Resident Evil 4 - Remake [XBSX|S, PS4, PS5, PC]

[davis.anthony]

Anyone else surprised that the PS5 has a performance advantage on XSX? Also have no idea what kind of visual benefits RT On offers

I doubt the game is compute bound all the time so will suit PS5 better due to faster clocks.

And RT doesn't seem to be as obvious as RE2/3 Remake.

 

[davis.anthony]

But to be fair, Xbox literally has more powerful hardware, and by many accounts, PS5 literally has better tools.

But we know that XSX's GPU isn't more powerful across the board.

XSX's GPU is faster in:

- Compute
- Ray tracing

In pretty much every other area of the GPU pipeline PS5's GPU is faster due to the clock speeds.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Or they don’t care about Xboxes at all. Whatever it is is fine. As long as it runs and dosent look significantly worse is acceptable.

That's a lot of assumption though without much proof

 

[Karamazov]

XsX build might also be older, that's a preprelease demo afterall

 

[chris1515]

Better to wait final version. After PS5 has some front end advantage in hardware and Xbox Series X have better compute and memory bandwidth, but API are very different from Primitive shader against Mesh shader in one side and no sampler feedback or hardware VRS on PS5 and API raytracing are very different too.

And it seems PS5 have a tools advantage and the advantage to be the lead platform because of bigger install base.

 

[pjbliverpool]

But we know that XSX's GPU isn't more powerful across the board.

XSX's GPU is faster in:

- Compute
- Ray tracing

In pretty much every other area of the GPU pipeline PS5's GPU is faster due to the clock speeds.

Higher texturing capability and more overall bandwidth too. The PS5 has higher theoretical fill rate (although that is often bandwidth constrained).

 

[Remij]

Looking at a comparison between the PS5 version and the Series X version, the PS5 version is definitely lower resolution. It almost looks like as if it's using some type of VRS or something. Not all aspects of the image have that kind of macroblocky looking resolve.

Series X

 

[davis.anthony]

Higher texturing capability and more overall bandwidth too. The PS5 has higher theoretical fill rate (although that is often bandwidth constrained).

I don't think texturing performance has been an issues for years now?

Bandwidth will only go so far.

If the game is front end limited then XSX's higher bandwidth and compute won't do anything to help it.

 

[iroboto]

I don't think texturing performance has been an issues for years now?

Bandwidth will only go so far.

If the game is front end limited then XSX's higher bandwidth and compute won't do anything to help it.

I do find it odd to be front end limited though, Is that a viable excuse?

Series consoles have Mesh Shaders, that replaces the entire front end, so discard and geometry hardware are moot with Mesh, it will leverage compute ALU.

On the same call if you don’t have enough compute you have VRS.

Fill rate is about the only thing I could point at, but if Mesh Shaders are doing their job correctly overdraw shouldn’t be an issue.

If it’s only about not using the features in Xbox because they want to share a code base with PC, well, then I guess it’s on Microsoft to step up and help, or on developers to have enough cycles to flip their engines over.

 

[chris1515]

I do find it odd to be front end limited though, Is that a viable excuse?

Series consoles have Mesh Shaders, that replaces the entire front end, so discard and geometry hardware are moot with Mesh, it will leverage compute ALU.

On the same call if you don’t have enough compute you have VRS.

Fill rate is about the only thing I could point at, but if Mesh Shaders are doing their job correctly this shouldn’t be an issue.

I am not sure Xbox Series X is faster than PS5 on this front where the console use native Primitive Shader and the Xbox Series X use it non natively like on PC and this is probably the main reason Mesh shader is slow on RDNA 2 and RDNA GPU.

À¾ÀîÁ±»Ê¤Î3DGE¡§Primitive ShaderÂÐMesh Shader¤Î¿¿¼Â¡£¥¸¥ª¥á¥È¥ê¥Ñ¥¤¥×¥é¥¤¥óÀïÁè¤ÎÆâËë¤ÈAMD¤Î¥²¡¼¥Þ¡¼¸þ¤±GPUÀïά

¡¡µî¤ë2022ǯ12·î¡¤AMD¤ÎRadeon GPUÀïά¤òÅý³ç¤¹¤ëDavid Wang»á¤ÈRick Bergman»á¤Ë¡¤¥¤¥ó¥¿¥Ó¥å¡¼¤¹¤ëµ¡²ñ¤òÆÀ¤¿¡£ËܹƤǤϡ¤Èà¤é¤Ëʹ¤¤¤¿¡ÖPrimitive ShaderÂÐMesh Shader¡×¤Î¥¸¥ª¥á¥È¥ê¥Ñ¥¤¥×¥é¥¤¥óɸ½à²½Á褤¤Î¼Â¾ð¤È¡¤º£¸å¤Î¥²¡¼¥Þ¡¼¸þ¤±GPUÀïά¤Ë¤Ä¤¤¤Æ¤ò¥ì¥Ý¡¼¥È¤·¤¿¤¤¡£

www.4gamer.net

From AMD David Wang

　Primitive Shader as hardware exists in everything from Radeon RX Vega to the latest RDNA 3-based GPU. When viewed from DirectX 12, Radeon GPU's Primitive Shader is designed to work as a Mesh Shader.

On PS5

　Since the PS5 GPU is an AMD RDNA-based GPU, it is equipped with a Primitive Shader and can be used natively (from the PS5 SDK). As a result, some PS5 exclusive game titles effectively utilize Primitive Shader.

 

[iroboto]

I am not sure Xbox Series X is faster than PS5 on this front where the console use native Primitive Shader and the Xbox Series X use it non natively like on PC and this is probably the main reason Mesh shader is slow on RDNA 2 and RDNA GPU.

À¾ÀîÁ±»Ê¤Î3DGE¡§Primitive ShaderÂÐMesh Shader¤Î¿¿¼Â¡£¥¸¥ª¥á¥È¥ê¥Ñ¥¤¥×¥é¥¤¥óÀïÁè¤ÎÆâËë¤ÈAMD¤Î¥²¡¼¥Þ¡¼¸þ¤±GPUÀïά

¡¡µî¤ë2022ǯ12·î¡¤AMD¤ÎRadeon GPUÀïά¤òÅý³ç¤¹¤ëDavid Wang»á¤ÈRick Bergman»á¤Ë¡¤¥¤¥ó¥¿¥Ó¥å¡¼¤¹¤ëµ¡²ñ¤òÆÀ¤¿¡£ËܹƤǤϡ¤Èà¤é¤Ëʹ¤¤¤¿¡ÖPrimitive ShaderÂÐMesh Shader¡×¤Î¥¸¥ª¥á¥È¥ê¥Ñ¥¤¥×¥é¥¤¥óɸ½à²½Á褤¤Î¼Â¾ð¤È¡¤º£¸å¤Î¥²¡¼¥Þ¡¼¸þ¤±GPUÀïά¤Ë¤Ä¤¤¤Æ¤ò¥ì¥Ý¡¼¥È¤·¤¿¤¤¡£

www.4gamer.net

From AMD David Wang


On PS5

Im not sure what native implies here. I definitely think that Mesh Shaders run natively on RDNA2 hardware unless it’s being suggested that it’s emulated over a primitive shader.

I’m not exactly sure if Mesh Shader performance can improve if the scheduler can be optimized further.
@Digidi can probably provide a lot better insight here. I don’t quite understand where the translation is going

 

[davis.anthony]

I do find it odd to be front end limited though, Is that a viable excuse?

Of course it is.

You have a good chunk of the pipeline that's up to 17% faster on PS5.

Series consoles have Mesh Shaders, that replaces the entire front end, so discard and geometry hardware are moot with Mesh, it will leverage compute ALU.

But are they being used in RE4 Remake?

On the same call if you don’t have enough compute you have VRS.

It's not used in RE4 Remake and is only worth 2-3fps best case.

Fill rate is about the only thing I could point at, but if Mesh Shaders are doing their job correctly overdraw shouldn’t be an issue.

But again, is RE4 Remake using Mesh Shaders?

If it’s only about not using the features in Xbox because they want to share a code base with PC, well, then I guess it’s on Microsoft to step up and help, or on developers to have enough cycles to flip their engines over.

Agreed.

 

[iroboto]

Of course it is.

You have a good chunk of the pipeline that's up to 17% faster on PS5.

But are they being used in RE4 Remake?

It's not used in RE4 Remake and is only worth 2-3fps best case.

But again, is RE4 Remake using Mesh Shaders?

Agreed.

Yea. I mean. Mesh Shaders are likely not to be used for a while. Just following through some guides here:

How mesh shaders are implemented in an AMD driver

In the previous post I gave a brief introduction on what mesh and task shaders are from the perspective of application developers. Now it’s time to dive deeper and talk about how mesh shaders are implemented in a Vulkan driver on AMD HW. Note that everything I discuss here is based on my...

timur.hu

And he writes, it’s easy to get poor performance from them. If you’re a developer struggling with DX12, low level geometry processing may be the last thing on your mind as apparently there is little hand holding there for the developers. It’s also a reason I don’t necessarily trust Mesh Shader benchmarks. In many cases they are represented so poorly, and in others so well.

So. To answer your question, probably not, I would agree few titles if any leverage mesh shaders.

 

[Dr. Nick]

I do find it odd to be front end limited though, Is that a viable excuse?

Series consoles have Mesh Shaders, that replaces the entire front end, so discard and geometry hardware are moot with Mesh, it will leverage compute ALU.

On the same call if you don’t have enough compute you have VRS.

Fill rate is about the only thing I could point at, but if Mesh Shaders are doing their job correctly overdraw shouldn’t be an issue.

If it’s only about not using the features in Xbox because they want to share a code base with PC, well, then I guess it’s on Microsoft to step up and help, or on developers to have enough cycles to flip their engines over.

Don't mesh shaders require extra work when it comes 3d models? I can recall the developer of Metro being like, "our vertex shaders are mature, so we don't see a need to move to mesh shaders right now." Much like many of the other features available on the Series consoles, it doesn't amount to much if developers aren't using it. Primitive shaders, on the other hand, just replace vertex shaders in the pipeline, so isn't culling automatic?

 

[iroboto]

Don't mesh shaders require extra work when it comes 3d models? I can recall the developer of Metro being like, "our vertex shaders are mature, so we don't see a need to move to mesh shaders right now." Much like many of the other features available on the Series consoles, it doesn't amount to much if developers aren't using it. Primitive shaders, on the other hand, just replace vertex shaders in the pipeline, so isn't culling automatic?

It depends on what you’re trying to accomplish. You probably don’t want to use Mesh Shaders for everything. As things get more complex or you require additional flexibility that’s where they come into play. But in the idea that you’re failing to make frame-time because of geometry challenges, either with culling etc, then I would wonder if Mesh Shading is an option there.

 

[chris1515]

Don't mesh shaders require extra work when it comes 3d models? I can recall the developer of Metro being like, "our vertex shaders are mature, so we don't see a need to move to mesh shaders right now." Much like many of the other features available on the Series consoles, it doesn't amount to much if developers aren't using it. Primitive shaders, on the other hand, just replace vertex shaders in the pipeline, so isn't culling automatic?

Primitive shaders is the hardware and culling isn't automatic.

There is no mesh shader hardware on RDNA GPU just Primitive shaders and with an abstraction into the API seeing like Mesh shader on AMD PC GPU or on XSX.

From the interview of David Wang (Senior Vice President, Engineering, Radeon Technologies Group, AMD)

Mr. Wang
　Certainly, Mesh Shader was adopted as standard in DirectX 12. However, the new geometry pipeline concept originally started with the concept of tidying up the complicated geometry pipeline, making it easier for game developers to use, and to make it easier to extract performance. In other words, it can be said that both AMD and NVIDIA had the same goal as the starting point of the idea. To put it bluntly, Primitive Shader and Mesh Shader have many similarities in terms of functionality, although there are differences in implementation.
　So did AMD abandon the Primitive Shader? As for hardware, Primitive Shader still exists, and how to use Mesh Shader is realized with Primitive Shader , it corresponds to Mesh Shader with such an image.

Mr. Wang
　Primitive Shader as hardware exists in everything from Radeon RX Vega to the latest RDNA 3-based GPU. When viewed from DirectX 12, Radeon GPU's Primitive Shader is designed to work as a Mesh Shader.

 

[Dr. Nick]

Im not sure what native implies here. I definitely think that Mesh Shaders run natively on RDNA2 hardware unless it’s being suggested that it’s emulated over a primitive shader.

I believe that is what was being said in the article. Primitive shaders can run natively on the PS5 because it is exposed in the API. While in DirectX 12 instead of primitive shaders being exposed in the API the Primitive sharder hardware is being used to emulate mesh shaders.

 

[mr magoo]

But we know that XSX's GPU isn't more powerful across the board.

XSX's GPU is faster in:

- Compute
- Ray tracing

In pretty much every other area of the GPU pipeline PS5's GPU is faster due to the clock speeds.

“Modern graphics APIs (D3D12, Vulkan) are complicated. They are designed to squeeze maximum performance out of graphics cards. GPUs are so fast at rendering not because they work with high clock frequencies (actually they don't - frequency of 1.5 GHz is high for a GPU, as opposed to many GHz on a CPU), but because they execute their workloads in a highly parallel and pipelined way. In other words: many tasks may be executed at the same time.“

XSX has more compute units than ps5.

 

[Dr. Nick]

“Modern graphics APIs (D3D12, Vulkan) are complicated. They are designed to squeeze maximum performance out of graphics cards. GPUs are so fast at rendering not because they work with high clock frequencies (actually they don't - frequency of 1.5 GHz is high for a GPU, as opposed to many GHz on a CPU), but because they execute their workloads in a highly parallel and pipelined way. In other words: many tasks may be executed at the same time.“

XSX has more compute units than ps5.

Not trying to be snarky but then why do people overclock their GPUs? It's not really a replacement for more CUs but higher clock does seem to help out with certain games, am I wrong here?

 

[DavidGraham]

Due to faster potential clocks, the PS5 can have faster triangle setup (primitive rate, culling, tessellation, etc), pixel fill rate, texture filtering rate, thread scheduling (front end), and memory subsystem (caches).

Series X is definitely faster in Compute, Ray Tracing and memory bandwidth.