Some small constructive criticism. I would personally prefer if you would still upload 1080p material at 4k or at least 1440p on TH-cam because otherwise the lower per pixel bitrate of TH-cam's 1080p30 and 1080p60 modes destroyers a ton of detail during faster moving scenes.
I was fully set to be playing 60fps 1440p this generation, as the choppiness of 30fps was unbearable for me. But after trying out this 40fps 4k mode I was honestly surprised how smooth it was compared to 30fps. I can see myself playing this mode if more games support it.
@@jollama Ocarina and a lot of older games were made with lower framerates in minding order to maximize detail so the game design and physics and controls still feel good even in 20fps. Newer games however are made in 60fps minimum so playing in 20 is sluggish and almost unplayable.
Just tried it and this really is a big deal. I wont play at 30hz, the extra detail and resolution is not worth the chopiness of playing at 30fps for me. But with this 40hz mode the fidelity modes become viable again for me. Those extra 10fps really make a difference. Lets hope this becomes the new standard.
@@stansmith7445 Technically, hz is a measure of frequency. FPS is also a measure of frequency, so it isn't wrong to use hz to describe FPS, it's just not standard.
Wasn't Insomniac one of the first developers to do LOD, with their Spyro The Dragon and essentially be able to draw worlds much bigger than what other wise the original PlayStation could do? I can definitely see 40 FPS becoming very common place on consoles in years to come with what I just saw on this video.
40 FPS feels like the sweet spot for a game like ratchet. Tested it on my C1 and it really gives the Pixar appearance and feel without the judder and poor motion handling of 30fps . I want this more on more games.
Exactly! It removes the judder and input lag of 30, while maintaining a bit of that "cinematic" look. I think I actually prefer it over 60 (for this type of game).
The fact that the mid point between 60fps and 30fps is 40fps and that it happily fits in a 120hz refresh rate is really a fascinating way of creating a performance mid point that really wasn't there prior to 120hz displays.
What are you on about? I can cap my fps to 40 on my 60hz PC and get the literally same smooth effects they are showcasing in this video. The 40fps mode on Playstation 5 IS ONLY available ON 120HZ DISPLAYS. That mode can work on 60hz displays but Sony doesn't allow that for unknown reasons
@@josephl2965 Buddy ol pal, 40fps is 40fps it doesnt matter if its 60hz display or 75hz or 120hz, its a lot better than 30 and it will feel a lot smoother. Just because the TrashStation 5 can't use the 40fps mode on non 120hz monitors that doesn't mean 40fps mode should not be used by non 120hz monitors lmao
@@ForsakenGod96 I don't know what made you so angry but if you calm yourself and watch it again, you'll be able to understand the problems of 40fps on 60hz screens. And frankly it's not even difficult to understand
Played my first playthrough in 60FPS RT, and my second playthrough in 40FPS fidelity mode. I'm playing on a LG CX and found the 40 FPS mode very playable. Hopefully more games will enable modes like this. I feel 30 FPS is pretty rough on the LG CX, so I always opt for 60fps modes. But, if 40 FPS fidelity becomes more widespread, I would probably use it every time.
If you have a CX you should try performance RT with 60fps lock, and enable BFI. BFI in combination with frame interpolation on my Panasonic is even smoother than 120hz VRR mode with Spiderman. It’s the only way to get plasma or CRT-like motion on sample and hold displays.
@@ThePipojp In a bright room I agree, but in a dark or dim room it's great. Plus motion interpolation doubles perceived brightness because of the added 60 fps.
@@t-rev1721 They are still fairy easy to find. The really difficult thing to find for many, is the exorbitant amount of cash needed to purchase one. What was really needed in the TV industry, was 1080p and 1440p high refresh TV's, like we got with monitors...But alas it's looking like there are never going to be any.
This is extremely nice to have. It's nice to have the full details with 10 extra frames. Insomniac is working hard as usual. This game looks great on OLED.
@@wizzenberry Well they are cheap, I could buy one and chuck in the lounge but I would never use it lol, its OK for the kids I guess. WTF are you talking about, God of war is the best "SONY" game on Steam, but its not even in the top 20.
@@Battleneter 4090 is struggling to maintain above 60 natively in the latest triple A games without using DLSS, the fact that consoles are catching up should scare PC owners (this is coming from a pc owner). Once the next set of consoles start doing 4k 60 native in way more games, this is going to make alot of PC gamers move to console especially with how outrageous GPU pricing is. Imagine 4k 60fps gaming being a thing at a 400-500 dollar price point? Its going to be such a no brainer
I tried out the 40fps mode when it came out for a little bit and it works really well. It's definitely something I'd opt for over 30fps, but I still found myself preferring the amount of frames I could see with the Performance mode. But the latency gap did feel fairly similar between the two which was great.
Everything is possible in pc. The consoles are catching up. It can also be more confusing for majority of the ppl if u give pc like options in consoles. Consoles are designed for plug and play living room experience. Also it's good that u prioritise frame pacing rather most pc players who mindlessly target 50+ fps on a 60hz display.
May I ask how you do that? do you just lock the game with rivatuner then apply v-sync in game or...? I have a 144fps display also, I would love to know. Thanks in advance
If I have a 144hz monitor, I should cap the game to only 48, 72 or 144 fps? What if I cap to lets say... 90fps? My rig runs games on an average of 100fps, so I tend to cap games at 90fps for a balance of stability and high fps.
@@5izzy557 It’s actually most of the time implemented in the game right away. You can adjust how V-Sync is capping the frames. There is a setting and it says like 1, 2 or 3. 1 is equal to refresh. (120hz; 120fps) 2 is half of the refresh (120hz; 60fps) 3 is every 3rd refresh (120hz, 40ps) Some games have it like Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk, and others don’t, but good games tend to have that option.
The TV needs to do processing and it takes a frame or two or three frames to do so. So, if the TV needs 2 frames: it will be 66ms lag at 30hz, 33ms of lag at 60hz, 16.7 ms of lag at 120hz. If the TV just needs one frame ahead then 120hz yields 8.3ish ms lag...
not correct when game runs in 60 fps fixed its 33ms input lag and is no difference when you have 60hz or 120hz Tv displayed but when the game frames are 120 frames then you have a difrience at 120hz
Believe it or not 30 fps vs 40fps is a HUGE difference. Hoping all console games will have this option edit: Ppl in the comments think I don't know 144hz+ exists lmao.
Insomniac has been an ace in the hole for the ps5! I have all their games on ps5 and they've been great. The options they give with the graphics settings makes it feel like you actually have some options. Can't wait to see what's next from them.
Mocap is currently going on for Spider-Man 2! Nadji (Miles) posted a photo of him in the mocap suit this week and quickly deleted it when people noticed.
@@luuketaylor The only Superhero game done right lol The amount of playability with Spiderman as in open world env has been something missing out for like decades I refunded the Marvel Avengers the next hour i started to play it Absolute clusterfuck and too boring This is something we all enjoy and I would really like them to expand the franchise and bring a lot of comic lore
@JMB b I can understand. I played Ratchet and TLOU2, didn't finish any of them, I am finishing Tsushima now, but apart from these there is nothing to keep me playing on PS. Because on Xbox I get most games I Game Pass so no need to waste cash in PS Store. But I can say I spend most time playing Switch and 3DS since half of year. There is no game to beat all fun I get from Zelda and Mario!
Finally was just able to test this now that I have a ps5 and this 40 fps is absolutely brilliant. It's the PERFECT compromise of graphics and smoothness and with perfectly decent amount of input lag. It takes a little adjustment for your eyes but I really wish this was an option in every single game it's just that good
VRR eliminates the judder from a variable framerate, but it doesn't always look as good as an absolutely locked framerate. Consistency is often better than something going between 40 and 60 constantly.
I have a Steam Deck and basically target 40 FPS for all my games in portable mode even for games that can reach 60 FPS. To me, 40 FPS feels closer to the 60 FPS than 30 FPS, and you can rarely have to make the significant cutbacks to visual fidelity that you have to when targeting 60 FPS. I feel except for when playing competitively online or games that require extremely fast reaction like fighting, the increased visual fidelity at 40 FPS is well worth it vs 60 FPS. I hope that developers continue to allow these options on console games for folks with 120hz displays, as it can honestly completely change the experience of a game.
Why? Most users don’t own a TV that can do it. It’s just a gimmick at that point for early adopters. The goal should be that developers use their resources and can achieve a stable framerate. Fluctuating framerates is just asking for problems… Edit: Seems like most people don’t get what I tried to explain… Sad thing.
It is advertised as having it... Apparently it is not an easy task with inconsistent implementations in various monitors and TVs and a distinct lack of TVs to try VRR on while developing it.
@@ryue5626 try to think, I know that obviously there's better on the market (I play overwatch at 250 fps on my computer..). But this could maybe increase the lowest frame rate target of most developers on consoles, that is 30 fps. A small step, but definitely something better than the previous generation!
@@yoyo-nf1ww 40fps isn’t going to help the vast number of ppl, who are still using 60hz screens. Anyone who owns a 4K display - chances are it’s 60hz max. The adoption rate for 4k/120hz just is not there right now
@@workoutfanatic7873 I’ve also found that most 120hz 4K TVs are worse off because of it. I got a Samsung QLED, and a Sony Bravia and tested the 120 hz and then dropped down to the 60hz tv because it was just frankly a better tv. Probably just a small detail but I think that they just aren’t there yet, unless you end up with a top of the line LG OLED tv that will blow past these TVs, just get a good 60hz 4K
FYI Mike Fitzgerald(an engineering genius at insomniac Games) in a previous interview said if they got more time for optimization they could even have a 120FPS mode for rift apart 😳😳 damn wizards at insomniac I say
I’m playing in 120Hz fidelity. Glad my Sony 900H supports it. You can really feel the difference of 30 and 40FPS . Much smoother plus you’re getting the fidelity graphics. This is my preferred mode of playing the game .
I love it. I usually love bells and whistles over framerate, unless framerate is unplayable or its a fastpased game. Its innovation like this that truly defines next gen.
People on PC either use adaptive sync if they have it, or if they don't it's just best to disable Vsync, cap framerate at monitor refresh, and deal with the tearing. Most games are coded to tear at top/bottom and avoid tearing in the middle so it's often barely noticeable. Only with adapative sync are you going to have perfect frame-pacing - if that's not an option then there is no point in even trying.
@Thomas Sturges-Allard You don’t get perfect frame-pacing with adaptive sync. The frame rate can fluctuate so much. Only way is capping the frame rate.
@@rouhollahseyfi I assume he meant VRR, which actually yes, totally fixes the issue perfectly. Adaptive sync is an engine/API thing that drops to tearing if it can't reach sync, but Variable Refresh Rate (eg G-Sync or Freesync) is exactly what it says on the tin, draw the grand when you get it. You don't get judder, because the engine is drawing objects where they should be for exactly the time they're shown, rather than either one or two frames ahead.
Maybe you misspoke, but I don't think you understand what you're saying. Higher fps is always better: 1. Frame pacing is not a problem unless you pair a monster GPU with a crap CPU, which leads to massive frame spikes. "PC people" understand how to avoid this. 2. Variable refresh displays can hide nearly all frame pacing issues unless you go under the minimum or over the maximum refresh of the display. In those situations you have to deal with some judder or tearing, but there are ways to mitigate that as well. 3. 40fps is sh!t.
I have a 65" LG CX and I actually preferred playing this game in Fidelity mode. I just think it looks so much better in that mode and is more enjoyable from a cinematic standpoint. The 40 fps mode is the absolutely perfect update for my setup and it's been a true joy to play through again this way. I can't believe how much more impressive this game has been to me than any previous rachet game. I tended to find them a little bland, but this game really is amazing on all fronts.
@@GeneralKenobi69420 60fps looks absolutely terrible on most games because of how much of the resolution they have to cut to achieve it. I will always play fighters and racers at 60 but cinematic games shouldn’t be played at 60.
I hope 40fps becomes the new standard for fidelity modes. It makes a huge difference. I got a 75Hz monitor for my PC and it puts out 38fps with v-sync which is the difference between 30fps-flickery and fluid.
@@MyloSkeng I suppose it would at least minimize any judder compared to running at 30. So far, for games that I can't lock at 75, I've just been changing the monitior's refresh rate to 60. I used to just keep the setting on Adaptive in Nvidia settings, but it resulted in some weirdness when we change output to the TV.
@@jamiepogue6024 that's probably worth it, I had lots of these issues back when I was gaming on my laptop as I'd sometimes plug it into my monitor, and because of unstable framerates and no freesync, the judder was awful, so I definitely think running locked framerate is better even if it's lower in general, so definitely worth dropping the monitor to 60hz
Show people 2:00 when they tell you not to get a display with higher hz because you won't hit those fps. A screen with a higher hertz will ALWAYS feel smooth that a lower one even if you don't have that hertz.(Response time matters alot also)
Just checked all the modes on my C9, and the new 40 fps mode is the winner for me. Looks identical to Fidelity mode while adding just enough fps to avoid the 30 fps slideshow. Brilliant move by Insom! This mode would do wonders for RDR2( in back compat), Metro Exodus Enhanced, and Demon's Souls Remake.
Rift Apart has a Performance Ray Tracing mode that runs at 60fps. The 40fps mode is fidelity mode, which has ray tracing and a higher overall resolution.
@@apictureoffunction i know... i saying games who drops from 60 to 30 only to enable RT in high res. Because this game shows the 4k RT mode game reach more than 30fps sometimes
Indeed, 40 frames per second is not a bad experience. It's noticeably smoother than 30 frames per second. I hope more titles a 40 FPS option because it can be the perfect compromise
The 40fps mode is a notable boost to the performance. The movement looks A LOT smoother with a barely noticeable resolution drop (and pretty much no noticeable quality tradeoffs). Though I did notice a weird perceptional pattern where individual moving objects within a scene, like the characters and the enemies, look like they’re moving at almost 60, whereas the camera and the background movements look and feel 30-ish. Either way, the new mode (just like the game itself) is a feat, and I’m sure it’s going to become a new next-gen standard. The PS5 was my first-ever console bought at launch, and I only truly became happy with it after I played the new Ratchet & Clank and witnessed the sheer technological (and otherwise) brilliance the game entails. Can’t wait for the Wolverine game!
I wont lie running fidelity mode 40fps actually feels like 60fps when playing the game on my lg cx 65, its weird because i have a pc and 40fps doesnt feel like that at all when playing a pc game....
40fps got me through a lot of years with my RX480. Games that I would typically play with a controller (like Watchdogs 2, etc.), I would set a fps cap to 40fps on my Freesync monitor which was "overclocked" to 80hz. This gave me very stable performance which looked and felt way better than 30fps and let the card run cooler so it had thermal room to boost up to cover momentary spikes in scene complexity. Doing this allowed me to run most games at max settings at 2560x1080.
Oh damn, your comment gave me a flashback. I had a gtx980m Asus gaming laptop with a 75hz gsync screen and you could overclock it to a true 100hz using CRU. I used to run games at 90fps locked. It was fun to tinker with.
This sounds like such a great option for consoles.. Not quite the buttery smooth 60fps, but it removes the obnoxious judder from 30fps and retains all the quality?? Sign me up
I feel like all games should have a “maximum mode” even if the current Gen system won’t be able to run it probably, future Gen consoles will. Why you may ask? Because developers won’t update old games in the future but on PC players can just simply up the resolution and what not.
Great video, very informative. I had never thought about it before but it's clear and interesting how 40 is halfway between 30 and 60 not 45. I don't know what option I'd pick, until I gave them a shot but it is a difficult choice just based on the data.
FPS tells you the total # of frames per second, and you can use that information to calculate the time per individual frame (which is really what matters in terms of the visual experience). There are 1,000 milliseconds in a second, so 30 frames per second = 30 frames per 1,000 milliseconds, 60 frames per second = 60 frames per 1,000 milliseconds, and 40 frames per second = 40 frames per 1,000 milliseconds. To calculate the *time per individual frame,* just divide 1,000 milliseconds by the number of frames per 1,000 milliseconds in each case: 30fps = 30 frames in 1,000 milliseconds. That means each frame lasts 33.33 milliseconds (1,000ms / 30 frames = 33.33ms per frame). 60fps = 60 frames in 1,000 milliseconds, which is 16.66 milliseconds per frame (1,000ms / 60 frames = 16.66ms per frame). 40fps = 40 frames in 1,000 milliseconds, which is 25 milliseconds per frame (1,000ms / 40 frames = 25ms per frame). In other words: 60fps = 16.66ms per frame 40fps = 25ms per frame 30fps = 33.33ms per frame 25ms per frame is the exact midpoint between 16.66ms and 33.33ms per frame. So in terms of time per frame (which is what matters for the visual experience, as previously mentioned), 40fps is precisely the midpoint between 30fps and 60 fps.
@@ocrawford77 there is a 60fps ray tracing mode with variable resolution. Thats personally how I play but if you want 4k ray tracing you can do that at 40 fps now which is way better then 30. Much harder to chose between 40 and 60 then 30 and 60.
Higher fps/framerates beats higher "fidelity" all day every day. This is why the 60hz/60fps mode looks better than the "fidelity" mode running at 40fps. And this is why PC gaming that can play at 120hz or higher with 120fps or higher is still the best experience no matter what the consoles have going for them. Give me a choice between 4K 30fps or 1080p-1440p 60-120+fps, and the lower res will win everytime no matter what.
"This is why the 60hz/60fps mode looks better than the "fidelity" mode running at 40fps." It objectively does NOT look better lol. "Plays better" sure, but what you just said is not true.
What about PS5 only supporting 4:2:2 chroma subsampling in 120hz mode? Might not be a deal breaker for most but definitely worth mentioning. I think it looks more washed out and not as inky in my opinion. The 40fps mode is interesting though. I look forward to more games doing this.
You are right. On my Oled B9 it changes to 8 bit ycbcr
3 ปีที่แล้ว +4
Yes. I don’t get it why nobody talks about this! I prefer the performance RT without 120hz mode just because of this changes in the color depth. (I have a lg c9)
I was concerned about this too, but having tried it I honestly only see the subsampling effects in the PS5 menus, the game itself looks as clear to me as when it's only 60hz.
I play Forza Horizon 4 on PC on a 120Hz screen, and with that specific option enabled (to try to run the game in 120fps) actually does make a difference, even though my rig can't go past 40fps. Even though it's just 10 fps above 30, it still is a MUCH smoother feel. And since I play it at 1440p, it's a hell of a nice in-between
I haven't played Rift Apart yet, but I did try the 40fps fidelity mode on Miles Morales recently and was honestly surprised by how smooth it was. Somehow, it feels closer to 60fps than to 30fps. It's definitely a good compromise between quality and performance and should become the standard.
With you, I can't see any significant difference in res on performance RT mode. The only difference I see is density and slightly sharper image which really isn't worth losing 20 frames.
Think that's pretty apparent by watching the video. Particularly at 12:50 ... And likely because this video is about frame rates, not a review or graphics analysis.
I played Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart at the 30FPS Fidelity mode and it was playable but definitely felt rough on an LG CX, I wish I didn't platinum the game before testing the 120hz 40FPS mode I'm sure it's an excellent improvement and pushing closer to the best visuals and a smooth playable framerate. It's unfortunate that almost every new game forces you into an "either/or" situation where you always feel like you're compromising one thing for another. I think having the option in the first place is always going to leave people underwhelmed whereas older console games just had one setting and everybody had to adapt to it. Technically more choice is better but you're just made fully aware that whatever you choose something is sacrificed. I tested Control on PS5 and Series X with the RT mode at 30FPS and it felt absolutely unplayable. It was making me physically ill any time the camera moved. I don't know how a game like Spider-Man or Rift Apart can feel "okay" at 30 but some other games feel like a nightmare. Control with 120hz 40FPS RT on would have been great to experience and I'm sure would have fixed the awful camera movement. Control was fine in the 60FPS mode though even if it was downgraded.
There is a possibility that when graphics really improve in the next 4 or so years, games will start targeting 40fps when they can't push 60fps on the current gen consoles. That will be interesting
@@CyborgSodaCollects That would be very bad idea. What's next - using a fog in games because hardware cannot process advanced graphics? (Old Silent Hill games had this fog, because they were unable to force old PC to run it properly..). I mean, I never had a gaming PC, so 60 fps was just a wish, and now I can experience 60 fps smooth gameplay, I would never go back to anything below 60 fps..
didn't know this was a thing until i saw this video... fired it up and tested it, actually feels great at 40fps, this is a mode i could see myself using more if it were more widespread
I've been playing the Return to Arkham Asylum on my series X. The game is capped at 45fps and with my series X set to 120hz on my 120hz display it feels significantly smoother than having my series X set to 60fps. It also feels significantly smoother overall to a 30fps game. Not quite as fluid as 60fps but definitely very playable.
Yeah... If a frame is late at 30hz, it has to wait 33ms for the next refresh. At 120hz, the wait is just 8.3ms and there is a smaller chance that a refresh will be missed because there are 120 refreshes every second.
@@mondo2548 The first time I played RDR2 on PC I had also just gotten a 120hz monitor. I remember thinking Rockstar must have created some sort of secret software-freesync because of how smooth it was at a variable 40-50 fps. Switched to 60hz and immediately realized it was the 120hz mode smoothing out the typical frame-skipping you get from a variable fps. Like the guy above said, you get only 8.3ms between frame-skips, which is why it's much less noticeable. This is another secret advantage to 120hz, and it's useful in Ratchet as the few drops below 40 will be much less noticeable.
@@alexanderulv3886 you likely wouldn’t on a 60 Hz display, you would either get stuttering which is very unpleasant it makes it actually feel less smooth, or you get tearing, Which may be OK, but also not ideal.
40 fps and VRR functions that push towards Higher image quality- (for the time being) are useful for TV's over a certain size like 65" & Up and especially 80"+ size and also for TV's with 8K displays. I can't think it would be a boon to feed a 720p output into a 75" 8K screen. so taking a dip in latency might be worth it when playing on something that big. However when new techniques in ai and upscaling and so become more common the perceived resolution drop will not be as bad so that might want some to start pushing for the higher frame rates again. But if you are playing on a 30" screen i'd say go with the higher frame rate as the loss of detail wouldn't be as obvious. But on a 75" 8K screen even a 1080p or 1440p input to that screen is better than 720p - though it does kinda beg a rather thorny question about how terrible a docked switch could look on a very large screen
I think this could mean a 40 fps lock in games that doesn't have any 60 fps modes and tbh could be game changer... A super ambitious game that couldn't ever work at 60 would have a great benefit, I love the idea, kudos to insomaniac and DF for showing
There are thousands of tv panels that supports arbitrary refresh rates generally from 24hz to 60 or even 72hz if OCed ive been playing @ 40hz for years and dont get why this has not been used by consoles until now... down clocking a tv to 40hz is even better than 40 fps on 120hz since there is not frame doubling so you effectively eliminate ghosting. And you dont need hdmi 2.1
I think 40fps might be the standard in future consoles. That would make the 40 and 60 fps an actually thing that could change the gaming industry. 30 is great but 40 just feels more clearly, not by a lot from the 60 but definitely noticeable when playing.
This development inspired me to go back to Cyberpunk and run it with a 40fps cap on an RTX 3080. It allowed me to crank every graphics setting all the way up to max at 4k with Performance DLSS and the frame rate doesn't dip below 40 once. Amazing looking game and the best way to experience it on current hardware!
@@RobOngrui Have you played Cyberpunk on max settings at 4k my dude? Quality DLSS dips below 30fps, you're talking about a very demanding open world game with ray traced shadows, reflections and global illumination. Auto DLSS chooses Performance at 4K too, Performance looks fine at this resolution since it's reconstructing from a 1080p source with DLSS doing it's magic. Something I forgot to mention that also inspired me is the new DLSS 2.2, with it Performance looks better with ghosting eliminated.
@@HeloisGevit hi there, I'm getting a 3070ti build soon, would you mind helping me out by answering a couple of questions... 1. How do you know which version of DLSS a game uses? 2. Can you just drag and drop a DLSS 2.2 file and overwrite DLSS 2.0 in any DLSS supported game?
I platinum’d the game with the Performance RT mode on an 1440p monitor. I just recently got a Sony 4K 120hz HDMI 2.1 tv that I’m playing on now and the Performance RT mode looks significantly lower res now. Just switched to the Fidelity mode with 120hz option on and it looks a lot better and that extra 10hz really makes it a lot smoother than 30.
Since the PS5 doesn't support 1440p, that means the monitor was getting a 1080p input when you were playing. That would explain why Performance RT looks lower Res now, since your 4K tv is able to display the full resolution now in Fidelity Mode.
@@nickmotsarsky4382 My 1440p monitor would accept a 4K signal and downsample it to 1440p, so I believe they said the Performance mode renders at 1440p and then upscaled to 4K. I think the big difference is just how much better 4K looks now compared to my old 1440p monitor. Still loving my new 4K TV, was a great choice to pair with the PS5.
Really and truly this seems like a hatchet workaround for not having VRR. The goal of this isn't about reaching smooth mid way point between 30 and 60. That's a byproduct. It's about giving 120 hz TVs a static better way to handle 30 hz content. VRR provides a dynamic handling of the issue. If the PS5 had VRR this mode wouldn't exist, and you won't see this mode on any games for its direct rival. Workarounds like this being done, and the fact that Sony's latest TVs don't support VRR out the box, lead me to believe PS5 owners won't be seeing that software update to handle VRR Sony promised us over half a year ago. I loathe that we're rewarding this with praise.
I disagree for a couple of reasons. You can still detect judder even with VRR when frame rates are dropping this low. It seems ratchet drops as low as 38fps and if it was completely unlocked you’d see frame rates all over the place. I don’t believe this would feel as consistent, even with VRR, as a locked and stable 40fps. As it stands there are no VRR TV’s that can handle large variances in frame rate without having flickering black issues due to the way the static gamma curve works. There are PC monitors that handle this just fine but they have their own drawbacks such as size and HDR performance. This 40fps mode is a great solution for pushing fidelity as far as possible with smooth performance and I’m all for it as long as we still get the choice of a 60fps mode. That being said we are long overdue VRR compatibility on PS5. It works excellently to hide moderate drops and has been in place on the Xbox since the one x. I’ve bought the bulk of 3rd party games on the series x so far this gen because of this. And although it makes little real life difference I’m still disappointed the PS5 doesn’t support full 444 chroma at 120fps 4K.
@Daniel Blair are you talking about refresh rate or frame rate? Unless the TV and source has VRR they do indeed only refresh at 60/120hz. That’s what causes all these issues.
This has no business being a standard. It may become one on the PS5, but it only exists because of a lack of VRR. When Sony makes good on their promise 7 months ago about adding VRR to the PS5, you'll likely never see this mode on a game again.
I'm sure I'm missing something in the way it was said, but Rich said at 12:30 that "the PS5 only supports 1080p120 output?" It does 4k120, so now I'm confused.
it only support 1080p120 with an hdmi 2.0 TV, you need an hdmi 2.1 TV to have 4k120. at least it's what i understood. That said, the PS5 currently lower the color depth of the image when put in 120Hz mode so that you might notice this color downgrade if you have an high end tv.
This is how I see it... If gaming at 4k, this mode makes sense. If your max resolution at 120hz is 1080p, then use the 60fps Performance RT mode for extra frames in the same resolution.
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 unfortunately no, the 120hz Fidelity Mode is locked at 40 even on 1080p. If you want 60fps and ray tracing, even in 1080p, you need to use the Performance RT mode.
I tried it out but went back to RT performance mode pretty quickly. While the 40fps mode is absolutely a much smoother experience than the 30fps one, leaving 60fps behind was just too much of a sacrifice for me.
That's really neat. I never thought about the fact that 40 FPS is the mid-point between 30 and 60 in terms of latency. And that comparison between 120Hz 40 and 60Hz 60 is quite remarkable. BTW that's a stark difference in Ratchet's face at 20:08 in the middle
I used to do this when my PC couldnt handle a game at 60 fps, I would just cap the game at 40fps and crank settings up, specially in single player games.
@@DrJones20 it’s noticeable definitely I’ll tell you that. I would still expect the standard to be 60 FPS later in the gen and 4k but for the time being it’s a great solution.
@@DrJones20 Big difference! It feels in between but somehow closer to 60 fps than just above 30 fps if that makes sense, but you can still clearly see that 60 is smoother. For me Fidelity is very much worth it now.
Bruh why can’t this generation be 60fps fidelity and 120performance all across the board 🤦🏻♂️. The fact that we’re still talking about 30fps period is disappointing as hell.
Because we are not getting the same visuals as last-gen, in order to get an easy 1080p120. When adding RT on top, hardware load increases tremendously.
@@raresmacovei8382 I’ve said before that if Sony and Microsoft waited until fall 2021 or even 2022 for 9th gen, they could have implemented Zen 3 and RX6000 series performance. That’d have them reach closer to that ideal goal. Better yet if they went with NVIDIA they could have gotten performance surpassing at least the 2080 cards.
The jump from 30fps to 40fps is indeed more significant than you might think. Since I got a laptop with 144hz G-sync screen a few years back, I've been playing around with frame rate caps so I'm talking from experience. For instance, I ended up playing RDR2 with a 40fps cap. Since my screen is G-sync enabled, I could have left the frame rate unlocked but honestly even with VRR, drops down to the 40s are notifiable and annoying to me. I often prefer to lock the frame rate at a number that the game can consistently hit.
I’ve been trying similar stuff. RDR2 doesn’t need 60 FPS to feel fluid, but 30 FPS makes me want to claw my eyes out. 40 FPS is that midpoint where it’s *just about* playable with a mouse and keyboard while still offering lots of headroom to dial up graphics settings.
I'm so glad this video exists because Genshin Impact has 45fps and I was wondering if this would make any difference when playing at 60fps or 30fps and it does. Locking my refresh rate to 120hz then playing at 45fps feels smoother than 30fps on 60Hz. But the battery drain is still huge
Great video, it was very informative, I found that 40fps to be much smoother than 30 and did not know why it was dramatically better. This video clears it up
@@nickmotsarsky4382 Framerate is deceiving, as they mention in the video. It's actually a 50% increase in pure performance, when measured by frametime - 25ms slots right in between 33.3 (30fps) and 16.7 (60fps).
Personally, I don't get distracted by "low" frame rates until a game is running below around 40FPS, so that's a good target IMO. I'm fine with variable frame rates as long as it's North of 40, but if a game is dipping below that frequently, I'd just as soon cap it at 30 assuming the cap has stable frame pacing.
I actually think this might be the ultimate sweet spot between quality and performance (except fast-paced/competitive-online shooters, where more fps is always better), but I don't know if anyone is planning on launching 144Hz TVs.
Wow 40fps is definitely noticeably smoother than 30fps. Also I saw another comment mention it. But even if your video is only 1080p, uploading at 1440p gets you TH-cam's better compression. It makes a big difference.
I bet some games could also benefit from running at 50 Hz for a locked 50 fps if they are just shy of hitting a locked 60 fps. I think every HDMI compatible display should support 50 Hz as it is part of the HDMI standard.
The latency in 40FPS is so unexpectatly good, because in 120Hz mode it takes less time to transfer the frame to the screen. It only takes 1/120 of a second, instead of 1/60 of a second. So, even the 30Hz and 60Hz modes could be improved by running it in 120Hz container. It would shove off another 8.3ms.
I was once joking about cinephiles setting their monitors to exactly 72 Hz so their 24 FPS movies could play without a 3:2 pulldown. I didn't expect console games to pull a similar trick in the near future but, here we are
I'd love to see this become a standard option (and that existing games receive patches to enable it where viable). Different games are suited to different frame rates and this seems to be a great compromise between visual fidelity vs performance. A very slow paced game (I'm so old that the best example I can think of are the first few Resident Evil games) depend on their visual fidelity to build mood and don't really benefit from high frame rates. 30fps is fine for such games in my opinion. A twitch based FPS obviously benefits from higher frame rates, especially if you're playing competitively. I personally play offline and non-competitively the vast majority of the time (it's literally been years since I last played online). If I'm playing an older and/or not very demanding game on PC, I could either use my 144Hz IPS for a nice blend between speed and visuals or if I wanted to go extreme I could hook up my 240Hz TN monitor (though it's currently living in the attic). Couple that with BFI and it's insanely smooth and blur-free. A lot of games however won't be able to maintain such high frame rates without dropping the graphics settings. I consider 60Hz perfectly adequate for most fast paced games (though having the option to go higher depending on your preferences is always nice to have). Based upon all the games I've played over the past few generations, I think 40fps would have probably been my preferred way to play the majority of them had it been available and I imagine that will be true going forward. I personally don't find 60Hz to be a minimum requirement for a lot of slower paced FPS games, most third person action games and while I'm not sure, I think even some racing games could get away with 40fps. I personally find a stable frame rate more important than a higher one that fluctuates a lot. I'm struggling to think of examples off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are plenty of games which have aimed for 60fps but couldn't maintain it. I'd much rather take a stable 40fps than a 60fps game with frequent dips.
Some small constructive criticism. I would personally prefer if you would still upload 1080p material at 4k or at least 1440p on TH-cam because otherwise the lower per pixel bitrate of TH-cam's 1080p30 and 1080p60 modes destroyers a ton of detail during faster moving scenes.
How the fuck did you comment this a week ago
May I borrow your time machine?
@@VioletViolent probably early access for members
Very valid point!!!
@@VioletViolent lol Patreon early access
I was fully set to be playing 60fps 1440p this generation, as the choppiness of 30fps was unbearable for me. But after trying out this 40fps 4k mode I was honestly surprised how smooth it was compared to 30fps. I can see myself playing this mode if more games support it.
40fps - the middle child is born!
If 30 fps is choppy then heaven forbid Ocarina of time run at a locked 20 fps
@@jollamaTry playing at 20fps now, while you're used to 30 or more. It's not nice.
@@brianhardy3759 Already did, easy af
@@jollama Ocarina and a lot of older games were made with lower framerates in minding order to maximize detail so the game design and physics and controls still feel good even in 20fps. Newer games however are made in 60fps minimum so playing in 20 is sluggish and almost unplayable.
Just tried it and this really is a big deal. I wont play at 30hz, the extra detail and resolution is not worth the chopiness of playing at 30fps for me. But with this 40hz mode the fidelity modes become viable again for me. Those extra 10fps really make a difference. Lets hope this becomes the new standard.
Fps not hz.
@@lostsektor the game is vsync so at 40hz it renders 40fps you little smartass
@@simracingchannel7691 no 120hz for 40 fps
Is fidelity mode fidelityfx?
@@stansmith7445 Technically, hz is a measure of frequency. FPS is also a measure of frequency, so it isn't wrong to use hz to describe FPS, it's just not standard.
Wasn't Insomniac one of the first developers to do LOD, with their Spyro The Dragon and essentially be able to draw worlds much bigger than what other wise the original PlayStation could do? I can definitely see 40 FPS becoming very common place on consoles in years to come with what I just saw on this video.
iirc mark cerny played a major role developing that engine
Mark Cerny The Einstein in the Gaming Industry
@Snake24 that doesn’t matter though
They were ones of the first doing that, and constant streaming from the CD-ROM on the PS1.
Amazing for the time.
Mário 64 has LOD
Leave it to DF to make me feel like I learned something but still burned brain cells.
That's how you stretch your brain to better learn in the future.
@@JudgeFudge57 true but it's not entirely DF's fault my brain cells were already fried.
This was easy to understand.
@@DrJones20 don't take the comment literal.
@@xlawlessx2052 ok
40 FPS feels like the sweet spot for a game like ratchet. Tested it on my C1 and it really gives the Pixar appearance and feel without the judder and poor motion handling of 30fps . I want this more on more games.
Exactly! It removes the judder and input lag of 30, while maintaining a bit of that "cinematic" look. I think I actually prefer it over 60 (for this type of game).
@@fapman4878 my man!
The fact that the mid point between 60fps and 30fps is 40fps and that it happily fits in a 120hz refresh rate is really a fascinating way of creating a performance mid point that really wasn't there prior to 120hz displays.
What are you on about? I can cap my fps to 40 on my 60hz PC and get the literally same smooth effects they are showcasing in this video. The 40fps mode on Playstation 5 IS ONLY available ON 120HZ DISPLAYS. That mode can work on 60hz displays but Sony doesn't allow that for unknown reasons
@@ForsakenGod96 I thought DF explained really well here as to why you don't want to do 40fps on a 60hz display.
@@josephl2965 Buddy ol pal, 40fps is 40fps it doesnt matter if its 60hz display or 75hz or 120hz, its a lot better than 30 and it will feel a lot smoother. Just because the TrashStation 5 can't use the 40fps mode on non 120hz monitors that doesn't mean 40fps mode should not be used by non 120hz monitors
lmao
@@ForsakenGod96 I don't know what made you so angry but if you calm yourself and watch it again, you'll be able to understand the problems of 40fps on 60hz screens. And frankly it's not even difficult to understand
Someone in this thread needs to do more homework... 40 fps on 60 fps is a jitterfest
Played my first playthrough in 60FPS RT, and my second playthrough in 40FPS fidelity mode. I'm playing on a LG CX and found the 40 FPS mode very playable. Hopefully more games will enable modes like this. I feel 30 FPS is pretty rough on the LG CX, so I always opt for 60fps modes. But, if 40 FPS fidelity becomes more widespread, I would probably use it every time.
If you have a CX you should try performance RT with 60fps lock, and enable BFI. BFI in combination with frame interpolation on my Panasonic is even smoother than 120hz VRR mode with Spiderman. It’s the only way to get plasma or CRT-like motion on sample and hold displays.
@@kristiangurholt59BFI affects brightness way too much
@@ThePipojp In a bright room I agree, but in a dark or dim room it's great. Plus motion interpolation doubles perceived brightness because of the added 60 fps.
We really need HDMI 2.1 support to be much more widespread and cheaper. Taking too long.
It's hard to find 4k tvs with 120 hz support nowadays
@@t-rev1721 even monitors, the only accesible monitor is the lg gp950 which is 800 USD which is always out of stock
Lg cx os saluda
@@t-rev1721 They are still fairy easy to find. The really difficult thing to find for many, is the exorbitant amount of cash needed to purchase one. What was really needed in the TV industry, was 1080p and 1440p high refresh TV's, like we got with monitors...But alas it's looking like there are never going to be any.
have to wait for this years models at the very least
I have tested this now. It is a wonderful experience compared to 30fps.
Hope more games do this instead of 30fps.
Just try it today. Honestly It runs great. Gonna replay the game like this.
This is extremely nice to have. It's nice to have the full details with 10 extra frames. Insomniac is working hard as usual. This game looks great on OLED.
lol 40 fps
@@wizzenberry Well they are cheap, I could buy one and chuck in the lounge but I would never use it lol, its OK for the kids I guess. WTF are you talking about, God of war is the best "SONY" game on Steam, but its not even in the top 20.
@@Battleneter 4090 is struggling to maintain above 60 natively in the latest triple A games without using DLSS, the fact that consoles are catching up should scare PC owners (this is coming from a pc owner).
Once the next set of consoles start doing 4k 60 native in way more games, this is going to make alot of PC gamers move to console especially with how outrageous GPU pricing is. Imagine 4k 60fps gaming being a thing at a 400-500 dollar price point? Its going to be such a no brainer
I tried out the 40fps mode when it came out for a little bit and it works really well. It's definitely something I'd opt for over 30fps, but I still found myself preferring the amount of frames I could see with the Performance mode. But the latency gap did feel fairly similar between the two which was great.
I've been doing this for years since having a 144hz monitor. I'll lock intensive games like RDR2 and Cyberpunk to 48fps, 1/3 vsync.
Everything is possible in pc. The consoles are catching up. It can also be more confusing for majority of the ppl if u give pc like options in consoles. Consoles are designed for plug and play living room experience. Also it's good that u prioritise frame pacing rather most pc players who mindlessly target 50+ fps on a 60hz display.
That's a good idea if you don't have VRR
May I ask how you do that? do you just lock the game with rivatuner then apply v-sync in game or...? I have a 144fps display also, I would love to know. Thanks in advance
If I have a 144hz monitor, I should cap the game to only 48, 72 or 144 fps?
What if I cap to lets say... 90fps?
My rig runs games on an average of 100fps, so I tend to cap games at 90fps for a balance of stability and high fps.
@@5izzy557 It’s actually most of the time implemented in the game right away.
You can adjust how V-Sync is capping the frames.
There is a setting and it says like 1, 2 or 3.
1 is equal to refresh. (120hz; 120fps)
2 is half of the refresh (120hz; 60fps)
3 is every 3rd refresh (120hz, 40ps)
Some games have it like Witcher 3 and Cyberpunk, and others don’t, but good games tend to have that option.
Also TVs have less input lag in 120hz mode, so there is that.
The TV needs to do processing and it takes a frame or two or three frames to do so. So, if the TV needs 2 frames: it will be 66ms lag at 30hz, 33ms of lag at 60hz, 16.7 ms of lag at 120hz. If the TV just needs one frame ahead then 120hz yields 8.3ish ms lag...
Display, not input.
@@bits3608 same difference
@@JudgeZetsumei it would mean output, rather than input then
not correct when game runs in 60 fps fixed its 33ms input lag and is no difference when you have 60hz or 120hz Tv displayed but when the game frames are 120 frames then you have a difrience at 120hz
It was so good . I played entire game in 40fps. Best visuals and great FPS . Don’t need 60fps mode when u have best of both modes
My thoughts exactly! The middle ground IS ALWAYS the best choice..
Believe it or not 30 fps vs 40fps is a HUGE difference. Hoping all console games will have this option
edit: Ppl in the comments think I don't know 144hz+ exists lmao.
Yea I discovered it with GoW on PS4 Pro. Was very satisfied with its 40s, and HellBlade was similar.
40 to 144 or 240 is a bigger difference tho😂😂
TV needs to support 120Hz also...
@@Alex_Logan22
GoW wasn't true 40 fps because 60 Hz can't show that properly.
Not really, once again you fools believe anything anyone tells you
Insomniac has been an ace in the hole for the ps5! I have all their games on ps5 and they've been great. The options they give with the graphics settings makes it feel like you actually have some options. Can't wait to see what's next from them.
Mocap is currently going on for Spider-Man 2! Nadji (Miles) posted a photo of him in the mocap suit this week and quickly deleted it when people noticed.
@@luuketaylor
I would prefer them working on something different. We already have two Spiderman games, and I have enough..
@@luuketaylor The only Superhero game done right lol
The amount of playability with Spiderman as in open world env has been something missing out for like decades
I refunded the Marvel Avengers the next hour i started to play it
Absolute clusterfuck and too boring
This is something we all enjoy and I would really like them to expand the franchise and bring a lot of comic lore
@JMB b
I can understand.
I played Ratchet and TLOU2, didn't finish any of them, I am finishing Tsushima now, but apart from these there is nothing to keep me playing on PS.
Because on Xbox I get most games I Game Pass so no need to waste cash in PS Store.
But I can say I spend most time playing Switch and 3DS since half of year. There is no game to beat all fun I get from Zelda and Mario!
@JMB b
Most of nowadays games are.. yawns.
I rarely finish any game these days, because they get boring and repetitive quickly.
Finally was just able to test this now that I have a ps5 and this 40 fps is absolutely brilliant. It's the PERFECT compromise of graphics and smoothness and with perfectly decent amount of input lag.
It takes a little adjustment for your eyes but I really wish this was an option in every single game it's just that good
It would be even better if they just supported variable refresh rate displays.
careful youll summon the muppets haha
@@biscuitsntea421
He's right though.
If it supported VRR, that would improve a lot.
VRR eliminates the judder from a variable framerate, but it doesn't always look as good as an absolutely locked framerate. Consistency is often better than something going between 40 and 60 constantly.
@@nickmotsarsky4382
But it would be good to have this option. Well optimized game would work great with VRR.
@@DanielDseven Sure.
I have a Steam Deck and basically target 40 FPS for all my games in portable mode even for games that can reach 60 FPS. To me, 40 FPS feels closer to the 60 FPS than 30 FPS, and you can rarely have to make the significant cutbacks to visual fidelity that you have to when targeting 60 FPS. I feel except for when playing competitively online or games that require extremely fast reaction like fighting, the increased visual fidelity at 40 FPS is well worth it vs 60 FPS. I hope that developers continue to allow these options on console games for folks with 120hz displays, as it can honestly completely change the experience of a game.
It runs even better with vrr enabled they should make another video about this
Speaking of latency, there is latency on John's audio
Sony really needs to ad VRR to the PS5
They are working on it.
Why? Most users don’t own a TV that can do it. It’s just a gimmick at that point for early adopters.
The goal should be that developers use their resources and can achieve a stable framerate.
Fluctuating framerates is just asking for problems…
Edit: Seems like most people don’t get what I tried to explain… Sad thing.
It is advertised as having it... Apparently it is not an easy task with inconsistent implementations in various monitors and TVs and a distinct lack of TVs to try VRR on while developing it.
@@Henriette187 VRR is the best tech of the decade. It's absolutely game changing,
And 1440p.
i'm impressed! Insomniac is literally carrying and setting new types of tecnical achievements for this next gen! Go insomniac!
In a world of 60 and 120fps you think 40fps is amazing ? Lol bruh stop smoking whatever Sony is selling you on
@@ryue5626 You do realize there’s a performance mode, right?
@@ryue5626 there is to 60 fps modes and a 40. Whats wrong with choice?
@@ryue5626 try to think, I know that obviously there's better on the market (I play overwatch at 250 fps on my computer..). But this could maybe increase the lowest frame rate target of most developers on consoles, that is 30 fps. A small step, but definitely something better than the previous generation!
@@ryue5626 they just showed a way for everyone to make graphics modes viable. Smoother with more detail and less input lag. Stop being a hater
This looks to be the PERFECT middle ground, enabling high quality image while having a smooth experience..
just no. 60FPS is already a quite low framerate and the bare minimum.
@@theprophet2444 You need to sacrifice A LOT on consoles to get 60 fps.
@@yoyo-nf1ww 40fps isn’t going to help the vast number of ppl, who are still using 60hz screens. Anyone who owns a 4K display - chances are it’s 60hz max. The adoption rate for 4k/120hz just is not there right now
@@yoyo-nf1ww so in short - 60fps or bust for consoles
@@workoutfanatic7873 I’ve also found that most 120hz 4K TVs are worse off because of it. I got a Samsung QLED, and a Sony Bravia and tested the 120 hz and then dropped down to the 60hz tv because it was just frankly a better tv. Probably just a small detail but I think that they just aren’t there yet, unless you end up with a top of the line LG OLED tv that will blow past these TVs, just get a good 60hz 4K
FYI Mike Fitzgerald(an engineering genius at insomniac Games) in a previous interview said if they got more time for optimization they could even have a 120FPS mode for rift apart 😳😳 damn wizards at insomniac I say
Everything low at 1080p, yes it can. Though it's pretty sad you have to pray for devs to do that instead of going to settings and adjust the visuals
@@那人冷靜一點 dmc5 did 1080p120fps at high settings
@@plexusgamer1105 dmc5 isn't demanding tho
I suppose they could. But I doubt it'd be locked and the cutbacks would probably be large.
Nothing special about that. Dialing back settings Will for sure get 120 FPS
I’m playing in 120Hz fidelity. Glad my Sony 900H supports it. You can really feel the difference of 30 and 40FPS . Much smoother plus you’re getting the fidelity graphics. This is my preferred mode of playing the game .
Does fidelity have ray tracing ?
Yes it have.
@@keenanjones6237 yes
I just tried this out and it makes a huge difference.
I love it. I usually love bells and whistles over framerate, unless framerate is unplayable or its a fastpased game. Its innovation like this that truly defines next gen.
Imo this needs more exposure for the PC people, where they just try to get as much fps as possible without the thought of frame pacing
People on PC either use adaptive sync if they have it, or if they don't it's just best to disable Vsync, cap framerate at monitor refresh, and deal with the tearing.
Most games are coded to tear at top/bottom and avoid tearing in the middle so it's often barely noticeable.
Only with adapative sync are you going to have perfect frame-pacing - if that's not an option then there is no point in even trying.
Cope harder. Higher frames are higher frames. 60 will always be better than 40.
@Thomas Sturges-Allard You don’t get perfect frame-pacing with adaptive sync. The frame rate can fluctuate so much. Only way is capping the frame rate.
@@rouhollahseyfi I assume he meant VRR, which actually yes, totally fixes the issue perfectly. Adaptive sync is an engine/API thing that drops to tearing if it can't reach sync, but Variable Refresh Rate (eg G-Sync or Freesync) is exactly what it says on the tin, draw the grand when you get it. You don't get judder, because the engine is drawing objects where they should be for exactly the time they're shown, rather than either one or two frames ahead.
Maybe you misspoke, but I don't think you understand what you're saying. Higher fps is always better:
1. Frame pacing is not a problem unless you pair a monster GPU with a crap CPU, which leads to massive frame spikes. "PC people" understand how to avoid this.
2. Variable refresh displays can hide nearly all frame pacing issues unless you go under the minimum or over the maximum refresh of the display. In those situations you have to deal with some judder or tearing, but there are ways to mitigate that as well.
3. 40fps is sh!t.
I have a 65" LG CX and I actually preferred playing this game in Fidelity mode. I just think it looks so much better in that mode and is more enjoyable from a cinematic standpoint. The 40 fps mode is the absolutely perfect update for my setup and it's been a true joy to play through again this way.
I can't believe how much more impressive this game has been to me than any previous rachet game. I tended to find them a little bland, but this game really is amazing on all fronts.
"cinematic"
Yup just got 55 inch LG G1 for my room new mode is preferred way.
@@GeneralKenobi69420 60fps looks absolutely terrible on most games because of how much of the resolution they have to cut to achieve it. I will always play fighters and racers at 60 but cinematic games shouldn’t be played at 60.
We have the same telly!
@@rolan5948 wtf does a "cinematic game" even mean. All games should be 60fps minimum full stop
More options is always a good thing in my book
I hope 40fps becomes the new standard for fidelity modes. It makes a huge difference. I got a 75Hz monitor for my PC and it puts out 38fps with v-sync which is the difference between 30fps-flickery and fluid.
Wouldn't 38fps still result in some judder?
I used to run forza horizon 4 at 37 FPS on a 75hz monitor and it's somehow a very noticeable difference
@@MyloSkeng I suppose it would at least minimize any judder compared to running at 30. So far, for games that I can't lock at 75, I've just been changing the monitior's refresh rate to 60. I used to just keep the setting on Adaptive in Nvidia settings, but it resulted in some weirdness when we change output to the TV.
@@jamiepogue6024 that's probably worth it, I had lots of these issues back when I was gaming on my laptop as I'd sometimes plug it into my monitor, and because of unstable framerates and no freesync, the judder was awful, so I definitely think running locked framerate is better even if it's lower in general, so definitely worth dropping the monitor to 60hz
40fps is still garbage
At 20:08, Ratchet looks much less "fluffy" in the 40fps mode compared to either the 30fps and 60. Wonder what's going on there.
I'm hoping it's just TH-cam compression. I don't want to miss out on fluffiness.
Could be a bug !
I wonder if it's the capture card, he HDMI 2.1 capture cards don't exist yet.
@@adingleberry4u I believe you're right. I think they're limited to 1080p capture when outputting 120Hz, even if the game is only 40FPS
Just TH-cam
Show people 2:00 when they tell you not to get a display with higher hz because you won't hit those fps. A screen with a higher hertz will ALWAYS feel smooth that a lower one even if you don't have that hertz.(Response time matters alot also)
Just checked all the modes on my C9, and the new 40 fps mode is the winner for me. Looks identical to Fidelity mode while adding just enough fps to avoid the 30 fps slideshow. Brilliant move by Insom! This mode would do wonders for RDR2( in back compat), Metro Exodus Enhanced, and Demon's Souls Remake.
It'a how I played RDR2 on PC. And yes, it does do wonders for it.
Bro said 30 fps is a slideshow 💀
Seems pretty good if games on RT mode drops just for 40fps from 60fps instead of 30
Rift Apart has a Performance Ray Tracing mode that runs at 60fps.
The 40fps mode is fidelity mode, which has ray tracing and a higher overall resolution.
@@apictureoffunction i know... i saying games who drops from 60 to 30 only to enable RT in high res. Because this game shows the 4k RT mode game reach more than 30fps sometimes
Beat the game at 40 fps and can confirm it's noticeably smoother than 30.
Indeed, 40 frames per second is not a bad experience. It's noticeably smoother than 30 frames per second. I hope more titles a 40 FPS option because it can be the perfect compromise
The 40fps mode is a notable boost to the performance.
The movement looks A LOT smoother with a barely noticeable resolution drop (and pretty much no noticeable quality tradeoffs).
Though I did notice a weird perceptional pattern where individual moving objects within a scene, like the characters and the enemies, look like they’re moving at almost 60, whereas the camera and the background movements look and feel 30-ish.
Either way, the new mode (just like the game itself) is a feat, and I’m sure it’s going to become a new next-gen standard.
The PS5 was my first-ever console bought at launch, and I only truly became happy with it after I played the new Ratchet & Clank and witnessed the sheer technological (and otherwise) brilliance the game entails.
Can’t wait for the Wolverine game!
I wont lie running fidelity mode 40fps actually feels like 60fps when playing the game on my lg cx 65, its weird because i have a pc and 40fps doesnt feel like that at all when playing a pc game....
i feel you bro. hell, even 60fps feels like shit to me on pc.
40fps got me through a lot of years with my RX480. Games that I would typically play with a controller (like Watchdogs 2, etc.), I would set a fps cap to 40fps on my Freesync monitor which was "overclocked" to 80hz. This gave me very stable performance which looked and felt way better than 30fps and let the card run cooler so it had thermal room to boost up to cover momentary spikes in scene complexity. Doing this allowed me to run most games at max settings at 2560x1080.
Oh damn, your comment gave me a flashback. I had a gtx980m Asus gaming laptop with a 75hz gsync screen and you could overclock it to a true 100hz using CRU. I used to run games at 90fps locked. It was fun to tinker with.
This sounds like such a great option for consoles.. Not quite the buttery smooth 60fps, but it removes the obnoxious judder from 30fps and retains all the quality?? Sign me up
The only point john forgot to mention is not a huge deal but.. u will lose colourinformation from 444 chroma to 422 in 120hz mode.
The human eye can barely register the difference tbh
@@eczamurai it cant unless its really small black text on white backgrounds. Thats why computer monitors are always in 444 rgb
the game looks and animates better then some movies, just incredible...and on top of that, is very very fun
That frame-time graph is absolutely essential. I stick to this channel because of it. It should be bigger!
This game now has a 30fps, 40fps, and 60fps mode. 120fps is next. The more options, the better. Insomniac are so great.
I feel like all games should have a “maximum mode” even if the current Gen system won’t be able to run it probably, future Gen consoles will. Why you may ask? Because developers won’t update old games in the future but on PC players can just simply up the resolution and what not.
Like the Hitman games, I appreciate they added in the 4K unlocked modes. Same with NFS Hot Pursuit Remastered
Very much doubt they are going to do a 120fps mode
40fps is the 120 mode
@@ramellmerced8899 That’s true, it works really well with 120fps displays.
Wasn't on board until the input lag section. Super good find!
Great video, very informative.
I had never thought about it before but it's clear and interesting how 40 is halfway between 30 and 60 not 45. I don't know what option I'd pick, until I gave them a shot but it is a difficult choice just based on the data.
I actually didn’t understand why it was in the middle. Could you explain?
@@NikHem343yes, I'm interested in knowing why is it 40 and not 45.
FPS tells you the total # of frames per second, and you can use that information to calculate the time per individual frame (which is really what matters in terms of the visual experience). There are 1,000 milliseconds in a second, so 30 frames per second = 30 frames per 1,000 milliseconds, 60 frames per second = 60 frames per 1,000 milliseconds, and 40 frames per second = 40 frames per 1,000 milliseconds. To calculate the *time per individual frame,* just divide 1,000 milliseconds by the number of frames per 1,000 milliseconds in each case:
30fps = 30 frames in 1,000 milliseconds. That means each frame lasts 33.33 milliseconds (1,000ms / 30 frames = 33.33ms per frame).
60fps = 60 frames in 1,000 milliseconds, which is 16.66 milliseconds per frame (1,000ms / 60 frames = 16.66ms per frame).
40fps = 40 frames in 1,000 milliseconds, which is 25 milliseconds per frame (1,000ms / 40 frames = 25ms per frame).
In other words:
60fps = 16.66ms per frame
40fps = 25ms per frame
30fps = 33.33ms per frame
25ms per frame is the exact midpoint between 16.66ms and 33.33ms per frame. So in terms of time per frame (which is what matters for the visual experience, as previously mentioned), 40fps is precisely the midpoint between 30fps and 60 fps.
12:28 the exact moment Rich puts John in a headlock.
Lmao
Ya boy John sounded hurt. That guy is a Playstation shill.
Just finished the game and used the 40fps mode. Coming in as a PC gamer primarily 30 fps is hard to play but 40 is very doable.
does this mode have ray tracing
@@ocrawford77 yeah mate ray tracing 4k at 40fps looks fantastic
@@ocrawford77yes, it’s the Fidelity mode but running at 40 fps.
@@Pick18 oh, ok. just thought fidelity mode was only for native 4k
@@ocrawford77 there is a 60fps ray tracing mode with variable resolution. Thats personally how I play but if you want 4k ray tracing you can do that at 40 fps now which is way better then 30. Much harder to chose between 40 and 60 then 30 and 60.
Higher fps/framerates beats higher "fidelity" all day every day. This is why the 60hz/60fps mode looks better than the "fidelity" mode running at 40fps. And this is why PC gaming that can play at 120hz or higher with 120fps or higher is still the best experience no matter what the consoles have going for them. Give me a choice between 4K 30fps or 1080p-1440p 60-120+fps, and the lower res will win everytime no matter what.
"This is why the 60hz/60fps mode looks better than the "fidelity" mode running at 40fps." It objectively does NOT look better lol. "Plays better" sure, but what you just said is not true.
For you..i don’t really care about the fps as long as the game is fun and good looking aka hi res
What about PS5 only supporting 4:2:2 chroma subsampling in 120hz mode? Might not be a deal breaker for most but definitely worth mentioning.
I think it looks more washed out and not as inky in my opinion. The 40fps mode is interesting though. I look forward to more games doing this.
You are right. On my Oled B9 it changes to 8 bit ycbcr
Yes. I don’t get it why nobody talks about this! I prefer the performance RT without 120hz mode just because of this changes in the color depth. (I have a lg c9)
@ agree. I have a 77” C9 too. I much preferred the colour depth when not in 120hz mode. Mine TV is colour calibrated too. I see a big deference.
I heard it doesn't change much the industry doesn't it much.
I was concerned about this too, but having tried it I honestly only see the subsampling effects in the PS5 menus, the game itself looks as clear to me as when it's only 60hz.
Playing at 40fps is fantastic! Loving it. With all that eye candy cranked, it's a great experience
Lol finally from 30 to 40 after 7 years, nice 😂😂😂
@@那人冷靜一點 you can play 60 aswell
@@那人冷靜一點 PC?
@@asheleydavies the console
@@Pick18 compromised 60, yeah nah
I play Forza Horizon 4 on PC on a 120Hz screen, and with that specific option enabled (to try to run the game in 120fps) actually does make a difference, even though my rig can't go past 40fps. Even though it's just 10 fps above 30, it still is a MUCH smoother feel. And since I play it at 1440p, it's a hell of a nice in-between
I haven't played Rift Apart yet, but I did try the 40fps fidelity mode on Miles Morales recently and was honestly surprised by how smooth it was. Somehow, it feels closer to 60fps than to 30fps.
It's definitely a good compromise between quality and performance and should become the standard.
I still will play Performance RT mode. The game feels *so good* at 60fps and I can't tell the visual fidelity difference on my 4K display, anyway. :)
The only time you can tell it's when there's a darker scene displaying a bright light source you can see the reconstruction of the image.
With you, I can't see any significant difference in res on performance RT mode. The only difference I see is density and slightly sharper image which really isn't worth losing 20 frames.
You guys missed the Performance mode having different lighting again. Fidelity has better lighting.
They mentioned it veeeeeery briefly, but yeah.
Think that's pretty apparent by watching the video. Particularly at 12:50 ... And likely because this video is about frame rates, not a review or graphics analysis.
@@nonyabusiness6084 That seems very much like a bug...
Something always has to give in order to get a higher frame rate.
Hmm oh darn, going to have to replay Rift Apart now in 40hz mode to see what it feels like :D
Already did, it felt great, also to have the Raytracing and 4k on full display was a treat. I hope other game devs add this mode in there games.
I played Ratchet & Clank: Rift Apart at the 30FPS Fidelity mode and it was playable but definitely felt rough on an LG CX, I wish I didn't platinum the game before testing the 120hz 40FPS mode I'm sure it's an excellent improvement and pushing closer to the best visuals and a smooth playable framerate. It's unfortunate that almost every new game forces you into an "either/or" situation where you always feel like you're compromising one thing for another. I think having the option in the first place is always going to leave people underwhelmed whereas older console games just had one setting and everybody had to adapt to it. Technically more choice is better but you're just made fully aware that whatever you choose something is sacrificed.
I tested Control on PS5 and Series X with the RT mode at 30FPS and it felt absolutely unplayable. It was making me physically ill any time the camera moved. I don't know how a game like Spider-Man or Rift Apart can feel "okay" at 30 but some other games feel like a nightmare. Control with 120hz 40FPS RT on would have been great to experience and I'm sure would have fixed the awful camera movement. Control was fine in the 60FPS mode though even if it was downgraded.
Almost done with the PS4 remake, can't wait to get this started on my new LG OLED that support 120hz!
Every game needs this feature please make it happen.
There is a possibility that when graphics really improve in the next 4 or so years, games will start targeting 40fps when they can't push 60fps on the current gen consoles. That will be interesting
I see this being a work around as well with a highly quality motion blur to make it feel smoother.
@@CyborgSodaCollects
That would be very bad idea.
What's next - using a fog in games because hardware cannot process advanced graphics? (Old Silent Hill games had this fog, because they were unable to force old PC to run it properly..).
I mean, I never had a gaming PC, so 60 fps was just a wish, and now I can experience 60 fps smooth gameplay, I would never go back to anything below 60 fps..
Interesting to see how in the future Amds FSR improves console performance.
As someone who mainly plays games on pc, sometimes I would fix the fps to 40 when I don't get consistent 60fps on big open world games in 4k
didn't know this was a thing until i saw this video... fired it up and tested it, actually feels great at 40fps, this is a mode i could see myself using more if it were more widespread
This is huge. I hope more developers take note and add this support to more games.
I've been playing the Return to Arkham Asylum on my series X. The game is capped at 45fps and with my series X set to 120hz on my 120hz display it feels significantly smoother than having my series X set to 60fps. It also feels significantly smoother overall to a 30fps game. Not quite as fluid as 60fps but definitely very playable.
Yeah... If a frame is late at 30hz, it has to wait 33ms for the next refresh. At 120hz, the wait is just 8.3ms and there is a smaller chance that a refresh will be missed because there are 120 refreshes every second.
I never thought of that game and that weird framerate. Thanks i might give it a go :)
@@DEVILTAZ35 yeah you should definitely check it out if you have a 120hz display. I'm surprised how good it feels
@@mondo2548 The first time I played RDR2 on PC I had also just gotten a 120hz monitor. I remember thinking Rockstar must have created some sort of secret software-freesync because of how smooth it was at a variable 40-50 fps. Switched to 60hz and immediately realized it was the 120hz mode smoothing out the typical frame-skipping you get from a variable fps. Like the guy above said, you get only 8.3ms between frame-skips, which is why it's much less noticeable.
This is another secret advantage to 120hz, and it's useful in Ratchet as the few drops below 40 will be much less noticeable.
always wondered why noone did framerates in-between 30 and 60
60hz pannels is the answer.
Same, nice to know the root cause for 30fps being a standard for so long.
Or 100fps if you can't reach 120hz
@@dazza2350 I’d take 80 over sixty any day of the week.
@@alexanderulv3886 you likely wouldn’t on a 60 Hz display, you would either get stuttering which is very unpleasant it makes it actually feel less smooth, or you get tearing, Which may be OK, but also not ideal.
40 fps and VRR functions that push towards Higher image quality- (for the time being) are useful for TV's over a certain size like 65" & Up and especially 80"+ size and also for TV's with 8K displays.
I can't think it would be a boon to feed a 720p output into a 75" 8K screen. so taking a dip in latency might be worth it when playing on something that big.
However when new techniques in ai and upscaling and so become more common the perceived resolution drop will not be as bad so that might want some to start pushing for the higher frame rates again.
But if you are playing on a 30" screen i'd say go with the higher frame rate as the loss of detail wouldn't be as obvious.
But on a 75" 8K screen even a 1080p or 1440p input to that screen is better than 720p - though it does kinda beg a rather thorny question about how terrible a docked switch could look on a very large screen
I think this could mean a 40 fps lock in games that doesn't have any 60 fps modes and tbh could be game changer...
A super ambitious game that couldn't ever work at 60 would have a great benefit, I love the idea, kudos to insomaniac and DF for showing
This game has good graphics
Pretty beautiful
Good graphics has this game
This game has GREAT graphics
The game is amazing visually
If you haven't played it, you haven't seen nothing yet!
There are thousands of tv panels that supports arbitrary refresh rates generally from 24hz to 60 or even 72hz if OCed ive been playing @ 40hz for years and dont get why this has not been used by consoles until now... down clocking a tv to 40hz is even better than 40 fps on 120hz since there is not frame doubling so you effectively eliminate ghosting. And you dont need hdmi 2.1
But the input lag is probably a lot worse
I think 40fps might be the standard in future consoles. That would make the 40 and 60 fps an actually thing that could change the gaming industry. 30 is great but 40 just feels more clearly, not by a lot from the 60 but definitely noticeable when playing.
This development inspired me to go back to Cyberpunk and run it with a 40fps cap on an RTX 3080. It allowed me to crank every graphics setting all the way up to max at 4k with Performance DLSS and the frame rate doesn't dip below 40 once. Amazing looking game and the best way to experience it on current hardware!
Performance DLSS on a 3080? Shouldn't you aim for quality?
@@RobOngrui Have you played Cyberpunk on max settings at 4k my dude? Quality DLSS dips below 30fps, you're talking about a very demanding open world game with ray traced shadows, reflections and global illumination. Auto DLSS chooses Performance at 4K too, Performance looks fine at this resolution since it's reconstructing from a 1080p source with DLSS doing it's magic.
Something I forgot to mention that also inspired me is the new DLSS 2.2, with it Performance looks better with ghosting eliminated.
@@HeloisGevit hi there, I'm getting a 3070ti build soon, would you mind helping me out by answering a couple of questions...
1. How do you know which version of DLSS a game uses?
2. Can you just drag and drop a DLSS 2.2 file and overwrite DLSS 2.0 in any DLSS supported game?
@@HeloisGevit would the 3090 be able to do it at 40?
@@lalunabelle3 Of course, since it's marginally faster than a 3080, you could even get away with Balanced DLSS without dipping below 40.
I platinum’d the game with the Performance RT mode on an 1440p monitor. I just recently got a Sony 4K 120hz HDMI 2.1 tv that I’m playing on now and the Performance RT mode looks significantly lower res now. Just switched to the Fidelity mode with 120hz option on and it looks a lot better and that extra 10hz really makes it a lot smoother than 30.
Since the PS5 doesn't support 1440p, that means the monitor was getting a 1080p input when you were playing. That would explain why Performance RT looks lower Res now, since your 4K tv is able to display the full resolution now in Fidelity Mode.
@@nickmotsarsky4382 My 1440p monitor would accept a 4K signal and downsample it to 1440p, so I believe they said the Performance mode renders at 1440p and then upscaled to 4K. I think the big difference is just how much better 4K looks now compared to my old 1440p monitor. Still loving my new 4K TV, was a great choice to pair with the PS5.
Really and truly this seems like a hatchet workaround for not having VRR.
The goal of this isn't about reaching smooth mid way point between 30 and 60. That's a byproduct.
It's about giving 120 hz TVs a static better way to handle 30 hz content.
VRR provides a dynamic handling of the issue. If the PS5 had VRR this mode wouldn't exist, and you won't see this mode on any games for its direct rival.
Workarounds like this being done, and the fact that Sony's latest TVs don't support VRR out the box, lead me to believe PS5 owners won't be seeing that software update to handle VRR Sony promised us over half a year ago.
I loathe that we're rewarding this with praise.
I disagree for a couple of reasons.
You can still detect judder even with VRR when frame rates are dropping this low. It seems ratchet drops as low as 38fps and if it was completely unlocked you’d see frame rates all over the place. I don’t believe this would feel as consistent, even with VRR, as a locked and stable 40fps.
As it stands there are no VRR TV’s that can handle large variances in frame rate without having flickering black issues due to the way the static gamma curve works. There are PC monitors that handle this just fine but they have their own drawbacks such as size and HDR performance.
This 40fps mode is a great solution for pushing fidelity as far as possible with smooth performance and I’m all for it as long as we still get the choice of a 60fps mode.
That being said we are long overdue VRR compatibility on PS5. It works excellently to hide moderate drops and has been in place on the Xbox since the one x. I’ve bought the bulk of 3rd party games on the series x so far this gen because of this. And although it makes little real life difference I’m still disappointed the PS5 doesn’t support full 444 chroma at 120fps 4K.
@Daniel Blair are you talking about refresh rate or frame rate? Unless the TV and source has VRR they do indeed only refresh at 60/120hz. That’s what causes all these issues.
Indeed, but you forget that MOST people's TVs won't have gaming features such as VRR.
I’m glad DF made a video on this, it’ll get the ball rolling on dev’s making this a new possible standard going forward.
This has no business being a standard.
It may become one on the PS5, but it only exists because of a lack of VRR.
When Sony makes good on their promise 7 months ago about adding VRR to the PS5, you'll likely never see this mode on a game again.
The 40 FPS is a game changer, I beat the full game again with it, it is sooo much better than 30 FPS
Why didn't you play 60 fps with RT first way better
I'm sure I'm missing something in the way it was said, but Rich said at 12:30 that "the PS5 only supports 1080p120 output?" It does 4k120, so now I'm confused.
it only support 1080p120 with an hdmi 2.0 TV, you need an hdmi 2.1 TV to have 4k120. at least it's what i understood. That said, the PS5 currently lower the color depth of the image when put in 120Hz mode so that you might notice this color downgrade if you have an high end tv.
This is how I see it... If gaming at 4k, this mode makes sense. If your max resolution at 120hz is 1080p, then use the 60fps Performance RT mode for extra frames in the same resolution.
But 1080p is rendering 4x fewer pixels so will the 120hz fidelity mode not run way faster than 40fps at 1080p?
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 unfortunately no, the 120hz Fidelity Mode is locked at 40 even on 1080p. If you want 60fps and ray tracing, even in 1080p, you need to use the Performance RT mode.
I tried it out but went back to RT performance mode pretty quickly. While the 40fps mode is absolutely a much smoother experience than the 30fps one, leaving 60fps behind was just too much of a sacrifice for me.
What is the resolution of rt performance?
@@sedateraslan9159 if I remember correctly the resolution varies between 1080p and 1440p in that mode.
@@Wooslee alright thank you so much
I'm definitely not switching anytime soon from performance RT. It's the perfect amalgamation of raytracing with a solid 60fps.
Yeah it was perfect for me. I want all games to have that
Are you playing on a 4k Tv?
@@D-NastyNoise yes
I love the 40fps on Ratchet- very surprised at the increase in smoothness from the seemingly small gain in frames
Think in frametimes not framerates. 40fps is actually right in the middle of 30fps and 60fps when it comes to frametimes.
12:40 I was about to ask. Thanks for letting us know.
That's really neat. I never thought about the fact that 40 FPS is the mid-point between 30 and 60 in terms of latency.
And that comparison between 120Hz 40 and 60Hz 60 is quite remarkable.
BTW that's a stark difference in Ratchet's face at 20:08 in the middle
Too bad 45fps isn't evenly divisible. That would be the perfect compromise.
I used to do this when my PC couldnt handle a game at 60 fps, I would just cap the game at 40fps and crank settings up, specially in single player games.
I usually cringed when I got down to 45 FPS or so, lol.
This mode is perfect as I just got the LG G1 and it’s a very fine in between.
How does it compare to 30fps? Big difference or small?
@@DrJones20 it’s noticeable definitely I’ll tell you that. I would still expect the standard to be 60 FPS later in the gen and 4k but for the time being it’s a great solution.
@@DrJones20 Big difference! It feels in between but somehow closer to 60 fps than just above 30 fps if that makes sense, but you can still clearly see that 60 is smoother. For me Fidelity is very much worth it now.
You have one of the TVs this mode was essentially created for as a workaround for a lack of VRR.
@@DrJones20 with 30 fps I see stutter with 40 fps while not as smooth as 60 fps it still doesn't show notable stutter
Bruh why can’t this generation be 60fps fidelity and 120performance all across the board 🤦🏻♂️. The fact that we’re still talking about 30fps period is disappointing as hell.
Because we are not getting the same visuals as last-gen, in order to get an easy 1080p120. When adding RT on top, hardware load increases tremendously.
@@raresmacovei8382 I’ve said before that if Sony and Microsoft waited until fall 2021 or even 2022 for 9th gen, they could have implemented Zen 3 and RX6000 series performance. That’d have them reach closer to that ideal goal. Better yet if they went with NVIDIA they could have gotten performance surpassing at least the 2080 cards.
Cause PS5 is crap and holding gaming back
@@glenmcl pretty sure thats everyone not using a high range GPU and CPU combo, you salad bowl.
@Sonic finally, someone who remembered that gaming is a business.
The jump from 30fps to 40fps is indeed more significant than you might think. Since I got a laptop with 144hz G-sync screen a few years back, I've been playing around with frame rate caps so I'm talking from experience. For instance, I ended up playing RDR2 with a 40fps cap. Since my screen is G-sync enabled, I could have left the frame rate unlocked but honestly even with VRR, drops down to the 40s are notifiable and annoying to me. I often prefer to lock the frame rate at a number that the game can consistently hit.
Yep. I have a 144hz gsync laptop and I usually lock to around 75fps.
I’ve been trying similar stuff. RDR2 doesn’t need 60 FPS to feel fluid, but 30 FPS makes me want to claw my eyes out. 40 FPS is that midpoint where it’s *just about* playable with a mouse and keyboard while still offering lots of headroom to dial up graphics settings.
I'm so glad this video exists because Genshin Impact has 45fps and I was wondering if this would make any difference when playing at 60fps or 30fps and it does. Locking my refresh rate to 120hz then playing at 45fps feels smoother than 30fps on 60Hz. But the battery drain is still huge
Great video, it was very informative, I found that 40fps to be much smoother than 30 and did not know why it was dramatically better. This video clears it up
Well, it IS 33% more framerate, so yeah, significantly smoother.
@@nickmotsarsky4382 Framerate is deceiving, as they mention in the video. It's actually a 50% increase in pure performance, when measured by frametime - 25ms slots right in between 33.3 (30fps) and 16.7 (60fps).
Personally, I don't get distracted by "low" frame rates until a game is running below around 40FPS, so that's a good target IMO. I'm fine with variable frame rates as long as it's North of 40, but if a game is dipping below that frequently, I'd just as soon cap it at 30 assuming the cap has stable frame pacing.
I want 48fps like the hobbit trilogy lol.
double 24fps... 48hz is great for 144hz TVs and monitors.
I actually think this might be the ultimate sweet spot between quality and performance (except fast-paced/competitive-online shooters, where more fps is always better), but I don't know if anyone is planning on launching 144Hz TVs.
Sony would need to deliver VRR first because 48fps doesn’t divide cleanly into 120 refreshes.
@@gameguy301 it does on 144 Herz monitors (144:48=3). Though at that point you are coming fairly close to 60 fps so idk if it's even worth it.
@@0ooTheMAXXoo0 Do 144hz TVs exist?
Wow 40fps is definitely noticeably smoother than 30fps. Also I saw another comment mention it. But even if your video is only 1080p, uploading at 1440p gets you TH-cam's better compression. It makes a big difference.
I bet some games could also benefit from running at 50 Hz for a locked 50 fps if they are just shy of hitting a locked 60 fps. I think every HDMI compatible display should support 50 Hz as it is part of the HDMI standard.
The latency in 40FPS is so unexpectatly good, because in 120Hz mode it takes less time to transfer the frame to the screen. It only takes 1/120 of a second, instead of 1/60 of a second.
So, even the 30Hz and 60Hz modes could be improved by running it in 120Hz container. It would shove off another 8.3ms.
The first game that i will buy when i get my hands on the console 😊
@@93836 that's just dumb
I was once joking about cinephiles setting their monitors to exactly 72 Hz so their 24 FPS movies could play without a 3:2 pulldown. I didn't expect console games to pull a similar trick in the near future but, here we are
I've been playing on PC with G-Sync (VRR) for the last 5 years, and I just can't go back. This is the next best thing
I'd love to see this become a standard option (and that existing games receive patches to enable it where viable). Different games are suited to different frame rates and this seems to be a great compromise between visual fidelity vs performance.
A very slow paced game (I'm so old that the best example I can think of are the first few Resident Evil games) depend on their visual fidelity to build mood and don't really benefit from high frame rates. 30fps is fine for such games in my opinion.
A twitch based FPS obviously benefits from higher frame rates, especially if you're playing competitively. I personally play offline and non-competitively the vast majority of the time (it's literally been years since I last played online). If I'm playing an older and/or not very demanding game on PC, I could either use my 144Hz IPS for a nice blend between speed and visuals or if I wanted to go extreme I could hook up my 240Hz TN monitor (though it's currently living in the attic). Couple that with BFI and it's insanely smooth and blur-free. A lot of games however won't be able to maintain such high frame rates without dropping the graphics settings. I consider 60Hz perfectly adequate for most fast paced games (though having the option to go higher depending on your preferences is always nice to have).
Based upon all the games I've played over the past few generations, I think 40fps would have probably been my preferred way to play the majority of them had it been available and I imagine that will be true going forward. I personally don't find 60Hz to be a minimum requirement for a lot of slower paced FPS games, most third person action games and while I'm not sure, I think even some racing games could get away with 40fps. I personally find a stable frame rate more important than a higher one that fluctuates a lot. I'm struggling to think of examples off the top of my head, but I'm sure there are plenty of games which have aimed for 60fps but couldn't maintain it. I'd much rather take a stable 40fps than a 60fps game with frequent dips.