• 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.

Infinity Ward confirms: CoD Ghost is 720p on Xbox One, 1080p on PS4

B

BruiserBear

Banned
wapplew said:
Well, what we see now might be mixture of both inferior hardware+inferior dev tools
Lets say PS4 power is 100%, and Xbone is 40% now because of both factor.
If they fix the tools, Xbone power might rise to 65%.
That way, some claim next COD will be 900p might be true.
Click to expand...

You're right to an extent, the XB1 tools are said to be behind the PS4, but tools only get you so far. The XB1's biggest problem is it's memory, and esRAM in particular. No tool improvements are going to change how much memory the XB1 can move through it's pipes, so that problem cannot be fixed. The only thing that can be done is make your game engine specifically so that it works around those weaknesses, but that is asking a lot from a third party developer. As we're seeing at launch, most of them won't be working around those weaknesses.

And that's just the memory problems. The GPU in the PS4 is simply more powerful. Nothing can ever make up that difference.

Marleyman said:
So those saying that ESRAM can be harnessed down the road are full of shit? If so, how do you know?
Click to expand...

I believe they are for the most part. Writing a game engine a certain way might help to go around some issues with the XB1 architecture, but at the end of the day you can't make something out of nothing. You can better utilize what you have, but you can't completely alter what you have. The PS4 has more to offer developers. Quite a bit more in fact, and I can assure you these launch games aren't utilizing everything they can on the PS4 either.
 
S

Skeff

Member
Amused said:
8S1HUvG.jpg



That makes sense now, does it?
Click to expand...

Can you not post random twitter posts from random people who know fuck all about games consoles?
 
H

Hanmik

Member
jschreier said:
I wouldn't be posting things like that if I weren't working on getting as much information as possible and reporting it.
Click to expand...

good to know.. I am at my normal workplace right now, but I also write for a small indpendent gaming site in my sparetime. I have no way of getting info.. but people like you should have the contacts.. I would just hope game journalists would do more.
 
M

Marleyman

Banned
BruiserBear said:
I believe they are for the most part. Writing a game engine a certain way might help to go around some issues with the XB1 architecture, but at the end of the day you can't make something out of nothing. You can better utilize what you have, but you can't completely alter what you have. The PS4 has more to offer developers. Quite a bit more in fact, and I can assure you these launch games are utilizing everything they can on the PS4 either.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the response. A few more questions; how do you know that this is the case? Do you have experience with ESRAM?
 
C

Curufinwe

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to.
Click to expand...

PS4 has a better GPU.

PS4 has much faster RAM, and no ESRAM bottleneck.

This has been known for months.
 
K

Knuf

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...

I think we already have the answer to this question: I remember a post here on GAF during E3, where someone said that he has been told from some IW dev there that CoD engine was ported to PS4 in like 15 days and they got 90fps right from the start, while took them 4 months porting it to Xbone and that build was initially running at 15 fps.
So everyone's assuming it's a performance factor because it's indeed what it is: the difference in maturity of devtools probably only amplifies this gap in power.
But since you are the journalist here, maybe you could help removing the "probably". :)
 
P

plagiarize

Banned
RoboPlato said:
In BF3 the UI got smaller as the resolution went higher.
Click to expand...

right. smaller UI doesn't remotely suggest lower rendering resolution. again, I'm not saying I think BF4 is using software scaling (I don't), I'm just saying there are reasons it might be, and we've seen games in the past use software scalers even when hardware scaling was available, for various reasons.
 
S

shinra-bansho

Member
BruiserBear said:
This is almost certainly known right now. The XB1's esRAM is a bottleneck on memory that the PS4 simply does not have. If a game engine utilizes a forward rendering solution (and many games do), that esRAM only allows the framebuffer to be 32mb, and that makes hitting 1080p very difficult.

The exclusive XB1 games may find ways around this, by customizing the engine to the XB1's weaknesses, as we're seeing with Forza, which runs at 1080p/60fps. But most devs are not going to go out of their way to work around the XB1's problems, so we're getting the results we're getting.
Click to expand...
I think you mean games using deferred rendering are having issues with fitting the framebuffer within the 32MB ESRAM at 1080p?
 
B

BruiserBear

Banned
Marleyman said:
Thanks for the response. A few more questions; how do you know that this is the case? Do you have experience with ESRAM?
Click to expand...

I'm not a developer at all, but I've read technical breakdowns for years on sites like Ars Technica, and Digital Foundry, to the point where I have a solid understanding of how this stuff works. Anyone who knows more than I do could certainly show up and knock down the things I'm saying, but I don't believe you'll see that happen.

shinra-bansho said:
I think you mean games using deferred rendering are having issues with fitting the framebuffer within the 32MB ESRAM at 1080p?
Click to expand...

Doh! Yes, thanks for the correction. ;)
 
S

Shahed

Member
sephi22 said:
These are dark times. People have posted things that are more insane while being 100% serious. I realize my fault though.
Click to expand...
Oh it definitely can be hard at times to tell the difference. There's usually at least one line that gives it away though. In this case having crushed blacks being an Xbox One exclusive feature was the main standout :p
 
S

Skeff

Member
x-Lundz-x said:
GAF > Internet (reddit ?) > GAF

The cycle of life indeed.

Also, anyone else notice the lack of talk about Xbox live compute from certain people these days? Maybe dem pixels can't be rendered in the clouds after all.
Click to expand...

yea, looks like Microsoft may not be 10 years ahead of nVidia in regards to cloud rendering after all, who would have thought it.
 
R

Raist

Banned
phosphor112 said:
Nothing irks me more than ignorance.

Can't stand stupidity.
Click to expand...

This type of people can't and won't get informed, sadly.

They can't possible accept that their favourite brand of console is fucked up this time around. So they'll just stick to reading stuff like mrxmedia's rubbish, which tells you for instance that HANA 2 (lolz) can even double FPS at no cost, even if it goes against all logic and reason.

They're a bit like creationists.
 
S

Shahed

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty obvious that the state of dev tools, the unfamiliarity with the system and the looming deadline were the main culprits.

Sure PS4 will always have an inherent performance and architecture advantage, but not to the degree of double and more performance. It's been hinted for months that XB1 tools are behind where they should while those for the PS4 were pretty good. The performance gap will more than likely lesson in time, but it will always be there
 
J

Jack_AG

Banned
Crakatak187 said:
Hahaha justification for having lower native res. Scaler is inferior!
Click to expand...

My PC sucks at scaling, too. It's the reason why I have to game in native 1080p on Ultra. Wait... are you telling me that Native res > Scaler? BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHHAHAAHAHAAHAHAAHH! I CANT! WAT IS THIS! HAHAHAHAHAHAAH.

Oh... you're serious?

HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHHAHA!

Am i doing it right?
 
N

Neuromancer

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...
I assume you're looking into it. I'd be interested to get some answers.
 
U

USC-fan

Banned
To be clear PS4 does have a hardware scaler.

http://www.vgleaks.com/orbis-displayscanout-engine-dce/

chrome acting weird so cant copy pate

CoG said:
Well, Xbox One has svogi version 1.4 where the PS4 has version 1.3. 1.4 added texticular occultation and narrowed the subpixel PWM depth rate from ~1.7Gf/s down to about ~1.2Gf/s (depending on which benchmark you believe). That along with the compressed vertex sparse tree matrix flyweight algorithm patented by MS and only in the Xbox One flavor of DX 11.2+ is going to give them a substantial bandwidth advantage once developers figure it all out. The November dev kits go out tomorrow so maybe too late for launch but E3 is going to be interesting :)
Click to expand...

Where is this info from? Sounds like its completely made up.

should be a ;) at the end...lol
 
Wishmaster92

Wishmaster92

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...
Hope you find something out, keep us posted.
CoG said:
Well, Xbox One has svogi version 1.4 where the PS4 has version 1.3. 1.4 added texticular occultation and narrowed the subpixel PWM depth rate from ~1.7Gf/s down to about ~1.2Gf/s (depending on which benchmark you believe). That along with the compressed vertex sparse tree matrix flyweight algorithm patented by MS and only in the Xbox One flavor of DX 11.2+ is going to give them a substantial bandwidth advantage once developers figure it all out. The November dev kits go out tomorrow so maybe too late for launch but E3 is going to be interesting :)
Click to expand...
wat
 
M

Mr.Speedy

Banned
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...

I thought it was pretty well known that the devtools were late and the ESRAM is terrible to work with? That seems like the most reasonable explanation.
 
D

Durante

Member
coldfoot said:
I don't know if I'm LTTP, but I see this Xbox scaler secret sauce FUD being stated by a bunch of posters, and it's time for some facts:

The PS3, PS4, 360, One ALL have hardware scalers. These scalers are simply GPU fixed-function blocks in all of them and they don't cost anything to use. The scalers are not separate chips, they're just a section inside the GPU.

The PS3's RSX has a hardware scaler that's shitty and broken as it cannot scale an image both vertically and horizontally. It can only scale horizontally. It's being used in such games like GT5 and Motorstorm Apocalypse (2D mode) where it stretches a 1280x1080 native render to 1920x1080, or at Wipeout where the resolution is dynamic but only scaled horizontally between 960x1080 through 1280x1080, 1600x1080 etc, only through the horizontal axis.

This means that any game that's not rendering at somethingx1080 or native 720p is being upscaled via software on the PS3. This includes all the COD games, GTA4, Crysis 2,3, etc. This is done at a minor cost to performance and more importantly memory, which is very precious on the PS3. This also explains why most PS3 games output at 720p, as there is no way to scale 720p to 1080p in hardware in the PS3 and it leaves it up to your TV to scale it. ANY SOURCE that's not 1080p that you watch on a 1080p TV is scaled to 1080p by your TV no matter what the input is, unless you letterbox it and use only half your TV to view it, which nobody does.

The lack of a proper scaler that works in both dimensions in the PS3 is also the reason why some games render at 480p when you don't have the 720p output option checked in the preferences, like some people did 8 years ago when there were many TV's that supported 1080i (1080i is the same resolution as 1080p, it's just not progressive) but not 720p. Uncharted 2 will render at 960x1080 and use the RSX's scaler if you disable 720p and enable 1080. Towards the end of the generation, most games on PS3 just used a software scaling solution that cost very little performance, and more importantly some memory. Also even very little performance can make a difference when you need all of it, obviously.

The Xbox 360 did not have any of these problems because the AMD GPU inside can scale any resolution to 1080p just fine.

The PS4 and Xbox One have the same hardware scalers that exist in ALL AMD 7xxx series cards and can scale any output resolution to 1080p (and maybe beyond to 4K). Those scaling hardware blocks are GPU components just like the CU's and ROPS.

The reason for the PS4 scaler FUD was due to DF not really knowing what they're talking about and saying this in their BF4 face-off:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-vs-pc-face-off-preview
"This should surely be a home run for Sony's console, but what is likely to be a software-based upscale to 1080p delivers less-than-stellar returns, and for better or worse leaves the Xbox One with an often crisper looking, albeit much more aliased image."

This DF quote, ladies and gentlemen, proves beyond a reasonable doubt, that DF DO NOT KNOW WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. DF looked at the Xbox One's incorrect gamma and sharpening filter, PS4 motion blur, and the FXAA solution in the PS4 version that slightly blurs textures and guessed immediately went Xbox super awesome scaler > PS4, which is false. They simply projected the scaling issues from the PS3 to the PS4 and incorrectly guessed that PS4 is doing a software upscale. THERE IS NOTHING COMMON ABOUT SCALING BETWEEN THE PS3 AND PS4, THEY USE DIFFERENT GPU VENDORS! All 7xxx series cards and APU's based on them have hardware scalers and developers have no reason to not use them as they're free.

As far as scaling games, both consoles have equivalent scalers. Only difference is MS can scale 3 different outputs, required for Game, UI, Snap, compared to 2 for PS4.

Sorry for the long read but this "DF software upscaler FUD" really pissed me off and I wanted to set things straight.
Click to expand...
I'll just quote this again, and add that the whole idea that you can distinguish between software and hardware scaling on a modern GPU based on the quality of the output is bullshit anyways. You can write a software scaling algorithm which creates a higher quality output than any hardware scaler I know of.
 
K

KMS

Member
shinra-bansho said:
I think you mean games using deferred rendering are having issues with fitting the frame buffer within the 32MB ESRAM at 1080p?
Click to expand...

Even Killzone 2 on the PS3 had a 36MB g-buffer. Maybe studios could adapt AMD's forward+ rendering techniques to get better performance as modern deferred rendering engines won't cut it for working around that small esram. Course that means taking the time of writing an entire new rendering path just to get more resolution. Wonder if studios will bother or just keep pumping out games at <=900p.
 
Dr. Kitty Muffins

Dr. Kitty Muffins

Member
Blobbers said:
People are forgetting that Microsoft has a deal with developers that no rival consoles may have more graphics than them. That means that the PS4 and XBox One version of Ghosts has the same amount of graphics. But keep in mind the PS4 is 1080p which means the graphics are stretched, while XBox One's 720p is the sweet spot and graphics are much closer together which gives a better-looking, more succinct experience.

In conclusion, if you run the same game on 1080p hardware and 720p hardware, the 720p will look way better. Now sprinkle that with some crushed blacks (XBox One exclusive feature) and the games look-not next-gen- but neo-gen (that's more than next-gen).

Hope this clears stuff up.
Click to expand...


Tell me more. Seriously. I want to know MORE. Lets get all your WISDOM in one place so we can SEE IT. Scale it if you have to. That way we we don't miss out on the FUN.
 
wapplew

wapplew

Member
Raist said:
This type of people can't and won't get informed, sadly.

They can't possible accept that their favourite brand of console is fucked up this time around. So they'll just stick to reading stuff like mrxmedia's rubbish, which tells you for instance that HANA 2 (lolz) can even double FPS at no cost, even if it goes against all logic and reason.

They're a bit like creationists.
Click to expand...

Ya, about that Hana thing, what tech those 120/240hz 3DTV use to make your movie look like TV drama?
Something add more frame something. Why don't console use those tech?
 
S

swordfishtrombones

Member
blame space said:
wait which version have the most graphics? I don't have time to read the whole thread.
Click to expand...

I'd go with the ZX Spectrum version; it renders at 256x192, but it uses Attribute Blocks of 8x8 pixels via 15 different color channels to upscale to 1080p. This means that the developers can focus fully on assets, with a theoretical upper limit of 49152 enemies (i.e. one per pixel).
 
H

Hanmik

Member
benny_a said:
Always with the specs. Why not come up with a new reason?

Specs specs specs, BORING. It's all about the Ryse gameplay.
Click to expand...

Dice is a Swedish company. In Sweden they have this law. (that is a real law)

If you release pigs into a acornwood (or a beechnutwood) mutually owned by you and at least one more, and exceeded your quota of allowed pigs, you will have to pay a fine for each each pig to the other owners and to restore any damages caused by the extra pigs.
Click to expand...

Bill Gates once released some pigs into a Dice Employees acornwood while he was in Sweden to buy some apples. Bill Gates never paid the fine. The Dice guy is now trying to ge this revenge.

Infinity Ward´s Mark Rubin. His name is an anagram for "Urbanism K".. that is actually a secret society against NSA. the rest is history..
 
T

Tsundere

Banned
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...

I think it's pretty straight forward.

PS4 has the hardware advantage, Xbox One struggles to maintain the same performance at the same resolution as PS4. Xbox One's tools aren't mature enough to make up for this difference; however, PS4's tools are also in their infancy and will further take advantage of the hardware as time goes by as well.

In other words, this won't change, PS4 will always have an advantage in some way or another (if devs utilize the hardware/tools to their best).
 
M

Marleyman

Banned
BruiserBear said:
I'm not a developer at all, but I've read technical breakdowns for years on sites like Ars Technica, and Digital Foundry, to the point where I have a solid understanding of how this stuff works. Anyone who knows more than I do could certainly show up and knock down the things I'm saying, but I don't believe you'll see that happen.
Click to expand...

That doesn't invalidate what you are saying. I guess we will have to wait and see.
 
P

phosphor112

Banned
Raist said:
This type of people can't and won't get informed, sadly.

They can't possible accept that their favourite brand of console is fucked up this time around. So they'll just stick to reading stuff like mrxmedia's rubbish, which tells you for instance that HANA 2 (lolz) can even double FPS at no cost, even if it goes against all logic and reason.

They're a bit like creationists.
Click to expand...

These guys are in for a rude awakening. It'll be interesting to see how they move from one "secret sauce" to another.
 
A

Amused

Member
jschreier said:
The more interesting question here - and something I don't think we know yet - is why the game runs at 720p on XB1 and 1080p on PS4. Now that's a question I want to find the answer to. Everyone's assuming the explanation is that IW had to sacrifice resolution to get the XB1 version performing well enough, and that might be the case, but there could be other factors here, too. Maybe they just got XB1 devtools late and didn't have enough time to acclimate.
Click to expand...


I agree. That is a very, very interesting question. I'm not going to say someone should ask it, because i know a lot of people have asked, I AM going to say that someone should bloody answer it, though.

Because I agree, the reasons for this being the case is a very interesting question indeed. That being said, the absolute unwillingness to answer questions is pretty god damn interesting as well. Why is this accepted?

Why are the gaming press allowing this, the whys, to be a non-story (it has been reported by some, yes) because Microsoft and the developers wants it to be a non-story?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

[Digital Foundry] Final Fantasy 14 Arrives on Xbox Series X/S + PS5 Update
Analysis Review
19
1K
Celcius replied
Infinity Ward could be working on CoD campaign focused on Ghost
News Rumor
6
633
Ghost of Caelid replied
  • Locked
Diablo IV will run at 4K/60 fps on Xbox Series X and 1080p/60 fps on Series S
News Platform
8
2K
DavidGzz replied
Ghost of Tsushima Director’s Cut PC cross-play and system requirements revealed. PlayStation overlay, cross-play, and Trophy support!
4 5 6 7 8
357
16K
IDappa replied
[IGN / NXGamer]: Star Wars: Jedi Survivor PS5 vs Xbox Series X|S Patch 7 Performance Review
3
4K
adamsapple replied
Top Bottom