4 fps = no discernible difference (in PS4's favor) on AC: Unity, but here it's interesting/fascinating/megaton? I appreciate the detail explored in other performance scenarios in this article, but the wording in some cases in some of the recent articles almost comes across as apologist for the Xbones shortcomings.
-
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.
Digital Foundry: GTA V PS4 and Xbox One compared in new frame-rate stress test.
- Thread starter Hanmik
- Start date
They have to dial back traffic/NPC for the 10% of less speed in the CPU? Have you drunk something?
Yeah, this isn't a big deal. People have gotten really obsessed about frame rates lately.
I'm going with GRRR. These boxes can't even get 30fps from a last gen game, so lame.
I guess I'll just wait 2 months...well mabey 12 months for a steam sale and some patches.
7DollarHagane
Banned
That minor CPU difference shouldn't matter that much.
Its probably a porting/optimization issue.
Its probably a porting/optimization issue.
Considering there are dips with no traffic on the screen and others that are the same on both consoles you can rule out the CPU as the cause.
Probably just a few instances of unoptimised code to be honest. They probably missed a few things while refactoring the code base for the x86 platforms.
This may just be my imagination, but I feel like the framerate drops are more severe when I'm driving really fast. If I'm walking/biking/driving slowly the framerate is fine. Anyone else notice this? I usually drive around in a super car so maybe thats why I've become more sensitive to the framearate?
shadowsdarknes
Member
Good thing they didn't need to do so.
Not sure what my posting history has to do with the game dropping frames while driving at high speeds. This is my first GTA V experience and I had a difficult time on the first couple chase missions because of the framerate. Or maybe I just suck at the game and want to blame the framerate, lol. Either way it was disappointing to see.
nkarafo
Member
Yes. Its just that my standards are higher than yours. I would normally except 60fps to be a standard by now. See i was spoiled by all these 60fps games we had, like, 2 generations ago. And they cant even keep up with 30. Which should be barely acceptable today anyway.
Well i'm no tech expert but months ago when it came out about the higher clock speed, many people on here were saying it would only amount to a small 3-4fps equivalent so maybe it does explain it.
Wow you sound pissed did a ps4 take a dump on your freshly cut grass.
iamaustrian
Member
Excuse my ignorance and tech-noobness but here is a question:
How is it possible that an enhanced last gen game runs that "bad" on platforms supposedly 10-15 times stronger?
Shouldn't it be locked 60ps(or at least locked 30fps) at 1080p?
I know that the last gen GTAs didn't exactly ran good by any means but this really baffles me. I mean, this isn't even a remake.
Wouldn't it be wiser to skip things like "double the draw distance" to get a this-gen worthy framerate?
How is it possible that an enhanced last gen game runs that "bad" on platforms supposedly 10-15 times stronger?
Shouldn't it be locked 60ps(or at least locked 30fps) at 1080p?
I know that the last gen GTAs didn't exactly ran good by any means but this really baffles me. I mean, this isn't even a remake.
Wouldn't it be wiser to skip things like "double the draw distance" to get a this-gen worthy framerate?
Those less prolonged fps drops on the xbone (whatever it means) could be caused to others factor: xbone use ddr 3 where in some case could give some advantages in the cpu work, compared the gddr5. I mean, some advantages could come from the more 'standard' hardware setup of the xbone, it's not that automatic how people supposed; even in AC Unity some issues could be caused for the same thing. I'm not expert, but it's not that automatic to understand what happen when an engine is understressed without develop tools.
Now everything it's the 10% of the overheated cpu. Hardly 10% of overheating gives a prominent contribution for the whole performance.
duessano
Member
High speed chases or extra grass
I know which is more important to me in a GTA game.
you mean high speed chases or gunfights and explosions.
If it was a straight port then yeah but they chose to improve the graphics considerably.
I would of preferred a straight 1080p/60fps port to be honest, the lst gen game was already a great looking game imo.
The Albatross
Member
It's not chugging at sub-30. Read the article or watch a video or play the game. It runs at 30FPS virtually 99% (perhaps more) of the time you are in the game, except falls momentarily below that a handful of minor, split-second times... Like when speeding through a specific intersection, or up a specific road at a specific time of day, or during a particular shootout in a particular area of the map with a lot of explosions, etc.
nkarafo
Member
yes. Unfortunately, most people have very low standards when it comes to frame rate. They would sacrifice a smooth frame rate that enchanches the experience in many ways for a few added visual effects and details.
rokkerkory
Member
Who said 10-15x stronger?
Gen.Grievous
Member
Just shows Naughty Dog is amazing. Double the res and double the framerate. And it's definitely the most consistent one from all the remasters.
It's both Microsoft's & Sony's fault for going with the same, weaker PC CPU in their consoles, to be honest.
They should've used CPU's that are just as powerful as PS3's, but ones that are more cheaper & developer friendly.
Teletraan1
Banned
The game stutters while driving around the city in a game called Grand Theft Auto. You dont need to spawn 10 jets to make the game struggle, it does just fine on its own during the basic gameplay element of the game that everyone will do.
Choppy framerate while driving takes me out of the game way more than any of the effects you posted previously put me into the game. That is the only way I can describe it. Seeing some of the gushing on this site about how the game looks I guess they made the right choice for some people. Not for me I guess.
Both versions struggle to various degrees. Would not hurt to dial both of them back so that you can do the basic thing you do in this game with some fluidity.
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
You are, easily, the most uninformed, uninteresting and salty Sony fanboy in recent times on this forum.
This is an open game, so spikes of unpredictable loads happens. And Jaguar cores are pretty weak.
What all of you try to present as a single 9% CPU overclock on Xone, is more like ~15% increased performance, given the memory setup for both consoles.
But the most funniest thing of those 2 days, is all that people being pretty happy with PS4 version having more grass here and there, when it's pretty obvious that the game was defined around Xone limitations, so they probably left enough GPU budget unused on PS4 for improving drastically the antialiasing or lighting. Hilarious.
It is not bandwidth. The xbox one holds 30 fps in other areas that look as complicated and bandwidth limitations tend to hurt in fillrate heavy scenes. It might help explain the drops during the shootouts but the lower peak fillrate does as well.
CPU are not as powerful as ps3. Where do you have read such bullshit? Cell give more performance in the graphic, but not means it's more powerful.
Agreed, love GTA 5 but when they charge this price for a remaster then I expect better. Wouldn't have minded if it was cheaper. I more dissapointed with the AA they are using. Most framerate woes are hyperbole with this game though. It seems solid most the time but that's no excuse and it really shouldn't be sub 30 at all! What I want from a remaster is just good imagine quality and frame rate. I'm not happy with the IQ and the fps shouldn't be dipping. Not worth the price they're asking for it.
They made a TON of changes to the visuals, though. This is very far from a straight port. Volumetric lighting and loads of POM textures aren't cheap.
This also explains the low traffic.
Let's face it guys: the amount of traffic you see in this GTA remaster is the MOST you will EVER see in a GTA game on these platforms.
It's only downhill from now: this is a remaster. Yet the traffic isn't up to par with how we were expecting it.
The true next-gen GTA will be way more demanding, hence less traffic.
Curious about the PC version.
Let's face it guys: the amount of traffic you see in this GTA remaster is the MOST you will EVER see in a GTA game on these platforms.
It's only downhill from now: this is a remaster. Yet the traffic isn't up to par with how we were expecting it.
The true next-gen GTA will be way more demanding, hence less traffic.
Curious about the PC version.
Explain in detail how the memory setup favours xbox one.
They really wanted that money saving apu, which means shitty AMD laptop tech. No ambition with these boxes, so different from 360 & ps3.
Possibly the one aspect would be the ability to access both system ram and esram at the same time.
But that would be it.
So what you're saying is that it experiences frame drops during gameplay intensive segments. Surely there's no problem with that in a video game?
You'll have to excuse my bag of salt, but I don't think it's unreasonable to get fed up with devs trying to shove as much stuff into their game as possible then forgetting to budget the polish, because polish is not marketable.
And this is a 60 dollar re-release of a game that came out last year. I don't want it to be good most of the time.
Did you even read what I said carefully? I never said that the CPU's inside Xbox One or PS4 are as powerful as PS3's; I just said that both companies should've used CPU's that are just as powerful as PS3's.
The PS3's CPU achieves 230.4 GFLOPS, max.
I doubt anyone really knows the answer to this, but would it have been possible for them to even get one of AMD's faster CPU's in the APU instead of the Jaguar cores? Or was it basically "Jaguar or bust"?
I'm not talking of bandwith but more of the memory setup. With the DDR3, cpu it's more easy to push, where GDDR5 could give some problem.
You said ps4 and xbone could use a cpu like the ps3, so I suppose you mean it was more powerful.
Pretty much what I thought to I would of rather them cut back a few thing's for better AA. Some area's it is really bad.
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
If anything, overheat degrades performance once throttle kicks in.
Don't dare to compare shitty Jaguars with almighty M68k.
If anything, overheat degrades performance once throttle kicks in.
Don't dare to compare shitty Jaguars with almighty M68k.
Seriously not even joking the Genesis and snes cpu's were awesome for the time period.
If anything, overheat degrades performance once throttle kicks in.
What it is supposed to mean?
They wanted small, cool apus to save money, so laptop cores were used. Jag was the best they had in that space.
Right, I understand that they wanted to go cheap and cool, but would it have been technically possible (without a LOT of extra work) for AMD to create an APU with a faster CPU and the same GPU as is currently used? Or was using Jaguar CPU's the best option without a year or so of extra work?
Before to ask if it was possible, should be ask to you how could been possible? I'm not an expert but I don't think it's that easy realize a new faster cpu without overheating problem, especially with such little dimensions.
That only applies to the GPU though so confers no advantage to the CPU making the claim that a 9% clock speed advantage has a 15% realworld advantage false unless he has a detail explination in some other area.
Not likely. GDDR5 does not have any inherant functional disadvantages compared to DDR3.
dr. apocalipsis
Banned
SNES cpu was like 1990s Jaguar core. PPU on the other hand...
That you have no clue of what are you talking about.
AMD just don't have the tech.
Tidus_Great
Banned
it runs at 30 FPS the majority of the time, quit being nitpicky. this is getting as bad as PC gamers with the nitpicking, i hate how this greater focus on tech has brought out the non gamers to scrutinize little details. Back in the ps1 and ps2 era we played games where characters looked like block people and they were some of the best games ever. Threads like this just need to be banned already.