Tomb Raider

[BoardBonobo]

No they didn't. Look at the graph.

A trailing average calculated from x refresh samples (at say 60hz) can make variation between 20 and 30 hz look like less than 20. It all depends on when you start and end the period you use to calculate the figure.

I predict there will be awful lot of people who shouldn't even be talking about frame rates.

Whilst being perfectly true if you were working out the average, I think it was the fact that the Xbone was actually crawling at 18fps during that section that was being highlighted.

I love the phrasing of the article:

For its part, Xbox One is clearly more consistent

This very true. Consistently worse! But I guess this is a just a re-run of the balance (non)argument.

Is the 8% claw back of the GPU reservation going to make up this kind of difference?

 

[pjbliverpool]

GTX680

Normal and Ultra avg 60

Everything maxed avg 47

And yet I get 51 on my 670 with everything maxxed and 54 at ultimate settings. Go figure.

EDIT: just realised why - going off the first 2 results you have vsync on which means the test cant go faster than 60fps bringing your overall average down.

 

[Sigfried1977]

I guess the master race dick waving shenanigans are inevitable whenever a new (ish) console game comes out, aren't they? Kind of an unwritten law or at least some weird code of conduct. Anyway, you can throw as much hardware power at the PC version as you want, you're still not gonna get rid of the rubbery skin and the static foliage. And like in just about any PC game released thus far, the tesselation in TR was damn near pointless anyway. When I bought the game last year I spent a good 10 minutes in front of my monitor switching the bloody feature on and off until I actually managed to spot the difference. Or rather until I thought I might have spotted a difference at least.
Whatevs, if a Definite Edition patch were to hit Steam tomorrow, the extra features would suddenly become quite the game changers.

 

[almighty]

And yet I get 51 on my 670 with everything maxxed and 54 at ultimate settings. Go figure.

EDIT: just realised why - going off the first 2 results you have vsync on which means the test cant go faster than 60fps bringing your overall average down.

My 7970 is a lot higher then those 2 cards.... I'm ~20% faster at the same Ultra settings.

 

[pjbliverpool]

I guess the master race dick waving shenanigans are inevitable whenever a new (ish) console game comes out, aren't they? Kind of an unwritten law or at least some weird code of conduct. Anyway, you can throw as much hardware power at the PC version as you want, you're still not gonna get rid of the rubbery skin and the static foliage.

Seems to me both sides are guilty and your post is a case in point.

EDIT: On the subject of "rubbery skin" this shot is quite interesting:

 

[Rangers]

Ya I know the X1 version is probably affected more... just saying that you can't mention one thing and ignore the other. I would guess that the X1's avg framerate would be ~35fps if unlocked and the PS4's would be ~53fps, which is how I reached my 18fps guess. That article that was posted earlier said that the X1 version peaked at 45fps with not much was going on, but mostly ran around 30fps, and averaged around 35fps. They probably got their numbers from an insider source that knew how it performed without a cap. Ultimately they probably capped it because it ran closer to 30fps most of the time

Looking at minimum gameplay framerates is a good (while still a limited picture) angle since it removes any cap effects. 24 vs 33, or basically 37.5% faster on PS4. Well short of the initial 30/60 hullabaloo over 200% faster PS4 frames.

OTOH for XBO, it's disappointing it cant even hold a locked 30, while the PS4 headroom means the lowest FPS is 33, above the magical 30 FPS threshold.

 

[almighty]

You're still not gonna get rid of the rubbery skin

PC on Ultra + FXAA

PS4

I know which one looks better to my eyes.... And it's not the bottom one either..

 

[Sigfried1977]

Yeah, let's pick the one screen shot with tons of perspective distortion to prove a point. It's not like there aren't dozens of other screen shots out there (and in this very topic no less) showing just how convincing the upgrade can look.
And it's not just the skin either. They also got rid of that dead-eyed look.
Also, let's not forget all the extra light emitting/receiving particles and the cool looking foliage. Looks really cool in motion, i.e. the way normal people tend to enjoy their games. Screen-shots mean squat.

 

[djskribbles]

Looking at minimum gameplay framerates is a good (while still a limited picture) angle since it removes any cap effects. 24 vs 33, or basically 37.5% faster on PS4. Well short of the initial 30/60 hullabaloo over 200% faster PS4 frames.

OTOH for XBO, it's disappointing it cant even hold a locked 30, while the PS4 headroom means the lowest FPS is 33, above the magical 30 FPS threshold.

I don't think it's that simple because they are not like-for-like scenes. Most of the parts where the X1 version dips below 30fps, the PS4 version holds a 15-25fps advantage. Only one of the sections of the video was the gap below 10fps for a few seconds. And the X1 version actually dipped to 18 for a brief moment according to their counter, which averages the framerate from the last half second vs last full second on the display below. I think the gap is more like 15-20.

 

[almighty]

Yeah, let's pick the one screen shot with tons of perspective distortion to prove a point.

Nope... Original still looks better...

http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1823137&postcount=476

 

[Gitaroo]

anyone knows if theres any changes in terms of gameplay? I was really hoping the orignal game to have new game +, when you aquire the item it will automatically max out its stats in a new playthrough.

 

[blakjedi]

Nope, digital foundry just proved you 100% correct

Good conversation, great response.

 

[ultragpu]

Nope... Original still looks better...

http://beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1823137&postcount=476

Um, not really. Original skin shader looks like a game from the Doom3 age, dry, lifeless and unnatural. The DE version looks exactly the opposite of that.
I bet you would be all over the DE's sss and other features once they patch it up the PC version.

 

[Gitaroo]

http://abload.de/img/amarectv2014-01-2414-f3up0.png

SSS on the face looks awesome, no contest.

 

[DavidGraham]

Ehm, just got here from DF's article! I must say this is my first visit to the console forum .. and wow, is it always that hot in here?

 

[joker454]

http://abload.de/img/amarectv2014-01-2414-f3up0.png

SSS on the face looks awesome, no contest.

That pic makes the new skin look much better, although the poly count is kinda low.

 

[ultragpu]

That pic makes the new skin look much better, although the poly count is kinda low.

Yeah true, although it's not as noticeable from the default 3rd person perspective. I wonder what would the sequel look like tho. A native nextgen Lara built ground up to PS4's spec, maybe something like that girl from Agni's Philosophy?

 

[Gitaroo]

should email nixxes and tell them to add tessellation for the Lara model, all Im asking for.

 

[joker454]

Yeah true, although it's not as noticeable from the default 3rd person perspective. I wonder what would the sequel look like tho. A native nextgen Lara built ground up to PS4's spec, maybe something like that girl from Agni's Philosophy?

Well at least the good news is that the machines are so similar in design that they can build next versions of games to ps4 spec and just drop resolution or frame rate for the xb1 version. Or in other words it doesn't seem like one box should be holding back the other this gen since they support similar software techniques without any coding voodoo.

 

[Pixel]

So it seems the PS4 version of the game uses triple frame buffering so there is no screen tearing regardless of the fps, as well as no input lag associated with double buffering.