• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Can you ELI5 why RE3 on X1X has bad Framerate?

Kuranghi

Member
Apr 17, 2015
4,401
7,686
780
a lot more than on the pro, but there are full examples of games running at 4k and a lot higher frame rates than this game. look at Star Wars battlefront 2 for example, full 4k and 60fps

There are 9 games on the X1X and 6 on the PS4 Pro that run at 4K with a target of 60 fps, the rest target lower framerates, or use dynamic resolution scaling. I guess 9 is "a lot more" than 6, percentage wise, but my point remains: X1X renders loads of games at native 4K but almost never at 60 fps.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 uses dynamic scaling and goes from 1800p to 2160p to maintain 60 fps. Maybe try actually verifying the truth before you make absolute statements. Even Wolfenstein New Colossus, which is seen as one of the biggest gaps in res between the PS4 Pro and X1X can't maintain 4K at all times, and the framerate drops to low 50s on X1X when it does maintain 4K.
 
  • Like
Reactions: OneShotThrill

CJY

Banned
Jan 8, 2016
2,562
5,637
725
There are 9 games on the X1X and 6 on the PS4 Pro that run at 4K with a target of 60 fps, the rest target lower framerates, or use dynamic resolution scaling. I guess 9 is "a lot more" than 6, percentage wise, but my point remains: X1X renders loads of games at native 4K but almost never at 60 fps.

Star Wars Battlefront 2 uses dynamic scaling and goes from 1800p to 2160p to maintain 60 fps. Maybe try actually verifying the truth before you make absolute statements. Even Wolfenstein New Colossus, which is seen as one of the biggest gaps in res between the PS4 Pro and X1X can't maintain 4K at all times, and the framerate drops to low 50s on X1X when it does maintain 4K.
If we assume that PS4 was the lead console and the Pro version of the game was pushed to 1620P, but runs at 60fps, but X1X version was pushed to 2160P but runs at ~47fps...

With the CPUs being near-identical between both systems... couldn't we assume that if X1X had 8TF, it would also run at 60FPS, everything else being the same?

I understand it might be solely down to the optimisation of the engine/game and even with a theoretical 8TF X1X, it would still see poor framerates... but that's pretty doubtful, isn't it?
 

CJY

Banned
Jan 8, 2016
2,562
5,637
725
I think youre just over thinking, man.

Its just not optimized properly on X1X. It happens. Doesnt COD perform worse on x1x vs PS5 also?

How is Re2R on the x1x vs ps4?
I have no idea about other games to be honest as I never paid much attention to comparisons between both system.

I always just assumed X1X had all the better multiplatform titles, because of the amount of people saying they're getting an XSX for the better multiplatform titles.

Maybe I'm over-thinking things, but I was really surprised to find this example of RE3 running so poorly on X1X.
 

Kuranghi

Member
Apr 17, 2015
4,401
7,686
780
With the CPUs being near-identical between both systems... couldn't we assume that if X1X had 8TF, it would also run at 60FPS, everything else being the same?

Possibly, it certainly would be closer to 60, but I don't think the problem can be easily overcome with brute force, the engine asks too much of the GPU in certain scenarios and they aren't willing to sacrifice the IQ for a stable 60 fps in those scenarios. I'd say the quality of transparencies is tied to the resolution but doesnt increase linearly.

Boot up RE2make and set your res to 4K and run around a bit, see what your average fps is and then go to one of the Birkin fights where it shows a closeup of him covered in the slimy, clear stuff [:messenger_hushed:] and see how your framerate does. They wanted the effect to be at that quality level but didnt bother to optimize the relationship between it and the resolution.

Another example of this happening in another engine is in Doom 2016, the room with the big glass test tubes where you first meet the Summoner runs so badly compared to the rest of the game because there are loads of transparencies around. I don't know if they ever "fixed" this or if Vulcan had efficiency gains for this type of "problem".
 

phil_t98

Member
Oct 10, 2014
4,425
4,489
620
If we assume that PS4 was the lead console and the Pro version of the game was pushed to 1620P, but runs at 60fps, but X1X version was pushed to 2160P but runs at ~47fps...

With the CPUs being near-identical between both systems... couldn't we assume that if X1X had 8TF, it would also run at 60FPS, everything else being the same?

I understand it might be solely down to the optimisation of the engine/game and even with a theoretical 8TF X1X, it would still see poor framerates... but that's pretty doubtful, isn't it?
But my point was the game wasn’t optimised and it isn’t a graphically demanding game. It could easily maintain better frame rate at the res that it does. I agree dropping them res a bit would be better. Maybe in patches they will get the game code running in a better state
 

RobRSG

Member
Jun 3, 2013
679
230
520
Brazil
I saw the demo, and took me a bit more than 5 minutes to cancel my pre-order.

IQ is superb but framerate is low, and comes to a crawl in character close-ups. I got the PS4 Pro demo to test, and it looks like crap.

I “solved” the issue by ordering some parts and buinding me a new gaming PC. Fuck the consoles and dumb ass developers that can’t even offer same performance levels on both machines in a light game like this one.

Played this thing maxed out at 1440p with a average of 110FPS and up to 130FPS on less intense scenes.
 

01011001

Member
Dec 4, 2018
5,374
8,276
570
I think youre just over thinking, man.

Its just not optimized properly on X1X. It happens. Doesnt COD perform worse on x1x vs PS5 also?

How is Re2R on the x1x vs ps4?

CoD runs slightly worse in terms of average framerate (3-5fps difference in bad spots) but about 100% more pixels on screen on average.

RDR2 runs at 2x the resolution (native 4k vs half of 4k + really bad reconstruction) and better performance than Pro in "4k" mode. but the Pro has a 1080p mode where the performance is basically on par if not a tiny bit better than One X
 

BusierDonkey

Member
Sep 21, 2018
3,484
9,413
595
It seems every for X1X game that’s had performance issues, they would have been completely solved by reducing resolution to 1440p. I’d even take 1080/60 over 2160/unsteady 30-60.
 

Bernkastel

Member
Mar 8, 2018
7,511
15,719
960
Capcom’s usually pretty good with performance in their last couple titles haven’t they?

Dropping the res a bit to get above 50 is such a no brainer, so I think they were mandated to keep it at 4K.
Why would Microsoft mandate 4K? Stop making stuff up, there are many X1X titles that are not 4K. Infact Re2 is not 4K either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: draliko
Jan 16, 2020
194
257
260
Cos its Capcom and they dont want to make the PS4 look bad, so they gimp the fuck out of the 1X to even it up.
Same goes for Namco and Square.
 

Tamy

Banned
Apr 9, 2020
161
503
280
*This is also a stealth next-gen thread*

ELI5 = "Explain it like I'm 5"


The GPU is what's responsible for pushing pixels.

Resolution of RE3 Remake:
PS4 Pro - 2880x1620 = 4,665,600 pixels
X1X - 3840x2160 = 8,294,400 pixels
(about 78% more pixels)

So X1X has a way better resolution, but the framerate is really bad/unstable on the X1X (floating around 35-50) compared to the PS4 Pro version which is close to a solid 60. This is what I don't understand: why?

You could say the X1X is being held back by the shitty Jaguar CPU, but PS4 Pro has the same CPU. If anything, X1X has a slightly better CPU.

I watched DF's analysis on this here:

Dark1X doesn't explicitly state why or how, just what is.

The basic answer to all of this that is that the 6TFLOPs of X1X's GPU just isn't good enough for true 4K gaming experiences. It's really not totally relevant about why though, because we see can examples of what is.

---

Mark Cerny back in 2016 said that for a true native 4K gaming experience, 8TF would be required.

Source:

In another article, Cerny also clearly states that the 8TF figure is a "personal estimate".

Was he right? With X1X failing to hit 4K/60FPS in a few games now, it would appear that he was correct and honest and it would seem the Xbox One X being sold as a "no compromise" native 4K gaming machine was in fact false, and the resulting games do in fact have some very serious compromises compared to the competition, particularly in the area of all-important framerate and stability.

With all that being said, why would anyone doubt Cerny's vision and suitability as PlayStation architect or doubt whether PS5 will be able to hit 4K/60?

Of course PS5 will be able to hit 4K/60 in most games if the dev chooses and not only 1800P vs 4K on XSX like so many seem to think.

To suggest otherwise is not dealing with facts.

It could be argued that any more than 10.3 TFLOPs on the PS5 would have been unnecessary in a machine targeting 4K/60. Cerny already said back in 2016 we would only need 8TF for a full 4k experience, so it just makes no sense why he'd build a console in 2020 not capable of it.

I'm not saying more isn't better, just that more isn't necessary for PS5, at all. I'm glad he seems to have invested more into other areas of the console.


because a Patch was missing, maybe because of Corona they didn't have the chance to get it on time, so it was delayed a couple of days, not a big issue:


the game now runs at near-perfect 60 FPS during gameplay

Too bad that it wasn't ready at launch, but I think its ok, I mean the current situation I can understand it.
 
Last edited: