For Xbox One X there are 2 resolution options a 4K and 1080p. My question is does that setting change resolution that One X is outputing or One X is always outputing 4K and that settings just changes if it is downscaled to 1080p? This is really important because if it is always outputing 4K and this option only changes if it will downscale then it wont affect performance because One X is effectively doing 4K resolution with either setting. In FFXIV on PS4 there was 720p and 1080p option in settings but 720p option only downscaled what was effectively 1080p output from PS4 (probably done for people with older TVs or monitors).

Now i know some people have said they noticed performance boost in 1080p (also a lot of people said no difference) but i think that could possibly be a placebo effect where since they think its doing smaller resolution they create illusion that its actually running better. 

If your tv is 1080 p whicnnmine you wont get 4khd, but you get other benefits just not 4k.

35 minutes ago, sunstar said:

If your tv is 1080 p whicnnmine you wont get 4khd, but you get other benefits just not 4k.

 

That has absolutely nothing to do with my question

Hey Namus, i was actually quite curious about this myself. Additionally i would have liked more than just 4k on or off as display options (perhaps a toggle to adjust brightness :P). In either case, i turned off 4k quite early. I played for the first 1-2 hours with it on and the last 20-30 hours with it off :P. I would argue that it "felt" better with it off but again i have no way of knowing if that feeling was just a placebo that was enforced by the fact that the beta ran extremely poorly early on when everyone was in one location and the servers were being hammered. After the first few hours the game itself smoothed out which is when i turned off 4k. I do think that 4k locks the framerate to 30 fps with dips bellow that and 4k off unlocks the framerate but we still see drops far bellow 60 in many circumstances which is why its hard to tell if there is a major difference between the two modes. In any case some clarity from the dev team or Simon would be greatly appreciated. 

42 minutes ago, Gankzy said:

Hey Namus, i was actually quite curious about this myself. Additionally i would have liked more than just 4k on or off as display options (perhaps a toggle to adjust brightness :P). In either case, i turned off 4k quite early. I played for the first 1-2 hours with it on and the last 20-30 hours with it off :P. I would argue that it "felt" better with it off but again i have no way of knowing if that feeling was just a placebo that was enforced by the fact that the beta ran extremely poorly early on when everyone was in one location and the servers were being hammered. After the first few hours the game itself smoothed out which is when i turned off 4k. I do think that 4k locks the framerate to 30 fps with dips bellow that and 4k off unlocks the framerate but we still see drops far bellow 60 in many circumstances which is why its hard to tell if there is a major difference between the two modes. In any case some clarity from the dev team or Simon would be greatly appreciated. 

I dont think Xbox can handle anywhere close to 60fps due to CPU limitations so it would be crazy for them to unlock fps it would only make it look worse due to big fluctuations.

14 minutes ago, Namus said:

I dont think Xbox can handle anywhere close to 60fps due to CPU limitations so it would be crazy for them to unlock fps it would only make it look worse due to big fluctuations.

Yea, thats what leads me to believe the framerate was unlocked with 4k off. The framerate felt extremely variable throughout my entire experience. I wouldn't say the framerate induced anything close to a negative experience, but i definitely noticed dips bellow 30 and surges above 30. I will say most games that i play, i play in first person perspective and as a result i may be less sensitive to lower framerates in 3rd person games as is the case with bdo.  

I have a alright gaming pc with a rx580 8gb, which is roughly on par with xb1x (just the gpu, overall the pc is likely more powerful than the xb1x because of the limited cpu in the xb1x like you said) so i am slightly a stickler for fps. That being said it felt like they scaled back in other areas like draw distance and texture quality; also the way the game streams in assets, enemies, npc's, and other players, appears to prioritize framerate which is why i think players are experiencing so much pop in and why pop in is so common for the bdo engine in general.

In any case i wish i had tried the game on my OG xb1 as well as that would have allowed me to have a better understanding of how the game "feels" under normal circumstances vs on xb1x. I do however believe that 60 fps  at 1080p with a possible dynamic resolution scaler is possible for a game like bdo on a system like xb1x despite its cpu limitations. If the game can push native 4k on the xb1x with a 30 fps lock, there is very little reason why it couldn't achieve 60 fps at 1080p aside from a lack of optimization. One need only look towards games like Hitman 2 and Forza Horizon 4 which are far more demanding than bdo. 

I was very curious about this as well and have the same questions as you. Now I played in scrictly 4k mode. I never messed around with 1080. I assumed it was locked 30 fps with xbox one s settings. I figured we got a more stable 30 fps. But my experience so far, is the X usually turns in a more stable frame rate displaying 4k then the S displaying at its resolution. I did think I could get better performance at 1080,but if it's the one S 1080 settings I figured I may as well stick to 4k. Would like an explanation on the exact details of these configurations before launch. 

29 minutes ago, Gankzy said:

One need only look towards games like Hitman 2 and Forza Horizon 4 which are far more demanding than bdo. 

I do think there is a chance its possible to get a possible 1080 60.But MMOs are vastly more cpu intensive. Even a MMO running at 30 that has inferior graphics to a single player game running at 60 fps. Would still have a very hard time achieving 60 on console in comparison . I'd like to see the deva acknowledge that we'd like to see such a thing and let us know that they will look into it, or they have, and it's not feasible. 

12 minutes ago, Jacs said:

I do think there is a chance its possible to get a possible 1080 60.But MMOs are vastly more cpu intensive. Even a MMO running at 30 that has inferior graphics to a single player game running at 60 fps. Would still have a very hard time achieving 60 on console in comparison . I'd like to see the deva acknowledge that we'd like to see such a thing and let us know that they will look into it, or they have, and it's not feasible. 

Entirely agree, but to be fair forza horizon 4 is an mmo aswell(although admittedly nowhere near the same scale as bdo). Additionally i feel people underestimate how well optimized BDO is on pc with all things considered (visual fidelity, custom engine, small team etc.). The game has been designed to run on an extremely wide range of PC's from low end to high (likely to appeal to widest range of the market). For example, I know people who play this game on pc with 8 year old duel core processors with only 8 gigs of ram (i believe the minimum requirement is only 4 gigs of ram) and they are able to achieve a consistent 30 fps with some minor adjustments to resolution and graphical presets.These same machines wouldn't even boot a game like Forza Horiza 4 I have seen people run the game at 60 fps on APU builds (ryzen 3 2200g) that don't include any dedicated graphics card (these machines are roughly on par, if not slightly more powerful than your standard XB1S), mind you in many circumstances the resolution was sub 1080p.

The moral of the story here is that although the 8 core mobile processor in the xb1x is dated and not the sharpest tool in the shed, it is significantly more capable than people let on. The majority of issues surrounding it (and the ps4/ps4pro/xb1/xb1s's extremely similar/identical processors) come down to a lack of optimization for 8 core mobile cpu's. In other words, these cpus often arn't utilized to their full potential as developers don't have much experience working with them as they were originally intended to be mobile chipsets.  

He answered the question in the first reply. Xbox will always output what your tv is one and two what your game is made for. If its not optimized for 4k it wont actually do 4k just upscale 1080. If your tv isnt a 4k tv this is also true. You will just downscale 4k and see some quality differences. It just depends how true of a 4k BDO provides and your tv and xbox settings. I do not have 4k TV but did test the option. While i noticed an increase in visual quality, performance was the same for me

...

13 hours ago, Gankzy said:

Entirely agree, but to be fair forza horizon 4 is an mmo aswell(although admittedly nowhere near the same scale as bdo). Additionally i feel people underestimate how well optimized BDO is on pc with all things considered (visual fidelity, custom engine, small team etc.). The game has been designed to run on an extremely wide range of PC's from low end to high (likely to appeal to widest range of the market). For example, I know people who play this game on pc with 8 year old duel core processors with only 8 gigs of ram (i believe the minimum requirement is only 4 gigs of ram) and they are able to achieve a consistent 30 fps with some minor adjustments to resolution and graphical presets.These same machines wouldn't even boot a game like Forza Horiza 4 I have seen people run the game at 60 fps on APU builds (ryzen 3 2200g) that don't include any dedicated graphics card (these machines are roughly on par, if not slightly more powerful than your standard XB1S), mind you in many circumstances the resolution was sub 1080p.

The moral of the story here is that although the 8 core mobile processor in the xb1x is dated and not the sharpest tool in the shed, it is significantly more capable than people let on. The majority of issues surrounding it (and the ps4/ps4pro/xb1/xb1s's extremely similar/identical processors) come down to a lack of optimization for 8 core mobile cpu's. In other words, these cpus often arn't utilized to their full potential as developers don't have much experience working with them as they were originally intended to be mobile chipsets.  

Xbox one is not using mobile CPU it is x86 architecture same one as all desktop CPUs.

On 11/20/2018 at 6:52 AM, Namus said:

Xbox one is not using mobile CPU it is x86 architecture same one as all desktop CPUs.

You are both correct and terribly wrong. Yes the xbox one cpu is based off the x86 architecture but that doesnt mean anything. Several mobile chibsets are based off the x86 architecture and are designed primarily for use in mobile devices. The intel atom processor is an example of such a processor. The processor inside the xbox one (and ps4 and ps4 pro and xbox one) is based of amd's jaguar microarchitecture.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_(microarchitecture)

"It is used in AMD's Semi-Custom Business Unit as a design for custom processors and is used by AMD in four product families: Kabini aimed at notebooks and mini PCs, Temash aimed at tablets, Kyoto aimed at micro-servers, and the G-Series aimed at embedded applications. Both the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One use chips based on the Jaguar microarchitecture, with more powerful GPUs than AMD sells in its own commercially available Jaguar APUs.^[2]"

The processor was originally designed for use in tablets and notebooks. Its was only later in its design cycle that it was redesigned for use within a broader range of devices like the xb1 and ps4. 

11 hours ago, Gankzy said:

You are both correct and terribly wrong. Yes the xbox one cpu is based off the x86 architecture but that doesnt mean anything. Several mobile chibsets are based off the x86 architecture and are designed primarily for use in mobile devices. The intel atom processor is an example of such a processor. The processor inside the xbox one (and ps4 and ps4 pro and xbox one) is based of amd's jaguar microarchitecture.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaguar_(microarchitecture)

"It is used in AMD's Semi-Custom Business Unit as a design for custom processors and is used by AMD in four product families: Kabini aimed at notebooks and mini PCs, Temash aimed at tablets, Kyoto aimed at micro-servers, and the G-Series aimed at embedded applications. Both the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One use chips based on the Jaguar microarchitecture, with more powerful GPUs than AMD sells in its own commercially available Jaguar APUs.^[2]"

The processor was originally designed for use in tablets and notebooks. Its was only later in its design cycle that it was redesigned for use within a broader range of devices like the xb1 and ps4. 

That doesn't change the fact that it is using architecture that devs are most familiar with making developing for them very easy. Also by mobile i meant smartphones. My bad for not making it clear.

1 hour ago, Namus said:

That doesn't change the fact that it is using architecture that devs are most familiar with making developing for them very easy. Also by mobile i meant smartphones. My bad for not making it clear.

The only experience most devs have using the jaguar architecture is for xb1 and ps4. Additionally this is Pearl Abyss's first time developing anything for xb1 and as a result, likely their first time dealing with the jaguar architecture. There is a reason the game has taken so long to be ported to xb1. 

The minimum specs for pc as i mentioned earlier are significantly low. 

-4 gigs of ram

-A 0.5 teraflop gpu roughy

-A duel core processor clocked at 2.9ghz (you can get 9-10 year old processors that meets these requirements)

-27 gigs of space

The xb1 has

-8 gigs of ram

-1.3 teraflop gpu 

-8 core processor clocked at 1.75ghz

-500gb min for most users

So we can conclude that xb1 ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specs for the pc. It has 0.8 teraflops of overhead, 4 gigs of ram overhead and assuming the user makes space any xb1 should have the space needed. The problem lies in the cpu (which still ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specd cpu).

8 cores x1.75ghz(speedpercore) =14ghz of total compute power

vs

2x2.9ghz (speedpercore) = 5.8ghz of total compute power

The issue with the xb1's processor is its low clock speeds across all 8 cores. Additionally it is another indication that it was originally designed as a mobile processor ( again, something most devs are not too familiar with). The reason porting BDO over to xb1 is challenging is because they have to optimize the game (and likely the engine itself) to operate across 8 cores at a minimum clock speed of 1.75 ghz when the game itself (and likely the engine itself) was designed to operate on a minimum of 2 cores clocked at a minimum of 2.9ghz.

This means tasks performed by the cpu like Physics and A.I. (just to name a few) need to be redistributed in a way to account for the lower clock speed. If something could have originally been deligated to a single core operating at 2.9 ghz, that same task may now need to be redistributed across two or potentially three or even all cores due to the fact that those cores are now operating at 1.75 ghz. The issue being that if some of those tasks were originally designed to operate on a single core than one might experience significant issues deviding that operation across multiple cores (major bugs).

Like i said, there is a reason the game is taking so long to be ported to xb1 and if the architecture was something p.a. was familar with, it would have been out long ago. 

5 hours ago, Gankzy said:

The only experience most devs have using the jaguar architecture is for xb1 and ps4. Additionally this is Pearl Abyss's first time developing anything for xb1 and as a result, likely their first time dealing with the jaguar architecture. There is a reason the game has taken so long to be ported to xb1. 

 

The minimum specs for pc as i mentioned earlier are significantly low. 

-4 gigs of ram

-A 0.5 teraflop gpu roughy

-A duel core processor clocked at 2.9ghz (you can get 9-10 year old processors that meets these requirements)

-27 gigs of space

 

The xb1 has

-8 gigs of ram

-1.3 teraflop gpu ?

-8 core processor clocked at 1.75ghz

-500gb min for most users

So we can conclude that xb1 ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specs for the pc. It has 0.8 teraflops of overhead, 4 gigs of ram overhead and assuming the user makes space any xb1 should have the space needed. The problem lies in the cpu (which still ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specd cpu).

8 cores x1.75ghz(speedpercore) =14ghz of total compute power

vs

2x2.9ghz (speedpercore) = 5.8ghz of total compute power

The issue with the xb1's processor is its low clock speeds across all 8 cores. Additionally it is another indication that it was originally designed as a mobile processor ( again, something most devs are not too familiar with). The reason porting BDO over to xb1 is challenging is because they have to optimize the game (and likely the engine itself) to operate across 8 cores at a minimum clock speed of 1.75 ghz when the game itself (and likely the engine itself) was designed to operate on a minimum of 2 cores clocked at a minimum of 2.9ghz.

This means tasks performed by the cpu like Physics and A.I. (just to name a few) need to be redistributed in a way to account for the lower clock speed. If something could have originally been deligated to a single core operating at 2.9 ghz, that same task may now need to be redistributed across two or potentially three or even all cores due to the fact that those cores are now operating at 1.75 ghz. The issue being that if some of those tasks were originally designed to operate on a single core than one might experience significant issues deviding that operation across multiple cores (major bugs).

Like i said, there is a reason the game is taking so long to be ported to xb1 and if the architecture was something p.a. was familar with, it would have been out long ago. 

 

 

 

 

There is no Jaguar architecture its using x86 architecture the same one that all desktop CPUs use... Lack of power does not mean its hard to develop for it it means it limits what they can do and that's primarily why our version looks like poo compared to maxed out PC. Also lower clock speed does not translate to lower speed always. The reason for delay was i would say completely different input method so they had to redesign UI from the ground up to make it work.

Last but not least your comparison of XB1 and PC min spec is flawed. First of all XB1 has only 5GB available for games and 3GB reserved for OS and in addition to that those 5GB are shared between GPU and CPU meaning more like 2.5 GB ram and 2.5GB vram or whatever way dev distributes it for their game. Lower clock speed does not always translate to slower CPU you can use that comparison for absolutely same CPUs only. There are many CPUs with lower clock speed but faster than other CPUs with higher clock speed.

During the Beta, you had to turn on 4k settings in the Settings Menu. It did not automatically output in 4k. Once turned on, it runs constantly in 4k if your TV/Monitor supports it.

On 11/23/2018 at 12:45 AM, Gankzy said:

The only experience most devs have using the jaguar architecture is for xb1 and ps4. Additionally this is Pearl Abyss's first time developing anything for xb1 and as a result, likely their first time dealing with the jaguar architecture. There is a reason the game has taken so long to be ported to xb1. 

 

The minimum specs for pc as i mentioned earlier are significantly low. 

-4 gigs of ram

-A 0.5 teraflop gpu roughy

-A duel core processor clocked at 2.9ghz (you can get 9-10 year old processors that meets these requirements)

-27 gigs of space

 

The xb1 has

-8 gigs of ram

-1.3 teraflop gpu 

-8 core processor clocked at 1.75ghz

-500gb min for most users

So we can conclude that xb1 ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specs for the pc. It has 0.8 teraflops of overhead, 4 gigs of ram overhead and assuming the user makes space any xb1 should have the space needed. The problem lies in the cpu (which still ultimately has far more total compute power than the minimum specd cpu).

8 cores x1.75ghz(speedpercore) =14ghz of total compute power

vs

2x2.9ghz (speedpercore) = 5.8ghz of total compute power

The issue with the xb1's processor is its low clock speeds across all 8 cores. Additionally it is another indication that it was originally designed as a mobile processor ( again, something most devs are not too familiar with). The reason porting BDO over to xb1 is challenging is because they have to optimize the game (and likely the engine itself) to operate across 8 cores at a minimum clock speed of 1.75 ghz when the game itself (and likely the engine itself) was designed to operate on a minimum of 2 cores clocked at a minimum of 2.9ghz.

This means tasks performed by the cpu like Physics and A.I. (just to name a few) need to be redistributed in a way to account for the lower clock speed. If something could have originally been deligated to a single core operating at 2.9 ghz, that same task may now need to be redistributed across two or potentially three or even all cores due to the fact that those cores are now operating at 1.75 ghz. The issue being that if some of those tasks were originally designed to operate on a single core than one might experience significant issues deviding that operation across multiple cores (major bugs).

Like i said, there is a reason the game is taking so long to be ported to xb1 and if the architecture was something p.a. was familar with, it would have been out long ago. 

 

 

 

 

Stopped reading  when i saw that

12 hours ago, Fortune said:

Stopped reading  when i saw that

lol what?? u dont like the DUEL core proc specs?? the only procs in the world that fight for bits!

but on a more serial note...y does the OP think the xbox one x outputs at 4k resolution 24/7? if ut tv is 1080 the signal will be 1080 with a bit of upscalin involved but if ur tv is 4k the resolution will be 4k. theres a setting that u had to turn on to use the "remastered" mode which is the 4k high res lower framerate version of the game. ur console doesnt convert the image from 4k to 1080p then convert it again from 1080p to an upscaled version of 1080p. that would be insanely wasteful don ya think?

i think the most confusin part of this thread is how much the op bounces around the specs all haphazardly. the original post is about 4k then the specs used to support his concern r from the xbox one which doesnt have 4k support and is obviously much slower than the beefier xbox one x console.

instead of postin all these fancy specs and numbers that many wont even begin to understand i suggest u keep it simple and heres how....the higher the resolution the slower the refresh rate will be (fps pretty much). 4k takes longer to refresh fully so the fps will always be higher the more detail there is. the same happens in reverse...1080p has less detail so the refresh rate time is much lower so the images look less blurry and will perf faster than 4k but the grass wont look as well defined and other quality related things will look less detailed.

i know its only been a hand full of years but has everyone forgotten about refresh rates?? i have a samsung unc9000 1080p tv that has an actual 240htz refresh rate panel. u cant find panels that high anymore. the highest i have seen is 120htz on 4k tvs (not the face truemotion or whatever fancy term the tv makers made up with a number usually 4x the actual refresh rate of the panel). hell u dont even need a tv to figure this out....if u play on the pc and have a good enough system bump the video up to ultra. with a 1080 ti strix i pull 90-100 fps. if i drop it down to non remastered and lower resolution the fps shoot up even higher than that.

im not even sure y this is bein talked about like this. maybe i missed the point of this thread completely?? its possible.......

1 hour ago, numnutz2005 said:

lol what?? u dont like the DUEL core proc specs?? the only procs in the world that fight for bits!

 

but on a more serial note...y does the OP think the xbox one x outputs at 4k resolution 24/7? if ut tv is 1080 the signal will be 1080 with a bit of upscalin involved but if ur tv is 4k the resolution will be 4k. theres a setting that u had to turn on to use the "remastered" mode which is the 4k high res lower framerate version of the game. ur console doesnt convert the image from 4k to 1080p then convert it again from 1080p to an upscaled version of 1080p. that would be insanely wasteful don ya think?

i think the most confusin part of this thread is how much the op bounces around the specs all haphazardly. the original post is about 4k then the specs used to support his concern r from the xbox one which doesnt have 4k support and is obviously much slower than the beefier xbox one x console.

 

instead of postin all these fancy specs and numbers that many wont even begin to understand i suggest u keep it simple and heres how....the higher the resolution the slower the refresh rate will be (fps pretty much). 4k takes longer to refresh fully so the fps will always be higher the more detail there is. the same happens in reverse...1080p has less detail so the refresh rate time is much lower so the images look less blurry and will perf faster than 4k but the grass wont look as well defined and other quality related things will look less detailed.

i know its only been a hand full of years but has everyone forgotten about refresh rates?? i have a samsung unc9000 1080p tv that has an actual 240htz refresh rate panel. u cant find panels that high anymore. the highest i have seen is 120htz on 4k tvs (not the face truemotion or whatever fancy term the tv makers made up with a number usually 4x the actual refresh rate of the panel). hell u dont even need a tv to figure this out....if u play on the pc and have a good enough system bump the video up to ultra. with a 1080 ti strix i pull 90-100 fps. if i drop it down to non remastered and lower resolution the fps shoot up even higher than that.

im not even sure y this is bein talked about like this. maybe i missed the point of this thread completely?? its possible.......

You answered it best but most replies were just an engagement in mental masturbation. He really just wants to know if there is a performance dip at 4k. I'm sure there is, and it's probably not noticeable most of the time. Even if it's noticeable they could have improved it since. No one will know until the full game is out anyway.

6 hours ago, numnutz2005 said:

lol what?? u dont like the DUEL core proc specs?? the only procs in the world that fight for bits!

 

but on a more serial note...y does the OP think the xbox one x outputs at 4k resolution 24/7? if ut tv is 1080 the signal will be 1080 with a bit of upscalin involved but if ur tv is 4k the resolution will be 4k. theres a setting that u had to turn on to use the "remastered" mode which is the 4k high res lower framerate version of the game. ur console doesnt convert the image from 4k to 1080p then convert it again from 1080p to an upscaled version of 1080p. that would be insanely wasteful don ya think?

i think the most confusin part of this thread is how much the op bounces around the specs all haphazardly. the original post is about 4k then the specs used to support his concern r from the xbox one which doesnt have 4k support and is obviously much slower than the beefier xbox one x console.

 

instead of postin all these fancy specs and numbers that many wont even begin to understand i suggest u keep it simple and heres how....the higher the resolution the slower the refresh rate will be (fps pretty much). 4k takes longer to refresh fully so the fps will always be higher the more detail there is. the same happens in reverse...1080p has less detail so the refresh rate time is much lower so the images look less blurry and will perf faster than 4k but the grass wont look as well defined and other quality related things will look less detailed.

i know its only been a hand full of years but has everyone forgotten about refresh rates?? i have a samsung unc9000 1080p tv that has an actual 240htz refresh rate panel. u cant find panels that high anymore. the highest i have seen is 120htz on 4k tvs (not the face truemotion or whatever fancy term the tv makers made up with a number usually 4x the actual refresh rate of the panel). hell u dont even need a tv to figure this out....if u play on the pc and have a good enough system bump the video up to ultra. with a 1080 ti strix i pull 90-100 fps. if i drop it down to non remastered and lower resolution the fps shoot up even higher than that.

im not even sure y this is bein talked about like this. maybe i missed the point of this thread completely?? its possible.......

On Xbox your TV does not determine resolution console is outputing but game itself. If a game has 4K sign that means it will always output 4K resolution regardless of your tv (unless its using dynamic res for performance sake). In case you have 1080p tv and play 4K game on it Xbox still produces 4K image but tv cant display it so it downscales it to 1080p or more commonly called supersampling. 

16 hours ago, Namus said:

On Xbox your TV does not determine resolution console is outputing but game itself. If a game has 4K sign that means it will always output 4K resolution regardless of your tv (unless its using dynamic res for performance sake). In case you have 1080p tv and play 4K game on it Xbox still produces 4K image but tv cant display it so it downscales it to 1080p or more commonly called supersampling. 

yes yes ik what supersampling is. what i was bdo has the option to use the remastered mode (4k) or leave it turned off which lowers the image quality and res of the game....similar to what the PC version has. i think the confusion here is ur choice or wording. ur initial post talked about the 4k output and continued on in this thread detailing how the image pushed out is always 4k. thats where i came in and said no thats not true. the game determines will determine the initial internally rendered resolution that i can agree with but the tv determines the output resolution. the resolution doesnt become the output until it hits that connector. everything involvin up down left right drivin in circles until u run outta gas and everything in between that happens when the console is renderin said output is all internal. the console wont push out a 4k signal 24/7 to a 1080p screen. that would imply that somewhere between the hdmi cable and the tvs proc it was then converter when in reality everything is happenin in real time.

a good way to see the diff (if u truly want to) is to take a 1080p screen and an xbox one s console (the s doesnt have sepersampling) and turn the 4k mode off in the game. then take that same console and do the same thing with a 4k tv. that will give u an idea of the drops in fps. then again u might not see much of a difference at all. the gpu power of the xbox one x is nearly 4 times that of the xbox one s so im sure the x can handle more than many expect.

in either case the OUTPUT with the xbox one x will never be 4k 24/7 unless the tv detected is a 4k tv. remember output in this case starts at chip pushin the signal to the connector....or even the connector if u wanna simplify it even further. not everyone knows the deets of the components so maybe its easier to just say "the hdmi connector is the output" but technically the output begins and the chip that pushes that signal to the connector.

On 11/25/2018 at 8:08 PM, Fortune said:

Stopped reading  when i saw that

All things considered, with english not being my primary language and typing this up on mobile, I think im doing pretty good. If you have a problem with typos and grammatical errors i would recommend stearing clear of the english port of this game however...especially if single letter typos trigger you that much. 

40 minutes ago, Gankzy said:

All things considered, with english not being my primary language and typing this up on mobile, I think im doing pretty good. If you have a problem with typos and grammatical errors i would recommend stearing clear of the english port of this game however...especially if single letter typos trigger you that much. 

I'm not the one who's triggered here ?

I don't see the huge debate on this. MS has been so clear on this lol. The One X can tell resolution your tv is. Now what they didn't do, was allow game devs access to these tools. So it will always output all the graphical fidelity of the 4k image and super samples it down. Still going to be using all the same power as if it was doing 4k,but will be outputting 1080p. As the Xbox knows what signal it can and can't use. 

I play loads of games at 60fps on the Xbox one X..