Hm... let me guess... because that's what you personally would prefer... and what others would prefer or what makes SONY more money is irrelevant? Is that in the ballpark?

Every game should be pushed to it's fullest potential in every aspect of the game, as long as it can still function properly.

well see the differences arent clear cut, because the performance of various functions changes with the difference to load, the graph just shows overall, id need to make individual graphs for every single portion of the test to get the full picture, the projected lines are more estimates based on early codebases weve received and updates to those early codebases, it probably (read: most likely) wont hit those projected results, but theyre within range to work around and a good reference point for future builds.

the strengths of DX12 on the xbox one arent really much graphically, but the load balancing effects functions that normally bog down easilly, and as such the more consistent performance frees up a bit more power for the gpu to stretch its lets more - the other thing to consider is that our SDK units arent running at stock speeds currently, but a little higher, to take into account the performance hit from having debugging and logging processes running.

Im actually going to update my UE4 development thread this weekend with some experimental rendering solutions i've been working on - fun stuff that hasnt been done in games before.

The fact that you can't notice the difference doesn't mean others can't. Ask poor digital foundry guys how their eyes hurt every time they play a game that runs below 1080p : (

True, all I'm saying is that, given their performance on PS4 at 900p, it was probably the right choice not to press for 1080p at any cost.

Actually your wrong in most cases ps4 also has better framerate dying light and evolve being most recent examples but I guess that doesn't suit your narrative

That's what I got from when DX12 was announced in the beginning. It won't offer new things in graphics (well, perhaps tile-based rendering on esram is now "easier") but perhaps might solve congestion issues in the whole process to bring a picture to screen.

Sadly, what most people don't seem to understand is that DX12 is really intended for PC, the update to Xbox One's SDK to add in support does very little.

people seem to have it in their heads that DX12 on XBO is going to pull it up to PS4 quality, when the only reason it will make such a difference on PC is to remove much of the obfuscation between hardware and software that exists on PC, but doesn't on consoles.

Also, tiles gets way too much hype.

When compared to other engines, is this engine extremely demanding?

It is configured to run multiple times with different parameters and catalog the impact of load, from low density scenes and low numbers of lights, to situations where both XBO and PS4 are in single figure FPS ranges.

It does this for each system and logs, the logs are the important part, not the framerates, the graph just cumulates the overall data to show a visual representation of the performance difference on the engine.

If someone wanted to be truly depressed as a console user, i would state that PC running directx is actually tested too, and rendered to the graph, the results are not shown because they do not fall within the viewable range :P