Are Modern Day TVs Why PS4 Pro & Xbox One X Games Won't Run Over 60 FPS?

What is the thing holding back PS4 Pro and Xbox One X games from running above 60 FPS? The answer to that is the very thing you watch them on. Boss Key's lead designer speaks about the topic.

[MegamanXXX]

It's mind boggling that the One X and Pro won't be able too play game's in true native 4K 60fps except for Racing games and probably fighting games because of modern day Tv's .

[RuleNumber5]

It's a real bummer. Feels like there are so many ingredients working against XBOX and Pro showing their true capabilities. Base console models are to blame and now the TVs. Ugh, feels like a waste of amazing potential.

[MegamanXXX]

Another thing if this is true is the One X worth the $500 dollars now🤔🤔

[Artemidorus]

Base consoles and TVs are not to blame, the hardware is weak.

Go and see what a PC has to do to achieve 60fps at ease with 4K settings on an AAA game.

[Bigpappy]

don't know what the limitations of X1X will be yet, But what I do know for sure, is that the Pro is not and will not be its equal. Cant just say Pro and XBOX because you have no idea what the limitations are.

[indysurfn]

@2pacalypsenow, the title may lead you to think the article is saying that's TV's are keeping us from running 4k at 60fps. But once you read it, it is saying tv's will keep us from running ABOVE 60fps @4k (because the tv's cap at 60fps, which is different from the refresh rate).

An HZ=1,000 frequency it is different than Frames per second. https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...
Not just xbox one, or PS4, of X1x, or PS4 Pro. The TV is capped at DISPLAYING 60fps

[its_JEFF]

@bigpappy in reality you DONT know, and won't know, what the limitations of either of these consoles will be until a full on Pro or X1X exclusive exists... past that is just pure speculation.

[indysurfn]

For you people that disagree because you don't want to read the article, and don't want to click a wikipedia link 120hz 4k tv's have been out for awhile now. So even common sense will tell you the article is not talking about hz (frequency) it is talking about fps (frames per second). (even though some people incorrectly use them interchangeably )

If they was the same, then the article would be wrong when it said there not being any tv's over 60fps.

[livininsin]

@indysurfn
hz is a unit of frequency which can be used in many situations but when talking specifically about a TV's display rate capability then 1hz=1fps, they are completely interchangable.

And yes, there are 120hz TVs, 240hz too, and although the screens can display this framerate, many, maybe most, cannot accept or process a signal greater than 60hz but some can. These TVs use their capability internally when the frame interpolation feature is turned on and artificial frames are added between native frames to reduce stutter and motion blur. The feature can also be used to display 3d material. Some TVs can even be overclocked to accept a higher framerate too.

[2pacalypsenow]

As long as the tv has a HDMI 2.0 port which almost every 4k tv has, other than the really early ones, they can all output 60hz @2160P, its the hardware limitation from the Xbox and PS4 that prevents it, not the TV.

[Kingthrash360]

Namely, the cpu

[CoryHG]

Problem is a lot of 1080p sets were running at 120hz, hence the smooth look. My samsung 30hz and supposedly 60hz 4k tv doesnt always do that. My tv is a huge issue, hence i'll never buy another samsung product.

[2pacalypsenow]

@Feldman9000

That "Soap opera effect" can be turned off, that's not caused by the panel being 120hz.

[OMGitzThatGuy]

@Feldman what tv manufactuers call 120hz is not the same as a 120hz monitor. Mostly all TVs do like a frame manipulation to stretch 60hz to 120hz which cause weird effects and high input lag. If you were to plug in a PC, it would run at 60hz but 120hz after processing wereas a monitor runs 120hz at 120fps.

[indysurfn]

@2pacalypsenow, the title may lead you to think the article is saying that's TV's are keeping us from running 4k at 60fps. But once you read it, it is saying tv's will keep us from running ABOVE 60fps @4k (because the tv's cap at 60fps, which is different from the refresh rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

An HZ=1,000 frequency it is different than Frames per second
Not just xbox one, or PS4, of X1x, or PS4 Pro. The TV is capped at DISPLAYING 60fps

[segamaniaco]

Super Stardust runs at 120fps on PS3

[JJShredder]

Article is trash.

Not even a 1080ti can run most games at 4K60FPS without reducing quality and a significant amount of 4K TVs sold today are 120hz native so the author has not clearly done their research (source: has 120hz native 4K TV)

Also, most console games run at 30FPS anyways and the ones that do run at 60FPS are rarely "locked" so why are we complaining about going above 60FPS?

[RuleNumber5]

Did you read the article? That is what Boss Key's lead designer is saying, not the author. Read before you type.

[TankCrossing]

Rich when actually you clearly haven't done your research. Those 120hz TVs won't accept a 120hz signal.

There were a tiny tiny number of TVs that you could botch 1080p120 on, but it's not part of the HDMI standard and would be stupid to target or support on a console.

[yomfweeee]

The article may not be trash but the designer's point is pretty stupid. He's right that most TVs don't support more than 60fps, but these consoles are barely able to hit 60.... so don't blame TVs.

[2pacalypsenow]

@ImGumbyDammit There are currently no consumer TV's that have HDMI 2.1.

[indysurfn]

@JJShredder, the title may lead you to think the article is saying that's TV's are keeping us from running 4k at 60fps. But once you read it, it is saying tv's will keep us from running ABOVE 60fps @4k (because the tv's cap at 60fps, which is different from the refresh rate https://en.wikipedia.org/wi...

An HZ=1,000 frequency it is different than Frames per second

Since hz means 1,000 then you would be saying 60*1,000 every time you saw 60fps.
Not just xbox one, or PS4, of X1x, or PS4 Pro. The TV is capped at DISPLAYING 60fps

[Zeref]

dat stealth trolling

[343_Guilty_Spark]

How many games actually need 60 fps outside of racers and shooters?

[tee_bag242]

All games mate. Screw your low standards.

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Not your damn mate...I don't swing that way.

[SyWolf]

It's actually pretty simple. The CPU isn't strong enough.

[fr0sty]

You guys are misunderstanding the headline. Games don't run AT 4k60 on Pro and XBO:X because they both have weak CPUs for gaming consoles, and that creates a bottleneck. They cannot run ABOVE 4k60 because there currently aren't TVs on the market that accept input at above 60fps (though many will upscale that to higher frame rates, they all cap the actual input at 60).

[XanderZane]

My HDTV does 120fps. There will definitely be games that are not racing or fighting games that will be 4K / 60fps. Most games don't need to be over 60fps. Don't be a delusional fanboy.

[MegamanXXX]

Sorry mate just to hard to believe because of the laptop cpu. Maybe when Sony and Microsoft puts in a desktop cpu we will see 4K 60fps in games like Dues EX and Witcher 3

[XanderZane]

@MegamanXXX
Didn't say there were games available that does 120fps. I said my HDTV is ready for 120fps games. I could hook my PC up to it and be able to get 120fps. The CPU is fine. It capable of doing games at native 4K / 60fps. We've already seen some on the Pro and XB1X. There are more coming in the future. You don't really need 60fps in a game like Dues EX or Witcher 3.

[MegamanXXX]

It's checkerboard 4K and I'm talking about more demanding games like Dues EX, Hitman, and so on. I get 4K 60 fps in Witcher 3 on my PC and it looks amazing

"You don't really need 60fps in a game like Dues EX or Witcher 3"

Why not? The One X should give you 60fps for $500 dollars

[XanderZane]

@MegamanXXX
PC is not a game console. I don't really care what you can do on your PC. When we can start upgrading our game consoles on our own, then we can start comparing them to PC's. No one said the XB1X would have every game 4K @60fps. DF never said that. Microsoft never said that. Only trolling fanboys like yourself keep saying this. They said the system would have native 4K games and it does. Yes, there will be some games that are native 4K @60fps. I'm sure some will be open world games as well once developers figure out how to unleash all of the power of the XB1X. Developers are still getting the SDK's. Give it a year or two.

[Malacath]

That doesn't make much sense. If a modern TV is 4k and 60Hz then surely it can display 4k in 60fps?

[Tsar4ever01]

O-M-F-G!!! I can't believe what I've just read!! This article writer says it possible that the HDTV available may be the reason why the latest consoles games can't do 60fps. And currently, Modern HDTV's support 60Hz, 120Hz, 240Hz and upto 480Hz. We've ALREADY F***KING KNOW WHY current consoles can't handle most games in 60fps.

It's CPU cores are the damn bottleneck. Devs been saying it since even before the consoles launched. PC gaming hardware analyst assumed that the low powered Jaguar Cores were going to be a problem and then later the console developers started speaking out like NaughtyDog. This already has been well documented for years. Then here this idiot coming out with this nonsense article about modern Tv's might be the reason. SO STUPID!!!

All you have to do is watch Richard from Digital Foundary's YouTube video called "Why next-gen consoles MUST USE RYZEN technology" Even he clearly explains why & how the weak cpu's holding back the PS4/Pro and STILL will be holding back the X1X. https://www.youtube.com/wat...

[deadfrag]

BS!And the fact that 60fps is suitable enough.Not to mention most games on the PS4 pro and Xbox One X dont even run above 30fps,this article is complete BS,it could make some sense if the majority of the games were already running at 60fps but unfortunately thats not the case because the focus is on the graphics resolution 4K and not on smooth play at 1080p60fps has it should be for now.

[2pacalypsenow]

Lol yeah this article is crap.

[SyWolf]

Under 80 is too low for me. 60 is the bare minimum of playability.

[indysurfn]

I play Horizon Zero dawn at 4k 30fps HDR AND at 60 fps @1080P and strongly prefer the 4k at 30FPS WITH HDR, HDR in this game is not playing! In fact all my friends that have seen it on my tv (which is a $3,500 tv ) have the same opinion.

Because of how much better it is to play at 4k HDR at only 30fps are now upgrading tv's (or in two of there cases have already done so. since early this year).

When playing in this mode if you have a high end TV you will wonder how they will make games look better than this one in the future. It is this good.

[Kornholic]

That's the dumbest thing I've read this week.

[SyWolf]

No, playing at 30hz is not better than 60hz.

[2pacalypsenow]

Lol this article is reaching, there are plenty of TV's that have native 120hz panels, there's very little demand for 120hz since majority of shows are broadcast at 30hz and movies are 24 hz.

[Genuine-User]

Not in 4K.

[2pacalypsenow]

He doesn't mention 4k, just 60fps .

When HDMI 2.1 is launched TV's will be able to do 4k at 60+hz

[RuleNumber5]

Did you read the article or just the title and description? That is what Boss Key's lead designer is saying, not the author. Don't be lazy and read before you type.

[2pacalypsenow]

I don't care what he said, unless hes referring to 4k (which he doesn't mention) there are Tv's with 120 and even 240hz panels.

[RuleNumber5]

@2pacalypsenow Then your comment is sheer ignorance because that is what the article is about, what the lead designer said. The issue isn't that there aren't TVs out there, the issue is no one has them. The majority of gamers aren't adopting them, thus it's a problem for everyone. They can't just make a game that runs on 1 percent of TVs owned, obviously. It's an unfortunate limitation added to the already limiting factor of the base PS4 and Xbox One weighing down XBOX and Pro versions of games.

[Genuine-User]

Yeah, they should have mentioned the resolution. That said, they're most likely talking about 4K.

[indysurfn]

This article is talking about FRAMS PER SECOND not hz. Herts are the frequency that the frames are refreshed. 1hz=1,000h

[SirCharles]

Lol no. If you think those CPUs are capable of hitting above 60fps on graphically demanding titles without castrating visuals you cray cray

[Smok91]

Who buys a 60 FPS tv?

[2pacalypsenow]

Majority of televisions use 60hz panels. So a lot of people

[Maxor]

EVERYONE.

[Yohshida]

Over 60fps makes sense for Fighting games and partly shooters. Still, a solid 60fps is better than a 80-120 fps jumping all over the place. This should be the norm for ALL games going forward. I dont care if the Resolution has to get lowered for it or even the overall graphics, as a PC gamer I know me and everyone I play with is going FPS over everything else. If I cant hit that rock solid 60fps, im lowering until I can.

[bluefox755]

It would be stupid to target over 60fps on a console anyway. Hell, it's barely practical for most PC gamers, considering only a tiny percent spend what's necessary for a top end build.

[Weeblordbad]

144hz in things like Titanfall 2/Battlefield 1 look amazing. Achieving 60+ fps in modern games isn't very hard if you're playing at a res lower than 4k.

[bluefox755]

I don't disagree that 144hz is great, I'm just saying the hardware required to do that isn't feasible for the average gamer, and certainly not worth the price increase from 60fps (to most gamers). People are willing to pay $400 for a console, $500 tops, and even that's pushing it. 60fps is a far more practical target from a cost standpoint. Obviously, there are exceptions to this, like CS:GO and whatnot, which have very low system requirements, but let's be honest, consoles struggle to get 60fps at their price point (which is totally understandable, performance isn't free). People can disagree with this all they want, but console prices and steam surveys confirm that the vast majority of gamers really aren't super concerned with breaking the 60fps ceiling. Though, once again, I'm not saying that it isn't nice, was just looking at the cost-benefit ratio.

[Elda]

Personally for me I'm not at all bothered by having 30/fps,for me I really don't know the difference but I think 60/fps moves a bit quicker in shooter games & some folks say 60/fps moves more fluidly but I still can't really tell the difference.As long as the game is not broken & I'm having fun then 30/fps it is.

[Hedstrom]

Lol, the biggest reason why games dont hit 60fps at all are the jaguar processor in the consoles.

[uth11]

I thought this was obvious?

[neoandrew]

Well XBOX ONE X will, it is ready to support hdmi 2.1 and VRR mode, not sure about ps4 pro, but i really doubt any developer will support 120 fps when VRR drops in. Disclaimer, vrr has nothing do to with fps cap but it is likely that VRR tvs will have more than 60 fps support.

There are already 120, even 200 hz tv.

You can also connect any HDMI monitor, 120, 144fps, but at the end of the day, console and game must support anything above 60 fps.

[ElementX]

Aren't programs broadcast at 30fps? Movies are filmed at 24fps. I know some panels display 120 or 240hz but I believe those insert extra frames to make things look smoother but the side effect is that everything looks really fake. I had a TV that did 120hz but I turned it off. When that TV crapped out I bought a cheaper 60hz TV and it's just fine.

[Weeblordbad]

It's frame interpolation, the issue with TV's offering 120hz+ was that no input standard would feed the TV at more than 60hz. So for gaming it was always a feature that just introduced a boatload of input lag, and didn't improve the game. I have a 144hz 1080p monitor and to get the 144hz out of the monitor I have to use DVI-D if I had opted for the HDMI ports I would be locked to 60hz as whatever version of HDMI the monitor is using (Probably HDMI 1.4) doesn't have the bandwidth.

The problem with this article is anyone buying a 4k tv should know whether or not the TV has HDMI 2.0 ports (Able to support 4k @60hz) if you have those ports there is nothing stopping the tv from displaying 60fps at 4k. Anyone purchasing a 30hz anything is not a very intelligent person and probably deserves the disappointment for not doing their research. That being said, since 4K tv's have come closer to mainstream pricing I haven't seen a single 30hz 4k panel, they're all at the very least 60hz. So to answer the articles question, a tv has nothing to do with it.

[Omnislashver36]

Yeah, you can turn off 120hz frame interpolation. It's not really 120fps anyway, it's faking 4 frames which is one reason it looks so bad.

Furthermore 120hz tvs are perfect for playing 24p content, as 24x5=120.(basically they can repeat one frame 5 times, so that it will play 24p content perfectly.) This cannot be achieved on a 60hz panel, as 24 cannot be divided into 60 perfectly. Some frames are repeated 3 times, and others twice to make 24 divide into 60. This results in uneven motion.

120hz is perfect.

24x5=120(movies and other 24p content)
30x4=120(tv and 30fps videogames)
60x2=120(60fps videogames)
120x1=120(120fps videogames)

As for frame interpolation, I'd turn that feature off on a 120hz set. Making 24p fakely into 120p content doesn't look good at all.

TBH I don't even like 60fps content all the time. It puts strain on my eyes and unless there's good motion blur doesn't look natural to me. Some games like TLOU Remastered did 60fps correctly, but most of the time I don't even like 60fps. Still, a 120hz panel is perfect for playing all content though.

[ocelot07]

How about we worry about this when 60FPS on consoles become standard first. Then we can worry about 120FPS gaming on consoles in the year 2030.

[XStation4pio_Pro]

No. CPUs are. My tvs are 240hz. Not an issue on refresh.

[Weeblordbad]

At 1080p the Pro or XBox One X could definitely out run 60fps. But with no TV's available that actually take more than a 60hz signal it's all kind of moot.

[tee_bag242]

Its not ligit 240hz, that's the laggy fake interpolation junk. Stop lying to yourself.

[MegaMohsi]

Most console games are 30 fps, most TVs are 60 fps. Let's worry about over 60fps once that's an actual standard. The fact that most TVs are at least 60 fps and console games aren't isn't the TV's fault...

[kevnb]

I can see people can't even bother to understand what the article is about.

[BRAN117DON]

Gears of war 4 runs at 1080p 60fps and the game looks realy good

[DrJones]

Not in single player

[BRAN117DON]

No im talking for the multiplayer the game looks even better in single player but limited to 30fps :/

[narsaku]

You know, this reminded me. I bought my recent 75 inch tv at Cosco and it cost 1850 Canadian dollars, "taxed/delivered" a complete and TOTAL bad ass deal. The 65 inch is under 800 bucks.

Just if anyone here's interested!

The input latency is perfect, "plays Spelunky, never misses a jump", there are no bright spots, the picture looks fine, and out of all the tv's I've tested over the years it's the ONLY motion interpolated tv I've ever seen that makes 30 fps games truly look like they're 60+ fps without any flickering, "still some soap opera effects tho, but very minor".

It's not HDR, but it's 4k, hdmi 2.0 and the response time feels really good, "no trail behind moving objects like some low budget tv's have."

It's called a, "haier", it's a chinese manufacturer, but don't be fooled. Also 2 years free warrenty.

[Ulf]

What a stupid question.

I guess if, yeah, we wanted 720p games, there would probably be some more 60 fps titles out there.

At a certain point, the simulation is the problem, though -- the TV doesn't matter any longer. Open world games have it the worst, because of all the AI pathing and physics. Racers have it easy, in that regard -- they easily make the framerates. So much so, that they have to go out of their way to make their simulation more realistic, just to compete and make use of all the extra CPU they have to burn.

[_LarZen_]

I was about to write a long post that actually answers the question in the headline. Something the article dont. But then I remembered that I would just get downvoted by label fappers. So F it. The readers here dont care about facts if it dont envolve or puts their favorite label in a positive light.

[TheOttomatic91]

Um no it's the lack of power both XB1 and PS4 have not the TV's

[CandarianGaming]

They rarely run at 60 fps anyway lol

[Ben2005]

Just enjoy the games :)

[zb1ftw777]

Most games won't run over 30fps on consoles due to mass production costs and what people can afford.

4k holds the framerate to 30fps at the moment. Not TV's.

I prefer 1080p 60fps, which the ps4pro and Xbox One X will EASILY be able to achieve.

But 4k will hinder that lovely 60fps framerate.

Fuck you 4K.

[Maxor]

The idiotic excuse that is full of contradiction. Most TVs don't support HDR yet it didn't stop the consoles from pushing this feature. Long story short, any TV that is 4K and HDR capable can easily handle 60 FPS. The fault is with the pathetically weak console that must resort to using fake resolutions to achieve 4K. If the console truly are 4K capable then everyone on both the Xbox and Sony side would be enjoying 1080p 60 FPS by now.

[gamer7804]

why in the world would we need games running at 90fps, i'd rather have improved graphics and effects.

[BenRC01]

Utter pr bull. You lot will fall for anything. "Manufacturers dont allow car damage"
"Emotion engine!"
"Cloud computing!"

Devs have chosen looks over framerate since the dawn of time. 60fps doesnt make pretty screenshots.

Isn't tlou 4k/60/hdr?

[IceKoldKilla]

It's not TVs. A lot of games can't even run at 60fps let alone more. It's the fact that as a team of developers you have to choose what is more important as you have hardware with limitations as well as only a certain amount of time and you have to work with the engine you got. Then comes shit like not being able to have multiplayer games run at 60fps on One X or Pro because the older consoles can't handle 60fps. That destroys the game immediately as 60fps people will have an advantage. Also I'm pretty sure PlayStation said they wouldn't do that. Having more than 60fps would mean sacrifice elsewhere.

[Tsar4ever01]

O-M-F-G!!! I can't believe what I've just read!! This article writer says it possible that the HDTV available may be the reason why the latest consoles games can't do 60fps. And currently, Modern HDTV's support 60Hz, 120Hz, 240Hz and upto 480Hz. We've ALREADY F***KING KNOW WHY current consoles can't handle most games in 60fps.

It's CPU cores are the damn bottleneck. Devs been saying it since even before the consoles launched. PC gaming hardware analyst assumed that the low powered Jaguar Cores were going to be a problem and then later the console developers started speaking out like NaughtyDog. This already has been well documented for years. Then here this idiot coming out with this nonsense article about modern Tv's might be the reason. SO STUPID!!!

All you have to do is watch Richard from Digital Foundary's YouTube video called "Why next-gen consoles MUST USE RYZEN technology" Even he clearly explains why & how the weak cpu's holding back the PS4/Pro and STILL will be holding back the X1X. https://www.youtube.com/wat...

[Cobra951]

Did I read the headline correctly? *Over* 60 fps? Who cares? It's hard enough to run at 60 fps at such a ridiculously high resolution. I can't read the article because the page will not display without javascript (which I only allow on trusted sites). TVs have refreshed by default at 60 Hz for decades (in NTSC territories anyway), and they've never had trouble displaying games at 60 fps. My 23" Samsung does that on a daily basis. So I guess I'll just scratch my head for a bit, and move on to the next story.

[Kosic]

Didn't think off the tv being the issue.
Wouldn't explain why most 4k games run at 30fps... and some even struggle at that (ff15).
My tv has a game mode which is runs at a high refresh rate but it's the console that's struggling to run at 4k 60.