• 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.

Tomb Raider Definitive Edition - PlayStation 4 = ~60fps, Xbox One = ~30fps

Status
Not open for further replies.
I would never consider not buying over resolution differences, but they are literally offering up 30fps version vs 60fps version. Not sure if want. :)

But Senju you gave us cute dog response :(. You're contractually obligated not to buy it. Also you're contractually obligated not to tell anyone about this....

Cute dog pics are stri g contracts. Trust me I would know
 
Tiled Resources are already present in openGL under the name Partially Resident Textures, it would be very simple for Sony to integrate them into their own API if they haven't already
you forget that in theory the esram is faster than the gddr5. not denying that the ps4 always will have the better specs, just saying that the one can make a big leap near the ps4 performance-wise with tiled ressources :)
 
Why? It's not just racing games and frame-counting fighters that gets hurt by a fluctuating framerate. It's an issue since it simply makes the game look worse, it looks unoptimized.

I don't know, I'm kinda fine with it so long as we're always talking about fully playable framerates, and it's a singleplayer title. In a serious, competitive multi-player title that I intend to take seriously, that's a big no, no, but singleplayer I don't mind as long as the framerate is regularly in very playable territory.

But Senju you gave us cute dog response :(. You're contractually obligated not to buy it. Also you're contractually obligated not to tell anyone about this....

Cute dog pics are stri g contracts. Trust me I would know

haha, yea, that dog pic is kind of a binding contract, but that decision largely hinges on if they also made serious graphical sacrifices on top of potentially not so good, below 30fps performance. However, even with solid performance between 30 and 45, if the game looks too graphically compromised for the sake of 1080p, I'm definitely not buying it, at least not full price. I may get it used (a practice I personally hate doing with any my games). I'll be watching the tech analysis of this game very closely. That much is certain.
 

Atlas157

Member
I wonder how this news will affect the sales. I preordered the PS4 version after reading the OP. What about X1 owners, will they drop their preorder out of disappointment?

The Xbox One version was sitting at around 800th a few hours ago.

GkXpwxz.png


MMY030T.png
 

nib95

Banned
I would never consider not buying over resolution differences, but they are literally offering up 30fps version vs 60fps version. Not sure if want. :)

edit: Yea, I know the xbox one version goes as high as 45 in less intense scenes, but you get my point.

It's interesting to me you're making such a fuss about frame rate, when one of your most championed games (Ryse) runs fairly consistently below 30fps. What gives? Sometimes you care about 60fps and sometimes you don't? Why is it not ok for Tomb Raider to be 30fps average but ok for other games to be say 27fps average?
 

AndyH

Neo Member
This is actually quite impressive. I wonder how close to maximum PC settings this runs at and and what the new TressFX looks like. PS4 versions of multiplats will always be better unless intentionally held to parity by the developers.
 

Facism

Member
I would never consider not buying over resolution differences, but they are literally offering up 30fps version vs 60fps version. Not sure if want. :)

edit: Yea, I know the xbox one version goes as high as 45 in less intense scenes, but you get my point.

ask yourself

a)was I okay with Ryse's general fps performance?

b)is the bone the only console I own?

yes to both? Buy the game. It's great. Don't miss out on it because the competing system has the better version. Yeh it's 100% difference in fps, but the game is completely playable @ 30fps, bru.
 

Panajev2001a

GAF's Pleasant Genius
ESRAM is obviously not the biggest issue here, though. It's a challenge for developers, sure, and he points that out clearly, but the GPU, pure and simple, is the bigger difference maker in the majority of instances where the PS4 will outperform the Xbox One in graphics performance, particularly at higher resolutions such as 1080p. I'm a little surprised how reluctant people seem to be to want to acknowledge this much. There is no magic at work here. It's just stronger hardware. The problem for the Xbox One isn't that it can't do 1080p. It can always do that if devs are willing to make the necessary sacrifices to graphics quality. With the GPU specs it has it's far more ideal to create the types of games that people expect to see at lower than 1080p resolutions.

Question: Do you think the Xbox One, with no ESRAM, and with a single pool of main memory bandwidth equaling the PS4's, would match the PS4's performance here while being the same resolution? How about in BF4? Not happening. At some point, no matter the unique architectural differences between the machines, the GPU with close to 600 more GFLOPS and twice the ROPs will factor heavily into the equation and will always win out. You try to balance that advantage by lowering the resolution on the Xbox One. The ESRAM is a challenge, but it isn't the biggest reason for why PS4 should outperform the Xbox One in raw graphics performance. The answer is the GPU.

Even a glance at dedicated GPU on the PC with more or less similar differences in specs will tell you that the better GPU always wins at higher resolutions (normally by the same, or bigger, gap in FPS), particularly at 1080p. And those aren't using ESRAM. They use GDDR5 like the PS4.



1.84 teraflop GPU PS4 vs 1.31 teraflop GPU Xbox One
32 ROPs PS4 vs 16 ROPs Xbox One

It's really as simple as that. The memory is a challenge to work with, but even without the more complicated memory setup on the Xbox One, the results would be more or less the same. The PS4 has more graphics performance muscle is the easy answer here. This is usually why developers choose to lower the resolution of the Xbox version, so they don't have to lower graphics or make sacrifices to the framerate. In this case, they opted for 1080p on both versions. That places the Xbox One version at a more serious handicap performance wise. Short of locking the framerate of the PS4 version at 30fps (which would be dumb, imo. If you have the extra performance, I say use it.), there is nothing preventing the PS4 version from running away from the Xbox One version performance wise. Lowering the resolution of the Xbox One version would have helped alleviate that, but they wanted both to be 1080p, so there you have it.

Let's not forget PS4 has 50% more TMU's than Xbox One does too, which helps sustain the extra FLOPS you gain with the extra CU's and their ALU's. ... Perhaps it is then just worth expressing the difference in terms of CU's as in this case they are the same kind of macro units.
 

Tabular

Banned
I would never consider not buying over resolution differences, but they are literally offering up 30fps version vs 60fps version. Not sure if want. :)

edit: Yea, I know the xbox one version goes as high as 45 in less intense scenes, but you get my point.

The quote in the article says the One version technically can go up to 45 fps but I expect it to be capped at 30 because bursting above 30 is worse than capping at 30 fps.
 

satam55

Banned
Tiled Resources are already present in openGL under the name Partially Resident Textures, it would be very simple for Sony to integrate them into their own API if they haven't already
Sony already confirmed at GDC Europe back in August, that it's part of the PS4's API.
 

Zozr

Neo Member
Hilarious

A lot of Xbone people seem surprised by this. It's been in the books for months that this was going to happen.

Only a matter of time before games start coming out to show off the spec difference.
 

pelican

Member
Anyone else remember the conspiracies that MS would be money hatting 3rd parties to bone the PS4 version? Obviously not happening.

Not surprised, and not too bothered. I like both consoles, but I've already decided my Xbone will be the home of exclusives with the majority of 3rd party games being played on the PS4.
 

Atlas157

Member
you forget that in theory the esram is faster than the gddr5. not denying that the ps4 always will have the better specs, just saying that the one can make a big leap near the ps4 performance-wise with tiled ressources :)

The ESRAM is so fast that it prevents the XBO from rendering intense games at 1080p.
 

CozMick

Banned
Are there any other gaming sites reporting this? Or is it another case of brush it under the rug and itll go away with 1 dollar for every thousand views typa thing?
 

Number45

Member
ask yourself

a)was I okay with Ryse's general fps performance?

b)is the bone the only console I own?

yes to both? Buy the game. It's great. Don't miss out on it because the competing system has the better version. Yeh it's 100% difference in fps, but the game is completely playable @ 30fps, bru.
This.

I bought so many PS3 multiplatform games last gen that were inferior to the 360 version, and it affected my enjoyment of the games in no way at all. Even some "broken" games were fine (played The Orange Box without issue, crashing it only in the exact place I managed to do on the PC as well).
 

Tabular

Banned
Are there any other gaming sites reporting this? Or is it another case of brush it under the rug and itll go away with 1 dollar for every thousand views typa thing?

There is one site for sure, besides Rocket Chainsaw. Was linked a page back or so.
 

mjontrix

Member
Are there any other gaming sites reporting this? Or is it another case of brush it under the rug and itll go away with 1 dollar for every thousand views typa thing?

It's more like don't report just to be safe in the offchance it's false, but if true just tuck it 3 pages into the review that 95% of readers will skip and have the scores at virtually the same number so MS doesn't cut exclusive interviews and free review copies along with travel to first hand impressions and dorito coupons.

Gotta get those $3 y'all! XB1MS13 AM I DOING IT RIGHT?
 
Guys, I can assure you that the Ps4 version run at 60fps because the game is here, in front of me. The frame rate is not the most stable one but the graphic flow like a dream.

We need a confirmation about the X1 version @30
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
I'm surprised that there aren't tons of people who have this already. Amazon was promising the game on the 21st until less than a week ago.
 

Jack cw

Member
Guys, I can assure you that the Ps4 version run at 60fps because the game is here, in front of me. The frame rate is not the most stable one but the graphic flow like a dream.

We need a confirmation about the X1 version @30

Tahts good to hear, mate. Well, I see know why SE didnt show the Xbone version to the press.
 
Secret Sauce v4.8.1 !!!

He is serious.
Just start reading what i said.

Gap between ps4 and xbox one now for 3rd party: big
Gap in the future (because of optimization) for 3rd party: smaller than today

1st party games dont have that big gaps like 3rd in graphic terms at the moment.
 

bombshell

Member
I caught wind of this before console launches when a few 3rd party devs were saying the same things.

Running code on the PS4 by raw power alone would already be better than the Xbox and required a lot of optimisation.

If this remains true then there will be more of the same. I hear the rock is not steady on another project.

What is Rocksteady working on? :D
 
It's interesting to me you're making such a fuss about frame rate, when one of your most championed games (Ryse) runs fairly consistently below 30fps. What gives? Sometimes you care about 60fps and sometimes you don't? Why is it not ok for Tomb Raider to be 30fps average but ok for other games to be say 27fps average?

Dude, I have beaten Ryse officially now twice beginning to end on the second hardest difficulty (first playthrough) and the hardest difficulty (second playthrough). Ryse does not, I repeat, does not have bad or lackluster performance at all. This much I'm certain of. Ryse's performance is great throughout the entire experience. You are going based off of framerate anlysis videos that give a very misleading portrait of what it is like to actually play and feel the game yourself.

According to framerate analysis videos, there are dips below 30fps mostly during executions, which are already slo motion to begin with. This fact has literally zero negative impact on either the speed of the executions, or your ability to carry them out successfully. In other instances, you'll notice drops in situations where it doesn't even matter, or when you don't even have control of the game because it's going into a real-time cutscene. Ryse has solid performance, and my 2 full playthroughs of that game supports this. My beef isn't necessarily with games being 30fps. I'm totally fine with 30fps games. Halo 4 is 30fps and one of my favorite last gen games. In fact, my favorite games of last gen were, by a large majority, 30fps titles. My beef in this situation is that a dev, in order to hit 1080p on both systems, seems to be shortchanging one of the next gen console versions of their game. Essentially offering 30fps edition and 60fps edition.

I've never been annoyed by any of the resolution differences up to this point, but this I legitimately find annoying. Also, my tolerance for framerate is by no means absolute. It really does depend on the game I'm playing. Example, Blue Dragon, one of my favorite games from last gen is a very solid performer majority of the time. However, strangely enough, the ugliest portion of the game, the wasteland, also happens to perform by far the worst. Performance there gets downright unbearable. However, in the game's most beautiful battle locations, performance is flawless. Just as I wouldn't use that wasteland section of Blue Dragon to condemn blue dragon's performance as a whole, I will not use situations that I feel are perfectly reasonable, or that in no way take away from my enjoyment of a game to condemn others. And, just to add once more, performance in ryse never gets as bad as it did in what I consider the least impressive looking section of blue dragon. The most impressive scenes in Ryse all perform perfectly fine.

This is no longer pre-launch speculation from watching DF videos. I've played it for myself, not once, but twice at the most difficult levels.
 
Maybe they should rebrand the game following this revelation

on PS4; Tomb Raider the Definitive Edition
on Xbox One; Tomb Raider the slightly less Definitive Edition (NOW WITH KINECT)
 

jonnyp

Member
I don't understand why people are still surprised by this stuff. I mean, we all know there is a difference in power between the consoles.
 

TAJ

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
Dude, I have beaten Ryse officially now twice beginning to end on the second hardest difficulty (first playthrough) and the hardest difficulty (second playthrough). Ryse does not, I repeat, does not have bad or lackluster performance at all. This much I'm certain of. Ryse's performance is great throughout the entire experience. You are going based off of framerate anlysis videos that give a very misleading portrait of what it is like to actually play and feel the game yourself.

Jesus.
Frame rate analysis doesn't lie. Bias does. This reeks of "my copy is fine".
 

Chobel

Member
Guys, I can assure you that the Ps4 version run at 60fps because the game is here, in front of me. The frame rate is not the most stable one but the graphic flow like a dream.

We need a confirmation about the X1 version @30

How often does framerate dips occur? Also, did you notice any screen tearing?
 

slapnuts

Junior Member
ask yourself

a)was I okay with Ryse's general fps performance?

b)is the bone the only console I own?

yes to both? Buy the game. It's great. Don't miss out on it because the competing system has the better version. Yeh it's 100% difference in fps, but the game is completely playable @ 30fps, bru.

S.Africa? Just wondering because one of my good friends is from there and says "bru".

peace
 

nib95

Banned
Dude, I have beaten Ryse officially now twice beginning to end on the second hardest difficulty (first playthrough) and the hardest difficulty (second playthrough). Ryse does not, I repeat, does not have bad or lackluster performance at all. This much I'm certain of. Ryse's performance is great throughout the entire experience. You are going based off of framerate anlysis videos that give a very misleading portrait of what it is like to actually play and feel the game yourself.

According to framerate analysis videos, there are dips below 30fps mostly during executions, which are already slo motion to begin with. This fact has literally zero negative impact on either the speed of the executions, or your ability to carry them out successfully. In other instances, you'll notice drops in situations where it doesn't even matter, or when you don't even have control of the game because it's going into a real-time cutscene. Ryse has solid performance, and my 2 full playthroughs of that game supports this. My beef isn't necessarily with games being 30fps. I'm totally fine with 30fps games. Halo 4 is 30fps and one of my favorite last gen games. In fact, my favorite games of last gen were, by a large majority, 30fps titles. My beef in this situation is that a dev, in order to hit 1080p on both systems, seems to be shortchanging one of the next gen console versions of their game Essentially offering 30fps edition and 60fps edition.

I've never been annoyed by any of the resolution differences up to this point, but this I legitimately find annoying. Also, my tolerance for framerate is by no means absolute. It really does depend on the game I'm playing. Example, Blue Dragon, one of my favorite games from last gen is a very solid performer majority of the time. However, strangely enough, the ugliest portion of the game, the wasteland, also happens to perform by far the worst. Performance there gets downright unbearable. However, in the game's most beautiful battle locations, performance is flawless. Just as I wouldn't use that wasteland section of Blue Dragon to condemn blue dragon's performance as a whole, I will not use situations that I feel are perfectly reasonable, or that in no way take away from my enjoyment of a game to condemn others. And, just to add once more, performance in ryse never gets as bad as it did in what I consider the least impressive looking section of blue dragon. The most impressive scenes in Ryse all perform perfectly fine.

This is no longer pre-launch speculation from watching DF videos. I've played it for myself, not once, but twice at the most difficult levels.

This is exactly my point. You're banging on about how they made the wrong decision with the frame rate, but you find a similar or worse frame rate in other games perfectly acceptable. If you played Tomb Raider on Xbox One, maybe you'd discover the frame rate is perfectly smooth, just like your experience with Ryse, or Halo.

What I'm trying to say is, don't let this mental barrier get in the way. If 30fps is good enough for you at 900p or 720p, it should be good enough for you at 1080p. Why you have this sudden demand for 60fps in a game like Tomb Raider, over having a higher resolution is beyond me. Maybe if you played it you might find going 1080p was the better direction.

Based on studies done by certain devs (e.g. Guerrilla Games), more gamers notice the difference between 720p and 1080p than they do 30fps and 60fps. I realise many might think otherwise, but i'd say that sounds about right based on my own experiences too.
 
I don't understand why people are still surprised by this stuff. I mean, we all know there is a difference in power between the consoles.

Umm... yeah you'd be surprised how stubborn those hardcore Xbox One fans are. You could tell them the Sky is Blue. They'll argue about the cloud how it makes it green.
 

Daffy Duck

Member
ask yourself

a)was I okay with Ryse's general fps performance?

b)is the bone the only console I own?

yes to both? Buy the game. It's great. Don't miss out on it because the competing system has the better version. Yeh it's 100% difference in fps, but the game is completely playable @ 30fps, bru.

Stop making out the PS4 runs at a constant 60FPS.

Jesus, it's like some people just focus solely on the 60FPS thing like it does all the time.
 

Chobel

Member
Just start reading what i said.

Gap between ps4 and xbox one now for 3rd party: big
Gap in the future (because of optimization) for 3rd party: smaller than today

1st party games dont have that big gaps like 3rd in graphic terms at the moment.

I only commented about Tiled Resources, the best secret sauce ever.

Stop making out the PS4 runs at a constant 60FPS.

Jesus, it's like some people just focus solely on the 60FPS thing like it does all the time.

Average 60fps is still better than 30fps.
 
Jesus.
Frame rate analysis doesn't lie. Bias does.

Forgive me if I don't take you seriously. I've played and beaten the game twice. You aren't telling me a damn thing about what I've already played and experienced to completion. Anyway, I won't argue anymore with anyone on this issue looking to score silly console war points without playing the game themselves. Anybody that has played Ryse, and is willing to be honest, knows the game has good performance, and this remains true throughout the game, particularly the most impressive scenes.

Anyway, I can already see what the thread is turning into, so I'll go relax now and watch some TV. I'm more or less snowed in tomorrow, and I like to at least not saddle myself with further annoyances on such days. Good night all. Enjoyed the talk, but not this one. :)

This is exactly my point. You're banging on about how they made the wrong decision with the frame rate, but you find a similar or worse frame rate in other games perfectly acceptable. If you played Tomb Raider on Xbox One, maybe you'd discover the frame rate is perfectly smooth, just like your experience with Ryse, or Halo.

What I'm trying to say is, don't let this mental barrier get in the way. If 30fps is good enough for you at 900p or 720p, it should be good enough for you at 1080p. Why you have this sudden demand for 60fps in a game like Tomb Raider, over having a higher resolution is beyond me. Maybe if you played it you might find going 1080p was the better direction.

Based on studies done by certain devs (e.g. Guerrilla Games), more gamers notice the difference between 720p and 1080p than they do 30fps and 60fps. I realise many might think otherwise, but i'd say that sounds about right based on my own experiences too.

Okay, I concede this point. My position does seem pretty unreasonable without actually playing it myself yet, which is precisely the same argument I myself was making with regards to Ryse or pretty much any other game. It makes sense to see for myself, so you're indeed correct on this. My apologies. :)
 

SmokyDave

Member
Forgive me if I don't take you seriously. I've played and beaten the game twice. You aren't telling me a damn thing about what I've already played and experienced to completion. Anyway, I won't argue anymore with anyone on this issue looking to score silly console war points without playing the game themselves. Anybody that has played Ryse, and is willing to be honest, knows the game has good performance, and this remains true throughout the game, particularly the most impressive scenes.

Anyway, I can already see what the thread is turning into, so I'll go relax now and watch some TV. I'm more or less snowed in tomorrow, and I like to at least not saddle myself with further annoyances on such days. Good night all. Enjoyed the talk, but not this one. :)
"Who are ya gonna believe? Me or your lying eyes?!".

Dude, I'm sure it felt perfectly smooth to you. You should buy Tomb Raider on that basis.
 

Perkel

Banned
This is no longer pre-launch speculation from watching DF videos. I've played it for myself, not once, but twice at the most difficult levels.

So your eyes are better than DF tool ?


Where he says the difference in FPS is 100%......

You also assume 30FPS is rock solid in Xbox version.

IMO i think it is mainly TressFX doing. PS4 has extra compute power at high end AMD GPUs where Xbox one has standard hardware.

We know that TressFX is performance hog.

Probably without TressFX there wouldn't be much difference
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Forgive me if I don't take you seriously. I've played and beaten the game twice. You aren't telling me a damn thing about what I've already played and experienced to completion. Anyway, I won't argue anymore with anyone on this issue looking to score silly console war points without playing the game themselves. Anybody that has played Ryse, and is willing to be honest, knows the game has good performance, and this remains true throughout the game, particularly the most impressive scenes.

Anyway, I can already see what the thread is turning into, so I'll go relax now and watch some TV. I'm more or less snowed in tomorrow, and I like to at least not saddle myself with further annoyances on such days. Good night all. Enjoyed the talk, but not this one. :)


Ryse is the very first next gen game I completed. It does not have a solid framerate.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom