Sony PlayStation 5 Pro

[davis.anthony]

Virtually no game is 100% locked to a framerate, and absolutely everyone uses the ballpark framerate number for a game to understand its framerate. That'll then be qualified as necessary with deviation. There's no IEEE standard for what proportion of time needs to be at a given framerate to qualify the whole game at that framerate, so just relax and accept a bit of leeway or else discussion will be impossible.

I accept and forgive a bit of leeway, but for 120fps COD and a lot of these 60fps console games, they need more than 'a bit of leeway' in order to fit within their frame rate bracket.

A lot of console games run a pretty flawless 60fps, and other only target 60fps.

And I think it's important that the difference is understood.

 

[davis.anthony]

I played this game a year ago for a while, and the only spot in the map that dropped minor frames consistently was the swampy area with the cargo boat.

It's 120 fps with occasional minor frames dropped. Because if this can't be considered 120 than we have no 120 games on console and just a couple "true" 60 fps games. Which sounds absurd.

Please see my previous reply to you.

 

[Charlietus]

Please see my previous reply to you.

Show me those videos where the game is well under 120 consistently. Have you played the actual game on PS5? I can tell you from experience that aside from minor drops, the game is 99% 120 fps.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I accept and forgive a bit of leeway, but for 120fps COD and a lot of these 60fps console games, they need more than 'a bit of leeway' in order to fit within their frame rate bracket.

A lot of console games run a pretty flawless 60fps, and other only target 60fps.

And I think it's important that the difference is understood.

I just randomly sampled the linked video. It's consistently at 120 fps, only occasionally dipping to 110 (one sample out of 6, in the water area). XBSX was more variably, and XBSS all over the place, suggesting my random sampling is indicative. COD on PS5 is clearly 120 Hz. We can qualify that even as 'solid', unless I happened by chance to skip all the points where the framerate nosedived. Yep. the DF video is also mostly a stable 120 with moments of dropping towards 110.

There is no definition of 'targeting' and 'achieving'. 100% faultless framerate basically doesn't happen unless your game in undemanding. For everything these machines were designed for, 99% of the time at a framerate is easily "runs at xxx fps'. Games that spend half their time below that are 'targeting xxx fps'. Those that get closer more of the time...there is no definition and it's not worth arguing over unless that really is essential to the debate at hand.

For the sake of moving this conversation forwards, I concur with DF who state this is a "genuine 120 Hz take on Warzone" and decree that a 120 fps game is what COD is managing on PS5, and we can call any game on PS5 Pro running as much of the time at 120 fps with the same ballpark spread of framerate to also be "120 fps."

Anyone wanting to use a specific all-the-time 120 fps standard should clarify it "locked 120 fps" or "100% 120 fps".

Let's move on and get back to talking about PS5 Pro, not MS's games quality or what definition to use for framerate or light transport definitions for trying to decide if PS5 is white or blue...

 

[XboxKING]

I played this game a year ago for a while, and the only spot in the map that dropped minor frames consistently was the swampy area with the cargo boat.

It's 120 fps with occasional minor frames dropped. Because if this can't be considered 120 than we have no 120 games on console and just a couple "true" 60 fps games. Which sounds absurd.

Not even pc is 60fps in that case with compilation stutter and windows Cortana popping up and whatnot lol

 

[XboxKING]

i think ps5 has shown that most games are GPU limited, also there are no 30fps games on ps5 are there?
So if gpu is the main factor then 120fps should pop up more often. Maybe even 240fps with all the frame upsampling if done at a native level

 

[davis.anthony]

So now we're altering what a frame rate target actually means so people can claim a console runs 'x' game at 'x' frame rate even when it's not locked.

60fps is 60fps.

120fps is 120fps.

There's no arguing it.

A variable frame rate has always meant a variable frame rate.

And by some of the comments on here I could count say I ran Crysis in 2007 at 60fps.

 

[davis.anthony]

So if gpu is the main factor then 120fps should pop up more often.

And how are going to to that with only a 45% extra GPU performance?

45% in the grand scheme of things is a weak upgrade, especially as PS4 Pro offer over a 2x GPU increase over base PS4.

 

[Charlietus]

i think ps5 has shown that most games are GPU limited, also there are no 30fps games on ps5 are there?
So if gpu is the main factor then 120fps should pop up more often. Maybe even 240fps with all the frame upsampling if done at a native level

Maybe we could get more 120 fps modes if pssr is good enough that upscaling from 540p-720p looks acceptable.

 

[Charlietus]

So now we're altering what a frame rate target actually means so people can claim a console runs 'x' game at 'x' frame rate even when it's not locked.

60fps is 60fps.

120fps is 120fps.

There's no arguing it.

A variable frame rate has always meant a variable frame rate.

And by some of the comments on here I could count say I ran Crysis in 2007 at 60fps.

I don't understand where this conversation is coming from

Anyways, I told you that it's 120 fps with minor drops. Yes, 120 fps is 120 fps.
120 fps with minor drops is 120 fps with minor drops.

It's not like saying that a game runs at 120 fps means that the framerate is flawless with no drops. No one is saying that.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

So now we're altering what a frame rate target actually means so people can claim a console runs 'x' game at 'x' frame rate even when it's not locked.

Yes. So the rest of the world isn't using your definition? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ Okay, use theirs and fit in instead of being pointlessly obstinate. It's not conducive to meaningful discussion to bang on about this. If you need to clarify a locked 120 for some reason, you can do so without trying to redefine what absolutely everybody else is using. That's how it's been for decades. 60 fps games very rarely hit 60fps 100% of the time once we hit 3D.

 

[davis.anthony]

That's how it's been for decades. 60 fps games very rarely hit 60fps 100% of the time once we hit 3D.

I don't seem to remember seeing the FPS readout on MSI Afterburner showing anything less than a solid 240fps in Titanfall 2.

In fact, pretty much every game I played at my chosen cap of 60, 120 or 240fps was solid.

 

[Charlietus]

I don't seem to remember seeing the FPS readout on MSI Afterburner showing anything less than a solid 240fps in Titanfall 2.

In fact, pretty much every game I played at my chosen cap of 60, 120 or 240fps was solid.

It's funny that you mention Titanfall 2, as that game had stuttering and frame skipping on PC, especially at higher framerates. Not on the level of shader compilation, buy it was there. So you probably didn't have a locked 240 fps in that game

 

[XboxKING]

And how are going to to that with only a 45% extra GPU performance?

45% in the grand scheme of things is a weak upgrade, especially as PS4 Pro offer over a 2x GPU increase over base PS4.

If you can reach around 80fps then a 45% GPU increase would get you to 120fps?

Also many ps5 games already offer 120 fps modes

 

[Cappuccino]

So it's not 120fps then.

120fps is 120fps, it's not 100fps, or 85fps, or even 115fps, it's 120fps.

It's not a difficult concept to understand.

I have never played a game on a console ever that ran at the target frame rate 100% of the time. It’s a target, not a guarantee.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I don't seem to remember seeing the FPS readout on MSI Afterburner showing anything less than a solid 240fps in Titanfall 2.

In fact, pretty much every game I played at my chosen cap of 60, 120 or 240fps was solid.

At this point, I don't care. This discussion is being moved forwards as described by establishing a definition for people to use here. Either accept it and continue, or choose not to be a part of the discussion because you disagree with the definition.

To clarify, a framerate like 60 fps or 120 fps is a game very mostly running at that framerate, and 'locked 60/120' or '100% 60/120' can be used to talk about titles that never deviate from the given framerate.

 

[XboxKING]

The issue is that the entire PS5 generation is practically 60fps locked with even ray tracing and other titles offering 40hz/120 fidelity modes or even uncapped above 100 with VRR mitigating most of the issues we had with non-locked framerates.

And thus a major advantage of not using a console which has been repeated for years (“consoles only have 30fps!!”) is now gone. At the same time there is no price advantage for comparable performance levels for PC not even after 4 years. So what can you expect from enthusiasts/fans, really?

It will be the same when I am playing GTA6 and a PC colleague will tell me that he can play it in 2 years at 1000fps, which I absolutely don’t care for lol

 

[XboxKING]

Steamdeck has also shown that pc gamers are willing to play at PS3 settings basically (in comparison to a 8800 pc at the time) with framerates often not even reaching stable 30 fps if it means convenience.

So just view a console as a cheaper steamdeck with mid-high range PC performance which you can only use when connected to a TV and pc gamers might understand why people use it. That is not even factoring in often playing better games years earlier

 

[davis.anthony]

Do you think frame rate is the only reason people game on PC?

There are more advantages to PC gamin than just frame rate, and if PS5 Pro is to tempt PC gamers to Sony's ecosystem it will also have to overcome the other advantages PC has.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

This thread is about PS5Pro. Please ensure every point comes back to that. Subsequent posts that don't directly refer to the PS5Pro discussion may be removed.