the systems very well, including PS5/XSX.

This game looks fun though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DarkMage619

Shmunter

Member
Aug 25, 2018
11,091
25,069
835
Every single time without fail if there is a poorly optimized 3rd party title on the XSS people blame the XSS hardware. People are silent when games like Forza Horizon 5 hit and it has better detail and performance than the X1X. The more expensive consoles aren't running this game at native 4k no one has a problem with that at all though. Oh well hopefully after the cross gen period ends we'll see non MS developers fully utilize the hardware.
XsS may run at 60 vs X1x, but it is at lower fidelity, detail and resolution. It’s not all golden.
 
Mar 16, 2014
1,541
1,529
780
Tons of TVs support it. LG has supported it since 2019, Samsung has supported FreeSync since 2018, TCL has supported it since 2019, and Vizio has supported FreeSync since 2020. The poll done of NeoGaf users indicated they about half owned a TV that supported it, which makes sense, as those who are early adopters of next-gen consoles would have a much higher likelihood of having newish or good TVs to go along with the new console.

It is also basically a standard feature for any decent TV going forward, so developers can rely on it more and more as time goes on, just as they did with 4k and HDR.
PS5 will not support FreeSync and will instead require a new hdmi 2.1 tv.
 

Bernd Lauert

Banned
Apr 15, 2018
7,071
21,217
770
I'm still amazed so many posters are concerned about a console they will never own.
They're more concerned about the resolution on a console they'll never own than about constant frame tearing on the console they actually own because the console developer still hasn't implemented a promised feature which would deal with said frame tearing. Priorities.
 
  • Thoughtful
  • Like
Reactions: MrFunSocks and Riky

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
5,560
6,702
835
I'm still amazed so many posters are concerned about a console they will never own.
it takes time away from 3rd party titles. It was not necessary when they could have just made a $400 console and everything would be easier. I don’t care about random people saving $100. Consoles are already “budget” by design. They need to be worked on to maximize their potential. That’s why people take issue with crossgen. On top of that, Microsoft is making more and more s consoles and can’t produce as many x consoles. So we’re looking at this low end all gen.
Now, because of the s, we have crossgen all gen.

edit:
I am not calling the s last gen. I’m saying there is no precedent for a console with lower specs. It’s a similar situation to cross gen and needs to be accounted for all gen. Which is what happens in a cross gen time frame
 
Last edited:

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
3,721
7,290
1,635
XsS may run at 60 vs X1x, but it is at lower fidelity, detail and resolution. It’s not all golden.
You need to watch the DF video. There is a level of detail on the XSS version of the game the X1X doesn't have. The XSS is every bit the current gen consoles minus resolution. It has less RAM but every feature present on the XSX minus the optical drive it has. I guess it's cool to knock the console that is $200 less for some odd reason. It's pretty golden seeing the savings.

I didn’t imply anything. It wrote what I said very clearly. You should ask the great defender of series s if he is implying that because he made this statement a few posts back.
I'm clearly stating the negativity around the XSS is completely disingenuous. It is plenty capable and there are several examples.

As shown above people simply don't know what they are talking about but enjoy attacking the budget console for reasons.
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
5,560
6,702
835
I'm clearly stating the negativity around the XSS is completely disingenuous. It is plenty capable and there are several examples.

As shown above people simply don't know what they are talking about but enjoy attacking the budget console for reasons.
I know. But all consoles are “budget”
Comparing first and 3rd party is never going to be 1:1.
guess it's cool to knock the console that is $200 less
This didn’t need to be a thing. It they would have split the difference it could have been $100 less and we wouldn’t have uncertainty. I think that’s the key point. There’s time that needs to be dedicated to another console for the sake of people saving $100.
 

Zathalus

Member
Jul 16, 2020
1,135
3,017
470
it takes time away from 3rd party titles. It was not necessary when they could have just made a $400 console and everything would be easier. I don’t care about random people saving $100. Consoles are already “budget” by design. They need to be worked on to maximize their potential. That’s why people take issue with crossgen. On top of that, Microsoft is making more and more s consoles and can’t produce as many x consoles. So we’re looking at this low end all gen.
Now, because of the s, we have crossgen all gen.

edit:
I am not calling the s last gen. I’m saying there is no precedent for a console with lower specs. It’s a similar situation to cross gen and needs to be accounted for all gen. Which is what happens in a cross gen time frame
How much time does it really take though? All 3rd party titles are going to be on PC as well, and optimising your game for the myriad of potential PC specs out there, including a completely separate GPU architecture then the consoles (Nvidia) would certainly take far more work. Dropping the resolution and some memory heavy settings (such as LOD and texture resolution) should sort out the Series S just fine.
 

intbal

Member
Apr 19, 2019
1,234
2,181
420
GAF is hardly a good representation of the public buying Nextgen consoles, but if you can afford one along with relatively new TV set, fair play to ya. Clearly we are in different leagues in terms of disposal income during a pandemic.

A lot of Xbox gamers play on monitors, simply because the selection is wider, the tech is frequently better, and the costs are lower. The only thing you give up is screen size. Freesync has been on the market since 2015. I bet a lot of people have PC monitors that include Freesync and they're not even aware of it.

This was my first VRR display - Acer Nitro VG280K
It's a 2020 model. 28"/4K/60(75)hz/10bit/HDR(391nits)/with Freesync and a framerate display. I got it for a little over $200 from Amazon. I believe you can still pick it up from the official Acer Recertified store for less than that.
VRR is not some exotically priced luxury inclusion. It's mainstream.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cragarmi

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
May 11, 2013
5,060
11,950
1,040
England
it takes time away from 3rd party titles. It was not necessary when they could have just made a $400 console and everything would be easier. I don’t care about random people saving $100. Consoles are already “budget” by design. They need to be worked on to maximize their potential. That’s why people take issue with crossgen. On top of that, Microsoft is making more and more s consoles and can’t produce as many x consoles. So we’re looking at this low end all gen.
Now, because of the s, we have crossgen all gen.

edit:
I am not calling the s last gen. I’m saying there is no precedent for a console with lower specs. It’s a similar situation to cross gen and needs to be accounted for all gen. Which is what happens in a cross gen time frame

It runs on the same architecture with the same GPU hardware and on the same development GDK.
It isn't a problem compared to multiple PC versions.
 

FrankWza

Member
Feb 14, 2013
5,560
6,702
835
How much time does it really take though? All 3rd party titles are going to be on PC as well, and optimising your game for the myriad of potential PC specs out there, including a completely separate GPU architecture then the consoles (Nvidia) would certainly take far more work. Dropping the resolution and some memory heavy settings (such as LOD and texture resolution) should sort out the Series S just fine.
I don’t know. But it’s not an insignificant amount. If it was, there wouldn’t be games running at sub 1080p.
It runs on the same architecture with the same GPU hardware and on the same development GDK.
It isn't a problem compared to multiple PC versions.
so why is this game 720p? Could have been completely avoided with a $400 disc less series x.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dcmk7

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
May 11, 2013
5,060
11,950
1,040
England
I don’t know. But it’s not an insignificant amount. If it was, there wouldn’t be games running at sub 1080p.

so why is this game 720p? Could have been completely avoided with a $400 disc less series x.

Probably because the bigger consoles aren't 4k. They wanted a substantial difference between price points, the difference is £200 here which is a lot of money.