• 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.

Digital Foundry Face-Off: Dragon Age: Inquisition

N

NumberThree

Member
Zophar said:
So a 1FPS difference is worth claiming that the XB1 trades substantially higher IQ for stronger performance? How many of these nominal differences in framerate are DF going to make hay over before their bizarre power parity narrative starts looking silly?
Click to expand...

They should ignore XB1 having a better framerate because PS4 is more powerful? It's a technical analysis of the game, they report the differences they find.
SolidSnakex said:
It's a 1-2fps advantage for the Xbox One in certain sections. It's highly unlikely that you're going to notice something like that unless you have a frame counter going while you play.
Click to expand...
If that 1-2 fps means dropping from locked 30 to 28 (instead of 28 to 26) it's a difference between a perfect image and a torn one.
 
Pop

Pop

Member
Seanspeed said:
Seems pretty good to me. A more solid 30fps would be great, but for a huge, beautiful RPG, its not bad at all compared to how many similar games tend to run on consoles.

Frostbite seems to be a really great engine.
Click to expand...

It's a wonderful engine. The game is beautiful.

I've put over 20+ hours now into it and there is hardly any frame rate drops. Maybe noticed it once. DF is just nitpicking to find a difference in performance.
 
F

fedexpeon

Banned
The drops are like 3-4 frames, and very rares.
Exploring the world for hours at a better resolution is worth more than the few drops that will pass by in an instant.
 
E

EGM1966

Member
MrMatt555 said:
How I feel it goes down with sony:
Dev: we optimized the game to run at 1080p like you requested. However,if you would hear me out as to why I would recommend 900p...
Sony: no we need 1080p on all our games.
Dev: I understand but the game would perform bette.....
SONY: *throws money at them* go away you puppet.
Click to expand...
Very unlikely.

Looking at results instead what see is a game that mostly hits 30fps with minor dips so they stopped investing in further Optimization. Remember Bioware produced far less smoothly performing titles last gen, that frame rate on PS4 is an improvement for them.

On Xbox they dropped it to 900p because going by the PS4 they must have been much further from any kind of stable frame rate. They also pared back a few effects here and there too seems like. They got the required fps - in fact a tiny bit better - and stopped there.

People massively overestimate the influence the platform holder has unless they are actually involved. For expel MS were clearly heavily involved with Diabolo.

TBH looking at the evidence of DF I suspectvif EA were willing to invest further in the title with Bioware they could further improve performance on PS4 but they won't.

The performance is in the bracket general market won't notice a thing (both versions) and they know it.
 
Dredd97

Dredd97

Member
SolidSnakex said:
It's a 1-2fps advantage for the Xbox One in certain sections. It's highly unlikely that you're going to notice something like that unless you have a frame counter going while you play.
Click to expand...

I'd like to see how many frames the XB1 drops when it's natively outputting to 1080p...
I suspect it will be more than 1 -2...
 
J

jellies_two

Member
the idea that a developer is unable to find 3% more speed in order to get from 29fps to 30fps (and please DF and gaf) is bizarre.

any code can be optimised to find such small percentage improvements. what would instead have happened is bioware got to 30fps 98% of the play time and decided "thats good enough".

but on xbox one they jumped to the lower res and of course its now got some performance to spare, and they say "thats also good enough".

if devs think the slight difference in fps reported in this conparo would impact sales, they might spend the short amount of time it would take to get the extra little tiny bit of performance required to get the DF "no tearing found" seal. Send the code to me, I could do it, with the performance analysis tools now available. 3% to 10% i mean, not 50%. +50% requires algorithm changes.
 
E

Elios83

Member
Tak3n said:
yet again it seems the first for 1080p on PS4 is hurting it.....

they have started down this road now, and the thread explosions tell us that anything other than 1080p on PS4 is not accepted... crazy really I am firmly in the performance camp rather than the visuals
Click to expand...

Do you really think that sticking with less definition/resolution for the whole game is a better choice than keeping minor and sporadic drops? This is a nitpicking difference, not something that changes the substance performance wise. Bioware as any other developer would be totally happy to run at 1080p with some sporadic and minor drops.
 
Windom Earle

Windom Earle

Member
CozMick said:
Goddamn this generation is gonna be over before it even begins.

900/1080p. sub 30 frames. Adaptive v-sync. Urgh.

I'd thought we'd see the back of this shit last gen and we're only a year in :/
Click to expand...

It's a mix of weak hardware and developers shitting the bed.
 
N

Noobcraft

Member
Stone Ocean said:
It's a 1 frame difference? So much for "performance"
Click to expand...
In the video they posted of the first boss battle the ps4 was anywhere from 25 fps at the lowest I saw, sitting mostly at 27-28 fps, and 30 when there wasn't much going on. The XB1 was locked 30. It's not a 1 fps difference.
 
J

Jawbreaker

Member
Sounds like they made the right compromises. PS4 version drops frames rarely but is always 1080p offering a clearer, cleaner image. Pretty easy choice between the console versions honestly, unless rare dropped frames absolutely bother you.
 
G

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
Backfoggen said:
Framerate dips to 26fps from what I've seen of the vid. Could go longer in short instances but I didn't look for that.
Click to expand...

In two of the several scenes in the video does it dip more than 1-2fps. By the sounds of the article these are rare cases.

I don't think any developer would or should make a blanket cut to image quality 100% of the time to deal with corner case dips like this that may appear for tiny fractions of game time. At most they could implement an adaptive resolution that could kick in in isolated cases, but otherwise they made the right choice. Cutting res would be way overkill here.
 
R3TRODYCE

R3TRODYCE

Member
Resolution over performance isn't really my idea of a good choice. I remember dropping the resolution to pack a bunch of skyrim mods and obtain great performance on my old pc but the drops here aren't too bad so eh. I wonder if this quest for 1080p will hinder performance later in the gen or if they'll drop the res.
 
M

Memorabilia

Member
Fliesen said:
how is it weird
it needs to push 31% less pixels.

if the cutback in visuals (in this case, resolution) is bigger than the disadvantage in computational power, the Xbone will offer a better frame rate.
Click to expand...

Considering both consoles use identical AMD based hardware platforms with the PS4 having a mathematically confirmed ~40% rendering and bandwidth advantage via better GPU and GDDR, this is actually somewhat surprising. Based purely on hardware differences the 31% greater pixels on PS4 should be handled at similarly smooth frame-rates and then some. There is clearly something else going on here with the SDK that may be fixable with a patch.
 
M

MurkyZebra2417

Member
I only have framedrops in the cutscenes on the PS4 version. But I heard that also happens on PC and is a common issue.

Well, whatever. Not like you can't play tacitcal combat with 28 fps or something.

Oh wow, 28 fps was a joke. It really only drops 1-2 frames and people are arguing they are takin that over 1080p?
3a1.jpg
 
Z

Zophar

Member
NumberThree said:
They should ignore XB1 having a better framerate because PS4 is more powerful? It's a technical analysis of the game, they report the differences they find.

If that 1-2 fps means dropping from locked 30 to 28 (instead of 28 to 26) it's a difference between a perfect image and a torn one.
Click to expand...

The problem I have is with the tone of the articles. In the conclusion particularly, I feel like it's stretching to paint weaker hardware in a kinder light. It suggests that the hardware is like-for-like and that the situation would be reversed if the developers had just switched what they prioritized; in a mirror universe, an XB1 version would also be at 1080p/minor drops.

It's a minor gripe, I guess, but it's already got people thinking that the PS4 struggles to hit 1080p as a general fact.
 
F

Feindflug

Member
Noobcraft said:
In the video they posted of the first boss battle the ps4 was anywhere from 25 fps at the lowest I saw, sitting mostly at 27-28 fps, and 30 when there wasn't much going on. The XB1 was locked 30. It's not a 1 fps difference.
Click to expand...

The first area of the video looks like the most demanding area (due to transparencies/particles) and yeah the PS4 is almost consistently below 30fps while the Xbone version is locked at 30fps, that being said in the rest of the video the frame-rate drops in the PS4 version are much smaller.
 
S

Seanspeed

Banned
Memorabilia said:
Considering both consoles use identical AMD based hardware platforms with the PS4 having a mathematically confirmed ~40% rendering and bandwidth advantage via better GPU and GDDR, this is actually somewhat surprising. Based purely on hardware differences the 31% greater pixels on PS4 should be handled at similarly smooth frame-rates and then some. There is clearly something else going on here with the SDK that may be fixable with a patch.
Click to expand...
These things dont work as simple as that. PS4 version also running a few details better than XB1 as well.
 
B

Backfoggen

Banned
SgtCobra said:
PS4
Peak fps: 31
Lowest: 25

XB1
Peak fps: 30
Lowest: 29

The dips mostly last 1 to 2 seconds (except for when in combat). The fps difference isn't that horrific.
Click to expand...

Whoa for all the talk about this 1 fps difference PS4 is actually 1 fps faster than XB1! 1080p saved.
 
R

Raist

Banned
Abylim said:
So is one 1FPS actually noticeable?
Click to expand...

You mean, a drop from 30 to 29?
Some people won't notice, but yes it is noticeable. For instance MK8 regulary drops from 60 to 59, some people noticed that and others didn't.

The point is that it clashes with the refresh rate of the TV, which is a multiple of 30 in most cases, so it will stutter. It's not like, say, if you drive at 30mph and then drop to 29. That you won't notice.
 
S

SgtCobra

Member
Backfoggen said:
Whoa for all the talk about this 1 fps difference PS4 is actually 1 fps faster than XB1! 1080p saved.
Click to expand...
Sorry, I noticed the XB1 version actually did 31fps too for half a second but on the PS4 it happened more frequently.
i-Lo said:
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
Click to expand...

A 3 to 4 fps difference in combat (in one game) is for you a reason to be #concerned?
 
I

i-Lo

Member
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
 
M

mrklaw

MrArseFace
Special C said:
I think this is overly dramatic but there is some truth to it. 1080p has become a bullet point this gen. The PS4 has the juice to get to 1080p but not without some sacrifices. People are overestimating the PS4's power advantage.

In this case it's not so much of a difference and would probably prefer the PS4 version if I had one.
Click to expand...


In that case devs should tune the settings to run smoothly at 1080p. It isn't rocket science. If the frame drops are as minor as some are saying, then it sounds like the devs did a good job


Seanspeed said:
These things dont work as simple as that. PS4 version also running a few details better than XB1 as well.
Click to expand...

See, this suggests that the xb1 was optimised for performance. Drop the resolution and dial back on a couple of details.

Why not do the same for PS4? It sounds like if they'd had one or more of the details dialled back it would be much more stable *and* 1080p.
 
Dredd97

Dredd97

Member
i-Lo said:
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
Click to expand...

Wow dat hyperbole....
 
G

gofreak

GAF's Bob Woodward
On a side note, in DF's framerate videos, they really should end each scene with a summary - min, max and avg, maybe mode too.
 
A

Always-honest

Banned
ninjablade said:
here is the link the frame rate video

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fzn7lIGfhoo

XB1 is locked at 30fps, while the ps4 is a solid 30fps, so i see nothing wrong with what written in this article. 1080p solid 30fps> 900p/ locked 30fps for me.
Click to expand...
Well yeah.. If the visual difference is pretty significant, that would be a logical choice for me too.
Unless you're a person who really notices every singel framedrop while actively playing a game.
 
F

Fdkn

Member
Some people should check all those supposedly "locked" games of the past that were never such thing before filling the thread with their performance is suffering narrative.

Even on pc unless your rig is far superior than the requisites, small drops are common when a lot of stuff happens on the screen.
 
K

Kezen

Banned
i-Lo said:
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
Click to expand...

Joke post ?
 
N

NumberThree

Member
Zophar said:
The problem I have is with the tone of the articles. In the conclusion particularly, I feel like it's stretching to paint weaker hardware in a kinder light. It suggests that the hardware is like-for-like and that the situation would be reversed if the developers had just switched what they prioritized; in a mirror universe, an XB1 version would also be at 1080p/minor drops.

It's a minor gripe, I guess, but it's already got people thinking that the PS4 struggles to hit 1080p as a general fact.
Click to expand...

But your problem with the tone of the article does not seem to be based on reality. There's nothing in the conclusion (or article otherwise) suggesting that the XB1 version running at 1080p would only have minor drops in framerate, you're making that up.
 
F

Feindflug

Member
Zophar said:
The problem I have is with the tone of the articles. In the conclusion particularly, I feel like it's stretching to paint weaker hardware in a kinder light. It suggests that the hardware is like-for-like and that the situation would be reversed if the developers had just switched what they prioritized; in a mirror universe, an XB1 version would also be at 1080p/minor drops.

It's a minor gripe, I guess, but it's already got people thinking that the PS4 struggles to hit 1080p as a general fact.
Click to expand...

I think that this article (and the framedrops in the PS4 version) tells more about the engine itself than the PS4's hardware capabilities.
 
M

MurkyZebra2417

Member
i-Lo said:
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
Click to expand...

This has to be a joke. What is happening to GAF lately.
It drops 1-2 frames for SECONDS in SOME places/actions. This is a 40 hour game. Probably all framedrops added up are like 5 minutes.
I really can't believe anyone in the world would be annoyed by this so much, that they prefer 40 hours of 900p with less details (if they own both consoles).
 
A

alexandros

Banned
Elios83 said:
Do you really think that sticking with less definition/resolution for the whole game is a better choice than keeping minor and sporadic drops? This is a nitpicking difference, not something that changes the substance performance wise. Bioware as any other developer would be totally happy to run at 1080p with some sporadic and minor drops.
Click to expand...

It can be a better choice, yeah, depending on the frequency and severity of the drops of course. For instance, in a 60 fps game the drop to 50 fps (a 20% drop in framerate) for a couple of seconds isn't that noticeable because 50 fps is still a relatively high base framerate. In a 30 fps game a framerate drop of a similar percentage (from 30 fps to 25) is much more jarring and annoying because 25 fps means a very choppy experience in both visual consistency and control response.
 
Dredd97

Dredd97

Member
NumberThree said:
But your problem with the tone of the article does not seem to be based on reality. There's nothing in the conclusion (or article otherwise) suggesting that the XB1 version running at 1080p would only have minor drops in framerate, you're making that up.
Click to expand...
So your conclusion is if the xb1 was 1080p it would be a solid 30fps?? Lol no....
 
J

Jawbreaker

Member
i-Lo said:
Objectively, XB1 has now gained an advantage with lowered resolution; something that was unexpected given the PS4's on-paper power advantage.

Honestly, the PS4 version should have been able to match XB1 in performance and then some. I hope that Mass Effect does not have the same case. I can live with a permanent lower resolution as opposed to fluctuating framerate.

I hope this pattern does not become a trend otherwise, the PS4 will become like PS3 for me and quite a few other folks- a platform worth owning mostly for exclusives.
Click to expand...

picgifs-laughing-0304594.gif
 
I

i-Lo

Member
Dredd97 said:
Wow dat hyperbole....
Click to expand...

Kindly explain how is that a hyperbole?

Also, FYI, a constant anything (to an extent) becomes less noticeable overtime especially w/o side by side comparison as opposed to fluctuations. While neither version drops below the "cinematic" framerate of 24fps (thus far), percentage of time the fluctuations occur vary and according to DF, XB1 is favourable in this regard.
 
D

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Honestly, I think the one feature Frostbite really needs is dynamic frame-buffer support. The PS4 version holds 30 fps at 1080p the majority of the time but during battles where it dips simply lowering the frame-buffer resolution would probably solve the issue.

alexandros said:
This is a dark10x article, right? Excellent work! As a PC guy I highly appreciate the in-depth analysis of the most important settings and the performance impressions from both low end and high end rigs. You even mentioned stuff like ini tweaks and the DRM speculation. I am genuinely impressed by the amount of care you put into this article. Again, nice work.
Click to expand...
Appreciate it! I've been trying hard to give PC releases the respect they deserve and I'm glad someone noticed.

The problem I have is with the tone of the articles. In the conclusion particularly, I feel like it's stretching to paint weaker hardware in a kinder light.
Click to expand...
I think you're looking at it from the wrong perspective as that was NOT the intention at all.
 
M

Memorabilia

Member
Seanspeed said:
These things dont work as simple as that. PS4 version also running a few details better than XB1 as well.
Click to expand...

I'm aware of that, but was merely stating it for simplicity's sake. That said, when comparing benchmarks between a 7850 and 7770 it IS possible to repeatedly show consistent, linear, predictable frame rate differences between games at various resolutions. So, yeah, things like different effects and differences between DX and OpenGL would be the 2 most obvious variables that may introduce some deviation from a predictable result from hardware differences, some of which may be fixable with a patch. In any case, after watching the comparison its not even noticeable to my eyes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Stellar Blade Demo - PS5 First Impressions - Every Mode Tested!
2
62
4K
poodaddy replied
(VG Tech) Final Fantasy 7 Rebirth PS5 Frame Rate Comparison (Demo)
Analysis 2
83
5K
Senua replied
Digital Foundry: Dragon's Dogma 2: Does The New Patch Fix The Game? All Systems Tested
44
4K
sachos replied
  • Locked
[Digital Foundry] Alan Wake 2 Xbox Tech Review - Excellent On Series X, But What About Series S?
Analysis Review Hardware
1
630
Mr Moose replied
(Vg Tech) Tomb Raider 1-3 Remastered PS5 & Switch & Xbox Series X|S Frame Rate Test
Analysis
6
1K
MDSLKTR replied
Top Bottom