30 FPS consoles isn’t such a problem on new TV’s

I have a midrange Samsung 4K display that I rarely use for gaming as it’s in the living room occupied by kids and movies most of the time. I usually game in my man cave on an older 1080p Samsung downstairs. Anyway, I have an X1X, and obviously my TV downstairs doesn’t take full advantage. All the complaints about games running 30 FPS are more apparent.

Last night I moved the console upstairs, and in addition to the beautiful resolution bump, HDR, etc, I noticed there was some sort of dynamic frame-syncing happening, eliminating any jutteriness and choppy frame loss. The smoothness of 60 FPS you’d see on any display was very closely emulated for this locked 30 FPS game (Assassins Creed Origins).

Does anyone know the name of this technology?

Would be a good start to provide the TV model....

Either way, there is no magic alternative to 60 FPS, what you are describing is your self-invented placebo effect.

This seems like a GioVela, magic TV thread.

My TV has it too... PC Master race doesn't want to admit it though. I forget what it's called but it mimics an extra frame to output at 60hz or whatever. I have a 240hz and it looks a bit weird some times. I also have an older 1080p tv and the difference is amazing... Me and my nephew both play Monster Hunter on each tv, and that old one is a blurry mess compared to the newer one.

Im waiting for the Sony A8f. Oled is where its at.

Have never had, and never will have a problem with gaming at 30 fps.

Your TVs are not making your 30 fps seem like 60 fps.

Please stop typing stupid things. If you want high fps, get a PC.

TVs apply motion blur and frame interpolation. It creates an illusion of smoothness. You're still playing with the horrendous input lag of 30 fps though, plus layers of extra input lag even above that due to all the post processing effects. That's why I laugh any time someone talks about "competitive" gaming on consoles.

LOL.

You would change your tune the moment you experience 144 fps, or even 60 fps (which is considered the bottom of the barrel on PC but is still an enormous upgrade over 30 fps).

It's called frame interpolation and it adds a metric shit ton of input lag. I know Samsung TVs have it (they call it "Auto Motion Plus"), but I'm sure it's on all models these days under some name or another.

There IS dynamic frame-syncing tech. AMD literally calls it “Framesync” and it’s found in monitors. Something very similar is going on in these newer TVs, the refresh rate is dynamically altered to smooth out the motion. It’s real. If I imagined it, I wouldn’t have made a thread about it, admitting that 30 FPS doesn’t look so hot...on my old TV. On my new one, it really is improved remarkably. I guess it’s something you gotta see for yourself.

Adaptive sync doesn't mimic higher FPS. It just gets rid of screen tearing at frames below the refresh rate.

F-sync dont make your FPS higher , LOL, it just removing screen tearing and support variable refresh rate

You just like rarely exposed to 60 fps, it just like you say Hanna from your village is the most beautiful girl , then after move to the Town you meet Jennifer then after that you won't go back to Hanna anymore, LOL

At no where, at all, did I say anything about my TV actually bumping up the FPS of a game I already said was locked at 30 FPS.

Let’s get this out of the way too: I never said it was equal to or better than 60 FPS. I merely said the smoothness of 60 FPS is very closely emulated. Perfect? No. Better and much more enjoyable? Yes.

About the input lag: Yes on standard settings, the input lag was unbelievable. On Game Mode it’s vastly improved, yet the effect I’m describing is still there.

Forgive my ignorance on this next question, but hypothetically speaking, wouldn’t decreasing the refresh rate to 30hz elimate the blur of 60hz/30fps?

Yeah, I played ps1 games, often at 20-30 fps, and was ok with it. Once I got a pc and experienced 80+ fps, consoles give me a headache now. It’s all about what you become accustomed to.

@nomadic8280: First off, there is no such thing as AMD "Framesync". It is called FreeSync and it is a variable refresh rate technology similar to Nvidia G-Sync. 30fps is still shit with either technology. The added smoothness that you are perceiving is being done by the post processing of your TV.

Unfortunately, there is no substitute for all the frames being present. So, any added frame interpolation / motion smoothing / anti-judder bullshit just makes things feel unnatural and is most likely ruining the image quality as well with artifacts.

I am positive that you don't have a magic TV that can do miracles, but bless your heart for putting up with it. For the rest of us who game at 60fps or higher on a regular basis and care about quality, I am sure what you think is good, is still shit.

If you have motion interpolation enabled you probably suffer from severe input lag, would enable game mode.

Edit: Read the thread, then post lul. OH and VRR (variable refresh rate tech) isn't supposed to be out yet for TVs.

Gonna say this one more time: the title of the thread is “30 FPS isn’t such a problem on newer TVs, not “I have a magic TV that doubles my frame rate!”

Man, the input lag on that must be so bad.

I mean, okay, for casual gaming, I think it's fine. But for those of use who wants something more responsive, gaming monitors will still be the best option for quality and performance.

Oh, by the way, it's not like you can't hook your PC to the TV and achieve that real 60fps without that horrible frame interp.

Frame interpolation is terrible and adds tons of input lag. Try it in any competitive or fast-paced game, and just watch how often you lose. Turn it off. You'll thank me later.

@drserigala: "Village"?? Lol we don't have those here but it'd be cool if we did.

@UssjTrunks: Yeaahhhh... That's the name. If there's lag, I haven't noticed(I'm sure there is some though). Not sure who I was talking to before, but I've been using gaming mode now... I think it turned that off. Still looks way better than my older tv though.

@zaryia: It looks better, period. I don't know what it is, or the tech behind it. And no, I'm not buying a PC... Monster Hunter isn't even on there yet.

@UssjTrunks: Competitive gaming on consoles makes more sense... Same hardware, same input lag, etc. On PC, it's whoever has the best hardware has an advantage.... Not because they are better than someone else. It's like racing an expensive sports car vs an average price sports car... It's obvious where the advantage is... How is that competitive?

Next to no video game looks better on console.

A majority of competitive gaming is done on PC due to better controls and 60fps+

The skill ceiling on PC is limited only by your reflexes. It's that old 1:1 mouse advantage. Many competitive PC gamers turn off all the fancy graphics when in tourney play, anyway. With consoles there's no 1:1 control input, it's all interpretive, which means the control method puts a hard ceiling cap that skills just can't burst through.

Example: rocket jump off a wall repeatedly and reliably with a controller in TF2. You won't be able to do it.

If this was the case, Dota 2, CSGO, PUBG, etc wouldn't be mostly tourneyed and played on PC.

@zaryia: Console exclusives shit stomp PC games. And I never said a TV gave you better framerates. HDR plus OLED is the best visual experience though and PC doesn't take advantage of it.

That is your opinion, please stop forming sentences as if they are facts. According to digital foundry over 90% of video games this gen (or any gen) objectively look better on PC and look smoother on PC (FPS). I trust them over you (as well as my own eyes). DF is better citation than you. That means a significant majority of the time PC will be giving you the better visual experience. Even the tiny amount of games that have those HDR functions still look better on PC, as DF said XB1X HDR Witcher 3 was not better than the PC version. This isn't even including mods.

TLDR: Most games look and run better on PC. Including the handful with HDR. Objectively speaking.

I have a newer Samsung TV that does the samething, so I know exactly what you're talking about. However, I'm not seeing a name for this feature anywhere in my manual.

Interesting thing is that I have two Samsung TVs that are both the same size, have the same resolution (1080p), the same Motion rate (60), but the newer one clearly displays far smoother motion than the other. No idea how this is being achieved, but it's really nice.

You mean that soap opera effect that they implement on modern TVs?

It's just refreshing x2. Pretty sure it fucks up the input.

@zaryia: "Next to no video game looks better on console."

I'm really hoping English isn't your first language because your reading skills are severely lacking. This whole thread is about TVs. When I said it looks better, I'm talking about the difference between one TV I own and another TV I own. This thread isn't about PCs. Console graphics can be dummied down to hit 60 fps also. But that's not what the thread is about.

@jasonofa36: Only one of those games are on console... And there's no reason kb/m can't be used on any game. Console gamers just aren't in the market for those types of games(If they were, they'd be on consoles). My point was that the playing field would be the same.... Same controller, same performance. If the dev wants to use m/kb, they have that option.(at least on PS4). Just my thoughts on competitive multiplayer gaming.

@zaryia: "TLDR: Most games look and run better on PC. Including the handful with HDR. Objectively speaking."

You need to define what PC is, because if you try to run any newer games on my PC, my PS4 will look way better. So if you are gonna try to compare PC with a console, like Xbox one X, then you need to use a PC that cost the same. Otherwise all you are saying is that a much more expensive machine runs games better than a cheaper one.

@zaryia: Errr no they really don't, PS4 exclusives look the best and if you take DFs citation as truth know that HZD won best graphics there and rightfully so. Especially in HDR which you simply can't experience on PC.

Tourneys provide the PCs needed for the games. Only peripherals are different because it's preferential. But a lot of those tourneys check the peripherals each pros use.

@jasonofa36: Yeah, it's interesting how all that works. I'm not saying you're wrong or anything, I just have a different view on how I think it should be. Like any other sport, there's rules... A QB can't choose what ball he wants to use(or how inflated it is lol), his outfit even has to be the same. I don't watch e-sports so this isn't really a discussion I want to have lol no offense. Isn't Splatoon a e-sports game? Pretty sure that's all the same hardware and peripherals... But I could be wrong. Nice chat, but this thread is about how console gaming at 30fps isn't that bad on a TV... We got way off topic now.

is this the motion plus shit that gives tvs the soap opera effect? If so, yuck. It's shit

Higher FPS is objectively the most important factor for determining the quality of a visual experience. 144 FPS looks like motion that is happening in real time, as if your monitor is a window.

It also reduces input lag to imperceptible levels, allowing near 1:1 tracking.

PC gamers have the option to buy high end systems. Console gamers don't. Why should PC gamers be dragged down to console levels? High end hardware is the PC's competitive advantage. Price is irrelevant.

@UssjTrunks: lol fps doesnt effect visuals. Performance but not visuals.

I really don't care much about 30 or 60 FPS but the soap opera effect doesn't equate to true 60 FPS, specially because it adds input lag instead of reducing it.

I'll say, if you really care about 60 FPS just get a PC instead.

MAGIC

Ignore the Hermits on this thread...... they act like frame rate is everything and yet none of them have a PC capable of running the resolutions and frame rates they claim in every game.

Interpolated salt