LittleBusters
Banned
Sorry but the 30fps era will be so over in 2021.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Phil Spencer: Frame Rate Is An Area Where Consoles Can Do More, CPU/GPU Balance Is Off vs PC
- Thread starter GoldenEye98
- Start date
Armorian
Banned
All cpu bound current gen games could be 60 fps+ with Ryzen
You will see some 60fps cross gen games for months but native games will most likely target 30fps so all that CPU power will go to physics/AI etc.
rokkerkory
Member
I bet MS first party will all go 60fps! It's starting to trend that way now with FH4.
only if there's also enough gpu headroom to run at 60
Armorian
Banned
Yeah, if X1X had Ryzen all X1 games could be 1080p/60fps (resolution would probably be higher of course), I think even pro could have most games renderd in 60 fps with Ryzen instead of jaguar.
General Lee
Member
I think what's more likely to happen is that more games will offer an unlocked frame rate mode, or "60 FPS" with dips, especially for those who get a VRR capable display with HDMI 2.1. I think with Ryzen it'll be easier for devs to hit the 60 FPS target, but since there's also high demand for graphics performance due to 4K, most cinematic AAA titles will continue to be mainly 30 FPS to reach the necessary improvements in visuals.
VR is also a bit of a wildcard when it comes to influence on devs making more 60 FPS titles. It's a base requirement for those titles, so if a studio wants to make a VR mode to a pancake AAA game, they do have to put in the effort to make it scale to 60 FPS, and in that case, a 60 FPS mode is a given outside of VR too. How many AAA's will do VR modes is completely up in the air though, it all depends on how and when next gen console VR debuts.
Personally I hope that at some point during next gen I can transition fully to using an HMD as my gaming monitor, even if the games I play are still just on a stereoscopic virtual screen instead of full presence VR. This might not happen on console though, but only on the highest end PC's.
VR is also a bit of a wildcard when it comes to influence on devs making more 60 FPS titles. It's a base requirement for those titles, so if a studio wants to make a VR mode to a pancake AAA game, they do have to put in the effort to make it scale to 60 FPS, and in that case, a 60 FPS mode is a given outside of VR too. How many AAA's will do VR modes is completely up in the air though, it all depends on how and when next gen console VR debuts.
Personally I hope that at some point during next gen I can transition fully to using an HMD as my gaming monitor, even if the games I play are still just on a stereoscopic virtual screen instead of full presence VR. This might not happen on console though, but only on the highest end PC's.
Last edited:
goldenpp72
Member
You expect the console to somehow force 60fps on games not intended for it? Pretty sure you'd need someone to go in and mess with the games code unless it has an unlocked framerate.
LordOfChaos
Member
There's two seperate issues
For one, yes, 8 Ryzen cores at the logical progression of clock rate going from 16nm to 7 would be able to do well over twice the work (more like 4-6x) in the same amount of time as the Jaguar cores. So in theory, anything Jaguar could do in 33ms, Ryzen could do in 16.
The other is if the engine is actually written for that. Some engines are locked to 30 such that if you force 60, everything goes twice as fast as you expect, or break in other ways.
So the jump to ryzen should allow current level games at 60fps, but as with every generation, it's all about developer choices. They could also start doing a lot more CPU simulation and stick with a 33ms refresh.
Oh, and as brought up above there's the bonus issue of if each other component had the headroom for it, mostly the GPU and bandwidth attached.
Last edited:
I've actually given this issue some thought and come to some ideas.
I think Sony may split the difference and require a 45fps minimum frame rate if they required one at all. The reason is actually pretty simple. PSVR renders at 90mhz and 120 mhz. A 45 target from the start would make it technically easier to port to PSVR from a game engine and optimization perspective.
mckmas8808
Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
This is a TERRIBLE response. I don't want 60 fps as a mandatory on any console! This is not how games are made.
Last edited:
LordOfChaos
Member
But 99% of TVs refresh at 60, hence 30hz (33.3ms refresh) and 60 (16.6ms refresh) being target choices with nothing in between unless it was unlocked.
45 fps would what, present one frame every 16ms and the other every 33? Those situations are perceptibly stuttery.
Now I'd love every next gen console to have Freesync and every new TV to support it, but there's still the install base of existing TVs.
Last edited:
Wait why wouldn't you attempt to present the frames evenly? Maybe I'm missing something?
LordOfChaos
Member
The TV part. Because (most) TVs refresh every 60Hz. To fit in evenly, you refresh at 60Hz or every 30Hz, which would be two 60hz frames. Most TVs can't adapt to 45Hz to present that framerate evenly, so the only way to do 45 would be alternating between a refresh every 16ms (the time each frame in a 60Hz refresh takes) and every 33. And that's what we would call a frame pacing issue and would present as stutter.
So with a 60FPS source on a 60Hz screen, you get
A B C D E F G H
Optimal output where each frame rendered is shown for one frame by the display
With a 30 FPS source you get this
A A B B C C D D
Notice that while you've had to render fewer frames, they're all shown for the same length of time.
With a 45 FPS source you'd get something like this
A B C C D E F F
Notice how every third frame is shown twice as long as the others, causing stutter. There's a reason no one has done this.
It's why video games have chosen between 30 and 60 and nothing in between forever, apart from games with unlocked framerates that can deal with frame tearing. And it's why Freesync is so wanted and freeing.
It would be like this graph on the right, except bouncing between 60hz which is 16ms a frame, and 30hz which is 33ms a frame
Put as simply as I can: You have 16.6ms refreshes to work with: How do you present 24.95ms refreshes evenly within that multiple?
Last edited:
The TV part. Because (most) TVs refresh every 60Hz. To fit in evenly, you refresh at 60Hz or every 30Hz, which would be two 60hz frames. Most TVs can't adapt to 45Hz to present that framerate evenly, so the only way to do 45 would be alternating between a refresh every 16ms (the time each frame in a 60Hz refresh takes) and every 33. And that's what we would call a frame pacing issue and would present as stutter.
So with a 60FPS source on a 60Hz screen, you get
A B C D E F G H
Optimal output where each frame rendered is shown for one frame by the display
With a 30 FPS source you get this
A A B B C C D D
Notice that while you've had to render fewer frames, they're all shown for the same length of time.
With a 45 FPS source you'd get something like this
A B C C D E F F
Notice how every third frame is shown twice as long as the others, causing stutter. There's a reason no one has done this.
It's why video games have chosen between 30 and 60 and nothing in between forever, apart from games with unlocked framerates that can deal with frame tearing. And it's why Freesync is so wanted and freeing.
It would be like this graph on the right, except bouncing between 60hz which is 16ms a frame, and 30hz which is 33ms a frame
Put another way: You have 16ms refreshes to work with: How do you present 24ms refreshes evenly within that multiple?
No, I think the piece I'm missing is that I assumed frame-rate interpolation was already a thing in gaming since I thought I remember reading about developers extensively using it a few years ago.
Found and article but this wasn't the one I read about, it was on a PS4 game. https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-force-unleashed-60fps-tech-article
So I assumed most console games already filled in missing frames with some type of interpolation and that an increased native frame rate target would improve its pixel prediction on the frame.
Last edited:
But I don't think we even need to worry about TVs at that point. I cant seeing it being variable just more relaxed with a suggested target, but again I was under the impression that devs were already making widespread use of frame interpolation anyway. A hardware intraframe accelerator would be a fantastic solution.
rokkerkory
Member
With GOW5 and FH4 hitting 60 fps I wonder if devs are finally catching up to the X1X hardware... hasn't even been out a year you know
@4k though do you know?
JLMC469
Banned
Yeah, give us options. 30 fps with better visuals or 60 fps with better performance.
ilfait
Member
Nikana
Go Go Neo Rangers!
It'll always be star cube to me.
rokkerkory
Member
Yeah no. It was cute and purple that's about it. Proprietary media ftl.
Pachi72
Member
yep also look a last generation how Sega ported over a lot of games to Xbox 360 and had a few exclusives that never made it to PSN like Guardian Heroes and Radiant Silvergun.
ilfait
Member
Yeah no. Uninformed opinion, bad taste, and embarrassing acronym ftl.
rokkerkory
Member
$5 at best
cireza
Member
Gamecube was very well designed. Xbox One X is also very well designed.
Whitecrow
Banned
It have nothing to do with hardware really. Is just that devs likes to push in whatever they can as long as the game is not 20 fps.
Also, 60 fps for everything costs more time, money and effort, that most of the time is worthless. because there's a lot of casual market that doesnt give a fuck about fps, that gives companies lots of money.
And this is a business, and companies wont make bad business decisions because there's some people that gets obsessed with things.
Well.. maybe except microsoft as it seems. Phil Spencer , imho, represents the political correctness of games.
Also, 60 fps for everything costs more time, money and effort, that most of the time is worthless. because there's a lot of casual market that doesnt give a fuck about fps, that gives companies lots of money.
And this is a business, and companies wont make bad business decisions because there's some people that gets obsessed with things.
Well.. maybe except microsoft as it seems. Phil Spencer , imho, represents the political correctness of games.
NO7
Neo Member
Is it just me or does anyone think that the new consoles should be capable of more than just 60fps?
Navi for PS5 should be around 12-15 TFlops, the Ryzen Cpu clocked at around 3-3,2 Ghz and GDDR6 should be doin over 100fps or even 144fps right?!
I know its always about the preferences of the devs whether they are focusing on resolution and details or other stuff but I personally think that some devs should target the highest framerate possible at 1080p of course! I'm not talking about anything above Full HD and also not singleplayers because thats just not possible which is okay but even though consoles will always be weaker compared to PCs, they should "skip" 60fps in 2018 and focus on really high fps/performance modes but thats just me
Navi for PS5 should be around 12-15 TFlops, the Ryzen Cpu clocked at around 3-3,2 Ghz and GDDR6 should be doin over 100fps or even 144fps right?!
I know its always about the preferences of the devs whether they are focusing on resolution and details or other stuff but I personally think that some devs should target the highest framerate possible at 1080p of course! I'm not talking about anything above Full HD and also not singleplayers because thats just not possible which is okay but even though consoles will always be weaker compared to PCs, they should "skip" 60fps in 2018 and focus on really high fps/performance modes but thats just me