Digital Foundry: Heard that Xbox Series S Is A "Pain" For Developers Due To Memory Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Just like 8k on some boxes and we have 1080p games that don't hold 60fps and some games below 1080p, I don't see the difference.
4K was claimed for PS5 and XSX many titles don't reach that mark. You blame the XSS for that?

Yeah but we've also got 1080p (and change) on PS5 and SX in various games as well.

Hopefully this slow news period ends soon so y'all can find something else to move on to lol.

I got 8K,6K and 4K on my big boxes.
I also got 60/120fps vs (in some cases) xss getting 30 and 60fps instead.

Lets stop trying to derail by mentioning other consoles, the thread is about the xss.
 
*have to because of this:




Try to get on the same page guys. You’re trying to deflect from the series s and you’re contradicting each other.
Is it ok to use one example either way?
Because plenty of people have provided more than one developer that have complained and more than one game that has failed to live up to the prelaunch expectations on what series s was supposed to do in relation to series x.
Funny coming from you when goal post shift from 'XSS has low TF', to 'it's just like the Switch', to 'it doesn't have enough RAM', to 'it has low resolutions', to 'MS promised all games would have RT just like XSX', and my personal favorite, 'the XSS is holding back the entire generation!' Just hurling accusations to see what sticks and from people who do not own the XSS and in many cases lack an Xbox entirely.

People who are completely unaffected by the XSS' existence have the most to say. Bonus points for taking the word of Alex, a guy Sony guys do not trust, but for some strange reason believe him here. Obviously this is a concern for you Frank how has your Xbox been holding up?
 

adamsapple

Banned
I got 8K,6K and 4K on my big boxes.
I also got 60/120fps vs (in some cases) xss getting 30 and 60fps instead.

Lets stop trying to derail by mentioning other consoles, the thread is about the xss.

Your entire logic is flawed.

You're trying to peddle the narrative that because *some* games on XSS drop as low as 540p, it means the console as a whole is weak and holding back game development.

By that logic any console that doesn't meet its advertised spec all the time is weak.

PS3 games did not all hit 720p, PS4 games did not all hit 1080p. PS5 games do not all hit 2160p.

My friend, please. The topic was derailed as soon as it was made with incomplete info, no real developers name and/or comment tied to them feeling "pain" and whatnot.
 
Last edited:
Your entire logic is flawed.

You're trying to peddle the narrative that because *some* games on XSS drop as low as 540p, it means the console as a whole is weak and holding back game development.

By that logic any console that doesn't meet its advertised spec all the time is weak.

PS3 games did not all hit 720p, PS4 games did not all hit 1080p. PS5 games do not all hit 2160p.

My friend, please. The topic was derailed as soon as it was made with incomplete info, no real developers name and/or comment tied to them feeling "pain" and whatnot.
Don't forget his repeated comments about the TF of the XSS being the issue when even DF's Alex made no such claim. It's transparent what's going in here.
 
Who needs developers' opinions on hardware? I myself prefer to stick to the comments produced by some veteran posters here, known for their knowledge, experience and impartial takes.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Your entire logic is flawed.

You're trying to peddle the narrative that because *some* games on XSS drop as low as 540p, it means the console as a whole is weak and holding back game development.

By that logic any console that doesn't meet its advertised spec all the time is weak.

PS3 games did not all hit 720p, PS4 games did not all hit 1080p. PS5 games do not all hit 2160p.

My friend, please. The topic was derailed as soon as it was made with incomplete info, no real developers name and/or comment tied to them feeling "pain" and whatnot.
Can you or anyone show that most xss versions of XSX games are 1440p? (heck even fake 1440p will count)


If not MS was disingenuous period!
 

Dolodolo

Member
In fact, some more things depend on the philosophy of Microsoft itself. Will their new projects focus on 60 frames per second, as Klobrille conditionally said.

Or they want to make several modes, where one with maximum graphics.

How the conditional Hellblade 2 will work on series S

And also, I'm wondering if these stripes will be in the game for its entire segment, or not.
 

FrankWza

Member
Lets stop trying to derail
This is the portion of the thread where, after being presented link after link and proof upon proof, they attempt to take the thread to a bad place so the mods will come in and lock it. Textbook.
One of them actually tried to pretend in another thread that this didn’t mean 120 fps wasn’t promised at launch for series s. Pre launch media on a first party site by the marketing manager in August of 2021.
Halo Infinite on Xbox Series X|S boasts up to 4K and 60 frames per second, and Multiplayer Arena supports up to 120 frames per second, advanced 3D Spatial Sound, and more. And, with new features like Quick Resume, Auto HDR, and framerate boosting, the entire catalog of Halo games gets better on next gen.
If you were to say something that you couldn’t prove they’d be crying to the mods to try and get you banned. But they’ve been provided with proof more than once here and not one of them is adult enough to acknowledge any of it. Embarrassing
 

Topher

Gold Member
GotG is a bad example since the console version just isn't optimized all that well. PS5/XSX were struggling to do 1080p 60 there with reduced settings when even a lowly 6500xt can nail 1080p/60 without moving the settings down as much.

The game isn't particularly optimized well on anything, including PC. And the 6500 XT *can* nail 1080p/60 with GotG and it can also drop to 1080p/27-ish during gameplay. That isn't the point though. The point is games are going to push the hardware harder and harder as then gen continues on whether than it is due to poor optimization or just more demanding games.
 

adamsapple

Banned
Can you or anyone show that most xss versions of XSX games are 1440p? (heck even fake 1440p will count)


If not MS was disingenuous period!

No one will go out and compile every single game.

But that's not the point and I think we all know it, even franky. No wonder it's the same Jason quote from two years ago that's being crapped out here worse than Johnny Depp's bed.

When your "advertised" 8K 120hz consoles barely have a fingers full of native 4k 60 FPS games, you know the marketing PR points are more aspirational and the ideal max spec of the console, not something that's expected of literally every game.

But please, continue to post the same asinine comments in this thread while we all wait for the next DF/VGTech or such article to come out so we can move the fight to a new field. Or, if the results aren't favorable to your primary console there, we can bust out the Series S discussion once again.

Cause that's always sure to get the reaction scores (y)

In fact, some more things depend on the philosophy of Microsoft itself. Will their new projects focus on 60 frames per second, as Klobrille conditionally said.

Or they want to make several modes, where one with maximum graphics.

How the conditional Hellblade 2 will work on series S

And also, I'm wondering if these stripes will be in the game for its entire segment, or not.

This won't nearly be as much of an issue as some might believe.

Xbox games are made on their GDK (Game Development Kit) which has built in support for the Series and even last gen XBO hardware. So, min maxing specs and features to get them running on appropriate hardware won't be the same as needing to craft a bespoke engine for a lower spec hardware.
 
Last edited:

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
GotG is a bad example since the console version just isn't optimized all that well. PS5/XSX were struggling to do 1080p 60 there with reduced settings when even a lowly 6500xt can nail 1080p/60 without moving the settings down as much.
Could it be a good comparison though ? Because if it isn't optimised and it is just shoveled on systems it could give us a idea how much optimization is needed for SS over SX.
But like this thread mostly guesswork.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
No one will go out and compile every single game.

But that's not the point and I think we all know it, even franky. No wonder it's the same Jason quote from two years ago that's being crapped out here worse than Johnny Depp's bed.

When your "advertised" 8K 120hz consoles barely have a fingers full of native 4k 60 FPS games, you know the marketing PR points are more aspirational and the max spec of the console, not something that's expected of literally every game.

But please, continue to post the same asinine comments in this thread while we all wait for the next DF/VGTech or such article to come out so we can move the fight to a new field.
So I take it the answer is most xss versions of XSX games don't run at 1440p like MS claimed.
If they did I feel they would get a pass.

You can't help derailing by bringing up the other consoles.

Waiting for the next DF/NXGamer/VGtech talk about xss?Well id wager It won't be good for that little box as we get deeper into this generation to see what these tech videos will show.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
So I take it the answer is most xss versions of XSX games don't run at 1440p like MS claimed.
If they did I feel they would get a pass.

You can't help derailing by bringing up the other consoles.

Waiting for the next DF/NXGamer/VGtech talk about xss?Well id wager It won't be good for that little box as we get deeper into this generation to see what these tech videos will show.

Most ps5 and xbox series games run at 1440p when trying ro deliver decent framerates. Why would a series s deliver 1440p?
 
So I take it the answer is most xss versions of XSX games don't run at 1440p like MS claimed.
If they did I feel they would get a pass.

You can't help derailing by bringing up the other consoles.

Waiting for the next DF/NXGamer/VGtech talk about xss?Well id wager It won't be good for that little box as we get deeper into this generation to see what these tech videos will show.
The XSS does not exist in a vacuum. Many here repeatedly claimed it would ruin the generation. To now act like it stands alone again shows the disingenunity of this conversation. No company can promise all games will run at a particular resolution. See the PS5 and Returnal as evidence that even though the box says 4K the game runs at 1080p.
If you were to say something that you couldn’t prove they’d be crying to the mods to try and get you banned. But they’ve been provided with proof more than once here and not one of them is adult enough to acknowledge any of it. Embarrassing
Just as embarrassing as you ignoring the many comments from none other than Jason Ronald himself explaining the philosophy of the XSS but pointing to a small snippet of a promotional video as some sort of 'gotcha'. No one can prove the XSS is 'holding back the generation' or affecting anyone who doesn't own an XSS yet you are still here. Of course now you are preaching about being an adult. Bad comedy.
 

PaintTinJr

Member
lol i love how people bring up Xbox Vs ps2 specs as if they came out at the same time. Ps2 was a March 2000 release in Japan. Xbox came out over 18 months later in November 2001. Of course it had better specs. Even the $199 GameCube had better specs than the ps2. RE4 had to be downgraded to run on the ps2.

This is so not the same thing.
The thing is, had Sony been infinity funding the PS2 to add a HDD temporarily like MS did with Xbox1 before replacing a year before the PS3 with the 360 Arcade - so late and dead early - the PS2 even with less memory would have been stronger gaming hardware than the Xbox1 except for First Person shooters because all it needed was a means of writing out the intermediate RAM data to an EIDE HDD to magnify the effectiveness of that small RAM.

Anyone that ran PS2 linux knows it was far more capable than the technical specs read compared to a Pentium 3 PC with double the RAM, but the overriding point you make about delaying hardware at a time of cheap credit across the world in a consumer boom time making it easy to improve specs 18months later is still very true IMO.
 

Reallink

Member
While I find it commendable that Xbox has a console appealing to a more casual, cost-conscious audience, I do have to wonder if a couple years in this thing starts holding back Series X titles.

Isn't it a mandatory to make S/X compatible games - never Series X exclusives?

And if that is the case, isn't that just another incentive for developers to consider simply PS5/PC exclusivity so they're not bottlenecked by this Series S inferiority?

No developer/publisher is going to pass up a 20, 30, or 50+ million user base. Use your brain. Like it or not S is the floor and "lead platform" of next gen development, and it always will be.
 
Last edited:

Hendrick's

If only my penis was as big as my GamerScore!
My friend, please. The topic was derailed as soon as it was made with incomplete info, no real developers name and/or comment tied to them feeling "pain" and whatnot.
Yet the thread continues. Wonder why this has not been locked yet. Another embarrassing thread from this forum.
 

Md Ray

Member
The XSS has techniques to deal with memory management. Techniques that have yet to be used. PCs have OS overhead consoles don't have to deal with but of course you knew that.
What OS overhead exactly? This isn't the 90s or PS360 era anymore. Modern PCs have just as much OS overhead as current-gen (Xbox) consoles these days.
 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
It is going to be interesting to see how that game performs on XSS. On PC, the game requires 8GB RX 580 along with the 12 GB of system RAM.
those requirements are overshot

game runs fine, only uses 2.5-3.5 gb ram + 3.5-4 gb vram (total of 6-6.5 gb of budget. easily fittable for series s's 8 gb). i dont see any stutters, problems, or texture loading problems in the footage below


7.4 gb ram usage (total system usage. in such cases, game itself usually only uses 2.5-3.5 gb ram. rest of the 3-3.5 gb is windows and potential background apps)

devs started "recommending" 12-16 gb because they assume most people will run tons of stuff on background nowadays (chrome, discord, spotify etc. etc.) even then, its an aggresive recommendation

of course this is with medium settings, and anything higher is not expected from the hardware level of series s anyways

if i had the game i would try and see how much ram data it actually uses. some games on PC also opportunistically uses more RAM when you throw more RAM at them. my rdr 2 was using upwards of 9 gb+ usage (total of 13-14 gb) one day i got curious and forced the game to use only 2.5 gbs of ram (dont ask how i did. its black magic) surprised, it was working quite good. random stutters happened, just like how they happen on ps4. a frame limiter most likely would help

 
Last edited:

arvfab

Member
Effectively putting the blame on developers again.

That's not even the point, I would even say exactly these "techniques" are what make consoles unique vs. PCs.

But I fail to see the reasoning behind this logic. If a game is made to make use of such techniques, it also counts for Series X. If a dev implements these techniques, they have more room for improvements on Series X, too. So a dev using these techniques and pushing the Series X, will encounter the exactly same problems porting on the Series S.
 
What OS overhead exactly? This isn't the 90s or PS360 era anymore. Modern PCs have just as much OS overhead as current-gen (Xbox) consoles these days.
Shoot me some information proving this. Also if you can show that the majority of gaming PCs out class the XSS proving it's holding back game development would also be appreciated. I've already seen some evidence that many PCs are worse.
 
i'm not arguing with that, though :) 6700xt and 6600xt is also close to each other, only separated by a small %14 margin on average. %14 is a small change, but they're different models regardless, hence named differently. ps5 is closer to 6600xt, and series x is closer to 6700xt. but people refuse to accept / acknowledge.

some people are so defensive on ps5 that they cannot even accept that there can be a correlation between ps5 and sx performance that amounts to a %10-25 difference (mind you, if a game is compute heavy, it is very normal for series x to have a %20 difference. since console games lock to 60 fps and use DSR all the time, they became more geometry bound, which helps PS5 more than Series X. On PC, you can just unlock FPS and fill all the shaders that RDNA2 can provide to games, and you can see that 6700xt can fly high. series x gets that chance with VRR unlocked modes

i'm not trying to say that %8-10-12-14 is a huge difference. i'm just matching consoles with their counterpart GPUs on PC. i originally gave that example to put series s in picture, and i said that it would be more cool if it was racing with a rx 6600, instead of a 6500xt (mind you, 6500xt is gimped by pcie 4 only and 4 gb vram, therefore it will have misleading benchmarks. but it does not change the fact at its core, its a 5.7 tflops RDNA2 GPU, and purely it is %35-40 faster than series s on equal terms. yet someone also ignored that and refused to accept it. on desktop, most people are overloading the 6500xt with ultra textures and settings and the GPU just buckles down. 4 GB is too small, it should at least had 6 GB though)

for a more honest and fair comparison, we need games that have VRR uncapped mode on both consoles. I hope DL2 gets a PS5 unlocked VRR cap mode so we can see the actual difference between sx and ps5 there aswell

as a matter of fact, I said in this very same topic that PS exclusives tend to have better graphics overall. I don't even know why people are so defensive of PS5 when it comes to hardware. you already have the best software, better games. PS exc developers will end up create games that push PS5 to its boundaries that Xbox SX won't have a chance to run. i'm not saying this difference is meaningful or means anything, I don't even consider this difference as a choosing factor between consoles. i'm just saying it is there. i firmly say that i have no preference over both consoles, i'm just an outsider that analyzes the data. and data tells me that sx seems stronger than ps5, between %8 and %23 (if the game is compute heavy, as i've said again).

data also tells me that sx is akin to 6700xt and ps5 is akin to 6600xt

literally, sx is a 12.15 tflops rdna 2 GPU (peak). 6700xt is a 13.2 tflops rdna 2 gpu.
literally, ps5 is a 10 tflops rdna2 GPU (peak), 6600xt is a 10 tflops rdna 2 gpu

why would i say sx is closer to 6600xt. it is closer to 6700xt in terms of pure, raw specs. and it shows.

I have a 3070. i use xbox series x equivalent settings WHENEVER I can. And I can testify that the performance I'm getting is very close to what series x provides. forza horizon 5, halo infinite, ac valhalla, you name it.

Both are fantastic consoles. I don’t think either has anything to be ashamed about. Also I’m really happy that they are so close to each other and it’s neat how each has their own strengths and weaknesses.
 

DaGwaphics

Member
Could it be a good comparison though ? Because if it isn't optimised and it is just shoveled on systems it could give us a idea how much optimization is needed for SS over SX.
But like this thread mostly guesswork.

Not really. Because if devs are so sloppy that XSX/PS5 can't hit a stable 1080p target, then obviously the result is going to be poor on the XSS as well. Same for if the devs just overshoot the capabilities of the hardware in general, if the XSS struggles badly the XSX/PS5 will be destroyed as well. This entire argument only makes sense if you are saying that you want XSX/PS5 to target XSS resolutions and settings (the same ones PS5 guys complain about on XSS).
 
Last edited:
That's not even the point, I would even say exactly these "techniques" are what make consoles unique vs. PCs.

But I fail to see the reasoning behind this logic. If a game is made to make use of such techniques, it also counts for Series X. If a dev implements these techniques, they have more room for improvements on Series X, too. So a dev using these techniques and pushing the Series X, will encounter the exactly same problems porting on the Series S.
Why would this be true? The XSS by its very design would require less RAM for lower resolution textures and effects. What uses more RAM than texture data? It would benefit even more from the unified development environment many here have ignored this the beginning of the thread.

The issue devs are potentially running into is treating Series console development like X1 console development and just dumping things into RAM because of the slow storage associated with the X1. XSS does not have this problem so new techniques are required to maximize the potential of the system, XSX as well. To NOT use them and then complain is a little strange.
 

dcmk7

Banned
Why would this be true? The XSS by its very design would require less RAM for lower resolution textures and effects. What uses more RAM than texture data? It would benefit even more from the unified development environment many here have ignored this the beginning of the thread.

The issue devs are potentially running into is treating Series console development like X1 console development and just dumping things into RAM because of the slow storage associated with the X1. XSS does not have this problem so new techniques are required to maximize the potential of the system, XSX as well. To NOT use them and then complain is a little strange.
Have you got any evidence that they are doing this. Seems a very ignorant statement to make.. care to back it up?
 

Three

Member
The only real 3rd party next gen experience we have is Matrix (I won't count Metro because last gen assets). It runs on the Series S and seems to be mostly CPU bottlenecked anyway. Looks like there's a bright future ahead for Little Beast :messenger_beaming:
What you're saying makes no sense to me. Matrix is not mostly CPU bottlenecked. What's bottlenecked by the CPU? It has a framerate cap with DRS. A 533p to 648p render upscaled to 1080p on XSS.
If the GPU could do more but is bottlenecked by the CPU it also wouldn't have lower draw distance, fewer light sources/particle effects and bad motion blur on the XSS compared to the PS5/XSX.

And what's this about last gen assets in Metro? They literally deleted the last gen assets from Metro. You mean it doesn't use nanite? So what? Metro didn't have a memory issue it had a GPU one meaning nanite would not help.

My friend, please. The topic was derailed as soon as it was made with incomplete info, no real developers name and/or comment tied to them feeling "pain" and whatnot.
Good luck with that. I mean when id engine devs delete tweets of the pain they were having (after the were aquired) you think Alex is going to throw whichever devs mentioned it to him under the bus by naming them? You would never get that info.
 

S0ULZB0URNE

Member
Why would this be true? The XSS by its very design would require less RAM for lower resolution textures and effects. What uses more RAM than texture data? It would benefit even more from the unified development environment many here have ignored this the beginning of the thread.

The issue devs are potentially running into is treating Series console development like X1 console development and just dumping things into RAM because of the slow storage associated with the X1. XSS does not have this problem so new techniques are required to maximize the potential of the system, XSX as well. To NOT use them and then complain is a little strange.
what
 
What you're saying makes no sense to me. Matrix is not mostly CPU bottlenecked. What's bottlenecked by the CPU? It has a framerate cap with DRS. A 533p to 648p render upscaled to 1080p on XSS.
If the GPU could do more but is bottlenecked by the CPU it also wouldn't have lower draw distance, fewer light sources/particle effects and bad motion blur on the XSS compared to the PS5/XSX.

And what's this about last gen assets in Metro? They literally deleted the last gen assets from Metro. You mean it doesn't use nanite? So what? Metro didn't have a memory issue it had a GPU one meaning nanite would not help.


Good luck with that. I mean when id engine devs delete tweets of the pain they were having (after the were aquired) you think Alex is going to throw whichever devs mentioned it to him under the bus by naming them? You would never get that info.
It's CPU bottlenecked because it's essentially impossible to run it at 60 fps, no matter the resolution.
 

elliot5

Member
Yes, but it doesn't mean it'll run great or won't feature compromises.
Deathloop isn't exactly a super demanding game and with an extra year of polish and FSR 2.0? It can probably run fine. I would even expect a raytracing mode at 30 FPS at 1080p.
 
You didn't answer my question. What OS overhead exactly?

And do you agree that most PCs have more memory than XSS?
I agree that PCs do much more than play games so additional RAM is used for the additional functions PCs do. The footprint of Windows 11 is much higher than the footprint for Xbox OS. How much RAM is required for 1080p games?

Consoles are more specialized which makes not using SFS more of a problem. You should also know that not all RAM is the same. Both PS4 and X1 had 8GB of RAM but the RAM on X1 was significantly slower. More memory != to better performance.
 

elliot5

Member
Halo Infinite takes 3.5 GB system memory and 6 GB VRAM with fully maxed out settings and high res textures for me. System memory usage with nothing running (as mant services background killed) is still like 36% usage. So like 5.5 GB of my RAM.

RAM efficiency will always be needed on console and having fixed amounts makes things easier and more difficult in their own ways
 

RydarGaf

Member
FSR 2.0 will breathe life into the Series S.

With that technology, they could render all games at 960p/30fps and output 1440p/unlocked fps for user that have hdmi 2.1 displays.
 

Md Ray

Member
The footprint of Windows 11 is much higher than the footprint for Xbox OS.
Yeah? How much exactly? It doesn't use anymore than 3GB of RAM on my system (could reduce the footprint even further to around 2 gigs). So it's about the same or even less than what Xbox uses for its OS.
 
Last edited:

RydarGaf

Member
Halo Infinite takes 3.5 GB system memory and 6 GB VRAM with fully maxed out settings and high res textures for me. System memory usage with nothing running (as mant services background killed) is still like 36% usage. So like 5.5 GB of my RAM.

RAM efficiency will always be needed on console and having fixed amounts makes things easier and more difficult in their own ways
The system memory portion on the Series S is very slow and there is only 2GB of it.
 

Md Ray

Member
Consoles are more specialized which makes not using SFS more of a problem. You should also know that not all RAM is the same. Both PS4 and X1 had 8GB of RAM but the RAM on X1 was significantly slower. More memory != to better performance.
More memory can certainly mean better performance. Your minimums (1% and 0.1% frames per second) can see improvements, sometimes significantly. Even avg fps can take a hit when less memory is used. In fact, this happens on FH5:

 
Last edited:

elliot5

Member
The system memory portion on the Series S is very slow and there is only 2GB of it.
I know, all 10 is shared. Technically games can still use that 2 GB if necessary (to some degree) but it’s best to keep most things to the high speed pool.

Point is 8 GB is probably perfectly fine for most games optimized for console for the time being. Raytracing is a different beast.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom