I already agreed his Vsync issue flawed the comparison.
Current Generation Games Analysis Technical Discussion [2022] [XBSX|S, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
snc
Veteran
But why do you think there is 0 perf cost of vsync on consoles ?
Because this isn't how vsync works as Alex pointed out above. If it can be fixed by an external framerate limiter then it's a performance bug. NXG shows in excess of a 30% loss in minimum frame rates in places between his 60fps vsync on footage and 120fps mode footage. Do you really think a console game would tolerate 30% lower minimum frame rates simply as a consequence of turning on vsync?
snc
Veteran
quite a long loading times for a first party game, nice they added folliage interactivity in final build
Disappointingly 12 sec to load a level on PS5. Were those drops loading stutters during cinematics? Ugh.
As expected there is no PS5 version, just an upresed, upframed PS4 version. Or maybe a version ported from the PC build. In both cases the game is designed to run on a HDD.
As expected there is no PS5 version, just an upresed, upframed PS4 version. Or maybe a version ported from the PC build. In both cases the game is designed to run on a HDD.
Its IGN.
Honestly - this game has some super stark differences in motion and in stills between PS4 and PS5. Just because one video did not show it off well, does not mean it is not there.
Also - a game taking 12 seconds to load does not mean it is using the IO stack of the PS5 poorly. An open world game can have a lot of simulation that needs to be set up that cannot be ran off of disc as file. That would mean CPU or GPU time during the load and it is not just straight reading static data. That is a good thing.
It is NXGamer. And as such, both as much and as little IGN as Digital Foundry is Eurogamer.
Impressive stuff, maybe even more in how good the game still is on PS4. All versions probably benefit from the improved decompression pipelines part of which came in the older console’s apis as well.
It looks like they have a bunch of smaller details and draw distances on PS5, but overall it is very much a cross generation title or PC type scaling title. They can probably increase the level of detail further but it is always a balance between asset creation, the available GPU rendering budget etc.
That is not to say we wouldn’t all have liked to see something completely dedicated to PS5 tech of course! But given the scope of the game and the time it may not have made a huge difference. Not like they would rewrite the decima engine overnight.
Oh well, he’s pretty well known here
Blurring the lines between off/online rendering, i think not even he would make such claims. IGN does seem to get alot of backlash lately. When did nxg start there?EG article snippit
’’Horizon Forbidden West is held back by clunky characters and new features that lack purpose.’’
https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2022-02-14-horizon-forbidden-west-review
Much upvoted comment on EG article:
’’This review might not be as laden with praise as most others, but it seems fair and well thought-out.
I really appreciate that, because oftentimes it's hard to get more critical perspectives on giant, beautiful, polished AAA open-world games, and those are exactly the games I want to select carefully. I just can't spend 60+ hours with every one of these behemoths just because they all have 9's on IGN.’’
Mod edit: trimmed URL. -Pete
Last edited by a moderator:
Depends on what range of pc scaling in that case (baseline), and more importantly, how good the scaling is. Like DF posted here, some wildly assume FW is poorly taking advantage of the ps5 (ssd etc), but that might be a wrong stab at the devs. The game might very well be using the ps5’s abilities, but that scaling tech generally just is very good these days. FW could be a different beast in what its doing, its a large open-world with alot of cpu/gpu work going on.
Chris1515 has stated last year that FW would make make use of the ssd and full ps5 capabilities, that it would be nothing like a typical pc-settings scaling difference. He said it so many times its hard to forget.
They don't use primitive shader, no raytracing. It seems they don't do good use of the SSD too. The game has more bug than usual for a first party release probably problem with developing the game during pandemics and working on cross generation title.
The scaling is good, some asset have better geometric details and more density in vegetation. This is not bad but not great, clearly a PS4 title with more details. At least they have better geometry assets than in PS4 this is not always the case. The good things we will have some big improvements for Horizon 3. The worst I hesitate to play the game on PS4 Pro but I think I need to wait to have a PS5 and currently it is very hard to find in Spain.
Last edited:
From 26s on Pro to 12 s on PS5. About 2x faster loading time mean there are not using PS5 I/O. We know the improvement should be like 20x faster, not 2x. PS5 can load 13GB of data in less than 2 seconds and you don't need 10 s to prepare one scene with all the assets.
And the CPU is much better too 2 times faster than PS4 Pro clearly this is the worst loading time for any first party title and by far. Same with the number of bugs even after day one patch noted by multiples reviews I suppose pandemic and cross generation development took it tolls. I hope after God of War ragnarok this will end on first party side.
It isn't comparable to other first party title and same on CPU side, there is absolutely no reason to only reduce by two the speed of loading compared to a Ps4 Pro.
Why are you just looking at the amount of time for one single load? I can guarantee, that result you are seeing for 12 seconds on PS5 is not representative of all loads on PS5.
Also comparing load times by themselves is contextless - the assets on PS5 4 to 8x higher res/higher density. It is not just loading faster, it is loading A LOT more FASTER.
For example, when I do load comparisons between PC versions and console, I try and make the load comparisons at the same quality settings, otherwise you are comparing one system loading way more data.
Because it is not. That video showing off that load is far from representative aka an average. On average it is much faster than 2x.
Indeed.
But the SSD is 100 times faster.
In spiderman other cross gen open world loading time are under 2 seconds. It needs for the loading data part to be at least 10 times faster and for the CPU part probably 3 to 4 time faster.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked