By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Digital Foundry: Face-Off: Far Cry 4

Zekkyou on 24 November 2014
SvennoJ said:

A couple of drops in 5 minutes equals, say 10 frames lost out of 9000 frames, 0.1% pixels lost, vs 25% pixels lost. Yup that tiny drop during an explosion is definitely worse than upscaling. At least they have caught on that upscaling isn't great and are keeping the vertical axis native.

I find it interesting that said 0.1% fps pixel loss is enough for some people to make a decision between the two versions, yet they'll mock PS4 owners for making the same decision based on resolution.

Ah well, nothing new there. If anyone needs me i'll be sitting in the corner complaining about the PC version :p



Around the Network
zarx on 24 November 2014
riderz13371 said:

Yup, TotalBiscuit has SLI 980's and his game had stuttering.


The stuttering has nothing to do with the GPU. You could have a GPU a hundred times faster than a 980 and you would still get framedrops in the game. The drops are a codingissue sadly. As you can see in this picture the game hits a single core to max while most of the cores are basically idle, with a couple hovering around 30-40%.



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

ZyroXZ2 on 24 November 2014
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/
d21lewis on 24 November 2014

So neither is bad. Awesome news for gamers.



TheNelsconey on 24 November 2014
ZyroXZ2 said:
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.


The hardware is what it is.  The gap doesn't change.   So the November sales have nothing to do with the spike?



Around the Network
HokageTenshi on 24 November 2014
Chevinator123 said:

1fps drop on PS4, ill take the x1 version please

yes, it is extremely important reason for XB1 multiplatform titles that could outperform PS4 ver... 



bonkeng on 24 November 2014
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).


Exactly what i was thinking. XB1 is also not locked, and at a lower resolution.

Both versions look nice, but imho it's just ridiculous to prefer 1-2fps advantage during 1% of the game over better graphics 100% of the time.

You can't go wrong with either though.



“Ore no... Kachi da!”


binary solo on 24 November 2014
ZyroXZ2 said:
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.

Oops, you're right. I must have put 1920 into the 900p calc. Silly mistake.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

riderz13371 on 24 November 2014
ZyroXZ2 said:
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.

You're right. The sales spike is a direct relation to the power gap between the Xbox One and PS4 closing.

Nothing to do with these factors:

1) MCC

2) Big multiplatform games coming out (CoD, AC etc)

3) Holiday season price cut and bundles.

I'm joking if you can't tell.



ZyroXZ2 on 27 November 2014
riderz13371 said:
ZyroXZ2 said:
binary solo said:

Slightly better graphics 100% of the time vs slightly better fps 0.1% of the time. Decisions, decisions.

Or to look at it another way:

PS4 can't achieve a locked 30fps at 1920x1080p, that's a shame. But Xb one can't even manage it at 1440x1080p, that's shameful. Xb one is rendering 25% fewer pixels per frame and still can't manage a locked 30fps. And in terms of pixel count 1440x1080 is a lower output than 900p (900p is only 17% fewer pixels than full 1080p).

1920x1080 = 2,073,600 pixels

1440x1080 = 1,555,200 pixels

1600x900 = 1,440,000 pixels

In other words, it's higher than 900p.  The beauty in this whole thing is that the Xbox One is really working to close that gap.

We went from the PS4 showing its 50% more powerful GPU almost directly translating into 50% more pixel count and better visual quality to more of a 30% pixel count gap, with near-equal visual quality.

Gotta hand it to MS, they're really working with developers to get the most out of the Xbox One.  I can't deny the effort, and many players are finding this 30% gap pretty tolerable, as evidenced by the sales spike of the Xbox One.

You're right. The sales spike is a direct relation to the power gap between the Xbox One and PS4 closing.

Nothing to do with these factors:

1) MCC

2) Big multiplatform games coming out (CoD, AC etc)

3) Holiday season price cut and bundles.

I'm joking if you can't tell.

People are so scared to acknowledge that gamers are willing to deal with "less graphics" if it's close enough......

If the Xbox One had Wii U graphics and had those "big multiplatform games" running at sub-720p using last gen assets, you think it would sell that well even with a price cut?

Exactly, graphics matter to the current generation of gamers, and the Xbox One has proven it can be close enough that people will buy it and take their mulitplatform games on it even with less grass



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/