only for NV tanking, on AMD cards is fine
AMD paying them to tesselate the water below the level
only for NV tanking, on AMD cards is fine
Then I will correct my mistake.Yeah there's a HFR mode, normally between 80-90.
Edited the OP to say that PS5 has better graphics setting in Quality Mode instead of being just superior.Which wouldn't be enough to make a 30-40fps mode the "better" version.
There are 4 modes on PS5.
Performance Mode: 60fps cap, resolution varies between 1440p-2160p with an average of 1872p. Settings unknown besides that shadows are between Low and Medium.
Quality Mode: 30fps cap. Resolution locked to 4K. Settings comparable to PC's Ultra.
If you have a 120Hz screen. You get two additional modes. A 40Hz mode, and a high frame rate mode.
High Frame Rate Mode: Unlocked fps that varies between 70-90fps. Resolution stays at 1440p. Same settings as Performance Mode.
40Hz Quality Mode: 40fps cap. Resolution varies between 1800p to 4K. Similar settings to Quality Mode.
There is a 5th mode? That must have been added later.You forgot the most important one
Quality + HFR unlocked (VRR)
This will offer the best IQ on PS5 Pro
It's like the 40fps mode but uncapped
Just with Boost mode it will be amazing to watch
There is a 5th mode? That must have been added later.
You see the same behaviour turning the settings down all the way. Alex probably should have shown that as well, but to be honest the difference in quality isn’t this vast gulf that a PS4 has no problems with LOD loading and a 4090 does.@7:00 He compares PS4 using lowest settings vs PC using max settings to make the case that the PS5 SSD i/o isn't contributing to the faster asset loading.
Anyone else see the problem with that logic?
Also hilarious that he deviated from his traditional practice of showing PC optimized vs PS5 Performance mode settings and head to head framerate comparison.
I find 2018 to be the better, tighter game. Ragnarok felt like a slog by comparison.Any gaffers want to give impressions on this game? Not the perf so much, but the actual game itself. Me, I like 2016 well enough, but am not over the moon about the new direction like some people. I liked it well enough to buy a sequel, I've just heard some mixed reviews, especially from people who felt the same as me about 2016.
he's is unprofessional, if you make tech and test, test it on every hardware, not only one.he still jacking off to his 4090 even when it has issues?
That’s not really what DF does. If you want a wide variety of benchmarks across multiple GPUs Hardware Unboxed is probably what you’re after.he's is unprofessional, if you make tech and test, test it on every hardware, not only one.
Poor Voodoo trying to run this.he's is unprofessional, if you make tech and test, test it on every hardware, not only one.
Video was very lackluster. Here are optimized settings and here is a 5-second clip of them running on a 4060. Couldn't he show a full sequence and how they scale on low-end, mid-range, and high-end hardware? What's the general performance like? I get it that he isn't the biggest PlayStation fan, but he should have just let Oliver do that one. We learned very little from this video and as you've pointed out, he had a few misses, attributing to bugs what is a problem with the interaction between DLSS and the engine.he's is unprofessional, if you make tech and test, test it on every hardware, not only one.
That would take an unsurmountable amount of time. And most who are into gaming on PC that play up-to-date titles; will have an Nvidia GPU. And will have access to RTX features as well as AMD ones.he's is unprofessional, if you make tech and test, test it on every hardware, not only one.
Sounds like I’m better off waiting for ~$35 range. I guess in the meantime it’s there if I get desperateI find 2018 to be the better, tighter game. Ragnarok felt like a slog by comparison.
Sounds like a horrible port, anytime there are missing effects and features you failed your mission.
This is the most interesting thing when you know the I/O complex on PS5 have this own processor for decompression, And the 3D Audio too with the Tempest Engine. So base CPU on PS5 are less struggle.Zen 2 CPUs (or at least the 3600) run terribly in this game. The 5600X, which is usually around 30-40% faster than the 3600, performs up to 99% better in Ragnarok. The 7800X3D, which is generally 100% faster, performs up to 247% faster in Ragnarok. Performance metrics reveal that the 3600 is poorly utilized as many of its threads have low usage. Could be a bug
Agreed. Once the Pro releases, every regular PS5 will explode. Then, Cerny can start the second phase of his plan for world domination.Pointless comparison, the Pro update will probably make this obsolete.
Really isn't.Another masturbatory video from DF, what are the odds…
The CPU doesn’t matter
Nah I think this is a Alex crying video this time..Another masturbatory video from DF, what are the odds…
The CPU doesn’t matter
it should be if they are talking about missing effects that is only missing on one brand of card and not the other.That’s not really what DF does. If you want a wide variety of benchmarks across multiple GPUs Hardware Unboxed is probably what you’re after.
But teh clics!!!Pointless comparison, the Pro update will probably make this obsolete.
Pixel counting on a 10x zoom is, and always will be.Really isn't.
Probably poor optimisation and CPU utilisation on the port. Alex did say said there is something off with the 3600 results. The 3600 shouldn't be that far behind in gaming (not way over 2x) and he gave examples in other games.PS5 here: 80fps.
This is the most interesting thing when you know the I/O complex on PS5 have this own processor for decompression, And the 3D Audio too with the Tempest Engine. So base CPU on PS5 are less struggle.
Of course, this is working if devs really want to push the PS5, mainly not happen with all shit port multisupport.
The CPU doesn’t matter
Yeah there's a HFR mode, normally between 80-90.
not PC, it's again NV DLSS
GAF tends to overreact. There's probably a bit too much Atreus and a few sections are very slow and kill the pacing, but the overall game is quite good with improvements to combat, enemy variety and bosses, exploration etc.I know everyone here shits on this game but I'm still gonna give it a go. Hopefully the DLSS issue will be solved soon
This game runs up to 60fps on a fucking jaguar so it's not really at all CPU limited on PS5
Except the financial ones.This can solve all your problems
This would be the perfect mode to compare PS5 against PC as it's static 1440p in that mode.
Not really, the port devs oversold it in the interview.Is this true?
Would it even be a valid comparison with all the performance bugs and missing visual parity? Plenty of games out there, some even Sony ports, that have far less issues, and have been compared to the PS5.Absolutely. Alex typically hides behind DRS when comparing PS5 vs PC. But now we have a game with fixed resolution and uncapped framerate mode, a la TLOU Pt.1 and I guess he doesn't want to go through that trauma again lol. We all know why he went with this peculiar comparison method.
Because the textures on PS4/PS5 are pretty similar, it wouldn't make a difference really.@7:00 He compares PS4 using lowest settings vs PC using max settings to make the case that the PS5 SSD i/o isn't contributing to the faster asset loading.
Anyone else see the problem with that logic?
Also hilarious that he deviated from his traditional practice of showing PC optimized vs PS5 Performance mode settings and head to head framerate comparison.
Is this true?
try look also after cave, unless it's 4xxx series bugIs it the DLSS FG (can't test that because Ampere) causing it or just the upscaling?
Did they just break the fog effect in a recent patch?I can't seem to replicate this, getting fog more like the FSR picture in the intro sequence (I assume it's the same as there's credits on screen?). Is it the DLSS FG (can't test that because Ampere) causing it or just the upscaling? I replaced whatever the shipping version of DLSS in the game was with 3.7.20 before even launching it though, so maybe that helps if someone else is having that issue.
Yes they added PC specific slowdown and are removing fog with their ClearView (TM) technology.Is this true?
The biggest issue are the shadows. 70fps on Medium. 86fps on Low. PS5 runs between Medium and Low. Impossible to match. We can probably fill in the gaps, but this could skew the performance. Obviously, setting it to Low on PC wouldn't make sense, but Medium could also be a lot more demanding.Would it even be a valid comparison with all the performance bugs and missing visual parity? Plenty of games out there, some even Sony ports, that have far less issues, and have been compared to the PS5.
try look also after cave, unless it's 4xxx series bug
Did they just break the fog effect in a recent patch?