Top
All Channels
780°

Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition New Gameplay / Runs at 60FPS on PS4

Check out one hour of Tomb Raider Definitive Edition on PS4. The game is confirmed to be 1080p/60fps on PS4.

Read Full Story >>
gamesradar.com
The story is too old to be commented.
zielocz3k912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

60FPS on PS4 confirmed at 50:35 :) There is a second question at 59:24 were the guy asked if its "locked 30fps?" He answers that their minimum was 1080p30fps and he goes further and says that they were impressed how well it was running and it runs in 60fps on PS4.

He never mentioned or said that the Xbone version will be the same. lol

From both questions it sounds like that Xbone version will be only ~30fps

Xsilver912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

Does this mean that Tomb Raider Runs at 1080p60fps only on PS4 http://img.pandawhale.com/m...

Hatsune-Miku912d ago

Ps4 is the future and the future is ps4.

gapecanpie912d ago

PC wipes the floor with both versions.

PC is the future unless you can't afford a decent one then you are just stuck with old outdated hardware that PC had two years ago.

ZodTheRipper912d ago

^We can talk once PC gets exclusives in the league of The Last of Us, God Of War or Journey.

morganfell912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

The frames are not locked. A well known Gaffer wrote this:

http://www.rocketchainsaw.c...

"On average:
PlayStation 4 = 60 fps
Xbox One = 30 fps

Yes, the PlayStation 4 build is, on average, twice the framerate of the Xbox One build. Both builds are rendering at native 1080p resolution, and generally look the same in graphical effects (though some minor differences may apply). Performance is a different matter. Both feature unlocked framerates, meaning framerate fluctuates between higher and lower values. The Xbox One build can technically reach around 45 fps, though this performance is generally only achieved during the most empty, simplest environments. For most of your play, and during action scenes, the Xbox One build will sit on around 30 fps. On the other hand, the PlayStation 4 build will attempt to hit 60 fps as often as possible, and does a pretty good job of doing so, but does have slight dips under 60 fps during certain scenarios.

So there it is. Both 1080p. PlayStation 4 = ~60fps average. Xbox One = ~30fps average. Take with a grain of salt if you’d like, but we’ve confirmed it on our end, and confirmation for the rest of the world is only a week away."

EDIT: Just saw this article is on the previous page posted to N4G:

http://n4g.com/news/1442403...

morganfell912d ago

So are you disagreeing the frames are unlocked, that a well known Gaffer wrote that article, or that I just saw it.

Hurts, doesn't it.

Here, this was written a year ago by the creator of FXAA:

http://www.neogaf.com/forum...

And the reason the differences between the X1 and PS4 are already appearing:

Xbone: 1.18 TF GPU (12 CUs) for games
Xbone: 768 Shaders
Xbone: 48 Texture units
Xbone: 16 ROPS
Xbone: 2 ACE/ 16 queues

PS4: 1.84TF GPU ( 18 CUs) for games + 56%
PS4: 1152 Shaders +50%
PS4: 72 Texture units +50%
PS4: 32 ROPS + 100%
PS4: 8 ACE/64 queues +400%

andrewsqual912d ago

@gapecanpie So true, can't wait to play The Last of Us 2 on PC, the sequel to the hands down Game of the Decade according to many sources.

mewhy32912d ago

wow this is a repeating pattern. The devs are taking full advantage of both consoles. Pushing them to their limits. I'm glad that they cared more about achieving maximum results from both both consoles instead of worrying about parity.

Sevir912d ago

Well, I was already buying this game on PS4 since I missed it last year, 60fps confirmed for PS4...? Sold

Army_of_Darkness912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

Oh man, it feels great officially knowing this Hahaha!
I laugh at all the nay Sayers and disagreeing people trying to tell me that the ps4 wasn't capable of 1080p @60fps for this game just because they thought the tech difference wasn't that big of a leap as it was going from the ps2-->ps3 LMAO!
I told you fools that the ps4 was capable of it and only depended on the developers as to whether or not they wanted to implement it on the ps4 version :-D

http://n4g.com/user/blogpos...

PLASTICA-MAN912d ago

Considering the Tress-FX which puts down most of the high end PCs, the extra added next-gen effects, lighting and physics, running at native 1920 x 1080 at 60 FPS it is a technical avhievements even for high-end machines ( you can bring your Alienware or Origin quad SLI Titan + 64 gigs of RAM which you can only see in your dreams or fairly tales, we are talking mainstream here, check Steam polls, most of users are stuck with GT 9800 which i used to have before my old HDD was fried). Devs who knew what they do weren't lying about the PS4 being high-end.

Maxor912d ago

Lol the GT 9800 is a 2008 era card and you're comparing its performance to a 2013 game. Failed trolling. The ignorance of PS4 fanboys continue to astound. Oddly enough my $700 PC run Tomb Raider with TresFX on at 60 FPS just fine.

Oh and I only paid $15 for Tomb Raider complete. It's irrelevant anyway. For all this hooting and praising, I doubt any of you clowns are actually stupid enough to pay $60 for this Tomb Raider Full Price Edition.

TheMadHatter912d ago

@gapecanpie

Lol well I have a high end gaming PC, but believe it or not, I use consoles way more. In my opinion, the console experience is far more enjoyable than PC. Not to mention PC has no decent exclusives. Only good indie exclusives.

Also, why is it that PC gamers have never seen games that look like Watch Dogs and The Division? Because of the next gen systems and PC gamers finally not being dumbed down by consoles. If anything, you fanboys should be happy for the next gen systems.

+ Show (9) more repliesLast reply 912d ago
The_Infected912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

What? I could've swore it was only 30fps which don't bother me for the type of game it is but 60fps is even better.

Edit: How the hell you watch this on mobile?

IIZANGETSUII912d ago

Sadly, you cant watch Twitch vods on mobile

Majin-vegeta912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

Wait i could have sworn i read it was 30FPS??

Edit:Found it so PS4 is running at 60FPS??

http://n4g.com/news/1438387...

@Infected Lol great minds think alike.

Riderz1337912d ago

"They were some misquotes. Our goal was 1080p 30 FPS minimum. And as you can see here, the PS4 version, is clearly running at 60."

brightlight912d ago

I'm pretty sure they hadn't said anything on it because, perhaps, mister Microsoft try to buy their silence or avoid it till launch.
This is pretty impressive that from the get-go the ps4 can manage 60fps compared to the X1 45fps, at most.

Can't imagine what developers would be up to when they get deeper into the systems.

ThatCanadianGuy514912d ago

Big deal.Just another multiplat looking and running better on the more powerful and efficient console.

ape007912d ago

don't celebrate just yet, save it

HaveAsandwich912d ago

lol nothin' to see here.......

Fireseed912d ago

That's great and all but it sucks to not see it in 4k at 60 fps, another generation held back graphically by the consoles :/

ThatCanadianGuy514912d ago

>implying you or even a fraction of gamers have 4K monitors to begin with

Typical PC elitist hyperbole lol.

Why o why912d ago

So many ms console champions now championing pc....isn't that a coincidence.

I guess running for your bigger brother to fight your battles is the in thing

Fireseed912d ago

@ThatCanadianGuy514

I have one... why should I care if others don't? They have options for their monitors.

@Why o why

Console champions champoning PC... yeah how about you read these and stuff calling me a console champion.

http://steamcommunity.com/i...

http://www.lolking.net/summ...

DarkHeroZX912d ago

@Fireseed

Dual titan GPUs can barely do 4k at 30 fps. 2 $1k graphic cards can't do that. Sorry but 4k gaming is not now.

Why o why912d ago

Fair to you and my apologies but many ms console lovers are doing just like I said... if the xb isn't on top and the graphics are better on the ps then all of a sudden ps owners shouldn't care about graphics because if we did, we'd get pcs. Its nonsense...

I prefer consoles, n4g is predominantly a console site but some pc guys love to pop up and spew superiority. Pcs have always and probably will always be superior, we get that, but I cant play the games I've enjoyed over the years on pc because they just aren't available. Show me the pc game of the year winners over the past 8 years.......

With consoles, its a fixed, more level playing field. Basically its down to comparing apples to apples.

Irishguy95912d ago

"Dual Titans can barely"> Why the **** would you get Dual titans?

ion666911d ago

did people lose there sense of humor ?. fireseed

Fireseed911d ago

@DarkHeroZX

I have a dual GeForce GTX 780 ti rig... trust me... it can handle it.

@Irishguy95

The utility of Dual GTX Titans comes with increased floating point precision performance. I've got to play around with a rig that had two of them, and holy crap was it a beautiful thing.

@Why o why
It's all good dude. But I mainly come in here and make this point on occasion because it does get sickening after a while seeing absolute fanboys like Canadian and the rest of them hooping and hollering about how 1080p 60 is the only acceptable standard NOW... and yet it's been the standard for A LOT of PC gamers since around the time of PS3s launch. It's the same feeling you get when you know a great deal about a subject, and see someone who most likely read a Wikipedia snippet passing himself off as a genius.

And I like consoles too (hence why I own the PS4 and X1) but this hubris that SonyPonies have that their middle of the road specs are as one deepthoating SonyPony puts it "The future is PS4, and PS4 is the future." Is laughably stupid, sure it's more powerful than the X1... but to say those specs are the future... ummmm it's adorable at best and pathetic at worst.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 911d ago
Riderz1337912d ago

Verified sources close to Rocket Chainsaw have detailed performance and rendering quality of both the Xbox One and PlayStation builds of Tomb Raider: Definitive Edition. And for that we’re thankful. So here it is!

On average:
PlayStation 4 = 60 fps
Xbox One = 30 fps

Yes, the PlayStation 4 build is, on average, twice the framerate of the Xbox One build. Both builds are rendering at native 1080p resolution, and generally look the same in graphical effects (though some minor differences may apply). Performance is a different matter. Both feature unlocked framerates, meaning framerate fluctuates between higher and lower values. The Xbox One build can technically reach around 45 fps, though this performance is generally only achieved during the most empty, simplest environments. For most of your play, and during action scenes, the Xbox One build will sit on around 30 fps. On the other hand, the PlayStation 4 build will attempt to hit 60 fps as often as possible, and does a pretty good job of doing so, but does have slight dips under 60 fps during certain scenarios.

So there it is. Both 1080p. PlayStation 4 = ~60fps average. Xbox One = ~30fps average. Take with a grain of salt if you’d like, but we’ve confirmed it on our end, and confirmation for the rest of the world is only a week away.

http://media1.giphy.com/med...

starchild912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

Forget it, I hate unlocked framerates. It would be far better to cap it at 30fps for a consistent frame interval. I hate uneven, juddery framerates.

People screaming for 60fps is going to result in a whole bunch of stuttery games with unlocked framerates, just so they can say their game is 60fps (well, some of the time).

kevnb912d ago

I think you are confusing bad frame times with inconsistent frame rate.

PersonMan912d ago

Agree. This is bad news. I don't want a framerate that fluctuates. Look at need for speed rivals on ps4... the frame rate is a ROCK SOLID 30fps (after patch) and it plays just as smoothly as a 60fps game.

thehitman912d ago

@kevn inconsistent framerate is bad frame rate. There is no such thing as having fluctuating good frame rates. Any frame dip no matter how high will cause tearing and stuttering. Thats why there is V sync and Nvidea put resources into developing G Sync.

I game on PC and lots of times and most games can reach up to 80-90 fps but when the action starts drops to 60,50,40 fps and I can see the change happening and its not pretty so I put v sync on always. Still then if its running at 60 and it drops to 50-45 fps I can see the stuttering. Most PC gamers have that problem, where console games dont usually have that since if they cant get 60 fps steady its probably just going to be 30 fps to avoid that. There are no graphic settings for console gamers to tinker with to make the frame rate as consistent as possible.

Ju912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

You know there is no such thing as "locked framerate". Vblank isn't used any more (TFTs don't have accurate vblank anyhow - that's a relic from tubes) and what other games do, is use a upper fps threshold - basically freeing up cycles. Neither is used here. Plenty of cores to run render loop at full speed.

And, actually, you can't see that fluctuation. KZ or BF run dynamically - and close to 60 and you can't tell when it dips. It has no screen tear nothing. NFS is just fine as it is at 30, but it also could probably run faster. We'll see the verdict eventually on DF.

PCs have latency issues and that's what you see. Solved yet again with brute force overpowering. Also, PC fans boast they can run games at 60+ fps when in fact a TFT has a fixed (simulated) refresh rate of 60fps which would then result in interference yet I haven't heard anyone complaining about that.

starchild912d ago

kevnb, with all due respect I do know what I am talking about.

When your display refreshes at a 60hz frequency rate a game has to output at 30fps or 60fps or you will get judder caused by the uneven frame intervals.

With 60fps a unique frame is sent to the display every 16.7ms, if there are latency spikes in the rendering pipeline somewhere and it misses that deadline and if the delay is pronounced enough you will detect it as a stutter.

Now, even though 30fps doesn't give you as much visual information (temporal resolution) as 60fps it isn't too bad as long as it sticks close to that 30fps. This means each frame is rendered in 33.3ms. It might not be as smooth and responsive as 60fps, but it is still even and consistent.

With double buffering the framerate has to be 30fps or 60fps, there is no in between. This is why games like AC4 on the PC run at 30fps with v-sync engaged if you can't maintain over 60fps.

Now with triple buffering you can get framerates between 30 and 60fps, but while you won't have to deal with screen tearing you will still have to deal with judder due to the fact that the frame intervals are all over the place.

I hate judder and it's one of the reasons I game on PC (because I can always buy more powerful hardware to guarantee I can maintain above 60fps). It's also the whole reason Nvidia and AMD are developing things like G-Sync and the so called "free sync".

If judder due to uneven frame intervals didn't matter then there would be no purpose for technologies like G-Sync.

This unlocked framerate trend on consoles is not a good thing at all.

starchild912d ago (Edited 912d ago )

So many disagrees and yet not a one of those people can prove that what I am saying is untrue, or is willing to argue that an uneven framerate is superior to a steady, smooth framerate.

Again, if variable framerates and the resulting judder weren't a problem then companies like Nvidia wouldn't be trying to come up with technologies like G-Sync to deal with it.

I watched the entire video now and it is easy to see the judder.

I can also see that the devs weren't bullshitting about the graphical improvements. I easily noticed the improved particle effects, fuller foliage with more animation, richer physics on certain objects, etc. And all of that is great.

I just think it would have been a much better experience had they capped it at 30fps. It would have given the game smoother motion from a visual perspective and a more consistent controller response.

JOHN_DOH911d ago (Edited 911d ago )

Ok, I play games on pc and I usually don't use vsync. Framerate will always go up or down depending on what's happening. That's why when you see reviews on video cards, they give the avg. framerate. To have a good experience, the minimum framerate is what's important. So if you have a min. framerate of 50, than it will look smooth, but if the framerate is low with a high max framerate it will be noticeable.

"A rate of 100 Hz is comfortable at almost any size. However, this does not apply to LCD monitors. The closest equivalent to a refresh rate on an LCD monitor is its frame rate, which is often locked at 60 frame/s. But this is rarely a problem, because the only part of an LCD monitor that could produce CRT-like flicker—its backlight—typically operates at around 200 Hz."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 911d ago