• 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
General Console Gaming Thread
#61
(07-03-2017, 02:52 PM)gstanford Wrote: Anthem is an EA effort isn't it?

Swapping the button icons on the video sounds exactly like something EA would do to try and cut costs to me....

Yep. Bioware/EA

https://www.ea.com/games/anthem

It won't be out for another year. And I am willing to bet the visuals won't match the launch trailer. Clearly, the demo was made on a PC even though it was claimed to be "running on XBox X" at E3.
:giggle:

But then Sony was sloppy to use the video and they should probably take it down ... it is also clear to me that MS is pushing back hard against Sony with their own massive viral marketing influence.
Thinking
  Reply
#62
I was just reading that the Nintendo Switch sales for 2017 are projected to match or exceed Xbox sales. I also have concerns about the Scorpio hardware given the fact that in PC form Big Vega appears to be only slightly faster than a GTX 1070, if that. The console version will be clocked lower and perhaps also scaled back. If the Scorpio hardware is weak that will be a big blow to Microsoft. It will also be bad for AMD as they may eventually lose all these lucrative console contracts.
  Reply
#63
(07-03-2017, 07:58 PM)SickBeast Wrote: I was just reading that the Nintendo Switch sales for 2017 are projected to match or exceed Xbox sales.  I also have concerns about the Scorpio hardware given the fact that in PC form Big Vega appears to be only slightly faster than a GTX 1070, if that.  The console version will be clocked lower and perhaps also scaled back.  If the Scorpio hardware is weak that will be a big blow to Microsoft.  It will also be bad for AMD as they may eventually lose all these lucrative console contracts.
I wouldn't be so excited. The source for that is Michael Pachter, the same guy who said the PS4 would play games at 240 FPS.

In other news: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digita...s-revealed
Quote:Assuming Titles B and C are indeed Forza Motorsport 7 and Gears of War 4 respectively, we have real life parallels here between initial port data and optimised results present at E3. Turn 10's engine is indeed capable of hitting 60 frames per second with milliseconds to spare and with frame render time of 11ms, we get the 65 per cent GPU load from a title aiming for 60fps - precisely what we saw with the ForzaTech demo based on an older iteration of the engine. With that in mind, we're curious as to what upgrades Turn 10 has decided to deploy here compared to the basic Xbox One - certainly, texture filtering is looking great on the demo we've played.

Arguably more fascinating is Gears of War 4. There is overhead in the leap to 4K based on the benchmarks, but not a huge amount of it - not compared to Forza, at least. However, The Coalition announced upgrades for the game at E3 including higher resolution textures, higher polygon counts, longer draw distances, upgraded dynamic shadows and improved reflections. It's hard to believe that all of those could be accommodated in the relatively small render time improvement seen here, suggesting that more intensive optimisation for Xbox One X improves upon the raw benchmark result significantly.

And if that's the case, two of the three 900p titles tested here could conceivably attain native 4K resolution upgrades - Title A is just 1ms away from parity with base Xbox One, while Title E is just 2ms off pace, frame-times increasing by around five to six per cent in both cases. Clearly not every game will scale along those lines though. Title D - an open world adventure - clearly isn't going to make it. Perhaps coincidentally, open world adventure Assassin's Creed Origins made it to E3 running on Xbox One X hardware and producing a 2160p output, but requiring checkerboard and dynamic scaling to get there. The results still look impressive in motion though, clearly.
...
There's more too, based on the documentation we've seen. The fundamental architecture of the Xbox One X GPU is a confirmed match for the original machine (believed to be the case for PS4 Pro too) with additional enhancements. There are other features, including AMD's delta colour compression, which sees performance increases of seven to nine per cent in two titles Microsoft tested. DCC is actually a feature exclusive to the DX12 API. In fact, DX11 moves into 'maintenance mode' on Xbox One X, suggesting that Microsoft is keen for developers to move on. There are benefits for both Xboxes in doing so - and there may be implications here for the PC versions too. We could really use improved DX12 support on PC, after all.

Microsoft's key advice for developers? Expect an easy port to Xbox One X with a baseline 4x resolution boost, start with your high-end PC settings, use the memory well and fill any extra frame-time with additional effects. Guard carefully against increased loading stalls and - yes - consider techniques like checkerboard rendering and dynamic resolution. We've certainly seen representation of the latter techniques already, but as we move closer to Gamescom and the run-up to the Xbox One X launch, these early benchmarks are fascinating - and how the scaling demonstrated here translates into final shipping software should be fascinating to track once we have hardware and games to test.
  Reply
#64
Quote:Ark developer Studio Wildcard likens Xbox One X to a PC running a GTX 1070 with 16GB of RAM.
- which isn't that incredibly fast at 4K considering the Windows 'tax' :P

Let's wait for the actual performance figures before we believe any of the incredible hype surrounding both Vega and XBone X.

No one knows what games were tested, and MS only provided a single snapshot of each game - no doubt at 'most ideal' circumstances.
Thinking

The article *assumes* ... and then assumes again ... it's a bunch of PR crap.
:no:
  Reply
#65
Yup I agree with both of you, the Scorpio is somewhat underwhelming. I am quite disappointed personally. It looks like AMD half baked Vega. It's hard to believe how little it improves over the Fury X. It kind of reminds me of how they could have die shrunk the Phenom 2 and it would have been faster than Bulldozer. I suspect a die shrunk Fury X would have worked out better than the Vega turkey we are seeing now.
  Reply
#66
I don't think so. Fury was a rather unbalanced design with several bottlenecks. Vega appears to be the transitional chip to Navi ... it had to be done.

UPDATED:

Actually, Vega acts just like a higher clocked Fury X - these are the latest benches using the Vega FE at the same clocks at the Fury X:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2977-v...clocks-ipc
  Reply
#67
From the end of your link, and the reason why I decided not to post the same link that you did:
Quote:This was an academic exercise. We’d strongly advise that readers don’t draw too many conclusions for RX Vega based on these results. That said, looking at Vega: FE, we can theorize that there are a few parts to the performance differences of this card in gaming: (1) There is room for driver improvement – but keep those expectations realistic, (2) Vega’s small primitives discarder is aiding in some tests – but we’re also not convinced it’s fully functional (or working properly in general), (3) memory bandwidth could play a role in the Fury X’s performance at 4K in some games.

We cannot confidently state what the precise scaling would be with RX Vega, and recommend that everyone just wait and see for its performance. There are too many moving parts with GPUs – as you resolve one bottleneck, you encounter another, and it may not be the same on each architecture. It could still go either way.
  Reply
#68
(07-05-2017, 04:43 PM)apoppin Wrote: I don't think so. Fury was a rather unbalanced design with several bottlenecks. Vega appears to be the transitional chip to Navi ... it had to be done.

UPDATED:

Actually, Vega acts just like a higher clocked Fury X - these are the latest benches using the Vega FE at the same clocks at the Fury X:
http://www.gamersnexus.net/guides/2977-v...clocks-ipc
If you look at those tests, Vega was slower than the Fury X at the same clockspeed, albeit slightly.
  Reply
#69
https://www.neowin.net/news/developer-sa...nd-ps4-pro
I don't know about this, the guy seems to be full of bravado.
  Reply
#70
(07-05-2017, 11:52 PM)SteelCrysis Wrote: https://www.neowin.net/news/developer-sa...nd-ps4-pro
I don't know about this, the guy seems to be full of bravado.
Just like the AotS devs talk about AMD?
:mmm:
  Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)