Did someone watch the Ori video yet?
I’m not watching, because I haven’t played it enough yet (yeah, I know, crazy) and I don’t want new areas spoiled.
Watching the Ori video right now. What’s interesting is, that the switch port led to much more optimised groundwork for the series X|S port und ultimately to the 120fps mode. So having a lower spec target has it’s benefits for optimization.
The optimization for the Switch version led to Improvements not only for the Series X/S but also for the One X and One S apparently through the latest patch. I tried it myself a few days ago and the frame-rate in some stress-points (with lots of particles for example) is much more stable now while also some backgrounds look higher res with less artifacts. Great interview btw but anyone who hasn’t played the game (like you Staffy) avoid it for now since it’s filled with spoilers (areas, bosses e.t.c.).
Oh man, am I glad I skipped it. I wasn’t sure if DF would spoil things but on the other hand it’s been many months since it released, can’t blame them.
Thanks for letting me know.
1 Like
I’m not sure development actually optimize around the number of CUs, perhaps on PS4/Pro where it was even important to have the butterfly layout. But usually it’s not needed.
And if it was the case we wouldn’t see the performance improvements we saw with BC.
1 Like
I find it funny how you use the word “Fanboys” to describe …other people, and in the same post you say that microsoft changed their slogan -which is false information, then implying that somehow between two similar machines, the machine with more gpu power, faster bandwidth and larger bus is not the faster one.
Thanks for replying, I don’t know how these things exactly work (that’s why I asked about your opinions) but I was trying to figure out why SX runs some games (like Valhalla) like a 10tf machine, it’s weird to me that the immature tools could gimp so much the console’s power. It’s probably a mix of both not optimizing enough and not being familiar with the new development tool environment.
We don’t know the state of the platform when the games were made. But how the OS talks to the hardware and the game with the OS is all code and can be optimized too.
For example the June GDK mentions that simply reading the controller input causes unnecessary copy of data structures. This was done because it’s easier to implement to have the api ready asap for the developer and was noted that will be improved. So in that GDK version the simple action of reading input would use extra cpu and memory i/o than needed.
But there are more performance related issues. They mention for example that the shader (both runtime and compiler) were also less performant than expected, so basically every gpu code runs at lower speed.
For raytracing they also mentioned that unnecessary copying of the data structures were performed which again take away both gpu time and bandwidth.
And for SS in special the June GDK didn’t even allowed to properly profile the performance so developers couldn’t even tell where the performance was impacted.
And some aspects of the architecture was not ready too. For example the separation between the fast and “slow” ram is logical. So for example. One resource that demands a high bandwidth amount to be created but once created only a few reads are performed, could be logically tied to the faster pool during creation, and assigned to the slower pool for reading later. But that functionality was not ready. So the game would have to either allocate that into the fast ram and then create a copy allocated to the slow ram which would impact performance with unnecessary copying. Create the resource in the slow pool which would impact the performance during the creation process. Or create it on the fast pool and leave it there but then the game might face a lack of memory and eventually need to move something to the slow pool which would get back to the first problem.
Now that was a mere 5 months from launch, which doesn’t sound like much time for launch games. But keep in mind that the mentioned issues might not be fixed until a few months later, or perhaps weren’t fixed still (we have no way of knowing since there was no other leak), so in reality devs had even less than that to solve those issues.
1 Like
Tannenberg is an indie shooter game that was optimized for the Series X|S without anyone even noticing it. I contacted the developers and asked what exactly was optimized for the new consoles. This was their answer:
The title has been optimized for Series X, but has no next-gen specific upgrades. Specifically, because of the great specs in the new machines, we are able to turn off dynamic resolution scaling when there’s a lot of action on the screen. Basically meaning it not only runs smoother on Xbox Series X (when the framerate cap is disabled, then it goes up to 60), it will look sharper as well since it is consistently running on full resolution.
See: there are no next-gen specific upgrades. But they patched the game in a way that the SAME GAME would adapt to whatever console it is running on. So they turned off dynamic resolution scaling so it could run smoother on the Series X, while the framerate cap was disabled so it could go up to 60 FPS.
It is something that is only possible on Xbox. There is no PS5 version for this game because the developers would have to straight up port the game to the console instead of just patching the PS4 version. This is why it was worth to work on those dev kits to work across all the Xbox ecosystem. And yet this is an advantage for the brand that is often overlooked.
Edit: I mean: look at the amount of games that were optimized for the Series X|S and not for the PS5. Tannenberg, Warhammer: Vermintide 2, CrossCode, Bridge Constructor: The Walking Dead, We Happy Few, Star Wars: Squadrons…
Plus, Yakuza: Like a Dragon PS5 version is coming out only in march; the PS4 version of Haven failed to hit launch… while they are both Smart Delivery titles on Xbox.
4 Likes
See I don’t think the GDK is how these games are made. I think Xbox allows XDK to work on Series machines - so you can patch a game for Series consoles via XDK…IF like Sony do they make all PS5 games use the PS5 dev kit it means rebuilding the game.
Whereas MS allow XDK games to be enhanced for Series X/S (like Squadrons as another example).
So I don’t think the GDK working across platforms has anything to do with this (I could of course be horribly wrong).
Oh, but you are right! I didn’t mention the GDK specifically in my post, but the devkits provided by Microsoft in general – including the XDK. The games working across all ecosystem is a mindset Microsoft has established for a while now, the XDK already worked across Xbox One, One S, One X. The GDK is an evolution of that that is still in its early days.
What I wanted to say in my post is that because of the roadmap Microsoft has created a couple of years ago we are able to enjoy those enhancements now, and that things will only get better when the GDK matures.
1 Like
I mostly want to stay out of these discussions because I don’t find pixel counting that interesting however to off-set some of the doom-posting in the Xbox community lately, here’s an update from a developer (buddy of mine) who I talked to for the first time since all the next gen DF stuff hit the fan.
He only very recently gained low level access to Series X and devs haven’t had much time with it for optimization purposes. Many features still aren’t turned on to this day. He hates these DF and DF-like comparisons (thinks freeze frame pixel counting is stupid and bad for the industry) and doesn’t want to be part of system wars but says Series X being more powerful is just a matter of fact and that’s before other features are turned on. Will likely start to see results shift by the spring however some of the other features won’t really get pushed for a couple years. There are no bottlenecks or issues with the actual hardware. I specifically asked about the the memory.
Heard from someone else who has a different source that difference in current GDK could provide as much as 50% rasterization increase next year (relative to where Xbox Series X was previously)…though switching over to newest version isn’t trivial. It can sometimes break things already in development. So just because there’s a new version of the GDK out now, it doesn’t mean devs are already using or that you’ll start to see results immediately. His person said results would be 2nd half of 2021.
In summary, expect better results in the spring. A big jump between launch games and 2nd half 2021. The exciting stuff (the RDNA2 advantages with ML and all that) will take much longer. Expect the PS5 to improve as well but just not by as much.
11 Likes
Not just most visually impressive port…imho it’s the most visually impressive game on next gen consoles wrt visuals.
2 Likes
Thanks for the post. I listened to the Halo podcast this morning and I was going to mention what was said in it about a planned update to the GDK for spring that will supposedly increase performance. I do think we will start to see improvements starting from spring as well but, as you say, we won’t really see what the Series X is capable of for a while due to the ML and RDNA2 features requiring developers to specifically have them in mind.
It is really starting to sound like that the GDK hasn’t been coming in hot, but still cooking in the oven lol. However there is a long term play from Microsoft going on, which will reap serious benefits if it all works out.
3 Likes
All this sounds absolutely right. I’ve heard similar but it’s hard to really disentangle it all. But I’d bet on this.
1 Like
LOL. Good way to put it.
1 Like
First things first, we can confirm that Warzone is indeed a backwards compatibility title, even though Xbox Series X and S versions receive ‘optimised’ status, presumably owing to their 120Hz support. However, running matched feeds of Xbox One X and Series X side-by-side, it’s pretty clear that this is effectively the same game - though there are some interesting improvements, mostly delivered by the efforts of the Xbox compatibility team. First of all, the Series X hardware essentially eliminates the dynamic resolution sub-4K rendering seen on Xbox One X, which scales between 1920x2160 all the way up to 3840x2160. In every pixel count we carried out, Series X delivers full ultra HD resolution - even in scenarios where Xbox One X drops well beneath 60 frames per second. In essence, Warzone fully taps out back-compat support, with a 2x resolution multiplier - impressive stuff.
What of the PS5? On the PlayStation Store, the game is marked as a PS4 title, confirming that 120fps gaming is off the table based on the information gleaned from Psyonix - but this still leaves the door open to the kind of enhancements we saw in Days Gone and Ghost of Tsushima. Sadly, high resolution texture pack aside (which is available on last-gen systems too, by the way), the only enhancements we get on PS5 are side-effects of bringing extra horsepower to the table - otherwise we’re looking at PS4 Pro spec. It means that Warzone runs at the PS4 Pro’s maximum of 2716x1528 resolution, meaning no 4K support on the newer machine. PS5 has no way to push beyond 1528p, despite the GPU increase, but you are basically locked to 60 frames per second. Also, the system level features Series X enjoys courtesy of its compatibility team are not available for PS5 users, meaning no boost to grass draw distances or anisotropic filtering.
As for Xbox Series S, it’s a bit of a strange situation. Microsoft’s junior next-gen machine inherits the older, weaker One S settings and therefore runs with dialled back post-effects quality, and operates at 1080p resolution, maxing the original code’s DRS window. There’s a lot more potential in this version, and as it stands right now, it looks a little rougher than it really should given the power on tap. At the very least , you are getting the same locked 60 frames per second as seen on the other next-gen machines. Also fascinating is that just like Series X, if you run the game connected to a compatible display, Series S can break free of the 60 frames per second limit, delivering frame-rates up to 120fps.
2 Likes
Not gonna hear about this analysis today from people
4 Likes
Indeed. Some studios are still on VS2017. Even changing the IDE sometimes can make problems. Though I hope MS internal studios take the effort to move to the newest versions of the SDKs.
2 Likes
As someone who owns Black Ops: Cold War on PS5, I want to say I think the Digital Foundry video didn’t even give the full picture on the frame rate struggles it has. They highlighted a couple set piece moments in their video, but there was an entire mission that had some mild drops, and then there was an entire 5 minute portion of that mission that felt like it was running in the 50’s. I found it quite distracting, and I honestly wish I’d bought the game on the Series X.
This narrative that the Series X is underperforming in so many games seems a bit weird to me. For the vast majority of the people who will play Black Ops at 60fps, the Xbox version is better, yet somehow the conversation around the game only seemed to focus on how the Xbox version wasn’t as good at 120fps.
2 Likes