PS4 and Xbox One resolution / frame rate discussion

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

PS4 version of GTA5 is a next-gen grass simulator - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-gta-5-next-gen-grass-compared

[vcfan]

PS4 version of GTA5 is a next-gen grass simulator - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-gta-5-next-gen-grass-compared

 

yeah but xb1 has better clouds

[Elliot B.]

Some of the detail is pretty impressive, though. Bug eaten leaves?

Benchmarks didn't look this good 5 years ago!

Games are getting crazy :)

[compl3x]

Some of the detail is pretty impressive, though.  Bug eaten leaves?

 

 

If you showed that video to a bunch of random people and told them it was a tourism advertisement of somewhere like Nepal they'd probably believe you.

[Ironman273]

If you showed that video to a bunch of random people and told them it was a tourism advertisement of somewhere like Nepal they'd probably believe you.

Even the guy getting hacked up? :P

[compl3x]

Even the guy getting hacked up? :p

 

 

lol. I must have missed that part.

[Ironman273]

lol. I must have missed that part.

It's at 41 seconds but it's some soldiers burning a guy, not hacking him up.

[0nyX]

"Xbox one is compromised to a certain extent"  (Shouldn't stop xbox one owners from getting the game)

 

 

[notchinese]

Wants high res/framerate, buys a console.....what could go wrong.

[vcfan]

GTA 5 performance analysis

 

The final analysis is in. We've put together a wealth of GTA 5 clips culled from capture sessions spanning over 20 different missions, concentrating on areas where the title's 30fps target frame-rate faces its toughest challenges. In comparing PS4 and Xbox One, the end result is fascinating; it shows that while there are some scenarios that prove equally challenging for both consoles, specific areas can see one platform out-performing the other. On a native 1080p title like this, we might reasonably expect PlayStation 4's more powerful GPU to demonstrate an unassailable advantage across the game, but the reality is a little more complicated.

Travelling at speed through city junctions - such as Strawberry Avenue - turns out to be a particular Achilles Heel on PS4, with sustained drops to around the 24-26fps range at their worst. It's a situation that also applies to Xbox One, but to a consistently lesser degree when testing under the precise same conditions (and borne out in repeated tests). Put simply, in areas where junctions are stacked up one after the other, the Sony platform suffers more prolonged frame-rate drops when burning through traffic with your foot jammed to the floor. It's an interesting, recurring scenario that points to a CPU bottleneck, where Xbox One's increased clock-speed has an advantage when racing around these busy sections.

Another potential cause could be hard drive access, of course. GTA 5 is very intensive in terms of background streaming, a state of affairs that made the digital download versions of the last-gen version less desirable than the physical releases (where streaming bandwidth was shared between disc and drive). To lessen the impact of any streaming bottleneck, we installed the PS4 version onto an SSD for a re-test - the results showed no improvement.

However, while Xbox One enjoys an advantage during high-speed races in packed junction areas, it's clear the platform faces its own particular challenges. It drops a few frames during downtown driving outside of the problem junction areas, whereas PS4 remains solid. On top of that, we've already seen that Rockstar has made some visual cutbacks to its complex outdoor rendering, presumably to accommodate Xbox One's less capable graphics hardware, but in certain areas where cuts haven't been made, performance can dip.

Complex effects work, usually involving transparency effects (explosions etc) can also cause visible, sustained hitches in performance. Explosive missions with Trevor in Los Santos' outskirts show the biggest pitfall on Xbox One - with 24fps held at length during one shoot-out. Meanwhile, the PS4 has no issue with these segments, sparing one or two dropped frames just as alpha effects appear on-screen.

It's an interesting result overall, leaving us with different performance profiles on each platform. It's an unmistakable advantage for Sony's platform when it comes to shoot-outs, but on the other hand, the Xbox One typically avoids the heavy mid-20s frame-rates that can kick in during high-speed chases.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-grand-theft-auto-5-performance-analysis

the cpu advantage is real

[Polonium]

It could be the cpu but realistically I'd rather have a few frames drop while driving than in a shoot out. It will be a pig to aim when the frames are dropping to 25 or so.

[George P Global Moderator]

Aiming and GTA never went well together.

[theyarecomingforyou]

"Xbox one is compromised to a certain extent"  (Shouldn't stop xbox one owners from getting the game)

 

 

Wow, that's quite a big difference. Even though both versions can claim to be 1080p/30fps it's clear the PS4 version has a higher level of fidelity.

[compl3x]

Wow, that's quite a big difference. Even though both versions can claim to be 1080p/30fps it's clear the PS4 version has a higher level of fidelity.

 

It does look significantly scaled back.

[GotBored]

"Xbox one is compromised to a certain extent"  (Shouldn't stop xbox one owners from getting the game)

 

 

 

Wow thats a very noticeable difference on a very popular title. Not sure why they scaled back the X1 version so much as most games aren't that different. Maybe GTA5 is just too GPU hungry?

[vcfan]

Dragon Age: Inquisition performance analysis reveals that while PS4 has the image quality advantage, Xbox One runs more smoothly overall

As the developer revealed, Dragon Age runs at 900p on Xbox One and 1080p on PlayStation 4. The console versions both appear to use the same post-process anti-aliasing technique. As expected, this looks significantly cleaner when paired with the native 1080p image of the PS4 release, but still works well enough on Xbox One. Both versions also utilise HBAO and implement decent anisotropic filtering, though the lower resolution on Xbox One does leave textures looking a touch blurrier.

On the PC version, raising the quality of the tessellation setting simply increases the radius in which detail is rendered. In many cases the two console versions appear to be a match for the PC's medium preset but we noted a number of situations in which detail was greater on PS4, suggesting a higher setting on Sony's console.

Performance-wise, both consoles do a good job of delivering a stable, consistent frame-rate but it is the Xbox One version that delivers the smoothest experience overall. Frame-rate drops are extremely rare, only appearing in the most extreme circumstances - for all intents and purposes we're looking at a locked 30fps. Unfortunately, the higher resolution on PS4 comes with a catch in the form of noticeable performance dips during strenuous sequences. During a normal run of play, the game does a good job of maintaining the target frame-rate but frame-rate faltered sometimes during battle sequences and sometimes even traversal across the landscape. Both versions use an adaptive v-sync setup that results in torn frames when the 30fps performance target isn't met, but thankfully, torn frames are contained mostly within the top 25 per cent of the screen, with less of a serious impact on image quality than you might expect.

In terms of final recommendations, it's clear that if you have the muscle, the PC version is going to provide the best experience - but the console versions are still very impressive. If you don't mind minor frame-rate dips and feel that image quality is most important, it's easy to recommend the PS4 version. However, those looking for the most stable experience should instead opt for the Xbox One version. It's clear that neither console version is quite perfect but the level of graphical accomplishment and performance are an enormous improvement over every other BioWare console title we've played.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-dragon-age-inquisition-face-off

5 fps difference at times

this game also uses kinect,so it has some locked resources on xb1. the camera light turns on when this game is being played.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

As a born PC gamer I'd prefer 40% more pixels for one or two frame rate drops in rare circumstances. I wouldn't lower my monitors resolution to 900p for a small hiccup here or there in hectic battles. EA said they'd make the most out of each platform and they have.

 

Frame-rate drops are extremely rare, only appearing in the most extreme circumstances - for all intents and purposes we're looking at a locked 30fps. Unfortunately, the higher resolution on PS4 comes with a catch in the form of noticeable performance dips during strenuous sequences. During a normal run of play, the game does a good job of maintaining the target frame-rate but frame-rate faltered sometimes during battle sequences and sometimes even traversal across the landscape

[vcfan]

As a born PC gamer I'd prefer 40% more pixels for one or two frame rate drops in rare circumstances. I wouldn't lower my monitors resolution to 900p for a small hiccup here or there in hectic battles. EA said they'd make the most out of each platform and they have.

that part you bolded is referring to the xb1 version. watch the video. the drops are far from rare.

[Polonium]

Aiming and GTA never went well together.

 

Maybe so, but GTA V on PS4 does it far, far better than anything before. For that reason alone PS4 gets the nod

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

that part you bolded is referring to the xb1 version. watch the video. the drops are far from rare.

 

Just watched it, it dips 1~2 most of the time, not 5, and it really just seems to be during fights. You can actually see the PS4 going above to 31 every so often as well.

 

I'll still take the better graphics fidelity in this case when the drops aren't that noticeable in gameplay. The Xbox One is pushing a lot less pixels and general texture detail also takes a hit, so I guess it's no surprise it doesn't drop 1~2 frames. If the XB1 version could have ran similarly to the PS4 version at 1080p it would be at 1080p in this case.

[wakjak]

that part you bolded is referring to the xb1 version. watch the video. the drops are far from rare.

 

Your arguments are pathetic. Xbox has the worst graphics out of the 2 so it's no wonder it very rarely has better performance. It's not doing as much work as the PS4.

[Emn1ty]

Your arguments are pathetic. Xbox has the worst graphics out of the 2 so it's no wonder it very rarely has better performance. It's not doing as much work as the PS4.

 

"Better" - only in the gaming community is better defined purely by numerical values than actual results.

[vcfan]

Face-Off: Far Cry 4

First impressions of Far Cry 4 on Xbox One are positive. Image quality is very clean and the overall presentation compares favourably to the PS4 game. On close inspections, detail looks a little softer and less refined, but otherwise it holds up very well during gameplay. Pixel counting - not very easy here, for reasons we'll go into later - reveals a 1440x1080p framebuffer horizontally scaled up to full-HD resolution (1920x1080), although artefacts from the resizing process appear subdued compared to most sub-1080p games. In comparison we see a native 1080p image deployed on the PS4 that appears suitably sharp, and indeed clearer than the Xbox One game, but the Microsoft console is punching enough above its weight with a presentation that - by and large - defies its sub-native pixel-count.

What HRAA brings to the table is worthy of a Digital Foundry feature in its own right, but let's look at the basics. For Xbox One, the choice of resolution means that scaling artefacts are only apparent on one axis. On top of that, for every four horizontal pixels rendered, it draws upon three source pixels, an additional three from the previous frame plus accumulated data from previous frames. HRAA works nicely not just for anti-aliasing, then, but also in reconstituting something approaching the quality of a full 1080p framebuffer when it is working at its best. PlayStation 4 looks even cleaner, mostly because it appears to have access to more temporal data than Xbox One version of the algorithm and doesn't need to upscale at all.

Away from image quality, both consoles share the same core set of assets and effects throughout Far Cry 4. Quality levels appear identical in most areas, although curiously we see evidence of lower resolution ground textures on the Xbox One in one particular location, and missing trees in the distance on the PS4 in another. We suspect that occasional streaming oddities are to blame here, since these differences only seem to occur in areas directly after a cut-scene. Beyond this, the only differences we see come down to the randomised placement of wooden shacks, garden fences, foliage, and other incident objects across the environment, where these elements aren't always rendered in the same place.

Overall, performance sticks closely to 30fps on both consoles, but the Xbox One comes out on top, displaying slightly higher frame-rates during intense shoot-outs and generally fewer dips elsewhere. It's likely that the difference in resolution between the two versions is the cause here, with the Xbox One rendering 25 per cent fewer pixels, and using a less refined version of HRAA into the bargain. That said, the difference doesn't stand out during a general run of play, and neither version suffers from performance issues that get in the way of enjoying how the unpredictable gunfights turn out.

In terms of the multi-platform comparison, the PS4 gets the nod here for its sharper native 1080p presentation and almost solid 30fps frame-rates. In comparison, the image quality isn't quite as pristine on the Xbox One, although frame-rates are slightly higher under load, but the quality of the presentation overall remains excellent. It's a great buy on either platform.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-far-cry-4-face-off

[trooper11]

As a born PC gamer I'd prefer 40% more pixels for one or two frame rate drops in rare circumstances. I wouldn't lower my monitors resolution to 900p for a small hiccup here or there in hectic battles. EA said they'd make the most out of each platform and they have.

As a born pc gamer, you wouldn't own either console, or put up with lower than 60fps, much less 30. If your pc couldn't handle your settings, you would have to cut back somewhere. Most pc only gamers I see aiming for rock solid frame rate with as much res and effects as possible. So I would say level of importance goes like this:

Frame rate, Resolution, effects

When it comes to the two consoles, its always going to be the ps4 on top outside of some cases where the games turn out equal or in rare cases where CPU speed makes a bigger difference. Dragon Age looks like it has a nice advantage on ps4.

[+Audioboxer Subscriber²]

As a born pc gamer, you wouldn't own either console, or put up with lower than 60fps, much less 30. If your pc couldn't handle your settings, you would have to cut back somewhere. Most pc only gamers I see aiming for rock solid frame rate with as much res and effects as possible. So I would say level of importance goes like this:

Frame rate, Resolution, effects

When it comes to the two consoles, its always going to be the ps4 on top outside of some cases where the games turn out equal or in rare cases where CPU speed makes a bigger difference. Dragon Age looks like it has a nice advantage on ps4.

 

A lot of games I want to play aren't on the PC?