People did insist for the truth, now we know PS5 was punching above its weight but that issue has thankfully been resolved.
Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2020]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
Apparently, until DF/Dictator confirms all this and based on Tom's and John's tweets:
- PS5 version seem to run worse than before, however a recent tweet from John seems to suggest is not that bad and previously reported FPS drops may not happen that often or drop that low (a video on YT shows PS5 dropping 15fps every 15-20 seconds, could be a capturing issue).
- Some twitter users are suggesting that reinstalling the game fixes framerate drops on PS5.
- XBSX version runs better than before, there are also some cryptic tweets from John implying XBSX may drop to a lower res to maintain a more constant framerate and prevent tearing.
- Based on what Tom mentioned, XBSX (and apparently PS5 as well) run at locked 30fps on quality mode.
- XBSS seems to be the console to get the nicest bump in performance.
- PS5 version seem to run worse than before, however a recent tweet from John seems to suggest is not that bad and previously reported FPS drops may not happen that often or drop that low (a video on YT shows PS5 dropping 15fps every 15-20 seconds, could be a capturing issue).
- Some twitter users are suggesting that reinstalling the game fixes framerate drops on PS5.
- XBSX version runs better than before, there are also some cryptic tweets from John implying XBSX may drop to a lower res to maintain a more constant framerate and prevent tearing.
- Based on what Tom mentioned, XBSX (and apparently PS5 as well) run at locked 30fps on quality mode.
- XBSS seems to be the console to get the nicest bump in performance.
snc
Veteran
ps5 2.25x more pixels than ps4 pro and 5x ps4 witch more details, better reflections, occlusion, and more stable fps, not bad
Yes but it will come, and the pc version will be that day one.
PS4/Pro still holding up quite well nice to see.
Not comparable at all. WD and Ubisoft games all have dynamic TOD. They are always recalculating lighting. Spider Man as I understand it is fixed lighting. They can spend their remaining frame time on reflections.
Agreed, my general caution on this type of comparison, without a histogram showcasing frames over a larger spread, you can theoretically hit pause at any time in the video and capture a frame where one is higher resolution than the other and vice versa. Such is the case with dynamic resolution algorithms. So if your two systems are not synced to the frame when you do the comparison, one might be ahead of the other in adjusting resolution. You wouldn't know.
To be biased, one could just cherry pick a bunch of side by side scenes that are not frame aligned and choose the ones where console A is always higher than console B and create that narrative.
That and as you said, you can't really tell shit from youtube. The amount of compression happening on youtube destroys colour detail (therefore pixel detail) etc.
On a pure technical level regarding ray tracing, spiderman is one of the least impressive ones to show the new tech off. Strangely enough, its probably Q2RTX and minecraft really going for it. While WD isnt all that 'next gen' (no game really is so far), its RT is absolutely rather well done. Cold wars ray traced shadows also are game changing in the shadows department.
Now what would be cool is if RT would give some advantages in multiplayer games. Btw, its really nice to see that CoD is cross-plat in MP matches. This will ensure more populated servers and longetivity in the long term on all platforms. I tried cold war on PS5, you can even use kb/m. Its not the same as the pc somehow, but its close enough as in the matches are fair between the two platforms.
Whatever the reason. I don't care about the reason. The considerably reduced RT distance spoils the whole package.
From a technical point, sure. But at face value, SMM RT looks far more impressive than WDL implementation. And WDL dynamic TOD isn't all that impressive... but the night scenes are quite nice with an RTX card.
Well yes, but the end-product of that tech matters as well.
it's not used in the game, and don't know how it impacts performance, but you can modifiy the sun position in photo mode though.
The clouds may be volumetric too, not sure, but they move and deform.
Sure but if we’re talking technical, then this needs to be acknowledged. Baked lighting looks every bit as good as dynamic but it’s static for a fraction of cost. You lose out on gameplay design when you go that route.
so you’re right while not visually impressive, if you’re gameplay revolves around dynamic lighting that matters.
anyway the point wasn’t to judge a winner here. I just need to point out that SM:MM didn’t discover some RT method that other companies couldnt resolve. It’s just that a bulk of what enables the far distance reflections is likely due to the amount of available rendering time allotted to it. Which really just a discussion around whether we are seeing the limitations of the hardware or the limitations of the software.
Last edited:
We're not here to declare winners though. That's getting into console warring.
I agree, never was up for debate. But while a technical thread, there should always be room for end-product results and/or opinions (even if they're subjective in nature). Which I think Globby was trying to state - the end result.
Never stated such. Only presenting my opinion on the end product results. Those taking it as "console warring" need to relax.
Yea I think SM:MM looks better as well.
But I wanted to put context around it for those who may not understand why
There's not much use for declaring results without understanding why - which is what the tech forums are about. It leaves for a rather poor discussion without, so the intentions are unclear - are they asking for why the results look a certain way or are they just simply declaring a winner for the sake of being a winner?
I have to agree. While dynamic time of day is nice and all, it doesn't really have a function in games that warrants its cost, in my opinion. Especially when some games with supposedly 'dynamic time of day' still have a very much artist-driven time of day.
I'm playing through Ghost of Tsushima right now, which has a dynamic time of day system which at times completely changes in front of your very eyes to suit whichever event is happening. So while it may still be more expensive than a Spiderman with simple, set times of day, it is very much still driven in a way to make the game look as good as it can in each event.
Either that, or i'm imagining things.
I can't define everyone's intentions but my own. For me, a technical discussion can be had (which this forum and this thread are all about) along with varying opinions on how such tech compares to other tech, even when those opinions can be heavily subjective. But this is nothing new, even DF has compared tech from various engines and often preferring one over the other. And there is nothing wrong with that.
And console fanboys and warriors don't need much to get upset over... so this being a technical thread isn't going to stop those subjective views. But yes, context is always needed - that I do agree with.
- Status
Similar threads
