Digital Foundry Article Technical Discussion [2023]
- Thread starter BRiT
- Start date
- Status
Hmm. Yes. I was doing the wrong fraction. I was doing 9-6 / 6.
Definitely the compute difference is coming into play for sure. Though I still believe feature set has a factor here, and I’m zeroing in on the Series S, where typically it’s performing abysmally compared to the other two, and right now it’s doing a decent job keeping up.
It’s 1/3 the compute power of X, but operating at 50% of series X nearly; in most other titles it doesnt fare as well despite being simpler in complexity compared to AW2.
I'm aware that since Vega there's been Primitive Shader (or not on Vega) running on NGG, that PS5 can use Primitive Shader, and that from RDNA2 NGG also does the work of Mesh Shaders, but I've seen nothing to indicate that the 5700XT has support for Mesh Shader. Quite the opposite infact, from the Valve dude writing a graphics driver from RDNA2.
Yeah, very impressive Series S version. In a stroke it's shown it can operate well beyond even the last gen "pro" consoles when its next gen featureset is used to run a very impressive next gen game. And that's just on the GPU side, it's weakest area, relatively speaking.
Doesn't AW2 on the Series X run at 60fps, at the same (or occasionally slightly lower) settings than the series S performance standard 30 fps mode?
Series X performance mode is 847p while Series S is 720p. So per frame that's about 1.38x the resolution for Series X. Double that up to account for 60 fps vs 30 fps and that's 2.8x the pixels per second for Series X, with Series X running the same or slightly higher settings (in a few cases) while maintaining the same or slightly higher relative consistency with frame rates.
In other words, the Series S and Series X are performing similarly with regards to pixels vs TF.
Feature set could indeed be a factor with Series vs PS5 performance though. Series X is up to ~20% faster in the geometry heavy forest area that DF showed (possibly more, but frame cap can potentially hide things). Maybe that could be from having a more advanced geometry engine.
P.S. I wouldn't say the Series S normally compares abysmally compared to SX/PS5. It's not got great fillrate compared, but in games like Starfield, Forza, Diablo 4, even Immortals, it stands up pretty well.
Alex in the video said he talked to a Remedy dev who said RDNA1 does have *a* form of mesh shader support, just without amplification stage(which is why PS5 can run it well enough too). I wont pretend to know what that really means in a real world context, but it's clear it is enabling the 5700XT to run the game way better than a 1080Ti can.
See above comment. It seems to have a limited form of mesh shader support.
This would all quite well explain the Series X advantage over PS5.
Riddlewire
Regular
I didn't see or hear any mention of it. Is this game using VRS on Xbox?
The particular visual characteristics of this game would seem to be an ideal case for such a technology.
The particular visual characteristics of this game would seem to be an ideal case for such a technology.
I would say Vega 64 has aged better.
How? Nobody even benchmarks Vega 64 anymore and hasn't for years so we don't even know how it performs.
In what video did Alex say this? DF Direct?
Also, yeah the 5700 XT runs this better than the 1080 Ti but it runs at like half the performance of the PS5 which isn't supposed to happen if they have similar support.
It is benchmarked as often as Pascal is. Pascal does not perform well in the DX12 era. Vega 64 has a good deal fewer cases where performance tanks.
Yes, recent DF Direct. Wasn't posted here, which is why I guess some people are missing this information.
PS5, because of the programmable nature of mesh shader support, probably was just able to be more optimized at a low level for this? Just a guess.
It’s a primitive shader.
When people refer to mesh shaders on directX; they are talking about both amplification and mesh shader.
On PS5, they only have a primitive shader which aligns with the mesh shader, they are missing an amplification shader, which means developers have to do it.
It’s not a bad thing, and we have seen examples in the past: see UE5 Nanite uses compute shaders and mesh/primitive shaders. But it is on the developer to do which is why I don’t think it’s often used.
snc
Veteran
20% more compute power seems to give up to 20% fps boost in some scenes, cant see any corelation with lacking of mesh shaders support
Well tell the people at Remedy that, according to Alex.
I dont think this topic has been fully explored and discussed enough to make any declarative statements about what 'people mean' when they talk about this. :/
Good reasoning and good math. I was ballparking but you are correct. So the math holds. You are right with the cap we can’t tell how high either will go.
Technically when we speak about mesh shader is a primitive shader we are just referring to it explicitly they do the same thing more or less. But to be DX12U compliant you need amplification shaders, and those are used to call a mesh shaders.
They enable a compute like calling of mesh shaders.
This behaviour can be emulated via compute shaders which is what they are doing on ps5.
You are again presuming to talk for other people when this isn't a topic that hasn't been nearly discussed enough to have such definitive declarations assigned to them.
Clearly this whole topic is creating a new conversation about this stuff, because there's more nuance to it than simply 'does or doesn't have DX12U mesh shader support' as had always been supposed.
We have a whole forum dedicated to this
- Status
Similar threads
