symphonask
Member
You may need to look at those prices again, bub. A 280X costs less than half of a PS4.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Shadow of Mordor DF Face-Off
- Thread starter neogaffer1
- Start date
You may need to look at those prices again, bub. A 280X costs less than half of a PS4.
WonkyPanda
Member
So, what texture setting is the PS4 running? I'd figure high textures should be no problem for the ~5gb pool
alexandros
Banned
Seems to be mostly high, although the blurry AA makes it difficult to say.
This is actually awesome. Monolith did it exactly how devs should. Both versions have solid, stable performance, and it's not a MASSIVE difference between PS4 and XB1, but there's still a big enough one that feels proportional to the actual performance difference between the two platforms.
I would still read those benchmarks with lively interest because it would likely prove that 60fps at console settings isn't that taxing at all.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Not well enough to bump up any of the other effects without compromising the 33ms refresh. So even if we can't quantify it exactly, it's a good ballpark.
New architecture that requires different optimizations? What examples are there of this? Maybe it's game specific.
GhostTrick
Banned
x86 CPUs are really old architecture.
As for PS4 GPU, it's based on AMD Graphic Core Next architecture... the same as HD7850.
Since when current gen consoles cost 200-250$?
GhostTrick
Banned
My R9 290 costed me 220/$ in Summer... with 3 games.
That's like below half a home console.
Wow the Pc verison just ...is...well..the pc verison is just better.
I'll complete it on the one and own it on pc once i can get it really cheaply. I got the one version for 37 off amazon.....PC just is better tho.
also looking at that chart a 570's minimum fps is above 30. I wonder if sli 570's would hit above 60
Byron Bluth
Banned
Wait. Is Xbox One 900p upscaled to 1080p or is it an unknown native resolution upscaled to 900p?
The way it's worded it sounds like upscaled to 900p. So what is the actual native resolution?
The way it's worded it sounds like upscaled to 900p. So what is the actual native resolution?
Cizeta-Moroder
Banned
Only 60?
VFX_Veteran
Banned
What is clear is that LithTech is an incredible next-gen graphics engine and is already pushing the consoles with advanced features only found on PC. Congrats to LithTech. This game has all kinds of polish.
shinobi602
Member
Huh, people are complaining about the AA on the PS4? I think it looks pretty damn sharp...at least on my TV...
I think the problem with thr AA solution is that it basically nullifies the resolution boost the ps4 has over the xbox one version, due to it not beinga very crisp AA method.
alexandros
Banned
Most games out there exhibit the same behavior. Even in Watchdogs, a game with various problems at launch, the 1.4 Teraflop 750Ti matches or exceeds the PS4 frame rate on High settings (a match for the console quality settings) while running at a higher resolution (full 1080p instead of the 900p res on PS4). CPU bottleneck is the only reasonable explanation imo.
Lol what? They both use the same AA, how can it nullify the resolution with one already higher than the other? Unless you can't tell the difference on a native 1080p screen.
Sutton Dagger
Member
FXAA has never been sharp, that's why you'll see many people refer to it as the vaseline filter. There have been a couple of PC games where it's the default AA and it's really noticeable.
Jessie.Bristol
Member
No, it is 900p native upscaled to 1080p.
I wish console developers would adopt MFAA. It would definitely be much better then the blur FXAA provides.
What is the wattage differences between a ps4 and a similar pc? I wonder if them trying to keep within a certain threshold due to CE laws are messing things up as well. But yeah the amd cpu route is going to hurt more than anything but unfortunately intel is an asshole corporation when it comes to prices and because of their stranglehold on the PC market they have no reason to adjust them.
alexandros
Banned
Yeah, I really dislike FXAA and even the superior TXAA. I prefer crisp graphics and I'd rather run with no AA at all than have a blurry image.
VFX_Veteran
Banned
Same here. Definitely a beautiful game on my PS4 + 55" Plasma.
alexandros
Banned
Huh, so throttling? I hadn't thought of that, it is certainly possible.
perineumlick
Member
When the market can sustain consoles with an $800 price tag, maybe then 60fps will become a new standard. It's apples to oranges.
Yeah I have been wondering if that is why the steambox initiative has been set to the back burner a bit. Maybe someone from the EU decided that maybe steamboxes should have to follow the CE standards since they would be marketed and priced as one. I could see that screwing with the ones with higher end GPU combinations.
Edit: Ok looking at some links the ps4 under gameplay uses around 140 watts total while a 7850 uses around 250 alone that is strange there must be some amount of throttling right?
7850 PS4
Not pointless at all, grab an R7 265, use the PS4 settings and see how it performs, if you have plenty of headroom above 30 FPS then increase the settings to see if higher effects and no FXAA looks better than what the PS4 can put out. If that is the case then ask the devs why they chose the settings they did for the consoles when these alternative settings that seem to run just as well look better.
There might be a valid reason related to CPU usage but I doubt it as once you start increasing in game effects that is down to GPU performance. CPU performance will affect no of on screen enemies and that sort of thing more.
PS4 wins, again.
This game is so fun and I'm only a few story missions in. There's so much side content to get lost in.
It's probably also the case that because the PS4 and Xbox One are an all in one SoC naturally they have lower thermal and power headroom. The same isn't true for a discrete graphics card in a PC, they in many cases have a TDP equal or greater to that of the PS4/Xbox One by itself.
e.g. AMD rates a reference 7850 card at 130w, the PS4 consumes approximately that for the entire system.
GavinUK86
Member
My 3 year old GPU disagrees.
Check out the links I posted they don't show the 7850 anywhere close to 130.
Your link only shows total power consumption for the whole system at idle. The board itself is rated to handle up to 130w for a 7850 and benchmarks show under load it can range from 100 - 110w e.g.:
http://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/HD_7850_HD_7870/24.html
BruiserBear
Banned
Have you looked at the screenshots in this thread? How noticeable does it look to you?
Cool thanks didn't notice that at first. Still seems like the ps4 should be drawing more power with the cpu and gpu combination it has. Is it really that much power savings when going to an all in one solution?
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
We've reached the point where it's all gorgeous to me.
Definitely grabbing this sometime this year, as it does look quite fun.
Definitely grabbing this sometime this year, as it does look quite fun.
I think there are definitely power savings to be had by going that route, but I think it is more that there is a lower heat threshold so they can't pump as much power into the SoC, which probably means there is more headroom for better performance on the discrete 7850 in a PC than there is the integrated 7850 on the PS4 SoC as there is a higher headroom for both head and power on the PC.
Well the PS4 GPU has a lower clock speed than the 7850 so that can lower power consumption more than enabling extra CUs increases power consumption. The PS4 GPU is also based on GCN 1.1 and is more of a cut down Hawaii than a modified Pitcairn which is what the 7850 is based on. The 28nm node has matured a lot since the 7850 was released so chances are the PS4 SOC will require fewer volts to operate compared to if it had been created back when the node was new. The PS4 CPU is a very low power design anyway so will no add much to the overall power consumption
Combine all those factors and you can have a SOC that has better performance than a 7850 but uses less power.
It definitely is noticeably blurrier in the Xbox One version. If you still can't see it, then compare specifically Talion's character model and its detail, especially the sword.
GPU in PS4 is running lower clock than normal cards and Jaguar dual cpu combo doesnt require more than 20W.
But even high end PCs on Maxwell and i7 Haswell rarely go over 300W under max load.
Well, if they could they would. That said, MS should spare no expense in ensuring every effort is made toward attaining parity. As a PS3 only owner for first 3 years since 2007, I felt the pain of owning inferior ports. Xbone owners shouldn't have to go through that. I just hope that in years to come the compromise is restricted to resolution only.
Man so many games to play. Will be picking this gem up on PS4 hopefully this week.
I really think you've lost your damn mind.
I really think you've lost your damn mind.
Well, here's the thing, the ones who don't know better probably don't care. And then the ones who do know better but still bought a XO anyway will act like they don't care. So they deserve everything they get; they would've bought an XO even if Microsoft didn't do their 180s. The only 180 that never came is they still went with some weaksauce hardware.
AgentP
Thinks mods influence posters politics. Promoted to QAnon Editor.
Beta tested in the future, now reuse the time machine!