• 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.

Tomb Raider Definitive Edition - PlayStation 4 = ~60fps, Xbox One = ~30fps

Status
Not open for further replies.

Atlas157

Member
Aug 24, 2013
3,720
0
0
29
Albuquerque, New Mexico
the difference in power on paper is much smaller than this game is indicating, the only thing might make sense is that the XO has a massive bottleneck(that will probably haunt it for the rest of its life), my bet is on the memory architecture.
I think the 32MB ESRAM in the XBO is too small of a frame buffer for 1080p in intense games.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.
 

iMax

Member
Dec 5, 2012
13,413
3
645
www.neogaf.com
I agree the difference between versions is likely due to both ease of development and the power differential so it's unlikely to be a bad port job as it's given adequate effort at least compared to its closest competitor
I honestly think as time goes on, the power differential is gonna be less significant as developers become more confident with Microsoft's tools and hardware. Irrelevant for Sony, as their tools are apparently fantastic.
 

Fredrik

Banned
Jun 27, 2005
7,344
0
0
Seems I bet on the right horse in this race. Not that I had much choice, seeing as I live in Tier Third World aka Sweden.
same here, it's laughable that Microsoft has failed this bad over here, Game even had christmas ads saying "Kommer lagom till julhandeln!", and the reason for the delay is rumored to be that they need to get Kinect working in Swedish... Why? How many into gaming over here can't say simple Kinect commands in english?
I had it preordered at first but dropped the preorder once I heard rumor about a late 2014 launch. I'll just stick with PS4 until the price drops or there are some must have titles available.
 

slapnuts

Junior Member
Apr 24, 2013
1,631
0
430
Chicago, IL USA
No, it really doesn't look very last gen at all. It just isn't the most graphically intensive next gen game, but there's nothing wrong with that. Titanfall looks quite good for a source title, a lot better than any source title I've ever seen. I think the geometry, art, particle effects and physics all look fairly solid. Titanfall is far from an ugly game.

That aside, we've been prepared for a while now that it possibly won't be 1080p, which I don't really have an issue with, because getting the performance right is important. I just hope it isn't a jag fest. That'd really detract from what I think is an otherwise pretty attractive looking game. Plus, it's a multiplayer title. I don't need the most mindblowing visuals. If I want to have my mind blown, I'll put in Ryse. Titanfall I expect will be a pretty solid release all around, and the leaked footage as of late has made me a whole lot more excited.



I think he is. :p
Im a long time 30+ year old sucker for visuals but man....Titanfall is not a looker in my book..it clearly looks like a last-gen title imho. Granted though, it is a dedicated online multiplatform game to its fullest so that also explains the some-what lackluster candy.
 
Jun 27, 2010
41,275
0
0
Someone simplify this for me. Is this going to become a PS2 / Xbox gulf in terms of performance?

because of it is, what the hell have MS done. It's insane that they've allowed such a huge power gap in favour of PS4 to happen...
 

dragonelite

Member
Mar 9, 2010
12,132
0
0
The 1080p thing is nice, did not expect the fps difference so big.
Hope its 30~40 and 50~60 fps would be nice. That seems about right given the on paper specs.
 

GameAddict411

Member
Aug 4, 2013
5,494
0
0
Well, if you take in to account the Xbox One's GPU reserve….it's really not "much smaller" at all. And this is not factoring in the PS4's considerably higher bandwidth GDDR5 ram, and the fact that there's more of it to play around with, due to less of an OS reserve.
I know that damn well, the difference in processing power(counting the 10% reserve in the XO GPU) is around 56%; this game is showing around 100%.
 

iMax

Member
Dec 5, 2012
13,413
3
645
www.neogaf.com
Im a long time 30+ year old sucker for visuals but man....Titanfall is not a looker in my book..it clearly looks like a last-gen title imho. Granted though, it is a dedicated online multiplatform game to its fullest so that also explains the some-what lackluster candy.
Are you basing this off the alpha? Bear in mind that's running textures at 0.25x.
 

BigTnaples

Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Feb 10, 2011
13,457
3
0
I honestly think as time goes on, the power differential is gonna be less significant as developers become more confident with Microsoft's tools and hardware. Irrelevant for Sony, as their tools are apparently fantastic.

Not going to happen. Even if ms tools and hardware architecture are really problem, there is still a huge difference in actual hardware, and the ps4 is a significantly more powerful machine. What you're doing is hoping for a miracle that will never come. If anything, the gap is going to widen.
 

SwiftDeath

Member
May 31, 2013
23,627
0
0
I honestly think as time goes on, the power differential is gonna be less significant as developers become more confident with Microsoft's tools and hardware. Irrelevant for Sony, as their tools are apparently fantastic.
The idea that the PS4 SDK and tools will not improve at a similar rate to MS's is baseless, we have no clear idea who has more overhead potential for improving their ease of use although if you want to go with what is known currently from a hardware perspective the PS4 has the easier architecture but you can't simply assume XB1 SDK will greatly improve while the PS4 will stagnate simply because it's much easier to program for currently.

A significant portion of the XB1's SDK problems are due to ESram issues from the little I've read and that's a hardware problem as well as a software one. It's a complex solution that adds little real benefit.

I have serious doubts the gap is going to close in any significant way especially considering the hardware differences that are present
 

DemonNite

Member
Apr 15, 2007
2,637
0
0
When the true next gen Tomb Raider comes out and is 30fps on both, the PS4 will feel like a downgrade. Xbox wins again.

Joking aside, I heard about this a while ago but they were hopeful to get both the same at the time. Oh well
 

NullPointer

Member
May 4, 2006
44,304
2
0
San Francisco
3.5 hours and 3.5 thousand posts in this thread already.
I forgot how megatonne-ish these FPS disparity threads can be.
I find that GAF thread size is a function directly proportional to the sum of spin and misdirection and obfuscation used in the run-up marketing of these consoles and games.

Basically, what we're witnessing is the natural Karmic process unfolding and unwinding us towards equilibrium between marketing hype and the real world. You could also refer to this most recent of phenomena as the Penello effect.

Boom, statistics from Perkel:
As expected there's no discernable difference.
 
Sep 24, 2011
23,596
0
0
Brittanialand
Boom, statistics from Perkel:

Xbone: 1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
Xbone: 768 Shaders
Xbone: 48 Texture units
Xbone: 16 ROPS
Xbone: 2 ACE/ 16 queues

PS4: 1.84TF GPU ( 18 CUs) for games + 56%
PS4: 1152 Shaders +50%
PS4: 72 Texture units +50%
PS4: 32 ROPS + 100%
PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues +400%
 

nib95

Banned
Feb 26, 2007
34,618
2
0
I know that damn well, the difference in processing power(counting the 10% reserve in the XO GPU) is around 56%; this game is showing around 100%.
But then the PS4's GPU has a higher performance ceiling for 1080p, and on top of that you have nearly 3x the memory bandwidth (for the bulk of the memory), and an extra 1GB of memory to play with too.
 

Cyborg

Member
Aug 21, 2009
5,433
527
1,035
Netherlands
Boom, statistics from Perkel:

Xbone: 1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
Xbone: 768 Shaders
Xbone: 48 Texture units
Xbone: 16 ROPS
Xbone: 2 ACE/ 16 queues

PS4: 1.84TF GPU ( 18 CUs) for games + 56%
PS4: 1152 Shaders +50%
PS4: 72 Texture units +50%
PS4: 32 ROPS + 100%
PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues +400%
Whaaaaaaaat? Is junior right ?
 

jayu26

Member
Feb 24, 2013
6,359
0
400
Brampton, ON
When the true next gen Tomb Raider comes out and is 30fps on both, the PS4 will feel like a downgrade. Xbox wins again.

Joking aside, I heard about this a while ago but they were hopeful to get both the same at the time. Oh well
How long ago did you hear this? I just want to know how long has this been true for this game.
 

iMax

Member
Dec 5, 2012
13,413
3
645
www.neogaf.com
Not going to happen. Even if ms tools and hardware architecture are really problem, there is still a huge difference in actual hardware, and the ps4 is a significantly more powerful machine. What you're doing is hoping for a miracle that will never come. If anything, the gap is going to widen.
The idea that the PS4 SDK and tools will not improve at a similar rate to MS's is baseless, we have no clear idea who has more overhead potential for improving their ease of use although if you want to go with what is known currently from a hardware perspective the PS4 has the easier architecture but you can't simply assume XB1 SDK will greatly improve while the PS4 will stagnate simply because it's much easier to program for currently.

A significant portion of the XB1's SDK problems are due to ESram issues from the little I've read and that's a hardware problem as well as a software one. It's a complex solution that adds little real benefit.

I have serious doubts the gap is going to close in any significant way especially considering the hardware differences that are present
Not disputing that PS4 is more powerful. Those are facts. There's no argument to be had there whatsoever.

I'm saying that based off what I've heard, the development tools for the PS4 are far more matured than those for the Xbox One. I fully expect Microsoft's tools (and developers architectural understanding) to improve at a faster rate than Sony's. They've got more headroom to work with.
 

Jack cw

Member
Mar 14, 2006
8,680
0
0
Bavaria
Whaaaaaaaat? Is junior right ?
Pretty much, yes. This is basically what the specs on paper are. You'll notice that the PS4 is build for 1080p. Still great to hear that this edition runs with 60fps and 1080p on PS4. I guess all the tech guys here were on point when they claimed that with the small ESRAM it would be pretty hard to render 1080p60fps for more complex games.
EDIT: That 400% number should actually be 300% on the ACE and queues.
 

Quadraphonic

Member
Mar 23, 2010
4,893
0
660
Woodland Hills
The idea that the PS4 SDK and tools will not improve at a similar rate to MS's is baseless, we have no clear idea who has more overhead potential for improving their ease of use although if you want to go with what is known currently from a hardware perspective the PS4 has the easier architecture but you can't simply assume XB1 SDK will greatly improve while the PS4 will stagnate simply because it's much easier to program for currently.

A significant portion of the XB1's SDK problems are due to ESram issues from the little I've read and that's a hardware problem as well as a software one. It's a complex solution that adds little real benefit.

I have serious doubts the gap is going to close in any significant way especially considering the hardware differences that are present
I think they're working off of "The Biggest Loser" logic.

As in, fat people have a lot more extra weight to lose, so dropping 15 lbs in a week isn't a big deal for someone at 350 lbs compared to someone at 175.

But that's a false equivalency since there is no upper limit for consoles.
 

SenjutsuSage

Member
Jan 23, 2010
9,850
1,275
970
Speak for yourself. If I was an Xbox One only owner, I'd much prefer 1080p/30fps over 720p/60fps. Didn't you say in another thread you don't even game on a 1080p screen anyway?
You read wrong. My PC monitor isn't 1080p. All my televisions, however, are all 1080p. I just don't mind devs making their console titles at lower resolutions than 1080p. I much prefer for devs to lower the resolution on the Xbox One version, so they can get more out of the system, as opposed to trying to run at 1080p, just to say they released both games at 1080p. We've known for awhile now that the GPU on the Xbox One would be best at lower resolutions. I hate the thought of games being gimped to reach 1080p. I much prefer a more impressive at lower resolutions. The PS4 doesn't have this same issue thanks to the GPU.

I don't think most xbox one owners would want games gimped to achieve 1080p. 30fps vs 60fps is, to me, a bigger deal than 720p vs 1080p or 900p vs 1080p. I don't expect others to agree, but that's my take.
 

iMax

Member
Dec 5, 2012
13,413
3
645
www.neogaf.com
Yeah i might be a bit too hasty with my opinion. I shouldn't of posted that just yet, my bad because i do understand that alphas are not representatives of the retail.
Well Respawn's been saying from the outset that the Alpha is just there to test their net code, pretty much. I think you'll be pleasantly surprised :)
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Mar 20, 2007
20,961
0
0
Someone simplify this for me. Is this going to become a PS2 / Xbox gulf in terms of performance?

because of it is, what the hell have MS done. It's insane that they've allowed such a huge power gap in favour of PS4 to happen...
Seemingly larger than last gen but less than Original Xbox/PS2 gen.

Though the gen is still early (obviously). Don't know how things will play out months/years from now.
 
Apr 20, 2005
3,984
5
1,460
Seemingly larger than last gen but less than Original Xbox/PS2 gen.

Though the gen is still early (obviously). Don't know how things will play out months/years from now.
Agree for most part, but I'm leaning more towards original xbox/ps2 gap at this point.
 

Raist

Banned
Jan 27, 2007
24,543
0
0
He told us a lot of things before promptly disappearing after the launch.

I figured he was a clown the second he was trying to defend the cut in launch-window countries, saying that it was still launching in more countries than the 360 did, despite that cut.

I pointed out to him that this was a mistake, he insisted that it wasn't, linking himself a wiki article listing launch territories and dates. A list of 8 entries, one of them being "Europe". Since the 360 launched in most of Europe, unlike the XB1, I obviously pointed out that, no, it won't launch in more countries then.

His defense was that he's getting old and is not very good at geography. For the director of product planning, who's been gloating about the fact that he's been with the XB division since pretty much day 1, that's freaking hilarious.

edit: here it is

The program is in great shape, and nothing happening is really much different from the last three launches I've worked on - except we live in a world where information flows much more freely. Last generation, Xbox 360 launched in 3 countries, with another 8 following. So a 13 country launch is still more than Xbox 360.
Might wanna mention that the 360 launched in 20+ more countries (basically the whole of geographical europe) only a couple of weeks after US/JP launches maybe.
Since I'm old and my memory goes, I went to Wikipedia on this one. According to that, we were in 11 countries before the end of the year we launched. We rolled out another 15 the following year. So 13 in one year beats that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xbox_360_launch

This time it's complicated by our need to have deep voice recognition. So it's not apples-to-apples with the amount of work needed to launch a territory.

Anyway, hope that helps. Not that this had anything to do with our new policies around region-locking, which I think are awesome and should help out our European customers in particular greatly.
"Eurozone" is not a country, it's 17 countries. If for some reason you want to count it as one country, then do it for the xbox one too, in which case it will launch in 7.35 countries (six of the first launch wave are part of the eurozone, so that's 35% of that zone only). Because counting 17 as 1 or 6 of these 17 as 6 depending on the console is a bit misleading.
#geographyfail.

I stand corrected. I'll make sure the internal teams are aware of this too.



On that note, it's quite interesting that 2 months post-launch, there's still zero update about countries other than the original 13.
 

Superman

Member
Aug 22, 2013
797
0
0
Will definitely try now. For one reason or another I skipped the PS3 version. 1080p 60fps has grabbed my attention. More of these versions please! (Cheaper than £40 would be better though)
 

SenjutsuSage

Member
Jan 23, 2010
9,850
1,275
970
Not disputing that PS4 is more powerful. Those are facts. There's no argument to be had there whatsoever.

I'm saying that based off what I've heard, the development tools for the PS4 are far more matured than those for the Xbox One. I fully expect Microsoft's tools (and developers architectural understanding) to improve at a faster rate than Sony's. They've got more headroom to work with.
I don't entirely agree. The PS4 has a lot of headroom for GPU compute with all the ALU resources. There's HSA or hUMA style development benefits that will come, and then there's just the commonly expected growth that you expect out of every console. The Xbox One, I'm certain, has some impressive room to grow also, but I wouldn't necessarily say who will progress at a faster rate, or who has more headroom to work with. An argument can be made for both sides. Xbox One due to the known challenges that don't hamper the PS4 to the same degree, and on the PS4 side, there's all the GPU compute potential that even Cerny himself stated would take years for devs to grasp. Either way, xbox one and ps4 owners will be well served in the years to come.
 

Parapraxis

Member
Jan 15, 2009
1,521
1
760
I find that GAF thread size is a function directly proportional to the sum of spin and misdirection and obfuscation used in the run-up marketing of these consoles and games.

Basically, what we're witnessing is the natural Karmic process unfolding and unwinding us towards equilibrium between marketing hype and the real world. You could also refer to this most recent of phenomena as the Penello effect.
Side effects for some may include:

Frenzied Cachinnate
Spontaneous Nasal/Oral Water Spraying
Tender Costae

and others

Sodium Chloride Lacrimation
Gluteus Maximus Smarting
 

Jack cw

Member
Mar 14, 2006
8,680
0
0
Bavaria
Agree for most part, but I'm leaning more towards original xbox/ps2 gap at this point.
Its pretty much equivalent to the PS2/xbox in terms of power and performance. While detail is nearly identical, the difference in resolution and/or framerate is significant. While res is only important for the image quality, framerate is something that influences the game rather heavily and rate the framerate difference as way more important than resolution.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
Mar 20, 2007
20,961
0
0
30fps vs 60fps is, to me, a bigger deal than 720p vs 1080p or 900p vs 1080p. I don't expect others to agree, but that's my take.
I feel the same way when it comes to more fast paced games like sports. I'm fine with this news about Tomb Raider for the most part.

I have no choice either way though considering I don't own a PS4 yet.
 

Dictator93

Member
Jun 29, 2011
23,812
4
660
Perkel is only a junior because he was junior'd at some point for some reason (thread post I think).

But even then, it is irrelevant if he is a junior.
 

DracoBlade

Member
Jun 2, 2013
1,903
0
0
San Francisco, CA
You read wrong. My PC monitor isn't 1080p. All my televisions, however, are all 1080p. I just don't mind devs making their console titles at lower resolutions than 1080p. I much prefer for devs to lower the resolution on the Xbox One version, so they can get more out of the system, as opposed to trying to run at 1080p, just to say they released both games at 1080p. We've known for awhile now that the GPU on the Xbox One would be best at lower resolutions. I hate the thought of games being gimped to reach 1080p. I much prefer a more impressive at lower resolutions. The PS4 doesn't have this same issue thanks to the GPU.

I don't think most xbox one owners would want games gimped to achieve 1080p. 30fps vs 60fps is, to me, a bigger deal than 720p vs 1080p or 900p vs 1080p. I don't expect others to agree, but that's my take.
I find your tag quite relevant to your points.
 
Apr 20, 2005
3,984
5
1,460
Its pretty much equivalent to the PS2/xbox in terms of power and performance. While detail is nearly identical, the difference in resolution and/or framerate is significant. While res is only important for the image quality, framerate is something that influences the game rather heavily and rate the framerate difference as way more important than resolution.
You may be right, but I guess we'll see as this gen progresses. For me, personally, I view the gap between xone/ps4 far greater than the gap between 360/ps3.

Edit - oh never mind, you're agreeing with me, right? LOL. But yeah, I view the gap between ps2/xbox very similar to ps4/xone
 

SenjutsuSage

Member
Jan 23, 2010
9,850
1,275
970
That's what happens when you stick a 32mb frame buffer into a console and expect modern engines to cope with it.
So unbalanced.
I'm always surprised when people blame the ESRAM. I think it's getting blamed for things where I think it isn't even the biggest factor.

This boils down to GPU strength, pure and simple. Xbox One could have 64 or even 128MB of ESRAM, and I think the result would be the exact same here. The stronger GPU is always going to win at the exact same resolution. The devs should have opted to lower the resolution to 900p on the xbox one version to improve performance imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.