Face Off Preview : NFS Rivals ( One & PS4)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Astro's still claiming standard AMD GCN features are Xbox exclusive? Oh dear.

consolewarz is still fabricating quotes left and right in the absence of the intellectual grit to offer counters to what ppl have actually typed? Oh dear.

The display pane capabilities of both consoles are very similar.

No they aren't. One has 2 image planes for games, the other has just 1 which entirely defeats the purpose of vplanes rendered independently (since without multiple planes there's no sch thing as parallel rendering of a singular image plane). It also removes the possibility for avoiding redundant rendering ops by exploiting occlusion as well as not allowing for blending ops to be done (since you can't blend a single plane with itself).

The PS4 equivalent is called the Display ScanOutDevice Engine.

I know abotu the scanout engine. It's not the equivalent at all. You're just pulling s*** you find qualitatively similar and asserting they are the same thing. They are worlds apart. One lefts you scale, adjust framerate, does blending ops, adjust color depths, and adjust resolutions of multiple image planes processed in parallel independently on the fly between frames. The fact there are two planes, each chopped up into quadrants, means you can significantly reduce the amount of redundancy in rendering the image to be displayed to the end user as you can avoid writing twice to areas where, for instance, there is occlusion etc. You can't do anything of the sort with just a single plane on PS4. The scanout engine on PS4 is just a scaler.

The main difference is the Xbox can have 3 overlapping panes rather than 2, according to vgleaks. Once again, it seems like straw grasping and "mountains out of molehills" over tech features that are very similar if not identical.

You should learn wtf you are babbling about before posting. It's not a 2 vs 3 issue. Each has 1 reserved for the OS overlays, meaning it's a 1 vs 2 issue which makes all the difference in the world when on one you can do all that staff between frames and in parallel with the 2nd image place for games, while on the other you...can't. That's like saying having a pair of moving trucks isn't really any different than having just one moving truck.
 
Why is the game sharper on X1.

:txbconfused:

Seems kinda...odd

My guess is the x1's display planes give devs lots of flexibility to adjust how pixels are distributed within an image as well as the color depth adjustments (which is vital to good contrast ratios). Better contrast can make a 720p upscaled image retain its sharpness (but it still loses out on AA which gets stretched). Combine that with good hue saturation and the assets can pop more visually to viewers.

Don't take my word for it, go look at how the internet reacted to the DF comparison gallery pics. The utterly vast majority, even on GAF of all places, felt the X1 version looked better visually to their eye. There were various claims about conspiracies with MS/DF doctoring the images and others with DF purposely mislabeling them, etc.

It's somewhat subjective. If you don't like how it looks, that's cool. I do (so long as crushed blacks are fixed, which they supposedly are). And clearly a helluva lot of others felt that way too. As such, Sony fanboys asserting that it "objectively" looks worse visually are spinning their wheels trying to cling to reviewers who didn't even do direct comparisons in lieu of forming their own opinions from side by side direct feed pics.

MS gave devs the extra display plane for a reason, and this is precisely what that reason was. To better help with flexible pixel management and other techniques to make sure the games when upscaled stay nice and sharp with minimal artifacts.
 
Pretty much this. From what I've played, the game is not blurry like that, and is near PC quality. Even eurogamer said PS4 looked better.

They said the assets look sharper and pop more on X1. They take comparison pics for a reason ya know...to let viewers take the initiative to think for themselves and make up their own mind dependent on their subjective sensibilities. That wasn't motion blur on the guy's head btw...
 
Argument from ignorance, desktop AMD and Nvidia cards have been able to do it since forever and yet it's not present in BF4 or any game for that matter. This is like saying if XBO one was capable of running COD:G at 1080p then it would have.

I haven't seen a good set of CoD side by sides yet, but if it was anything like BF4 then there is little reason to bother outside of AA. It's dumb to render so many additional pixels when you get nothing notable for your GPU's efforts without counting pixels and pretending ppl in the real world care about that sorta thing. IW couldn't get X1's version to 1080p without dropping frames, so they didn't. The difference is that IW's engine is a decade old at the baseline whereas Frostbite 3 is new and designed for next gen ground up. It's clear as day how ppl felt about the X1's version looking better overwhelmingly when given side by sides to compare. So why didn't DICE do the same on PS4? They couldn't because they don't have hardware that does all of that without costing GPU cycles.

You guys can try to ignore actual side by sides all day long. Doesn't change the fact that an overwhelming majority felt the X1 version looked notably better due to the contrast and hue saturation making the 720p image scale nicer than the 900p counterpart. The pics prove my point, as do the reactions they drew.

And yes it's per frame or otherwise it'd be a useless feature altogether, and it'd still be done on CPU...since it's something that's been capable on PCs since times immortal.

That doesn't suggest it's done between frames anywhere. And their post fx are hardly worthless to have between frames on non-real-time video feeds likes games. Your link is about applying post-fx to BR movies. Also, that is all done on the GPU itself, not external to it like the display planes. We are now talking about a solution that's free for X1 but costs cycles on PS4. Additionally, you can't cull redundancy or control for res/color depth/etc across multiple planes with PS4 or the PC's setup without doing it entirely via software (to create a 2nd plane to work on).
 
Comparing disparity on a title such as NFS is not ideal as it seems like the developer made quite sure that PC, PS4, and Xbox One would look remotely the same.
 
They said the assets look sharper and pop more on X1. They take comparison pics for a reason ya know...to let viewers take the initiative to think for themselves and make up their own mind dependent on their subjective sensibilities. That wasn't motion blur on the guy's head btw...

They also said ps4 version was better, quit ignoring that. And, contrary to your claim, people felt the pss4 version looked better.

I easily have made my ps4 version colors pop by adjusting tv settings.
 
I haven't seen a good set of CoD side by sides yet, but if it was anything like BF4 then there is little reason to bother outside of AA. It's dumb to render so many additional pixels when you get nothing notable for your GPU's efforts without counting pixels and pretending ppl in the real world care about that sorta thing. IW couldn't get X1's version to 1080p without dropping frames, so they didn't. The difference is that IW's engine is a decade old at the baseline whereas Frostbite 3 is new and designed for next gen ground up. It's clear as day how ppl felt about the X1's version looking better overwhelmingly when given side by sides to compare. So why didn't DICE do the same on PS4? They couldn't because they don't have hardware that does all of that without costing GPU cycles.

Just so I'm clear, you're saying in complete seriousness that DICE didn't have the ability to lower the resolution of the PS4 version by nearly 40% give or take and render at 1280x720 and do your magical contrast adjustment because they/PS4 didn't have the hardware to spare the cycles...the same cycles they used to simply increase PS4 version's resolution....and you're serious? Like not even remotely joking? I don't think you quite grasp how not intensive dynamic contrast + a sharpening filter is compared to going from 1280x720 to 1600x900 across all your MRTs is. Though I will say your new stance on resolution is a dramatic change from just 6 months ago in which you were pretty adamant in your speculation that Xbox One would have more games running at 1080p than PS4 because display planes.

Also you should inform Turn 10 about how pointless higher resolutions are. They clearly didn't get the memo. Perhaps they should have lowered Forza to 1280x720 applied the magical display plane magics and add some AA. It would have "popped" more.

And you're right, COD's engine is pretty old. You'd think such an old engine that was developed primarily for Xbox 360 would have no problem running at 1080p on Xbox One given the new system is per your own words remarkably similar to the Xbox 360 and the development environment is almost the same, thus the idea that developers are having a hard time developing for Xbox One because of the eSRAM is FUD.

You guys can try to ignore actual side by sides all day long. Doesn't change the fact that an overwhelming majority felt the X1 version looked notably better due to the contrast and hue saturation making the 720p image scale nicer than the 900p counterpart. The pics prove my point, as do the reactions they drew.

Kinda like how you're ignoring that DF messed up the entire process and introduced BTB with the Xbox version due to the fact they set Xbox One to 0-255 and but there was a bug and it gave a 16-235 signal to their capture device that caused clipping that wasn't nor is intended and contrary to your initial assessment had nothing to do with the magical display planes or per frame contrast adjustment? (and it's totally not done per frame) But rather it was a bug? What you're championing as a victory is the difference between PS4/PC adhering to sRGB color space while Xbox doesn't (much like 360). You sound like the kind of person who has a TV still set to torch mode and proclaim that its better than a calibrated TV.

Anyone who thinks crushed blacks/BTB is a good thing is an idiot unarguably. I mean here are some direct feed grabs of KI

ibx6129YYTUIOe.png

izINCbk3jRBps.png

i3DAx1lLwXoDt.png


At no point should you be losing any and all information within shadowed areas like this. This is not technically better in any way shape or form. Stuff like this is the very reason we have colorspace profiles and calibration. Not only are you losing information, you're also losing dynamic range. This is not a desired effect.

That doesn't suggest it's done between frames anywhere. And their post fx are hardly worthless to have between frames on non-real-time video feeds likes games. Your link is about applying post-fx to BR movies.
What exactly do you think the point of real time encoding, decoding and post processing is exactly? That's not rhetorical by the way.

We are now talking about a solution that's free for X1 but costs cycles on PS4. Additionally, you can't cull redundancy or control for res/color depth/etc across multiple planes with PS4 or the PC's setup without doing it entirely via software (to create a 2nd plane to work on).
You mean a solution you assume costs cycles on PS4 based on your limited knowledge? An absence of evidence is evidence of absence argument is a silly argument to put forth so I pray you don't. As for the PC you mean other than the fact that OSX since like forever and Windows since DX10 can create multiple planes in their graphics API? You assume because individual software creates their own planes that PC OSes are incapable of doing such on their own. Flimsy logic. Not even sure what the point of mentioning culling is for at all.

Also, that is all done on the GPU itself, not external to it like the display planes.
UVD is part of the VCE block that resides on the GPU. It's the most logical place to put it since it requires GPU bandwidth to function, where else would it be done exactly? And I'm sure you're aware that the display planes are a block on the GPU and by extension shares resources much like any block on the GPU would. It doesn't work in a vacuum.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Anderson
Just so I'm clear, you're saying in complete seriousness that DICE didn't have the ability to lower the resolution of the PS4 version by nearly 40% give or take and render at 1280x720 and do your magical contrast adjustment because they/PS4 didn't have the hardware to spare the cycles...the same cycles they used to simply increase PS4 version's resolution....and you're serious?

Dropping down to 720p without good scaler hardware to get it back to 1080p would only result in having lots of pretty fx smeared all across the screen. Devs would prefer to avoid that on PS4. You are forgetting that you still need to output at 1080p.

Though I will say your new stance on resolution is a dramatic change from just 6 months ago in which you were pretty adamant in your speculation that Xbox One would have more games running at 1080p than PS4 because display planes.

That speculation is likely still correct, as X1 likely has all games with a native 1080p HUD. MS could have been marketing that but didn't.

Also you should inform Turn 10 about how pointless higher resolutions are. They clearly didn't get the memo. Perhaps they should have lowered Forza to 1280x720 applied the magical display plane magics and add some AA. It would have "popped" more.

I am 100% in favor of lowering Forza's resolution in favor of better AA and more fx. Nothing magic going on with the display planes btw. You can stop with that nonsense any day now Ketto.

And you're right, COD's engine is pretty old. You'd think such an old engine that was developed primarily for Xbox 360 would have no problem running at 1080p on Xbox One given the new system is per your own words remarkably similar to the Xbox 360 and the development environment is almost the same, thus the idea that developers are having a hard time developing for Xbox One because of the eSRAM is FUD.

Development environment isn't almost the same. X1's dev tools are behind schedule, as we've known since the guy from Avalanche told us so months back. Nice try though.

Kinda like how you're ignoring that DF messed up the entire process...

Their capture was perfect. The X1 unit was malfunctioning. Stop spreading FUD you KNOW is bulls***.

...and introduced BTB with the Xbox version due to the fact they set Xbox One to 0-255 and but there was a bug and it gave a 16-235 signal to their capture device that caused clipping that wasn't nor is intended and contrary to your initial assessment had nothing to do with the magical display planes or per frame contrast adjustment?

The color adjustment with the display planes is something that allows for the colors to pop and the contrast to be a higher ratio on X1. DF's comparison was limited by the X1's RGB output for that bugged unit which crushed blacks. It wasn't intended nor did I ever claim the HDMI bug was done intentionally. You're just lying compulsively about what I had said now. Back to the old Ketto I see.

But rather it was a bug?

I said this on day 1 of those comparisons. What the HDMI bug did was cut off the RGB spectrum and crush blacks. It didn't magically create a surge of color vibrancy and contrast adjustments by sheer happenstance that miraculously conspired to make the X1 version look better for so many ppl.

What I'm "championing" is the fact that the display planes and their capabilities are unique to X1 and that they allow devs the flexibility to do various things not possible on PS4's scanout engine, which result in contrast/hue adjustments that can make the X1 version of a game look more vibrant and sharper, even with lower native resolution. We see that in BF4 and AC4 as demonstrative examples. You are fighting a losing battle. You are arguing against your own eyes because ya don't like what the reality in front of them is suggesting.

Anyone who thinks crushed blacks/BTB is a good thing is an idiot unarguably.

The X1 doesn't crush blacks. You are reading too much of GAF's FUD. Those pics are captures from the Game DVR, not the actual game itself. It's not doing that in other games so clearly it's not some mysterious hardware level issue doing that to all games. It's likely more to do with Game DVR having messed up settings to accommodate smaller upload files. Nobody noticed this issue with KI until they saw Game DVR footage/screens.

You mean a solution you assume costs cycles on PS4 based on your limited knowledge?

No, based on what your own whitepaper says. If it's in the GPU, it costs cycles. On X1 that isn't the case.

As for the PC you mean other than the fact that OSX since like forever and Windows since DX10 can create multiple planes in their graphics API?

...which is in software.

You assume because individual software creates their own planes that PC OSes are incapable of doing such on their own. Flimsy logic. Not even sure what the point of mentioning culling is for at all.

Wat? I never suggested anything like that. said they are done via software which eats into processing power in the main processors.

UVD is part of the VCE block that resides on the GPU. It's the most logical place to put it since it requires GPU bandwidth to function, where else would it be done exactly?

I never claimed it was a bad place for it. I said it's not external to the GPU and as such eats into GPU cycles when used for post fx.
 
Last edited:
They also said ps4 version was better, quit ignoring that.

I'm not interested in their subjective opinion on overall visuals. I have my own eyes to judge that myself. They make galleries specifically for that purpose.

And, contrary to your claim, people felt the pss4 version looked better.

Almost nobody did, in fact. Go look at how ppl reacted to the DF gallery pics when they went live. Almost everyone agreed the X1 version looked sharper and better overall until there came word that there wasn RGB issue. At that point GAF jumped on DF for conspiring with MS to mislead everyone. Now it's known the X1 unit had an HDMI bug that crushed blacks and DF's capture was perfect the whole time.

I easily have made my ps4 version colors pop by adjusting tv settings.

Enjoy doing that with every single game you buy during different parts of the game.
 
You're going by comments on the screens. I'm going by, you know, feedback from those that actually played both.

And I don't have to adjust settings for every game.


Keep up the good fight though.
 
We can see exactly what the Xbox scaler does to 720p upscaled to 1080p, because the scaler doesn't activate if the monitor is 720p native.

720p native on xbox:
vB0.png


720p upscaled to 1080p on xbox:
xB0.png
 
Astro stuffs strawmen, mixes opinion with fact, and makes false accusations as a matter of course, which says just about everything you need to know. Reminds me of "free energy" advocates or vaccine denialists.

He's literally reduced to sharpness/contrast filters, "display pane IQ massages" and "Native 1080p HUDs", that's how sad the straw grasping is at this point. How long will he keep using cherry picked screencaps from botched pre-launch BF4 footage?

He'd probably be better off focusing on real Xbox advantages like Kinect, TV, snap, exclusive games, etc. Not going down with the "Xbox is equal or greater in graphics performance" ship.
 
You're going by comments on the screens. I'm going by, you know, feedback from those that actually played both.

I'm going by opinions of ppl who viewed direct feed, side by screenshots and formed their own opinions. You are presuming the opinions of other ppl are somehow more valid, to the point of dismissing those who disagreed based on direct feed side by sides. Also, your favored 'opinioneers' at the various websites didn't do any side by side comparisons right in front of them by eye. The review events weren't arranged for that sorta thing. Those reviewers were judging purely from memory and being told PS4's sku was higher res.

Don't think that can affect how these reviewers felt subjectively? Tell that to the various reviewers who claimed that Ghosts was dramatically crisper on PS4 due to the native 1080p resolution that...well, didn't actually exist in their review builds. It was 720p in SP and those boneheads convinced themselves there was some easily discernible difference and trumpeted it when it literally didn't exist.

Bottom line there: Reviewers' opinions are no more meaningful than anyone else's, and an intelligent surveyor would look at direct feed side by sides as provided by DF's gallery...not form opinions on the back of being told one is sharper than the other and then playing sku's on different platforms in totally different rooms many hrs apart and then acting like they have the total recall to remember notable differences in subtle pixel distributions. Nothing you nor reviewers can say will make those DF pics evaporate. I'm going to judge them with my own eyes, thanks. Before asserting my eyes are broken, go back to GAF of all places and look how the vast majority favored there agreed with me. If you don't, that's totally fine. But my perspective on this is the polar opposite of fringe.
 
Astro stuffs strawmen, mixes opinion with fact, and makes false accusations as a matter of course, which says just about everything you need to know. Reminds me of "free energy" advocates or vaccine denialists.

Depending on what you mean by 'free energy', it very much exists. ;) Keep on trollin without that counter argument though big fella. Guess ya gotta spend your nights doing something.

He's literally reduced to sharpness/contrast filters, "display pane IQ massages" and "Native 1080p HUDs", that's how sad the straw grasping is at this point. How long will he keep using cherry picked screencaps from botched pre-launch BF4 footage?

I've reduced 'IQ parameter adjustments per frame' to 'IQ parameter adjustments made by display planes' because the display do precisely that per frame. And there was nothing wrong with the DF captures. The actual game doesn't have those crushed blacks but retains the sharper look with more saturation. Do these facts upset you?
 
Wow, the new KI looks like dogsh1t. That said, I won't be buying this new NFS. It's locked to 30FPS on PC and the developer actually tried to say that performance didn't matter in a racing game and 30FPS was good enough. Fail

Give me Criterion
 
Why are people still giving him fuel? Isn't this a NFS thread?
 
i2e7KHZdybvXP.png
image_assassin_s_creed_iv_black_flag-23808-2670_0007.jpg
1920x-2.jpg~original

This is the PS4 version of the same shot for GHOST DOGS.
http://images.anandtech.com/doci/7528/ps4-ghosts.png

These three games look like junk. The sharpening up scalar is hilarious. The fact that some people are pushing it as a advantage is even worse. Astrograd will quote me and through out paragraph after paragraph of technobabble he doesnt and isn't qualified to understand but ill say this now. Converting between bit depths and changing the resolution of a image would be trivial on these GPU's were talking probably thousands of images a second. Theres a reason the XB1 version rarely looks like the PC version and thats because of this sharpening upscale.

I'm sure these three images really 'pop' to astrograd, but personally they make me want to gouge my eyeballs out.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, clear photos of the Xbox 720 to 1080 scaler are coming in and it's not pretty. The sharpness filter adds artificial noise to the picture, makes jaggies worse, and it can't be turned off at 1080p. Not sure if those crushed black KI shots are part of the filter, or if the 0-255 color space options are still bugged, or if KI just looks like that normally.

If you think all the lost detail in this shot is "sharp, clear, and popping" I don't know what to say:
ibx6129YYTUIOe.png
 
Well, it's been an entertaining read, but it's been too far off topic for too long. I'm going to have to shut it down.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.