| hinch said: Iirc the PS5 version runs 4K with checkboarding @ 60fps (so probably ~1440P) on performance mode with lower settings on PC so this is quite a demanding game, despite being a PS4 game from 2018. It does seem a little low though considering the PS5's GPU desktop equivalent should fall in between a 6600XT and a 6700XT, and should be closer to the former. DF just did a deep dive of the game's technical performance review and they say its a good one. There are quite a few improvements in this port has like better LOD's; less pop ins, higher quality textures, SSR, volumetric fog and shadows (even on normal settings). There are some issues though like asset streaming in between loading that causes some dips in performance - though the devs are well aware and should be in a future patch. Thus far this seems to be the superior version, and though not by a mile it looks like a decent upgrade. My only real gripe is that they don't have a FOV slider which is a shame because the camera is so darn close to Kratos. I'll most likely double dip at some point when it comes on sale on Steam. |
After looking at the DF and some images, I'm honestly having a hard time trying to see the big differences with texture detail and SSR. Shadows are easy and obviously night/day, as are LoD's and no ghosting, but texture detail and SSR still look muddy to me, even in the 3 side by side vids/shots.
| Captain_Yuri said: I think the main issue is that these games are developed for 30fps in mind and because of that, it takes a significantly more powerful GPU to push these frames any further. Even on PS5 it's meh. With Sonys new games having 60fps options, I can see the next one running better overall ironically. I did buy it from cdkeys which has a nice discount and no tax since overall, it sounds like a good port even if not a fantastic one. Plus it doesn't have Denavo which is always a plus. But yea, as time goes on, Pascal and such will continue to underperform as a lot of new games are being developed for Turing or later. |
It just seems crazy to me how a 1080ti is considered the min for this kind of game, even for HZD, when both of those were originally on a closed system that paled in comparison to that GPU. Looking at that 3080 chart and I'm even more surprised, because that GPU atm is rare af, expensive af, and only 81fps, which again, just seems so...low?.
I hope the ports going forward do better perf/visual wise, because as I said to Hinch, I had a tough time trying to spot the differences between texture detail and SSR (and we've seen since the past gen, that pubs have been playing texture parity with PC, especially ubisoft).
My standards are pretty high, but that's only primarily down to the fact that these are ports from 2 of the big 3, who are exceedingly wealthy and can foot the bill. 60fps is and should be the standard on PC, then going forward, texture detail and the rest should naturally be boosted to being an obvious night/day difference, then we'll see the differences in demands.
The port itself isn't bad, not anywhere near what HZD was it started out, but I just find the hw demands vs perf metrics a bit off. Not saying it has to be a crysis style world of difference, but it would have been nicer to see something closer to what the latest higher GPU's are to accomplish.
Step right up come on in, feel the buzz in your veins, I'm like an chemical electrical right into your brain and I'm the one who killed the Radio, soon you'll all see
So pay up motherfuckers you belong to "V"
