• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[DF] Assetto Corsa Competizione Upgraded For PS5 and Xbox Series X/S - Full Analysis

Lysandros

Member
Yes, nothing else stands out - everything else in the hardware is conventional apart from the ram configuration.

I do believe it effects the scaling. The GPU is overwhelming the bandwidth at the cost of other things, hence resolution can be higher. Lowering it doesn’t gain more performance due to bottlenecking elsewhere.
Reading it again, i don't think that understand this part well. It seems you are talking about a bandwidth problem due to split setup on XSX. But how this leads to 'resolution can be higher'? The resolution can be higher at the expense of performance on any platform including PS5. How is this specific to XSX?
 

onQ123

Member
Reading it again, i don't think that understand this part well. It seems you are talking about a bandwidth problem due to split setup on XSX. But how this leads to 'resolution can be higher'? The resolution can be higher at the expense of performance on any platform including PS5. How is this specific to XSX?

Yes, nothing else stands out - everything else in the hardware is conventional apart from the ram configuration.

I do believe it effects the scaling. The GPU is overwhelming the bandwidth at the cost of other things, hence resolution can be higher. Lowering it doesn’t gain more performance due to bottlenecking elsewhere.

My guess is the fact that Series X ROPS set up leave it with half the Depth ROPS
 

Shmunter

Member
Reading it again, i don't think that understand this part well. It seems you are talking about a bandwidth problem due to split setup on XSX. But how this leads to 'resolution can be higher'? The resolution can be higher at the expense of performance on any platform including PS5. How is this specific to XSX?
If the performance issues cannot be overcome by reclaiming bandwidth reserved for the GPU you may as well use it up for resolution because performance will be unchanged.
 
Last edited:

assurdum

Banned
it's a dynamic res, with a difference in the min res, 25% means nothing in this case.
Don't waste your time. If XSX would have lower resolution with better FPS of ps5, their narrative would be totally different. Even DF said it's literally impossible to spot such differences, heck, there is a spot in the video with 400% of zoom which compares both console side by side and still it's impossible to catch a difference in the sharpness. But the more FPS drops on XSX are definitely perceivable even without tools.
 
Last edited:

Lysandros

Member
If the performance issues cannot be overcome by reclaiming bandwidth reserved for the GPU you may as well use it up for resolution because performance will be unchanged.
Okay but 'reclaiming the bandwidth' for which component/s exactly, the CPU? So you don’t think XSX FPS drops are related to GPU itself? Higher resolutions should also mean higher bandwidth consumption, wouldn’t this exasperate bandwidth problem originated from the split setup in that case?
 

Shmunter

Member
Okay but 'reclaiming the bandwidth' for which component/s exactly, the CPU? So you don’t think XSX FPS drops are related to GPU itself? Higher resolutions should also mean higher bandwidth consumption, wouldn’t this exasperate bandwidth problem originated from the split setup in that case?
I'm merely speculating. If it were GPU related, the fix would be easy - just lower the rez and conversely improve framerate. So the question remains why increase the rez and tank the framerate. Doesn't pass the smell test.
 
I own both the Xbox Series X, for Gamepass and third-party releases, and the PS5 but I am continually surprised (read: disappointed) at how much better PS5 games tend to perform compared with the Xbox Series X.

It seems like Microsoft have some sort of mandate that Xbox Series X games *must* run at a higher resolution than PS5 (because the console is, on paper anyway, 20% more powerful) but this usually means its games run worse. This and Elden Ring are good examples but there are other third-party releases as well. I know the Xbox Series X has VRR support unlike the PS5 (which is why I no longer buy Ubisoft games and other third-party releases that have inconsistent framerates and/or screen tearing on Sony's console) but, c'mon, surely achieving a 99.999% stable framerate is way more important that having a higher pixel count that no-one would ever notice outside of a Digital Foundry tech video?

Of course, owning both consoles means I have a choice of which one to buy games for but currently we have PS5 games performing better but those 1-3 fps dips below 60 fps manifest as judder because it doesn't have VRR and on Xbox Series X we have worse performing games but VRR can be used to save the day. The latter is clearly better for people wanting a smooth gaming experience but really neither console is in a ideal position. VRR should really only be there to mask the inevitable framerate drops every game has from time to time, not really used as a band-aid for lazy or poorly optimised games such as those from Ubisoft (who should have The Masters of Screen Tear as a byline in my opinion!) and From Software.
 
Last edited:

Caio

Member
This is coming from someone who does not care about this Game, and only owns XSX : PS5 is the superior version.
Said that, XSX can do better than this, so why we keep talking about VRR ? Come one, just tell me why XSX with lower shadow quality VS PS5, adding cars and weather, can bring frame-rate to high 40s VS nearly locked 60fps on PS5, but yeah yeah, the RES is dropping less...
come on guys, let's try to be credible, for god sake. That's either a bad choice from Microsoft which want at any cost to prioritize resolution and/or bad optimization on XSX or PS5 and XSX really have the same performance so whatever you increase on one platform, you have immediately a significant downside. Make your choice, place your bet...
 
Last edited:

FritzJ92

Member
It's not split, but 2 distinct performance profiles sit on the same bank - it's a unique setup never seen before I beleive.
Correct, but I don’t see the RAM as being any issue unless this game uses more than 10GB or VRAM.

The PC requirement is 8GB of VRAM for recommended hardware. That 2Gb of extra ram available and the bandwidth within that 10GB is much higher than Sonys RAM set up. So the whole RAM argument is silly.

I just believe that the PS5 having hardware very similar to the PS4 Pro makes it’s much easier for the devs to squeeze everything they can out of the PS5. While Microsoft it’s not so simple and devs have limited time and budget. I also think that Microsofts released a great hardware without proper support to utilize all of it.

Just recently they did videos discussing direct storage, velocity architecture and more. Things they should’ve been had ready for devs since before launch.
 

Shmunter

Member
Correct, but I don’t see the RAM as being any issue unless this game uses more than 10GB or VRAM.

The PC requirement is 8GB of VRAM for recommended hardware. That 2Gb of extra ram available and the bandwidth within that 10GB is much higher than Sonys RAM set up. So the whole RAM argument is silly.

I just believe that the PS5 having hardware very similar to the PS4 Pro makes it’s much easier for the devs to squeeze everything they can out of the PS5. While Microsoft it’s not so simple and devs have limited time and budget. I also think that Microsofts released a great hardware without proper support to utilize all of it.

Just recently they did videos discussing direct storage, velocity architecture and more. Things they should’ve been had ready for devs since before launch.
Irrespective of the games ram footprint, the console is likely utilising and therefore accessing a much larger portion of it constantly.

There is likely even a couple of gig reserved for the game dvr to store the video buffer because it’s not writing a file to the ssd constantly for obvious reasons.

There is some kind of contention here I reckon, of which I agree it’s a dev time and budget issue to properly deal with the unique architecture, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
 

Tomcat

Member
The next gen upgrade was made by a small studio and not 505. It has so many bugs that i dont know if its still available to download. Next week they promised an update so we will see how that goes. They didnt even update to 1.8 version which is the pc one. I cant even think how many bugs will that have since its 1 year of improvements. Obviously they made a bad job especially on xbox. It doesnt say anything about the abilities of each console either way.
 

FrankWza

Gold Member
Make your choice, place your bet...
saw puppet GIF
 

Lysandros

Member
I own both the Xbox Series X, for Gamepass and third-party releases, and the PS5 but I am continually surprised (read: disappointed) at how much better PS5 games tend to perform compared with the Xbox Series X.

It seems like Microsoft have some sort of mandate that Xbox Series X games *must* run at a higher resolution than PS5 (because the console is, on paper anyway, 20% more powerful) but this usually means its games run worse. This and Elden Ring are good examples but there are other third-party releases as well. I know the Xbox Series X has VRR support unlike the PS5 (which is why I no longer buy Ubisoft games and other third-party releases that have inconsistent framerates and/or screen tearing on Sony's console) but, c'mon, surely achieving a 99.999% stable framerate is way more important that having a higher pixel count that no-one would ever notice outside of a Digital Foundry tech video?

Of course, owning both consoles means I have a choice of which one to buy games for but currently we have PS5 games performing better but those 1-3 fps dips below 60 fps manifest as judder because it doesn't have VRR and on Xbox Series X we have worse performing games but VRR can be used to save the day. The latter is clearly better for people wanting a smooth gaming experience but really neither console is in a ideal position. VRR should really only be there to mask the inevitable framerate drops every game has from time to time, not really used as a band-aid for lazy or poorly optimised games such as those from Ubisoft (who should have The Masters of Screen Tear as a byline in my opinion!) and From Software.
I also suspect a similar thing. As a correction, Elden Ring is actually higher resolution on PS5 in performance mode (quality mode res. is the same) along with higher performance. Just before that in Cyberpunk RT mode PS5 had also very slightly higher resolution (DRS lower bound). So PS5 having slightly higher resolutions also happens, it's just less often. The distinction there being when XSX has somewhat higher resolution this is often at cost of performance, but in the case of PS5 its FPS stays solid even with a res. advantage.
 
Last edited:

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
The next gen upgrade was made by a small studio and not 505. It has so many bugs that i dont know if its still available to download. Next week they promised an update so we will see how that goes. They didnt even update to 1.8 version which is the pc one. I cant even think how many bugs will that have since its 1 year of improvements. Obviously they made a bad job especially on xbox. It doesnt say anything about the abilities of each console either way.
505 Game is just the publisher.

This is the developer:
 

Neo_game

Member
Surely that shadow quality is a bug on SX. The game is pretty heavy on PC as well. I wonder what settings are console running this game.
 

hlm666

Member
The game looks great, but I’ll never understand the comparison between the two videos. They look completely different. Sorry.
Here's a VR video without mods, it looks pretty similar except it's obviously all game and a little less sharp because the resolution isn't as good as the simrig displays.

 

yewles1

Member
Yes, nothing else stands out - everything else in the hardware is conventional apart from the ram configuration.

I do believe it effects the scaling. The GPU is overwhelming the bandwidth at the cost of other things, hence resolution can be higher. Lowering it doesn’t gain more performance due to bottlenecking elsewhere.
There's also PS5's features such as cache scrubbers, AMD Smart Shift and the possible--and still debated--72 ROP's.
 

Shmunter

Member
Here's a VR video without mods, it looks pretty similar except it's obviously all game and a little less sharp because the resolution isn't as good as the simrig displays.


Driving in VR is it’s own genre imho. Probably not even going to bother with any driving game till psvr2 hits.

Anyone remember Driveclub (again) in vr. You could actually be a passenger in your own replays….good times.

 

ArtHands

Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
The force feedback is shit in this game. If you can get it on PC get it there.
Definitely. There’s a racing bundle right now with this game and various other race titles at $13. Not to mention the PC version has VR

 

Lysandros

Member
Surely that shadow quality is a bug on SX. The game is pretty heavy on PC as well. I wonder what settings are console running this game.
Even if that's the case a higher shadow quality has a higher processing cost. XSX performance is already less than ideal so it also makes sense as a design choice. PS5 GPU's additional ROP hardware at higher frequency should also help with shadow maps.
 
Last edited:

Lysandros

Member
There's also PS5's features such as cache scrubbers, AMD Smart Shift and the possible--and still debated--72 ROP's.

For the ROPs even if PS5 has only 64 active color ROPs (so same as XSX) those are running at 22% higher frequency. When it comes to depth ROPs PS5 has 256 (again at 22% higher frequency) compared to 128 for XSX, that's 100% more. So the disparity there is quite substantial in favor of PS5. As the Cache Scrubbers those are hardware units designed to improve cache hit rates and minimize flushing so they should be beneficial to things like actual real world bandwidth and CU saturation. I think their contribution to overall performance is really underdiscussed. There are of course plenty of other factors like higher geometry throughput, culling rate, cache bandwidth/speed etc.

But in the posts above we were discussing about the reasons of a possibly less effective 'scalability' on XSX in isolation.
 
Last edited:

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
People do realize that the PS5 has a ROP advantage because it is using RDNA1 style RB units, the XSX is using the RDNA2 RB+ units which it has half the amount but each unit has double the amount of some kind of process compared to the RDNA1/PS5 RB units.

Its why XsX has hardware VRS tier 2 and PS5 does not.

image-147.png
 
People do realize that the PS5 has a ROP advantage because it is using RDNA1 style RB units, the XSX is using the RDNA2 RB+ units which it has half the amount but each unit has double the amount of some kind of process compared to the RDNA1/PS5 RB units.

Its why XsX has hardware VRS tier 2 and PS5 does not.
Thus far would you say that decision has benefited PS5 or XsX more?
 

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
Thus far would you say that decision has benefited PS5 or XsX more?
Its impossible to know, unless you have hands on development experience with both consoles.


However I dont see why AMD would choose to do things in a inferior way with RDNA2.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Identifies as young
Thus far would you say that decision has benefited PS5 or XsX more?

Based on the results, I think it benefitted both very well. Thinking back over the games released we are seeing the differences to be largely negligible. For all the talk about teraflops and other tech jargon, the feature that has been highlighted the most time and time again has been VRR.
 

onQ123

Member
People do realize that the PS5 has a ROP advantage because it is using RDNA1 style RB units, the XSX is using the RDNA2 RB+ units which it has half the amount but each unit has double the amount of some kind of process compared to the RDNA1/PS5 RB units.

Its why XsX has hardware VRS tier 2 and PS5 does not.

image-147.png

Yeah this sound like something I told you but in the end PS5 has the Advantage in ROPS both Color (By a small amount from higher clock rate) & Depth (By a large amount from higher clock rate & over 2X the units)
 

DeepEnigma

Gold Member
Based on the results, I think it benefitted both very well. Thinking back over the games released we are seeing the differences to be largely negligible. For all the talk about teraflops and other tech jargon, the feature that has been highlighted the most time and time again has been VRR.
Looking back to two years ago and today, it's quite hilarious the narratives time capsule, really.

All chipped down and scratched off the list to VRR and Vaseline Rate Shading. One is about to be off that list soony, and the other as well with PSVR2.
 
Last edited:

GHG

Member
Looking back to two years ago and today, it's quite hilarious the narratives time capsule, really.

All chipped down and scratched off the list to VRR and Vaseline Rate Shading. One is about to be off that list soony, and the other as well with PSVR2.

This is what happens when fiction and dreams are more important than fact.

There was also talk that Sony weren't talking or going overboard on technical mumbo jumbo marketing because they were "scared". Turns out they knew what they were doing, were confident in doing so and didn't feel the need to make their fans high on hopium.
 

Sosokrates

Report me if I continue to console war
Yeah this sound like something I told you but in the end PS5 has the Advantage in ROPS both Color (By a small amount from higher clock rate) & Depth (By a large amount from higher clock rate & over 2X the units)

The thing is we dont know the rationale behinds AMD decision, you say for extra space which seems plausible but if the RB+ units would give inferior performance why do it? The gains in compute or other RB+ benifits must outweigh the benefits of double the colour ROPs of RDNA1.
 

onQ123

Member
The thing is we dont know the rationale behinds AMD decision, you say for extra space which seems plausible but if the RB+ units would give inferior performance why do it? The gains in compute or other RB+ benifits must outweigh the benefits of double the colour ROPs of RDNA1.

It's only inferior when compared to using 2X more of the older units
 

FritzJ92

Member
People do realize that the PS5 has a ROP advantage because it is using RDNA1 style RB units, the XSX is using the RDNA2 RB+ units which it has half the amount but each unit has double the amount of some kind of process compared to the RDNA1/PS5 RB units.

Its why XsX has hardware VRS tier 2 and PS5 does not.

image-147.png
Glad someone corrected the information. The PS5 and XSX does have some unique hardware in both but it’s been show many times that faster clock speeds alone wouldn’t give the PS5 the advantages it has in some games.

I still believe that XSX just isn’t effectively being used because all of its hardware isn’t efficiently being used. Time and cost.
 

FritzJ92

Member
Irrespective of the games ram footprint, the console is likely utilising and therefore accessing a much larger portion of it constantly.

There is likely even a couple of gig reserved for the game dvr to store the video buffer because it’s not writing a file to the ssd constantly for obvious reasons.

There is some kind of contention here I reckon, of which I agree it’s a dev time and budget issue to properly deal with the unique architecture, otherwise we wouldn’t be having this conversation.
We are still talking about a 2 GB buffer from a device using an SSD. No way ram is a factor.
 
Top Bottom