Tomb Raider On PS4 Vs Xbox One: An In-Depth Look

Tomb Raider On PS4 Vs Xbox One: An In-Depth Look

When I wrote up my own impressions of the next-gen version of Tomb Raider, I hoped I’d soon see Eurogamer‘s Digital Foundry doing their trademark deep-dive into the technical underpinnings of both the Xbox One and PS4 versions of the game. And here we go.

Today, they’ve published their first look at the next-gen versions, focusing on a frame rate comparison. During gameplay, they’ve got the PS4 averaging 50.98fps and the Xbox One averaging 29.84fps, with more fluctuation on the PS4 version and a more consistent but lower frame rate on Xbox One.

There’s a ton of technical analysis over in the main article, along with some theories as to why Xbox One developer United Front Games decided to cap the frame rate while PS4 developer Nixxes went unlocked.

From Digital Foundry:

For Xbox One, we can only speculate, but we suspect that a lower overall performance resulted in even more noticeable judder were the game to remain unlocked – which would look really unattractive compared to the capped 30fps frame-rate we see in the final game. What’s curious from our perspective is that United Front Games on Xbox One would have benefited from a reasonably straightforward porting process from the original PC DirectX 11 code since both platforms use the same API, while Nixxes would have needed to translate the original PC version across to the PS4’s LibGNM API – not exactly a walk in the park based on this presentation from Ubisoft Reflections, who are handling the PS4 version of The Crew, ported across from the PC DirectX 11 codebase. Another development source we reached out to suggests that the DX11 ‘driver’ for the Xbox One still requires a lot of work.

For more, read the full report.


  • Let the gaming community cliché comments begin.

    Fanboy comments, master race comments, “Which console is better is subjective” comments and flame comments. Let out all that needless jibber jabber… do it NOA!!!

    • Master Racers will be here telling us how the PC is more powerful than next-gen consoles. It’s a fact that they seem hell bent on arguing despite the fact that nobody is arguing against them. Someone needs to issue them a certificate acknowledging that the PC is potentially more powerful.

      • I own a pc, I know it’s more powerful, I don’t give a shit. I want good games. Power doesn’t always equate to a better game.

        I want inFamous Second Son so bad! Where’s my goddamn PS4!!!!

        • I have all 3! And i love them all! 😛 PS4 for when MGS5 and others and Halo 5 and stuff for Xbox One! And stick with PC for the rest 🙂

        • But hey, more power isn’t bad at all, it’s the most ideal. I’d love a kick ass PC but I don’t have the budget at the moment so I’m sticking with the consoles right now. I just get annoyed when a person in a Ferrari shows up to a bunch of guys talking about their Commodores and tries to tell them how superior their car is. Everybody knows, it’s not even an argument, but they just feel like they have to roll up and toot their horn and remind everyone.

          • To be fair on most other sites on the internet they are arguing before the Ferarri shows up :p

          • Haha, true. But to continue the analogy, it’s Holden vs Ford. No one is under the illusion that either car is gonna edge out the Ferrari, the debate is about a specific class or car, in this case it’s mainstream, lower price bracket, similar performance, affordable family car. Bringing in the Ferrari to these debates is redundant.

          • A more than fair point. I guess I’m that guy that waxes and polishes his ferrari, commodore, ford, volkswagen and morris minor evenly and loves them all for what they are 🙂 beautiful creations that give fun and great times!

      • Well, I see you defending Xbox One as much as you can … I don’t see the difference. You want a certificate too?

        • Close but no cigar, I do indeed have a preference towards Xbox and I own an Xbox One which I enjoy very much. But I’m not a fanboy and I don’t blindly defend it. Here, sample some of my recent work:

          I’m worried. The party system is an abomination, a downgrade from an 8 year old platform. I’m worried they don’t know how to fix it, and that they’ll stick to their guns or make it worse. The old party system was a dream. The fact that it was balled up makes me worried they don’t even know how to fix it.

          The thing that rages me so much is when you get an achievement it says “hold for details” so you hold the guide button and it takes you to a screen that shows the name of the achievement and you have to press A to show details. WHY THE FUCK WOULD I HOLD THE BUTTON IF I DIDN’T WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE ACHIEVEMENT WAS!!!!!!!!! Really, who wants to know the name of the achievement but not the rest? Why not just take you to the actual achievement? It’s lunacy.

          What boggles my mind is the how the people who thought that would be a good idea were are able to perform simple tasks like bathing and getting dressed, let alone obtaining employment.

          The achievements should be snappable like the party app. That way you could check your achievement without even pausing the game like you had to pause on the 360. That’d be a, y’know, improvement over the last generation, considering this was marketed as the next generation.

          Here, look at how much I defended this Xbox advertisement:

          I also enjoy bashing Microsoft for their failure with the Halo franchise and my hobbies include talking about how good the free games on Playstation Plus are.

          If you want to research some of my comments you’ll see I’m just as critical about the Xbox platform as I am about Nintendo, Playstation and PC. I give credit where credit is due and criticism where I see faults.

  • I don’t really notice a difference in frame rates… but I do notice sudden lagging (like we got in Saints Row 4)… so, theoretically, is the Xbox version better for me because the swings in frame rate aren’t as great?

    • Please don’t bring your hippy objectivity in here. Frame rates are absolute, and irrefutable evidence of superiority.

      • Are the cubes meant to be falling at 3 different speeds… or is that the frame rate difference?
        Because, without trying to incite violence, that is the only difference I can spot.

        • Great you noticed the 3 speeds. The reason for the different speed is the frame rate difference. It’s the smoothness of the movement that is determined by the frame rate. Image game characters moving like the cube. Would you be able to notice a game running at 30fps and a game running at 60fps?

          • I have no idea.

            How do you tell if the there are more frames or if the object is just moving at a different speed?
            The images don’t appear to be any smoother than each other… just more accelerated.

          • One way you can think of is this:

            One ball is thrown in a curve from point A to point B of 10 meters. In 10 fps, there are 10 balls position in 1 second. However in 20 fps, there are 20 balls position in 1 second.

            If you see the ball movement, it is safe to assume that you can see the ball in each 1 meter in 10 fps. In your eyes you can see that the ball is “jumping” between meter since we only have 10 frame to see the movement. As you can only see 10 position, you may notice it to be slow.

            However when you play the movement in 20fps, you can see the ball in each .5 meter. The extra frame sort of “fill in the gap” allowing a smoother movement of the ball. Since you see the ball movement better, you may notice it to be faster, but it is actually the same speed.

            That is exactly whats happening with 30fps vs 60fps. 60fps is “smoother” as it fills in the movement gap from 30fps.

            If you see the website properly and have the cube moving up and down at the same time, you can see they touch the top and bottom at the same time but you feel the lower fps to be slower.

    • You don’t see a difference because YouTube only allows encoding of videos at 24fps… If this were hosted on a site that allows uploads of 60fps videos or you saw them side-by-side in real life you’d see the difference.

    • The PS4 version would be better for you, as long as its minimum isn’t worse than the Xbones minimum it is a pretty clear choice. If the fluctuation was from 60 down to like 15 then you would choose the Xbone but considering its 60 down to 32 it’s a safe bet.

      I would much rather has a game that feels silky smooth most of the time with slight dips when an explosion or something goes off to a game that feels slower all of the time.

  • I’d play both before buying, I don’t notice a frame rate change between say 50 and 60 fps, but the difference between 29fps and 51fps average is going to be pretty noticeable.

  • X1 was have bigger FPS dips in the game and it seems like that is the reason why they lock it to 30fps. From the video you can see that the FPS is quite similar which is quite good. Need another video to compare the graphics in game for texture, depth of field, AA to know which one is better.

    Arguments about “There are no different between 30 fps and 60 fps you eyes can only see 30 fps” bullshit will definitely come up along the argument.

    • as a master race’r that hears this from his mates in regards to 60 vs 120fps on his 120hz monitor i’m sick of this argument as well, I can tell almost instantly if my game is locked at 60 frames and go to the internet to find out how to change it.

    • Wow, who’s claiming a person’s eyes can only see 30 fps? Even my grandmother can tell the difference between a 60Hz TV and a 100Hz TV…

      • @stoob @kaflooey

        Precisely that was what they were arguing last gen VS PC because it was it was 30fps vs 60fps most of the time. When PC get bad port and get pissed off, console gamers will sweep in and says that crap argument of eyes can only see 30fps etc etc fanboy fight begins.

        If they go here: and still tell me they are the same. They need to stop gaming and go play candy crush forever

  • from what i watched of the video… the xbox one is far more stable… i can’t stand framerate drops so yeah i’d go xbox one over ps4 on this… i noticed it with killzone on the ps4 and it pissed me off… a stable 30 is better than an inconsistent 60 in my books

    hell i locked ass creed 4 to 30fps on my loungeroom system as it was jumping between 40 and 60 and driving me insane…

    flame on…

    • master race here, I had to use a frame limiter off assassins creed 4 because maxed out at 1080 it was breaking 250fps and working my pc harder unnecessarily when my screen can only display 120.

      • while i call bullshit you were getting 250fps… yeah thats a good, if irrelevant, point… didn’t have to bother with limiting on my main gaming rig… was getting a constant 60fps (i’ve got a 120hz screen too but didn’t feel like cooking my gpu’s to try and achieve it in my tiny case lol)

    • That last video is an interesting comparison. It seems to show that the texture quality looks better in some scenes on PC ultra than in the definitive edition. And personally, I think Lara’s face looks better in the PC version than the definitive edition.

      • I agree, I actually like the old Lara texture and I find her more attractive than the current model. The old model shows how young and how unrefined she is (I LOVE HER FROWNING EYEBROWS) and the new model makes her into some jungle trekking veteran with the tan and all.

Show more comments

Comments are closed.

Log in to comment on this story!