Xbox Series S/X: Thread 02

[wakka]

The more dodgy places sometimes have 2k versions of stuff. So still HDR, Wide Colour just 2k instead of 4K. I'm specifically saying that I could not see the difference between a 2k download of Blade Runner 2049 and the 4k UHD. I was curious if anyone else had tried this. Unlikely I'll grant you!

I can imagine the difference is pretty narrow compared side-by-side like that, yeah. But since 2K TVs aren't a thing and 2K movies aren't a thing, outside of pirated copies, it doesn't make a whole lot of 'real world' difference I guess?

[Brad]

I can imagine the difference is pretty narrow compared side-by-side like that, yeah. But since 2K TVs aren't a thing and 2K movies aren't a thing, outside of pirated copies, it doesn't make a whole lot of 'real world' difference I guess?

True. Except... when you bring the whole topic back around to Series S targetting 2k and X targetting 4K. If that's the main difference between the two machines and my 2k vs 4k experience is anything to go by then a series S on a 4K TV might look really very close indeed to a Series X. If, as people are saying, the difference is just the resolution.

[wakka]

Yeah I guess there are a couple of things for me on that.

Firstly, it's kinda apples to oranges as I think movies are so different to games. I think a resolution increase in games is more noticeable, and I think the HDR implementation in a lot of games so far is not really that great, so the difference is slighter in that area than for many films.

Secondly, I'm not sure I buy this idea that the Series S is going to be exactly the same in terms of performance, or even offer improved performance, because all of the additional power budget on the Series X is going to be poured into the resolution. I'm really no expert whatsoever on this kind of stuff, but instinctively I just don't feel that is how it's going to turn out over the course of the gen. I think you will see the resolution ratcheted down on the Series X as games become more demanding, and more power budget poured into other areas. And when that happens, I think performance on Series S will suffer and it will lag more obviously.

Just my 2 cents.

[nonny]

[MENTION=221]nonny[/MENTION] (and anyone else able to comprehend the specifics of this question) Have you tried a 2k movie vs a 4k on a 4k TV? At normal viewing distance I can't tell the difference. YMMV of course!
So I guess I'd be happy with a Series S outputting 2k and letting the TV do whatever.

If you've got a 4K TV and you're setting the Series S up with it I am going to assume it is like my current One X where you're not going to get a 2K (1440p) option when connected to a TV, mainly because that isn't a popular resolution for TVs like it is with PC Monitors.

So whether the Series S is outputting native 1440p for a game (or less, we know Yakuza is an unoptimised 900p!) then the hardware is still going to do some sort of upscale in resolution to display 4K.

In terms of trying a 2K movie what I can say is I watch a lot of YouTube @ 1440p on my PC monitor and that looks great, lowering it down to 1080p60 you really notice the difference sat very close (at my desk).

On my TV in the lounge, a 65" 4K Samsung. I have watched the exact same YouTube video clip at 4K, then 2K and 1080p and whilst the TV is then attempting to upscale/render it internally you can see a startling difference. Between 4K/2K it isn't actually that bad but between 4K/1080p its night and day.

For reference, this is the video I use a lot when calibrating my stuff:

[wakka]

Yeah, even putting aside my personal theory that the gap between the machines will widen as power budget gets increasingly diverted from resolution into other areas as the gen progresses, it's worth looking at the lowest common denominator in terms of resolution rather than the target resolution.

Series S games aren't all going to be a solid 2K all gen long. Probably they will not slip much below 900p however. Likewise, not all Series X games will consistently hit 4K. My completely unsubstantiated guess would be that they will probably not slip much below 2K though.

So in weighing up the two machines, it's probably worth bearing in mind whether the difference between 900p and 2K is significant enough for you to care about. Because I think both resolutions will be a reality for the machines for some games.

[fuse]

For reference, this is the video I use a lot when calibrating my stuff:

Why is that snake a Tojo clan patriarch

[Brad]

Makes sense [MENTION=5490]wakka[/MENTION]

If S was always 2k and X was always 4k then maybe no noticeable but when devs start dropping that res in order to do other stuff then as you say, you're looking a comparing lower resolutions and we know how that goes from xbox vs ps4 back in the day.

I think people are going to be a bit disappointed when they realise their PS5 or Series X (at £400ish) is unable to do what a £1000 PC GPU is also unable to do i.e. solid 60fps @ 4k with ray tracing.

[Team Andromeda]

To both of you ^^^ I asked about the difference between 2k and 4k, not 1080p and 4k.

I don't have a 2K TV, do you ?

[nonny]

Makes sense [MENTION=5490]wakka[/MENTION]

If S was always 2k and X was always 4k then maybe no noticeable but when devs start dropping that res in order to do other stuff then as you say, you're looking a comparing lower resolutions and we know how that goes from xbox vs ps4 back in the day.

I think people are going to be a bit disappointed when they realise their PS5 or Series X (at £400ish) is unable to do what a £1000 PC GPU is also unable to do i.e. solid 60fps @ 4k with ray tracing.

I still remember back when PS4 and Xbox One launched and people were talking about how we were going to get 60fps on everything... the reality is these are powerful machines for the price point they are hitting but 4K60 is really costly target in resources and you can get some amazingly detailed games running at 1440p60... enough that you might not even realise its not 4K.

Case in point, that Epic showcase for PS5 was running at 1440p and everyone was basically gushing over how next gen it was. It was really impressive and it wasn't 4K. We're in an unfortunate position in gaming where suddenly 4K TV is now seen as a benchmark and we expect it, when really it's the gameplay experience that matters not the resolution... which is why I keep repeating to give us options. Give us resolution or framerate options to let us pick and choose what looks and feels best.

[wakka]

I don't know what you guys are talking about. These consoles will deliver 4K 120fps for every game!! With ray tracing!!

Nah I totally agree. There will be 4K games, there will be 120fps games, there will be games that make heavy use of ray tracing. But it's all a trade-off and unless something is pretty basic looking, it will have to let one or more of these elements go.

Options are a good idea, although to be honest I'm quite big on 'creator intent' - so if the developers think that the game simply must be played at 60fps 2K, or at 30fps 4K, because of how they've particularly done the art or the gameplay or whatever, I'm happy with that too.

[Cassius_Smoke]

I think the big winners will be PC gamers. Finally games will be developed with 4k, Ray Tracing, high framerate in mind. The consoles won't do it all the time. But if a game has some Ray Tracing implemented for example, then on PC it'll mean ALL Ray Tracing will be implemented. No more waiting for a patch or a mod to do it, it should be out of the box.
I think it's exciting times.

[Neon Ignition]

It'll be the same deal as last gen. Ray tracing aside (which will increasingly be sparingly used) MS will make 4K60fps games that are simpler in conception but hit that target seamlessly whilst Sony will aim for variable resolution at 30fps with it resulting in by far better looking games for making that sacrifice. Outside of CoD, BF etc third parties will quickly get onto the 2K/4K 30fps bandwagon

[Brad]

I don't have a 2K TV, do you ?

Yes I do.

[hudson]

We really need a TV thread

[nonny]