Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2020]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
Are you sure? This is not the only game, same happened in Dirt 5.
Attachments
these types of differences can be chalked up to just variation between all xbox titles and all playstation titles.
nothing major. there could be bugs as well.
You won't be able to compare graphical settings with Youtube quality. Things like resolution, texture quality, AF, draw distance are probably the things you want to look for and will have a hard time finding with such shitty compression. Even then, without the raw footage from DF, you're going to have a tough time with that as well.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Unless the PS5 does indeed have unified L3 cache on the CPU, which in the case of Zen3 it could be an important factor why its gaming performance is so much better than Zen2's.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
So the performance is the same? Weird that checkpoints affect the performance, it must be some kind of bug in the code.
edit: maybe the checkpoint clears some memory that wouldn't happen otherwise? Maybe a garbage management issue?
edit: maybe the checkpoint clears some memory that wouldn't happen otherwise? Maybe a garbage management issue?
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, was thinking that memory management could be in play. Where gaming for longer than checkpoint to checkpoint shows it, but in shorter stretches dont trigger the cleanup tipping point.
This is the most intresting launch of a gen since the 6th generation
Not really. The game comparisons and analysis are simply showing what developers and trusted sources have been saying for over a year now, that both of these systems will perform similar, no great divide in graphics (parity for the vast majority of third-party games). This generation just like the prior, will boil down to game artistry and art assets put forth by first-party games.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
Obviously DF should do whatever they want but I do feel that these type of comparisons do more harm than good. DF here is helping consumers make decisions, so when there were games in 07 that run at 60fps on the 360 and at 30fps on the PS3, a DF analysis would had helped the consumers back then to make a good purchasing decision. However, when the differences are limited to a 12p difference in resolution or 10fps when both version run at frame rates of over 100fps, that goal is kind of lost. Because both versions are good, it will only fuel trolls although there is a marginal number of people who would like to know the technical explanation for those differences.
IMO DF should do these comparisons when there are clear performance issues that would help the consumer make a more informed decision, and focus more on what I believe they do best, explaining rendering techniques and visual effects in layman terms. But I guess console comparisons draw more view and these guys need to eat as well.
I think this comparison had to be done to counter-point the other comparisons that did show differences. Otherwise some might think vast differences were the norm.
For my personal take, I'm so pleased that 60 FPS gaming with nice visuals is more than a token option, where regardless of system you're playing on it's a substantial improvement over last-gen.
I don't expect 120 FPS for next-gen only games, so as long as there's 60 FPS mode I'll be happy. Of course I say all this without having experienced 120 FPS gaming in decades. Maybe my tune will change next year when I pick up an LG OLED?
For my personal take, I'm so pleased that 60 FPS gaming with nice visuals is more than a token option, where regardless of system you're playing on it's a substantial improvement over last-gen.
I don't expect 120 FPS for next-gen only games, so as long as there's 60 FPS mode I'll be happy. Of course I say all this without having experienced 120 FPS gaming in decades. Maybe my tune will change next year when I pick up an LG OLED?
Then the claims of bias for not showing titles when games are close across platforms.
How do they or people who are interested know that said titles are close without the work being done and published?
Obviously DF should do whatever they want but I do feel that these type of comparisons do more harm than good. DF here is helping consumers make decisions, so when there were games in 07 that run at 60fps on the 360 and at 30fps on the PS3, a DF analysis would had helped the consumers back then to make a good purchasing decision. However, when the differences are limited to a 12p difference in resolution or 10fps when both version run at frame rates of over 100fps, that goal is kind of lost. Because both versions are good, it will only fuel trolls although there is a marginal number of people who would like to know the technical explanation for those differences.
IMO DF should do these comparisons when there are clear performance issues that would help the consumer make a more informed decision, and focus more on what I believe they do best, explaining rendering techniques and visual effects in layman terms. But I guess console comparisons draw more view and these guys need to eat as well.
I have no major problem with DF comparisions but I do think an issue is WHEN do you do the comparison? Do you do it with the first game code at launch? Or do you wait a few months when they may have been patches that may show significant differences (improvements)?
Perhaps they could label comparisons "Initial code test". Then with follow ups "Patch code test"....or something of the sort.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
Agreed, once you do one you cannot stop there or you'll be accused of being one sided, which is not new for them either. In any case I feel they will put a limit to this, if not they'll find themselves testing every Dirt patch from now until the end of the year. And seeing that most games have shipped with issues, it can become a monumental task. Not an easy spot to be in, specially now that there are other channels out there putting similar content that can contradict your findings, like in the PS5 COD case.
Yes. Other channels have no dips on those areas. But many other bugs are being reported so if you are planning on buying it I'd wait a bit.
They usually stipulate if it's been patched and version when required.
Trouble is games can keep getting patches months after release.
And what about people who want to buy early on.(which is when the bulk of sales happen) They already get complaints how slow they are sometimes.
Maybe it's on the games studios to launch in a better state than for DF to have to wait months? Isn't this a case of blaiming the messenger?
Thanks, I will cancel my patreon subscription then.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
