Head to head comparison between the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X versions of The Witcher 3.
They both look pretty good. My Problem is I can never really tell by the posted videos. But that said it would make sense the more powerful console would have some extra muscle.
Exactly. Head and shoulders implies something more pronounced. Thats why people call it clickbait. I submit that neither version approaches PC and as such neither offers a tangible improvement over the base console unit. Its just more exaggeration. When people read headlines like that and then they actually see it, they are less likely to purchase the Xbox because they were expecting more. Compare the Pro to the PC on Ultra and then you have a head and shoulders improvement. This has already been shown in much better comparisons.
@Eonjay.. #wrong when i watch these videos on my Sammy KS8500 .. the difference can be seen... yes the 1X versions tend to look better than the PS4PRO variant... but the PS4PRO versions are NO slouch either.
In person tests im sure are far more pronounced - differences are always just harder to tell once videos are compressed via youtube. That said, even with the crummy youtube version, the Xbox clearly was the better picture
It’s a compressed video downrezzed to 1080p. Trust me. In real life the differences are noticeable. The x is significantly sharper in both resolution and textures, and shadows and aliasing chatter, and pop in and so on. Try it sometime and see for yourself so you know I’m not blowing smoke.
It's all fanboy fodder. Any rational person can admit the difference is marginal. The mid-gen consoles are far closer together than either of them are to PC or the OG console versions. Fanboys gotta have something to bicker about though.
when you have a bigger resolutuion jump then 900 p to 1080 p and then add in textures in 4k, yeah thats a massive jump, the last 4 years with 1080p to 900p that was not a massive gap but everyone and their mother claimed it was, well now you have a real gap between pro and x1x games so yeah thats a massive difference \ now people say the pro version is pretty good its no slouch but when games where 900p vs 1080p then you all claimed masssice differences. f that bs. pro is a garbage upgrade
Do you actually believe the crap that comes out of your mouth?
30fps vs 60fps is big difference, the most notable
@BigWank78 65Ks9000 here. No you can't tell shit from their videos. No matter what tv you have.
They are both major improvements of base console but neither is that much better than the other.
@Duke19 Nobody said otherwise. But the difference is minimal.
Even though in the end the x1x version should look better because it is a newer box with more power. One thing people are forgetting is that the PS4 Pro has a update in the works. The x1x update was completed first.
^^beat me to it. Not to mention the framerate isn't 60fps is a variables between 40 and 60. The pro patch will do the same. Head and shoulders is an overstatement for sure.
Only difference I can see is the HDR on the Xbox One X version. The PS4 Pro version is getting HDR soon, probably still in testing.
It's amusing that every time a person's said console falls behind in the power race the PC always comes into the discussion as their proxy champion.
You all have better eyes then DF then. Because in fact the the Pro is locked at 4K CB, while the X is 1800-2160p dynamic. Sure, native pixels, and yet they pointed out, that some areas are in fact sharper on the Pro. What the X has over the pro is an average more stable 30fps (3fps surplus in cases), but that's about. The 60fps mode render at a max of 1300p or something, not much above 1080p; the Pro has no 1080p more, so hard to compare. And yet, can drop to 35fps in worst cases on the X. So, sure, the X has an advantage as it should be being the newer and more expensive machine, but "head and shoulders" it sure ain't. Really, if anything it's the framerate, everything else, shadows, filters, ambient occlusion are identical between Pro and X. But sure, tell me again how you dual Pro and X gamers can see the difference; hey, not only did you buy both consoles, but also the game twice...thanks for clearing this up for us in the unknown. /s
It’s easier to see on a 4k screen in real life. It’s way easier to spot the differences cuz you’re seeing them 1:1 and not compressed downrezzed videos. I have a pro and a one x and you really can see a quality difference. The X is noticeable sharper overall and not just in render resolution. It just looked me more high quality. .
Kumakai How dare you give an honest evaluation here, that's absolute blasphemy! ;)
I guess that doesn't make sense to some people. LOL. I know they're not disagreeing with the first line. They serve brand and company and don't agree with fact.
Somehow I'm not losing sleep over this, I beat W3 on the PS4 and it looked great then, so some extra res bump isnt going to make me run out to the store and spend on another console.
It isn't just a res bump though is it. Just like most/all of the enhanced games, there is a lot more going on than just res.
@gamebro I have a 4k OLED with HDR, and I still don't want the X1X, I'm not going to spend another 500 just to play games I already beat. If M$ would have had their sh*t together from the start of this generation I would have kept my OG X1 and possibly used that towards a trade in. But until they get their act together game wise with the 1st party games I'll stay clear of their system.
Right on. As I always say, I'm not losing any sleep. My base PS4 may offer an "inferior" experience to these two, but differences are largely cosmetic (with short load times on Xbox).
The game was released 2 years ago. Is anyone actually still playing it?
I wouldnt say head and shoulders but the X does look a bit cleaner in some areas. The big improvement is the inclusion of up to 60fps. I didn't think this game really needed that but it certainly is a nice option.
The big improvement is to give us options of 60fps and HDR, dinamic 4k at constant 30 fps vs checkerboard 4k with not stable 30fps.
Agreed. Saw DF's analysis and the Pro isn't nearly as stable. The Xbox One version has always felt more stable, honestly.
Yep! 1080p-4k @ 60fps is HUGE especially considering the game only runs at 1920x1620p on Pro (Still looks a little sharper than 1080p horizontally) but for X to run this game @1080p+ with better graphics @ 60 was not expected!
Two upgraded consoles this gen and you are acting like Microsoft should not have a more powerful $500 console AND as if any version is not worth having.
It doesn't run at 60 though. Yes it can reach that framerate but the majority of the time it is well below 60 FPS. PS4 Pro is capped at 30.
Butt it doesn't run at 60FPS, it only targets 60FPS.
It runs full 2160CB on the Pro and the 60fps mode on X tops out at nowhere near 4K, it's rather something around 1300p, a minimal upgrade over 1080p. HDR will get patched into the Pro version and I wonder if they also add a 1080p @ 60fps option on the Pro. It's running marginally better on the X, nothing else. The 60fps mode dips heavily, mostly around 55fps, down to almost 35. It is basically the unpatched game pushing the res in some scenarios; it's like running the PS4 version in boost mode - which didn't hit 60fps but still; it's not a "new version" on the X either.
I would say it needs 60fps more than it needs 4K. It's a great option in my opinion.
Head and shoulders, take 2 bottles into the shower, not me, I just wash and go. Have fun this Christmas with your console of choice. Ill be on switch, mario and zelda. And some pubg on xbox.
" By contrast, PS4 Pro makes use of a checkerboard method to push its own 4K image. Side-by-side with X's native output, the checkerboarding technique still works brilliantly, and the only real downside here is a faint stippling effect on moving edges, largely hidden by the game's motion blur." this is written by Digital foundry. so saying it is head and shoulder above the ps4 pro is not a proper way to describe the situation here.
One word "Gamingbolt", no explanation needed
Every time somebody clicks on a gamingbolt article a puppy dies...a cute one.
@cd1 I laughed and now i feel bad.
Agreed but Gamingbolt gotta get those clicks. Its laughable they try to do a comparison without having the correct tools. I like that the Xbox X version has the option for 60 fps, its a nice touch.
If you saw the DF video then you saw too how the 30fps of the checkerboard 4k of PS4 pro drops and the 30fps dinamic 4k of the X stay totally stable......plus HDR and the option to play 60fps. It isn't a head and shoulders difference but it is a considerable one.
I like how the PS4 Pro is "no slouch" when it comes to checkboarding a not even full 4K image , but when the regular xbox1 was only doing a 180P less image than the PS4 it was an utter joke and failure, the defense force is back....I know I know, now come back with all your exclusives, I know , I own both consoles. Just admit the 1X is more powerful and can do more than the Pro, the Pro was a thrown together afterthought by Sony to try to combat and beat the 1X to market and its inferiority shows.
@TheRacingX "180p"? Are you foolish yourself?
@ theracingx I'll make this short. Pro was being developed first. Make a quick Google. 1x actually was thrown together to try and combat sony's vastly bigger market share. So they threw the highest end components feasable together, and now offer the best place to play 3rd party multi-plats. It might not seem to be about money to you, but it is to big businesses like Microsoft. Here's the thing though. Playstation division is still beating Xbox division from a business standpoint. Maybe it's because of those ex clue civs you mentioned. Here's a suggestion. Go enjoy you 3Rd party multi-plats at slightly higher resolution and frame rate. I'll enjoy those amazing ex clue civs. Everyone gets what they want.
You should be comparing the PC version (non-HDR) vs. the Xbox One X (HDR) version. It would be close but as of now Xbox One X with HDR is the best version. Comparing to the Pro version isn't even fair.
Yeah, if you think 1800p at 30fps is better than native 4K with superior draw distances.
Digital Foundry themselves have said "HDR is an even bigger visual upgrade than 4K". The more excuses you give, the longer it's going to take for HDR to become standard on PC.
But pc supports hdr all the way, if they didnt do pc hdr update then it wont have hdr, thats not pc fault.
I just re-bought this on the X for HDR. I did this based on my experience with Rise of he Tomb Raider. The PC version against the X version on the same OLED display in front of my eyes... It just looks fantastic. Hopefully W3 will be a similar achievement. If not I'll just stick to the PC version and forget the £14 lol.
I'll take 60fps over 30fps any day of the week.
PC can actually do 60FPS and much higher settings than Xbox One X manages. Ultra on PC is way above the medium/high Xbox One X does on this game. Not forgetting the fact this title is TWO AND A HALF YEARS OLD. I was playing it in 4K over 12 months ago on PC. Welcome to the party console gamer, late as ever.....
Yeah and PC can do HDR but for some reason The Witcher III on PC does not have HDR support. The difference on a nice HDR TV is clear as day. Until PC devs get their acts together, the console versions with HDR will remain the best versions of the games.
Because HDR beats more resolution, a higher framerate and higher settings by itself? Lol give it a rest. No it doesn't. PC batters the console version, it has done so for years and Xbox One X doesn't change that. So you finally got a version of the game that is a bit closer to what I was playing over a year ago! Woopty do. Totally worth waiting ages and ages for. NOT!
Even in this thread you saw someone who compared the PC version and the X version on the same nice HDR tv and their choice was the X version. Have you actually seen HDR yet? Do you have an HDR tv? Just curious.
The head and shoulders above, a whole generation gap, etc., descriptions are getting a bit old now. We know X is better than Pro in terms of specs, but it's not as drastic of a difference as people try to make it out to be.
Exactly Sgt. Both versions look brilliant in their own right, though the X has improved results in most titles do to better specs. Simple as that. A big 🖕 to gamingbolt sensationalism. Fanboy wars are for kids and we dont need more fire stoking around here.
Lol I like this comment..
Gamingbolt is head and shoulders deep in Microsoft's nether region. We get it. They are hot for the X. Enjoy it. However the combination of PS4 Pro, and a gaming PC blows this away at every level. There are simply no exclusives worthy of making a purchase. Search your feelings...you know it to be true.
Gamingbolt does rely on sensationalism but come on, do you really have to stoop to their level? All the consoles have their pros and cons and im glad there is still competition. Its better for everyone as gamers.
Geralt has dandruff ?.
Haha! I get it "head and shoulders" what is up with the sensationalism and exaggerations?. Microsoft's check must've cleared?.
The performance gap is significantly more pronounced than the Xbox vs PS4 ever was.
Whilst we could never claim that you fanboyism is understated
True. 30 fps vs 60 fps is a much bigger difference than 900p vs 1080p and we're just seeing the 1st X1X games wich means that the difference will only get more pronounced.
But it isn't 30 vs 60fps in like for like scenarios. 60fps res is significantly lower than the 30fps option.
Ju Then why doesn't the pro have an option to have less resolution and 60 fps? Is it preferential treatment or is it that the pro can't run the game at 60 fps and the X1X can?
Wasted no time, sea of thieves got boring that quick huh?
@Imalwaysright I disagree, since the mid cycle systems have the same architectures. They are simply scaled up. Its intended that there should be minimum effort from developers to scale to them. Any differences you see will be engine/genre dependent and will not grow with time.
Yeah, history disagrees with you. There is always a learning curve, there is always getting to grips with the hardware and there is always optimizations to be made on consoles no matter how small they are. "Any differences you see will be engine/genre" yeah isn't that always the case with consoles? I mean the hardware is static and yet Horizon, an open world game, looks much better than Killzone Shadow Fall despite the PS4 having x86 architecture that is older than me and I'm 31 years old so I ask: why didn't Guerrila achieve the same level of graphical fidelity with Shadow Fall (their 1st game) as they did with Horizon (their 2nd game)?