Digital Foundry Analyze the PC version of GTAV -WARNING: Will upset so

[TheMostKnowledgable]

Got them from a website, there's a bunch of comparisons cropping up. They look like they were taken at 1080p to me, not much artifacts of the kind you get from downscaling and they look like msaa4 or 8, hard to tell on 1080p.

 

This one suggests one of those is misleading in the previous post, too. While the lighting model and shading is potentially stronger, the texture is merely slightly blurrier from different filtering, not lacking in details as the vertical comparison on the last page suggested: http://i.imgur.com/Y5Y301P.jpg

 

It's a topic that fascinates me - differences between platforms. As much as I wish everyone was on the same gaming platform together and as much as I wish that all the funds that go to developing many versions of a game or different consoles and pc component brands could be all put into the same pot making the resulting product that runs games better, and better faster, and more profitable for everyone involved, and more enjoyable for every gamer, I would miss the living crap out of seeing which console was better. Rather than all of this competition between platforms and people feeling the need to"defend" or "gloat" or "brag" or "bash" a given platform. I would miss seeing the comparisons, regardless of the pc versions.

 

GTA V thoroughly impresses me on both of the consoles, at a time where the standards it reaches on PC haven't really penetrated the market yet with most people still on 1920x and 2560x, through both generations. PS4 blows my mind, the grass quality is great, and it runs at 30fps steady. My ultra grass brings me to 40 and 50 now so I play half vsync like ps4 and xb360, lets me msaa and ultra more without worry or stutter except hi res shadows are way too much. Ultra grass was 30 to 35 with ultra , doubt it was a patch because my windows experience scores for areo and 3d went to 7.9 from 7.7 recently, which is awesome and unexpected (I changed nothing, maybe the new nvidia drivers did more than add gta v day one support, but it's great). Anyway, the PS4 is doing nearly-ultra grass and it looks great compared to the xb1. xb1 seems to have slightly better lighting and in the comparisons I've seen though it's not always the case.

 

Hope 4k is in my range soon, or I'm in 4k range soon, because it sucks sitting double distance from the monitor and looking at only 1/4 of each 4k screen I see just to see what it really looks like, or closest possible

Edited April 24, 2015 by TheMostKnowledgable

[LankanComrade]

 

The new star Wars battlefront looks so real and that will still be running at 60 FPS across all platforms.

It will TARGET 60fps, the same way BF4 TARGETED 60fps, but barely ran at 40

if the game looks that good and runs at 60fps that's great news for PC as well, FB is a well optimized engine.

[swirler]

 

with most people still on 1920x and 2560x

Dunno where you get your info from, but most people are nowhere near those res's.

 

While 1080p is the most common res, it is only-just, and at that only in the last 12 months. People running higher res's account for hardly a few percent. Which means, actually, the majority are running SUB 1080p o.O!

 

Mind blowing.

[TheMostKnowledgable]

Really gonna be mind blown now.

 

I'm talking about gamers who play games like the one we are discussing here, not the entirety of the world pc's and laptops whether they game or not. Those who are making the statistics you're looking at a bit skewed who may play games casually, but do other things with a PC like surf and use facebook and netflix. Notebooks and sh*t, walmart desktops and stuff. That's why you think that, but gamers are on 1920 for a long time now, nearly 5 years it is the most used, and for 7 and 8 years has been the PC gaming standard, whether it took a couple years for the masses to catch up or not.

 

Consoles just got 1080p in the latest iteration. PC gamers been using 1080p for years now, why else do you think we've gone on about the tiny 720p of the PS3 and 360 since before they even came out?!

 

You are making a mistake of seeing broad statistics of all the monitors and assuming they are all desktops and gaming pc's. Even if you're looking at the Steam hardware survery, nope. Lots of people have steam on laptops and desktop and don't really game on that laptop. It is still surveyed. Hell, I even have steam on a laptop that isn't even mine. And it only does 1366.

 

If people are getting 1080p in 2015, it's good for them, but they are late. 1080p monitors have been coming with 399 dollar Acer's without GPU's for years at walmart, too, man.

 

Where are you getting your information?

 

Here you go; quote the following article:

 

 

My favourite statistic of this whole damn list is regarding monitors. Obviously 1920 x 1080 remains the standard (32.06%)

 

Remains being the key word for you. It means it's been a standard since before the 2014 hwsurvey that is in reference to, the top is of course 1080p this year as well.

 

Here, way back in 2012, 3 years is a far cry from "only-just now":

 

 

What resolutions are these GPUs powering? Currently, the most popular resolution used according to the survey is 1080p (1920×1080, to be exact), with a 25.60% share. 1080p is a “de facto” sweet-spot for gaming, so it’s nice to see that more and more people are picking up monitors to handle it. But to be fair, just because someone uses 1080p

http://techgage.com/news/a_look_at_steams_hardware_survey_for_may_2012/

 

2011:

 

 

 

At some point since the last time we checked out the survey, 1080p has quite surprisingly become the most-popular resolution used, sitting currently at 22.97% and increasing on a monthly basis. In similar territory, 1920×1200 owns 7.95% while 1680×1050 is responsible for 19.57%. Interestingly, almost all resolutions below 1680×1050 are decreasing in usage with each passing month, with some exceptions likely due to notebook usage.

 

http://techgage.com/news/taking_a_look_at_the_latest_steam_hardware_survey/

 

Four years is a f*cklong time in computers.

 

Got me here though, there is certainly a lot less 2560 than I expected, I thought that was a higher number of people by now, that hasn't really actually changed much in a very, very long time:

 

 

 

Edited April 24, 2015 by TheMostKnowledgable

[DWeasel]

have anyone seen this? (sorry if this was posted already)

http://i.imgur.com/efSqjXr.gif

 

Day and Night!!!

[swirler]

Consoles just got 1080p in the latest iteration. PC gamers been using 1080p for years now, why else do you think we've gone on about the tiny 720p of the PS3 and 360 since before they even came out?!

Consoles didnt just get 1080p! PS3 may not have had many titles play at that res, but it did support it. And I personally said b'bye to 1080p over a decade ago on PC!

 

My "only-just" was with regard the %, not the time frame. And depending on where you get an analysis, it'll paint a different picture, obviously the millions of screens in crumby old offices would destroy the stats. So Steam is a fair place to get an idea of what gamers use on average. I dont think notebooks and such muddy those numbers that much as you suggest, if you have no intention on gaming on it, why would you install it? Not saying it never happens, but nothing noteworthy (Id bet*).

[Ash_735]

I've been saying it for a long time about how much some people brag about 4K and yet how Steam seems to indicate that only a miniscule amount of people are actually viewing proper 4k. It seems that more people are happy to brag about it than actually buy into it!

 

Also, yeah, TheMostKnowledgeable can't be trusted in these situations, he knows his stuff in regards to PC because it is his favorite platform, but in regards to consoles, he doesn't know jack and spreads lies, if you guys could see some of the stuff he sent to me in PM you'd think he was apart of the Epsilon Program. 1080p on consoles is more STANDARD this generation than last, doesn't mean it wasn't around previously, hell, amazing enough one studio called HexaDrive who are brilliant coders actually got a game to render in 4k and downsample to 1080p on PS3! And on another they have 32xMSAA applied to a render field of lines! They are true developers who know what they are doing and it really boggles my mind how they don't get more work.

[gsw_hoops]

The PS4 being beaten by 10 fps with an i3 and a 750 Ti is really nothing to be excited about. 30 fps locked is unplayable for many of us who are used to 60 fps gaming. I'm not trashing the PS4 either. And I've got some beef with the PC version at that, I think the article goes easy on it in terms of calling it well optimized when their test bench is rocking a Titan.