Shadow Of The Tomb Raider Xbox One X version has 4K 60 fps

I ran a benchmark on mine yesterday for shits-and-giggles, just to see how the 1070 does. I ran on all max settings, at 2x resolutions scaling (1080P) due to not having a 4k display, and I got a minimum of 29.

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@ronvalencia said:

@Grey_Eyed_Elf said:

@ronvalencia:

No it doesn't RIVAL the RX 580 in killer instinct. The X1X had drops to the low 50's... While a PC with a RX 580 ran it close to flawless at 58-60FPS.

All your gibberish aside, the X1X on paper SHOULD out perform a PC with a GTX 1060 and RX 580 but in MOST cases its just on par with them or at times comes close, very RARELY is it actually better.

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-killer-instinct-on-xbox-one-x-is-native-4k-60fps

Xbox One X's performance at 4K is absolutely bang on 60fps 99 per cent of the time, with v-sync engaged as well. It's not a completely solid read-out though as there are drops when those heavy alpha effects kick in for special moves. As an average though, 60fps is largely what you're looking at. And to cherry pick some worst-case moments during those intensive special moves, you do momentary get drops to 50-60fps

Wait so... You use DF to show performance of a X1X but then don't use DF to show that the RX 580 on PC is better?...

You bringing up performance benchmarks that aren't relevant to what I said don't work with me son.

What are you talking about? GameGPU's benchmark is correct i.e. my R9-390X matches stock clock GTX 980 Ti.

DSR Factor has to be 4X scale to render 2160p

@ronvalencia: How come you haven't changed your thread title?

pretty sure it’s 2x with this game. It multiples each axis’s by 2.

1920x2

1080x2

Cool, now you willing to try that with X1X Settings ? Would be cool if you could post a video at X1X Settings. I don’t think you’ll get more than 31 minimum FPS at X1X Settings.

AF: Ultra

Shadows: High

Environment: High

Geo & Vegetation: High

Terrain: Low

Fog: Low

AA: TAA

Motion Blur: On

@hrt_rulz01: I don’t think they care about a generic series like tomb raider. I certainly don’t because LOL tomb raider. If RDR2 is a stark contrast though, things will get interesting around here.

TBH though Xbox is basically a multiplat system and with Sea of Theives flopping as hard and shamefully as it did, I’m not sure Xbox owners can come back from the deficit regardless of how powerful their system is. Where are the exclusives?

I couldn't be bothered making a video, as i'm currently playing GoW, but I ran a quick benchmark with the corresponding settings and resolution scaling enabled. All my components are at stock clocks, no overclocking done.

@lundy86_4 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

Cool, now you willing to try that with X1X Settings ? Would be cool if you could post a video at X1X Settings. I don’t think you’ll get more than 31 minimum FPS at X1X Settings.

AF: Ultra

Shadows: High

Environment: High

Geo & Vegetation: High

Terrain: Low

Fog: Low

AA: TAA

Motion Blur: On

I couldn't be bothered making a video, as i'm currently playing GoW, but I ran a quick benchmark with the corresponding settings and resolution scaling enabled. All my components are at stock clocks, no overclocking done.

Cool about what I expected after you posted the results on Ultra.

Is your 1070 factory overclocked ?

I think it’s fair to say that at 4K X1X is getting 1070 performance with this game.

Theres several publications that have said Gameplay can cause bigger frame rate drops than the benchmark.

36 average is 20% higher than 30 average. You're assuming the X1X could average 36 frame per second with an unlocked frame rate when we know the 1070 trounces it. Quit your bullshit. They're not equal.

I freakin knew it, I showed him that there was a large gap between the 1070 and the X1X and he completely ignored me and moved on to the next victim....

@dxmcat said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@lundy86_4 said:

@Dark_sageX said:

I did some digging and it turns out I was half right and half wrong.

It looks like the Xbox ONE X outperforms a GTX 1060, so I was wrong about that

HOWEVER, the game is still no match for a GTX 1070, which I was right about and you were wrong about

According to DF Far Cry 5 on the X1X runs on a mix of low and high settings like you listed.

This video shows a GTX 1060, 1070, 1070 ti, 1080 and 1080ti running at native 4k at ultra settings (as in everything is at ultra settings)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qqp9yZU66TA

As you can see he 1070 averages at around 32fps, again with everything at ultra, something the X1X would most definitely NOT handle, the X1X may outperform a GTX1060 but not by a large enough margine to separate it from it in performance scaling, the gap however from a GTX 1070 is clearly large, so no, you are not getting 1070 performance with an X1X.

I ran a benchmark on mine yesterday for shits-and-giggles, just to see how the 1070 does. I ran on all max settings, at 2x resolutions scaling (1080P) due to not having a 4k display, and I got a minimum of 29.

DSR Factor has to be 4X scale to render 2160p

pretty sure it’s 2x with this game. It multiples each axis’s by 2.

1920x2

1080x2

Proves that money =/= intelligence. Still grasping at straws after looking that bad.

You guys shouldn’t be wasting your time with that clown M3Boarder. He lost the argument a long time ago even before this TR fiasco. Everyone and their grandma has known long before the FlopBoneX launch that it wasn’t gonna perform like a 1070. The only people still arguing against this fact are morons like m3Boarder (Gio), Ron, and a handful of delusional lems.

? These clowns should be laughed out of SW for being idiots. They’ve been wrong so many times in the past and continue to be proven wrong everyday and yet people still give them a platform.

For Far Cry 5, the gap between GTX 1070 and RX-580 is not huge.

From DF, X1X's results are higher than RX-580's results stupid clown.

@ronvalencia X1X isn't even running on Ultra. Also Shadows are blurrier than on PC. It's awfully close to the RX 580. Likely does better because of higher memory bandwidth.

@ronvalencia said:

@Dark_sageX said:

@Juub1990 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

Cool about what I expected after you posted the results on Ultra.

Is your 1070 factory overclocked ?

I think it’s fair to say that at 4K X1X is getting 1070 performance with this game.

Theres several publications that have said Gameplay can cause bigger frame rate drops than the benchmark.

36 average is 20% higher than 30 average. You're assuming the X1X could average 36 frame per second with an unlocked frame rate when we know the 1070 trounces it. Quit your bullshit. They're not equal.

I freakin knew it, I showed him that there was a large gap between the 1070 and the X1X and he completely ignored me and moved on to the next victim....

For Far Cry 5, the gap between GTX 1070 and RX-580 is not huge.

From DF, X1X's results are higher than RX-580's results stupid clown.

Change your thread title dude.

"But... but the minimums...."

Why isn’t this thread locked? TC is wrong again. Shocking...

Who cares when RX-580 at X1X graphics settings was defeated by X1X.

"Woops! Something happened and we are working on it!" web site error.

So this thread has gone from TR running at 4k60fps and Ronbot trying his bestest to prove that X1X could actually do with his favorite charts when people told him it would never happen.......

It's turns out to be bollocks and now the topic has been changed to the old X1X vs 1070 thing again.....which Ronbot was also wrong about.....

Hahahahaha...........

@m3Boarder32 said:

@lundy86_4 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

Cool, now you willing to try that with X1X Settings ? Would be cool if you could post a video at X1X Settings. I don’t think you’ll get more than 31 minimum FPS at X1X Settings.

AF: Ultra

Shadows: High

Environment: High

Geo & Vegetation: High

Terrain: Low

Fog: Low

AA: TAA

Motion Blur: On

I couldn't be bothered making a video, as i'm currently playing GoW, but I ran a quick benchmark with the corresponding settings and resolution scaling enabled. All my components are at stock clocks, no overclocking done.

Cool about what I expected after you posted the results on Ultra.

Is your 1070 factory overclocked ?

I think it’s fair to say that at 4K X1X is getting 1070 performance with this game.

Theres several publications that have said Gameplay can cause bigger frame rate drops than the benchmark.

29 FPS is surprisingly low, are we sure something isn’t wrong with Lundy’s Setup? Xbox uses low settings, so low settings should have minimums around 40 FPS. 40 FPS would be 30% better than Xbox

@Alessandro_R said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

@lundy86_4 said:

@m3Boarder32 said:

Cool, now you willing to try that with X1X Settings ? Would be cool if you could post a video at X1X Settings. I don’t think you’ll get more than 31 minimum FPS at X1X Settings.

AF: Ultra

Shadows: High

Environment: High

Geo & Vegetation: High

Terrain: Low

Fog: Low

AA: TAA

Motion Blur: On

I couldn't be bothered making a video, as i'm currently playing GoW, but I ran a quick benchmark with the corresponding settings and resolution scaling enabled. All my components are at stock clocks, no overclocking done.

Cool about what I expected after you posted the results on Ultra.

Is your 1070 factory overclocked ?

I think it’s fair to say that at 4K X1X is getting 1070 performance with this game.

Theres several publications that have said Gameplay can cause bigger frame rate drops than the benchmark.

29 FPS is surprisingly low, are we sure something isn’t wrong with Lundy’s Setup? Xbox uses low settings, so low settings should have minimums around 40 FPS. 40 FPS would be 30% better than Xbox

Nothing is wrong with Lundy’s Setup, which is why people are damaged controlling the fact that his minimum frame rates are the same as X1X at equal settings.

Those are proven to be 5% minimums by Digital Foundry.

Weird. that's the message you get when you try to edit a poll thread.

Seriously. It took less than a day for this thread to completely 86 itself.

Everything is set up perfectly, and 100% up-to-date.

@AdobeArtist: so have rules changed?

Lmao....you can never get console level settings on PC games without looking at the specific .cfg file....

Console's are custom tweaked and could/do have settings and variables that the PC doesn't have a setting for and can't go that low.

Xbox One X's version doesn't use low settings. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HfOu36SPnHs

Digital Foundry's X1X vs PC

Non-terrain AF on high or ultra

Shadows set to high

Environment set to high (slight blur perhaps due to AA selection)

Geometry and Vegetation set to high, LODs matches PC's high.

Terrain AF set to low

Volumetrics set to low (this effects is use occasionally e.g. Fog)

The gap between RX-580 and GTX 1070 is not large.

Give RX-580 a memory boost, it could yield higher performance.

Maxwell v2, Pascal, Hawaii, Polaris and Vega TFLOPS numbers are ranked nearly in order based on GPU's TFLOPS numbers.

Both RX-580 and GTX 1070 has similar bills of materials on 256bit bus PCB and GDDR5-8000.

The chip size difference between RX-580 and GTX 1070 is about 36 percent, but GTX 1070 has an entire SM block disabled (25 percent of GP104 hardware is disabled for GTX 1070 SKU).

NVIDIA is laughing all the way to the bank while AMD suffers smaller margins for near GTX 1070 cost for RX-580.

@ronvalencia Stop talking about hardware. You have no more credibility after this fail of a thread.

That credibility was lost well before this thread

If you are at a point in your life where you are "waiting" for the next big games then you need help.

You can't re-edit poll titles or polls for that matter. The site won't let you do that. The only thing you can do is re-crate the poll threads and have someone locked the current one. GS staff never bother to address this issue for years.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-x-pc-and-xbox-one-graphics-comparison-gea/1100-6454615/

While discussing Gears of War 4, reviewer Jimmy Thang said, "In terms of pure image fidelity, it surprisingly looked better than our high-end gaming PC equipped with a GTX 1080 running the game maxed out, as it offered extra dynamic shadows that don't seem to be available on the PC.

https://www.game-debate.com/news/24785/far-cry-5-pc-performance-report

According from Digital Foundry, X1X's FarCry 5 10 graphics settings has 1 ultra (AF), 8 at high and 2 at low (i.e. Terrain AF and Fog)

GTX 1060 failed at medium settings.

Against Xbox One X, GTX 1060 must deliver 4K minimum 30 fps for ALL scenes, not just easy scenes.

game-debate.com's GTX 1060 has 1987 Mhz

1987 Mhz clock speed is NOT stock. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2862/geforce-gtx-1060-6-gb

From https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/7131/21/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-and-6gb-review-8-models-tested-throttling-test

EVGA's GTX 1060 FTW+ has 1987 Mhz clockspeed !

Try again.

@ronvalencia said:

@Juub1990 said:

@ronvalencia Stop talking about hardware. You have no more credibility after this fail of a thread.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-x-pc-and-xbox-one-graphics-comparison-gea/1100-6454615/

While discussing Gears of War 4, reviewer Jimmy Thang said, "In terms of pure image fidelity, it surprisingly looked better than our high-end gaming PC equipped with a GTX 1080 running the game maxed out, as it offered extra dynamic shadows that don't seem to be available on the PC.

Loading Video...

https://www.game-debate.com/news/24785/far-cry-5-pc-performance-report

According from Digital Foundry, X1X's FarCry 5 10 graphics settings has 1 ultra (AF), 8 at high and 2 at low (i.e. Terrain AF and Fog)

GTX 1060 failed at medium settings.

Against Xbox One X, GTX 1060 must deliver 4K minimum 30 fps for ALL scenes, not just easy scenes.

game-debate.com's GTX 1060 has 1987 Mhz

1987 Mhz clock speed is NOT stock. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2862/geforce-gtx-1060-6-gb

From https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/7131/21/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-and-6gb-review-8-models-tested-throttling-test

EVGA's GTX 1060 FTW+ has 1987 Mhz clockspeed !

Try again.

I don’t understand why these fangirls fail to realize that minimum framerates is the borometer to judge by, not average frame rates. At this point I have to assume theyve simply resorted to trolling now that they realize X1X is matching a GTX 1070 i

Farcry 5 is one of those games where memory bandwidth does play a role. But there are multiple things that allow the X1X to perform as it does with Farcry 5. First is its customized settings and assets while some settings look like low, or high or ultra as on PC , they may not even be exact. ie "“slightly blurrier detail”. so it not equal to so less detail equals less demanding... The X1X gpu has around 300GB/s of memory bandwidth while both the 1060 and 580 have only 192gb/s and 256gb/s.

For the hell of it I tested FC5 on my GTX 1080 at multiple clockrates and settings at 4k.

at 1.125 ghz (5.7 TFLOP) it got 25/30/37 results at DF suggested X1X settings.

at 1.4 ghz (7.1 TFLOP) 31/36/45 results at DF suggested X1X settings. Max settings 30/35/44. Then I knocked the GDDR5x down to 9000mhz ( 285GB/s) it got 29/34/42.

. X1X extra memory bandwidth helps in few cases not all the time. X1X's gpu performance can range wildly because of its cpu as well.

There is no way we will see TR at 60 FPS at 4k without having compromises. And IMO 30 fps for any shooter is pointless landmark for showcasing 4k.

@GioVela2010 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@Juub1990 said:

@ronvalencia Stop talking about hardware. You have no more credibility after this fail of a thread.

https://www.gamespot.com/articles/xbox-one-x-pc-and-xbox-one-graphics-comparison-gea/1100-6454615/

While discussing Gears of War 4, reviewer Jimmy Thang said, "In terms of pure image fidelity, it surprisingly looked better than our high-end gaming PC equipped with a GTX 1080 running the game maxed out, as it offered extra dynamic shadows that don't seem to be available on the PC.

Loading Video...

https://www.game-debate.com/news/24785/far-cry-5-pc-performance-report

According from Digital Foundry, X1X's FarCry 5 10 graphics settings has 1 ultra (AF), 8 at high and 2 at low (i.e. Terrain AF and Fog)

GTX 1060 failed at medium settings.

Against Xbox One X, GTX 1060 must deliver 4K minimum 30 fps for ALL scenes, not just easy scenes.

game-debate.com's GTX 1060 has 1987 Mhz

1987 Mhz clock speed is NOT stock. https://www.techpowerup.com/gpudb/2862/geforce-gtx-1060-6-gb

From https://uk.hardware.info/reviews/7131/21/nvidia-geforce-gtx-1060-3gb-and-6gb-review-8-models-tested-throttling-test

EVGA's GTX 1060 FTW+ has 1987 Mhz clockspeed !

Try again.

I don’t understand why these fangirls fail to realize that minimum framerates is the borometer to judge by, not average frame rates. At this point I have to assume theyve simply resorted to trolling now that they realize X1X is matching a GTX 1070 i

They attack me personally, I will retaliated.

At 4K resolution, it's mostly GPU bound instead of CPU bound.

X1X's 32 ROPS bottleneck wasn't a large factor since FC5 is AMD optimised title i.e. TMUs for significant read/write operations and X1X's GPU has extra memory bandwidth when compared to RX-580.

https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/directx/2018/03/19/announcing-microsoft-directx-raytracing/

You may have noticed that DXR does not introduce a new GPU engine to go alongside DX12’s existing Graphics and Compute engines. This is intentional – DXR workloads can be run on either of DX12’s existing engines. The primary reason for this is that, fundamentally, DXR is a compute-like workload. It does not require complex state such as output merger blend modes or input assembler vertex layouts. A secondary reason, however, is that representing DXR as a compute-like workload is aligned to what we see as the future of graphics, namely that hardware will be increasingly general-purpose, and eventually most fixed-function units will be replaced by HLSL code. The design of the raytracing pipeline state exemplifies this shift through its name and design in the API. With DX12, the traditional approach would have been to create a new CreateRaytracingPipelineState method. Instead, we decided to go with a much more generic and flexible CreateStateObject method. It is designed to be adaptable so that in addition to Raytracing, it can eventually be used to create Graphics and Compute pipeline states, as well as any future pipeline designs.

AMD's optimisation such as forward plus render via compute shaders reduces output merger blend modes path (this is ROPS path).

Depending on output merger blend modes (ROPS path) usage percentage, RX-580 can land close to GTX 1070 or land close to 1060. X1X's version has RX-580's behaviour with more bandwidth and 2 MB render cache for 32 ROPS bottleneck reduction, but it's not the complete solution as GTX 1070's 64 ROPS with 2MB L2 cache.

In crypto-currency, ROPS path is not used for read/write operations i.e. TMUs are used for read/write operations.

TFLOPS is nothing without the associated read/write units i.e. it's TMUs or ROPS.

This is applicable for Vega 64 LC reaching close to Titan X Pascal.

X1X's result is about half of GTX 1080 Ti or Titan XP.

@GioVela2010: Minimum framerates can be caused by other factors not related to graphical horsepower. One example is hard drive access. You could see hitches and small stutters in framerate when loading between areas in an open world game. A minimum frame drop can also be caused by a bug in the code.

Well there is one good thing to come out of this thread. @GioVela2010/@m3Boarder32 and @ronvalencia have become friends!

There is nothing scary about this at all

I can have my 1080 Ti have issues sometimes on benchmarks, but immediately pop back up. The average is definitely where we should be looking at to get a picture of what the GPU is capable of.

the Benchmarks Lundy posted are consistent with the frame rates every reviewer Has shown. These are 5% minimums as has been shown by Ditotal Foundry

@GioVela2010: It doesn’t matter if the results are consistent. Minimums are often not the GPU’s fault. That’s why at times you see the 1080 Ti have 5fps minimums. This isn’t caued by the graphics card. That’s why you don’t rely on them because they don’t accurately reflect the experience.

this is not an instance where u can claim it’s not the GPU’ fault. Sorry it just isn’t.

In the last 20 seconds of gameplay here, Vega 64 is consistently dropping under 36 FPS. A GTX 1070 would consistently be dropping under 31 FPS in the same scenes

@GioVela2010: It’s an instance where you can’t reliably say where the bottleneck lies therefore your comparison is inadmissible.

Second, developers on consoles target 30fps specifically and can tweak and customize settings to make it not drop below the targeted frame rate. PC doesn’t give a shit if you drop below 30fps. You’re assuming the X1X would average 36fps when you can’t rightfully prove that because by design, the settings are customized to make sure it stays at 30, not to make sure it reaches 36 or whatever else.

No the settings are are not designed to “stay“ at 30, the settings are implemented as they are so the frames don’t drop below 30. Thats a big difference

Once they see the frames are not dropping below 30, they hit the cap or vsync to 30 because everything Above 30 is pointless without Gsync or Freesync. And with 4K, that’s always since no 4K Gsync or Freesync Displays exist. (Below $3k for a tiny monitor)

If they unlocked the frame rate it would 100% without a shadow of a doubt hit Over 40 at times. If you don’t understand that, you’re just clueless on the matter

Settings and assets are customized to reach a performance target ..... That is why you see assets and quality settings with multiple examples that go below or are in between a PC version's preset settings. ie farcry's example "“slightly blurrier detail”" vs PC preset.

anything below a TV's refresh is pointless and 30 is a really pointless and idiotic when vast majority of TV refresh rates are between 60hz to 240hz not 30..... lol adaptive refresh rate screens are needed when you cant sustain a screen's refresh rate..... X1X wouldn't hit 40+ fps unless you where looking at the floor or sky with nothing going on.

You’re clueless

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-the-case-for-30fps-pc-gaming

“Locking at 30fps is the solution often favoured by console developers - but why cut your potential frame-rate in half on a platform that offers so much flexibility? Why not settle on something like 40 or 45fps? The problem here is that 60 screen refreshes per second cannot be equally divided by 40 or 45 frames. Some frames stay on-screen for longer than others, resulting in off-putting judder. Locking to 30fps ensures that each rendered frame persists for two screen refreshes and presents with no screen-tear whatsoever. Combine that with a decent motion blur implementation and you have a good, consistent presentation. To find out more about why 30fps is sometimes the best option, check out our dedicated article that addresses the topic directly - do higher frame-rates always mean better gameplay?.“

Your the clueless one...... read the info you just posted you fool..... If you cant sustain 60 go 30, not in between ...... 30 fps is a compromise when you cant reach a screen's refresh rate. Its only when you have a true 30 fps where you avoid screen tearing. Vast majority of games dont sustain a solid 30 fps or 60 fps on consoles.