Hitman 3 PS5 Marginally Outperformed by Xbox Series X

Performance is more solid but, unlike most comparisons, resolution lower. Until they add dynamic resolution it’s not really possible to properly compare though.
Regardless, the copy with VR support is best.

60 frames make the game more enjoyable.

@thefourfoldroot it's difficult to understand what you wrote so please excuse if I misunderstood. The whole point of this comparison is that the game doesn't do dynamic resolution. XB6 does true 4K at 60fps and is clearly the way to go for people who have both consoles.
Then again, if you have both consoles and PSVR, well then PS5 is the clear winner.
Of course, one would need to be mildly interested in Hitman franchise. I tried to like the series but it never clicked with me.

@TheDudeElDuderino I've got both consoles but went with PS5 cause I own the other 2 games there and it's nice having the complete package and progress in one place. The game looks amazing anyway, the difference is marginal as stated.

The difference isn't teensy or marginal. That just sounds fanboyish. Its a 44% increase, what I'd expect considering the difference in resources between the 2 consoles.

We'll see this more often as games begin to be developed for this generation of console only.

In the grand scheme of things it doesn't matter, and personally a solid framerate is more important to me.

After playing nothing but Cyberpunk 2077 for the last 6 weeks I'm used to 720p and 20fps now.

I still have my gameboy advance, so no resolutions or framerate can hurt me 😂

It's weird how everyone makes a big deal about resolution, framerates and all this other technical mumbo jumbo these days, no one gave a damn about any of this stuff back during the days of the Super Nintendo, N64, PS1, PS2, OG Xbox etc. it was all about simply enjoying the games for what they were, seems like people have lost sight of just how much better and simpler those days were compared to now.

@TheDudeElDuderino
Yes, so, until they add dynamic resolution that scales, we can’t know where between 1800 and full 4K the PS5 version would actually fall. Thus it’s hard to make comparisons. The fact that the PS5 version maintains better frame rate at stress points than the Series X version shows that dynamic res should be used (or they should drop the res of the series X version if performance is the priority).
To be honest, like you, I’ve never got into the franchise. I find stealth games tedious

@JapaneseSonic - We were talking about what games we were playing, exchanging tips, tricks & secrets if we happened to be playing the same game, or one of us had already played it so we opted to give them advice for sections we or they had struggled with, gushing over the story, or characters, or weapons, the levels / worlds, the soundtrack, or the Boss Fights, all that good stuff. It was all about being in the moment and simply enjoying the games for what they were, give me a PS2 with all the Jak & Daxter, Ratchet & Clank, Sly Cooper and Kingdom Hearts games, or a Super Nintendo with Super Mario Bros 3, Donkey Kong Country 1 & 2 and The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, and I'll play them with the stupidest grin on my face without a single complaint.

@DrClayman ah right, forgot about that aspect: where you owned the games before, for the added content. Good point.

@Hyperluminal so why this time is the power difference and not developer optimization or buggy performance?

@JapaneseSonic That's only if you go by the vertical number of pixels but as an image is 'area' which has horizontal pixels (3200x1800 vs 3840x2160) that is 44% difference in area - number of pixels. Its like 900p vs 1080p in HD terms.

If you divide 8294400 (the number of pixels at full 4k) by 5760000 (the number of pixels in a 1800p image) you get 1.44 indicating that the image is 44% larger at 4k - although you can also do it the other way to show that 1800p is just under 70% of the size of 4k.

@stu123 On a 1080p screen, the 'extra' detail on textures is unnecessary - its only when you play on a 4k screen that the extra detail is 'necessary'. The Textures are being scaled down too with the resolution. Its not 'just' a smaller GPU, its also got less RAM because it doesn't 'need' 4k textures if the game is only running at 1080p.

The Series S is supposed to be a Series X with just the Graphics scaled down and part of the graphics is textures as well. The Textures are a 'lower' resolution as well.

I do find it somewhat hypocritical though because if DF had come out with the same results with PS5 being 4k and the Series X being 1800p, the article would be written very differently - PS5 smashes Xbox, Native 4k is much better, pin sharp details compared to a bit more 'blur' from upscaling etc and that 'drop' in one very specific map in one very specific area would be 'immaterial' because everything else is rock solid...

@thefourfoldroot got it. Thanks. I am assuming since PS5 is not operating at 2160 they simply couldn't maintain 60fps at that resolution. Either way, we agree on "stealth" in games, which is a far more important point to agree on👍

@BAMozzy I'd disagree on the headline being different. So far PS5 has beaten Series X for performance on all multi plat games, including hitman. Just the resolution being different here. All the other DF videos I've watched have responded equally just saying both X and PS5 versions are pretty much the same even with the increased performance of PS5.
They do come across pretty neutral in general from what I've seen as they don't get carried away with the fact PS5 is performing better in general this generation even though its a less powerful machine, and they don't get carried away with this Hitman review either.
The biggest take from their videos is the relief I didn't get the Series S in the end. MS Saying its just an X at 1080p is a straight out lie. Who knows what will happen further down the generation line. Will the differences grow?

**throws ps5 out the window**

Ok, so what?

If we competing then I'll take the locked framrate and VR over higher res any day.

these videos from DF are usually interesting but they always say ridiculous things like it's a much smoother experience on such and such platform when the difference is about a 2% shift in frame rate every few minutes

@JapaneseSonic - True while nostalgia can play a huge part in that, and yes when were younger we were more carefree than the cynical turds we would inevitably end up as, LOL. I still stand firm by the belief that gaming was better when we weren't burdened by the knowledge of all this technical stuff that we put way too much emphasis on than we really should.

However we also didn't have online gaming that chewed up, stifled and/or drained a lot of the passion that developers once had for gaming, back in the day Developers had a genuine passion for gaming that isn't as present these days (Indie Developers notwithstanding), money always played a factor for sure, but they seemed fueled more by passion than the money, thus games were arguably better back, that's just my opinion though.

Your comment regarding Day One Patches however is concerning in the sense that Day One Patches shouldn't be a thing because that's the point of playtesting, something that clearly doesn't happen as much or effectively as it did back in the day, I would argue games were more complete and bug-free back then because of actual competent playtesting, and without the luxury of Day One Patches, it pushed them to scour every corner of their games for potential issues and eradicate them, now thanks to Day One Patches, Developers think it's acceptable to release games in an incomplete state, when it isn't, if it isn't ready, postpone the release until it is, Patches should only be a thing for the bare minimum of issues, not to literally fix the entirety of a broken game that they willingly chose to release in said broken state. Also keep in mind; not everyone has internet or good internet to be able to rely on Day One Patches, thus some people may be forced to have endure a defected game just because the Developers rushed it out.

However I can't really argue with your time travel analogy, even if I wasn't the biggest fan of BOTW, your overall point has validity.

@JapaneseSonic It wasn't meant as a correction, just an explanation of resolutions and the difference in area/image size. If for example, a game were to use Dynamic Resolution Scaling, 1800p would represent a drop of 70% from 4k even if its only dropping by a relatively small percentage on the y axis. 1080p isn't 50% of 2160p for example its 25%.

@StonyKL I wasn't referring to DF who are generally much more factual and unbias - presenting the results of their findings as fact not trying to spin it one way or another. My point was more about trying to make out that the difference between the results are 'insignificant' here because in this instance, Series X has an advantage - in 99% of the game. You can try and spin that one very specific area performs better (a very 'small' section of just 1 map), but in the rest of the game, it performs the same and has a 44% higher resolution as well as better shadow quality. My point is that if the results were the other way round, the article would have been written very differently, that the 'difference' between PS5 and Series X would be 'massive' and another big win for Sony's hardware rather than trying to make out these differences are inconsequential. Its that hypocrisy that grates more than the actual differences. Its either inconsequential 'regardless' of who has any advantages or its relatively big - it can't be inconsequential when Xbox has the 'advantage' and 'massive' when Sony do...

Personally, as someone who had an XB1 and PS4 when the resolution was 1080p vs 900p (basically the equivalent) and will have both a Series X and PS5 (when I can actually find stock at Retail prices - not paying a Scalper), I couldn't care less who has the advantage (if any). I also know that people aren't likely to trade in a console just because of resolution etc - they will buy the game on the platform they have.

There will be people 'happy' to play this on older gen hardware - with lower quality textures, lower resolutions, lower shadow quality too no doubt and (up to) 30fps only so its not a 'big deal' for a lot of console gamers. I find DF interesting because it can help me to decide which console to buy games on - where I have a choice. Otherwise, you just buy the game and 'enjoy' the game on your platform regardless of how it looks/performs on others...

@BAMozzy couldn't agree more with you on how this kind of comparison information gets handled and presented by the media depending on personal, or perhaps editorial, bias.

@nicc83 **catches nicc83's PS5 before it hits the ground and runs off with it because I don't have one yet. Yells out "Thanks!!"**

@zebric21 'so why this time is the power difference and not developer optimization or buggy performance?'

Any answer i give is an assumption because I can't possibly know that.

I would say that perhaps more developers have the right tools from MS to get better results from their consoles. Or maybe developers have grown more experienced in using them.

What I confidently predict is that once multiplat games start getting developed for current-gen consoles only that this scenario will occur more often than the recent examples of cross-gen multiplat games where the PS5 version was outperforming Series X.

And that's not a problem or suggesting that PS5 isn't every bit as good as Series X. They have their strengths and weaknesses in different areas. For all that power MS doesn't have anywhere near the strength in depth of Sony's games catalogue, and that's what I care about.

@BAMozzy Yeah I agree that DF do seem quite neutral. It is strange there is such a difference between the two resolutions considering PS5 can obviously do more as it doesn't ever drop a frame while the X has its moments of stutter keeping to 4k.

I actually would rather games came in lower resolution - whatever that has to be - if it meant more 'action' on screen. An example say NPC count/AI quality. If this was compromised to ensure that a console can reach 4k output I would be disappointed. Haven't bought Cyberpunk but if it stays as an empty game with no atmosphere, odd AI and transporting police I will never get it. It sounds terrible. Even if that garbage happened in 4K. If, however it was a high quality game in 1080p it wouldn't stop me getting it.
I'm no expert but I do hope quality of game isn't compromised just for resolution.

@Turismo4GT - "Hey! I'll give you a $1000 for that PS5 right here right now. Don't run! DON'T RUN! STOP RUNNING AWAY FROM ME!!!"

@kyleforrester87 brilliant

If the differences are so small and microscopic, does it really count as a difference?

More on this at the 10 o' clock hour.

didn't care ps5 getting the better versions, don't care now.

Spider-man at 1080p will always be better than any assassin creed at 4k

I keep seeing these disclaimers about the differences being small, negligible, and needing magnifying glasses to appreciate. Why then are articles/comparisons like this consistently made and written on? Why are these articles the ones getting the "clicks"? This just perpetuate console warring IMO, and just like in politics I don't get why more journalist aren't washing their hands with this type of stuff. No shade at DF, they are running things on a technical level, but I don't get why the media then turns and runs articles like this unless the differences between versions are indeed noticeable and offer different experiences.

I know there are people that care about this, but as long as the game is not broken. I can't afford to buy every single console anymore.

You can only see the difference if you're actually comparing it side by side. PS5 res is 3200 x 1800 while maintaining 60fps with ultra textures and shadow at medium meanwhile XSX res is 3840 x 2160 with ultra textures and shadow at high but dips to 50fps.

If I was playing this game on PC. I would prefer the graphic setting of PS5 over XSX especially when the framerates become sluggish to compensate for the resolution. We don't know if the PS5 is capable of running Hitman with the same graphic setting as XSX. if only Sony can implement the option to choose between resolution or performance then it might be possible.

I'm playing this on Series S (purely because I owned the previous 2 games there) and I have to say that it looks fantastic on that console. I played Hitman 2 on the One X but this looks every bit as good even with a lower resolution but runs so much better. Anyone playing this on PS5 and Series X is in for a treat.

More to the point though, after all the excuses for the likes of Ubisoft with having to make so many versions of the game and Cyberpunk of course, IO have done an amazing job of shipping this in such a great condition

I’m not overly bothered by comparing and analyzing pixels, but I have to say, since purchasing a 4K OLED 2 years ago, being able to sit 4 feet from a 65inch screen and still see everything rendered in crisp detail is a transformative video game experience. Coupled with properly implemented HDR, there is a marked difference in presentation that’s hard to dismiss.

In some aspects I actually find games are looking better (crisper, more detailed and with richer colour palettes) than a lot of recent movies and tv shows, surely a negative result from the push for digital filmmaking.

@LiterallyDoNotCare Bro, that username lol. Did you make an account just to comment on this?

@ApostateMage sounds like a personal problem, you should seek some help!

@Amusei who are you?

Lmao I love it, never change Push Square. a 2% lead by an Xbox console would be "marginal" but a 2% lead by a Playstation console would be "massive".

Hey! so I just registered after being a lurker here for a while. Finally got a PS5 after missing PS3 and PS4 generations. Have to say, now that I own the XSX and PS5, it comes down to how much can I save, will it be on Game Pass, etc. Because these performance issues are going to be so marginal either way and are done mostly just for clicks and to stoke the never-ending console wars. And when I was only on Xbox consoles for years - just knowing how my brain works - as long as the game plays well and isn't broken, I was never going to lament playing a multiplatform game on my One X for example that ran at a lower resolution or had a few less frames than on a PS4 Pro. Because I'd never see the 'better' version and would have no reference to compare it to.

@Menchi When did a powerfull console made a difference the issue isnt such a problem but a few people go mental over it. 😅

Here playing on a PS4 never did it cross my mind that i needed a Xbox X because the games would look better. What did cross my mind was getting a Switch why because of the graphics no its just what i like too play. I like the Playstation controller better then the Xbox controller too.

In the end it comes down too the games and thats no contest for me personally so ill be staying on Playstation for another generation.

@2cents Oh not you again!? You're like a really bad smell that won't go away.

@JapaneseSonic

Perhaps it's just us longing for how it felt playing a game on SNES (I was 10 when it was released in North America) and no matter how technologically advanced a game is now, It's going to be hard (if not impossible) for it to ever hit the same as something far less basic did when I was in 5th grade. That being said, I was all smiles when I played Astro's Playroom and Spider-Man Remastered for the first time last month and DID feel a bit like a kid again.

@ApostateMage Best 20 fps you'll ever experience.

@StonyKL Obviously the PS5 could do 'more' in some areas but whether or not it would drop frames on that 1 specific map at the same situation that the Xbox stutters - who knows. For all you know, it could start dropping frames in that same spot at 1820p but still hold 60fps everywhere else - like the Xbox. You are making out that the Xbox stutters because its native 4k when the reality is, only one specific map, and only in a small part of that map, there is an issue - which maybe a 'bug' on the Xbox version.

Anyway, to get a 'perfect' framerate, you must have overheads in the vast majority of the game to ensure that at the very worst point, the game doesn't drop. Therefore there must be points where the PS5 has much more overhead than other points but by the same token, so has the Series X because in 99% of the game its a locked 60 - even when you try and cause the frame rate to buckle. That one garden area seems to be an anomaly and I wouldn't be surprised if its some 'bug'. Considering some areas that are filled with NPC's and detail don't cause an issue, its strange that one area does. The PS4 Pro doesn't have the same issue either at 1080/60 yet buckles in other areas compared to the Series S....

I do agree that I would rather take a reconstructed 4k over a native 4k to ensure a higher and more consistent frame rate, even happy to have Dynamic Resolution Scaling rather than an unlocked frame rate but drop the resolution too low and it ends up looking soft/blurry and lacking detail/clarity. Native to me isn't important but image quality is and nowadays, you don't need to have 'native' resolutions to get that image quality - its why DLSS and Chequerboard rendering are gamechangers because they look better than the actual resolution the game is rendering.

@get2sammyb what I say now i say with respect. How very defensive of you. That's quite an immature way to respond and I'd expect better from a representative of the site. What I said is factually correct.

I am not, and did not, dispute any subjective impression any person has of the quality of the image or their probable inability to be able to tell the difference between the resolutions the game runs at on each platform. I am perfectly happy to accept that in reality the average gamer would find it tough to see unless they were actively looking to notice.

What I commented on is the impression given by the article that the actual, physical difference in resolution is marginal. There's a 44% increase in resolution on the Series X and that's not marginal, its what I'd expect from the fairly significant difference between the 2 consoles in raw power.

It's not a complaint or a dig at PS5, its an honest appraisal. I don't understand why you've replied to me in such a sarcastic fashion.

@JustPlainLoco **doesn't hear JustPlainLoco's offer of $1K as he's running past because he's laughing maniacally at his insane luck of passing under @nicc83 window and bagging a PS5 seemingly dropped from heaven, all while listening to 'Hallelujah' on full blast on a new pair of earbuds 'gifted' by @get2sammyb **

@LiterallyDoNotCare I am Amusei. I'm a member of the thieves guild. You can find me chilling by The Waterfront in Cyrodiil.

@Amusei I literally don't care

People never learn. After waiting for so long, one game with slightly higher resolution and they are back to bragging about TFlops with their self righteous certainty. Pathetic
🤦‍♂️

@get2sammyb - I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest you wouldn't notice XSX dropping 4 frames while standing in a field full of flowers unless Digital Foundry told you it did.
Bait article is bait.

@ApostateMage won’t go away like your constant posts about Cyberpunk’ed on every article possible!?

@LiterallyDoNotCare Nonetheless, I appreciated our little convo. Take care.

@JustPlainLoco two words: "Blast Processing" lol

@Hyperluminal.... Please take the sand out of your v******, and stop to breath a little and you will realize you contradict yourself.

You said according to your own unproven pixel/resolution calculations that the difference is 44%(subjective and unproven to be correct) which is just speculation on your part, and this difference according to you is significant yet you then state that it's not noticeable unless you magnifyingly zooming like Digital Foundry and it's still not noticeable unless you do a frame by Fram analysis and also have an analyzer which I doubt anyone playing the gaming will be having or doing.

Then you go on a troll "Victim Fit" when @getsammy pointed you out that if anyone were to walk into a room with two guys each playing the game separately on the Ps5 and xboxsx, by only looking at the TV's you would think they were playing co-op the same game running on the same system or one one system. You would only notice one player having the dual sense and the other having the Xbox controller to notice that they are each playing on PS5 and Xboxsx.

@GREGORIAN 44% increase in resolution is not a subjective observation, it's an objective fact. That's a significant amount difference in terms of how many pixels are being pushed around by the respective consoles, and that was what i am talking about. In terms of display resolution in a technical breakdown such as the one DF did, a 44% boost to resolution on the Series X represents a significant uplift on that machine.
At no point have I denied what the game would LOOK like subjectively to an observer. I'm not interested in that and don't deny that to the uninterested gamer it won't be very noticeable. That doesn't mean the technical nature previously mentioned isn't true and isn't significant.

I can see you don't understand what 44% means so let me quote BAMoozy who explained it earlier in the thread:

'That's only if you go by the vertical number of pixels but as an image is 'area' which has horizontal pixels (3200x1800 vs 3840x2160) that is 44% difference in area - number of pixels. Its like 900p vs 1080p in HD terms.

If you divide 8294400 (the number of pixels at full 4k) by 5760000 (the number of pixels in a 1800p image) you get 1.44 indicating that the image is 44% larger at 4k - although you can also do it the other way to show that 1800p is just under 70% of the size of 4k.'

Was there any reason for you to put your point across to me in such a disparaging fashion? How are you calling me a troll when I respectfully, more respectful than your reply to me, respond to sammi's immature taunt that I'd be hard pressed to tell the difference, again not understanding that I'm talking about the technical aspect of the disparity not the subjective view of it.

@JapaneseSonic

Graphically speaking, I’m only marginally impressed with the PS5 so far. Compared to my Switch it’s night and day, but the cross gen titles I own haven’t really wowed me yet. Spider-Man with Ray Tracing did impress me, but I quickly stopped noticing it after a few minutes.

What has wowed me every single time I’ve played a native PS5 game are the amazingly fast load times. That is by far my favorite thing about the system. That and the more stable frame rates across the board.

@TheRedComet I'm with you there. I still think Last of Us 2 looks better than anything I've played on PS5 but damn I love how quick everything loads.

I still don't understand if 99.99% of users (basically anyone who doesn't magnify single frames like DF does) can't tell the difference between these resolutions then why bother. Why not just focus on the game for improvements rather than the resolution? I'd argue that Zelda BOTW is the best game last gen (and if its not its not far off) yet that resolution is nowhere near 4k.

@JapaneseSonic I remember the days of people claiming that the Atari ST was better than the Amiga due to its 8MHz 68000 processor vs the Amiga's 7.14MHz!
The playground taunts are just called fanboy wars these days.

I'm sure that the first-party devs will do amazing things with the PS5's custom architecture but so many third party devs will just throw code at the new shiny box and expect pure hardware grunt to sort out their problems. Will that tip the scales towards the XBTwo? Doubt it.

I will be double dipping on this. Got a Series X and no PS5, so will be buying it on Xbox for now, but definitely want it on Playstation in the future to try PSVR.

Surely in this latest gen talking performance is like debating who’s car can go to 200mph quickest dispute only really using it to go 80 on the motorway.
They’re both ‘good enough’

@Archius9 not really because there's no 'speed limit' the consoles must adhere to but I see what you mean. For that analogy to make perfect sense it should be: there are two cars, one is a 200mph super car, a 911 Carrera, the other is a 160mph sports car, a Skyline R34. Brilliant cars.

An external observer sees the Porche travelling on a road left to fight at 200mph and the Skyline right to left at 160mph. One is going a significant amount faster than the other but that difference would be very hard for the observer to notice without tools to measure the speed and so would appear to be relatively the same.

Not sure I agree it's marginal. The jump from 1800p to 2160p is significant as others have said. I didn't expect the XSX to outperform the PS5 so much.

A tad disappointed. I am hoping it's just IOI and this isn't the shape of things to come from most developers.

On face value the higher resolution on better shadows is more bang for buck than the paper specs comparison would suggest.

You do realise the PS4 pro version is 1800p, the Xbox 1X version is 2160p. IO devs just literally just "Ctrl + C, Ctrl V" the game for next gen, stuck a next gen logo on the game cover, charged a "next gen" premium... for ONLY unlocking the 30fps limit and capping it to 60fps instead.

This is literally robbing the PS5 off its capabilities and an insult to the customer.

Since the PS5 didn't drop frames, its clear that;
A) it can handle a higher resolution than 1800p, had resolution not been limited to this figure.
B) If fps was uncapped..it probably would have been significantly higher than 60fps.

@JustATomato - Well, the thing is Sammy is a full on fanboy. If PS5 had a 44% resolution advantage over XSX it would be MASSIVE and the framerate wouldn't get a mention. With that boot being on the other foot, it's only marginal in his eyes and XSX dropping frames not perceived by the human eye is a thing. Like I said it's a bait article.