I’m not trying to suggest it dosent matter. Overall more CUs is better than higher clock speeds but as you noticed I can overclock GPU I cannot add more cus.
Resident Evil 4 - Remake [XBSX|S, PS4, PS5, PC]
- Thread starter Grizzly Teddy
- Start date
I’m not trying to suggest it dosent matter. Overall more CUs is better than higher clock speeds but as you noticed I can overclock GPU I cannot add more cus.
That's exactly my point. Saying "XSX GPU is more powerful" is technically wrong. For instance caches performance can be very important in some games.
Isn't texture filtering done on the CU's?
I did want to broach something like this. Is it possible to leverage the extra cu's and bandwidth to make up for the clock deficit?
davis.anthony
Veteran
They say "1.5Ghz is high for a GPU"
Talk about using an old ass quote.
And it does have more CU's but it also has less bandwidth per CU than PS5 (Actually the lowest bandwidth per CU of any RDNA2 GPU) and it's also trying to feed more CU's with a slower front and back end than what PS5 has.
XSX is a poorly balanced system.
davis.anthony
Veteran
This statement is not true as evidenced by historic AMD GPU's and also proven wrong currently by XSX.
davis.anthony
Veteran
You are correct with everything apart from texturing.
The TMU's are contained within the CU's and as XSX has more CU it actually has higher texturing performance by around 17%.
I quoted Adam Sawicki on that. He is currently developer technology engineer at AMD.
davis.anthony
Veteran
Ask him to benchmark Vega 56 and Vega 64 at the same clock speed and ask him to explain why Vega 64 isn't faster despite its additional CU's.
Last edited:
DavidGraham
Veteran
Only the Texture Mapping Unit (TMU) is responsible for Texture Fill Rate, and Filtering.
That's true for the texture fill rate (texture mapping) part, but texture filtering requires a different methodology, as it's quite complex and not as straight forward.
Texture Filtering (using FP16 precision) on AMD GPUs is often half their texture fill rate, filtering also requires way more memory bandwidth, and more cache usage. The Series X has 44% more CUs/TMUs than PS5 (208 TMUs vs 144 TMUs), however it only has 25% more L2 Cache (5MB vs 4MB), memory bandwidth is also fractured on Series X, with a 560GB/s portion and a 336 GB/s portion, while the PS5 enjoys a fixed 448GB/s at all times.
So in practice, while texture fill rate on Series X is a huge 380GT/s vs the PS5's 320GT/s (a difference of 60GT/s), the texture filtering rate stands at 190GT/s vs 160GT/s (a meager 30GT/s difference) easily compensated for with the higher clocked caches on the PS5 and the more consistent memory bandwidth.
Keep in my mind that even the 160GT/s filter rate is a crazy high number for consoles, that is never reached in practice. Even if we assume a console game implementation of native 4K120 (which never happened), we only need 1 billion Texel/s for filtering, multiply that by 8X (using AF 8X, which is rarely used in consoles), you get about 8 billion Texel/s, still far from the 160GT/s rate. You would become bottlenecked by memory bandwidth, ROPs, or compute way faster than the filtering rate.
Edit: of course other advanced texture techniques need more texture fill rate (such as render to textures and cubemaps), but still the available fill rate in modern GPUs if often way more than enough.
That's why I believe the PS5 can filter more textures than Series X (even if by a small amount), or at the very least, is not at a deficit compared to Series X.
Last edited:
Yeah ps5 runs better, but grass it's a pixelated mess. I don't know why on ps5 is so terrible when XSX has not such issue, I supposed both use same recontrunction tech but vegetation it's not that shit on XSX. Maybe it explains why runs better on ps5, probably CBR is cheaper.
Didnt notice the grass issue on my playthrough. Seems like it is something I have to look for
edit: btw you say that it is shit on the PS5 but I really cant see the difference in the video between the X and PS5 versions
Last edited:
If you have the time make a capture screen shot, grass it's a pixellated mess if you zoom on it, not on xbox console, neither on XSS.
Is it also evident on the video above?
Because I cant see it
First minutes in this video:
Last edited:
It seems to be on the frame rate mode where the PS5 version is running at lower resolution compared to the Series X version (1200p vs 1440p) and the PS5 version is also darker.
Cant see that as much pronounced on the 4k mode which might also be the result of a darker image
snc
Veteran
I can confirm, something broken with reprojection algorithm on ps5
PIxels counts is false in the video, I just used it to show how awful is the rendering of vegetation on PS5. PS5 has definitely higher final resolution buffer compared XSX (it's visible in the tree branch) but grass is pixellated as hell and I don't know how you cant noticed it, neither XSS version show such pixellated mess. It's very clear in the video posted above, look at it and zoom at the max in the first minutes, on PS5 grass is pixellated, it's not on xbox consoles. Unfortunately I can't make a capture, I'm at job now.
Last edited:
