• 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.

Face-Off: Plants vs Zombies: Garden Warfare [PS4,XB1,PC]

I didn't drop below 110 FPS while "benchmarking" this on max settings 1080p, usually hung around 130-140. I should have run some actual benchmarks (Frostbite games can dump frame times to a file), mostly I just played with an FPS counter so I could get a feel for what settings my system could/could not handle. I honestly find it hard to believe a 680 would ever drop below 60. Here are my specs:

4770K @ 4.5GHz
R9 290

Strictly Mantle, I didn't bother trying DirectX.

I feel like I should buy the game, it was pretty fun.

Mantle is killer, I went from ho hum performance with a 7970 in BF4 dx11 to locked 60 FPS at ultra 2XMSAA with mantle. I was using a AMD cpu as well :p

Great work by DICE
 

DiscoDave

Member
Me too. If you gave me the money I'd build it for you. Then you also have the price of postage too though which you wouldn't have if it went from a store straight to you.

Very capable of building one myself, and i will when ready still looking at a few things.
 

UnrealEck

Member
Here's my post from a while ago when I was playing the game on a GTX 770.
"Plants Vs Zombies Garden Warfare 4K @ 45-50 FPS on a single GTX 770 2GB"

So how DF are saying what they are about the performance is beyond me.

Very capable of building one myself, and i will when ready still looking at a few things.

Why did you ask me then?
 

Vestax

Banned
Eh but Xbox owners got to play the game way sooner. The game is old news now, so i think its a good tradeoff.

Are you serious?

It may be older for some XBO owners, but there's plenty of players to be found still, after 6 months, on XBO. That's not "old news".

PS4 players waited a bit longer, but received a better-polished (plenty of hiccups at XBO launch) and a DEFINITIVE version. I much rather have a rock-solid 60fps AND 1080p, than just having it sooner.

Slightly worse performance than the PS4 but getting to play the game 8 months earlier. I'm sure some of the discrepancy is due to the hardware differences, but the PS4 version also got extra dev time.

6 months. Are you upset or something?
 

ethomaz

Banned
Slightly worse performance than the PS4 but getting to play the game 8 months earlier. I'm sure some of the discrepancy is due to the hardware differences, but the PS4 version also got extra dev time.
You mean 4 months earlier?

The game launched in April, no?
 

JBourne

maybe tomorrow it rains
Has anyone posted any videos with a 680 or 770 in action? I've found a few on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiQPFdQB00M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnPxSxLawW8

Seem to spend most of the time over 100 FPS.

I'm using an i5/670 4GB. I'm about to head to work, but I could make a video when I get home tonight. I've never noticed any framerate drops with everything cranked, although it could've dropped a few when shit is getting crazy and I'm not looking at the counter.

I'll bookmark this thread for later tonight.
 

FLAguy954

Junior Member
Man, what setup is DF using? Even a first gen i5 with that GPU should be able to pump over 100 fps easily. Shit, I'm running this game @ ~120 fps with a 4670K and an R9 270 (both OC'd and at the lowly resolution of 1440x900 [saving for a new tv]).
 

DiscoDave

Member
Here's my post from a while ago when I was playing the game on a GTX 770.
"Plants Vs Zombies Garden Warfare 4K @ 45-50 FPS on a single GTX 770 2GB"

So how DF are saying what they are about the performance is beyond me.



Why did you ask me then?

Because I still would of liked to see this build for the price you was saying.
 

M_A_C

Member
I have both PC and PS4 and have spent a fair amount of time compairing them. PC has better grass and slightly higher res shadows. PS4 has more smoke/dust and fog effects. Both look and run great.
 

delta25

Banned
I have both PC and PS4 and have spent a fair amount of time compairing them. PC has better grass and slightly higher res shadows. PS4 has more smoke/dust and fog effects. Both look and run great.


I think its time for you to go outside now ;)


on a side note, if there's one game to rule them all in terms of DF face-off's its going to be GTA5 next gen, my god its going to be glorious.
 

thelastword

Banned
I have both PC and PS4 and have spent a fair amount of time compairing them. PC has better grass and slightly higher res shadows. PS4 has more smoke/dust and fog effects. Both look and run great.
Now here's a pc guy who gives a non-biased analysis after comparing. From what I've seen you would be right, in one of the pics I've seen that the grass is better on the PC for sure. I know that DF said that the pc version uses HBAO as opposed to SSAO on the consoles, but in some earlier pics in this thread it seems some shadows are non-existent on pc, could you perhaps post some pics to show how superior the hbao looks to you against the PS4 version?
 
Whilst the PC version does seem to be improved in some areas (shadow resolution, AA etc), in other areas the console version actually looks better. With the PC version either missing shadows or AO etc.

2z0BD6.jpg


oJ52JH.jpg


Seems to be yet another poor PC port, joining the ranks of games like Watchdogs at launch. Pretty embarrassing optimisation wise tbh.

That's what HBAO looks like (ie, it doesn't drench everything in deep shadow), you can also clearly see the halo/aura which is typical of ambient occlusion.

And seeing as it's frostbite i assume they have an SSAO toggle just incase you prefer the look of that option/performance.
 
There is something wrong with Digital Foundry's PC results. I've talked to a couple of people who play the game, they both had better performance than that with the game maxed out at 1080p. Someone should tweet DF and let them know they should doublecheck their test system.
 
Bought the Xbox One version at launch, recently double dipped and bought the PS4 version. It's been some weeks since I played the Xbox One version, but I found it quite hard to adjust to the PS4 triggers. I'm not great in these type of games, but went back to the Xbox One version this afternoon and despite the game looking a bit better on the PS4 ( although Xbox One is looking great as well ), I really prefer the Xbox One controller for this game.
 

thelastword

Banned
Bought the Xbox One version at launch, recently double dipped and bought the PS4 version. It's been some weeks since I played the Xbox One version, but I found it quite hard to adjust to the PS4 triggers. I'm not a great in these type of games player, but went back to the Xbox One version this afternoon and despite the game looking a bit better on the PS4 ( although Xbox One is looking great as well ), I really prefer the Xbox One controller for this game.
Why exactly would your controller preference be relevant in this thread? Can't you use the r1 for shooting in another controller config?
 

jryi

Senior Analyst, Fanboy Drivel Research Partners LLC
Why exactly would your controller preference be relevant in this thread?
Why shouldn't it be? Actually, wouldn't it make sense to have the closing statement in DF always in the form: "While the PS4 version of the game has better image quality and it keeps the framerate more consistently at 60fps, we declare Xbox One version better because of the controller."
 

Dec

Member
Now here's a pc guy who gives a non-biased analysis after comparing. From what I've seen you would be right, in one of the pics I've seen that the grass is better on the PC for sure. I know that DF said that the pc version uses HBAO as opposed to SSAO on the consoles, but in some earlier pics in this thread it seems some shadows are non-existent on pc, could you perhaps post some pics to show how superior the hbao looks to you against the PS4 version?

Doesn't look like a missing shadow to me, looks like not great SSAO looking like a missing shadow. The angle of the light in those shots wouldn't cast a shadow like that.
 

Stallion Free

Cock Encumbered
Now here's a pc guy who gives a non-biased analysis after comparing. From what I've seen you would be right, in one of the pics I've seen that the grass is better on the PC for sure. I know that DF said that the pc version uses HBAO as opposed to SSAO on the consoles, but in some earlier pics in this thread it seems some shadows are non-existent on pc, could you perhaps post some pics to show how superior the hbao looks to you against the PS4 version?

Here you go:

pvzeeqva.jpg
 

Vestax

Banned
Bought the Xbox One version at launch, recently double dipped and bought the PS4 version. It's been some weeks since I played the Xbox One version, but I found it quite hard to adjust to the PS4 triggers. I'm not great in these type of games, but went back to the Xbox One version this afternoon and despite the game looking a bit better on the PS4 ( although Xbox One is looking great as well ), I really prefer the Xbox One controller for this game.

LOL...good stuff, right there.
 

Foxyone

Member
There is something wrong with Digital Foundry's PC results. I've talked to a couple of people who play the game, they both had better performance than that with the game maxed out at 1080p. Someone should tweet DF and let them know they should doublecheck their test system.

I tried sending them a private message on Youtube. It sounds ineffectual, but they have responded to me several times before.
 

thelastword

Banned
Why shouldn't it be? Actually, wouldn't it make sense to have the closing statement in DF always in the form: "While the PS4 version of the game has better image quality and it keeps the framerate more consistently at 60fps, we declare Xbox One version better because of the controller."
Ha!, you know what they need to start comparing, sound? Also how comes DF says nothing of loadtimes?

Declarius said:
Doesn't look like a missing shadow to me, looks like not great SSAO looking like a missing shadow. The angle of the light in those shots wouldn't cast a shadow like that.
The pc version is not using ssao though but hbao, is this a similar issue to the need for speed rivals comparison where df was corrected by the dev.

Stallion Free said:
Here you go:
What are we watching here exactly, towards the right and behind the railing on the pc version I see a bit more shadow detail, but it appears there's a bit of inconsistency based on earlier screens in this thread.
 
Game runs 60fps even when im streaming it. Even better when I enable mantle but of course streaming is rather difficult with that renderer.
 
Why exactly would your controller preference be relevant in this thread? Can't you use the r1 for shooting in another controller config?

The answer is quite simple. To me, it is relevant. Especially since the differences in IQ are minor. Comparing the same game for PS4, PC and Xbox One is more than counting pixels and frames. The feel of the controller is important too, and I prefer the Xbox One controller for this game. Others might prefer the mouse or DS4.
 
Good tradeoff = playing the worst version of a game early.
I'd have gladly traded my PC or PS4 versions (double-dipped) if I could have played the game 6 months ago, even at 900p. It's that good. 1080p vs 900p is like nothing to me. A couple of shadows or frame drops doesn't matter to me, either. As long as it doesn't have horrific tearing or something jarring like that, I'm good. Six months earlier is huge. Best multi-player game of the year so far, one of the best in recent years too. Buy it! :D
 

Foxyone

Member
I had sent a message to Digital Foundry about people reporting better performance than their PC benchmark seemed to indicate (and I sent a few links to videos of a 770 doing over 100 FPS most of the time), and they messaged me back:

"Just got your message about PvZ via email but I can't find it in the messages! I've asked Dave B to look at this again. I think you're right. PvZ is a stripped back Frostbite (hence 792p BF4 on XO migrates to 900p PvZ) so a Core i5 with GTX 680 should be able to monster this game in exactly the way you suggest. Thanks for the message."

Kinda weirded out by the "792p" BF4 thing though :/
 

alexbull_uk

Member
I'm really impressed at how good the PS4 version looks. I can barely tell any difference between it and my PC, which is pretty impressive.
 
Drops with a 680? With my 770 playing at 1080p with all settings maxed out the game NEVER goes under 105 fps, usually 120 :p

I hear the game scales pretty well with lots of cores, so this benchmark might be not be too representative of what they should have got with a stock i5 (but there's not too many benchmarks to choose from):

900x900px-LL-a3fa479d_http--www.gamegpu.ru-images-stories-Test_GPU-Action-Plants_vs._Zombies_Garden_Warfare-test-PVZ_1920.jpeg

Has anyone posted any videos with a 680 or 770 in action? I've found a few on youtube:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kiQPFdQB00M

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnPxSxLawW8

Seem to spend most of the time over 100 FPS.

That first video is with a non-k i5 at only 3.2ghz , and a gtx770 is a gtx680 with brand new sticker for those who don't know :p


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8Kyi0WNg40

I'm guessing all the smug fuckers from the first 2 pages have already crawled back under the floor boards.

Meanwhile digital foundry wins with another garbage article getting tons of clicks

Horse armor always tricks at least a few people though:p

Better resolution and better performance.

DAT 1080p60fps experience.

And WOW @ PS4 > PC.
Yo Ethomaz, are you going to adress your earlier comment about performance? Seems you were quite wrong there.
Think you get some ammo = like a fly on honey
Evidence to the opposite in the same thread = not a peep suddenly, a deafening silence even.
 

Foxyone

Member
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8Kyi0WNg40

I'm guessing all the smug fuckers from the first 2 pages have already crawled back under the floor boards.

Meanwhile digital foundry wins with another garbage article getting tons of clicks

I think DF might take another look at their PC performance. The damage might be done though, with people thinking PS4 offers similar performance to a 680 in this game.

I actually also stumbled upon a video with a 680 + an overclocked quad-core CPU from 2008:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VP1hJoGw7WU

It still keeps over 100 FPS most of the time :/
 

Kaydan

Banned
The game was developed pre-10% kinect reserve boost on XB1 so a bigger disparity than usual was to be expected between the PS4 and XB1 version.
 

-MD-

Member
I've noticed the PC version frames drop when there are like 2 stink bombs and a few people on screen shooting.

It's pretty rare but it drops to like 30-40fps for 1-2 seconds when typically it runs 60fps 99.9% of the time. It could just be my hardware though, I run an i5/660ti and I have everything on ultra. The stuff on screen doesn't seem to warrant the frame drops though. Seems to only happen when there are multiple stink bombs and a battle is going down near or inside one.
 

Stallion Free

Cock Encumbered
What are we watching here exactly, towards the right and behind the railing on the pc version I see a bit more shadow detail, but it appears there's a bit of inconsistency based on earlier screens in this thread.

You can switch to the basic SSAO which is what the PS4 uses if you want. They are two different approaches to AO and I think Dice fails at both when compared to games implementing HBAO+, but those are the options they give us with the engine.
 
Top Bottom