Holiday 2020 there will finally be a console that runs games at 60fps

Kind of pathetic that it's taken them that long. Presumably the PS5 will be similar spec. Mark Cerny Mr Clever never in all these years has it occurred to him to make a console with a decent fucking FPS.

Mindboggling on the part of both of these industry giants when you think about it. Better late than never though, I suppose.

Finally? There are games on the PS3 and PS4/xbox that run in 60fps.

Consoles were always capable of running games at 60fps, it's just that developers chose fidelity over performance most of the time. I don't see how this changes that. They might have just been talking about what the console supports, I find it very hard to believe you'll find many games running 120fps on scarlett.

I'm not talking about indies or games with an option to kill the graphics to help the framerate like on the Pro or the X I'm talking about ALL games including the huge AAA heavy hitters which traditionally run at a pathetic 30fps on modern consoles.

The current consoles run games at 60 fps. Plus, I would try not to jinx things at this point. For all this boistering Sony and MS are doing, they should try to make 60 the baseline.

Wait your under the impression that 30FPS games won't exist next generation?...

I'd say it changes things a lot just by having a decent CPU in the system. The Pro and the X both have comedy CPU's that can't push decent frame rates at high resolution. Even if devs aim for 4K on the new consoles a decent CPU will have enough in reserve to deliver good performance.

I don't expect 120fps on either console. 60fps is completely fine anyway. That's what they should have been aiming at all along.

Everything is relative. The Pro and X CPUs are more than enough for older generation games, but more demanding ones come around. The new CPUs are much better this time (relative to PC tech) but that just means devs will be able to create more complicated environments that puts the extra power to work. My only evidence is what we've seen one generation after another; devs do not prioritize performance (for the most part). From what I can tell, it seems like you're assuming games are going to stay relatively similar and not evolve so that next gen consoles can just run them 60fps.

They've always been capable you clown...developers just chose not too..... ??

i'll believe it when I see it

It's no secret both PS4 & Xbox One could do 60fps, but the developers want raw graphics over better framerates. We all know this trend will continue and look at how they advertise 4K into this gen and now 8K, you can't get both 8K & 60fps (much less 120fps) you can only have one thing on next-gen consoles.

Lock this joke thread down mods

@nfamouslegend: why? Is it worse than the 5 threads about halo/Gears/Forza? It's an actual discussion topic

To which I reply: I'm sure many games will be 30fps still. I hope I'm wrong, but consoles can do 60fps now - devs choose not to most of the time because they have decided (whether correct or not) that their customers prefer resolution. Unless they change their mind, we should still see plenty of 30

Why are you assuming devs don't see the importance of high frame rates when lots of games on the X and Pro give players a choice of 1080p 60fps or higher res with 30fps?

They know it's important and with a much better CPU and presumably GPU they should be able to deliver the best of both worlds.

I know games evolve but that's always been the case on PC except it's much easier to put a good CPU in your system that lasts longer than a typical console cycle. Truth is the CPU's in PS4 and Xbox One are so awful they completely bottlenecked both systems right from the start.

@xantufrog: no those threads are no better, which is why I don't bother with them generally. What is the topic here, that next gen consoles can do 60fps? The PS1 can do 60fps. All I'm saying is that there is nothing to discuss. To assume 60fps will be the standard is premature.

AAA will be 30fps, as is tradition.

I just don't see devs aiming for 8k when nobody will have TV's that support it and 4K 60fps should be achievable with a good CPU and GPU. I suppose it depends how much a leap the next gen consoles will be compared to the X and the Pro but there's not much point in MS releasing another console that has obvious bottlenecks surely even they will have learned their lesson by now, Sony too you would hope.

@blueinheaven: that's true - if the Scarlett offers 4x the CPU capability alongside the GPU you could have the nail on the head for 4k.

8k/120fps confirmed ?

I'm not assuming it, devs have traditionally chosen 30fps over 60fps. This is because gamers always expect a big leap not only between generations but also within generations. Uncharted 1-3 all released on PS3 but each one looked better than the last. This is a big part of its marketability. When the average gamer looks at a commercial for your game, they do not see 60fps, they see the leap in graphics or gameplay advancements. Just look at Uncharted 4 which initially had a framerate target of 60 but later abandoned that for its singleplayer component. Spectacle and graphics = AAA experience and everyone wants to top the previous installment.

You cannot look at the X and Pro because those are just mid-gen refreshes. They aren't the norm. A big reason why players have a choice now is because not everyone owns a 4KTV and it would be silly to not market the PS4 Pro to 1080p users too. Even then, the majority of games released on PS4 Pro and X do not even offer the player a choice.

The PC can't be compared to consoles because it's an open platform. Games are not made with the best PC hardware in mind, so people can always just spend more money to run anything at whatever framerate/res they want.

Any time you have a closed system, something's gonna bottleneck something else. That's just a given when you've got only $400-500 range to work with. Something's gotta give.

You're preaching to the converted here I have always been a PC gamer first and foremost and I know what traditionally holds back consoles in hardware terms. I just think you're underestimating what these next gen consoles will produce with a much better CPU and GPU. 4K 60fps has to be the target and it shouldn't be that difficult to reach. I'm hoping, maybe a tad optimistically, that devs won't have to choose between resolution and performance next gen.

Let's be honest here how high does the res really need to go considering how far most console gamers sit from their TV's? They couldn't tell 4K from 1440p if their life depended on it.

@blueinheaven: not all games will be 60fps lol

Technically the GPU is always a bottleneck.

The CPU has caught up BUT games get more demanding each generation as the add new features and this generation will be hit with one of the most demanding that there is Ray Tracing, the GPU that the coming consoles have is a 9-10TFLOP Navi GPU that is targeted to perform around 2060-2070 performance.

A game with all the bells and whistles with ray tracing at 4K?... Yeah it doesn't matter what CPU you have that GPU will not be able to push 60FPS.

The Navi 5700X has leaked to be a 9.7TFLOP GPU with 40CU's, I wouldn't get your hopes up that the console varient will be any faster due to clock speeds and the slower CPU compared to 4.5GHz desktop Zen 2 chips.

Give it 3 years and that GPU will be struggling to maintain 30FPS at 4K... Because developers don't care about framerates and have publishers and deadlines on their necks, we live in a era of day one patches and where games like PUBG get released on consoles that run at 20-30FPS.

there will probably be a bunch of games with a 30fps mode, and a mode that 'targets' 60 fps, looks worse, and doesn't actually run at 60fps.

@blueinheaven: Why would they not have to choose between performance and graphics?

Graphical fidelity relies on much more than just resolution. Even the best cards available today struggle to handle ray tracing at 1080p/1440p resolutions. That's just one of many new technologies that can be featured in next gen games.

Games get more demanding on PC which is an ever evolving platform, not console. That's why the definitive version of Witcher 3 was always going to be on PC assuming you had the right hardware obviously. Nobody expects a technical revolution on a console.

I get what you're saying though, it's probably a big ask to expect devs to hit a decent fps with all the pressure of publishers wanting to market ultra high resolution gaming to sell their damned micro transaction filled garbage but I am eternally optimistic and still think a much better CPU will change the landscape for devs who genuinely want their games to be played as intended.

Maybe the trend with the X and the Pro of giving players options will become a bigger thing next gen?

So you really think if devs can hit 4K at 60fps they will ditch that to offer ray tracing at 30fps? I have to hope that there aren't people in the world who are that stupid.

That's not my point. You said they need to choose between performance and resolution. I gave you an example of one up and coming technology that we know the consoles will support (hardware accelerated ray tracing) that stresses systems even on lower resolutions.

What's to say there won't be other technologies that do the same? Running metro last light at 4k 60fps vs running metro exodus at 4k 60fps = night and day difference. It's not just about resolution.

The PS5 will be as much 60 fps as any other platform from sony or ms,tech doesn't stand still in 2022 PC will be way ahead of consoles,and to keep image quality as much as possible developers will do what they always do trade frames for visuals is never ending.

Most likely will be, especially now that the CPU can keep up and actually give us 60FPS at lower resolutions.

A CPU doesn't change much really for the high resolutions, 2080 Ti's and my 2080 which sits at 2100MHz can't play every current game at 4K/60 with all the features on.

You hit the nail on the head when you said "devs who genuinely want their games to be played as intended"... Developers vary in skill, budget, time and the games they develop are as varied not to mention that there are many engines out there and not all are optimised.

Games will look better and load quicker and you will have more games at 60FPS but there will be 30FPS games and believe it or not there will be games that have bad framerates, its just inevitable. Consoles have had locked hardware since their birth and developers know what it can do... AND That doesn't interest them because they literally HAVE to push graphics, its a industry that competes for best looking games where we have websites and youtubers who spend many hours a day benchmarking and comparing scene for scene which game looks better and what settings they are using. Developers have even more pressure to make better looking games next generation because of ray tracing and that one feature alone turned Quake 2 a game older than some people on the forum from running buttery smooth at 4K/60 to "oh no I need to lower my resolution to 1080p" on a $700 GPU.

To be frank, Frames arent the be all end all when you are against braindead AI in SP movie games.

Different story in the competitive MP environment tho.

Because they can't. It would require them to drop the gfx too much.

Thats why casuals like you are stuck with 2nd/3rd place this gen.

Didn't, like, SNES games have 60fps games back then?

Keep that 60fps BS for yourself, no one cares here!!!!

5700 XT has up to 1.9 Ghz clock speed which improves raster hardware.

High clock speed follows NVIDIA's improvement path.

Geometry-raster and 64 ROPS read/write units at 1.9 Ghz are very competitive.

RTX 2070 at 1.9 Ghz yields about 8.76 TFLOPS FP32.

8 GB GDDR6 indicates 256 bit bus.

I have advocated higher clock speed to improve raster hardware along with 64 ROPS and higher memory bandwidth.

5700 XT beats Vega 64 with AMD sponsored game Strange Bridge

Wow, those can probably be counted on one hand.

Impressive, most impressive.

@ronvalencia: Its a great price to performance option but not a next generation GPU jump over current mid generation GPU from a raw power perspective. Next generation will get a jump in processing power and load times but the actual GPU pull will still more or less leave something to be desired by console gamer's once new features like ray tracing are implemented in games the cry for 4K/60 will not be met by such a small GPU jump.

Un-compromised 4K/60 experiences with ray tracing is still yet to be reached even on desktop hardware.

The PS5 rumour had Navi Lite as the GPU so the PS5 might be using a 5700 Pro as a basis with obvious custom tweaks here and there, as I assume the X4 will use the same with again tweaks here and there so be might be seeing anything from 8-10TFLOPS, as a 5700XT is rated at 180-220w with that 1.9GHz boost.

Also the rumour was a 1.8GHz boost GPU for PS5 so that would drop the TFLOP count a bit from a stock 5700 pro.

The CPU clocks are yet to announced and details of the GPU aswell but we can pretty much say we will be looking at a:

• 8 core 16 thread Zen 2 with a 2.8-3GHz all core boost
• 16GB GDDR6
• 1TB M.2 SATA4
• Custom Navi 5700 with more CU's than the pro variant but lower clocks than the desktop varient 8-10TFLOPS

I don't expect these to come in at anything less than $499 due to the SSD and GPU prices that Navi is selling for on desktop unless they take a loss on the hardware.

No chance that the coming consoles will have something stronger than a 5700 XT, it might have the same CU count or a count in between the Pro and XT with a slower boost clock and core clocks in general.

So much for the 12-14 TFLOP dreams some plebs were hoping for.