• 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.

Trials Fusion runs at 1080/60 on PS4, 900/60 on Xbox One

Bsigg12

Member
I legitimately would like to listen to the devs talk about the differences here. Full on technical talk not just ho humming the differences. Could be really insightful
 
Is MS just going to have to donate a half dozen of their engineers to every studio for this gen, to get things running right?
This is disturbing.
 

Hexa

Member
Why did they go with esram again? I forgot.

They went with esram to patch the hole due to DDR3 being shitty.
They went with DDR3 because they weren't sure if the price of GDR5 would come down fast enough and they preferred a slower 8GB to a faster 4GB (like PS4 originally had) due to multimedia features.
 
Why did they go with esram again? I forgot.

As per your actual question and not the one I somehow made up

MS wanted XB1 to have certain Multimedia capabilities[Snap, 3 OS's etc.] which required 8GB of Ram absolutely.

Given 8GBs of ram being necessary they had the choice of DDR3 or GDDR5 for the system memory. At the time of development 2010/2011 8GB of GDDR5 would've been seen as crazy expensive thus they went with 8GB of DDR3.

But DDR3 memory is slow for modern rendering techniques and demanding games, thus MS added 32mb of ESram to compensate somewhat but it is too small to hold large framebuffers that many full HD games need especially at 60fps

tl;dr Multimedia Features [Snap, 3 OS's] -> 8GB Ram needed -> DDR3 over GDDR5 -> ESRam to compensate for slow DDR3

--------------------------------
Thought you asked why ESram would cause a bottleneck

I will continue to utilize the mind of Tim Lottes because my own thoughts are of lesser quality on the subject matter

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=510076

Tim Lottes said:
A fast GDDR5 will be the desired option for developers. All the interesting cases for good anti-aliasing require a large amount of bandwidth and RAM. A tiny 32MB chunk of ESRAM will not fit that need even for forward rendering at 1080p. I think some developers could hit 1080p@60fps with the rumored Orbis specs even with good AA. My personal project is targeting 1080p@60fps with great AA on a 560ti which is a little slower than the rumored Orbis specs. There is no way my engine would hit that target on the rumored 720 specs. Ultimately on Orbis I guess devs target 1080p/30fps (with some motion blur) and leverage the lower latency OS stack and scan out at 60fps (double scan frames) to provide a really great lower-latency experience. Maybe the same title on 720 would render at 720p/30fps, and maybe Microsoft is dedicating a few CPU hardware threads to the GPU driver stack to remove the latency problem (assuming this is a "Windows" OS under the covers).

Edit: wow misread your question. I'll fix this post in a minute
 

Salex_

Member
This is bullshit. If they didn't have the dexterity to get it to run at 1080p/60 FPS, then they should have brought the PS4 version down for parity. It's my fucking rights as a consumer to have the same experience.
 

RoadHazard

Gold Member
"Not intensive enough", or "simple game", isn't really a factor here. It's still a 3D game with a rather advanced rendering engine, and people simply need to accept that getting any advanced engine (with decent AA) to run at 1080p on the XBO is very challenging, due to the memory setup, etc. You need to make a lot of sacrifices in other areas to make that happen, like with Forza. It may look pretty good overall, but it's a game full of compromises in the visual department. With Trials (as with most games) they clearly didn't want to make those compromises, because that would likely have made the visual difference between the XBO and PS4 versions more pronounced. So they went with a lower resolution instead, while probably making sure everything else is as close as possible. This is gonna keep happening on the XBO; it simply doesn't have what it takes to run an advanced, modern engine at 1080p. Sucks, but XBO owners better get used to it. If you want a 1080p generation, get a PS4 or a PC.
 

Korosenai

Member
After reading some replies in this thread, i'm really glad that I don't give a shit about something as trivial as 1080p vs. 900p.
 
How the fuck is Trials not 1080p on Xbone? What the hell is going on?

Either: A. Devs didn't bother to put in any effort with the Xbox One version (like many other devs)

B. The development tools haven't matured enough and/or the devs haven't figured out how to use the ESRAM effectively
 

blastprocessor

The Amiga Brotherhood
Cloud does not work at 60 fps hence no 1080p.

But seriously l can't understand why most X1 games are stuck at 900p. This does not look a particularly taxing title.
 
Because 720p is a common ass resolution and often placed alongside 1080p.

What are you people looking for, an ulterior motive?

I'm just surprised someone could make such a basic mistake when the numbers are right there in the quote they've copied and pasted.

Anyway, it's fixed now...
 
The last Trials on 360 had ridiculous tearing, so I'm not surprised that they couldn't get this one to 1080p on both platforms. It should still be a blast though.
 

Bgamer90

Banned
I can't believe some people chose XB1 over PS4.

Really crazy that people can be more interested in games on one console over the other regardless of its position in specs and/or visual quality in multiplats.

Must be mind blowing to you how the Playstation brand got popular via PS1 to PS3 right?
 

Papercuts

fired zero bullets in the orphanage.
Hah, expected this when it said 1080p on ps4 and nothing confirmed on xb1. Unless they say resolution/frame parity from now on it's pretty clear it's gonna be 720 or 900.
 
What the...

I imagine Xbox fans would be pretty damn pissed at getting a worse version of what was basically an Xbox franchise. But yeah, Trials is a game that strikes me as the sort of game that shouldn't have much problem getting 1080/60 on a toaster, never mind the Xbone.
 

Bessy67

Member
I can't believe some people chose XB1 over PS4.

Why is that so hard to believe? Lots of people chose Wii over PS3/360 last generation, and lots of people chose PS2 over Xbox the generation before that. People like different things.
 
Yeah I agree, its a trails game my two year old gaming laptop can run this game better.

Have any of you seen the game? Yes, it's Trials. But it's also pretty outstanding, visually. Great lighting work, high detail models - if they're demanding 60, I'm not shocked the ONE is doing it at 900p.
 
I can't believe some people chose XB1 over PS4.
giphy.gif
 

bombshell

Member
Either: A. Devs didn't bother to put in any effort with the Xbox One version (like many other devs)

B. The development tools haven't matured enough and/or the devs haven't figured out how to use the ESRAM effectively

Lazy devs most definitely. Yep must be it.
 
Top Bottom