• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

[VGTech] Halo Infinite Xbox Series S 120fps Mode Frame Rate Test

Jose92

[Membe

Xbox Series S in the 120fps mode uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being approximately 1536x1080 and the lowest resolution found being 960x540. Xbox Series S in the 120fps mode uses a form of temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 1920x1080 resolution. The native rendering resolution seems to usually be below 1280x720 on Xbox Series S when in the 120fps mode and seems to often be 960x540 in demanding scenes such as the open world part of the campaign. Note though that a 1920x1080 pixel count can be resolved due to the temporal reconstruction used. Variable Rate Shading appears to be used which can result in some double width and double height pixels being visible in the frame.

Wow 540p insane
 

MarkMe2525

Gold Member
Cool option for those that want it. I imagine this will get mostly used in multiplayer, it's more of a novelty in the campaign.
 

Razvedka

Member



Wow 540p insane
Exactly the kind of performance to be expected from the S given the specs. Realistic expectations as to what the S brings to the table as a "Next-Gen" box needs to be the order of the day for any current owners or prospective buyers.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
All gaming fans.......

...this is truly the generation that resolution doesn't matter thanks to reconstruction....

....also gaming fans....lol 540p on a console delivering 3 to 4 times the framerate we have seen compared to the 360 generation....what year is it?
 

ShakenG

Member
All gaming fans.......

...this is truly the generation that resolution doesn't matter thanks to reconstruction....

....also gaming fans....lol 540p on a console delivering 3 to 4 times the framerate we have seen compared to the 360 generation....what year is it?
"All gaming fans"

That your problem right there, its not hivemind. People have always had different opinions.

The people that will use this are most likely the ones that will pick 1440p 60fps over 4k 30fps.
 
Last edited:

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
"All gaming fans"

That your problem right there, its not hivemind. People have always had different opinions.

Fair play. It's still obvious abd communicated by anyone with braincells that tge series s is built more for people with a 1080p TV.

540p lows and reconstructed to 1080p is just the same to me as say returnal being 1080p or below and targeting reconstruction and output to a 4k display and that's 60fps.
 
Last edited:

Topher

Gold Member
All gaming fans.......

...this is truly the generation that resolution doesn't matter thanks to reconstruction....

....also gaming fans....lol 540p on a console delivering 3 to 4 times the framerate we have seen compared to the 360 generation....what year is it?

And then we have the console vs console threads where some like to highlight very minor resolution differences. The attitude towards resolution seems to change dramatically from one thread to another.
 

Elysion

Member
I‘m surprised how good these reconstruction techniques have become. I always thought you‘d need special hardware combined with something like DLSS to achieve these kinds of results (like Nvidia with their tensor cores), but it seems it can be done purely in software as well, even on last gen consoles.

Doesn’t the PS4 version of Horizon FW do something similar to achieve 1080p? Do we know what the internal resolution in that case is? I also wonder how much overhead these techniques usually have, since I assume that going from 540p to 1080p isn’t exactly free.
 

DenchDeckard

Gold Member
And then we have the console vs console threads where some like to highlight very minor resolution differences. The attitude towards resolution seems to change dramatically from one thread to another.

There has to be a win somewhere no matter the tiny amount of "Ps" difference.

Even if its one frame difference which i bet no one would be able to feel if they were playing the games next to each other. Say 57 fps vs 58 lol
 

yamaci17

Member
Fair play. It's still obvious abd communicated by anyone with braincells that tge series s is built more for people with a 1080p TV.

540p lows and reconstructed to 1080p is just the same to me as say returnal being 1080p or below and targeting reconstruction and output to a 4k display and that's 60fps.
they're not the same because reconstruction techniques need higher amount of pixels to work with. this is why dlss / fsr works pretty bad at 1080p and works like a charm at 4k and they're only mediocre at 1440p

and the video looks pretty bad. native 1080p is nowhere near looks that bad. it is apparent that it is below 720p most of the time, as stated by the VG Tech themselves. and even then, its not a 120 fps lock its around 75-90 fps and this also confirms my suspicions that 60 fps mode had never native 1080p to begin with (it was also 800p-900p)
 

elliot5

Member
Gave it a spin on my series s hooked up to a 65 inch 4K TCL at my ‘rents house. Its like a series 3 which is low end and I had to turn off auto settings and crank everything down to get 1080p 120hz output in the video settings in the OS (was surprised it offered 120hz)

Loaded into mission 2 on the campaign and it was buttery smooth. Visually its a bit blurry but still looks 1080p to me. I switched to 30 hz and it felt awful on this tv in game mode lol. Without that much of a visual change tbh. 60 fps is still prob the sweet spot, but 120 is appreciated here.

Playing some MP now in FFA and its a similar story. Maybe ever so slightly more blurry but buttery smooth. Not that big of a deal. Honestly if I had a better TV it probably would be even less noticeable but this one was $350 at Sams lol.

Im also used to playing on a 1440p monitor On PC with lower settings (for framessss) so it doesnt bother me
 
Last edited:

Bo_Hazem

Gold Dealer

540p. Just wonderful, I can take advantage of my old CTR again. I knew keeping it was a good idea.

 
Last edited:

assurdum

Banned
All gaming fans.......

...this is truly the generation that resolution doesn't matter thanks to reconstruction....

....also gaming fans....lol 540p on a console delivering 3 to 4 times the framerate we have seen compared to the 360 generation....what year is it?
With 540p reconstruction at 4k it's almost useless.Though why people is still shocked. We already know the series S hardware limits from awhile.
 
Last edited:

DJ12

Member
540p with vrs doubling pixels and in some cases probably quadrupling them.

Why bother. Vrs should only be engaged on games pushing out 4k, 1440p at a miminum.

You will notice vrs at 1080p, as I have done myself playing dirt 5 on PC (until they patched in the option to turn that off) at 540 those pixels will be larger than playing a game on the nes.

I know it's one of the tick box options for some round here, but it really needs to die a death.

It was created for eye tracking vr, not general use gaming.
 
Last edited:

Riky

My little VRR pleasure pearl goes vrrrooommm.
try to run this on a 300$ pc at 120. oh and you also get a 60$ controller.

you literally can’t

This is the point people miss, you then have to get into an 80w power window, good luck with that. My 5500XT is over 5tflops and has 8gb ram with 16gb of System ram and can't live with Series S on Gears and FH5, that card on its own cost as much as a Series S.
 

yamaci17

Member
This is the point people miss, you then have to get into an 80w power window, good luck with that. My 5500XT is over 5tflops and has 8gb ram with 16gb of System ram and can't live with Series S on Gears and FH5, that card on its own cost as much as a Series S.

what do you mean dude?

plus its a rdna1 chip with dx12.1 feature set. you know that better than me. yet it will mostly match series s performance however you spin it.

before you, no, series s does not run fh 5 at 1440p in performance/60 fps mode. and i'm quite sore its not quite ultra, but you get my point
 
Last edited:
try to run this on a 300$ pc at 120. oh and you also get a 60$ controller.

you literally can’t
Try to run this on a $500 Series X. Much better.

A generation last about 8 years, to be limited to the Series S (a digital only console) instead of the Series X because of $200 is absurd. That's the product and results you get when the only focus is cutting costs to get to a specific price point no matter what.

This is the point people miss, you then have to get into an 80w power window, good luck with that. My 5500XT is over 5tflops and has 8gb ram with 16gb of System ram and can't live with Series S on Gears and FH5, that card on its own cost as much as a Series S.
It's only low like that because of how weak it is. It's not like they had the option of a 200w console that was much more powerful for $300 but chose to go with a 80w one instead, it's not like it's a portable console where that matters.
 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
here are some side by sides. if you say "it looks very 1080p to me" or "minimal visual change" you need to get your eyes check. or actually get closer to your screen or something.

(reference: quality mod runs at a fixed native 1080p)


i dont think this has nothing to do with video bitrate either. both images are from VG tech @4k with 50 mbps bitrate. the game literally looks like that
 

elliot5

Member
here are some side by sides. if you say "it looks very 1080p to me" or "minimal visual change" you need to get your eyes check. or actually get closer to your screen or something.

(reference: quality mod runs at a fixed native 1080p)


i dont think this has nothing to do with video bitrate either. both images are from VG tech @4k with 50 mbps bitrate. the game literally looks like that
I’m sitting on a couch literally playing it from about 14 feet away, not looking at an image on my phone or comparing it in real time lol. It looks fine in play. I played through the campaign on XSX on my own nice TV. It’s softer, but runs well and still looks good enough to be clear to read the action and everything.
 

DarkMage619

Member
Hot damn, they went ahead and added a 120hz mode to the tiny box.

Fantastic stuff.
Exactly. The complaints about the resolution seem to be moving the goal posts. First it was MS 'lied' to customers because this game didn't have a 120fps mode. Now it has one and now it's complaints that the low resolution budget console has lower resolutions. It's pretty apparent who is speaking sincerely here. The system is $300. List the consoles or PCs outperforming the XSS at that price point.
 

elliot5

Member
here are some side by sides. if you say "it looks very 1080p to me" or "minimal visual change" you need to get your eyes check. or actually get closer to your screen or something.

(reference: quality mod runs at a fixed native 1080p)


i dont think this has nothing to do with video bitrate either. both images are from VG tech @4k with 50 mbps bitrate. the game literally looks like that
Youre comparing series s 120hz to series x 120hz lmao? Series X has higher quality settings than Series S too so that makes the comparison more drastic. Compare XSS 60 to 120.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
X360 resolution....damn

S is 1080p so can be enjoyed on 1080p TVs. But 540p? I'll need a CRT for that.

540p. Just wonderful, I can take advantage of my old CTR again. I knew keeping it was a good idea.


Hi friends. I know some of you are eager for topics like this to try and get some zingers in.

But it wouldn't be too much to ask for to realize this is a 120 FPS output mode on a $299 box.

You can still play the 60 FPS mode at a stable performance at 1080p.

Carry on.
 
Last edited:

Bogroll

Likes moldy games
What do people expect. It's just nice to have the option.
I've got all 3 current gen consoles and I think the SS is a great little machine. I probably play it the most out of all of them. I don't expect much out of it and if I'm being honest I'm more disappointed with the Ps5 and Series X.
 
Is 120fps even worth it for single player? Maybe for multiplayer but I've found I only really noticed the improved input latency more than anything visual.
I don't know how anyone who is perceptive enough to notice improved latency wouldn't also be able to see it feel the effect of literally doubling the frames? It's was easier to see/feel the difference between 60 and 120 than it is to perceive the barely detectable difference of latency there.

Check your tv/monitor settings, your Xbox settings and in game settings. Something must be off
 

Leyasu

Member
120hz is nice if you want it I suppose. 343 Still adding stuff that was supposed to be there for launch.

My boy plays this at 60hz on his S and it looks and runs great.
 
Top Bottom