The japanese don't put much emphasis on fps, case in point the switch where even the flagship zelda games are 30 fps. They put more effort into gameplay mechanics and content, Even the players dont seem to mind 30 fps games over there
Over 90% Players Can’t Run Final Fantasy 16 At 1080p 60 FPS
- Thread starter John Elden Ring
- Start date
Or just buy a PS5 Pro. You need a 4080 or better to guarantee performance above a PS5 Pro. Anything less then that on PC is embarrassing.just drop the resolution, use DLSS or buy a new GPU
Flagship Zelda games are 30 fps because switch spec is 10 years behind industry standard.
Nintendo games have run with stable and often high frame rates since the GameCube days. They’re actually on point with game performance. Square is not…
Nintendo games have run with stable and often high frame rates since the GameCube days. They’re actually on point with game performance. Square is not…
No 4070 Super in that graph. Strange.
How about CPU usage? Helldivers, Baldurs Gate and Warhammer rely heavily on CPU for AI. But its almost never mentioned.
My 10th Gen i9 struggles with the above games and is essentially bottlenecking the performace in those cases.
Not everything has to be done by the GPU....
How about CPU usage? Helldivers, Baldurs Gate and Warhammer rely heavily on CPU for AI. But its almost never mentioned.
My 10th Gen i9 struggles with the above games and is essentially bottlenecking the performace in those cases.
Not everything has to be done by the GPU....
No they're not. Unless you accept graphics from 10-15 years ago. And that's the whole point here.
FF16 kinda looked and ran like shit on ps5. Towns were notoriously hideous and missing lighting on npcs. Yeah cinemafixs looked nice— who cares not what it actually played like. Couldn’t hold a stable frame rate.
Stable performance is far more important across the board and Nintendo has mostly been on point with such. There are few outliers like launch Zelda botw locking up entirely.
Nintendo games are always polished. For square you’re hoping for a ps5 pro.
Honestly, before their technical issues... I'd clear their corporate level.
Also because FF games have been getting more action oriented. FFXV was hideous in motion at 30 FPS.
I'm sure Square could have gone for FFXV levels of fidelity at 1440p 60 FPS on PS5 and it would have been the better choice.
I'm sure Square could have gone for FFXV levels of fidelity at 1440p 60 FPS on PS5 and it would have been the better choice.
Western gamers want their games to be like interactive movies.
Japanese gamers want their games to be like games.
Just an RTX 4070 is roughly the price of a PS5 Pro.
However, this gaph is misleading, they could use DLSS to upscale the image from a lower resolution.
However, this gaph is misleading, they could use DLSS to upscale the image from a lower resolution.
I actually pay way less for games on PC then I did on ps5. WAY less. This easily compensates the higher expenses of keeping a rig up to date.
I dont need top of the line hardware. Im running a 4 year old i9 but did invest in a midrange GPU, the 4070 Super.
It runs everything I throw at it at 60fps minimum without having to cut back on graphical fidelity or using some dynamic resolution scaling.
At 1440P native upscaled to 4K it runs like a dream. Of course it's more expensive than a console, but you get constant resolution with a constant framerate throughout.
Even its impressive what the consoles can do, you get what you pay for. Same goes for pc, but then it depends how much you want to spend to get decent quality.
Are consoles more bang for buck? Hell yes! But comfort and budget come with sacrifices.
Differences are far from peanuts
Last edited:
The upcoming RDNA4 8800XTX 16GB should have superior performance and architecture compared to the PS5 Pro and cost 500 to 600€.
We're probably looking at 64CUs at 3.2GHz compared to the PS5 Pro with 60CUs at 2.21GHz, so it should be significantly faster.
Just to say that RDNA4's performance/price ratio is predicted to be well above what we have right now with the RTX4070 / Super/ Ti.
There's no PiSSeR, but AI based FSR4 should be around the corner as well.
Why is it an issue for console players to have access to better resolution and framerate, with DLSS. Usually that's all I hear you PC bragging about but when the console ishigh end its..... pisser. getting a 4070 performance wise is quite impressive correct? I'm assuming it would put you in the top 5-10% for games performance.
Absurdly expensive rigs and new tech is always awesome to me.
Calm your tits. The technology looks excellent but PiSSeR is by far the funniest name we can call it, therefore is the one we should absolutely use.
In this particular case, the console version isn't even using a temporal upscaler like FSR2, they're going with FSR1 which is just a smarter and very fast spatial filter.
Simple. Consoles can only dream of utilizing DLSS. They dont support it. Only the lackluster FSR1
In theory, with the small info we have right now yes. The thing is that Cerny did some clever shit and tricks in previous designs of base PS5, PS4 Pro or Vita that made them perform of how they should theorically perform against others.
I mean, remember that in theory Series X should be considerably more powerful than PS5, but on practice Cerny's sauce makes PS5 perform pretty much the same or in many games even better than in a Series X.
So I think it will be better to wait until they release the final product and we see a big enough amount of benchmark comparisions of patched games to see what the closest equivalent would be.