By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
ithis on 11 November 2015
Edit Thread
Porcupine_I said:
walsufnir said:
ganoncrotch said:
walsufnir said:


A different storage shouldn't impact the fps that much. Faster loading times is common, better fps is not.


Did you read it? where in the article directly is it talking about the fps other than removing of the stuttering on the X1 which is a loading issue on taking out a weapon which is basically it being loaded into memory. You didn't ctrl C/V something without even reading it? or did I miss something?

Perhaps you missed the original article. There was evidence that the Xbone fall to 0 fps which led to a discussion how that is even possible and that PS4 was performing better. Of course it was quite obvious that the 0fps was because of a streaming problem and had nothing to do with processing units like the CPU or GPU but that didn't stop people confusing it with actual computing performance. Now that 0fps drop is gone by using different storage media.

I'm blaming DF for calling a short freeze 0fps.  It's obvious what is happening, the game freezes and waits for the content to load. If it is loaded faster before the game has to wait for it to process, the freeze doesn't happen. It is not related to performance but saying the game drops to 0fps gets a lot more attention. 

Well, if the game does not update the screen for a while (say 1 second), than effectively for that second we have 0FPS. No matter the cause, if the effect is that the graphics update suffers, it impacts the frames the game displays per second - and the performance of the game. 

I get it that drawing the next scene probably took far less than  seond, but that's not what the user sees, the user sees how many individual distinct frames the game draws on the screen in one second. If that is impacted (and short freezes impact that quite heavily) then what is percieved as the performance of the game suffers.

It's quite logical and straightforward.