Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2021]

Status
Not open for further replies.
As I said, in the day to day gaming temperature will not be a problem, but there will be situations (however rare) where temperature could cause a drop.
No, it won't. If temperatures reach a certain point, the console will shut down (or throttle like the PS4 did). But that is not the normal behavior. Every PS5 on the earth should have the same clock speeds when using the same workloads. Temperature is only a fail-safe thing for that console. Nothing that has something to do with normal operation.

I have always thought that Control in RT+ Photomode is causing downclocking on PS5, I can't even test mine as my watt meter broke...(God damn Fermi :cry:)
This can be the case because with an open framerate, also the CPU needs more power so the power-budget for the GPU might shrink.
But I really don't know how you came to this conclusion as we can't tests which clock-speeds are used. We can only see that the framerate fluctuates above the original frame target, but we can't say if that is due to CPU or GPU.
 
No, it won't. If temperatures reach a certain point, the console will shut down (or throttle like the PS4 did). But that is not the normal behavior. Every PS5 on the earth should have the same clock speeds when using the same workloads. Temperature is only a fail-safe thing for that console. Nothing that has something to do with normal operation.

Yes, i remember Sony (was it sony) stating that no matter where you play in the world (hot or cold) you get the same performance.
 
because the PS5 always tries to run as fast as possible if the power budget allows it. The peak power budget is at around 220W.
For the most part this is correct, but it cannot exceed it's maximum clock speed so there could be situations where power is left on the table.

Ultimately power output is derived a function of frequency and activity level. If the activity level is very low then the clockspeed can go high with little penalty, eventually you get to the point where it's high but not really doing anything, this is typical sort of idle behaviour but high frequency you often see on processors.

The other situation is a bottleneck, like RT, in which there is not enough RT silicon to generate a lot of silicon activity, so you get a situation where you're running RT but the silicon is waiting idle for the GPU to retrieve results from memory, so you're taking on a more difficult software load, but energy wise it's not really doing much, so you once again will have a high frequency maybe in this type of situation, but you have low activity meaning possibly lower voltage ultimately.

Where you get the most power draw is maximum activity, and that comes from using the largest part of the GPU as often as possible at the highest frequency as possible - which is easy to do with higher frame rates, and harder to do with graphically complex loads or higher resolutions, as it's not necessarily easy for developers to maximize every single part of the pipeline such that the whole GPU is always active. As they often say, the GPU sitting idle, or not being saturated much more than 50% is considered normal.

So I think in theory we should see PS5 hit 220W as often as possible, since that is the behaviour it is designed with; we may not necessarily see that happen in reality, and that will come down to a case by case scenario on how games are built.
 
Article @ https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2021-far-cry-6-tech-review

Far Cry 6 tech review: it looks good and runs well - but needs extra polish
PC, PS5 and Xbox Series consoles tested.

The venerable Dunia engine returns once again for the sixth mainline entry in the Far Cry franchise - and there's a certain sense of a series returning to its roots. Firstly, the latest open world evokes the more lush, jungle terrain of earlier games, while there's also the return of technologies like fire propagation - its omission much lamented in Far Cry 5. While gameplay hasn't progressed significantly, there are a range of new graphics features, along with ray tracing on PC and a focus on 60 frames per second on the latest generation of consoles - but also the sense that the game requires further polish to make it everything it can be.

Perhaps this is the Dunia Engine's last stand, but there's no doubt that Far Cry 6 is still a handsome game and some of the new additions to the engine are striking. For example, the skies are considerably more impressive than prior games thanks to the inclusion of a ray-marched volumetric cloud rendering system. Similar technologies have been seen in Horizon Zero Dawn and Microsoft Flight Simulator to name just two, but the clouds do look good in Far Cry 6, particularly in how they interact with lighting, especially during sunset. There are limitations though, with their low resolution breaking down into noise with fast movement at 60fps.

Less dramatic but still impressive is water deformation, best highlighted when marine wildlife interacts with the surface - but one element of the game I was really looking forward to was the introduction of hardware-accelerated ray tracing features. Unfortunately, this is PC-only, but regardless, there are two key effects here: shadows and reflections. How much they add to the presentation depends on the effect. Honestly, ray traced shadows are a bit of a question mark in their effectiveness, because first of all they only apply to sun shadows - so all indoor and artificial shadows are standard shadow maps. Also, shadows cast by vegetation or alpha-masked transparencies are also just shadows maps mixed into the RT equivalents. Another negative aspect is the fact that RT shadows - along with much of the post-process pipelines - run at quarter resolution. RT shadows are a net gain overall, but the implementation could be much better and the effect is too limited overall.

...

So how does the game fare on consoles? Series S seems to spend most of its time in the 1080p-1224p range and while you get 60 frames per second, the presentation is not hugely attractive. The general blurriness in the presentation means that hammering down pixel counts for PS5 and Series X is challenging but PlayStation 5 renders in the 1728p to 1872p range, while the Microsoft flagship has a higher resolution window, seemingly in the 1872p to full 2160p range. The real-life implication of this is simply that you get a crisper image on the high-end Xbox console.
 
interestng test with 11gb vram usage and textures problem on geforces, so I suppose consoles doesn't have this texture problem ?
seems possible, though in theory could slightly affect XSX and not PS5.

As per Alex's note, there something amiss with how Nvidia cards are handling the ultra texture pack, and I assume, to some degree, if there was a VRAM allocation issue, but XSX wasn't affected by this, seems contradictory to the posit. XSX should be performing poorly due to the VRAM bottleneck. It may well be just a nvidia driver issue.
 
Last edited:
Article @ https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2021-far-cry-6-tech-review

Far Cry 6 tech review: it looks good and runs well - but needs extra polish
PC, PS5 and Xbox Series consoles tested.

The venerable Dunia engine returns once again for the sixth mainline entry in the Far Cry franchise - and there's a certain sense of a series returning to its roots. Firstly, the latest open world evokes the more lush, jungle terrain of earlier games, while there's also the return of technologies like fire propagation - its omission much lamented in Far Cry 5. While gameplay hasn't progressed significantly, there are a range of new graphics features, along with ray tracing on PC and a focus on 60 frames per second on the latest generation of consoles - but also the sense that the game requires further polish to make it everything it can be.

Perhaps this is the Dunia Engine's last stand, but there's no doubt that Far Cry 6 is still a handsome game and some of the new additions to the engine are striking. For example, the skies are considerably more impressive than prior games thanks to the inclusion of a ray-marched volumetric cloud rendering system. Similar technologies have been seen in Horizon Zero Dawn and Microsoft Flight Simulator to name just two, but the clouds do look good in Far Cry 6, particularly in how they interact with lighting, especially during sunset. There are limitations though, with their low resolution breaking down into noise with fast movement at 60fps.

Less dramatic but still impressive is water deformation, best highlighted when marine wildlife interacts with the surface - but one element of the game I was really looking forward to was the introduction of hardware-accelerated ray tracing features. Unfortunately, this is PC-only, but regardless, there are two key effects here: shadows and reflections. How much they add to the presentation depends on the effect. Honestly, ray traced shadows are a bit of a question mark in their effectiveness, because first of all they only apply to sun shadows - so all indoor and artificial shadows are standard shadow maps. Also, shadows cast by vegetation or alpha-masked transparencies are also just shadows maps mixed into the RT equivalents. Another negative aspect is the fact that RT shadows - along with much of the post-process pipelines - run at quarter resolution. RT shadows are a net gain overall, but the implementation could be much better and the effect is too limited overall.

...

So how does the game fare on consoles? Series S seems to spend most of its time in the 1080p-1224p range and while you get 60 frames per second, the presentation is not hugely attractive. The general blurriness in the presentation means that hammering down pixel counts for PS5 and Series X is challenging but PlayStation 5 renders in the 1728p to 1872p range, while the Microsoft flagship has a higher resolution window, seemingly in the 1872p to full 2160p range. The real-life implication of this is simply that you get a crisper image on the high-end Xbox console.
I don't know if that was really pertinent as during normal gameplay it's mostly around 1800p in both versions and with their TAA the difference is really hard to notice in most cases. In real-life 99% of people won't see any crisper image on XSX.

We have seen others comparisons using about the same resolution in both versions where we could actually see a crisper image on PS5 as XSX had blurrier textures caused by VRR. In those cases I have seen posts where some people who had both version actually noticed the crisper image on PS5.

But in that game with their TAA I personaly have trouble noticing a 20% resolution gap. But whatever.
 
You're confusing your TLAs.
VRR = Variable Refresh Rate
 
But in that game with their TAA I personaly have trouble noticing a 20% resolution gap. But whatever.

20% is not a small difference, of course you can notice it. Especially in a game with an image as soft as this one has. Every little bit of crispness helps. Its been a while since i've played a game so soft looking. My monitor is 1440p, even going 1.2 res multiplier has an imediate effect in the stability of the folliage while in motion and is less alliased. Also, what do you mean with "normal gameplay" ? Alex was showing his counting in the middle of a firefight, in perfectly normal gameplay.
 
20% is not a small difference, of course you can notice it. Especially in a game with an image as soft as this one has. Every little bit of crispness helps. Its been a while since i've played a game so soft looking. My monitor is 1440p, even going 1.2 res multiplier has an imediate effect in the stability of the folliage while in motion and is less alliased. Also, what do you mean with "normal gameplay" ? Alex was showing his counting in the middle of a firefight, in perfectly normal gameplay.
Its easier to notice 20% more pixels from 1440p than for example from 1872p, dynamic res is generaly hard to notice if upsaling is good tough yeah game looks kinda soft
 
seems possible, though in theory could slightly affect XSX and not PS5.

As per Alex's note, there something amiss with how Nvidia cards are handling the ultra texture pack, and I assume, to some degree, if there was a VRAM allocation issue, but XSX wasn't affected by this, seems contradictory to the posit. XSX should be performing poorly due to the VRAM bottleneck. It may well be just a nvidia driver issue.
The XSX VRAM usage is not limited to the 10GB GPU optimized memory. The GPU can still use the other portion of the RAM even if it's not as fast as the GPU Optimized memory.

Also, XSX has more overall memory available to a game than the PS5; 13.5GB to 12GB.....
 
The XSX VRAM usage is not limited to the 10GB GPU optimized memory. The GPU can still use the other portion of the RAM even if it's not as fast as the GPU Optimized memory.

Also, XSX has more overall memory available to a game than the PS5; 13.5GB to 12GB.....
True but if the footprint of the game is spilling beyond 10GB it’s officially hitting the slow pool. I’m not sure how much bandwidth is required though.

We’ve typically been under the assumption that 10GB was for graphics and the remaining memory (slow pool) for everything else; audio, game, etc.
 
True but if the footprint of the game is spilling beyond 10GB it’s officially hitting the slow pool. I’m not sure how much bandwidth is required though.

We’ve typically been under the assumption that 10GB was for graphics and the remaining memory (slow pool) for everything else; audio, game, etc.
The "slow" pool is still 330gb/s, which is not particularly slow, just slower than the full bandwidth.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jay
what is source of this info ?

Nothing that has been publicly confirmed, but was said in passing by some developers during discussions on other forums. So take it as you want.
 
  • Like
Reactions: snc
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top