• 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

yamaci17

Member
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.
60 fps mode is not a proper 1080p either



"Xbox Series S in Performance Mode uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being 1920x1080 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 1152x720. Xbox Series S in Performance Mode seems to use temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 1920x1080 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution."

Now, I'm sure it mostly renders at 800p-864p at 60 fps target. its a far cry from native 1080p (that's why i chose 30 fps native 1080p mode as a 1080p comparison). you're not getting a 1080p at 60 fps mode. that's why people saying "not so much difference between 60 fps mode".

VG Tech says that it is below 720p all the time with the new VRR mode (can't call it a 120 fps mode when it mostly lingers between 70 90 frames) . do you really think going from 80 frames to 60 frames will magically uplift a 540p-600p resolution target to 1080p resolution target?

if it was really going to hit 120 frames, most likely it would have to hit 300-400p

you only, realistically get native 1080p at 30 fps, like all rx 580-5500xt in the world do.
 
Last edited:

Arioco

Member
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.


HI Friend!

Yes, Series S is a hell of machine. A next gen dream come true, definitely. 👍

Sorry if some of our comments on your 299$ piece of plastic hurt your feelings.

P. S. Funny thing is it doesn't hold 1080p in the 60fps mode either as you already know, but yeah, whatever. OK, moving on.
 
Last edited:

Mr Moose

Member
The chromatic aberration looks hideous at a low res, would probably be best in 60fps for best of both worlds.
 

DaGwaphics

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.

Expectations probably shift.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
60 fps mode is not a proper 1080p either



"Xbox Series S in Performance Mode uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being 1920x1080 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 1152x720. Xbox Series S in Performance Mode seems to use temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 1920x1080 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution."

Now, I'm sure it mostly renders at 800p-864p at 60 fps target. its a far cry from native 1080p (that's why i chose 30 fps native 1080p mode as a 1080p comparison). you're not getting a 1080p at 60 fps mode. that's why people saying "not so much difference between 60 fps mode".

VG Tech says that it is below 720p all the time with the new VRR mode (can't call it a 120 fps mode when it mostly lingers between 70 90 frames) . do you really think going from 80 frames to 60 frames will magically uplift a 540p-600p resolution target to 1080p resolution target?

if it was really going to hit 120 frames, most likely it would have to hit 300-400p

you only, realistically get native 1080p at 30 fps, like all rx 580-5500xt in the world do.



Sure, but in a day where we can count games with 120fps in a handful and so many games not having the option on Series S in those cases, the fact that they went and added the feature based on fan demand is admirable.

Also that the tiny 4TF machine is able to run an open-world-ish game like this in 120hz in the first place. With compromises of course.

This isn't replacing the other modes, this is an option for those who wanted it.
 
Last edited:

DaGwaphics

Member
The entire attitude shifts. Resolution and frame rate turn into scoreboards while any real differences on the screen would hardly ever be noticeable.

Certainly true. In the case of 120fps modes on XSS, I think the attitude shift is warranted. Not exactly the class of GPU that you typically look to for 120fps output. I think it's quite an accomplishment when a game pulls it off.
 
I don't see what the problem is, it's a massive open world on a 4 teraflop GPU at 120fps with as much as 30+ enemies on screen along with vehicles and the ability to traverse the entire environment via grapple or air. What resolution low point were people expecting for 120fps with all that action going on with a 4 teraflop console?
 

anothertech

Member
I don't see what the problem is, it's a massive open world on a 4 teraflop GPU at 120fps with as much as 30+ enemies on screen along with vehicles and the ability to traverse the entire environment via grapple or air. What resolution low point were people expecting for 120fps with all that action going on with a 4 teraflop console?
Not 540p lol
 
Wasn’t this supposed to be included at launch?
How is that an extra option?
Says who? Features like resolution and framerate are up to the developers. You constantly called out this game for not having 120fps now it has it are you happy? You can now play this at 120 fps on your XSS congrats Frank!
 
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.

And regardless of what the resolution is, how about that gameplay!? This game looks fantastic even at 120fps on the Series S. The gameplay is just too damn fun and there are so many possibilities gameplay wise.
 
X360 resolution....damn
Halo 3/ODST/Reach was 640p, so worse internal res than Xbox 360.

But we've come a long way with reconstruction techniques, it most likely comes close to doubling that all the way to 1920x1080 in motion, bar the very first frames that get pushed out and at 120 fps that's particularly fast (8,33~ miliseconds).
Wasn't the likes of Ninja Gaiden 2 and COD Modern Warfare also sub 7:20P. I seem to remember Infinity Ward need special permission to be allowed to drop the 720P 3rd party mandate from MS
 
Yo, Series S is a truly incredible machine for just $300. Look at how friggin smooth it is on those chaotic outposts attacks and while driving around full speed on Zeta Halo. It isn't a perfect 120fps, but you'd be hard pressed to see any signs that anything is amiss with performance. Zero tearing. Job well done by 343 with this one.

And there's still so much more yet to crank out of this console. There's so much more left in the CPU and GPU. They've really yet to crack the surface.
 

01011001

Banned
Wasn't the likes of Ninja Gaiden 2 and COD Modern Warfare also sub 7:20P. I seem to remember Infinity Ward need special permission to be allowed to drop the 720P 3rd party mandate from MS

what do you mean by "3rd party mandate"?
there were a shitload of games that weren't 720p

Crysis 1-3, NG2, all call of duty games afaik... sub 720p was normal not the exception
 
Last edited:

MonarchJT

Banned
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.


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.
is a product for who think that 500€ for a console is too much and doesn't give a f**k about best res and performance . Are we still at it ?
 
Last edited:

Codes 208

Member
I mean, even with medium settings at 1080p this game seems to barely hit 80fps on my 2070s/i7

So the S hitting 540p to get 120fps seems like a given.
 

Arioco

Member
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 👆
 

yamaci17

Member
I mean, even with medium settings at 1080p this game seems to barely hit 80fps on my 2070s/i7

So the S hitting 540p to get 120fps seems like a given.


Xbox Series X in Performance Mode uses a dynamic resolution with the highest native resolution found being 2560x1440 and the lowest resolution found being 1280x720. Native resolution pixel counts at 2560x1440 seem to be rare on Xbox Series X in Performance Mode. Xbox Series X in Performance Mode mode uses temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 2560x1440 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution.

it probably averages something akin to 800-1100p, mostly 100-120 fps. so very close to your performance (considering xsx is a bit like 2080super-6700xt and a bit above 2070s). you getting 1080p 80 fps is pretty respectable, given the performance profile of the game


IFXi0ky.png


game is simply super unoptimized, for both consoles and GPUs. (reference video, )
 
Last edited:
At 120fps?! [Vrr]
Of course not :)

And very different games and tech too.
Wasn't the likes of Ninja Gaiden 2 and COD Modern Warfare also sub 7:20P. I seem to remember Infinity Ward need special permission to be allowed to drop the 720P 3rd party mandate from MS
Plenty games were sub 720p in that era. I'm not sure if it was mandatory in any way at launch but if it was it was quickly ditched. I believe Microsoft aimed for native res in their releases though.

Call of Duty games on x360 were usually 1024x600 and then scaled up to 1280x720 which was a fine compromise back then.

PS3 was harder because it couldn't scale vertically, only horizontally. That lead to increasingly strange resolutions and generally worse results than of that was transparent, specially in multiplat releases. Vertical scalling when used, needed to be done by software.
 
Last edited:

Three

Member
I mean, even with medium settings at 1080p this game seems to barely hit 80fps on my 2070s/i7

So the S hitting 540p to get 120fps seems like a given.
It doesn't hit 120fps. It's a 120hz tv mode but calling it 120fps is really stretching it. Like saying your PC runs at 144fps because it's on a 144hz monitor. It never seems to hit 120fps and floats at 80fps most of the time.
 

ZywyPL

Banned
Sort of related, but did anyone noticed improved image quality on XSX at 120Hz mode? I swear the game looks much cleaner and texture details are much more noticeable now. My bet is that along 120FPS fir XSS they also added image reconstruction in XSX version as well.
 
I don't have a Series S and don't have much of an opinion on it, but the owner seem to be pretty happy with it. They really don't mind the dips in the resolutions and by all accounts don't seem to really even notice it during gameplay.

So, my question is why is it more "acceptable" to the types of resolution drops on the Series S versus on the PS5/Series X? Is it simply just the price? Is the drop from 4k to 2K more noticeable than it is from 1080p to 720p? As a PS5 owner who has played games with dynamic resolution/res drops... I don't think I've ever really noticed, but then again I'm not looking for them and maybe I just don't know the "signs" of resolution drops.
 

yamaci17

Member
I don't have a Series S and don't have much of an opinion on it, but the owner seem to be pretty happy with it. They really don't mind the dips in the resolutions and by all accounts don't seem to really even notice it during gameplay.

So, my question is why is it more "acceptable" to the types of resolution drops on the Series S versus on the PS5/Series X? Is it simply just the price? Is the drop from 4k to 2K more noticeable than it is from 1080p to 720p? As a PS5 owner who has played games with dynamic resolution/res drops... I don't think I've ever really noticed, but then again I'm not looking for them and maybe I just don't know the "signs" of resolution drops.

i dont know. i try using dlss quality (720p) at 1080p and it is too noticeable for me. everyone at 4k says even dlss performance mode is fantastic (4k to 1080p). higher resolutions have more pixels to work with, as a result, the end result will usually be more pleasant if you fly high (at 4k). when you re already at 1080p, an already very low resolution, there's not much "visual" headroom to go down further

at least this is my experience. maybe dlss is worse than their temporal upscaler. what do I know
 

01011001

Banned
i dont know. i try using dlss quality (720p) at 1080p and it is too noticeable for me. everyone at 4k says even dlss performance mode is fantastic (4k to 1080p). higher resolutions have more pixels to work with, as a result, the end result will usually be more pleasant if you fly high (at 4k). when you re already at 1080p, an already very low resolution, there's not much "visual" headroom to go down further

at least this is my experience. maybe dlss is worse than their temporal upscaler. what do I know

DLSS starts becoming good at 1440p and up

so I made a few God of War comparisons (64k modem warning!)
I labeled the static images so you know which res all of them are, and the "in motion" ones where I tried to walk forward at the same spot over and over are the same settings in the same order as the static ones where I stand still

for the motion ones I went to that one lamp and walked forward while taking the shot, also there are falling leafs everywhere for additional motion assessment!

I locked all modes to 60fps as more frames technically could result in cleaner images since the AA/Upscaling method has more samples to work with and therefore an unfair advantage
take note how surprisingly good the 480p shots still look


this is max settings too btw
gownativetaa8okym.png


gowdlssqualitykpk8y.png


gowdlssbalanced1jj62.png


gowdlssperformance0fkai.png


gowdlssu-performancej8j57.png


gownativetaamotioneyjcr.png


NOTE HERE, look at Kratos' back and axe. in the Native + TAA 👆 you see weird artifacting in the pelt he wears and the axe is really aliased
and in the DLSS Quality version below 👇the pelt looks way nicer and the axe is properly edge-treated

gowdlssqualitymotiondkjm9.png


gowdlssbalancedmotion37kd6.png


gowdlssperformancemotxfjsc.png


gowdlssu-performancemrtjbt.png

all in all Native + TAA looks sharper but more aliased and has weird artifacting not found in the DLSS Quality mode. every DLSS mode below Quality still looks decent but should only really be used at higher resolutions like 4K
at 1440p I would advice anyone to use DLSS Quality, it looks better than Native + TAA for sure. the TAA has more artifacts and worse edge-treatment so DLSS Quality is an absolute no-brainer here

edit: zoom in on the pelt in the motion shot

comp1small0bk3w.png

comp1bighyjvo.png


the top one is native + TAA the bottom is DLSS Quality (960p native res)

you lose sharpness with DLSS Quality but you gain better edge treatment in motion for sure! you can see the TAA completely breaking apart in motion even on the axe and the arm/shoulder where you can see hard pixel edges not really anti aliased but having obvious staristepping
 

yamaci17

Member
DLSS starts becoming good at 1440p and up
i know. but it does not match the experience of series s owners somehow

no sophistaced AI upscaler, a simple temporal upscaler. yet everyone says 540p-720p input literally looks like 1080p. either i'm crazy or its just at this point PC users have different expectations from upscalers or that console users are not actually accustomed to what a native resolution actually looks like
 

01011001

Banned
i know. but it does not match the experience of series s owners somehow

no sophistaced AI upscaler, a simple temporal upscaler. yet everyone says 540p-720p input literally looks like 1080p. either i'm crazy or its just at this point PC users have different expectations from upscalers or that console users are not actually accustomed to what a native resolution actually looks like

you can not actually take subjective statements like that seriously online sadly. you have to know the person to properly assess if they are just having REALLY low standards or actually are reliable when it comes to this stuff.

you can absolutely tell immediately that Halo on Series S looks sub native.
I have my Series S set up on a 1440p PC monitor, it's basically the local LAN system and replaced my One X recently who was used for that before.

and I can easily tell that Halo Infinite, even in the 60fps mode, didn't look like 1080p half the time. I didn't play this new update with the 120fps mode yet, first of all because my PC monitor does not support 120hz over HDMi, and secondly because I uninstalled the game on every system cuz I'm done with it.
but even the 60fps mode could drop below 1080p and you could easily tell.

while the game's TAA seems to be pretty decent, it's not that good, and far away from the quality of DLSS
 

elliot5

Member
i know. but it does not match the experience of series s owners somehow

no sophistaced AI upscaler, a simple temporal upscaler. yet everyone says 540p-720p input literally looks like 1080p. either i'm crazy or its just at this point PC users have different expectations from upscalers or that console users are not actually accustomed to what a native resolution actually looks like
I have a 3060 Ti and use DLSS whenever I can. I know what native and dlss looks like. Even on a 65 inch TV sitting across the room I can tell at 120hz Halo Infinite looks soft, but not terribly soft that it’s unacceptable. It plays like im playing on low settings on pc but on a tv and doesnt look much worse than other 1080p games or xbox one version games. 🤷‍♂️
 

Leyasu

Banned
Sort of related, but did anyone noticed improved image quality on XSX at 120Hz mode? I swear the game looks much cleaner and texture details are much more noticeable now. My bet is that along 120FPS fir XSS they also added image reconstruction in XSX version as well.
I thought that it looked better to. But I am playing at 60 on my xsx
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Sort of related, but did anyone noticed improved image quality on XSX at 120Hz mode? I swear the game looks much cleaner and texture details are much more noticeable now. My bet is that along 120FPS fir XSS they also added image reconstruction in XSX version as well.

Patching is an ongoing effort, won't be surprising if further optimization makes the DRS better towards the higher ends.

They've patched the 30 FPS animations to full frame rate now since launch as well, so maybe that smoothness is also adding to it.
 
So, my question is why is it more "acceptable" to the types of resolution drops on the Series S versus on the PS5/Series X? Is it simply just the price? Is the drop from 4k to 2K more noticeable than it is from 1080p to 720p? As a PS5 owner who has played games with dynamic resolution/res drops... I don't think I've ever really noticed, but then again I'm not looking for them and maybe I just don't know the "signs" of resolution drops.
The price is one reason it is acceptable the other is for the displays usually used for the XSS it isn't a huge deal. Couple that with the fact that most people don't buy an XSS for high resolution graphics and more so for high framerate you can understand why people don't care as much about resolution for this system. You'll also notice the loudest complaints come from people who don't even own an Xbox. It's an interesting coincidence.
 

TLZ

Banned
Where in the video can you tell its 540p
Oh I didn't watch the video. Just took the info from OP.

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.
Nothing like some lighthearted banter 😊
 
Of course not :)

And very different games and tech too.

Plenty games were sub 720p in that era. I'm not sure if it was mandatory in any way at launch but if it was it was quickly ditched. I believe Microsoft aimed for native res in their releases though.

Call of Duty games on x360 were usually 1024x600 and then scaled up to 1280x720 which was a fine compromise back then.

PS3 was harder because it couldn't scale vertically, only horizontally. That lead to increasingly strange resolutions and generally worse results than of that was transparent, specially in multiplat releases. Vertical scalling when used, needed to be done by software.
There was a mandate, much like with 3rd parties needing to break the 1 disc role for 3rd parties.
 
There was a mandate, much like with 3rd parties needing to break the 1 disc role for 3rd parties.
Here's a good list about X360 native resolutions, not as bad as I imagined such a list would look:

-> https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1114423/

There is at least one launch title not hitting 720p:

Perfect Dark Zero: 1152x640 (same res as Halo 3, interestingly)

But the list certainly looks better than I assumed it would.

Worst offenders are:
Alan Wake: 960x544
Call of Duty Black Ops 2: 880x720
Sonic Unleashed: 880x720
Star Ocean 4: 936x512 (battles only)
much like with 3rd parties needing to break the 1 disc role for 3rd parties.
I remember that, and the "security partition" thing that took 1GB out of total capacity of a dual layer DVD and in reality mostly served to pad the game to the inner side of the disc where the read speed was higher.
 
Last edited:

01011001

Banned
I just remembered that VRR is broken in this game, because... of course it is, so 120fps mode should be avoided for now in campaign
 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
I just remembered that VRR is broken in this game, because... of course it is, so 120fps mode should be avoided for now in campaign
i asked riky if vrr is working properly or not with uncapped series s mode (80-110 frames) but he refuses to answer for some reason.
 
Here's a good list about X360 native resolutions, not as bad as I imagined such a list would look:

-> https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1114423/

There is at least one launch title not hitting 720p:

Perfect Dark Zero: 1152x640 (same res as Halo 3, interestingly)

But the list certainly looks better than I assumed it would.

Worst offenders are:
Alan Wake: 960x544
Call of Duty Black Ops 2: 880x720
Sonic Unleashed: 880x720
Star Ocean 4: 936x512 (battles only)

I remember that, and the "security partition" thing that took 1GB out of total capacity of a dual layer DVD and in reality mostly served to pad the game to the inner side of the disc where the read speed was higher.
Yeah. MS put lots of silly mandates for 3rd party software at the start. They rules over the size of XB Live Arcade games was stupid too
 

ShirAhava

Plays with kids toys, in the adult gaming world
As someone who uses my Series S with a 720p CRT Monitor I'm ok with this
 

Riky

$MSFT
I just remembered that VRR is broken in this game, because... of course it is, so 120fps mode should be avoided for now in campaign

It isn't as bad now, I had a look at it last night after John's comments in the DF weekly.
Performance has improved greatly with all the patches, so much so that the game just runs mostly at 120fps so VRR becomes less useful.
During gameplay I couldn't see any judder when the framerate was dropping to about 110fps so I presumed it has been fixed, but it hasn't .
If you stand very high up and look over a large expanse normally with water in you can more easily drop the framerate to about 110fps, then if you stand still and move the camera slowly you can see some judder, move the camera fast and it's incredibly difficult to spot.
So on Series X I would say 120fps is a go as noticing it in gameplay is very very difficult.
 
Top Bottom