VGTech Video Technical Discussion [2017]

Status
Not open for further replies.

Globalisateur

Globby
Legend
Veteran
Supporter
Wolfenstein 2 XB1 vs XBX comparison by VG Tech.


Basically the game has not a stable framerate and runs very similar to the XB1 game based on the stats.

- Fluctuating 55-60fps during most fights.
- Hovers at 30-40fps when lots of alphas (with a minimum of 31fps, worse than the XB1 version at 33fps)

m8RzimR.png


Another game on XBX that has problems (more than the others consoles) when there are lots of alpha to process (the other being Shadow of War).
 
Last edited:
You'd prefer a technical review using a different perspective and different scenes tested ?



They already use dynamic res on consoles for both Doom and Wolf 2. On XBX wolf 2 runs from 1512p to 2160p (the latter very rarely according to VG tech).
DF traditionally takes the heaviest scenes. VG Tech is imo pretty new. I don't trust them or know their methods. The fact that DF reviews takes longer is ideal, that means they are thoroughly investigating their results and can prove them and get back to the developer with them. Like you saw with Titanfall.

So If VG Tech and DF have the same analysis then yes they become more credible. For now, I just don't trust them yet.
 
DF traditionally takes the heaviest scenes. VG Tech is imo pretty new. I don't trust them or know their methods. The fact that DF reviews takes longer is ideal, that means they are thoroughly investigating their results and can prove them and get back to the developer with them. Like you saw with Titanfall.

So If VG Tech and DF have the same analysis then yes they become more credible. For now, I just don't trust them yet.
Maybe you should trust him/her more. Because you kind of already know VG Tech actually. He is with us since 2014 with the username: @VGA and is doing pixel counting at least since 2015.

https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1907318/

AFAIK his framerate videos never contradicted DF videos. But he usually selects different scenes than Digital foundry and it's always interesting to have another perspective. Like NX gamer perspective is also interesting.

Also he / she gives us very interesting and exhaustive stats from his framerate videos (DF rarely ever do this).
 
Maybe you should trust him/her more. Because you kind of already know VG Tech actually. He is with us since 2014 with the username: @VGA and is doing pixel counting at least since 2015.

https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1907318/

AFAIK his framerate videos never contradicted DF videos. But he usually selects different scenes than Digital foundry and it's always interesting to have another perspective. Like NX gamer perspective is also interesting.

Also he / she gives us very interesting and exhaustive stats from his framerate videos (DF rarely ever do this).
oh neat I didn't know. That's actually something new I didn't know.

Yea, that's pretty cool, and i'll spend some more time watching vga's videos.
but I have my reasons for trusting DF.
 
DF traditionally takes the heaviest scenes. VG Tech is imo pretty new. I don't trust them or know their methods. The fact that DF reviews takes longer is ideal, that means they are thoroughly investigating their results and can prove them and get back to the developer with them. Like you saw with Titanfall.

VGTech is very accurate, even more so than DF in my opinion, and provides the data to support his claims.

For instance, it's VGTech who discovered the dynamic resolution of Fallout 4 on XB1. DF didn't notice anything...

Sometimes, they may test the game with a different patch though.
 
Last edited:
Yeah VGTech sometimes spots lower drops in res/framerates than DF. Maybe he/she spends more time in his/her tests and can spot tougher stress points. I also like how he/she posts in-depth stats for every video.
 
VGTech is very accurate, even more so than DF in my opinion, and provides the data to support his claims.

For instance, it's VGTech who discovered the dynamic resolution of Fallout 4 on XB1. DF didn't notice anything...

Sometimes, they may test the game with a different patch though.
Numbers without commentary isn't as useful as numbers with commentary. And so I want the full analysis completed by DF to explain the numbers. I'm not interested in just the numbers, it's important to know why. Otherwise looking purely at numbers is basically useless if the viewer themselves cannot perform in-depth analysis on it.

That being said, I respect the content he provides as well. I see it as a strong supplement to DF analysis.
 
Last edited:
Posting one screen grab seems a little misleading..


Dg2wO1N.jpg


X1X doesn't seem to overall struggle with the scene relative more than X1S, there's a ton of FPS variation within the scene making comparison difficult, but overall X seems to run it similarly or better overall.
 
Both of these "heavy alpha overdraw" single image screenshots are bad. The first one has heavy explosion in the middle of the screen on the right screenshot, but not on the left one. The second one has heavy flames near the camera on the left side image, but not on the right. Alpha overdraw cost can fluctuate a lot from frame to frame. The left/right size of these screenshots don't even look identical to each other. You need to do a much more controlled experiment (camera exactly in the same place, perform exactly the same action) and average fps from longer time to get valid results.
 
It looks like VGTech has been toying around with Xbox One BC X360 in the past few days...

Mass Effect BC X360



Grand Theft Auto IV BC X360



Assassin's Creed III BC X360



Assassin's Creed Rogue BC X360



Halo 3 BC X360

 
More tests by VGTech:

Lost Odyssey BC X360:


Doom One X vs One:

 
is there a DF article on Doom, XB1 vs OneX? Because it could be an interesting one, especially because VGTech mention in their video that the OneX version never drops below 1080p but doesn't explain what is the average resolution overall.

Remember, Doom does not have an 1X enhancement patch yet. The 1X doesn't drop below 1920x1080p so the average resolution is the same as the max resolution which is the same as the min resolution -- 1920x1080 or 1080p.

VGTech commented the following:

The version tested was 1.0.0.11 on both consoles. Note that Doom hasn't received an Xbox One X Enhanced patch yet. The default video options were used for both consoles.

The Xbox One version of Doom uses a dynamic resolution ranging between 1344x756 and 1920x1080. The Xbox One rarely reaches a full 1920x1080 with pixel counts usually closer to the lower end of the range. The Xbox One X doesn't seem to drop below 1920x1080.
 
Remember, Doom does not have an 1X enhancement patch yet. The 1X doesn't drop below 1920x1080p so the average resolution is the same as the max resolution which is the same as the min resolution -- 1920x1080 or 1080p.

VGTech commented the following:
Well the game still drops down into the ~50fps on XBX at only 1080p according to VG tech.
 
Well the game still drops down into the ~50fps on XBX at only 1080p according to VG tech.
That should be a bug, because the adaptive resolution should prevent this. It should also not be a cpu-limit because else it would drop even further on xb1 or ps4.
Or the author of the video did the following to slow down the x
- play from the internal hdd
- start a big download in background on the internal hdd
- record everything in 4k onto the internal hdd

If you do all that combined, you get some loading problems here.
 
That should be a bug, because the adaptive resolution should prevent this. It should also not be a cpu-limit because else it would drop even further on xb1 or ps4.
Or the author of the video did the following to slow down the x
- play from the internal hdd
- start a big download in background on the internal hdd
- record everything in 4k onto the internal hdd

If you do all that combined, you get some loading problems here.
Lol. Why should it be a bug ? XBX is not that omnipotent machine that should run everything twice faster than any other machine. If you think that then you have being mistaken by only hearing one bell, and not some others.

Also there are others minor drops throughout the short video, it's not an isolated case. And Doom can drop lower on XB1 and PS4 anyways even using a dynamic resolution that can be quite drastic on the peasant consoles.
 
We know Doom is getting the One X treatment, so why bother discussing it before it's even patched?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top