• 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.

EDGE: "Power struggle: the real differences between PS4 and Xbox One performance"

Perkel

Banned
It does actually. 2x anyAA isn't all that great, by the way. You're unlikely to see these artifacts with the game in motion, these are probly a byproduct of some post processing.

I did few things on newest direct feed footage from BlimBlims gamersyde video.

First of all resolution:

jt579fftT94Pg_e.jpg


1080(8/8)=1080

j8eewLObvMMWi_e.jpg


1920(8/8)=1920

FM5 is native 1920x1080 from that footage. If they didn't released like Ryse faked 1080p footage game should be fullHD

Now picture quality.

this is car at 200% zoom

ip2uNGcZcixPq.png


To me it looks like there is no AA. or it is some temporal AA that works like shit. There is motion blurr going on so most of aliasing is hidden under motion blurr (sides) but car and middle of screen is noticeable aliased.

Source material:
http://i3.minus.com/iby5CQAwioAL5B.png


Summary:

-game is definitely fullHD (1920x1080)
-there is no AA or very shitty TAA sollution
-there are noticeable compression artifacts in BliBlim footage that should blur a bit overall IQ


Special thanks to:
- Liabe Brave and his thread

question:

How much framebuffer would take for 1920x1080 without AA ?
 

vcc

Member
I don't get that relative ESRAM to DDR3 bandwidth is a key factor, that doesn't make sense as to why the XB1 is worse as a system then the 360 and couldn't use tiled deferred rendering. That sounds like the wrong metric to me.

For example, lets say you split your 1080p frame into 4, and went for 1080p30 and you somehow filled all 32MB with each of the 4 tiles, that would be 32*4*30 (*2 as you have to save the current tile from ESRAM to DDR3 and load the next tile into ESRAM from DDR3). That is 7.6GB/s (around 11%).. of your frame time spent copying.. But once in ESRAM, you then have a theoretical 272GB/s (204 + 68) of bandwidth to the system, so the CPU can be doing other stuff while the ESRAM is being used by the GPU.. for the other 89% of the rendering time..


I quoted his post in my posts, and I agree that ESRAM is cited as a problem, but he also uses the statement "If MS makes this transparent in the API" which sounded like it was an API issue rather then hardware, but I also support it could be either.

The bolded section: Should be 109GB/s + 68GB and 177GB/s theoretical max. The 204 is a completely impossible number. The DF article is referring to a very specific trick which under a ideal case data set hit 133GB/s or an extra 30% for a specific order of instructions which left one side or the other of the bus unoccupied and tiled together.

They need to use the ESRAM optimally to approach a compromised parity.
 

Perkel

Banned
IDK about you guys but I'd take upscaled 900p with proper AA than this shit

Now now there. There is noticeable artifacts from GS video going on so we shouldn't yet to judge final IQ. 1920x1080 even without AA should look a lot better.

This is Portal 2 shot in native 1920x1080 without any AA. Notice how distant detail look compared to FM5 image.

http://i2.minus.com/iqPboMkXUyFRW.png

There are obviously artifacts that make IQ a lot worse.
 

Perkel

Banned
That car is painful to look at when you zoom in like that.

I did it for people who know how 1920x1080 looks like. If you compare it to Portal 2 screen i presented you can judge role of artifacts from video. Portal2 screen at 200% looks much better than still from FM5 video.

edit:

Also if people wonder why i am using Portal 2 comparison and why 200%...

If you will play game aliasing will "crawl" creating shimmering effects on distant detail that will be super noticeable and can brake immersion of "awesome graphic" as seen on this gt5 video (notice how it is awesome looking and how aliasing crawling brake immersion)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YAFPPg0OCPI#t=36

Why Portal2 shot ? Because native 1920x1080 in that games produce rarely aliasing shimmering effect but still uses ton of straight vertical and horizontal lines (which should look a lot worse than FM5 but looks a lot better, especially distant detail)
 

TheD

The Detective
Maybe a ridiculous question from someone stuck in the 90s but can we get a "bittage" comparison of each consoles CPU?? I guess we're in MEGA-bits now right? Or giga-bits...?

The size of the CPU's general purpose registers are 64Bit.
How many "Bits" a CPU has becomes mostly meaningless pass 32Bit, 64Bit precision is rarely needed outside of scientific workloads. The only major thing a 64Bit CPU gives you is support for more than 4GB of RAM.
 

foxbeldin

Member
I did it for people who know how 1920x1080 looks like. If you compare it to Portal 2 screen i presented you can judge role of artifacts from video. Portal2 screen at 200% looks much better than still from FM5 video.

Please use ANY other game than Portal, which has very simple geometric environments and is de facto less impacted by the lack of AA...
 

Cryoflar3

Member
I did it for people who know how 1920x1080 looks like. If you compare it to Portal 2 screen i presented you can judge role of artifacts from video. Portal2 screen at 200% looks much better than still from FM5 video.

Out of curiosity is that console portal or pc?
 

Kagari

Crystal Bearer
If that Forza 5 pic is indicative of what the game actually looks like... goddamn Microsoft is in trouble.


It can't look that bad. Turn 10 is really talented, large and well funded. It can't look like that.
It could if MS is making them rush it out for launch... which they are.
 

Perkel

Banned
Please use ANY other game than Portal, which has very simple geometric environments and is de facto less impacted by the lack of AA...

That is absolutely false. Aliasing is especially visible on straight diagonal lines. Portal 2 is game where there is absolutely shit ton of one-two pixel wide straight diagonal lines.

Out of curiosity is that console portal or pc?

PC. It is 1920x1080 shot. Current consoles render at 720p max (with few exception)
 

foxbeldin

Member
That is absolutely false. Aliasing is especially visible on straight diagonal lines. Portal 2 is game where there is absolutely shit ton of one-two pixel wide straight diagonal lines.

While Portal does have diagonal straight lines, it doesn't have many because the environments are really simplistic, which makes it tolerable to no AA.
Little to no AA is especially bad in the little details, where a lot of edges are involved, making the whole screen a jagged mess, not just a few lines here and there like in Portal.
 

viveks86

Member
Apologies if this has been posted already but there is a video in this Kotaku post showing what appears to be the latest Madden game in action on the Xbox one, rather than direct marketing vids,,, doesn't look too hot, although to be fair the vid is 360p ...

http://kotaku.com/espn-says-its-been-using-next-gen-madden-footage-it-l-1445158516

Well all the madden videos have been painful to watch. Did you notice the official video in that article? Some highlights (This is actual commentary around the time the screen shot was taken):

"The way that their the skin deforms when they smile or scream"

XrTadKi.png


"Wow! This game looks amazing! (Cue music)"

HNWueTE.png
 

Perkel

Banned
Can you make me a Crysis 2 screenshot with no AA and understand my point?

Unfortunetely i don't have C2 anymore but you are welcome to post if you have.

If you are talking about distant detail then yes adding more complex models to less square/pixel ratio will mean more noticeable aliasing and more noticeable shimmering as you play.
 

foxbeldin

Member
Can't do screenshots @ work, and unfortunately, google only delivers big AA pc master race screenshots.

edit :
Found those Crysis 3 images, i'm sorry it's not 1080p so it looks better than it should with no AA
no AA : http://i.imgur.com/SjpeppX.jpg
2xFXAA : http://i.imgur.com/5QDpqJS.jpg

If you are talking about distant detail then yes adding more complex models to less square/pixel ratio will mean more noticeable aliasing and more noticeable shimmering as you play.

Yes that was exactly my point.
 

Perkel

Banned
fuck sakes

I don't think you know why i posted this shot. It is forza5 still from GS video at 200% zoom. I did it to see how artifacts from GS video changes IQ.

Naturally GS is not here to blame. They use compression to make long videos.

Uncompressed 1080p video is like 350-500MB for 10 seconds.

5 minutes would be like 10-15GB.

This is a big problem to people who want to see how really next gen game looks like. Because even BlimBlim awesome Gamersyde site won't be able to get trailers in 10-20GB formats
 

Ishan

Junior Member
this thread has ridiculously long legs ... every couple of days keeps popping up ... now if only neogaf could sneakily work in advertisement for monster servers into this thread ... hl3 rumours would never crash GAF!!
 

Daeva

Banned
Oh God! My eyes!!!!! Please don't do that again? :)



Good question. Paging Skeff!

Seriously man, that is fucking hideous. That kind of aliasing has no place in next gen. I really hope developers think and feel the same way. Would you watch a film with CGI that looked that terrible and go it's fine? People would notice it immediately but somehow it's okay in games and let's be honest this is something that is there ALL THE TIME. How and the hell people and devs think jaggies are okay like that in 2013 is beyond insanity at this point.

I'd lower my standard for visual effects quite a bit to get rid of that ish. Period.
 

ypo

Member
Absolutely horrendous in terms jagged edges. Imgur actually softens the blow a little bit due to the website's compression.

v8XBGcO.jpg



The water on the left is horrendous

2qtJtsZ.jpg
 

Perkel

Banned
pgvWDdS.jpg


From the gamersyde video, exported one frame, cropped the car, 200% resize.

Lighting conditions can make a big impact on aliasing and it does look bit better (definetely some form of AA going on). I am downloading currently gameplay video with full sun same as in forza. That should be representative (compared to Forzavid)
 

Daeva

Banned
I for one cannot understand developers and their total lack of care for image quality. It's like they are dev'ing on 15 inch screens and expect no one to notice how totally facking awful their game looks!

Look what we have guyz! Umm, hold on while I power up my PC. I speak as a rabid console fan but this is just too much for me to bear for 500 hundred or 600 hundred bones.
 

foxbeldin

Member
Lighting conditions can make a big impact on aliasing and it does look bit better (definetely some form of AA going on). I am downloading currently gameplay video with full sun same as in forza. That should be representative (compared to Forzavid)

This is the only video with AA they released. The previous ones had no AA solution. You're probably right though I should have picked a frame earlier, when the sun was higher.
 

stryke

Member
I for one cannot understand developers and their total lack of care for image quality. It's like they are dev'ing on 15 inch screens and expect no one to notice how totally facking awful their game looks!

Because with the way sub-HD games sell like COD, they realised masses don't care or don't know about IQ.

Thankfully we have one developer who actually gives a shit.

Thank you! We worked really hard on it.

1) We actually used to use deferred rendering, and one of the reasons for switching was so that MSAA would be more affordable and less error-prone. I'm a firm believer in MSAA, and I think it's required if you want really good image quality. The shader-based techniques like FXAA and MLAA are certainly a lot better than nothing and they make a still screenshot look really nice, but they're fundamentally limited by a lack of sub-pixel information and it really shows in motion. They can still be nice though when used in conjunction with MSAA in order to improve the quality further and to cover up some of the places where MSAA doesn't work as well, and there's also some shader things you can do on modern GPU's that make MSAA more effective overall.
 

Perkel

Banned
I for one cannot understand developers and their total lack of care for image quality. It's like they are dev'ing on 15 inch screens and expect no one to notice how totally facking awful their game looks!

Look what we have guyz! Umm, hold on while I power up my PC. I speak as a rabid console fan but this is just too much for me to bear for 500 hundred or 600 hundred bones.

I think it is to early to judge IQ based on Gamersyde video. of FM5. There is a lot more shimmering and aliasing problems than it should have at 1920x1080. My assumtion is compression artifacts are making it look a lot worse than it should.

I also wonder why Forza devs didn't realease any material with OVERCAST weather lighting. Overcast is for driving games like "this looks photo-realistic" paint. No overcast lighting don't need to be dynamic. IBL can do that.

HEre is GT5 gif at spa in overcast weather:

ibwYS2mOGAHnrp.gif
 
I think it is to early to judge IQ based on Gamersyde video. of FM5. There is a lot more shimmering and aliasing problems than it should have at 1920x1080. My assumtion is compression artifacts are making it look a lot worse than it should.

I also wonder why Forza devs didn't realease any material with OVERCAST weather lighting. Overcast is for driving games like "this looks photo-realistic" paint. No overcast lighting don't need to be dynamic. IBL can do that.

HEre is GT5 gif at spa in overcast weather:

ibwYS2mOGAHnrp.gif

Your right man. GT5 overcast looks incredible
 
PGR used that a lot. It is one of reasons why it looked so good.

Just watched gamersyde videos of both Forza and Drive Club and DC looks better to me. Of course we won't know until the games are out and we can see actual gameplay in person but the lighting in DC just does it for me. There seems to be a depth Forza doesn't have. Imho

Edit: Also, the car in DC looks a little floaty compared to Forza but the Forza car looks like plastic
 

stryke

Member
Just watched gamersyde videos of both Forza and Drive Club and DC looks better to me. Of course we won't know until the games are out and we can see actual gameplay in person but the lighting in DC just does it for me. There seems to be a depth Forza doesn't have. Imho

Another contributing factor is that for some reason the environmental shadow mapping is broken.
 

foxbeldin

Member
Lighting conditions can make a big impact on aliasing and it does look bit better (definetely some form of AA going on). I am downloading currently gameplay video with full sun same as in forza. That should be representative (compared to Forzavid)

Sunniest condition i could get from the video. Again, unfortunately, this is the only one they released that included their AA solution. (they're still working on that btw)

ymmEzKE.jpg
 

Skeff

Member
I don't get that relative ESRAM to DDR3 bandwidth is a key factor, that doesn't make sense as to why the XB1 is worse as a system then the 360 and couldn't use tiled deferred rendering. That sounds like the wrong metric to me.

For example, lets say you split your 1080p frame into 4, and went for 1080p30 and you somehow filled all 32MB with each of the 4 tiles, that would be 32*4*30 (*2 as you have to save the current tile from ESRAM to DDR3 and load the next tile into ESRAM from DDR3). That is 7.6GB/s (around 11%).. of your frame time spent copying.. But once in ESRAM, you then have a theoretical 272GB/s (204 + 68) of bandwidth to the system, so the CPU can be doing other stuff while the ESRAM is being used by the GPU.. for the other 89% of the rendering time..


I quoted his post in my posts, and I agree that ESRAM is cited as a problem, but he also uses the statement "If MS makes this transparent in the API" which sounded like it was an API issue rather then hardware, but I also support it could be either.

I see what you mean about it being quicker to do on XB1 than 360 and your right, but that's 11% of your DDR3 bandwidth wasted just transferring data around for the framebuffer alone, or 22% wasted at 60fps. The 68GB/s needs to cover a whole lot more than that, for a start it has to be used for snapped apps, to what extent we have no idea, Probably not much at all, but still some, We also need access models, textures, lights, everything needs to come through that 68GB/s at some point, By comparison, everything needs to come through the 176GB/s in the PS4. The esram can provide a lot of bandwidth, and likely more than you would ever really need for 32mb, however the 68GB/s is the choke point, the last thing you'd want to do is take 11%(30fps) or 22%(60fps) away to move frame buffers around. I think the bandwidth of the DDR3 is going to be a lot more precious than the bandwidth of the esram for developers.

This is what I was meaning when I was talking about 360 vs ps3 and X1 vs. PS4. Because the main pool of ram is so much slower than PS4 relative to the comparison between 360/PS3 you need to preserve that 68GB/s as much as you can.

I hope I explained my point of view a little better there.

Oh God! My eyes!!!!! Please don't do that again? :)



Good question. Paging Skeff!

1080p framebuffer using forward rendering and no AA at 32 bits per pixel would be ~24mb IIRC, however using deferred rendering which is far more likely would put it at the total of 2073600 pixels so at differing BPP(Bytes per pixel) we would get:

16 BPP: 31.64mb
20 BPP: 39.55mb
24 BPP: 47.46mb
28 BPP: 55.37mb
32 BPP: 63.28mb

As a reference BF3 (1080p on PC) is 20BPP and KZ:SF is 24BPP both without AA. I can't imagine Next Gen going any lower than 16BPP.
 
Interesting tweet from Albert Penello (don't know if it already has been posted):



Right, because someone in his position isn't able to get information about the resolution of those games by himself. Just another obfuscation attempt imo.
 

Skeff

Member
Gemüsepizza;86116102 said:
Interesting tweet from Albert Penello (don't know if it already has been posted):



Right, because someone in his position isn't able to get information about the resolution of those games by himself. Just another obfuscation attempt imo.

We made a list of confirmed resolutions, but Albert sure as shit wouldn't want to look at it:

Forza: 1080p - http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/09/17/forza-5-runs-at-native-1080p-ryse-does-not
Fifa 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ference-between-current-gen-and-next-gen-fifa
LocoCycle 1080p - Pixel count by Liabe Brave - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=86349940&postcount=35
Zoo Tycoon 1080p - Pixel count by Liabe Brave - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=86353156&postcount=37
PowerstarGolf - 720p with 1080p UI - Pixel count by Liabe Brave - http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=86349940&postcount=35
Ryse: 900p - http://uk.ign.com/articles/2013/09/17/forza-5-runs-at-native-1080p-ryse-does-not
CoD:DoG 720p
BF4: 720p
KI: 720p - http://gamingbolt.com/killer-instin...s-removed-or-optimized-praises-xbox-one-cloud
DR3: Dynamic bullshit - actually unable to find a solid link on this, many available but no direct dev comments could be found easily. - Albert could clarify if he wanted to, even if he didn't know it would be 1 phonecall away.

Driveclub: 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4
KZ:SF: 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4
Knack: 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4
Infamous: 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-hands-on-with-playstation-4
the Order: 1920x800 (artistic- 2.40 cinema aspect ratio, retains 1:1 pixel mapping) - Seriously, the resolution of this one is everywhere, find it yourself :p
ACIV: 1080p - constantly referred to as 1080p, eurogamer comment here - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tech-analysis-assassins-creed-4
CoD:DoG 1080p
Fifa 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...ference-between-current-gen-and-next-gen-fifa
Resogun: 1080p - http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-resogun
Flower: 1080p - https://twitter.com/TDMoss/status/385907407475314688 - talks about 60fps in tweet but in comments confirms 1080p
DC:UO 1080p - http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/06/13/e3-2013-dcuo-plans-to-remain-completely-free-on-ps4/
FF14 1080p - http://www.dualshockers.com/2013/09...-fps-1080p-equivalent-to-highest-pc-settings/
Blacklight Retribution 1080p - http://www.thesixthaxis.com/2013/09/06/hands-on-with-blacklight-retribution-for-playstation-4/
Hohokum 1080p - http://blog.us.playstation.com/2013/05/07/hohokum-coming-to-ps4-ps3-ps-vita-in-2014/
Strider 1080p - http://blog.us.playstation.com/2013/10/10/strider-hands-on-remember-your-ninja-training/
BF4 900p


They are just about the only confirmed resolutions out there.

EDIT: If anyone provides a valid link with a developer quote or a pixel analysis I'll add the game to the list.

EDIT2:
There is a thread here: www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=86349940 which not only does some pixel counting it also explains how it is done if anyone is interested, it also confirms the figures above for Killzone, Knack, Infamous, Resogun, Driveclub and Infamous.

Also of note: Ryse was 1080p native at E3.
 

KidBeta

Junior Member
I think he would be well received if he came in this thread with a list of resolutions, sources for them and just gave plain information (ie, no 'FULL HD Experience').

Hes a member of these forums and fully capable of doing so, yet posts to twitter. Unless i've missed something and hes posted in here already.
 

E92 M3

Member
We made a list of confirmed resolutions, but Albert sure as shit wouldn't want to look at it:

Forza: 1080p
Ryse: 900p
KI: 720p
DR3: Dynamic bullshit

Driveclub: 1080p
KZ:SF: 1080p
Knack: 1080p
Infamous: 1080p
the Order: 1920x800 (artistic- 2.40 cinema aspect ratio, retains 1:1 pixel mapping)
ACIV: 1080p
Resogun: 1080p
Flower: 1080p

They are just about the only confirmed resolutions out there.

Wow - I didn't know all of those games are 1080p on the PS4 (serious). It must suck for the engineers working on the X1 because they could have designed an amazing game machine, but the suits from various branches of MS had their way.
 
We made a list of confirmed resolutions, but Albert sure as shit wouldn't want to look at it:

Forza: 1080p
Ryse: 900p
KI: 720p
DR3: Dynamic bullshit

Driveclub: 1080p
KZ:SF: 1080p
Knack: 1080p
Infamous: 1080p
the Order: 1920x800 (artistic- 2.40 cinema aspect ratio, retains 1:1 pixel mapping)
ACIV: 1080p
Resogun: 1080p
Flower: 1080p

They are just about the only confirmed resolutions out there.
Is DR3 confirmed dynamic now?

I know it was rumoured but maybe I missed the confirmation.
 

Bobnob

Member
WoW that tweet as me thinking! Whats Albert saying ? Whats he implying ? Is there anychance theres still secret specs ? Whats going on ?
 

airjoca

Member
We made a list of confirmed resolutions, but Albert sure as shit wouldn't want to look at it:

Forza: 1080p
Ryse: 900p
KI: 720p
DR3: Dynamic bullshit

Driveclub: 1080p
KZ:SF: 1080p
Knack: 1080p
Infamous: 1080p
the Order: 1920x800 (artistic- 2.40 cinema aspect ratio, retains 1:1 pixel mapping)
ACIV: 1080p
Resogun: 1080p
Flower: 1080p

They are just about the only confirmed resolutions out there.

You can add FIFA14 to the 1080p list.
 
Top Bottom