Pemalite said:
I haven't actually tried those two games on my Ryzen 2700U notebook.
But Overwatch, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty: WW2 were hitting 1080P native... Which is certainly a step up over what my base Xbox One machine can do... Or I can dial back the resolution to 75% scale (Which fits the bandwidth better) and dial up some of the effects.
The thing with Ryzen notebooks is that Ryzen has a configurable TDP and some notebook manufacturers limit it to 15w instead of 25w.
Some notebooks also only come with single channel DDR4...
And some notebooks (like mine) actually allow the DDR4 to run at 2666mhz rather than 2400mhz.
And some notebooks aren't limited to 12 month old driver sets. (I hacked mine.)
Trumpstyle said:
I'm glad you accept last-gen games (atleast uncharted 3) looks better than what Switch has, I remember we had a similiar discussion about this and you and John refused to accept Halo 4 looked better than Doom on Switch (handheld). |
"Look better" is a subjective approach... I rather take a methodical one.
Doom on Switch is using techniques that Halo 4 doesn't such as GPU accelerated particle effects, it's rendering is a step up over Halo 4's baked approach and it shows.
From a graphics perspective, Doom on Switch beats Halo 4 on 360 in terms of fidelity. - Artistic style, Halo 4 probably wins.
Mr Puggsly said:
Generally speaking we know the PS4 and X1 are about equal on the CPU side, but lower resolutions are on the X1 due to GPU limitations. So generally speaking, it evident low resolution is mostly a GPU issue.
|
Indeed, the Xbox One is GPU limited.
But games that are CPU bound will occasionally pull ahead. (Assassins Creed at one point.)
The difference between the Xbox One and Playstation 4's CPU's are pretty inconsequential. I.E. 1.6ghz vs 1.75ghz. - 150Mhz is stuff all either way you cut the cake.
The Xbox One does have the DDR3 and eSRAM advantage which reduces latencies as well, which gives it a little extra kick in the CPU department.
However, the Xbox One on the GPU side is partly hampered by the lack of bandwidth... Even the PC's Radeon 7750 saw large reductions in performance moving from GDDR5 to DDR3. - The Xbox ONE's GPU is a step up over that and it has to share it's limited bandwidth with the CPU and other components as well, compounding the issue... Granted it's mitigated somewhat by the use of a 256bit bus and eSRAM, but not resolved entirely.
The ROP/CU/TMU reductions doesn't help matters either of course.
Nate4Drake said:
Pop in will always be an issue if Devs don't address the power in a "balanced way". Of course a very weak hardware has much more problems, and if you wanna eliminate significantly pop in, the overall geometry, tessellation and IQ would be so poor that Devs prefer to keep more significant pop in, and a clear example is The Legend of Zelda on Nintendo Switch.
So, what about pop in, when PS5 and Next Xbox will be out ? It could always be an issue if Developers aim for the maximum geometry, details, effects, good tessellation in the medium/long distance and big scale and complex environment, to an extent that frame rate would significally drop with zero pop in. It's only a matter of resource management, and it will be always an issue, regardless of the power available. The good thing is, with PS5 and Next Xbox, you might have games with far better graphics, more advanced physics, AI, Animations, effects, and further reduce pop in, if devs want.
PS: Do you remeber what kind of pop in we had in racing games on PSX, Sega Saturn and N64 ? :D
|
Well. There are better ways to go about resolving pop-in, such as fading. But I digress, that is another discussion entirely that could take me many hours to elaborate upon. :P
|
