O_o .....

Not even the 3060... but now we are gone up to the 4060?... How much PR to you say or believe?.

Saying that its not like the 4060 is doing much more than the 3060 but still man.

Never mind i see where she fud comes from. His looking at a few games running on PC with a 4060 and thinks PS5 = 4060 in power. Man this wasnt even worth a reply the first time and now i see what i was replying too not even worth it the 2nd time but here we are.

I really think you should elaborate, because I'm sure I'm not the only one who trusts Digital Foundry more than a random forum person. All you have going on for you is "you're wrong" (in a much ruder form, mind you), with nothing to back it up.

I don't think they said ps5 = 4060 it's just the results they are seeing. few reasons is the way the ps5 is designed and a bigger reason is most developers put all their resources in making the ps5 version as best as possible.

Cherry picking.  Ps5 games were designed for the ps5 and the PC ports were poorly done.  The ps5 is not a 4060.  The ps5 is 10 tflops while the 4060 is 15 tflops.  The 3050 is 8 tflops...  meaning the ps5 is closer to the 3050 than the 4060.  

And to be clear I never said the 3050 matched the ps5, all I said is the card runs way better than I expected...  and it isn't that far behind the ps5 based on the games I've tried.

What i mean is you cant look at a few ps5 ports running on a 4060 and think PS5 is as powerful just cause DF done a video..

Im sorry if i sound rude i was drinking. But even now my reply still stands a PS5 is not as powerful as a 4060 gpu. The specs alone speak for themselves.

You say specs alone speak for themselves... and you and Chrkeller are comparing Nvidia Ampere and Ada Lovelace Teraflops to AMD's RDNA 2 Tflops LMAO....

You can only compare Teraflops between the same generation of GPU's. So you can directly compare PS5 and XSX to RX 6700 XT or RX 6700 and vice versa.

PS5 GPU is essentially RX 6700 non XT level performance, which is indeed slightly above RX 7600 and and RTX 4060 (in pure rasterization)

Also you need RTX 2080 Ti to even match PS5 resolution and performance in Immortals of Aveum. There's videos on YouTube.

I'm not even going to check the specs, because I have little reason to doubt you. However, I'm not sure specs alone are a practical way to look at the situation. Do I really care how powerful a GPU is in theory? No, not really. I care about how it's in practice, and if in practice I get weaker performance because of lackluster optimization effort, I don't really consider it a saving grace for a GPU. As a gamer, I don't care about specs, I care about what I really get. It's not necessarily fair, but what can you really do. In that sense, DF has analyzed exactly what is meaningful, at least as far as I'm concerned - and no, of course it's not a comprehensive analysis, but it's (probably) better than nothing.

@Pemalite I feel like your insights would be useful here regarding PS5 performance vs PC cards, you seem to know your stuff pretty well.

At any rate, hopefully this is just teething issues and future UE5 games on consoles don't make such steep compromises. Remnant 2, another recent game on the engine, was also around 720p in performance mode on PS5 and Series X, and that one only used Nanite, not Lumen.

Aveum is a poorly optimized game.
There is practically no scaling between a 4 core/4 thread CPU to an 8 core/16 thread CPU.
On the consoles, that means a chunk of the CPU isn't doing much, not ideal when you could task an entire core to perform morphological AA rather than let it go to waste, something developers would do even on the PS3.

Ram requirements are also not that intensive, 16GB is more than enough for everything, even the Series S with only 10GB of Ram isn't impossible to run.

It's mostly a GPU bound game.

The game originally started development on Unreal Engine 4 then was "ported" to Unreal Engine 5 and that is likely where the dramas started to set in, because they tried to shoe-horn older development methods into the new development paradigm.

On PC when you first load the game up, there is a ton of pre-compilation of shaders going on, but even while that is occurring, CPU usage isn't maxxed out, it spikes, which means the CPU is waiting on data, which likely means they aren't pre-loading that data into system memory and is instead fetching it directly from the SSD/HDD... Which introduces an I/O bottleneck. - There is no pre-compilation stutter on all platforms thankfully but it does highlight the CPU not being used efficiently and RAM not being used effectively, the SSD/HDD is holding back performance potentially.

Nanite and Lumen are intensive, for games that are going to highlight and push that technology, I wouldn't be surprised if this becomes a common occurrence... And the way around it? 30fps. The console GPU's are the limiting factor I am afraid so you need to be able to increase your render time budget and the best way to do that is halving your framerate.

Developers need to start offloading their Global Illumination to the Ray Tracing cores... And virtualise all the texturing and geometry with Nanite, but also start loading up the RAM (Especially on PC) with frequently requested assets and bypass streaming from the SSD as much as possible.

This is all a learning thing, UE5 does change many aspects of how games are designed from the last several decades, so it's only normal for there to be a few teething issues early on... And despite being 3~ years into the generation, it's only just recently that developers started to cut the tether on older hardware.

And of course we need a Playstation 5 Pro and Xbox Series X Pro with newer, more powerful GPU's and faster SSD's.