Call of Duty: Warzone at 120Hz - has PS5 back-compat evolved?

Digital Foundry : The recently released 120Hz update for Call of Duty: Warzone for PlayStation 5 users is a welcome boost - it doubles performance over the prior version of the game, doing so with no noticeable impact to image quality. More importantly, its release may well signify that Sony is beefing up its backwards compatible support for its latest console, bringing it closer into line with the kind of features available on Xbox Series consoles, when running code designed for last-gen machines.

[Jin_Sakai]

Richard states they’re clearly issued with the Series X version and it rately locks to 120fps and usually hovers around 90 to 110fps while PS5 stays closer to 120fps albeit having lower resolution and textures.

I’ll take better performance any day of the week.

[Jin_Sakai]

The Xbox Series X version also suffers with stuttering and screen tearing while the PS5 version doesn’t and has full vsync enabled.

VRR helps with these issues but not everyone has a compatible TV. Still yet, Sony really need to enable this feature for those of us who do!

[bartender64]

Lol how about no, if your tv has 120hz support with 4k, I'm almost 100% sure it has VRR/free sync support too. Even the lg c9 has it, while also having gsync capability. So I'll gladly take the cleaner visuals with the 120hz output, because if you truly have a 120hz display, then this is a non issue.

[chiefJohn117]

Worse graphics, less res, for a few more steady frames, 8 months later.....

[IRetrouk]

👀 up to 40 extra fps is a few more steady frames🤔🤣
Dynamic textures and res on both, that can swing either way...🤷‍♂️

[343_Guilty_Spark]

Anything above 60 fps is excellent. I would not take lower res at 120 vs 90-110 with higher res in any scenario

[IRetrouk]

👀Ofcourse you would😂
Nobody in their right mind that has the option is picking a version that runs between 80-120 while hardly actually hitting the target framerate over one that constantly hits it, for a texture and resolution bumb that does not always exist in that mode and can go the other way lol, not to mention the added input lag of all those drops and variations on the framerate, its pure cap🤷‍♂️

[Jin_Sakai]

@chiefJohn117

“Anything above 60 fps is excellent. I would not take lower res at 120 vs 90-110 with higher res in any scenario“

Of course you’d say that. Sorry to burst you bubble but being a first person shooter higher framerate is more important.

[Orchard]

You missed a key part: Xbox gamers have been enjoying 120hz for 8 months already…

[Jin_Sakai]

“You missed a key part: Xbox gamers have been enjoying 120hz for 8 months already…”

And PS5 owners ended up with the better experience…

https://i.ibb.co/PwFhFH5/AE...

[Orchard]

@infamousr "I think the key part is Microsoft tried to make game boost out to be this special feature and even had Richard/DF and other sites say that PlayStation couldn't do it."

That was true at the time - sceKernel checks were added recently in response to the 'ERA enhanced' system on Xbox.

@Jin_Sakai Better experience is subjective - it depends on whether you prefer visuals or perf.

I'd rather start playing 8 months ago than wait 8 months for slightly better performance and worse visuals - a few frames at 120hz doesn't have much impact and my TV has VRR anyway. There is just one problem - I can't find an XSX anywhere!

So I'm playing on PC, which is arguably better for FPS games anyway.

[Orchard]

@infamousr Boost mode and sceKernelisProspero are two different things. Boost mode boosts the title without/with minimal developer involvement, similar to what MS does with it's boost.

sceKernelisProspero is the PS equivalent of ERA enhanced on Xbox and lets developers make their software aware of which platform it is running on - but both sceKernelisProspero and ERA enhanced require code changes / an update by the developer.

For example, boost works well when the game didn't hit 60 previously, or had dynamic resolution scaling, but would be unable to boost beyond 60 or beyond the max resolution - as these would require code changes by the developer (same applies to Xbox's FPS boost). On the other hand, a developer could update their code to check if PS5 (SCE Kernel checks), set max res to X, or set FPS cap to Y.

PS5 boost was available day 1, sceKernel checks were not.

"You were one of the people who said AMD Fidelity FX wouldn't work on PS5 and spreads every other mis/disinformation about PS5."

I was? Please do show me where I said AMD Fidelity FX is not possible on PS5's current hardware/spec.

[Orchard]

I've read the entire article and no where do I see Richard say it was available from day 1 on PS5. Please show me where he says that?

Anyway, I have SDK access, it was not available day 1. And if it was, WZ would have been updated a long, long time ago, we would have many more boosted games, and developers would not have been complaining publicly about the lack of such API.

"The only difference between the two consoles is that Microsoft is implementing the updates on other publisher's software, and Sony so far hasn't chosen to alter other publishers code."

This is somewhat incorrect - Microsoft does not alter the code of your game for you, heck, no company I've worked for would even share their code with Microsoft. Their FPS boost program simply intercepts DX calls at the OS/driver level, the game binary remains the same and is unaltered. Sony have done similar things with PS5 too, just with less titles. Any code modification to utilize ERA enhanced / sceKernelIs* is done by the developer, not the platform holder.

"Microsoft DF and MANY MANY other sites spread misinformation"

That's not what you said, you said I said the PS5 hardware wasn't capable of running FidelityFX. I do not work for Digital Foundry, nor any website for that matter.

Why would Digital Foundry care about Sony (or Microsoft, or any other companies) stock price? Realistically nothing said about PS5 or XSX is going to affect Sony or Microsoft's stock prices - they are very diverse companies that don't really rely on gaming.

And similarly, why do you care if they spread misinformation that caused a stock price drop? Are you a Sony shareholder?

"You tried to derail the discussion into SDK's to cover for Microsoft, which again was more misinformation."

Nope. I simply pointed out that it has taken 8 months for us to get this upgrade. The first mention of any SDK or API was by you =]

[Orchard]

@infamousr

Isn’t clearly what you said? Here’s a direct quote from you above:

“You were one of the people who said AMD Fidelity FX wouldn't work on PS5 and spreads every other mis/disinformation about PS5. “

You said it, not me 🤷
It’s not my fault you chose to say things you couldn’t back up.

You messaged me? I have no messages from you and your account has been active for under a day.

I’ve proven to multiple people on here I am a dev and will continue to do so for anyone who messages me - and I am fine if you choose to not believe that - but that’s also ultimately irrelevant to this topic anyway since other devs have given actual formal interviews saying this wasn’t supported day 1.

So did COD just choose to wait 8 months to do a simple upgrade for fun / to screw PS gamers? A platform which they have a marketing deal with… makes perfect sense! /s

Only one liar here 😉

[northpaws]

And Sony have had awesome exclusives for years, by the same logic, can we dismiss every single Xbox games from now on? Since who doing it first is all that matters.

[Rimeskeem]

Congrats, now it's inferior.

[wiz7191]

@jin the better experience is the lower resolution and texture quality ?? Just to keep its frames is the better experience ??? Woooow I get it now lol no PS5 owners didn’t get the better experience … run it at the same resolution and textures see if it holds its frames the same

[badz149]

@Orchard

I think you are the one missing the key part. what 120Hz? you've seen the video, right? the SX version is almost NEVER 120Hz LOL

[neutralgamer1992]

Orchard

8 months you said right well over the last 9-12 months ps4-5 owners actually got to experience actual new games. Blockbusters that both broke sales records and won more GOTY than any other game in history

The last of us 2
Ghost
Astro
Demon souls remake
Spiderman MM
Bugsnax
Returnal
Ratchet and clank
Destruction all stars

But who knew you don't need new games all you need are patches for old games

[Orchard]

@badz149 I have a TV with VRR support, so it wouldn't really matter to me. PS5 lowers the resolution and texture quality to achieve 120hz, I'd rather have VRR + better visuals. But I play FPS on PC, so it's actually all irrelevant to me really.

@neutralgamer Oh I totally agree, most of those games are spectacular and I really enjoyed them (minus Bugsnax and Destruction).

But those games existing and being great doesn't mean WZ is bad or should just be dropped/unsupported. Warzone is still one of the most played games on all platforms, so it does deserve upgrades/patches.

[bartender64]

This is how you know that this guys here doesn't even have a 120hz display and don't even know what they're talking about. I don't blame them though as Richard should've explain that TV with 120hz also has vrr in almost 100% if not 100% of the cases. I'll take the visuals, because you will not notice any of the "issues" if you truly have the display lol.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

https://n4g.com/news/241705...

SO now which one performed better first matters. . . lol

[IRetrouk]

Vrr does not fix the dropped frames though, they still drop, you still get the input lag etc associated with the drops, it fixes the torn frames and juddering, thats it.

There is no way i would prefer vvr and barely hitting 120fps constantly vs an almost constant 120fps with v- sync, just for sometimes getting better resolution and texture detail, especially after finding out the res and texture detail is dynamic on both systems and can go either way.

[derek]

Sure Orchard, we are all "devs" here. Lol

[Toncsipapa]

I got both and i rather play on xbox ps5 got really blurry and the lower textures makes me harder to see enemies. But nice that ps5 is more stable.

[jznrpg]

Blurry? Lol screen tearing is blurry not a small amount of pixels .

[InUrFoxHole]

"I'll take better performance any day of the week."

Yet you're playing cod! ROFL!!

[DigitallyAfflicted]

It’s Microsoft marketing narrative that Xbox can somehow do things ps5 can't. As much as it was that they have `the best controller and the 12 teraflops. Not having a go at Xbox it's a good piece of technology, it's just that Xbox should stop comparing itself to ps5...

[derek]

Marketing and hype is all xbox has at this point.

[Father__Merrin]

Ps5 stick to 120fps closer than what series x does. Another big win for PS5 Warzone is still mega popular so it's a valid win.

Personally I tried the 120htz mode on my monitor and didn't think it was all that tbh mabey for quick fire competition use but that's all. I'd prefer the higher res at 60fps

[badz149]

the thing is, the SX version is not even close to 120fps!

[Father__Merrin]

But we was led to believe 12tf > 10tf even though experts claimed TF isn't the only barometer

Now as I predicted the 12tf die hards are once again hiding behind the bike shed...

[Orchard]

@Father_Merrin

That TF comparison would only make sense if both versions of the game were both operating at the same resolution and quality.

[IRetrouk]

And framerate

[Neonridr]

People clearly ignore that the Series X is rendering at a much higer resolution:

"PlayStation 5 appears to render Warzone at an internal resolution in a window that's typically 1512p to 1566p. Meanwhile, the Series X looks visibly cleaner - in 120Hz mode, it seems to run at 1920x2160 usually, reconstructing up to 4K. So, while both consoles can output a 4K signal at 120Hz, native resolution is lower: PlayStation 5 is visibly blurrier than Xbox Series X, as the comparison shots on this page demonstrate."

don't you think if the Series X was running at the same internal resolution there wouldn't be as much of a performance hit?

[yarbie1000]

People aren't ignoring it. The whole point of the mode is 120 fps and Series X can't do it. Xbox focusing on resolution and no one else cares about resolution

[purple101]

So your saying they promised something and didn't deliver? :)

[MadLad]

Weird, last generation it was all about 4k, and if that meant 30fps, that was fine.
Now 120fps is needed, and resolution doesn't matter.

People on here constantly move the goalpost when it suits them; and that's for both the MS crowd, as well as Sony.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

"Weird, last generation it was all about 4k, and if that meant 30fps, that was fine.
Now 120fps is needed, and resolution doesn't matter."

What is also weird is that, just last year people were complaining about manufacturers focusing on visuals over frames per second. Now hits in FPS are reasonable/understandable if higher resolution is the trade off.

[Teflon02]

Ted the difference is this is a choice mode. If you select 120hz you don't care about resolution and care more about framerate. That's why it's not relevant here.

If it was the 60fps mode we were talking and its visibly that big a difference it's a actual conversation. It's already stated series X makes the game look better generally too because ps5 only runs at pro res currently so that's been known. It's frames in this convo

[Neonridr]

it can't do it because it's rendering too high of a resolution. If it was matching the PS5 could it not possibly do 120fps locked?

[Eonjay]

But if it can't lock to 120 doesn't that me that the resolution is too high on the Xbox? At some spots the PS5 is performing damn near 50% faster. It just seems sloppy when we know the Series X is capable of sustaining 120.

[SeTTriP]

The game is running in back compatibility mode.

It's telling the game its running on a pro and has nothing to do with horsepower.

[badz149]

indeed it's on Pro mode with X2 multiplier. in this mode, the RAM is limited to 5.5GB thus the 1080p res is maintained.

[Rimeskeem]

I'll tell you one thing, people notice framerates far more than they notice resolution changes.

[Neonridr]

agreed, my point was if the Series X was rendering at the same resolution, you don't think it could hold the same framerate?

[badz149]

@Neon

IF? what's next? the Switch will be able to run this game at 120fps too IF it runs at 480p?

that only works on PC because you can choose your preferred res based on your hardware to get higher fps but the result on consoles is there for all to see, now. MS should have known better when they promised 120fps. but the other fps boost games have their res scaled down to make 120fps happen, why not with Warzone? it's literally one of the most popular game on earth right now

[BlaqMagiq1]

PS5 has the most consistent 120fps experience which is what matters the most. Resolution should ALWAYS be secondary.

[sho0ok360]

In my opinion (higher res with 90-100 fps + vrr) is better than (lower res and texture in 120).

In the first instance, you won't feel the frame drop especially if you have VRR, but you gonna notice the higher res and texture. This is more balanced approach in my opinion.

[IRetrouk]

Vrr matches the screen to what the console outputs, it stops screen tearing, if the game drops in frames vrr does not fix that, you will still feel that 120 - 80 drop, just without the tear or judder, vrr makes it less noticable, it doesn't fix the dropped frames.

[thorstein]

Weren't people just arguing before launch that it couldn't do 4K 60fps? And behold, all new games do 4k 60fps.

[Stanjara]

I would've guess that PS5 would push 4k and XSX would push performance, but it's the other way around. Steady framerate over res any day.

[franwex]

That’s cool.
*proceeds to play in base xbone*
:/

[Abbott123]

Xbox rendering at near native 4K in 60fps mode whilst PS5 manages 1512p shows the true difference in power.
Facts. Let’s see how many disagrees this one gets.

[Father__Merrin]

It's running in back compat mode

[badz149]

The BC mode are handled differently between the 2. the PS5 will limit the RAM to just 5.5GB to match the Pro thus the res is usually maintained from what is already playable on the Pro. it is a design choice. the only thing unlocked on the PS5 is the CPU multiplier thus we can see double the performance from the Pro and thus crappy last gen game like CP2077 runs at smooth 60fps on PS5 at the same res as Pro.

let's wait for the native next-gen versions before celebrating, shall we. as for now, the PS5 is winning the performance crown in 120fps by a huge margin. that extra res on the SX is really not a very wise choice.

[HardKnockKid24]

So does anyone here really believe if the SX outputted at the same resolution as the PS5 it wouldn’t lock 120? It’s all about adjusting the code. There’s a lot of comments on here that make this seem as if this is still not a clear demonstration that the SX has more power. The coding from the devs just didn’t prioritize FR. mental gymnastics

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

You realize that this is PS5 BC so not representative of PS5's power too right? If you're going to be considerate of the res on the SX, be considerate on that front as well.

[HardKnockKid24]

Of course, 100%, you’re not wrong. But if we’re all being honest even if we were having this conversation in two years with a completely next gen game, there’s more horse power available on the SX. More games will likely perform better on it unless they are designed around the speed of the SSD. And this is coming from a guy who hasn’t booted up his SX in weeks. Just finished TLOU2 on my PS5, so biases out of the way, it is what it is.

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

Yeah, SX is more powerful no doubt. However PS5 has performed above expectations so far given how much flack it got for being 10TF and variable clocks and people are going to point that out whenever possible. My point was that this games' resolution is limited by BC and thus could potentially be higher than what it is at 120hz not that it's preventing PS5 from being on par or better than SX. Obviously SX would maintain 120 at the same res. SX FPS is being affected by the res, PS5 res is affected by BC. Just pointing it out people are quick to point out SX res without acknowledging PS5 BC implantation is holding back as well.

[HardKnockKid24]

I literally re-read your replies to me 5 times each. I still can’t see how what your saying is a sound rebuttal. My point was if both games were set to the SAME res the SX would outperform. You replied to say I need to be considerate of the fact that the PS5 is running in BC mode. Isn’t the SX as well? It’s the same code, optimized for last gen devices. We could go on and on and on with hypotheticals. When SX wasn’t performing, we heard the dev kits were late and not mature. With the PS5 it’s the implementation of BC. It’s all true and it’s all code. My point was, all things in code being even, the SX will perform better. What’s to refute here?

[Outside_ofthe_Box]

My point wasn't to refute what you just said. It was merely to point out that SX isn't the only one being held back. You and others are quick to point that out without acknowledging that PS5 is being held back as well, is all. PS5 BC mode is different than Xbox's BC.

You took issue with the "mental gymnastics" no one here is even saying this is definitive proof that PS5 > SX, but it does suggest that the gap between the two is a lot closer than what Teraflop die hards want to believe. Remember one upon a time the PS5 wasn't capable of 120 according to haters.

[HardKnockKid24]

Ok, good day.

[John_McClane]

The PC destroys them both!

[HardKnockKid24]

True

[EasilyTheBest]

My PC doesn't. It won't even run it..

[XxINFERNUSxX]

Exactly, I really find it funny everyone is now like OMG 120FPS mode!!! I mean, ok, calm done there killer lol. It's nothing new at all. Even now we have 360hz on PC, I'm like ok cool, I like the higher FPS but I'm not going crazy 😀

[John_McClane]

I'm a console and PC gamer but if I had to choose just one gaming platform the PC wins hands down, no monthly fees to play online, cheaper game prices as a rule, far more customization and mods and I can upgrade my hardware as I see fit.

[John_McClane]

I'm sorry.

[frostypants]

Do people still play this slop?

[XxINFERNUSxX]

I guess, I like to call it shit. 💩💩 😁 Same thing again this year another COD. We need a new original IP from them.

[franwex]

But Warzone is the new IP. Two years old, but newish.

[Destiny1080]

stuttering and screen tearing, lets chalk that down as unplayable

[RosweeSon]

Wouldn’t have a clue they could put this 💩 at 240 I’d still not touch it 😑🤷🏻‍♂️ 🤣

[XxINFERNUSxX]

Even at 360hz on PC I wouldn't play this 💩💩 🙃

[XxINFERNUSxX]

120/1080p is always the way to go, higher FPS always over higher res and lower FPS it's just so much better and smoother. Until that day comes when we can all have 120+ @4k with everything maxed this is the best for now. I'm so used to playing on my PC with FPS in the 100s to sometimes 200 FPS, but seriously this 120fps mode should have been there when PS4/Xbox one launched, I'm sure it could have been done. There were 120hz+ monitors for years, way before TV's had a 120hz mode.

[anast]

The SX will be a good Bethesda machine...

[BrettAwesome]

Yeah. It has the grunt to brute force its way through all their shitty code 😂

[hduce]

The PS5 has missing HDR missing textures and lower draw distances just to hit 120fps.
Wow you give up alot on the PS5.