Fallout 4 PS4 Pro's 1440p vs Xbox One X's 2160p (4K)

@04dcarraher: i agree with that. Same issue is with PC as well.

Neogaf? aka Pony ground zero?

No thanks an no way I buy anything from what anyone there is selling.

EA has already said they are going to use X to the most of its ability so just browsing the list see that Battle front 2 was not mentioned as 4k 60fps, know your list is wrong.

Again X games will look better. A lot better. Just deal with it! Gameplay is more important than resolution member? You member!

@cainetao11: base level is the strongest lv. It holds the most weight. Your x1x isnt gonna change how this gen started nor how it now.

Nice spin attempt. Enjoy the slightly better checkboard for 100 extra. 150 by time it comes out. We paid 100 dollars less for our slightly better power. Which is the only reason some bragged.

Bet money our future exclusives still end looking better.

Bethesda games on consoles....missing 99% of mods that make the games playable...

LMAO

At least tell me it goes over 30 fps.

Don't forget this is a Bethesda game. If it is native 4K, I wouldn't be surprised if it drops below 30FPS quite frequently and takes them ages to fix. The Fallout engine is a mess.

Will it make the game not suck though?

LOL I don't need anything changed, my life doesn't hinge on SW. My X1X is going to be better than my X1S, just like my PS4 Pro is better than my PS4 was. Awww $100 is so much money, you really showed me! Saving that money I make in a 2 hour service call on Saturday. Don't brag to me that you need to penny pinch HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

I'll bet more money that I still wont give a shit for many of the PS exclusives. What should I get all riled up for? Another emotionally written SP campaign that I'll play through once then again after a year or so? At least Gears, Halo, Crackdown 3, Sea of Thieves and State of Decay 2 are offering me the unscripted excitement of playing with other human beings. TLOU2, GoW, Days Gone, Spider-Man? Am I buying those for replayability? How many fvcking times can I guide Kratos to the end of the story and be excited about it?

Aside from Alienation (my GOTY last year), PS MP lives off of multiplats. The cost for plus is a rip off because the *free games have certainly been shit for a long time. Fvckin Uncharted 4? LMAO its a ghost town and I couldn't play through the campaign a second time. I cant get excited to get Nate and the gang to beat the whiny villain again. I saw how it ends already. Lastly who's "our future exclusives"? You're a Sony first party developer? Maybe you need a break from SW, pal. It isn't that serious.

Just wait it out. Eventually there will be confirmation that Fall Out 4 will be upscaled and they'll never speak of it again. It's going to be upscaled with some extra quality here and there. Maybe a higher resolution than 1440. But not native.

Some of the people here that wet their pants over 1.8 TFLOPS vs 1.3 TFLOPS are now like "40-50% increase in power is nothing". LMAO the fvckin flip is hilarious!!

@gamecubepad said:

@scatteh316 said:

PC GPU's are ALWAYS benchmarked with the fastest CPU's available to avoid any limitations to frame rates and the results are not any where close to being indicative of how a GPU of equal power would perform in a console with a much much much shittier CPU.

So stop using these charts as it's laughable.

LMFAO!!!!!!!

1. 4K/30fps will create a GPU-bound scenario where there will be little difference between various tiers of CPUs.

2. FO4 is 1080p/30fps on XO, making it an ideal candidate for 4K.

---

Not to say it will be that res, just that your reasoning is incorrect.

That has pretty much just proven my point..... The i3-4350 can't offer a solid 30fps and that's faster then Xbone X's CPU...

a. Has nothing to do with it

b. Sure, but still a different category. I didn't see any of these remarks when people kept posting DF articles that compared PS4, and the One. Oh thats right, flip flop

Meh, even on PC with all the mods at 4K, FO4 is at best a "decent" shooter game with a sprinkling of RPG elements, and still a piss poor excuse for a Fallout game.

Too bad all the extra horsepower can't be used for something useful. Like non-braindead companion and enemy AI.

@scatteh316 said:

@gamecubepad said:

@scatteh316 said:

PC GPU's are ALWAYS benchmarked with the fastest CPU's available to avoid any limitations to frame rates and the results are not any where close to being indicative of how a GPU of equal power would perform in a console with a much much much shittier CPU.

So stop using these charts as it's laughable.

LMFAO!!!!!!!

1. 4K/30fps will create a GPU-bound scenario where there will be little difference between various tiers of CPUs.

2. FO4 is 1080p/30fps on XO, making it an ideal candidate for 4K.

---

Not to say it will be that res, just that your reasoning is incorrect.

That has pretty much just proven my point..... The i3-4350 can't offer a solid 30fps and that's faster then Xbone X's CPU...

Prove it.

Double Athlon 5350's result for 8 core at 2.05 Ghz version. Intel Atom C2750 has 8 Silvermont cores with 2.4 Ghz to 2.6 Ghz clock speed.

Per CPU core, Intel Silvermont is roughly similar to AMD's Jaguar.

Unlike Bulldozer/Piledriver based CPUs, Athlon 5350's quad cores doesn't share FPU resource with two threads.

You still not thinking render time i.e. each hardware advantages affects render time.

Each hardware component has dependencies e.g. memory write is dependent on math result being ready at a timely manner.

Memory transfers consumes render time.

Solving math problem consumes render time.

Both XBO and PS4 has similar memory write performance while X1X has about 50 percent superior memory write performance over PS4 Pro.

Memory bandwidth bound TFLOPS is the real difference between X1X and PS4 Pro.

There's no logical reason for X1X's Fallout 4 to be CB 4K since ancient R9-390X (5.9 TFLOPS) with ~2/3 of RX-480's 3Dmarks Vantage's color fill rate (Polaris DCC 32 ROPS crushed non-DCC 64 ROPS) is already native 4k ~32 fps average.

The GPU is the bottleneck since higher GPU SKUs can still scale the same CPU.

XFX Radeon HD R9-390's 40 CU has 5.3 TFLOPS with 33 fps average.

At 1050 Mhz, XFX Radeon HD R9-390's non-CU hardware is same as R9-390X's non-CU hardware, hence 0.7 TFLOPS is wasted. X1X's 40 CU GPU non-CU hardware is clocked at 1172 Mhz.

40/44 CU at 1172 Mhz is faster Hawaii Pro/XT variant.

Fallout 4 PS4 Pro's 1440p vs Xbox One X's Unconfirmed

Here, I fixed it for the the people that are having a hard time reading articles. Nice try!

Wrong

From http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58024/bethesda-xbox-one-support/index.html

"We're looking for all of our studios to add a level of support for Xbox One X. We Tweeted out last night that we're working right now to get Skyrim SE and Fallout 4 supported on the X,"

Hines said in a recent interview with Geoff Keighely. "We're working right now to get both of those titles supported with higher resolution, True 4K, higher frame rates, etc. The games will take advantage of the hardware and Microsoft's been grateful and Phil Spencer came out last year to tell us what they're doing and walk us through a tech demo to let all of our guys get up to speed on what Xbox One X is capable of doing and how we want to embrace it and incorporate it into our games."

It's 4K for both Skyrim SE and Fallout 4 for X1X.

Try again.

@ronvalencia said:

@scatteh316 said:

@gamecubepad said:

@scatteh316 said:

PC GPU's are ALWAYS benchmarked with the fastest CPU's available to avoid any limitations to frame rates and the results are not any where close to being indicative of how a GPU of equal power would perform in a console with a much much much shittier CPU.

So stop using these charts as it's laughable.

LMFAO!!!!!!!

1. 4K/30fps will create a GPU-bound scenario where there will be little difference between various tiers of CPUs.

2. FO4 is 1080p/30fps on XO, making it an ideal candidate for 4K.

---

Not to say it will be that res, just that your reasoning is incorrect.

That has pretty much just proven my point..... The i3-4350 can't offer a solid 30fps and that's faster then Xbone X's CPU...

Prove it.

Double Athlon 5350's result for 8 core at 2.05 Ghz version. Intel Atom C2750 has 8 Silvermont cores with 2.4 Ghz to 2.6 Ghz clock speed.

Per CPU core, Intel Silvermont is roughly similar to AMD's Jaguar.

Unlike Bulldozer/Piledriver based CPUs, Athlon 5350's quad cores doesn't share FPU resource with two threads.

Ahahahahahahaha......... Maybe use a game benchmark.... making up things again just like you did in the OP....... And maybe use a CPU with equal IPC to Jaguar.....

Deal with it.

Where's it state the exact resolution for XBX again??? Or are you making stuff up again.... Lmfao..

"higher resolution, True 4K, higher frame rates" You are making stuff up again.... Lmfao..

Ronbot again showing up that his brain can't handle the english language.

So now your point is it can't offer a "solid" 30fps? Before it was that a weaker CPU would turn a 980ti GPU into a 270x.

Mad Cow again showing up who can't handle precious PS4 Pro having inferior 1440p resolution when compared to X1X.

Oh I can handle it, I play games not resolutions or AMD presentations like you do. You, on the other hand, can't handle the english language, logic and rational thought processes which is sad and pathetic.

@Zero_epyon: just make sure you quote the people that claimed Fallout 4 will be native 4k.

So basically the OP and all the lemmings here that agree with him then...

@ronvalencia

https://news.xbox.com/2017/06/11/new-packaging-icons-xbox/

Wrong! Microsoft has muddied the waters. We will wait for Digital foundry for the real info. Not Microsoft's marketing BS. The Xbox X is an Xbox Pro. Im not sure why you keep claiming otherwise. Same resolutions and same framerates across the board except for a few instances. I'm sorry to have to be the one to break it to you.

@the-a-baum Battlefront 2 is 1440p/60fps on Pro and X.

Xbox One X can't run Battlefront 1 at native 4K. Nice try!

@pinkanimal: yup as long as you can quote them stating FO4 will be native 4K.

I know that you're going to flip flop and require that the specific word "native" was said because you're a troll but OP said "8,294,400 pixels" which is the amount of pixels for native 4k so they are equivalent. The rest of the lems here are not directly saying native 4k but agreeing with ronvalencia which is also admitting they think FO4 will be native 4k.

@pinkanimal: i never specified any poster. As long as zero can quote menbers here stating that FO4 will be native 4K, then he should be ok.

For this topic, Fallout 4 on XBO is already has 1080p and 30 fps target i.e. for 4K, 1.3 TFLOPS x 4 = 5.2 TFLOPS. My topic's information is not from Microsoft's PR.

From http://www.tweaktown.com/news/58024/bethesda-xbox-one-support/index.html

"We're looking for all of our studios to add a level of support for Xbox One X. We Tweeted out last night that we're working right now to get Skyrim SE and Fallout 4 supported on the X,"

Hines said in a recent interview with Geoff Keighely. "We're working right now to get both of those titles supported with higher resolution, True 4K, higher frame rates, etc. The games will take advantage of the hardware and Microsoft's been grateful and Phil Spencer came out last year to tell us what they're doing and walk us through a tech demo to let all of our guys get up to speed on what Xbox One X is capable of doing and how we want to embrace it and incorporate it into our games."

XFX R9-390 with 1050 Mhz OC and 5.3 TFLOPS has 4K >30 fps average with ultra settings.

PS4 Pro's 4.2 TFLOPS GPU is not enough for 4K.

RX-470 has 4.9 TFLOPS FP32 which makes PS4 Pro's GPU weaker than PC's RX-470.

PC's RX-470 can handle Fallout 4 at 1440p without major problems.

Wrong. My memory bandwidth argument comes from NVIDIA's presentations. Try again mad cow.

@kuu2 said:

@pinkanimal said:

@kuu2 said:

@pinkanimal said:

@kuu2 said:

@scatteh316: couldn't care less about something not saying "native". That is the latest SW troupe trying to discredit The One X.

You are trying to hard.

Actually it was originally your troupe to discredit the PS4 honey.

So, you're the one who is trying too hard to flipflop

We get it ALT you're obsessed with me.

Flattering and creepy all at the same time.

If you keep lying I will keep exposing you with that single post that illustrates your hypocrisy. If you want to have a serious discussion then go ahead. But since lemmings like you already know that you're pretty much destroyed in the gaming department by the PS4, you're grasping at any little thing to claim a win, flip flopping like crazy, changing the definition of terms, i.e. being desperate. But then desperation makes you make mistakes such as this because your arguments are poor, weak and badly thought out, usually based on exaggerated, deceptive and unproven news headlines. It appears you people don't even care to read your own sources before posting here. If the X1X is truly going to be a native 4k machine then I suggest you guys wait until the games release because right now you are making a fool of yourselves every time you make one of these threads that get disproved 5 posts into the thread using the same source posted on the OP. I have seen like 4 of these already and it is always the same outcome.

By the way, no one has ever disputed that the X1X will have better versions of multiplat games than the PS4 Pro, that's obvious considering the machine released one year later, has better tech and is more expensive. What people have always disputed is if it's going to be so much better than the Pro to justify paying $100 and getting a much weaker game library. I think it is obvious that the X1X will still be no match for the PS4 even with the slight power advantage. What Microsoft needs is a solid game library and lemmings are not helping by using pixel counting of multiplat titles as their main argument to damage control in favor of Microsoft. Microsoft will continue being mediocre if all your arguments and expectations are mediocre.

Dude you're an ALT you are the posting persona of a lie.

Just stop you're embarrassing yourself.

Damn, you got OWNED. BIG TIME

Ok first off another super Sony fanboy hiding behind the PC since the PS4 is weak as heck and they can not defend it.

Lets just say in some crazy alternate world you are not a Sony Fanboy and are some hardcore PC gamer. So your defense is you spent at least 4 times the price of a Xbox One X for a small gain? Oh and before you try and act as if it costs the same price. Lets see the cpu, gpu, power supply, ram, motherboard, casing, operating system and so on. Also keyboard and mouse while your at it since part of the price for the Xbox one X is the controller.

Just so you know a gpu by itself will probably cost more then the Xbox One X.

To tell you the truth, due to the miners and the GPU price hike, it's impossible to build a PC at $500 range at this time, hell I already explain it to someone about it. a single GTX 1060 as of right now used to cost around $200 and now, they go around for $400! So yeah, it's a bad time to be building a PC.

And LOL as if I hide behind a PC, I already had a PC, even before PS4 (Xbox One) existed. I have a GTX 1070+i5 6600k+16GB Ram that smokes both PS4 Pro & even the mighty upgrade console that is Xbox One X in there tracks. But hey, feel free to accuse me hiding behind my PC, cause that's where I play my games the most! My PS4 is good for playing exclusive games and very few other 3rd party games.

Ethereum is harder to make a low BOM price custom ASIC (Application Specific Integrated Circuit) since this crypo currency needs uncompressed memory bandwidth and multi-GB memory storage.

Small custom ASIC vendors needs to master leading edge GDDR5 memory controllers.

In short, it's not a compute problem solvable by ASIC's but an access problem reliant upon an already efficient commodity RAM industry.

Link?

@scatteh316 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@scatteh316 said:

@gamecubepad said:

1. 4K/30fps will create a GPU-bound scenario where there will be little difference between various tiers of CPUs.

2. FO4 is 1080p/30fps on XO, making it an ideal candidate for 4K.

---

Not to say it will be that res, just that your reasoning is incorrect.

That has pretty much just proven my point..... The i3-4350 can't offer a solid 30fps and that's faster then Xbone X's CPU...

Prove it.

Double Athlon 5350's result for 8 core at 2.05 Ghz version. Intel Atom C2750 has 8 Silvermont cores with 2.4 Ghz to 2.6 Ghz clock speed.

Per CPU core, Intel Silvermont is roughly similar to AMD's Jaguar.

Unlike Bulldozer/Piledriver based CPUs, Athlon 5350's quad cores doesn't share FPU resource with two threads.

Ahahahahahahaha......... Maybe use a game benchmark.... making up things again just like you did in the OP....... And maybe use a CPU with equal IPC to Jaguar.....

Deal with it.

No PC Jaguar SKU has PCI-E version 3.0 with 16 lanes. Deal with it.

PS4 beats i3/GTX 750 Ti.

On my GTX 1080 Ti i get around 45 FPS average @ 4K with ultra settings.

I bet on Xbox 1 it runs with lots of settings turned off like godrays and probably lower lightning/shadow quality and virtually 0 draw distance.

God-rays set to medium.

Focus on R9-390/R9-390X cards.

Yay... lets keep using PC graphics cards that are pushed by much, much, much faster CPU's then what XBX has.... it's already been proven that CPU's play a big part in Fallout 4 performance.......... And check out that 21fps minimum on the 390x in your last chart.........lmao..

DEAL WITH IT.

Great...

Owners of Microsoft's new console aren't treated to the same level of quality in this area. 720p - also featuring the same post-process anti-aliasing - is confirmed, which is then upscaled to 1080p by the console before arriving on your TV screen. On top of that, a strong sharpening filter is also applied over the entire 720p image, encompassing both in-game imagery along with the HUD elements and even the main menu screens. Based on the fact that we're seeing something very similar in Killer Instinct and Dead Rising 3, we have a feeling that this may actually be part of the Microsoft upscaling solution - and we don't like it.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-call-of-duty-ghosts-next-gen-face-off

More than 40% advantage for the PS4.

One of the perks of the PS4 version, as revealed earlier via a tweet, is atmospheric simulation - a real-time approach to rendering skies in the Ground Zeroes mission. This allows clouds to move dynamically and impact the sun's lighting, where by contrast the Xbox One release joins PS3 and 360 with purely static skyboxes. It's a difference that only becomes apparent during side-ops missions, where the military base is accessible in broad daylight. Though curiously, the skybox is reinstated during certain set-pieces on PS4 - making this a subtle advantage if you know when and where to look.

The resolution details stand as the most dramatic difference though, with Konami happily making public the specifics of each version ahead of release. From our pixel counts, we can confirm that the PS4 does indeed push out a 1920x1080 framebuffer as promised, while on Xbox One we have just a 1280x720 window with which to work. For a game that embarks on a crusade for open-world stealth action, the lower resolution on Microsoft's platform does affect visibility when lining up long-range shots - just as it does across Battlefield 4's sandbox areas.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-metal-gear-solid-ground-zeroes-face-off

More than 40% advantage for PS4

This highlights one area where a PS4 exhibits an advantage over Xbox One: it boasts a full 1080p output for the vast majority of the duration, with minor drops in resolution occurring in select circumstances. In contrast, Xbox One regularly struggles to hit full 1080p, more often coming in around 1472x828 or lower.

When it comes to performance, both versions aim to deliver a steady 60 frames per second update and the game comes remarkably close to delivering just that. On PlayStation 4, the majority of battles play out with only the smallest of drops. We've already presented one of the worst-case scenarios in video form, but the overall experience feels perceptually rock solid to the point where we were surprised to find any drops at all after analysing the footage.

On Xbox One, performance isn't quite as robust but it still manages to feel great. During many of the larger battles, frame-rates tumble into the mid-50s with some dips all the way down into the 40s.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-doom-face-off

More than 40% advantage for the PS4

For the sake of absolute thoroughness, we can confirm any such change doesn't extend to the resolution issue. If you're buying the PS4 version, you're getting a 1600x900 image scaled to whichever output you'd prefer, while the Xbox One trots behind with a 1280x720 framebuffer that, to be blunt, has an impact on overall visibility on some of the game's bigger multiplayer maps.

In motion, it's the Xbox One version that suffers from the greater temporal aliasing - a flicker artefact on thin geometry and power-lines while panning - but also a general muddying of enemy outlines on the horizon. A post-process anti-aliasing method is in place for both versions, but it's simply not enough to pull the Microsoft release out of the muggy mire as far as image quality goes - it stands as a real shame.

For every other sequence, we see a consistent delta of 10fps in the PS4's favour; from the docking of a rainy, battle-torn Singaporean beach to the ripping in half of an airship carrier.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-battlefield-4-next-gen-face-off

More than 40% advantage for the PS4.

While this point is shared, PS4 and Xbox One part ways when it comes to resolution and anti-aliasing. As confirmed by the team itself, Sony's machine continues to push out a native 1920x1080 image, while Microsoft's hardware musters an upscaled 1600x900. The results are unfortunately not always flattering for Xbox One's final image, even with the team's choice of EQAA in place (also in effect on PS4). This is an AMD variant of the traditional MSAA method, but in this case with extra coverage samples per pixel, in theory giving a smoother gradient on each aliased edge.

As established in our earlier analysis, PS4 does also have an advantage in performance. To re-cap quickly, Project Cars' read-out is typically 60fps in its career mode, with tearing and drops below 50fps once rain kicks in. Stress-tests also show a PS4 advantage once 30+ cars are engaged, while Microsoft's platform takes a bigger hit on hectic races with heavy alpha effects. Tearing is constant in these 30-40fps stress-test scenarios, but in the interest of keeping render times as close as possible to the 16.67ms target, dropping v-sync helps to keep the visual update as rapid as possible - if at a cost to image quality.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2015-project-cars-face-off

More than 40% advantage for the PS4.

In fact any game on PS4 that is 1080p and 900p on xbox one or 900p and 720p on xbox one is already showing a more than 40% advantage that is without frames or other perks like extra AA,faster frames,dynamic effects and so on..

But on those days you didn't care and you were one of those who downplayed the gap hypocrite.

Link with proof of such claim remember you claim it you back it up.

Now link me to the list showing most xbox one games are 1080p,i am not saying is not true is simply that you invent to much crap in order to win an argument..lol

We all remember how you false claim of all PS4 games playable on PC ended..lol

Is like they learned nothing from the xbox one and PS4 situation,the PS4 was 40% more powerful and most of the time only manage to get an extra bump in resolution and maybe a few minor touch ups in some cases it was bigger but not by much,because of that rendering extra pixels over 900p already was eating most of the extra power,then same will happen with scorpio as well they just can't see it they think the difference between 1440p or 1800p vs 4k is nothing and has no penalty apparently.

@ronvalencia: Link?

Confirmed to Xbox enhanced but no further details yet. here is a prediction. It's going to be glorious!

http://cogconnected.com/2017/07/battlefront-ii-xbox-one-x-enhanced/

Even if a game is checkerboarded. Going from 1440 vs 2160 is a big difference.

Actual source comes from https://www.windowscentral.com/star-wars-battlefront-2-confirmed-xbox-one-x-enhanced-title

However, at the time, mention of an update for Star Wars Battlefront 2 appeared to be absent from the show.

As seen on the official Xbox website, we now have clear confirmation that Star Wars Battlefront 2 will be upgraded for the Xbox One X. Like other games advertised under the "Xbox One X Enhanced" tagline, Star Wars Battlefront 2 will have various visual upgrades on the console – though the actual specifics of the upgrade are yet to be confirmed.

Your entire post is a red herring for Fallout 4 X1X at 4K vs PS4 Pro's 1440p version.

It's not X390 LOL, it's R9-390X. You can't get the basics correct.

To bad for you, R9-390X is very old GCN version 1.1 architecture and it's without X1X's 60 deep graphics pipeline and Polaris' GCN version 1.3 changes.

When RX-480 is less memory bottlenecked at 1440p resolution, RX-480 is actually faster than R9-390X. Heavy tessellation based god-rays hammers both R9-390X and Fury X. Too bad for you, X1X's has Polaris update with it's tessellation.

There's no PC SKU part with updated PolarisPlus architecture with 40/44 CU wide at 6 TFLOPS with up to 326 GB/s physical memory bandwidth.

With similar results, R9-390's 5.1 TFLOPS shows RX-580's 6.17 TFLOPS being memory bandwidth bottlenecked. There's about 0.88 TFLOPS being wasted. Deal with it.

There's only 9.5 fps difference between reference GTX 1070 and reference RX-580.

There's only 6.5 fps difference between reference GTX 980 Ti and reference RX-580.

https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/Sapphire/RX_580_Nitro_Plus/15.html

Using 0.88 TFLOPS with extra memory bandwidth, lands X1X estimate into GTX 980 Ti and GTX 1070 range.

Yeah my post is red herring when i linked ass you apparently don't know what red herring mean moron.

All the links i posted showed more than 40% gap in favor of the PS4..lol