Probably the worst comparison that can occur between a PC and PS5. What was its point? Neither you matched equivalent settings in order to estimate PS5's performance on PC hardware, nor you maxed out PC's settings in order to compare with the console presentation.
You don't want to do that, because here is the truth: a $600 or less build (3P3 1TB NVMe, 4060, maybe Ryzen 4500 or i3 1200F), that includes mouse and meyboard, gets better image definition, double the framerate (more than double if it is with ray tracing and higher settings), less artifacts and lower input latencty than a PS5. We are talking about an entry level PC that not ony has better "native" performance, but it can also have access to DLSS 3.5, Frame Generation, Nvidia Reflex and better RT performance. We are talking about over 110 fps at all times, 120 fps for the most part, and way more "room" to work with to find a good balance between visuals and perfromance. Again: you don't want to do this comparison. It would make a PS5 look bad. You may be thinking "but I can get a PS5 for $400". Yes, but you are getting half the perfromance, and you have to pay for online access, and much more expensive games. You save $20 a week, in 7 years you save $7280, half that ($10) a week are still $3640. Add the $80 a year, and things hit different. Add that PS Plus + game price to start with, and you close to breaking even. Entry lvl PS5 vs entry lvl PC is not a good comparison to make. Maybe a Switch 2 could compete, but current gen consoles aged like milk, and pretty quickly.
@@joseijosei 4060 is no way going to produce 2x the framerate of a PS5 apart from a very small fraction of games. it might actually underperform the PS5 in vast majority unless you include FG, which adds latency, so I won't count it anyway.
@@techtunnel402 First at all, a PS5 performs like a 3060 or 2070 Super, and a 4060 is better than that, so it's NEVER worst than a PS5, even without Frame Generation. Frame Generation always comes with Nvidia Reflex. This is something that the Digital Foundry guys said, but if you are playing on consoles, you are not having good input latency. I was go as far as to say that if you play on consoles, you straight up don't know or care about input latency, but don't worry, because I'm here to inform you: with a 60hz output, you are playing God Of War with 112 ms on PS5, Fortnite with 97 ms. On PC, thanks to Nvidia Reflex, we play God Of War with 47 ms, and Fortnite with 36 ms. You know how much input latency gets added with Frame Generation? Around 15 ms, which does leave you at a much lower input latency than the one you're getting on consoles. On top of that, DLSS makes that EVEN LOWER, and it looks better than the FSR you see on consoles. Both Frame Generation and DLSS combined have leds artifacts issues than FSR does, so, the end result for a PS5 vs. A 4060 build is the PC has double the framerate (if not over double), lower input latency, less artifacts (not that this is an issue on consoles tho. Dw, you'll not notice them in motion) and better image definition. So, tell me, WHY WOULDN'T I count Frame Generation, and where is your proof that without it the PS5 perfroms better than a 4060? Even tho you don't need to be without it, because games with no FG, like Starfield, The Last Of Us, Red Dead Redemption 2, AC Mirage, Skyrim, Fallout, Baldur's Gate 3, etc, got mods anyways. I advice you to just shut up if you don't know what you're talking about. Imagine trying to use input latency as a con of Frame Generation vs the rasterisation performance of a console. That's... something else.
@@joseijosei frame generation at frame counts around 40-50 fps or lower feels quite sluggish… even tho Reflex can help to make the game more responsive, it reduces your frame rate to do so. It works best when the fps is around 80-100+ The only way input latency can be a major con with frame gen is if your getting sub 60fps WITH it on, because it’s gonna be a laggy mess no matter what you do then. I’m glad you’re enjoying your 4060 machine so much, as everyone should be able to have a great gaming PC to go along with consoles to give you the total gaming experience. It’s really the only way to go because you get the best of all worlds. I for one have a great gaming pc as well as a ps5 & switch. Would I play Alan wake 2 on ps5? FUCK NO, lol. I literally have close to the best of what you can have in my pc, But it does look and run comparable to a setup like yours, minus several goodies of course because it’s AMD based. But that doesn’t mean it looks bad (not that you said it did). I flat out guarantee even with frame generation that you aren’t going to get 120fps with Alan wake 2 on a r5 with a 4060 unless you dial the resolution and the settings WAY down and put it on DLSS performance… even then it’s iffy. My brother has a 13600k with 32gb of ddr5 6000 ram, and a 4070, and it can’t even get above 58fps WITH frame generation at 1080p medium settings, RT medium, DLSS set to quality (which is 720p internal). Also, frame rates don’t go UP when you turn ray tracing on, they go DOWN. RT is very taxing on a GPU so it wouldn’t make any sense for something as demanding as Ray Tracing to increase performance in any game. An overclocked 4060 is at most about 5-7% faster than a 2070 super btw, native to native of course. Having access to the 40 series feature set can be very helpful otherwise. DLSS does look far, FAR better than anything AMD has done with FSR. can’t disagree there. No matter what they do they always seem to be a full generation behind in all of the features. That, as well as the fact that their drivers have still been known to have issues is why I buy Nvidia generation after generation. Whoever said a ps5 outperforms a 4060 is a nut job, but… there’s more to it than just the GPU. The CPU is as important at lower resolutions as a GPU is. That being said, the ps5’s CPU, tho faster than the previous generation’s CPU by a wide margin, it still slow compared to what you can get even in the budget market with today’s gaming PC’s. But for someone with a tight budget, it’s hard to argue against what the PS5/Series X can give you. Especially with access game pass and PS+ Premium. They can give you a ton of quality AAA games that’s included with either service. But the value isn’t there anymore after Sony’s price increase, and you can get PC game pass on your PC which is a double benefit for us PC users.
I wouldn't be surprised if the high demand is largely from the hair and clothing. Sagas hair is the best hair I've ever seen in a game. It doesn't slip through her jacket like most hair tends to do. Also all the clothing looks natural and has realistic physics. I know that fabric physics is hella demanding on hardware. It's usually pretty bad in most games because they actually use pre-made animations instead of true physics because of this demand.
I have the PC and PS5 version (my bf swears to console while I'm more of a PC gamer) and I have to say it runs great on PS5 but the difference in image quality is quite obvious. Esp the dark scenes in NYC look way better on PC due to the lighting and ray tracing.
Try turning down the brightness on your tv see if it gives you darker black levels. You can also turn the contrast up and then go to active contrast and turn that to a higher setting. On games like resident evil 2 a lower main contrast with a low or medium active contrast gives darker blacks for the hallways and makes the lighting pop more.
@@wade196840 Changing the contrast settings on your TV isn't going to make up for the lack of path-based global illumination lighting and reflections. Nor will it adjust for Nvidia's updated RT reconstruction denoisers the consoles lack. There's simply going to be a vast difference in lighting quality between the consoles and PC. Maybe there will be updates for the PR versions of the PS5 and Series X when those ship. As of now, this is the situation. Just like how the PS5/Series X versions of Cyberpunk don't support path based RT like the PC version. Path based RT is the holy grail that developers have been looking towards. I also wish sites like this would learn how to adjust settings. Use the high preset! Don't turn up every setting to max. The high preset deliberately leaves volumetric and point lighting at medium (which is like a high setting with high being akin to ultra). Those two features impact framerates without adding much in terms of visual quality (you'd have to do side-by-side pixel hunts to spot the visual difference). Even at medium, they're much higher than the console settings, and allow the PC version to run at higher framerates. The shadow settings also trump the console quality settings. Not that the game looks bad on either platform or with the lowest settings.
@@Phantom-kc9lyBecause no other current gen only titles were released on PC... What? You know it is the platform that got most of them, unlike a PS5 or Xbox, right? If you combine both, then fine, but if we are talking about each platform individually, then PC got more current gen only titles than Xbox Series or PS5, and they all run better in that platform to. You can't forget how bad the Lords Of The Fallen port was for consoles. That happened like yesterday. It still a problem now.
I'm not a PC gamer, but im all for developers using the latest technology for PC. Us console peasants need to chill. The price for performance value on console is amazing. You would probably need a $3000 PC to get this game running at max settings
I totally agree. It’s shocking that my series S could play Alan Wake 2. Couldn’t play quality mode though it was choppy. With that said my gaming PC I built for $600 (got parts slowly overtime on discount so probably $1000 value) and I have a rig about the same as what they had for this video.
@@Crashed131963 exactly what I’m sayin. Mines the Series S so I got it for $300 when they first came out by lucking out and finding one at Walmart. It’d be impossible to build a PC with $300 that could run anything better than counter strike source. Not to mention it’d be 3x the size.
@@Shotzno It's why the Series S is a hot seller casual gaming people want to play new AAA games without paying big bucks. Nothing is Newer than Alan Wake 2 and "Digital Foundry" showed the game running very well on a $300 series -S. Here is the link ruclips.net/video/lgUTSQEIo3M/видео.html skip to 8 min 36 sec in video. Impressive for $300 .
They might as well be interchangeable. Within the first 15m of the game, they explain that the "mind place" is Saga's own made-up version of the "mind palace technique", which is a real technique/skill grounded in reality that is proven to improve memory retention.
Only thing I don't get is why in PATH TRACING mode there are still lod changes and pop ups, when path tracing can literally handle unlimited geometric complexity ? Is this really path tracing or are they bullshitting us ?
Paths are not going to be traced to objects that effectively do not exist because they've been culled. Increasing the draw distance will increase memory use and slow down path tracing (because there are more objects the paths interact with). Yes, it's really path tracing, but there are performance considerations and you can't just use as much geometry as you'd ideally like to as there simply isn't enough memory and compute resources to do it in enough time, otherwise you'd end up with a slide-show, not smooth gameplay
It's pretty impressive they got that much performance out of the kit in the PS5 - it's about 8 years behind the curve - roughly the performance of a 2070 super
Played for 2 hours on xbox series x. There is lip sync issues. Sound issues like disappear or cut of for a couple of seconds. Voices sometimes disappear when looking at map. Frame rate was smooth rock solid 60 fps for one hour and then it suddenly dropped to not 30 but around 40-45 fps. Restarted and it went back to smooth 60 fps. To much issues. There is a great game but the technical issues ruin a big part of the game.
"..no signs of visible artifacts". Meanwhile, foliage shimmers like a christmas tree on PS5. And why does nearly every game in your comparisons have raytraced GI on consoles? AW2 has no RT at all in this case and thanks to the low res paired with FSR2 the game is full of noise, artifacts and aliasing. Great video. Lol.
The amount of shimmering resembles that of control on ps5, I don't know what kind of reconstruction they're doing but hell it's just ugly. Control ran at native 1440p while looking like 720p. In comparison to other games rendering at the same resolutions, there is a night and day difference.
@@mohamad-abdofsr bro on both consoles, in performance mode res is 870p upscaled that is why there is shimmering plus majority of settings are dropped to low to hit 60 fps 👎
Looks amazing on PS5, regardless of what your playing on. Its still the same game with a few extras. The PC crowd think its great because they have extra leaves on a tree or some more reflections in a puddle. Get over yourselves and enjoy the game. Thats why we buy em in the first place, yes.
At the same time you felt the need to state your case in the comment section.. who cares just play it on whatever u have or can afford and enjoy it. Those who bought an expensive pc want to get the value out of having a nasa rig and those who own a ps5 want to tell themselves it’s fine regardless who cares??? Only you
The game looks substantially better on PC, I'm not sure where you get the idea it simply has a couple extra leaves. The consoles have no path tracing or even any ray tracing for starters. The consoles also runs at a very low resolution. It seems odd to moan about PC plays bragging about such silly things but your not really any better when you have to downplay to the point of lying about the differences to try and make your point, just make you sound bitter
I own a PC and a PS5 and I wasn't going to spend close to $2000 on a 4090 gpu so I got it on PS5. At some point I may get it on pc when I upgrade in the future. But for now I'm good with PS5.
@@bundyho1PS% is struggling with fizzling and shaking screen in AW2, but doesn't happen on PC version. Digital Foundry showed how PC version is the best by far.
@@FreeRoamer1 PS5 have serious frame pacing problems in this game. Easy to see the difference vs PC which is flawless. And it's not their job to optimize games. Shareholders decides when to release a game, not the developers.
Alan Wake 2's graphics make the RE remake games look like ps3 games. My goodness AW2 graphics are absolutely incredible especially on my 55 LG Oled Tv 😭❤
@@fvallo Requim also came out a year ago and has had many patches to improve its original performance, which was also hard. Try again kid and as far as requim looking better...thats up for debate. The lighting itself in Alan Wake 2 blows anything that has released thus far, completely away especially with Path Tracing enabled. you tried it kid, but you failed
@@ActNasty5 I am running 3440x1440 Ultrawide on a RTX 3080ti, personally I turned off hardware RT as its just not worth the performance cost imo, but still looks great and stays above 60fps with my custom pretty high settings. Even a 4090 cannot max out everything and stay above 60fps, will usually be in the 40's.
I pretty much always turn on Frame Generation. We no longer have the artifacts issues, and input latency is much lower than your original one when you combine it with Nvidia Reflex, so I pretty much never turn that one off. Like, unless you play with a 60hz monitor, I don't see a reason to not use it. Even with a 60hz monitor you get less stutters and a smoother frametime, and you can use fast sync and a 120 fps cap to avoid screen tearing.
@@ErrrorWayz I actually took advantadge of my 4080 in Baldur's Gate 3, because of a Frame Generation mod made by PureDark. Maybe you are not in Act 3 yet, but the framerate is much lower there.
I been trying to get as much input across other videos by others. I want to get my best experience of the game. I have a 3070 MSI and I'm wondering should I get it on PC or The PS5 to get the best out of it?
PC of course. There, you can adjust your settings to get the best balance of Image Quality and Performance. PS5 will use FSR and it ruins the visuals with all of the shimmering/artifacts. With a 3070, you can use DLSS, which will immediately provide a superior image quality experience over the PS5.
Are you actually dumb or just trolling, you are basically asking if a PS5 comes close to a 3070 that is basically a 2080Ti ??? NO, no it doesn't come even close. the PS5 was always a 3060/2070S equivalent, literally even a 1080Ti was beating the PS5 for the past 3 years until a game that relied on mesh shaders finally appeared, Remedy did release a patch later on and now a 1080Ti gives 80% of PS5 performance even with 0 meshshaders. Even the XSX that has a 15% faster gpu than a PS5 doesn't come close to a 3070/2080Ti, it's a 2080/4060 equivalent at best and rarely does it ever reach the performance of a 2080S/3060Ti in some bad pc ported games. Why do people and these stupid game journalists like to glorify consoles for no reason when all they do is rely on heavy dynamic resolution scaling and FSR2
It’s very good, I’ve noticed when I first when to the town one issue in a building I could see what looked like little grains or light coming through the parts of the building just didn’t look right that. I was stopping playing last night but I got stuck on the mind place screen wouldn’t let me come back out so I’ll need to load my last save 5 minutes earlier to continue playing.
Sounds pretty normal for Playstation tbh if it crashes less then 10 time's then it mite be an issue after that but until then it's probably fine, as long as it's 30 FPS it's good for PS 🤷♀️
Can anybody make me a recommendation… I have an i5-12500h and RTx 3060 plus 144hz display I also have a PS5 and LG Oled On which system should I buy this game on? I’m torn!
Pc is way better. And if you have a 4090 you can run it up to 100fps with dlss 3.5. You can have vertical sync on with it this time too. So it's amazing
@@crazedxfighter I just gotta pc I got a 2100 build for 1500 off this guy who built it last year and it’s amazing I played rdr2 and the ps version looks dog water to me now but Tbf it is still on the ps4 version they never upgraded it for ps5 on that game
Onestly on RUclips Impossible see the real difference, also Crysis 3 is the same ps3 vs pc 😂 in this algoritm compression video. The reality is very different when you look at the screen.
My goodness, no one is saying the game looks bad, but far far far away from having such system requirements. The faces and characters alone are much worse compared to Horizon Forbidden West
You personally think that faces look worst, even tho they don't even have the same art style, therefore this game shouldn't have those system requirements. Makes sense... What? We still didn't see how good Horizon Forbidden West can look, because we still a couple months away for the PC release, but I highly doubt that game will look better than this one.
@@joseijosei I didn't say that the faces look the worst or that the game looks bad because of the faces. I said from the start that the game doesn't look bad, but not so good that I think it should have such hardware requirements. This was just an example of why the hardware requirements are just ridiculous and it's not a graphics wonder. This has nothing to do with art style and anyone with some gaming experience should realize how much worse these are compared to HFW in terms of graphics and animations. A PC version is not necessary here, as the HFW PS5 version is far ahead in this matter alone with significantly less hardware power. Other examples in the forest are the muddy trees, the ground or just the entire representation of the vegetation in general, which I don't think is good enough for the hardware required.
@@silbirobi The hardware requirements are high, because even low settings have a lot of texture, shadows, lighting, etc, work that you usually don't see in the lowest settings, but the high ones, meaning that working around that to get higher settings will require a lot more than in other games. Also, this title is using mesh shading. No, nothing you mentioned looks worst than in HFW in this game. When you see HFW, there is a reason why you can already tell the game will be much easier to run, even tho they have the same modes.
Not quite when you see this game running on it. Performance is pretty stable (at least in Quality Mode). Image Quality on the other hand isn't that great. There are literally no big differences between PS5&SX,btw
DLSS continuing to be a crutch for developers so they don't need to optimize their games for current hardware. You are essentially rendering the game at 720p on a very powerful GPU, and are okay with that kind of performance?
I have a 4070ti. This game looks great on it. I also use reshade because the hdr wasn't the greatest, but afterwards its the best game I've seen. The console version looks great, but I noticed a bit of shimmer. The lighting is also not as good, but still good enough. Either way, it's top notch no matter what you play it on.
@@proassassin8473 it doesn't matter how it does it just that it does and even quick resume is crazy fast and ps5 still takes a while to load with the quick cards.
Well... there is a sort of software ray tracing, used in its global illumination. But it's nothing at all like the proper RT system, no. It has no RT direct lighting, to say nothing of path tracing!
Yah its just software magic there is no hardware accelerated rt that is why they managed to hit 60 fps in performance mode that too with lot of shimmering 👎
Played it on PS5, it is very shimmery especially when pointing the flashlight towards a wall in a dark area, water reflections look like crap, shadows look like they re rendered in 360p, both performance and fidelity mode have noticeable frame drops especially when there's a lot going on like the fight against taken and Scratch on the beach, mirrors are completely broken, the game looks like 560p or 720p or 960p upscaled to 4k, so, why did they use mesh shaders if they don't know how very well to work with them? I understand if you make a next gen game you'd wanna use the best technology but you can't claim anymore that the game is hard to run because of mesh shaders because we didn't get a next-gen looking game, although it looks very beautiful is it not that crazy, we really got a game that need to be used with raytracing and other very demanding stuff that only people with a 3090/4070 and above can run it and not even at native 1440p or 4k, and if you got a PS5 or something like a 3060Ti you can barely run the game and it will look like crap at all times. And the thing is that everyone can make a next-gen game and put billions into their game and it will only run on a 4090 but then it will be terrible for sales and not many people can afford a 4090 just to run that game so they will declare bankruptcy after putting billions into their game. The funny thing is that we didn't get either insane looking game(it just looks good on a 4080-4090 BUT not next-gen) or good performance and people keep defending bad optimization by saying "mesh shaders", the same mesh shaders only top 10% best GPUs can properly run them and like 95% of all gamers don't have a 4080-4090
Looks amazing on my RTX 4090 with everything maxed out I play on a 1440 P ultra wide oled I get about 165 FPS on average! Could not imagine playing this game, without retrace reflections, and lighting. It looks so amazing.
Have both PS5 and PC version: looks like shit on console compared to the full ray/path traced experience you get on a 4090 (and Ultrawide OLED). The gap is so high that it’s almost the remake of itself. 😅
@@jamestaylor954jus ignore him he’s tryna bait u into sending him a comment bruh lmao everyone knows pc is the best that guy jus bored in life with his 30fps console lol
Your PC isn't near the PS5 in hardware. The GPU in the PS5 is the same as a 6700 xt AMD graphics card. Try actually matching the hardware then run the test.
@@sloppyjoe5263because it performs similarly to the ps5 hardware regardless of what the spec sheet tells you, i have a 3070 and i match the resolution and settings of the ps5 based on df analysis and ign performance reviews to compare performances in many games and in 99% of cases they perform identically
@@wade196840 what I find even weirder is remedy games not really utilising the consoles power to it's fullest. Control on ps5 was equivalent to only low preset to the pc version, like wtf ?? My old freaking GTX 1650 can do control at medium over 30 fps 1080p. The ps5 is obviously way more powerful than that. Same with Alan wake 2, ps5 version doesn't have ray tracing. I know the game is very demanding, but you will be surprised to know it's running at 30fps+ again on a freaking 1650 non super non ti card at 1080p low fsr2 quality. Ps5 is like light years ahead of a 1650. I saw a performance test on 1650 super and 1660 super on yt, and both did very well. Ps5 is much better than both. Something really isn't adding up here. I don't think remedy even bothers with optimising their games properly for consoles at all.
@sloppyjoe5263 they probably just make a game and port it to other systems. Most make pc games and port them over that's why they are not optimized, even console developers don't optimize their games to later after people complain. I starting to think they just do the minimum to see what they can get away with before the gamers speak up
I don't think it needs better optimization. Look at those "low graphics". Do they look low to you? The only problem is in the wording of the settings, because people are used to go crazy on ultra everything with a 3080. This game does not allow it. You want to see one of the best graphics? Then get one of the best GPUs.
Extremely buggy on PC, with all characters falling through the ground and stuttering. Poorly optimized. I won't even attempt to get back on until there's a patch for this mess. Games are getting worse amd worse eveey release.
Bait video... Where is the comparison? In 20 seconds of side-by-side video? There is no identical image to compare. What are you comparing in this video? Bait title, lack of content.
I'm playing on PS5 and the frame rate so far is terrible. At times, it is like 10 to 15 frames per second. And much of the wilderness scenes are no way close to 4k. What game are you people looking at that is so beautiful. Is this all fake to sell games. I switch over to play Spiderman 2, and holy sh@t, Spiderman 2 is gorgeous, great framerate, and super high resolution.
It's ironic that in a game that looks as advanced as this one does can't manage facial expressions even as good as Half Life 2, that's coming up on being 20 years old.
There are still so many games that can't replicate stuff that HL2 did right! That game is a masterpiece for a reason, tech is good and all, but you gotta have commited devs, vision, and a great team at its peak level, I really doubt any game can make me feel like HL2 soon, if at all.
@@otherreality 100% Not until God of War Ragnarok did I think that any game actually did it better. (Facial animation) Of course, I haven't personally played that game, just watched clips of gameplay.
Worst comparison ever i have 4090 i9 and ps5 but on pc this game is photo realistic path ray tracing is real MVP and future of gaming but yes even 4090 cant run it without dlss fake frame generation that really sucks i keep the normal ray tracing on high with 4k resolution n i get around 40-50 fps on 4090😊
So far I encountered no real problems. Ok, I'm spoiled with an RTX4090/i9-13900ks but still, except some small glitches it runs great on PC. Anyway, I'm gonna wait for some first-release patches to continue the game.
Probably the worst comparison that can occur between a PC and PS5. What was its point? Neither you matched equivalent settings in order to estimate PS5's performance on PC hardware, nor you maxed out PC's settings in order to compare with the console presentation.
Yep it was half assed for sure, the DF PC performance video this morning far better.
You don't want to do that, because here is the truth: a $600 or less build (3P3 1TB NVMe, 4060, maybe Ryzen 4500 or i3 1200F), that includes mouse and meyboard, gets better image definition, double the framerate (more than double if it is with ray tracing and higher settings), less artifacts and lower input latencty than a PS5. We are talking about an entry level PC that not ony has better "native" performance, but it can also have access to DLSS 3.5, Frame Generation, Nvidia Reflex and better RT performance. We are talking about over 110 fps at all times, 120 fps for the most part, and way more "room" to work with to find a good balance between visuals and perfromance.
Again: you don't want to do this comparison. It would make a PS5 look bad. You may be thinking "but I can get a PS5 for $400". Yes, but you are getting half the perfromance, and you have to pay for online access, and much more expensive games. You save $20 a week, in 7 years you save $7280, half that ($10) a week are still $3640. Add the $80 a year, and things hit different. Add that PS Plus + game price to start with, and you close to breaking even. Entry lvl PS5 vs entry lvl PC is not a good comparison to make. Maybe a Switch 2 could compete, but current gen consoles aged like milk, and pretty quickly.
@@joseijosei 4060 is no way going to produce 2x the framerate of a PS5 apart from a very small fraction of games. it might actually underperform the PS5 in vast majority unless you include FG, which adds latency, so I won't count it anyway.
@@techtunnel402 First at all, a PS5 performs like a 3060 or 2070 Super, and a 4060 is better than that, so it's NEVER worst than a PS5, even without Frame Generation.
Frame Generation always comes with Nvidia Reflex. This is something that the Digital Foundry guys said, but if you are playing on consoles, you are not having good input latency. I was go as far as to say that if you play on consoles, you straight up don't know or care about input latency, but don't worry, because I'm here to inform you:
with a 60hz output, you are playing God Of War with 112 ms on PS5, Fortnite with 97 ms. On PC, thanks to Nvidia Reflex, we play God Of War with 47 ms, and Fortnite with 36 ms. You know how much input latency gets added with Frame Generation? Around 15 ms, which does leave you at a much lower input latency than the one you're getting on consoles. On top of that, DLSS makes that EVEN LOWER, and it looks better than the FSR you see on consoles. Both Frame Generation and DLSS combined have leds artifacts issues than FSR does, so, the end result for a PS5 vs. A 4060 build is the PC has double the framerate (if not over double), lower input latency, less artifacts (not that this is an issue on consoles tho. Dw, you'll not notice them in motion) and better image definition.
So, tell me, WHY WOULDN'T I count Frame Generation, and where is your proof that without it the PS5 perfroms better than a 4060? Even tho you don't need to be without it, because games with no FG, like Starfield, The Last Of Us, Red Dead Redemption 2, AC Mirage, Skyrim, Fallout, Baldur's Gate 3, etc, got mods anyways.
I advice you to just shut up if you don't know what you're talking about. Imagine trying to use input latency as a con of Frame Generation vs the rasterisation performance of a console. That's... something else.
@@joseijosei frame generation at frame counts around 40-50 fps or lower feels quite sluggish… even tho Reflex can help to make the game more responsive, it reduces your frame rate to do so. It works best when the fps is around 80-100+
The only way input latency can be a major con with frame gen is if your getting sub 60fps WITH it on, because it’s gonna be a laggy mess no matter what you do then.
I’m glad you’re enjoying your 4060 machine so much, as everyone should be able to have a great gaming PC to go along with consoles to give you the total gaming experience. It’s really the only way to go because you get the best of all worlds.
I for one have a great gaming pc as well as a ps5 & switch.
Would I play Alan wake 2 on ps5? FUCK NO, lol. I literally have close to the best of what you can have in my pc, But it does look and run comparable to a setup like yours, minus several goodies of course because it’s AMD based. But that doesn’t mean it looks bad (not that you said it did).
I flat out guarantee even with frame generation that you aren’t going to get 120fps with Alan wake 2 on a r5 with a 4060 unless you dial the resolution and the settings WAY down and put it on DLSS performance… even then it’s iffy. My brother has a 13600k with 32gb of ddr5 6000 ram, and a 4070, and it can’t even get above 58fps WITH frame generation at 1080p medium settings, RT medium, DLSS set to quality (which is 720p internal).
Also, frame rates don’t go UP when you turn ray tracing on, they go DOWN. RT is very taxing on a GPU so it wouldn’t make any sense for something as demanding as Ray Tracing to increase performance in any game. An overclocked 4060 is at most about 5-7% faster than a 2070 super btw, native to native of course. Having access to the 40 series feature set can be very helpful otherwise.
DLSS does look far, FAR better than anything AMD has done with FSR. can’t disagree there. No matter what they do they always seem to be a full generation behind in all of the features. That, as well as the fact that their drivers have still been known to have issues is why I buy Nvidia generation after generation. Whoever said a ps5 outperforms a 4060 is a nut job, but… there’s more to it than just the GPU. The CPU is as important at lower resolutions as a GPU is. That being said, the ps5’s CPU, tho faster than the previous generation’s CPU by a wide margin, it still slow compared to what you can get even in the budget market with today’s gaming PC’s. But for someone with a tight budget, it’s hard to argue against what the PS5/Series X can give you. Especially with access game pass and PS+ Premium. They can give you a ton of quality AAA games that’s included with either service. But the value isn’t there anymore after Sony’s price increase, and you can get PC game pass on your PC which is a double benefit for us PC users.
I wouldn't be surprised if the high demand is largely from the hair and clothing. Sagas hair is the best hair I've ever seen in a game. It doesn't slip through her jacket like most hair tends to do. Also all the clothing looks natural and has realistic physics. I know that fabric physics is hella demanding on hardware. It's usually pretty bad in most games because they actually use pre-made animations instead of true physics because of this demand.
Its wild how many people claim they have 4090s in the comments. That has to be 90% of total owners in the comments alone 🤣
Guess what? I have a 4090.
@@mikew1080 congrats on being the 0.5% of people that do lol
@@ActNasty5 thank you
@@mikew1080 Who asked?
@ardasevmis7583 who needed to?
I have the PC and PS5 version (my bf swears to console while I'm more of a PC gamer) and I have to say it runs great on PS5 but the difference in image quality is quite obvious. Esp the dark scenes in NYC look way better on PC due to the lighting and ray tracing.
My dude, what videocard do you have?
Try turning down the brightness on your tv see if it gives you darker black levels. You can also turn the contrast up and then go to active contrast and turn that to a higher setting. On games like resident evil 2 a lower main contrast with a low or medium active contrast gives darker blacks for the hallways and makes the lighting pop more.
@@wade196840
Changing the contrast settings on your TV isn't going to make up for the lack of path-based global illumination lighting and reflections. Nor will it adjust for Nvidia's updated RT reconstruction denoisers the consoles lack. There's simply going to be a vast difference in lighting quality between the consoles and PC. Maybe there will be updates for the PR versions of the PS5 and Series X when those ship. As of now, this is the situation. Just like how the PS5/Series X versions of Cyberpunk don't support path based RT like the PC version. Path based RT is the holy grail that developers have been looking towards.
I also wish sites like this would learn how to adjust settings. Use the high preset! Don't turn up every setting to max. The high preset deliberately leaves volumetric and point lighting at medium (which is like a high setting with high being akin to ultra). Those two features impact framerates without adding much in terms of visual quality (you'd have to do side-by-side pixel hunts to spot the visual difference). Even at medium, they're much higher than the console settings, and allow the PC version to run at higher framerates. The shadow settings also trump the console quality settings. Not that the game looks bad on either platform or with the lowest settings.
@@2drealms196 RTX 4090
Your BF spent £450. You've spent £££££££. Your BF probably laughing at you.
One of the best looking games I've ever seen hands down..
Probably the first actually current gen game also released on PC.
@@Phantom-kc9lyBecause no other current gen only titles were released on PC... What?
You know it is the platform that got most of them, unlike a PS5 or Xbox, right? If you combine both, then fine, but if we are talking about each platform individually, then PC got more current gen only titles than Xbox Series or PS5, and they all run better in that platform to. You can't forget how bad the Lords Of The Fallen port was for consoles. That happened like yesterday. It still a problem now.
@@Phantom-kc9lysay wat? 😂
@@ErrrorWayz reading comprehesion?
@@joseijosei I said what I said. It's the first game I've heard of that flat out doesn't support GTX gpus.
I'm not a PC gamer, but im all for developers using the latest technology for PC. Us console peasants need to chill. The price for performance value on console is amazing. You would probably need a $3000 PC to get this game running at max settings
I totally agree. It’s shocking that my series S could play Alan Wake 2. Couldn’t play quality mode though it was choppy. With that said my gaming PC I built for $600 (got parts slowly overtime on discount so probably $1000 value) and I have a rig about the same as what they had for this video.
Its a $3000 Pc compared to $500 console .
Sure it looks better but not $2500 better.
Maybe $100 better .
@@Crashed131963 exactly what I’m sayin. Mines the Series S so I got it for $300 when they first came out by lucking out and finding one at Walmart. It’d be impossible to build a PC with $300 that could run anything better than counter strike source. Not to mention it’d be 3x the size.
@@Shotzno It's why the Series S is a hot seller casual gaming people want to play new AAA games without paying big bucks.
Nothing is Newer than Alan Wake 2 and "Digital Foundry" showed the game running very well on a $300 series -S.
Here is the link ruclips.net/video/lgUTSQEIo3M/видео.html skip to 8 min 36 sec in video.
Impressive for $300 .
Love it how all the early reviewers keep mixing up Saga with Sarah and Mind Place with Mind Palace.
They might as well be interchangeable. Within the first 15m of the game, they explain that the "mind place" is Saga's own made-up version of the "mind palace technique", which is a real technique/skill grounded in reality that is proven to improve memory retention.
Only thing I don't get is why in PATH TRACING mode there are still lod changes and pop ups, when path tracing can literally handle unlimited geometric complexity ? Is this really path tracing or are they bullshitting us ?
Paths are not going to be traced to objects that effectively do not exist because they've been culled. Increasing the draw distance will increase memory use and slow down path tracing (because there are more objects the paths interact with).
Yes, it's really path tracing, but there are performance considerations and you can't just use as much geometry as you'd ideally like to as there simply isn't enough memory and compute resources to do it in enough time, otherwise you'd end up with a slide-show, not smooth gameplay
Pathtracing isn't responsible for geometric detail. It is only a simulation of light.
This game with a RTX 4090 and OLED is perfect
It's pretty impressive they got that much performance out of the kit in the PS5 - it's about 8 years behind the curve - roughly the performance of a 2070 super
Or the opposite.
@@IwinMahWayum what
Played for 2 hours on xbox series x. There is lip sync issues. Sound issues like disappear or cut of for a couple of seconds. Voices sometimes disappear when looking at map. Frame rate was smooth rock solid 60 fps for one hour and then it suddenly dropped to not 30 but around 40-45 fps. Restarted and it went back to smooth 60 fps. To much issues. There is a great game but the technical issues ruin a big part of the game.
the game on xbox runs great
100% bro. Same with ps5. Game is almost unplayable for me. People just to care for quality. So many NPCs just gobble up anything
@@lofi1598digital foundry said xbox was the console of choice for this game it runs quite alot better than the ps5 version in both modes.
Wish it could run better with my 3080 but I'm stuck on medium setting at 540p and still not 60fps.😩
"..no signs of visible artifacts". Meanwhile, foliage shimmers like a christmas tree on PS5. And why does nearly every game in your comparisons have raytraced GI on consoles? AW2 has no RT at all in this case and thanks to the low res paired with FSR2 the game is full of noise, artifacts and aliasing. Great video. Lol.
Seriously. At this point they should just stop doing graphics comparisons.
The amount of shimmering resembles that of control on ps5, I don't know what kind of reconstruction they're doing but hell it's just ugly. Control ran at native 1440p while looking like 720p. In comparison to other games rendering at the same resolutions, there is a night and day difference.
@@mohamad-abdofsr bro on both consoles, in performance mode res is 870p upscaled that is why there is shimmering plus majority of settings are dropped to low to hit 60 fps 👎
Looks amazing on PS5, regardless of what your playing on. Its still the same game with a few extras. The PC crowd think its great because they have extra leaves on a tree or some more reflections in a puddle. Get over yourselves and enjoy the game. Thats why we buy em in the first place, yes.
Most PC gamers are old enough to remember a time when PC advantages were actually noticeable
At the same time you felt the need to state your case in the comment section.. who cares just play it on whatever u have or can afford and enjoy it. Those who bought an expensive pc want to get the value out of having a nasa rig and those who own a ps5 want to tell themselves it’s fine regardless who cares??? Only you
They spent 2000 on a pc, they won't skip an opportunity to justify their dumb purchase.
The game looks substantially better on PC, I'm not sure where you get the idea it simply has a couple extra leaves. The consoles have no path tracing or even any ray tracing for starters. The consoles also runs at a very low resolution.
It seems odd to moan about PC plays bragging about such silly things but your not really any better when you have to downplay to the point of lying about the differences to try and make your point, just make you sound bitter
I own a PC and a PS5 and I wasn't going to spend close to $2000 on a 4090 gpu so I got it on PS5. At some point I may get it on pc when I upgrade in the future. But for now I'm good with PS5.
The beginning part is insane , I spend like 3 hrs in one section
Wait, are you telling us that a maxed out PC has better graphics than a PS5?
Mind=blown.
This game looks incredible on PS5 playing it natively. Digital Foundry cracks me up they’re always like look at the differences while 200% Zoomed😂
What's the equivalent settings on pc ?
Also as long as you don't play the pc version you will be fine.
@@adriabd ruclips.net/video/QrXoDon6fXs/видео.html
@@bundyho1PS% is struggling with fizzling and shaking screen in AW2, but doesn't happen on PC version.
Digital Foundry showed how PC version is the best by far.
@@FreeRoamer1 PS5 have serious frame pacing problems in this game. Easy to see the difference vs PC which is flawless.
And it's not their job to optimize games. Shareholders decides when to release a game, not the developers.
Alan Wake 2's graphics make the RE remake games look like ps3 games. My goodness AW2 graphics are absolutely incredible especially on my 55 LG Oled Tv 😭❤
Better than spiderman 2
55 LG Oled tv would be nice, I have too BIG 65 LG Oled Nanocell tv what's size is almost my whole room... 😅
Grabbing my popcorn 🍿
Requiem looks better and runs 3 times better
@@fvallo Requim also came out a year ago and has had many patches to improve its original performance, which was also hard. Try again kid and as far as requim looking better...thats up for debate. The lighting itself in Alan Wake 2 blows anything that has released thus far, completely away especially with Path Tracing enabled. you tried it kid, but you failed
No way the editor didn't catch "Sarah"and "mind palace"this is a goddamn joke 😂
Can I play on my RTX 3090Ti ?
Playing it maxed out all effects ultrawide oled it’s def very good looking game. No jaggies and everything is very realistic
You got a 4090 or what lol
@@ActNasty5 I am running 3440x1440 Ultrawide on a RTX 3080ti, personally I turned off hardware RT as its just not worth the performance cost imo, but still looks great and stays above 60fps with my custom pretty high settings. Even a 4090 cannot max out everything and stay above 60fps, will usually be in the 40's.
This video kept buffering to watch @4k because my 250Mbps connection was flatout downloading Alan.Wake@-RUNE
ps5 version runs at about 25fps by the looks and has no RT at all, despite what you are saying
Not true it's has solid performance in both modes. It doesn't have ray tracing though
@@Packin-Heatnowadays yall will say that word o literally anything
I played on both pc and ps5, the pop in i experienced on console was unacceptable.
runs and looks great on my RTX 4080. frame generation is needed if you want to fully experience this game at its best
I pretty much always turn on Frame Generation. We no longer have the artifacts issues, and input latency is much lower than your original one when you combine it with Nvidia Reflex, so I pretty much never turn that one off. Like, unless you play with a 60hz monitor, I don't see a reason to not use it. Even with a 60hz monitor you get less stutters and a smoother frametime, and you can use fast sync and a 120 fps cap to avoid screen tearing.
Holding off playing until I've finished bg3 and cyberpunk. With cyberpunk overdrive and this my 4090 is finally coming into its own
@ErrrorWayz nice. I play at 1440p, so the 4090 is abit overkill haha
@@ErrrorWayz I actually took advantadge of my 4080 in Baldur's Gate 3, because of a Frame Generation mod made by PureDark. Maybe you are not in Act 3 yet, but the framerate is much lower there.
Its a $3000 Pc compared to $500 console .
Sure it looks better but not $2500 better.
Maybe $100 better .
I been trying to get as much input across other videos by others. I want to get my best experience of the game. I have a 3070 MSI and I'm wondering should I get it on PC or The PS5 to get the best out of it?
PC of course. There, you can adjust your settings to get the best balance of Image Quality and Performance. PS5 will use FSR and it ruins the visuals with all of the shimmering/artifacts. With a 3070, you can use DLSS, which will immediately provide a superior image quality experience over the PS5.
3070 destroys the PS5. Go for the PC version.
Are you actually dumb or just trolling, you are basically asking if a PS5 comes close to a 3070 that is basically a 2080Ti ??? NO, no it doesn't come even close. the PS5 was always a 3060/2070S equivalent, literally even a 1080Ti was beating the PS5 for the past 3 years until a game that relied on mesh shaders finally appeared, Remedy did release a patch later on and now a 1080Ti gives 80% of PS5 performance even with 0 meshshaders.
Even the XSX that has a 15% faster gpu than a PS5 doesn't come close to a 3070/2080Ti, it's a 2080/4060 equivalent at best and rarely does it ever reach the performance of a 2080S/3060Ti in some bad pc ported games.
Why do people and these stupid game journalists like to glorify consoles for no reason when all they do is rely on heavy dynamic resolution scaling and FSR2
Man, theres no RT on consoles. Seriously, 1,24 mln subscribers and u know nothing about graphics and ur making graphic "comparisons".
+ in most of their "comparisons" console games have raytraced GI. Lol.
Digital foundry said nothing about rt in the ps5 version? To my knowledge the console version have no rt effects whatbso ever.
Yeah I am confused,
In other words, it doesn't matter which version you get
@@jegjrtp87 In othere words, guy from this "comparison" is blind.
@@rafawroblewski8472 I doubt it
@@jegjrtp87 I dont. This so called comparision is a joke. Watch DF, if this guy dont see so obvious things like reflections or shadows hes blind.
Did they go with digital only release?
Yes
this video is as usefull as their reviews... pretty much no side to side
Hmm.. With the PS5 I have surround sound. But on the pc the gfx will look better. Hard choice.
This isn't "Alan Wake 2", this is "Saga Anderson 1".
"Facial expressions continue to be the weakest link..."
But they still completely destroy even the best ones from Starfield LOL
Well... yeah? Who said Starfield faces look good tho. Don't get me wrong: it is a great game, but who said the faces there looked good?
How is the Xbox series x version of Alan wake 2
Same as PS5
@@SOTVT gotcha
It’s very good, I’ve noticed when I first when to the town one issue in a building I could see what looked like little grains or light coming through the parts of the building just didn’t look right that. I was stopping playing last night but I got stuck on the mind place screen wouldn’t let me come back out so I’ll need to load my last save 5 minutes earlier to continue playing.
@@richardharrington6515 gotcha
Why is the PS5 version stuttering like giving you nausea?
Sounds pretty normal for Playstation tbh if it crashes less then 10 time's then it mite be an issue after that but until then it's probably fine, as long as it's 30 FPS it's good for PS 🤷♀️
Can anybody make me a recommendation…
I have an i5-12500h and RTx 3060 plus 144hz display
I also have a PS5 and LG Oled
On which system should I buy this game on? I’m torn!
Lol the pc
1250H, thats a Laptop.. Stay away from that shit
@@1989rs500 well… that’s what I’ve got and that’s why I asked the question…
@@JLMarchJones Never evr use laptop for gaming and don't buy gaming laptops
@@1989rs500 have you ever touched a woman my friend?
Can I play on R5 5600g and RX 6600 or just buy it on PS5?
Pc is way better. And if you have a 4090 you can run it up to 100fps with dlss 3.5. You can have vertical sync on with it this time too. So it's amazing
I would think so when the 4090 is the price as 4 consoles….
2. But yes for sure. Can't cut corners on a OLED you'll see every imperfection
@@crazedxfighter I just gotta pc I got a 2100 build for 1500 off this guy who built it last year and it’s amazing I played rdr2 and the ps version looks dog water to me now but Tbf it is still on the ps4 version they never upgraded it for ps5 on that game
@@crazedxfighter 4070 card
Onestly on RUclips Impossible see the real difference, also Crysis 3 is the same ps3 vs pc 😂 in this algoritm compression video. The reality is very different when you look at the screen.
My goodness, no one is saying the game looks bad, but far far far away from having such system requirements. The faces and characters alone are much worse compared to Horizon Forbidden West
You personally think that faces look worst, even tho they don't even have the same art style, therefore this game shouldn't have those system requirements. Makes sense... What?
We still didn't see how good Horizon Forbidden West can look, because we still a couple months away for the PC release, but I highly doubt that game will look better than this one.
@@joseijosei I didn't say that the faces look the worst or that the game looks bad because of the faces. I said from the start that the game doesn't look bad, but not so good that I think it should have such hardware requirements. This was just an example of why the hardware requirements are just ridiculous and it's not a graphics wonder. This has nothing to do with art style and anyone with some gaming experience should realize how much worse these are compared to HFW in terms of graphics and animations. A PC version is not necessary here, as the HFW PS5 version is far ahead in this matter alone with significantly less hardware power. Other examples in the forest are the muddy trees, the ground or just the entire representation of the vegetation in general, which I don't think is good enough for the hardware required.
@@silbirobi The hardware requirements are high, because even low settings have a lot of texture, shadows, lighting, etc, work that you usually don't see in the lowest settings, but the high ones, meaning that working around that to get higher settings will require a lot more than in other games. Also, this title is using mesh shading.
No, nothing you mentioned looks worst than in HFW in this game. When you see HFW, there is a reason why you can already tell the game will be much easier to run, even tho they have the same modes.
What about the Xbox Series X vs PC comparison? XSX is a powerful console
Not quite when you see this game running on it. Performance is pretty stable (at least in Quality Mode). Image Quality on the other hand isn't that great. There are literally no big differences between PS5&SX,btw
@@SOTVTwhat do you mean it’s been running great on my Xbox 🤷🏻♂️
@@pandagonerogue.140My bad, didn't mean performance. I'm talking about the unstable IQ caused by FSR2
@@SOTVT thanks for the info. 👍🏽
It’s really looking nice on Xbox Series X on an LG OLED
Isn't the xbox version of allen lake two more a. Of the youth as mesh shaders
DLSS continuing to be a crutch for developers so they don't need to optimize their games for current hardware. You are essentially rendering the game at 720p on a very powerful GPU, and are okay with that kind of performance?
I have a 4070ti. This game looks great on it. I also use reshade because the hdr wasn't the greatest, but afterwards its the best game I've seen. The console version looks great, but I noticed a bit of shimmer. The lighting is also not as good, but still good enough. Either way, it's top notch no matter what you play it on.
The game loads faster on SX than ps5 and keeps a better framerate.
It loads faster on my gen 3 nvme too so what's the point?
Only because Xbox version skips Logo screens which is really weird it doesn’t on PS5
@@proassassin8473 it doesn't matter how it does it just that it does and even quick resume is crazy fast and ps5 still takes a while to load with the quick cards.
@@COYG94 The big difference is that the PS5 was advertised for its SSD speed and practically no loading times. The PC and SX weren't.
@@Rooster832 only games that i can think of with no loading screens are spiderman games and ratched & clank both were ps exclusives
As much as PS5 is handling this game well, there is no Ray Tracing features in the console versions. So…idk where you got that from.
Well... there is a sort of software ray tracing, used in its global illumination.
But it's nothing at all like the proper RT system, no. It has no RT direct lighting, to say nothing of path tracing!
Yah its just software magic there is no hardware accelerated rt that is why they managed to hit 60 fps in performance mode that too with lot of shimmering 👎
Played it on PS5, it is very shimmery especially when pointing the flashlight towards a wall in a dark area, water reflections look like crap, shadows look like they re rendered in 360p, both performance and fidelity mode have noticeable frame drops especially when there's a lot going on like the fight against taken and Scratch on the beach, mirrors are completely broken, the game looks like 560p or 720p or 960p upscaled to 4k, so, why did they use mesh shaders if they don't know how very well to work with them? I understand if you make a next gen game you'd wanna use the best technology but you can't claim anymore that the game is hard to run because of mesh shaders because we didn't get a next-gen looking game, although it looks very beautiful is it not that crazy, we really got a game that need to be used with raytracing and other very demanding stuff that only people with a 3090/4070 and above can run it and not even at native 1440p or 4k, and if you got a PS5 or something like a 3060Ti you can barely run the game and it will look like crap at all times.
And the thing is that everyone can make a next-gen game and put billions into their game and it will only run on a 4090 but then it will be terrible for sales and not many people can afford a 4090 just to run that game so they will declare bankruptcy after putting billions into their game.
The funny thing is that we didn't get either insane looking game(it just looks good on a 4080-4090 BUT not next-gen) or good performance and people keep defending bad optimization by saying "mesh shaders", the same mesh shaders only top 10% best GPUs can properly run them and like 95% of all gamers don't have a 4080-4090
So a $2500 pc renders a game slightly better than a $500 console. Got it.
It looked $100 better not $2000 better.
Looks amazing on my RTX 4090 with everything maxed out I play on a 1440 P ultra wide oled I get about 165 FPS on average! Could not imagine playing this game, without retrace reflections, and lighting. It looks so amazing.
salute to remedy can run at 60fps even on low settings.
The RX 5700xt, which is at the same level as the PS5, is unable to achieve 30fps.
Have both PS5 and PC version: looks like shit on console compared to the full ray/path traced experience you get on a 4090 (and Ultrawide OLED). The gap is so high that it’s almost the remake of itself. 😅
sony give us the ps5 pro already.........Its about time!
90% of the gameplay I've seen is night 😩
These are interactive movies right?
Tf you mean interactive movies?
Current gen consoles dont have RT support for AW2 so this is wrong.
Will relesead on xbox s pleaseee???
PC Gamers: PC is the best
SONY : Hold my duelshock😂😂😂😂
No way you trying to compare ps5 graphics to PC?! I have a 4090 and I know it’s going to crush anything you see on ps5 or Xbox! SMH
@@jamestaylor954jus ignore him he’s tryna bait u into sending him a comment bruh lmao everyone knows pc is the best that guy jus bored in life with his 30fps console lol
@@jamestaylor954I am a pc and ps5 gamer, pc is best no doubt but kinda unfair comparing a 3k usd+ rig to sub 500$ ps5 though
@@sloppyjoe5263 I don’t disagree!
@@jamestaylor954 Hold my dual shock 🤣
the aliasing looks pretty bad on console
Your PC isn't near the PS5 in hardware. The GPU in the PS5 is the same as a 6700 xt AMD graphics card. Try actually matching the hardware then run the test.
Exactly, most of these performance comparison vids are doing ps5 vs 3070 or above, like why...
@@sloppyjoe5263 I think they all are being paid to do it. I haven't seen one yet actually match the correct specs of a PS5 or an Xbox.
@@sloppyjoe5263because it performs similarly to the ps5 hardware regardless of what the spec sheet tells you, i have a 3070 and i match the resolution and settings of the ps5 based on df analysis and ign performance reviews to compare performances in many games and in 99% of cases they perform identically
@@wade196840 what I find even weirder is remedy games not really utilising the consoles power to it's fullest. Control on ps5 was equivalent to only low preset to the pc version, like wtf ?? My old freaking GTX 1650 can do control at medium over 30 fps 1080p. The ps5 is obviously way more powerful than that. Same with Alan wake 2, ps5 version doesn't have ray tracing. I know the game is very demanding, but you will be surprised to know it's running at 30fps+ again on a freaking 1650 non super non ti card at 1080p low fsr2 quality. Ps5 is like light years ahead of a 1650. I saw a performance test on 1650 super and 1660 super on yt, and both did very well. Ps5 is much better than both. Something really isn't adding up here. I don't think remedy even bothers with optimising their games properly for consoles at all.
@sloppyjoe5263 they probably just make a game and port it to other systems. Most make pc games and port them over that's why they are not optimized, even console developers don't optimize their games to later after people complain. I starting to think they just do the minimum to see what they can get away with before the gamers speak up
Well...as I see, no difference..;) (A PS5 owner)
Is my tv shit or the game anti aliasing is bad??
The game is full of shimmering/aliasing "thanks" to FSR. Nothing wrong with your TV.
I’m glad I invested in a 4080 because holy shit is this game heavy on performance. It definitely needed better optimization.
Yea it's a little rough trying to play on a 3060ti
@@xXSpartan757XxJust copy the Digital Foundry settings for the PS5 and you're going to be fine. More than fine.
I don't think it needs better optimization. Look at those "low graphics". Do they look low to you? The only problem is in the wording of the settings, because people are used to go crazy on ultra everything with a 3080. This game does not allow it. You want to see one of the best graphics? Then get one of the best GPUs.
Extremely buggy on PC, with all characters falling through the ground and stuttering. Poorly optimized. I won't even attempt to get back on until there's a patch for this mess. Games are getting worse amd worse eveey release.
Bait video... Where is the comparison? In 20 seconds of side-by-side video? There is no identical image to compare. What are you comparing in this video? Bait title, lack of content.
I'm playing on PS5 and the frame rate so far is terrible. At times, it is like 10 to 15 frames per second. And much of the wilderness scenes are no way close to 4k. What game are you people looking at that is so beautiful. Is this all fake to sell games. I switch over to play Spiderman 2, and holy sh@t, Spiderman 2 is gorgeous, great framerate, and super high resolution.
Saga's partner looks like the og max payne
The owner of Remedy, Sam Lake, is both Alex Casey and Max Payne on the model side. They look the same because they are.
5:20 I have I9 1300k 4090 64 GB RAM DDR 5
Nobody cares.
@@paradiseb5950 I do and thx you and enjoy your 🐕 💩 pc lol
It's ironic that in a game that looks as advanced as this one does can't manage facial expressions even as good as Half Life 2, that's coming up on being 20 years old.
There are still so many games that can't replicate stuff that HL2 did right! That game is a masterpiece for a reason, tech is good and all, but you gotta have commited devs, vision, and a great team at its peak level, I really doubt any game can make me feel like HL2 soon, if at all.
@@otherreality 100% Not until God of War Ragnarok did I think that any game actually did it better. (Facial animation)
Of course, I haven't personally played that game, just watched clips of gameplay.
Its a $3000 Pc compared to $500 console .
Sure it looks better but not $2500 better.
Maybe $100 better .
only if your pc has 4090 you think its better lol
i guess usa is bad cause they are not the ones with the foreign sweets for ppl too , they are poor whatsoever.
R.i.p consoles there is a reason they sell them in toys R us lmao
Toys r us is dead dude
The jumpscares completely ruin this game.
Looks better on the series x
no it doesn't and it runs just as bad as the ps5 version
@@cherzo71😂
only fools put all the settings on ultra/very high/high
One side by side comparison? Waste of time.
He called her Sara haha this guys a joke
Worst comparison ever i have 4090 i9 and ps5 but on pc this game is photo realistic path ray tracing is real MVP and future of gaming but yes even 4090 cant run it without dlss fake frame generation that really sucks i keep the normal ray tracing on high with 4k resolution n i get around 40-50 fps on 4090😊
Can’t even play it on pc with a 3070ti on 1440p. Its a complete shit show. Had to request a refund and download on ps5.
Glad you wrote that since I have the same card. I'm sick of PC ports.
You can get refunds on epic?
@@ActNasty5 yep
The PlayStation 5 version is the weakest of the Three, p.c x and playstation five.
Why didn't you include the Xbox version? Stop being so biased
It’s a Microsoft game on Xbox and pc. Doing a pc and not an Xbox comparison isn’t biased don’t be dumb
I am getting 8 fps with AMD RX590! Lmao
Console versions don't have ray tracing at this point buddy. #JESUSMATTERS!!!!!
Xbox got scared 😂 it looks like PlayStation has their own solution for mesh shaders after all 😎
Yep, you're right, Xbox should scare Playstation version of Alan Wake 2 will win the race. 😅
Is this like a serious comment? Because this is cringe
@@TropicaIJay Yes it is serious
Damn no Xbox series x lmao
Runs like garbage on most pcs. PS5 wins
if you want to play at game at 25fps #clueless
So far I encountered no real problems. Ok, I'm spoiled with an RTX4090/i9-13900ks but still, except some small glitches it runs great on PC. Anyway, I'm gonna wait for some first-release patches to continue the game.
@@cherzo71 All games run at 60fps on PS5. 25 fps u mean 95% of PCs hahaha. PC stutterfest unoptimized garbage #actuallyclueless
@@wardvandecotte9253 You are an exception bro. Obviously it runs best on your PC
@@cherzo71 Buddy...because the game is poorly optimized. Look at God for War Ragnarok, man. Perfect and incredible on PS5. Thats all.
Turn off the games and be productive in your life.
I do both because I’m an adult.
What kind of loser spends their time commenting on games' youtube videos instead of being productive in their life?
You can't tell me how to live my life, shitdick
or you turn on your brain and say something smart
SPOILER: The Next Step In Realism isn't on Console Peasants
Not true spider man 2 is graphics of the year contender
@@robertwalker3357 Show me one single article or video (timestamped) where this is claimed.
you just keep spending that money…….
@@hollowslayed4979 On what mate? I pirated this.
Really…….