Hmm. We have developers here that can actually explain these concepts in full and have if you search here. I would consider them a better source of information than the post there.
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2017]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- digital foundry
- Status
Hahahaha ... no.
Saving bandwidth at the cost of ALU and copy because you're hitting ddr3 would be stupid on a system where you aren't hitting bandwidth constraints because you aren't spilling into slow memory.
If system specific optimisations didn't have value there wouldn't be system specific optimisations. You know, of the type that iD are openly talking about. In detail. Because they give system specific performance advantages.
If I were to take a stab at guessing why, I would think it's because deferred route probably has smaller shader code. Forward tends to have larger shader code, (it needs to do more) and with GCN, latency hiding is done by issuing shader code over and over again, saturating the GPU. When shader code is too long and you don't have enough CUs, your pipeline starts to stall as a result of a lack of available registers to continue to do work.
In this way, deferred rendering, which is capable of breaking into smaller shaders, is more ideal in this way so that those registers can free up and not stall at the cost of bandwidth. You'll meet the 60fps target, but you'll lose out on resolution.
I'm guessing they have some sort of hybrid approach of course, so perhaps this is not entirely correct.
Deferred rendering would be faster on PS4 too.
What makes the Esram happy ?
- A lower resolution ? PS4 would be faster at a lower reslution too.
- Less alpha effects ? It's good for the PS4 too.
Etc.
If a specific optimization makes the code faster on PS4, then it should work on XB1 too and vice versa. After all, both consoles are virtually identical.
Basically, this sentence only means that you need to lower the resolution on XB1...
Last edited:
What I think is really cool, is that Sony pushed a bit ahead of MS with the PS4 and then some more with the Pro. Now MS is pushing the boundaries again. So hopefully Sony will answer with their next device and push ahead again. The good side of market competition, imho.
Backwards and Forward compatibility is something that MS seems to have nailed with the XB now, I am not sure how important it really is outside people that likes to compare games across generations and platforms, but it is definitely some real cool technology.
Will Sony follow suit or will they ignore it, will be interesting to see.
I wonder if we will see somebody push the XB1X and create something that you can not do on the PS4P or if it will just be more and prettier pixels. I would love to see something cool gameplay wise come out of it. Ala the pitch that MS did about cloud assisted XB1 etc.
Backwards and Forward compatibility is something that MS seems to have nailed with the XB now, I am not sure how important it really is outside people that likes to compare games across generations and platforms, but it is definitely some real cool technology.
Will Sony follow suit or will they ignore it, will be interesting to see.
I wonder if we will see somebody push the XB1X and create something that you can not do on the PS4P or if it will just be more and prettier pixels. I would love to see something cool gameplay wise come out of it. Ala the pitch that MS did about cloud assisted XB1 etc.
Tiled deferred is not "just faster" than tiled forward. It's a trade-off (I can't remember it off the top of my head), and therefore the performance difference depends on the performance profile of the hardware. XB1 has a different ratio of geometry: pixel:ALU and bandwidth from the ps4 so therefore it is affected slightly differently.
Its not so cut and dry recop.
Yes in theory its true that anything Xbox did would benefit PS4, at least in a general statement this should be true.
But there are some things that would benefit PS4 _more_ than doing it the way that is best for XBO for instance. And I don't think your argument accounts for that.
If everything that was great for XBO was equally as useful for PS4 (and we made PS4 follow the XBO code path), then you'd imagine there would be a lot of cases in which PS4 is not being fully utilized. Which is the worst case scenario for PS4 owners.
When a more powerful machine like, X1X chooses to go 16xAF or 4K assets, that's not good for the base models, they will be impacted heavily by them. Whereas, reducing the assets down to below 4K, or choosing less than 16XAF won't really impact X1X, or improve performance. this is the advantage of having more power (something PS4 shares in common over XBO in this case).
When you have more resources, you can do more, before you reach your limits, and reducing the graphical options will not necessarily make things 'better' than if you loaded them up.
I'm not sure if I'm throwing punches with the lights off but I think that for some obscure reason they couldn't implement Dynamic Resolution in this game; they used a 1440x810 resolution and Deferred to some degree avoid the geometry and shader utilization problems in Xbox One.
PS4 and PS4.Pro had a little more power to spare and were able to barely do it using Forward within their performance target of minimum 50 fps. As per Digital Foundry analysis the game seem to reach 50 fps often.
PS4 and PS4.Pro had a little more power to spare and were able to barely do it using Forward within their performance target of minimum 50 fps. As per Digital Foundry analysis the game seem to reach 50 fps often.
If you are optimizing for esram, I think it would mean that you'd get better performance from it.
Forza series and Gears, Halo and ROTR are all 1080p.
Halo 5 is using dynamic res (sorry 'dynamic scaling'). It's usually hitting ~900p or lower.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-assassins-creed-origins-xbox-one-x-analysis
The diminishing returns of resolution.
The diminishing returns of resolution.
Using 1750p that's 48% more pixels pushed by XBX much of the time. Which is "Impressive resolution boosts over PS4 Pro" according to them.
48% is a lot. I just don't think visually it has as big an impact as 1080p over 900p, which is about the same difference (44%). Also, their article and video pretty much say as much, that the perceived quality difference is not that significant.
Yea. Halo wars 2 is 1080p though (why I wrote halo and not H5). I have been doing catch alls here.
Basically the point is, optimization doesn't have to mean a reduction in resolution.
Last edited:
Agreed. In order for X1X to stand out further they would need more graphical options or even higher fidelity assets. But I think most people will be comfortable with this. A great win for Ubisoft here and in many ways 4Pro. They got a great amount of benefit here with less costs.
It's interesting that E3 I thought started out as CBR; but now we see removal of CBR for dynamic scaling. I guess they felt they TAA with dynamic scaling produced better results than a CBR solution.
There are many trade offs. Forward plays very well with MSAA and transparencies.
Deferred will struggle with this a bit more. But forward also has other cons in dealing with SSAO and SSR which deferred plays well with.
A lot of these issues are mitigated with going hybrid I think. But only studios with a lot of talent can support so many rendering methods with high levels of optimization.
And they totally forgot one feature of the x-version. As someone from ubisoft said in an interview (in the xbox x launch party) AC Origins uses the additional memory not for textures, but for the eagle-flight that Switches instantly on xbox one x. They just added a blob in memory to accelerate the loading of the the eagle-flight. That is not really an effective use of the memory, but Ubisoft have always said the want parity on the current gen in AC games.
Last edited:
That's a respectable response; tackle the masses head on and put the additional resources towards ensuring better gameplay experience.
So, Fifa 18 is more optimized than W2 because it runs at 1080 on XB1 ?
And you have to lower the resolution if you want the same result than on PS4. It's completely trivial... there's nothing specific with Esram.
- Status
Similar threads
