Ike Turner
Veteran
No, you also have contact shadows + higher res cone step mapping (also applied to more materials throughput the game).
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2020]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
except you reduce visuals by going to a lower res. 1440p UE5 will look worse than 4k UE5 .
Dynamic resolution is fine because i can still get a higher quality but the range needs to be small. I don't want a 4k image dropping to 480p so i can get more effects on screen.
We'd all have to agree at what resolution we hit diminishing returns. I would take 4k 60 over 1440p 120hz .
yea
we will just have to see what happens this generation. This is also why i'm staying PC. I will get a 6800xt and when it doesn't give me that 4k 60fps experiance I want and there is a card out there that is reasonably priced I will buy that card so i can experience it
Yes other sources have mentioned added contact shadows and particle counts. The DF video wasn't clear IMO on cone step mapping wrt whether it's improved over both PC and XBOX or just the OneX. It may well be the former but it sounds like these changes are also coming to the PC version so a face off after they have will be pretty interesting. Presumably resolution will have a far bigger impact on performance than these settings so the main take away for me from this video at present is the reduced average resolution. I found it strange that the XSX would be running at a full 4k/60 at PC ultra settings and thus seemingly performing on par or beyond the 2080Ti. The reduced resolution would have a big impact on that equation with the 2080Ti achieving a 63fps average at 4k, but 112fps at 1440p with the XSX seemingly running at roughly mid way between those 2 on average. The XSX may lose some performance from the increased settings and gain some from VRS, but the net loss/gain is probably negligible compared with the gain from the resolution drop.
I wouldn’t increase from 60 to 120 FPS, I also think beyond 60fps you start hitting diminishing returns- but some games I can appreciate the advantage.
snc
Veteran
nobody says it won't but thats not the point, I don't want games that are native 4k but still looks like ps4 or x one game just resolution bumped, you can spend gpu power better
Obviously if your hardware can run the same game/engine at 4K at the same level of detail as at 1440p, of course you’d go for 4K! That isn’t the point though.
If your hardware requires you to reduce details in order for you to hit 4K, then it’s a question of how much eye candy you’re willing to lose in order to get a native 4K picture.
Inuhanyou
Veteran
This is silly.
There is more to how demanding a game is than its res and fps target even if those things are important. Gears5 is doing a lot more under the hood on series x than on one X
Is it a larger problem on S? S's slow ram is so small and so slow, and isn't the amount available for games 8GB?
Rurouni
Veteran
I'm responding to the 4K is better thing because it isn't. If you can simply run the same game with the same setting on 1440 vs 4K without any performance penalty then obviously the game is not using the hardware properly on 1440. It is always a trade off and for me personally, I prefer lower res (1080p) with better quality vs 4K.
If there is going to be no performance penalty with going from 1440p to 4K the only scenario that I can think off will involve 2 different hardware, like a game developed for Xbox series where a dev could target 1080 or 1440 on S and 4K on X and be done with it. Even then, in that situation, I do think one of the console will not have its hardware utilized in an effective manner.
Having said that, so far it seems devs prefer to sacrifice S as in develop for X and see how low the setting need to be for S, which is a good thing.
It's very tight.
**
8GB @ 224 GB/s, 2GB @ 56 GB/s.
**
So CPU will take up a fixed amount of bandwidth that can't be avoided. The faster the framerate the more bandwidth that will be taken. So if you start to approach 40GB/s you've already come really close to maxing out your smaller pool.
Then you subtract that amount with loss from 224, and you're left with about what the PS4 has.
This is fairly tight from a raw muscle perspective. With features that help reduce workloads etc, they buy themselves additional margin, but without it, expect to see dips as low as 720p again as the configuration of memory and CUs seem better suited on the 1080p and below range as least wrt going into next generation.
The situation is still remarkably easier and better than the XBO setup with esram.
But expectations should be kept in check here. For a device that is as cheap as it is and as small as it is - it does work really well as a portable console, where the primary draw is the price and size.
The primary goals for this console should align with what this coming generation will largely be about:
higher frame rates
faster SSD
different game design
you're going to lose the graphics to obtain it, but that's okay. I only run 1080p on my 1070 anyway as well, because framerates are what I'm interested in.
Last edited:
I'd say this is a fairly common scenario for PC gamers. If you've already maxed out the games graphical options and perhaps your monitors refresh rate, then a move from 1440p to 4K can effectively be free. You don't even have to max out your refresh rate, just be unable to hold 60fps at 1440p, but still able to hold 30fps at 4k. So effectively you're limited to 30fps unless you have a VRR monitor or don't mind tearing.
Do we know what the system reserve is, as that will come out of the slow pool.
CPU probably won't saturate BW of slow pool anyway.
Overall BW and memory capacity was more my concern, but devs will just have to deal with it.
Which is lot harder work for devs due to state of GDK currently.
So it's easier to just drop features than to optimize at the moment.
Rumored to be all 8 GB Faster Speed is available to games, except for perhaps 32 Meg for dashboard/os graphics use. This has not been confirmed like the SeriesX info was in March. But worst case is system reserve is at most 2.5 GB if they didnt scale anything from Series X despite targetting lower resolution.
Bit more than I was expecting, but then that just means the slow pool will get even lower usage, as I don't expect the system to be using it enough to cause big impact whilst game is running.
steveOrino
Regular
Been using this for a while now and Alex finally gets around to trying it as well. Its a much more sane Implementation of HDR in non-HDR mastered games
Oh my god I've been waiting for this!!
DF on Teardown
DF on Teardown
Looks cool, I wonder if you could keep innovating on this engine to make the "voxel bricks" become smaller until you get a much more realistic looking world....
- Status
Similar threads
