Digital Foundry: Assassin's Creed Origins Xbox One X is improved, but to what extent?

Assassin's Creed Origins arrives on Xbox One X, giving us a fascinating insight into how a key developer aims to scale their multi-platform projects..

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
seanpitt23370d ago

Basically the x wil give you more pixels between dynamic 2160p/1600p mostly hitting 1800p vs 1420p/1260p vs the pro and x has slightly better shadows. That's it.

So if you have a 4K TV then the x will look better with the more pixels but not a huge difference alot of people wouldn't even notice any difference only if you put them side to side. If you have a 1080p screen then you won't see much of a difference between the pro and x via supersampling.

TheKingKratos370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

Thought so
They look so damn close to each other.

370d ago
370d ago
darthv72370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

So the X at it's lowest point still is more than the Pro at it's highest.... damn that thing is a beast.

UltraNova370d ago (Edited 370d ago )


Yeah I thought the fact that 4tlfs is less than 6 made comparisons like this redundant but some people are still surprised...

Thing is in when you can barely see the difference, like in this case it speaks more about the Pro's perfomance being able to keep up than it does the X's. And dont forget this game was marketed by MS not Sony.

Ceaser9857361370d ago

oh darthv boy
The X makes the Pro looks like PS 2 era... you feel happy now... Go play on your X and enjoy the realism gfx...

370d ago
NewMonday370d ago

A year later and for $100 more the difference should pass the eye test not the software test, when you need technical breakdowns to prove your version is better then you fail.

andrewsquall370d ago

@Woolly "On this occasion"

That just so happens to be the most talked about and marketed game that was coming to X that Microsoft wasted loads of money on. I hope it was worth it for you.

XStation4pio_Pro369d ago

Not in person or when playing. Way sharper on the x and runs smoother too. The textures and texture filtering are superior on X. I literally have both versions running on the same tv. And also on the X there’s virtually no pop in because so much is loaded at once.

morganfell369d ago

If I want more pixels I just get another exclusive game.


When you say things like that you take down his entire reason for posting.

starchild369d ago (Edited 369d ago )

Well, internet videos always tend to make different versions of multiplatform games look very similar to the casual observer. In my experience, though, the difference in person is usually significantly more dramatic.

I actually rented Assassin's Creed Origins for my PS4 Pro from redbox and compared it to the PC version and in person the PC version looked a lot better, with higher resolution, much better shadows and improved draw distance. Also, the PS4 version had quite a bit of stutter, while the PC version is smooth and runs at a higher framerate on my Gsync monitor.

The PS4 version still looks good and I'm sure some people won't mind the framerate drops, lower quality shadows and blurrier image quality as much as I do, but there's no doubt that the PC version offers noticeably better visuals and smoother performance.

DarXyde369d ago


Uhh, I wouldn't call that Pro's best (I know it isn't One X's).

Facts are that no console ever struts its stuff entirely with multiplatform titles. You need exclusives to do that.

Even then, One X and Pro may be shackled by their base platforms.

So in reality, as amazing as games like Uncharted or Horizon look on base PS4, I would argue Pro isn't fully utilized for those games either, but they are better utilized.

strifeblade369d ago

until another game like shadow of war comes out and then the x will feast on soup for breakfast

DrumBeat369d ago

Honestly, this all speaks to what the developers chose for both platforms. Not any hardware. Neither of them can reach a native 4K and I doubt this is the developer's desire. For performance issues, things are dynamic. Still, if you have an Xbox One X and a Pro, you're better served getting the X version.

+ Show (12) more repliesLast reply 369d ago
Neonridr370d ago

a 55-60% increase in resolution is not huge? That's more of a difference than 1080p vs 900p when it mattered at the start of this gen.

370d ago
370d ago
Septic370d ago

Haha I know right! 1080p to 900p was massive but this isn't? 🤣

Thatguy-310370d ago

Yea the difference will be too similar to how games looked on the ps4 and Xbox one vanilla versions.
That being said so much for *4k native uncompromised *

MegamanXXX370d ago

And yet Horizon Zero Dawn looks way better than all the multiplatform games I've seen this year so far. Even looks better than Wolfenstein 2

crazyCoconuts370d ago

It still matters. But as resolution goes up, the ability for your eye to discern the differences goes down - our eyes don't have infinite resolution. That's why you either need a bigger screen or get closer to your screen to tell. That's not an opinion, so I'm not advocating one console over another, I'm just pointing out a fact...

Thatguy-310370d ago

It mattered at the start because you were paying LESS for a more powerful console where as now you're paying more for a more powerful console. I mean it's self explanatory but go off. Xbox one X will be where one plays better multiplatform games will since the system is stronger. Curious to see the tears after it gets beat by the weaker consoles tho

bluefox755370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

No, it isn't. More pixels, yes, but perceivable difference is lower. It's extremely misleading to compare raw pixel count because of the nature of ever increasing diminishing returns when going to higher resolutions. Take 480p for instance, it was a massive, night and day difference when we jumped from 480p to 720p, despite there only being a mere 600k pixels difference. That 600k is FAR lower than the pixel difference between 1800p and 1400p (which is about 2 million pixels), yet the actual improvement from those 600k pixels, that we can see with our eyes, is much greater than the perceivable difference of the 2 million pixels. It comes down to human eyes being able to spot the difference between larger pixels easier than smaller pixels, for obvious reasons. It's the same reason we are less able to spot resolution difference when we sit further back from the display.

UltraNova370d ago

After a certain quality point (1440p) you get diminishing returns on perceived image quality, thats why AA is a waist of resources at 4K. This means visual differences when you have 1800p vs 1440p will be harder to discern due to the higher quality to begin with or even harder at 4K vs 1800p.

robleroy370d ago

ps4 pro is 100% more powerful than the ps4, yet we don't hear sony fanboys or Sony claiming it's a beast.
MS has a habit of overselling things.
the 900p mattered because MS XBO was sold as a powerful 1080p console.
MS claimed the ddr3 ram was not a problem, and that the power of the cloud and directx12/11 would power up its graphics to enormous levels.
It was laughable that most games ran on 720p or 900p, while the ps4 had no problems.
This is the main reason MS has been pounded on its 900P console.

You will not notice the difference between 4K and CB 4K on the ps4 pro or xbo x. The power of these consoles are just not enough to take games to a 4K level (not just resolution). The the theoretic minimum is 8Tflops for 4K (XBX has 6..ps4 pro has 4)

I do think that when consoles have 16 to 32 Tflops the 4K visuals be be as impressive as the uncharted or the last of us were at 1080P.
We are just not there yet.

For now even 4K CB ps4 exclusives look better than 4K XBOX one games concerning game graphics quality.
What does have a greater impact than 4K is HDR.
HDR has a greater positive and noticeable impact on experience than 4K. ask any gameplayer.

andrewsquall370d ago

No. How about the 810p 49fps of Wolfenstein II on Xbone to PS4's 1080p 60fps? Is that similar between Pro and X here? Exactly lol.

Foxhound922369d ago (Edited 369d ago )

@Neon, Septic, and Wooly

You guys seem a little lost, so listen, let me enlighten you on some grade school stuff. Ever hear of the "law of diminishing returns"? Regarding resolution and perceived quality of display, it is this neat little fact stating that the higher the resolution goes, the harder it is for the human eye to differentiate. Meaning 480p to 720p and even 900p to 1080p will be have a more noticeable effect than say 1600p to 2160p. Also, it was a bigger deal early on the generation because there were MASSIVE differences in certain games AND it was a $100 CHEAPER. What do you guys not understand about that? So it takes Microsoft 4 years of diminishing games, millions in R and D, a $100 hour expensive console, cancelled exclusives, minimal exclusives games output to finally achieve a "premium" console where even digital foundry (in Microsoft's pocket) to say that it's biggest front runner for "uncompromised 4k" which is Assassins Creed to be nearly identical to it's PSPro counterpart. Man, what a mind job...

Brazz369d ago (Edited 369d ago )


1080 vs 900 > ps4 wins by 30% whit same price ( Actualy it was less expensive at lauch lol), also more exclusives ( talking about numbers, if you like than... thats is a personal metter, but hey, if we go by metacritic... well ps4 wins hands down.)
On the other hand...
$100 more expensive, less exclusives, and just a resolution bump.... yeah, i will stick whit PS4 pro, or even the base ps4 that is $200 less expensive, lol.
Yeah, that extra $100 did the job on the power side... was it worth it? Is this a $100 worth difference? Not on my book....

Neonridr369d ago

well you also have to consider things like your screen size and how close you sit to the TV as well when you factor in the law of diminishing returns. If you play on a 70" TV at like 6 feet away, you would definitely be able to notice the difference. But say at 10' away on a 55' TV then correct, it would be much harder to notice a difference.

I definitely agree that it gets harder to differentiate the higher the pixel count because everything becomes so damned small :P

Bronxs15369d ago

1080p vs 900p was a bigger deal because 1080p was the cheaper console!

Paying as much as you are for the one x you should expect it to be better. Are the extra pixels worth the extra cost? That’s for individuals to decide.

thekhurg369d ago

From the distance most people sit from their TV. You can barely tell the difference between 1080p and 4k. It's only when you're close or playing on a large monitor up close that pixels begin to really matter.

Computersaysno369d ago (Edited 369d ago )

Diminishing returns tho. From the same distance away from a large tv in a living room 900p to 1080p is more noticeable than 1300p to 1700p.

Only so many pixels your eyes can see on a tv at a set distance. the gap gets smaller the higher the resolution gets to the point you couldn't tell the difference between 4k and 16k unless you were only a metre away from a tv or the screen were the size of a whole wall

same for phones you can tell 720p to 1080p phone screens easily but then any more resolution is kinda useless

DarXyde369d ago

The irony is that now, native resolution matters to you all.

+ Show (15) more repliesLast reply 369d ago
crazyCoconuts370d ago

X: 1656p-2016p
Pro: 1350p-1584p

Neonridr370d ago

basically even at the X's lowest, it is still higher than the Pro's highest.

JackBNimble369d ago

Keep counting your pixels to justify your purchase.

370d ago
chrisoadamson370d ago

Watched the video .you left out the part about the pixel increase being 90% that of the pro in parts . 90%!

CP_Company369d ago

at least make your wrong numbers right.
X: 1656p-2016p
Pro: 1350p-1584p

Professor_K369d ago

Thats a huge difference, can't wait this black Friday

Zeref369d ago

Hope you were saying the same thing when it was base X1 vs PS4.

Professor_K369d ago

LOOOL I strongly disagree , 4k on a 1080 screen looks fucking amazingl idk wtf your talking about.
Sonyfans gonna fan

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 369d ago
370d ago Replies(4)
freshslicepizza370d ago

XB1X is the best console version, pretty self explanatory.

370d ago Replies(11)
Cryptcuzz370d ago

Da beast my ass.

Sure it is running the game better than the Pro -better hope so considering it came out a year later and costs $100 more, but the fact that I saw plenty of people going around saying "True 4K console" "Da Beast" "Uncompromised 4K" sure is looking pretty silly now when hyping up the Xbox One X before.

369d ago
Professor_K369d ago

Nobody but PlayStation faggots cling to that 4k marketing. I just wanna play on the most powerful console and if that bothers you guys go pray on ur praystashun!

WaqarYounis23369d ago


Says the xbox faggot. Where your games at?


Mr Lahey370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

Have fun with the best version then. My Pro version on my 4K/HDR-TV looks stupid good! The HDR in this game is the best i've seen yet. Makes a huge difference.
Anyways. Difference between Pro and X is not big at all on a new massive open world game. What we Pro owners have been trying to say all along.

What TV you have makes a bigger difference.

Professor_K369d ago

LOL not when the X is running a high end game with a perfect frame rate and the other struggles. How can you be so narrow minded.

Mr Lahey369d ago

struggles?? Its the same fucking 30fps. ACO on the Pro have smooth 30fps. And narrow minded?? WTF are you ranting about?

Aenea370d ago (Edited 370d ago )

"Wake me up when you guys finally stop coming into multiplat comparison topics with your salty attitude"

That's touch coming from you. Why don't you stick to pc articles and not comment on console things...

369d ago Replies(1)
Professor_K369d ago


Yo can't decide what makes a console a beast or not, the XBOX is still ahead of being closer to your 60fps 4k unrealistic standard than the pos pro

+ Show (3) more repliesLast reply 369d ago
370d ago
370d ago