From the written article it says that windows is needed to run the current gen features, but the drivers arenât as good as Linux ones so it comes with limitations.
One thing I took away from this is that if steam deck is getting support in the future by devs, Series S support should improve as well.
Its not native 4K on xsx
Came across this video and figured some may find it interesting. Love retro gaming and what devs were pulling off on the PS1/Saturn/N64 is what drove my interest in game development. Love info like this.
Previous vid was just about correct in itâs analysis
- XSX 2160p at 30fps and 1800p at 60fps
- PS5 1872p at 30fps 1440p at 60fps
Kudos for TT that they took advantage of the XSX, I love to see it.
Tools? Hehe
Biggest delta yet⌠It is more then expected although
Are they using DX12?
No obvious reason for such a big deficit on PS5 hardware, seems like they dropped the ball a little bit there. I wonder if there is a story behind it or if they just put more effort and care into the Xbox version for whatever reason.
Either GDK update or PC/Xbox is the lead platform.
I didnât do the full numbers, but it seems about on par with the hardware differences, for instance TFs and Memory bandwidth. What makes you say the differences are out of reasonable expectation range?
I donât believe DF did a loading time review but there were other analysis that had the Xbox faster than PS5 as well. Xbox/PC were probably just lead platforms for this.
I mean Xbox sold more consoles so it make sense to priotize Xbox right? /s
(Or whatever argument was used in favor of Playstation before)
I think they have skipped loading time tests a couple of games already.
No particular reason, just seems like the console specs are close enough that I wouldnât have expected such a visible performance gap on a Lego game.
Oh right, but this seems to be a major engine revamp for the Lego series. The Lego series should be on a strong technical foundation for titles going forward. Even the combat system is drastically improved.
Thatâs what I thought so too, seems like an engine that can use the cores from the Series X to itâs advantage.
1800p in 60fps was the minimum, not the common res for SX at 60fps. He says the 60fps mode is essentially a 4k game too, with only some slight drops from that.
In the same scene Ps5 dropped below 1440p too
1440p to 1800p has been seen other times (less than it should given the hardware delta), but this time is actually 1440p versus 4k, which I think would indeed be the biggest one.
SX has been underperforming in a lot of games compared to what it should have performed. But dynamic 1440p60 isnât uncommon for Ps5 at all. Though in the other big gaps we had (doom eternal, metro, immortal shell etc) it was around 1440p on Ps5 versus around 1800p on SX. 1440p to 4k would be among the biggest if not the most one yet
The specs arenât really that close though, the bandwidth alone is quite big which can affect a game targeting 60fps for example.
The only area the PS5 has an advantage in is memory, everything else tips towards Series X. Graphics processing just on itâs own youâre looking at consistently higher resolution at 60fps compared to the PlayStation. The best comparison I can think of in laymenâs terms a 3070(Xbox) vs 2070 super(PS) but itâs not that simple.
As this generation continues to move forward and devs get more comfortable with Series X development(there was more of a learning curve here originally compared to PS5 dev) this type of performance difference is going to be consistent. Other than Elden Ring which is poorly optimized literally everywhere, the most recent multi-plats have all skewed Xbox in terms of best performance.
Not entirely. From a game perspective, the PS5 has a bandwidth deficit on 10 GBs of memory [448 vs 560], only a slight bandwidth advantage on 2 GBs of memory [448 vs 366], and then the Series X has 1.5 GB more memory available for use by games [13.5 GB vs 12 GB]. Overall, I would not say the PS5 has the advantage there.