The Mighty Xbox One X already has to resort to low settings

Look at how triggered and upset you are.

@calvincfb: Yeah, but they usually upgrade more and better.

For me, going from 1080p 60fps max settings to 4K with unstable 30 fps and some settings on low, is a downgrade. But not for lots of other people, it would seem.

The best part is that the bast majority i dare say more than 96% of the people who will play this game on xbox,will do so on the weak model,which drops to 26FPS full of screen tearing and with 1440x108p resolution when the PS4 normal version is 1080p with lock 30FPS...lol

The Normal PS4 version not only boost resolution over the xbox one,it also has higher frames and no tearing..

The xbox one X only has a resolution boost over the Pro the rest is the same.

The other graphics setting are in high and ultra.

Non-Terrain AF = high/ultra

Shadows : high

Environment: high

Geometry and vegetation: high (X1X matches PC's LOD high settings)

Terrain AF : low

Volumetric Fog : low

GTX 1060/RX-580 couldn't match X1X's graphics settings 4K 30 fps. https://youtu.be/HfOu36SPnHs?t=862

GTX 1060/RX-580 is better than PS4 Pro, but worst than X1X experience.

X1X lands between RX-580 and GTX 1070 e.g. GTX 980 Ti or Fury Pro or Fury X. GTX 1070 at ultra setting 4K still has 29 fps pacing problem.

Well, PC it is for me then! It's a shame that Sony and MS are trying to push 2160 resolution when their hardware struggles to get decent settings.

X1X Settings are below

• Terrain: Low
• Volumetric Fog: Low
• Texture Filtering: High or Ultra
• Water: High
• Geometry & Vegetation: High
• Shadows: High
• Environment: High
• AA: TAA
• Motion Blur: On
• PC uses MSAA with Ultra Preset not TAA
• PC has Motion Blur off with Ultra Preset

TAA and Motion Blur is more taxing than MSAA and No Motion Blur by 3.5%

The 3.5% performance hit from using TAA and Motion Blur, instead of MSAA and No Motion Blur cancels out the fact that Terrain and Volumetric Fog on Low saved X1X 4% in performance.

https://www.pcgamer.com/far-cry-5-settings-and-benchmarks/

Terrain: Sets the size (quality) of the textures used for the terrain, with a negligible impact on performance. Performance improves by just one percent going from high to low. Even at 4k ultra, Far Cry 5 only uses about 4GB of VRAM.

Volumetric Fog: Adjusts the quality of volumetric fog, including things like light shafts. Dropping to low only yields a three percent increase, however, and it's difficult to tell what has changed in the screenshots.

PS4 Pro SEttings are same as X1X.

Only difference is that X1X is outputting around 3.7 million more pixels every .033 of a second.

TLHBO

Regardless of all the whining the game looks gorgeous whatever the system. PC, with the right hardware, is the best version, as usual.

@GioVela2010:

Those numbers are for a PC. Not XB1X. There is a reason they had to dial down settings.

This game is stuck at 30 fps on 1X, with settings ranging from low to high, mostly. The person I quoted wants 60 fps.

Only PC can do that. Depending on the PC, this can be achieved in 4k, 1440, UW, or 1080, all on ultra or mixed depending on system.

You’re so dumb.

I frame every .033 seconds is 30 FPS

60 FPS would be one frame every .0166 seconds

nothig I said was wrong

@GioVela2010:

I wasn't replying to that post, moron.

I'm referring to that random shitpost you replied with to the guy who wants to play this at 60 fps as any real gamer would. Not on your little soccer mom toy for 30 fps on low.

5 pages later and the 4k console keeps baiting folks in.

No idea what post your referring to. But you’re making it sound as if I was talking shit on 60 FPS now

learn to quote

@Pedro: 4 gens later and Xbox is still teetering between 2nd and 3rd, unable to come to terms with it.

I guess memes and baiting is all you can do at this point. ;-)

Just as all you can do is game Vicariously through PC Gamers with good GPU’s

keep up the good fight GTX 670 warrior

This is such a weak troll attempt lol

Exactly.

And he made it while already knowing full well that Settings at Low for Terrain and Volumetric Fog Only saves 4% in performance over the Highest Settings for those assets.

pathetic little troll leaves out the details

I know, the troll Giovela and his 3 alts never learn. PC is always #1, no matter how many gens he tries to say otherwise. Facts first.

You sure are salty over a Console. The X1X right now is a very good price for it's power and more so after the price cut this year. So you keep paying more for the slight increase year over year and most console gamers will enjoy saving money to buy games.

No. We're merely fact checking. You sound like a Trump fanboy, getting triggered over being corrected.

The rest of your post was factually incorrect as well.

1. PC doesn't need yearly upgrades, this is 2004 lvl bait. Console Gamers who stay up to date pay quite a bit as well, with the 3 year upgrades.

2. Save for games? Only if you don't get the latest XB or pay for XBL, which add up every 3 years. Also what games, PC library destroys XB's.

3. Minor differences? 30 to 60 fps is night and day and insane. Low to Ultra is noticeable to DF in most games, including FC5. Your experience is shitty, and you deserve it.

And what makes you think us PC gamers have to upgrade every year? With my new shining 1080Ti, I don't have to upgrade for another 3/4 years from now and it's all the power I need now. Upgrading is a Choice and NOT like consoles when you are force to move to the next-gen if you wanna play that next-gen game.

If that the rabid Xbox fanatic named nyadc/dynamitecop?

Gotta be why they didn't use High or even Medium. The fact you're reaching a 1:1 conclusion for the impact the settings have on consoles and PC proves how clueless and dumb you are.

What games lol?

comparing the pc and X1X versious i honestly dont see a difference besides frame rate. even at ultra the terrain in this game looks like ass. for the console versions the game runs fine

I see a decent difference in just gfx, especially after playing both. But yeah, running this well over 60 fps Ultra on UW is the way to go, looks a bit better and runs 2-3x as good. Big difference overall.

BTW the post you quoted was false. That PC gamer article had no mention of XBOX, those numbers are only for PC. The last 2 bullet points are also wrong, as shown by DF. PC runs this game at Ultra 30fps 4K for 1070. Ultra 60fps 4k for 1080. Both noticeably better. This is a fact shown by Digital Foundry and multiple user videos confirming this fact.

He's spinning data and I'm not even sure why, the spun data even has PC as the clear winner.

Yeah sure for a super high end card that costs right now twice as much as the X1X. The X1X is going to last for 3/4 years too once MS allows game devs to make exclusive games for it and not be tied to the Xbox One/S. Oh and in July the 1080Ti won't be the most powerful gamer Videocard no longer.

Hahaha I thought PC gamers don't play games at 30fps. Even a 1080Ti can't play Far Cry 5 at 4k Ultra and get a locked 60fps.

1080 plays this game a 4k ultra 58-60 fps. 1070 easily does ultra wide ultra 80+ fps. If you go 4k it average 36 fps, still more than xb1x. All 3 methods look and run better than the xbox1x version. It will only get worse for XB1X here on out, as gens usually go.

A 1070 lasted people more than 1 year. You lied about yearly upgrades, it's more like 3-5 years to be realistic. Console has to upgrade to a new model and 3 years of online service, $650 tri-yearly. As we saw last year, by the time a new XB model comes out the old one barely functions (30fps with dips on low for XB1).

Only, when PC gamer upgrades he gets the best experience (ranging from noticeably better to extremely better, depending on the game) and a better library. When a XB user upgrades he gets 2nd or 3rd worst version of every game, horrific online (20-30 fps, no competitive games, low MP library), and the 4th place library. =\

The upgrading hassle of PC. None of the benefits. You go girl.

Lmao a more powerful Vega 64 averaged under 40 FPS for the last 18-20 seconds of this benchmark.

and hit 29, 34, 33, and 34 again in the final 25 econds.

1080 58-60? Hahahahahaha

No a single 1080 does not play the game at that high framerate. Also how many PC games support HDR?

True.

And about half as many HDR games as X1X