This is a bad example of performance difference to throw around cpu gpu bound stuff, fps >> resolution stuff. Fact is if you can get a game to perform at ps4 level resolution and fps for consoles that Witcher 3 is doing you do it. One console can and the other one cant. Its as simple as that and its ok. This is not game stuck at 20s unplayable stuff. To me its very clear now which console is ahead atm.
44% is misleading, since in reality you don't really see much of a gap at all between the console versions...
---
DF Verdict:
"Overall, the fact Xbox One tends to holds a higher frame-rate is misleading in terms of the quality of the end experience; a capped 30fps is by far the preferred option in this case and we still hope to see it implemented in a future update. The PS4 release has the right tactic, but it lets itself down by being unable to stream in world geometry or render effects at a perfect 30fps to take advantage of this. The perceived effect is a judder to motion on both consoles, for cut-scenes and gameplay, though PS4 is capable of smoother passages of play at times. When it comes to performance, and factoring in the game's superior 1920x1080 output, Sony's hardware is a preference - but it's not the clear choice we had expected."
44% is misleading, since in reality you don't really see much of a gap at all between the console versions...
---
DF Verdict:
"Overall, the fact Xbox One tends to holds a higher frame-rate is misleading in terms of the quality of the end experience; a capped 30fps is by far the preferred option in this case and we still hope to see it implemented in a future update. The PS4 release has the right tactic, but it lets itself down by being unable to stream in world geometry or render effects at a perfect 30fps to take advantage of this. The perceived effect is a judder to motion on both consoles, for cut-scenes and gameplay, though PS4 is capable of smoother passages of play at times. When it comes to performance, and factoring in the game's superior 1920x1080 output, Sony's hardware is a preference - but it's not the clear choice we had expected."
This game is heavily CPU bottlenecked on the consoles. You could drop the PS4 version to 900p and it will still run at the same frame rate because the CPU bottleneck.
The FPS advantage the Xbox One version has is because the CPU is clocked slightly higher and that is why frames are slightly higher on it as well.
A few things I'm intrigued by is the idea of devs building around lowest common denominator, nerfed CPUs dragging the PS4 down, and less important, but still possible the sw claim that Sony is after 1080p moniker at any cost.
This is mostly high, with a few medium/ultra settings thrown in the mix @900p. Looks noticeably better than PS4's "attempt" at 1080p.
A few things I'm intrigued by is the idea of devs building around lowest common denominator, nerfed CPUs dragging the PS4 down, and less important, but still possible the sw claim that Sony is after 1080p moniker at any cost.
This is mostly high, with a few medium/ultra settings thrown in the mix @900p. Looks noticeably better than PS4's "attempt" at 1080p.
how much is the graphics card doing the ultra settings on 900p? i think it comes down to price ps4 was 400 dollars with GTA 5 Last of us bundle almost a year ago what was that GPU at a year ago?
Isn't this the first game CDPR have developed on PlayStation systems? They've always been more of a DX fanboy type developer. I say it just needs more optimisations a lot like the Assassin's Creed Unity situation, that ran like shit on PS4 patchy patchy later, all was gravy, albeit, gravy being still horrendous on both platforms.
CDPR just need to get their shit in gear or people will start to see them as incompetent.
Here is the fact of the matter and how it all really breaks down, 1080p is a 44% higher resolution than 900p, coincidentally 44% is roughly the GPU disparity between the Xbox One and PlayStation 4.
If both consoles had the same 1.6Ghz CPU frequency and 6 cores running with the Xbox One version of a game at 900p and the PlayStation 4 version of the game running at 1080p, they should essentially run with identical performance with the same internal rendering/graphical settings. However the Xbox One runs its CPU at 1.75Ghz, it can also make use of its 7th CPU core, that of which the PlayStation 4 is incapable...
So what does that mean? Just going by technical specifications alone, if the Xbox One is running a game at 900p and the same game is 1080p on the PlayStation 4, the Xbox One version will theoretically always outperform the PlayStation 4 version in raw performance if the game is properly optimized for each platform.
The Witcher 3 is a spot on example of this happening, also a game running at 1080p on the PlayStation 4 and 720p on the Xbox One should not be a thing that ever happens as 1920x1080 is a 125% higher resolution than 1280x720. Is the PlayStation 4 125% more powerful than the Xbox One? Absolutely fucking not... It's a clear sign that the developer did not care to optimize their game on the Xbox One and hold a development bias for the PlayStation 4, *cough* Konami *cough* Ground Zeros *cough* PES 2015...
You also forgetting one more thing, to the person who own's both current-gen consoles, it's the comfort of the controller your cool with that should matter. I own Witcher on PC and Xbox One but the reason why I got it on Xbox One just for gaming preference, doing the review for Xbox One coming soon, and I'm going to be on-call at my job next month so I'm taking my Xbox One with me so I can continue to play Witcher 3. My point is, I enjoy the Xbox One controller then the Dualshock 4 and if a gamer has PS4 and Xbox One and don't give a damn about the resolutions, it's the controller your comfortable that should matter.
A complete build with 2 free games would have run $550 w/stock cooler, or $~600 w/after market cooler and a few nice case fans in June 2013.
If you could cop a nice OC on the 2GB 7850 then you might be able to run similar settings with a few tweaks at 1080p.
---
So $560 with 2 free games(Tomb Raider and FC Blood Dragon I believe) months before the release of the PS4.
oh hell no windows 7 cost what like 200 dollars or some shiz
were talking easily over 700 for this fully functioniong on my desk with all the bells an whistles labor my work isn't free im building shit take 20 dollars hour into account im not doing outa the goodness my heart like sony
they put it targether on there dime and isn't in a small form factor box like the ps4 on my tv with hdmi an the controller the ps4 controller throw that in gamecubepad remember the ps4 in the entire package for 400 the 2 game the controller hdmi the box the form factor the service the os the htis the that the free games on ps+ does steam have those flowing in?
Isn't this the first game CDPR have developed on PlayStation systems? They've always been more of a DX fanboy type developer. I say it just needs more optimisations a lot like the Assassin's Creed Unity situation, that ran like shit on PS4 patchy patchy later, all was gravy, albeit, gravy being still horrendous on both platforms.
CDPR just need to get their shit in gear or people will start to see them as incompetent.
there is no mystery to developing for the PS4. It's an x86 system. Since they were primarily a PC developer there is nothing for them to learn here. The real issue is the lack of power of the console itself. Sony is mandating 1080p and they are delivering that at a slight cost. They could run it at 900p turn up some eye candy and deliver a more stable experience across the board but Sony wants 1080p for most of it's games so here you have it.
44% is misleading, since in reality you don't really see much of a gap at all between the console versions...
---
DF Verdict:
"Overall, the fact Xbox One tends to holds a higher frame-rate is misleading in terms of the quality of the end experience; a capped 30fps is by far the preferred option in this case and we still hope to see it implemented in a future update. The PS4 release has the right tactic, but it lets itself down by being unable to stream in world geometry or render effects at a perfect 30fps to take advantage of this. The perceived effect is a judder to motion on both consoles, for cut-scenes and gameplay, though PS4 is capable of smoother passages of play at times. When it comes to performance, and factoring in the game's superior 1920x1080 output, Sony's hardware is a preference - but it's not the clear choice we had expected."
Yes, it does. The settings are factually higher across the board and the availability of custom sharpening allowed the 900p set to overcome the inherit texture blur that comes with upscale. The scene I chose was extremely like-for-like, they happen in the same area of the game. Don't like it? Try the test yourself.
@ProtossX:
At least make an attempt at being funny if you're gonna fakeboy so much. It was Win8 OEM and it only ran $89.99 on Amazon. 7850 2GB w/2 free games ran $150 at best price during that time.
Isn't this the first game CDPR have developed on PlayStation systems? They've always been more of a DX fanboy type developer. I say it just needs more optimisations a lot like the Assassin's Creed Unity situation, that ran like shit on PS4 patchy patchy later, all was gravy, albeit, gravy being still horrendous on both platforms.
CDPR just need to get their shit in gear or people will start to see them as incompetent.
there is no mystery to developing for the PS4. It's an x86 system. Since they were primarily a PC developer there is nothing for them to learn here. The real issue is the lack of power of the console itself. Sony is mandating 1080p and they are delivering that at a slight cost. They could run it at 900p turn up some eye candy and deliver a more stable experience across the board but Sony wants 1080p for most of it's games so here you have it.
the first i do when i go into a game is adjust my resolution to make text an everything cleaner an crisp for my monitor an max i out
after i dabble with settings an such
its just how things go man i would do the same thing as sony resolution is king clearer crisper text an no blurry or fuzzy ness u want ur tv maxed out you don't want anything to be not on par with the tv settings
Isn't this the first game CDPR have developed on PlayStation systems? They've always been more of a DX fanboy type developer. I say it just needs more optimisations a lot like the Assassin's Creed Unity situation, that ran like shit on PS4 patchy patchy later, all was gravy, albeit, gravy being still horrendous on both platforms.
CDPR just need to get their shit in gear or people will start to see them as incompetent.
there is no mystery to developing for the PS4. It's an x86 system. Since they were primarily a PC developer there is nothing for them to learn here. The real issue is the lack of power of the console itself. Sony is mandating 1080p and they are delivering that at a slight cost. They could run it at 900p turn up some eye candy and deliver a more stable experience across the board but Sony wants 1080p for most of it's games so here you have it.
Sony does market the 1080p thing to death, but I doubt though that they somewhat mandate CDPR to put this game 1080P on ps4. If your sony you dont want to mess around with dev like cdpr and lose one of the biggest game. We have seen sony taking absolutely crappy none 1080p port versions of games for sake of them being on their console also. They did it because they simply could do it, pretty much within target. They even played around with dynamic resolution on xb1.
No it really doesn't, you didn't even compare to like for like scenes.
Ok, here's another set:
Must be strange seeing what the game's textures actually look like. First peep at full implementation of volumetric fog I would suppose, as well.
Keep in mind PS4 is enjoying a 44% boost in resolution in this comparison.
Let me break it down even more:
44% res advantage.
What's the point of this dude? we already know PC is teh strongest!!11. Xbone and ps4 are using the same settings, ps4 has the res boost tho. seriously.
What's the point of this dude? we already know PC is teh strongest!!11. Xbone and ps4 are using the same settings, ps4 has the res boost tho. seriously.
I already stated the point I was trying to make. PC only acted as a tool to test a few common SW assertions. I found it to be an interesting experiment and surely worthy of exploration, don't you think? PC had nothing to do with it, and frankly, neither did XO except to say they were very close in quality.
@ReadingRainbow4 said:
even still I'd take a 44% boost in resolution over a few frames. Especially in a game like the witcher, it's not like it's a twitch shooter.
@gamecubepad said:
@ReadingRainbow4 said:
eh, 1920x1080 is still 1920x1080.
A few things I'm intrigued by is the idea of devs building around lowest common denominator, nerfed CPUs dragging the PS4 down, and less important, but still possible the sw claim that Sony is after 1080p moniker at any cost.
This is mostly high, with a few medium/ultra settings thrown in the mix @900p. Looks noticeably better than PS4's "attempt" at 1080p.
Let's be clear, I don't believe Sony would force a game to run 1080p at any cost. I made it clear I was exploring that concept on a tertiary level. I just tried to show the 44% resolution advantage you touted didn't result in correlating increase of image quality. In fact, I showed you could score a win in quality at lower resolution. Because I don't work for CDPR, and I have no hands on with PS4, they only way I can explore it's bottlenecks or weaknesses is to use PC versions of multiplats. If I came off fanboyish or unscientific in my approach let me know. I didn't intend to do so. Thought I was contributing something interesting.
As for project cars, project cars has weak ai and most of the physics are done on the gpu, making this game not very cpu intensive, hence the ps4 has the edge in this game. Good for car game lovers but the stage has been set, project cars is going to be the execption that confirms the rule, games will become more cpu intensive, like the last 8 months have clearly showed us and with dx12 the x1 is simply going to wipe the floor with the ps4, since it's going to be able to match the resolution with better performance.
Most ps4 owners didn't see this coming and for that I must warn my fellow gamers...
- We stated that high numbers of AI could cause CPU bound scenario's on XB1 and we used the 7th core to eliminate these cases. This is somewhat acknowledged in your updated article.
Like i already told you it is the high number of cars not the quality of the AI buffoon the problem and indeed the xbox one is CPU bottleneck on Project Cars more so than in The Witcher.
The witcher is an open game it put bigger strain on the PS4 GPU rendering the same number of object at higher resolutions.
The XBO use 7 cores at 1.75 ghz vs the PS4 6 cores at 1.6ghz and still the PS4 is faster on a CPU intensive game..lol
7 core vs 6 cores results.
1080p vs 900p.
Extra Temporal AA.
Up to 14 FPS faster..
But but but the xbox one has a faster CPU it will wipe the floor with the PS4...hahahaa
I get what you're saying but higher texture settings are always going to pop more than a resolution difference. I know it's personal preference but I'm really not a fan of that custom sharpening, in some spots it's quite overkill.
That is a tradeoff. In motion, the sharpening+900p produces more shimmering on foliage, whereas the higher resolution on PS4 coupled with what must be extra temporal AA keeps the grass looking smoother and more unified, at the sacrifice of losing texture detail(which is tradeoff for using post AA). At least you understand where I was coming from now.
That is a tradeoff. In motion, the sharpening+900p produces more shimmering on foliage, whereas the higher resolution on PS4 coupled with what must be extra temporal AA keeps the grass looking smoother and more unified, at the sacrifice of losing texture detail(which is tradeoff for using post AA). At least you understand where I was coming from now.
the ps4 is a better gaming device a dedicated system only serving one purpose GAMING
theres no kinect using up cpu power
theres no crap gpu cuz microsoft tried to save some cash or whatever the hell they were doing i dunno
its built to game its built for 1080p tvs
its built for 30 fps cinematic quality
we saw what gta 5 looked at 60 fps ppl were flying around cars they couldn't control the car with keyboard an mouse it was possible the cars were flying around like back to the future basically
Playing it on anything but PC is a waste of time and money.
Well thank god rational people (CDPR included) don't think that, because console sales are a huge chunk of why this game had such a successful launch. You aren't losing anything other than a high framerate and some nicer graphics if you're playing on PS4/XB1. Stop shitposting please
Sure PS4 is better if you prefer shit like Killzone over Halo, or Driveclub over Forza. lol.
MS spent more for less, IIRC the XO had a larger silicon budget for less powerful APU due to choice to go with EDRAM and DDR3 over unified GDDR5 like PS4.
I don't own GTA5 on PC yet, but I know GTAIV on PC crapped on the console versions due to better gfx, performance, and especially mods. The mods for GTA5 have been fucking hilarious I wouldn't trade that for anything. Main reason I want it on PC, regardless of better gfx and performance.
---
PS4 is a great little console for the price. Shame they charge for online, have lackluster exclusives, and the unit has weak CPU. I'll buy one in a couple years when it's worth it.
As for project cars, project cars has weak ai and most of the physics are done on the gpu, making this game not very cpu intensive, hence the ps4 has the edge in this game. Good for car game lovers but the stage has been set, project cars is going to be the execption that confirms the rule, games will become more cpu intensive, like the last 8 months have clearly showed us and with dx12 the x1 is simply going to wipe the floor with the ps4, since it's going to be able to match the resolution with better performance.
Most ps4 owners didn't see this coming and for that I must warn my fellow gamers...
- We stated that high numbers of AI could cause CPU bound scenario's on XB1 and we used the 7th core to eliminate these cases. This is somewhat acknowledged in your updated article.
Like i already told you it is the high number of cars not the quality of the AI buffoon the problem and indeed the xbox one is CPU bottleneck on Project Cars more so than in The Witcher.
The witcher is an open game it put bigger strain on the PS4 GPU rendering the same number of object at higher resolutions.
The XBO use 7 cores at 1.75 ghz vs the PS4 6 cores at 1.6ghz and still the PS4 is faster on a CPU intensive game..lol
7 core vs 6 cores results.
1080p vs 900p.
Extra Temporal AA.
Up to 14 FPS faster..
But but but the xbox one has a faster CPU it will wipe the floor with the PS4...hahahaa
yeah right project cars is cpu intensive with that weak AI lmao,
How many cars don't matter if the ai is weak, racing games exists since the eighties. It's the physics and the polygons that make the game more demanding on the gpu, not the cpu. Well the cpu will have some more work too, but project cars isn't cpu bottlenecked otherwise it would simply run better on teh x1, end of story.
There's a framerate comparison video on youtube for the latest patch and it's clear the ps4 dips more but it hardly happens. The ps4 version looks way better with a decent amount of anisotropic filtering and slightly better shaders. If i had to choose I would prefer the ps4 version over the xbox version. Also I own both platforms so don't bother accusing me of fanboyism.
@commander: Because a 3 to 5fps advantage makes up for a 44% res advantage?
When you're going sub 30fps that 5 fps is the difference between night and day especially when the x1 version can keep that 30 fps locked., that 44 percent over 900p is noticable, but not that much and it's only a shallow comfort if your game doesn't play fluently like on the x1.
Playing it on anything but PC is a waste of time and money.
Well thank god rational people (CDPR included) don't think that, because console sales are a huge chunk of why this game had such a successful launch. You aren't losing anything other than a high framerate and some nicer graphics if you're playing on PS4/XB1. Stop shitposting please
yet console players will fight to the death over 2fps difference and 900p vs 1080p.
@commander: Utter BS. The PS4 version rarely dips while it always looks better. This isn't a twitch shooter and the dips are extremely rare.
no it's not a twitch shooter, but it's an action game in a lot of scenes, and it is in those action sequences that the ps4 lags,and no resolution can make up for that, end of story.
Log in to comment