-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
What's the best for Xbox One .. lower graphics or lower resolution ?
- Thread starter Contra11
- Start date
- Status
JustinJ004
Banned
Breaking News: Xbox One owners prefer graphic settings over resolution!
Quelle surprise...
Quelle surprise...
ComputerMKII
Banned
1) 60 fps
2) 1080p
3) Everything else
2) 1080p
3) Everything else
killatopak
Member
It does not. We're not basing it off initial games but on permanent hardware installed on the systems. There's nothing else that MS could do to mitigate the fact that the PS4 has more potential to be better when every other metric of the systems the PS4 is winning sans CPU clock speed.
By the time the devs on Xbox One has come to grips with the system so should they in the PS4. The gap will never close because it wasn't meant to be.
If you bought the Xbox One to showcase it's better graphics than the competition then I think you bet on the wrong horse. What it does have going for it is the media options that it has which I think is a dice roll if it will ever win the general consumer. But when you try to argue the graphical capabilities of these machines on an enthusiast forum then this wouldn't really end up nice for the Xbox One.
Seriously, no need to argue this if you really enjoy the games. I know I would buy the console at least for the exclusives.
BuggeryBugz
Member
Resolution.
I don't play multiplatform games on my X1 whilst playing the same game on a PS4, side by side to see the minor differences.
Have they said the resolution and fps of halo 5? 900p 60fps would be my bet.
I don't play multiplatform games on my X1 whilst playing the same game on a PS4, side by side to see the minor differences.
Have they said the resolution and fps of halo 5? 900p 60fps would be my bet.
qa_engineer
Member
I predict this thread closing shortly. The subject matter will only lead to bans.
Dee Dah Dave
Member
900p should be the lowest they go to with decent AA, if more performance is needed beyond that then graphics effects should take a hit.
720p should be banned.
720p should be banned.
Except that example is terrible cause it uses only perfect IQ/AA.. Sure with a perfect AA, 900p must be fine. But this is not what we have with next gen games, faaaaar from it.
Ryse works with smoke and mirrors, and hide every problems with intensive motion blur. Captures in the screenshot thread looks like a mess. Also wake up, Crytek is a champ at putting his immense money where you see it, and optimizing what you see on screen. Ryse is a reaaalllly controlled environment.
Look at any other games, Colof, Battlefield, ACIV... where the lower resolution gives you a clear graphic disadvantage.
That said, based on the resolution captures drama etc.. i'd say they should go for lower res cause most people seems good at not seeing the diff!
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Lol at people in this thread still trying to make it seem as if the One is on even ground with the PS4. It's not. End of story. Move on.
I own them both, and Ryse was the first Nextgen game I completed. That said, it's quite obvious now that the PS4 has a huge power lead on the One.
By this time next year, this will be even more obvious, with things like Uncharted, Fallout 4, the next CoD, Driveclub, the Order, Second Son, etc. being showcased/Released.
I own them both, and Ryse was the first Nextgen game I completed. That said, it's quite obvious now that the PS4 has a huge power lead on the One.
By this time next year, this will be even more obvious, with things like Uncharted, Fallout 4, the next CoD, Driveclub, the Order, Second Son, etc. being showcased/Released.
EYEL1NER
Member
Alright, this got me pretty good.
travisbickle
Member
There's two consoles competing against each other (tech wise). In every conceivable scenario, one of the consoles was going to be less powerful. These threads were bound to happen.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Nope. Its an opinion and one I disagree with. Killzone looks at least as good and plays better to boot.
Caayn
Member
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Wait a second... How did you get these screenshots?
Did you just downsampled 1080p to 900p and then upscaled using image editing program? Do you know what you are essentially giving them supersampling this way?
This is not how games look in the end.
And even if you took both screenshots at their real resolutions, upscaling with image editors will always look better than real time hardware upscaler on a console. I can give you real examples once I get home, if people need them here.
You would be right on all counts.
Not really, Ryse (even Quantum Break) invalidates this part so no, its not obvious until the games show it. Some of the most technically proficient devs have come out and said the opposite. I doubt anyone is arguing that Xbox One is equal on paper, but that it can output games that can easily stand up next to the best PS4 has to offer.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
PS4 Gpu:
1156 Shaders
18 Compute Units
32 ROPS
Xbox One Gpu:
768 Shaders
12 Compute Units
16 ROPS
And Killzone runs at 1080p (2,073,600 pixels) vs Ryse 900p (1,440,000).
44% more and maintains a better framerate to boot.
Of course it can. Just not at the same resolution.
sleeping_dragon
Banned
Lmao at Xbox One game looking better than the PS4 games. Dream on.
BigTnaples
Todd Howard's Secret GAF Account
Sure. A skilled dev like Crytek can make a great looking game on inferior hardware, that does not mean that it is still not inferior.
Take the same game, same devs, only difference hardware, and you get 720p vs 1080p right off the bat at launch. That is not on paper, I can play them in my living room and see the difference.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
Devs who are working on Xbox One console exclusives or havent worked on Playstation hardware before, sure.
EtherMagic
Member
As far as your "Ryse" comment.. My brother owns both systems (he bought 2 PS4's, and one Xbox One), he is a technical geek as far as graphics, such as shadowing, lighting, textures, etc. He literally buys the same 2 games for the Xbox 360 and PS3 just to compare them (still to this day!!!), and I can tell you right now, his life style has not changed with this new generation.
This is exactly what he told me considering the Graphics on Killzone compared to Ryse", and I quote from my phone text messages...
"Killzone has better lighting and shadowing, while Ryse has better Textures and character modeling and animations. Overall Ryse is the more impressive game, graphically".
My brother also stated... He could not get over the fact of how realistic the character models in Ryse looked!
For those on this forum who own both consoles/games, I have been seeing the same comments regarding Killzone vs Ryse, opinions on this subject seem universal at this point, supporting the fact that Ryse is the superior game graphically .
.
.
You didn't address the point he was rebuffing.
But remember that the XB1 GPU is clocked 6.75% higher. Not a huge difference, but it's equivalent to having 820 shaders, ~13 compute units, and 17 ROPs at the same clock speed as the PS4.
Fattony12000
Member
I love graphics that know how to get low.
As far as your "Ryse" comment.. My brother owns both systems (he bought 2 PS4's, and one Xbox One), he is a technical geek as far as graphics, such as shadowing, lighting, textures, etc. He literally buys the same 2 games for the Xbox 360 and PS3 just to compare them (still to this day!!!), and I can tell you right now, his life style has not changed with this new generation.
This is exactly what he told me considering the Graphics on Killzone compared to Ryse", and I quote from my phone text messages...
"Killzone has better lighting and shadowing, while Ryse has better Textures and character modeling and animations. Overall Ryse is the more impressive game, graphically".
My brother also stated... He could not get over the fact of how realistic the character models in Ryse looked!
For those on this forum who own both consoles/games, I have been seeing the same comments regarding Killzone vs Ryse, opinions on this subject seem universal at this point, supporting the fact that Ryse is the superior game graphically .
.
.
Your brother is a technical fellow, right? Damn it Penello.
480p at 120 FPS son!
DonMigs85
Member
As far as your "Ryse" comment.. My brother owns both systems (he bought 2 PS4's, and one Xbox One), he is a technical geek as far as graphics, such as shadowing, lighting, textures, etc. He literally buys the same 2 games for the Xbox 360 and PS3 just to compare them (still to this day!!!), and I can tell you right now, his life style has not changed with this new generation.
This is exactly what he told me considering the Graphics on Killzone compared to Ryse", and I quote from my phone text messages...
"Killzone has better lighting and shadowing, while Ryse has better Textures and character modeling and animations. Overall Ryse is the more impressive game, graphically".
My brother also stated... He could not get over the fact of how realistic the character models in Ryse looked!
For those on this forum who own both consoles/games, I have been seeing the same comments regarding Killzone vs Ryse, opinions on this subject seem universal at this point, supporting the fact that Ryse is the superior game graphically .
.
.
The PS4 would likely run Ryse at 1080p and with a better framerate if it wasn't a moneyhatted exclusive.
symmetrical
Member
That's not how it works. Gpu speed doesn't magically produce more physical conpute units.
That's like saying overclocking a quad core i5 6.75% makes it like a 5 core processor.
Even then, 10% is dedicated to kinect, so by your logic it really has 738 shaders ~11 CUs and 15ROPs.
Melchiah
Member
Fair Trial
Member
Lowering graphical details/effects is better.
Non-native resolutions make things ugly.
Non-native resolutions make things ugly.
Actually it's not. There is a 518,400 pixel difference between 720p and 900p, and a 633,600 pixel difference between 900p and 1080p. Maybe you meant a bigger jump perceptually, which I'd probably agree with.
This thread is embarrassing.
Its like your all trying to support your purchase with pixel counts and throwing numbers around what you guys don't even mean.
hUMA is a proprietary protocol for unified memory access. Guess what, both consoles have unified memory access. The Xbox even has 4 DMA's with eSRAM and DDR sharing the same page tables.
Both consoles can do GPGPU although the PS4 is more tailored to it. The X1 has a slightly different approach regarding architecture with elements like SHAPE and those 15 co-processors.
ROPs get fueled by memory input and memory input only, a clock speed increase also increases the ROPs. eSRAM is perfect for post and ROPs but lacks the space needed for a full frame with high z buffer to fit in there. Hence the 4 DMAs.
Swings and roundabouts folks. Its no lie that the architecture is harder to extract power from in the X1. Look at the comparisons of launch games for instance. Personally, I don't see a massive difference going forward for both, NFS for example. Im looking forward to the next years with both of the next gen consoles.
Its like your all trying to support your purchase with pixel counts and throwing numbers around what you guys don't even mean.
hUMA is a proprietary protocol for unified memory access. Guess what, both consoles have unified memory access. The Xbox even has 4 DMA's with eSRAM and DDR sharing the same page tables.
Both consoles can do GPGPU although the PS4 is more tailored to it. The X1 has a slightly different approach regarding architecture with elements like SHAPE and those 15 co-processors.
ROPs get fueled by memory input and memory input only, a clock speed increase also increases the ROPs. eSRAM is perfect for post and ROPs but lacks the space needed for a full frame with high z buffer to fit in there. Hence the 4 DMAs.
Swings and roundabouts folks. Its no lie that the architecture is harder to extract power from in the X1. Look at the comparisons of launch games for instance. Personally, I don't see a massive difference going forward for both, NFS for example. Im looking forward to the next years with both of the next gen consoles.
killatopak
Member
As far as your "Ryse" comment.. My brother owns both systems (he bought 2 PS4's, and one Xbox One), he is a technical geek as far as graphics, such as shadowing, lighting, textures, etc. He literally buys the same 2 games for the Xbox 360 and PS3 just to compare them (still to this day!!!), and I can tell you right now, his life style has not changed with this new generation.
This is exactly what he told me considering the Graphics on Killzone compared to Ryse", and I quote from my phone text messages...
"Killzone has better lighting and shadowing, while Ryse has better Textures and character modeling and animations. Overall Ryse is the more impressive game, graphically".
My brother also stated... He could not get over the fact of how realistic the character models in Ryse looked!
For those on this forum who own both consoles/games, I have been seeing the same comments regarding Killzone vs Ryse, opinions on this subject seem universal at this point, supporting the fact that Ryse is the superior game graphically .
.
.
It looks better sure but does it play better? It can only look that good in corridors and on lower fps. I could play Skyrim on PC that looks so realistic with 1 FPS. Sure it looks good but does that mean I can play it well? Killzone isn't just good because of its shadows but also because it's semi-open world, and has a higher frame rate and resolution going for it.
That's why I hate comparing 1st party titles. It's hard to compare when most of it is not the same on the other 1st party title. Now on 3rd parties it is easier to compare since it shares all the things used on the other platform.
ShadowkillXNA
Member
But overclocking a 4 core processor by 25% will give it equivalent performance to a 5 core processor in perfectly threaded scenarios.
In the same way, 16 ROPs at 854MHz will have the same throughput as 17 ROPs at 800MHz.
Just comparing the number of physical units is useless. It's like comparing a 4 core CPU to a 2 core CPU and saying the 4 core CPU is twice as fast even though it has half the clock rate. Obviously it's not that extreme in this situation.
really?
C'mon I'd be great! Prone to evil. But great.
symmetrical
Member
No it won't, a 5 core processor with all 5 cores at 3.8ghz will outperform a 4 core processor at 4ghz if the program uses all 5 cores.
Digital Foundry dreamed Ryse was the best looking next gen game for them right?
What where? Not at all if your speaking about Crytek. I think everyone agrees XO not as powerful as PS4, but not the huge gaping difference your implying, there isnt a game that proves this yet (those 3rd party games dont show this "huge gap" and 1st party close that gap promptly)
CD Project would like to have a word with you. Theyve not worked on either console before
samurai1226
Member
As long as the Framebuffer is 1080p, everything is fine. Cryteks upscaler in Ryse is absolutey amazing.
maybe ryse would run better on ps4, but nevertheless has the xbox one launched with the graphically most amazing title ever (or at least on same level as killzone SF) - If there will be huge differences in 2-3 years when the one is maybe at the limit and ps4 can still power on, then we should talk about it then
The difference is more the missing AA then the resolution. also we should wait how the multiplatformers outside the launch window will look like. i dont think that the developers spend whole lot of time into their one and ps4 version. its impossible that ryse runs in 900p with AA smooth but something like CoD runs in 720p.AC4
DonMigs85
Member
No, he's saying that hypothetically, overclocking a quad core processor by 25% effectively grants it a "bonus" virtual 5th core in terms of the performance gain compared to the stock clock speed.
Always-honest
Banned
It's very debatable. And you know it. It's a shame fanboys like you ruin threads.
Considering the difference between 3.8 and 4 GHz is only 5%, not 25% like I said, I'd hope so. A 4 core CPU at 4.4 GHz should be roughly equal to a 5 core CPU at 3.5 GHz.
I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not trying to say the XB1 outperforms the PS4. Just that the PS4 doesn't have 2x the ROP throughput just because it has twice the ROPs. It's more like 1.88x due to the XB1's higher clock speed.
Digital Foundry: "The comparison in image quality is striking: The 900p framebuffer and sharpening filter result in broken sub-pixel details on the Xbox One compared to the PS4 game."
- Status