It's very strange, as you say the line and the min show 24, but the number is 18 on the video. It's not photoshop, it seems it's a glitch. Maybe the number is calculated with the longest frame time, but the line and the summary min is calculated with fps.

I watched the videos, I saw the X1 drop down to 18 during gameplay. I'm guessing they capped it at 30 because the game would have constantly been jumping between 28 and 32, which would cause a ton of stuttering. 

it's a trap!!!

SubiyaCryolite said: Guys, the port is not bad at all considering the graph below. Granted we don't know where this games stands between High and Ultra but its a good start, minus the dips.

So it runs like shit on Nvidia. No wonder I see dips regularly below 60fps on my PC on ultimate settings.

poorly optimised game in general for Nvidia.

As the graph clearly shows, yes.

They've updated the article.

The bottom line here is that if you have yet to experience this game and you want a quality action adventure, the PS4 version of Tomb Raider is the way to go.

There's no denying it, PS4 version is superior. And 30 fps vs. 60 fps is quite a significant difference. That's way more than most multiplat differences we saw last gen. You know, when people told you to get GTA 4 for the 360 because it had 10 % more fps. Well, I guess 100 % more fps aren't that important.

Seriously, just deal with it. PS4 will always have superior multiplats. End of story.

LOLZ

A lot of Spinstas in here. The Gangstas of vgchartz