Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2022]

Not open for further replies.


(>• •)>⌐■-■ (⌐■-■)
New Year, New Thread.

Old Thread @

Rules of Engagement : Read before posting or run the risk of losing posting rights in the Tech Forum!

This is principally a technical discussion thread. It is allied to the other tech analysis threads and shares the same rules as those which you should familiarise yourself with. The purpose is to discuss the findings of the Digital Foundry articles on a technical level, including the techniques employed by game developers in their games, and the comparative design decisions off cross-platform titles. Digital Foundry is more closely allied with Beyond3D than other gaming sites which is why they get special mention here! :D

What this thread is not, is a place to complain about a port's quality and make accusations of developers, to offer feedback on the quality of the Digital Foundry writing or the writers' biases, trumpet your preferred console over the other, talk business and sales, or otherwise sidetrack the discussion from talking about the gaming technology covered in the Digital Foundry articles. If you do not post to the required standard, your posts will be removed, and persistent unwanted contributions will see you locked out of the Technology Forum.

If you want to leave editorial feedback for Digital Foundry, the best place is to leave a comment for the relevant article(s).
Was intresting look back.

The XSS discussion was good also.
Start of video sounded rather negative as wasn't really placed in context.

End of video when placed in context of people who will actually be playing it, future facing metro and matrix sounded more positive.

Are there any titles first half of year that aren't cross gen?
Most anticipated games are still cross-gen, give it a year or two more before we see true next gen games (like UE5 demos).
Microsoft choosing to release a lower power Xbox Series console coupled with a prolonged cross-gen transition period has led to a fascinating head-to-head as the vintage 2017 Xbox One X manages to hold its own in some regards up against the brand new Xbox Series S. Just how close is the contest, and can adding an SSD to the legacy machine help? Oliver Mackenzie delivers this deep dive.

Edit: Article link added.

The results are intriguing and in many way controversial - but this could apply to the whole concept of launching Series S in the first place in a world where a prior generation Xbox exists with more GPU horsepower, more RAM and much higher levels of memory bandwidth. Of course, we have Series machines replacing One equivalents and it's Xbox Series X that is the successor to Xbox One X - the clue's in the name. And by extension, we also need to be aware that One X and Series S target very, very different markets: we're talking about a machine designed for the hardcore up against a console designed for a more mainstream audience, less likely to desire the clarity delivered by 4K resolution and higher-end rendering features.

In the meantime, the comparisons between One X and Series S are intriguing. Guardians of the Galaxy, for example, is an impressive-looking game, but the Series S version undoubtedly disappoints. We're getting a 1080p30 version of the game on S with a temporally stable but soft quality image. An option to unlock the frame-rate is available on S, but only offers limited gains to the point where sticking with the 30fps cap is probably the best option - and Xbox One X has the same 30fps cap with a much higher rendering resolution. We're talking about a 1440p to 1890p image that holds up well on a 4K display. Series S has an edge in shadow and texture quality, but Xbox One X undoubtedly produces a better-looking result.

Halo Infinite? There's the sense that the game was designed to get the most out of Xbox One X as it has both 30fps quality and 60fps performance modes. On the resolution side of things, quality mode is a clear Xbox One X win - dynamic 4K plays dynamic 1080p running at 30fps, albeit with frame-pacing problems on both systems. Series S enjoys some asset quality boosts, but ultimately, Halo Infinite looks better on One X. With the 60fps performance mode, again, One X is the clear resolution winner with a dynamic 1440p facing off against a dynamic 1080p. Likely owing to its far more capable CPU, Halo Infinite runs more smoothly on Series S, but again, resolution is lower. Xbox One X can see combat dip into the 40s and 50s, but it's still holding up well taken as a whole.

We still have concerns about the Series S spec but it is delivering on its promise to run next-gen games. Microsoft Flight Simulator is a stunning, extremely detailed game that transforms satellite data into a convincing visual approximation of commercial flight. The Matrix Awakens is an unbelievably high-fidelity glimpse into the future of real-time rendering. Neither game looks as amazing on Series S as they do on Series X, of course, but they do run on Series S and they're still visually impressive. These are titles that will never see a version on any last-gen console, including Xbox One X - unless you're happy to stream via the cloud.
Last edited:
Summary lifted from Era..

"summary incoming
  • on paper the One X's gpu > Series S's gpu; more memory and higher bandwidth
  • however Series S cpu > One X's cpu, so One X is limited to 30fps but at higher resolutions
  • Guardians of the Galaxy
    • Series S - 1080p/30, better shadows and textures
    • One X - 1440p-1890p/30
  • Forza Horizon 5
    • SS - 1440p/30 or 1080p/60 (both dynamic); 4x msaa; quality has higher object detail
    • OX - 2160p/30 (dynamic), 4x msaa; object detail similar to performance mode on SS
  • Halo Infinite
    • SS - 1080p, 30 or 60; 30fps has framepacing issues
    • OX - 2160p/30 or 1440p/60; 30fps has framepacing issues, 60fps has framerate drops
  • Far Cry 6
    • SS - 1224p/60fps, dynamic
    • OX -2160p30fps, dynamic
  • CoD Vanguard
    • SS - 1440p/60 or 1080p/120, dynamic,
    • OX - 2160p/60, dynamic, lots of visual effects downgraded; cutscenes are 40-50
  • CoD Warzone
    • SS - 1080p/60, actually Xbox One mode
    • OX - 2160p/60, dynamic, actually 45-55
  • Cyberpunk
    • SS - 1080p-1440p/30, better pedestrian density
    • OX - 1440p/30, driving dials fps to low 20s
  • Metro Exodus
    • SS - 1080p/60 (lower internal res), full ray traced GI
    • OX - 2160/30
  • pretty even so far for Oliver
  • loading (OX HDD, OX SSD, SS)
    • Vanguard: 24.4, 11.8, 3.5
    • FH5: 85.5, 42.9, 24.3
    • Halo: 61.3, 27.8, 14.1
    • the Ascent: 128.9, 30.8, 30.3
  • Backwards Compatibility
    • Final Fantasy 13 -
      • SS - 1152p, 2x msaa
      • OX - 1728p, 2x msaa
    • Mirrors Edge
      • SS - 1440p/60, has drops
      • OX - 2160p/30
    • Series S has Auto HDR, better loading, and 60fps on some 360 games
    • some One series games don't have One X enhancements on Series
    • Doom 2016
      • SS - 1080p
      • OX - 2160p
    • Red Dead Redemption 2
      • SS - 864p
      • OX - 2160p
    • Far Cry 4
      • SS - 60
      • OX - high res, 30
    • Prey
      • SS - 60
      • OX - high res, 30
  • One X is better with older games
  • Series S has some fps boost for some games, faster load times, also has new hardware features
  • One X is competitive in recent titles and very much in older titles, but will struggle more with 60fps
  • One X will be unsupported eventually while Series S will be support alongside the Series X"
It would be fascinating to see a version of The Matrix Experiencing running on One X.
The One X is lacking a lot of hardware features that could be required for Matrix Experience. I doubt it would run particularly well at the same fidelity. My general thought here is that CPU and SSD requirements would already stop it from running on One X, the GPU may do alright, but the lack of DX12U features would likely make it perform worse.
Not open for further replies.