Skyrim Remastered PS4 vs Xbox One Gameplay Frame-Rate Test

• Identical on both platforms
• 1080p/30 although there may be some dynamic scaling on both
• 30fps for the majority of the time
• Lighting and textures have also been upgraded

Solid remaster it seems.

Yep, seems like they did a good job.

This looks more like an enhanced port.

Only Ratchet and Clank, GTA V, MW: Remaster etc are worthy of being called a remaster.

But it's a solid port it seems and not a complete shitshow like Return to Arkham.

Good job? The graphics still look like last gen and yet it doesn't even run at 60FPS. Just another lazy remaster.

I'll quote part of what Wasdie said in a separate thread:

So what about this makes it lazy?

@walloftruth: vanilla OG Skyrim was able to run 1080p Ultra at ~60fps (but not 100% of the time) on an R7 260x and Phenom II 965BE. Given the lighting and texture upgrades for the SE, I would anticipate that to drop it to a ~45fps game with that hardware. Given that the X1 has roughly that same GPU but a worse CPU, and the PS4 has slightly better than that GPU, and a worse CPU, I would anticipate a ~45fps experience at best for SE on those consoles as well. Which makes the locked 30fps logical.

Disappointing, but the writing should be on the wall at this point about those systems' capabilities

I have been seeing some youtube benchmarks and a 750ti on ultra manages around 27-33 FPS and a r9 380 manages around 45-55 FPS. Skyrim SE still has that thing that when you look at the sky or at a simple ground texture the FPS can sky rocket to 60+fps, so it's understandable that consoles got the 30 FPS lock.

@glez13: that's what I'm saying

Why isn't this 60 fps? Pretty bad remaster.

Because the consoles are shit.

@Zero_epyon: Would be interesting to see how Skyrim Remastered preforms for Nintendo Switch should it get a port in the future that is.

Bingo console pleebs.

The only way this could have been 60 fps is if they had just released the original PC release maxed out. Consoles can't handle the new effects at 60fps. On PC you need something around a GTX 970 or R9 390 to get 60FPS so you will need to wait for PRO/Scorpio version for 60fps.

Which the pro will supposedly be able to run this at 4K/60fps

I don't expect it to outperform the XBO or PS4.

@Zero_epyon: where was 60fps claimed for pro? That would effectively be 8x the ps4 version

Seriously people... If you care about performance, you should be gaming on PC. Otherwise you will constantly be disapointed because consoles have shit hardware. Comparing performance between 2 shitty options is just retarded.

The usual painfully boring twats desperate to talk about their PC bleating on about how shit consoles are on a thread that CLEARLY states PS4 and Xbox One it's right there at the top for the boring dullards who seem to have missed it and just want to talk about their 'rigs' on a thread where nobody gives a ****.

I'll just say this.... take a look at the graphics on this remaster. According to Bethesda... they aimed to make the remaster 'as next gen as possible'. It looks like it should be on a fucking PS2, that's how shit Bethesda are but hey let's just use it to hate on consoles and talk about PC. Some seriously insecure people using up space on this forum, honestly.

Much more technically demanding games than this thing run at 60fps even on the Xbox One if you want to vent at anyone send an email to Pete Hines and ask him if he actually knows what 'next gen' means or if he just likes talking out of his ass the whole time.

Since they're identical, it all factors down to content that comes with the mods. The Xbox One has double the GB space for it so that equals double the mods. I saw a list of mods between the two and it's pretty staggering how the One will always have more. I'm a console gamer and if I had to choose, I'll get this on the One especially on the Scorpio.

PS4 Pro will run it in native 4K but given the extremely low quality of the assets to begin with I can't see that making much of a difference. Turd polishing, basically. Same when it comes to Scorpio.

Looking at some videos GTX 1060 hovers widely around 25-40 FPS on ultra 4K. If the PRO version is going to be 4k then it will also be locked to 30 FPS then, and it will probably need some dynamic stuff help to keep it consistent. Even a GTX 1080 has slight problems with 4K/60fps.

The pro version will probably give you options, including 60fps maybe dropping down to 2K res or something. It will still look shit at every option though lol.

@blueinheaven: LOL. You are hilarious. Please name a single big budget open world game on PS4 or XB1 that runs at 60fps.... Exactly. Now, why are people surprised that this game only runs at 30fps? The game has received upgrades over the last gen version and the consoles are incapable of providing the necessary performance. PC still remains the only way to play Skyrim properly.

I got to give it to Activision, I was surprised by how much work was put into the Modern Warfare Remaster, it looks great.

Shame on 2K and Bethesda for not treating their Bioshock and TES IP with more respect. People consider those games classic, a new lick of paint and some half assed lighting effects don't cut it.

Either make a decent remaster, or don't bother at all.

If you're not gonna put in any effort, why bother ? (this can be said about all things in life)

No mate you are the source of hilarity here, desperately seeking out threads that have NOTHING to do with PC so you can moan about lack of 60fps on consoles you will never play on.

Bethesda are the reason the console versions don't run at 60fps. If you had even a vague clue you would look at the videos and notice that the game has graphics that were 'in' about two fucking generations ago so should be easily playable at 60fps on PS4 or Xbox One but Bethesda just don't know how to do it.

After 5 years they still haven't fixed the million bugs in the PC version, they are charlatans. PC is the best way to play Skyrim BUT WITH FUCKING MODS the base game even on PC is absolutely atrocious. But hey knock yourself out slagging off consoles if it gives you a rise.

Skyrim looked like dogshit when it was released on PC yet it performed like a game that was stretching technology to its absolute limits, so bad was the programming. They are just hopelessly incompetent and wouldn't even exist today if they hadn't had the brainwave of releasing their own dev kits so users could fix their shit for free.

Even at 30fps compare something like DA Inquisition which looks phenomenal even on PS4 compared to the utter turd that is Bethesda's self proclaimed attempt at 'next gen' and you have your answer. OR just continue boring the shit out of everyone talking about your fucking PC to people who give not one solitary shit.

@blueinheaven: Skyrim never looked like shit on PC. Obviously, the mods make it look better, but the base game was still a beautiful world that was great to explore and do things. The creation engine has its issues, but Bethesda still makes some of the most immersive and interactive worlds with it.

You blame Bethesda and I blame the shit hardware. Why does the game run at 60fps on PC? If it is Bethesda's fault, the game would not run at 60fps on more powerful PC hardware. Might as well blame all other open world developers because their games only run at 30fps on console... Or maybe it is because they are all developing for the same shit hardware.

Like I said... if you care about performance, you should give a shit about PC because that is where you are able to play games properly.

The game will run at 60fps on PS4 Pro and in native 4K (Bethesda's own claims) because yet again they will let the hardware do their dirty work for them, that's why the better PC you have the less shit Skyrim is.

If you don't think vanilla Skyrim looked shit on PC you never played it OR you would forgive just about anything just because it was on PC. It looked downright terrible.

You don't have to keep selling how much better games are on PC, everyone knows it. I've been a PC gamer all my life, nobody knows it better than me, but you absolutely do NOT have to spend all your time thrashing consoles to make you feel better about playing on PC. I honestly don't know what your deal is there. Just play and be happy instead of going on to threads that have **** all to do with you and trying to disparage console players and make them feel bad about something they are paying money for.

Beyond doubt, Bethesda's utterly shit programmers are the reason this thing doesn't run at 60fps on current consoles, nothing AT ALL to do with the hardware.

@blueinheaven: where does it say it runs at 60fps on ps4 pro? All I've seen is 4k resolution

4K native res, HDR and full PS4 Pro support which could mean anything but I guess it means you can configure it. Quite a few games are doing this. 60 fps might mean 1080p, I don't know, I'm just believing everything I hear at the moment.

If they can't do 60fps on the Pro they may as well just farm it out to someone who can. I am still amazed they didn't do that with the 'remaster', just give it to someone who has a clue.

@blueinheaven: they'd have to do quite the work on the engine, it's pretty damn cpu hungry and rather poorly multi threaded, which is why I find it somewhat hard to believe it would run on 60fps regardless of resolution w/o significant sacrifices in shadows, draw distance and overall object count

And that is all you are going to see. This game will not run at native 4K/60fps on PS4 Pro. It struggles at 1080p/30fps on PS4. How is a console with a little more than 2x GPU power going to push 4x the resolution at twice the frame rate? These people need to do the math.

Looking forward to that Pro version.

My mistake! Thought it was 60fps, but it's actually 30fps.

Well the CPU is OC'ed, should be enough to run it at 1080p even with their shoddy programming. They might have to cut corners to make it happen. I wonder if they will even go to that effort though since Sony shafted them with mods. I hate Bethesda but If I was them I would have told Sony to f*** off and made it exclusive to Xbox One.

I never said it would run at 60fps in 4K. Do you actually read anything anyone posts? Ever? Or do you just rush in mumbling about 60fps all the time? YOU wouldn't have the faintest clue about what the Pro can or can't do yet here you are babbling on about it.

You're a crushing bore, obsessed with yourself and your fucking PC.

@blueinheaven: The thing is that resolution has no effect on the cpu demand, if a game is cpu bound the fps is the same regardless of the render resolution, going from 30fps to 60fps is nearly twice the cpu demand, pro being 28% higher clocked means the it should be running at 45+ fps on original ps4 so sacrifices would have to be made

I have to admit I didn't know Skyrim was that CPU intensive. It kind of explains why the graphics still look absymal even on much better hardware than the game expected on release. I don't know what to expect on the Pro then though they are claiming native 4K and HDR and configurable options which I assumed would mean 60fps probably at 1080p.

I think it needed a rewrite more than a remaster but that would cost money and Bethesda have been using the same game engine for ten years so yeah, good luck with that.

Wait, why is it identical on both consoles?

i thought this game was going to take advantage of the upgraded PS4 Pro hardware (at least thats what i remember reading in an article)?

shouldnt it be a bit better on the Pro?

EDIT: ya know what, nevermind..This is a one-on-one comparison on the OG PS4 and XB1. my bad lol

My "next gen" console is able to handle a last gen title in 30fps. Very impressive.

@blueinheaven: ye the engine has some real issues which werent exactly fixed with the improvements made in fallout4, it would need a massive overhaul, bethesda is more or less the From software of the west..

Zero_epyon mentioned 4K/60fps, which he later corrected. I am multi-tasking and naturally associated that silliness with you when skimming through the thread and posting. Sorry. As for knowing what the PS4 Pro is capable of... I have a very good idea. The specs don't lie. It will be shit just like I knew the PS4 would be shit before it came out.

You are the one who is obsessed with me. I understand haters are gonna hate, but you need to let it go.

Whoa wait....30fps?

PS4 Pro has 8.4 TFLOPS 16bit FP. It depends on the optimisations for 16 bit FP.

For 16 bit FP shaders, PS4 Pro is 4.6X over PS4. At a given memory bandwidth, native 16 bit FP yields 2X pixel writes over 32 bit FP data type.

For 32 bit FP shaders, PS4 Pro is 2.3X over PS4.

Only 30 fps no thanks

Note that Pro will not have the full 16 bit FP, it will never add up to 8.4..... Games will be a mixed precision workload where the vast majority of the registers will be used as 32 bit. There hasn't been much advantage in using 16bit.

Also note that Dev's having/wanting to create games for the Plain PS4 will not the ability. Meaning that most devs will not design their games to use the ability of being able to do two 16bit per register.They have to be willing to designate which variables in the shading that are ok with 16-bit..... Which will be limited.

Except FROM Software makes good games with terrific combat and great mechanics.

Bethesda makes walking simulators.

What Wasdie described is Prototype Remasters, GoW3, TLOUR basically. Up res and up the frames. But nothing else really.

Your "Which will be limited" assertion is false. GeForce FX/6/7/RSX/TX1's optimisations was done with 16 bit FP shader math. It was DX10 mandated 32bit FP shader math.

PS4 Pro's Mantis Burn Racing has 4X effective pixel output over the original PS4 version which DF guessed double rate 16 FP mode usage and MarkC confirms PS4 Pro has double rate 16bit mode.

All DX10/11/12 GPUs can run DX9a's 16bit FP code path via emulation on their 32 bit FP ALUs. DX12's optional native 16 bit FP feature skips the emulation code path.

AMD GCN version 1.0 and 1.1 has zero speed difference with 16 bit FP and 32 bit FP modes i.e. no performance benefits with DX9a's 16bit FP and DX9b's 24bit FP modes.

Fury/Tonga/Polaris' native 16bit FP mode has register storage and memory bandwidth reduction benefits but has no double rate 16 bit FP mode.

Shader Model 6.0 has mandated for native 16 bit FP feature.

Vega is optimised for incoming DX12's Shader Mode 6.0 while older GCNs with Feature Level 12_0 are in compatibility mode.

PS4 Pro's GPU has DX12 SM6's native 16bit FP feature with performance benefits.

MS is aware of AMD's 16 bit FP feature road map, hence it's inclusion into SM6.

NVIDIA Volta and AMD Vega hardware should be optimised for SM6.

Had trouble deciding which console version to get, but chose Xbox One because of the mods.

Ps4 pro 8.4 TFLOPS using 16 bit code LMFAO so the scorpio is what 12+ TFLOPS now using outdated code.

Native 16 bit FP feature is part of the unreleased Shader Model 6.0's hardware feature set.

SM6.0 reveal gives us some hints for Scorpio's hardware optimisations for SM6 target.

PS4 Pro is just AMD's on-the-field testing.

MS wanted GPU generation jump from XBO and PS4 Pro's GPU delivered half-gen jump i.e.

32bit ALU FLOPS jump between X360 vs XBO is 5.45X.

32bit ALU FLOPS jump between XBO vs Scorpio is 4.58X.

The real Pascal GP100 has support for 16bit FP. Lesser Pascal SKUs are warmed over Maxwell v2's SM designs.

Scorpio's 6 TFLOPS is half of Vega 10's 12 TFLOPS at 32 bit FP mode which is about Vega 11 level.