• 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.

[VG Tech] Halo Infinite Xbox Series X 120fps Mode Campaign Frame Rate Test (Season 2 Update)

Lunatic_Gamer

Gold Member



The version tested was 1.3414.47446.0. The default video settings were used. Footage was upscaled to 4K from 1080p for both versions of the game.

The latest version of Halo Infinite on Xbox Series X in the 120fps mode has a higher average frame rate than the launch version of the game.

The sharpness setting also appears to no longer work properly and this seems to be why the Season 2 footage is less sharp than the launch version.

There may be time of day variance between the two versions.

Xbox Series X in the 120fps 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 the 120fps mode. Xbox Series X in the 120fps mode uses temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 2560x1440 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution.

Variable Rate Shading appears to be used which can result in some double width and double height pixels being visible in the frame.

PlatformsSeries X Season 2Series X Launch
Frame Amounts
Game Frames4144138827
Video Frames4305843058
Frame Tearing Statistics
Total Torn Frames00
Lowest Torn Line--
Frame Height10801080
Frame Time Statistics
Mean Frame Time8.66ms9.24ms
Median Frame Time8.33ms8.33ms
Maximum Frame Time25ms25ms
Minimum Frame Time8.33ms8.33ms
95th Percentile Frame Time8.33ms16.67ms
99th Percentile Frame Time16.67ms16.67ms
Frame Rate Statistics
Mean Frame Rate115.49fps108.21fps
Median Frame Rate117fps108fps
Maximum Frame Rate120fps120fps
Minimum Frame Rate96fps80fps
5th Percentile Frame Rate107fps92fps
1st Percentile Frame Rate102fps88fps
Frame Time Counts
8.33ms39828 (96.11%)34598 (89.11%)
16.67ms1609 (3.88%)4227 (10.89%)
25ms4 (0.01%)2 (0.01%)
Other
Dropped Frames00
Runt Frames00
Runt Frame Thresholds20 rows20 rows
 

Kuranghi

Member
I don't understand this:

"Xbox Series X in the 120fps 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 the 120fps mode. Xbox Series X in the 120fps mode uses temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 2560x1440 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution."

So it's not native 1440p that's the upper bound of the DRS? It's temporaly upscaled 1440p from lower native resolutions? What are those lower resolutions? Me reading this:

Read Book Club GIF


It's a bit hard to gauge what the actual IQ would be like in person with this way of describing it. I'm guessing quite soft on a large 4K display but I'm a nerd so I'm frustrated I can't easily visualise it *folds arms grumpily* please someone help explain that.
 

yamaci17

Member
I don't understand this:

"Xbox Series X in the 120fps 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 the 120fps mode. Xbox Series X in the 120fps mode uses temporal upsampling to reconstruct a 2560x1440 resolution when rendering natively below this resolution."

So it's not native 1440p that's the upper bound of the DRS? It's temporaly upscaled 1440p from lower native resolutions? What are those lower resolutions? Me reading this:

Read Book Club GIF


It's a bit hard to gauge what the actual IQ would be like in person with this way of describing it. I'm guessing quite soft on a large 4K display but I'm a nerd so I'm frustrated I can't easily visualise it *folds arms grumpily* please someone help explain that.
its quite soft on a 1080p screen as well. it does not matter if you're playing it on a 1080p or 4k screen. as a matter of fact, running the game at 4k on a 1080p screen will actually make it look crisp, nice and clean

here is how the game looks on a 1080p screen at native 1080p and DSR 4K;


i can say it will mostly hover between 800-1000p in open world sections, based on the performance profile of my 3070. in campaign, at native 1440p, i was getting 75-90 frames in open world sections and at native 1080p, i, was getting 95-110 frames. with dynamic resolution, it was able to lock itself to 120. i did some pixel counts here and there and 900-950p was very common if you wanted that sweet 120 fps. naturally, 1440p would only be possible in in-door sections. so indeed 1440p was also rare. but in in-door sections, 1100p-1200p was more common (i used the optimized settings from DF)
 
Last edited:

Leyasu

Banned
I play at 60hz because my shitty qled has inverse ghosting when my XsX is set to 120hz, and I thought that it looked better in S2
 

yamaci17

Member
Highest 1440p and lowest 720p? Isn't that kinda low?
this game has a pretty bad optimization. its pretty expected to see such a performance based on what see on PC. and it does not have the looks to justify this kind of performance profile. doom eternal runs at 1440p-1620p 120 fps and looks way better than halo infinite (compared to halo's 120 fps mode, of course) due to how blurry the game becomes at 1080p and beyond

in this specific case: the game is problematic. if it looked like an actual nextgen title, i could've cut it some slack. but i can't. its just a regular old lastgen game. it looks pretty at 4k, and you can get 60 fps there. that's about it. but this caliber of graphics should've been able to run at a native unconsted 1440p 120 fps on series and unconsted 1440p 60 fps on series s
 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
In the 120hz mode ?

How many other console games are doing 120 fps with a 1440p target ? Most just do a flat 1080P with DRS.
there are notable games

sx is pretty strong. its dangerously close to 3060ti-6700xt in terms of pure power. it can easily power tons of lastgen FPS games at 1440p 120 fps. be reminded that most FPS games last gen managed to run 1080p/60 FPS on PS4 and 4K/60 FPS on Xbox One X. SX has the power to push 4k 120 fps on such titles, actually (titles like rainbow 6, overwatch and so on).



"Xbox Series X in the 120fps Mode uses a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 3200x1800 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 2266x1275."

A far cry from 1080p. It will be most likely in the range of 1440p based on its PC performance profile.



https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC9raWs2htw4f7slETx4u7mw
"Both PS5 and Xbox Series X in the 120fps mode use a dynamic resolution with the highest resolution found being 2560x1440 and the lowest resolution found being approximately 1536x1440. Pixel counts at or near 2560x1440 seem to be common on both consoles."


And then, lets take battlefield 5 into discussion. it looks better than Halo Infinite (anyone is free to dispute. you can't change my view, simple)



it says it runs at 1080p 120 fps with fps boost mode.

lets assume series x is at least powerful as 5700xt (it is a given).

lets see how 5700xt runs this game,



surprised ? i'm not

Problem here is that Halo Infinite needs more firepower but it shows nothing to justify it. I've just stated that my 3070 cannot hit native 1080p 120 fps. It needs 800-900p dynamic resolution to hit that. Yet, I can hit 1440p 120 FPS easily in lots of other FPS games, and even 4K 120 FPS if I use PS4 equivalent settings. I hope I was being clear.

Its clear that there's some unnecessary rendering stuff that takes away precious GPU resources with diminishing returns. Maybe its their GI system. I dunno.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
there are notable games

I think you just posted all the available examples lol.

Regardless, none of the games you've posted above have massive cohesive open world like Infinite does.

As far as the other relative examples of PC needing to drop to 900p to reach 120FPS on a 3070, well yeah, the games development woes are very widely documented. But that it still manages to churn out 4K/60 or 1440~/120 on SX and even a 120 FPS mode on Series S is still very impressive.

Can it do better ? of course.
 

yamaci17

Member
I think you just posted all the available examples lol.

Regardless, none of the games you've posted above have massive cohesive open world like Infinite does.

As far as the other relative examples of PC needing to drop to 900p to reach 120FPS on a 3070, well yeah, the games development woes are very widely documented. But that it still manages to churn out 4K/60 or 1440~/120 on SX and even a 120 FPS mode on Series S is still very impressive.

Can it do better ? of course.
it does not churn out 1440p 120 on sx. it literlaly runs between 720p-1080p and 1440p is simply rare. series x and 3070 are not widely apart from each other. at best, we're talking about a %20-30 divide. and it that aspect, never needing to drop 720p for 120 fps cements that 3070 is indeed getting %20-25 better performance than series x. but that's should not even be a discussion

120 fps mode on series s does not run at 120 fps on open world sections, rather it mostly runs at 70-80 frames at 540p

and, i'm not talking about whether it is impressive or not. this game has a pretty bland open world. it is pretty small and not much going on. and IQ is simply not there to justify it

i jumped back at the campaign and look at what I get in this particular scene with xbox sx quality settings, 110 fps @ native 1080p. it would need a decrease of %10 resolution to get a %10 bump for 120 fps. so, 960p or something. it changes of course. there are times it goes to 90s 100s. do note that I'm using xbox sx settings per this article: https://www.eurogamer.net/digitalfoundry-2021-halo-infinite-pc-tech-review therefore the videos on the internet where the maxed out ultra settings are used will show you that 3070 is getting 70-80 fps at 1080p. i'm not going to compare apples (cosole equivalent settings) to oranges (ultra maxed out settings)

DkVyLfd.png
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
it does not churn out 1440p 120 on sx. it literlaly runs between 720p-1080p and 1440p is simply rare.

That's speculation, the video only says 1440p is rare, it does not say it stays mostly between 720p and 1080p.

You're also ignoring that they've improved the average frame rate between launch and now as well.

So it's a net improvement.


series x and 3070 are not widely apart from each other. at best, we're talking about a %20-30 divide. and it that aspect, never needing to drop 720p for 120 fps cements that 3070 is indeed getting %20-25 better performance than series x. but that's should not even be a discussion

I don't know much about PC GPU equivalencies to comment but based on multiple DF videos (Gears 5 and Forza Horizon 5 come to my mind) they've always equated the SX GPU to be somewhere around the 2070S ball park.



120 fps mode on series s does not run at 120 fps on open world sections, rather it mostly runs at 70-80 frames at 540p

The 120 FPS mode on SS runs at an average of 108 FPS, within the 90 to 120 VRR range sweet spot.

The LOWEST drop is 80, it does not run 'between 70-80' like you're saying.

The stats are right there, not sure why you feel the need to butcher them lower.


1a3jra.png



and, i'm not talking about whether it is impressive or not. this game has a pretty bland open world. it is pretty small and not much going on. and IQ is simply not there to justify it


That's your subjective opinion and you're entitled to it.

 
Last edited:

yamaci17

Member
That's speculation, the video only says 1440p is rare, it does not say it stays mostly between 720p and 1080p.

You're also ignoring that they've improved the average frame rate between launch and now as well.


I don't know much about PC GPU equivalencies to comment but based on multiple DF videos (Gears 5 and Forza Horizon 5 come to my mind) they've always equated the SX GPU to be somewhere around the 2070S ball park.



The 120 FPS mode on SS runs at an average of 108 FPS, within the 90 to 120 VRR range sweet spot.

The LOWEST drop is 80, it does not run 'between 70-80' like you're saying.

The stats are right there, not sure why you feel the need to butcher them lower.


1a3jra.png





which video do these stats belong to? is it with completely open world section or does it have multiplayer stats sprinkled into it?

also, i've said there might be a %30 divide between sx and 3070. 3070 is indeed %30 faster than a 2070s. but personally, i don't believe the nonsense that sx is equivalent to a 2070s.

finally, i'm not speculating. i'm making a solid case with solid arguments. ask VG tech for a more concrete answer. do not expect miracles out of the hardware. and do not ignore how badly the game is optimized.

it does not have to be a speculation, when you can create a very solid logical link between hardware and performance profiles. it is quite impossible for series x to average anything above 1080p in open world sections. quite as simple.

section i'm referring;



lets make it a 90 for your sake. sorry on that account. does not change the main idea of what I'm trying to convey across.

then again, i've specifically said over and over again that i'm specifically talking about open world sections. that video has in door sections, multiplayer sections which increases the average framerate highly. i never was talking about them in the first place. i've clearly stated that sx would also average 1200-1300p in in door sections.
 
Last edited:

ParaSeoul

Member
Obviously haven’t played it. Game plays bitter smooth and even “dipping” to less than 120fps the VRR does in fact run flawlessly. One of the best games made in years and can’t wait for all the new content still in the pipeline.
Theres frame pacing and VRR issues. Still haven't been fixed.
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
which video do these stats belong to? is it with completely open world section or does it have multiplayer stats sprinkled into it?

*Edited*

Copied wrong stats from wrong source*.


Theres frame pacing and VRR issues. Still haven't been fixed.

Frame pacing issue only happens if you run the 60 FPS mode and display is set to 120hz.

You can either play in the 120 FPS mode, or set the console to 60hz in the display settings to fix this if you want to play in the 60 FPS mode.

Very easy workarounds.
 
Last edited:

azertydu91

Hard to Kill

yamaci17

Member
It's the same VGTech video in this topic. The same one we're using to determine everything else.




Ok, I mean you're using the same VGTech video to determine, base-lessly mind you, that the game is always running between 720p and 1080p.

Now I'm using the same video stats to show you that it runs at a 108 FPS on average on Series S, not the 70-80 you're speculating, and suddenly we need more info from VGTech.

I see how it is :rolleyes:




Frame pacing issue only happens if you run the 60 FPS mode and display is set to 120hz.

You can either play in the 120 FPS mode, or set the console to 60hz in the display settings to fix this.

Very easy workarounds.

the stats you are sharing belongs to series x. not series s.


108 fps average is for series x in launch. 115 fps average is for series x with season 2 path.

this specific latest video does not COVER series s.

this is the video that covers series s,



and these are the stats for it,


it says a 87 fps average, with minimums to 74 fps. THEN again, the average is increased thanks to the in door section. if you watch the actual video, you will see series s performs between 75-85 in open world sections.
 
Last edited:

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
the stats you are sharing belongs to series x. not series s.



Ah, my bad.
 

yamaci17

Member
Ah, my bad.
no problem

i'd like you to remind you, my analysis is not baseless. its not particularly a speculation either. i just say that, 120 fps mode on sx in open world sections must run at 800-1080p mostly. I wish VG tech would confirm.


you can see the open world picture, and it looks pretty blurry. if you think that picture has any business being anything above 1080p, you're welcome. and yes, game mostly performs similar in open world sections and thats not a baseless speculation either.

take notice with other pictures, they actually look decent and presentable. because they are indoor shots and probably have a resolution upwards of 1200p, most likely

I'd suggest VG Tech to give sample pixel counts so that we can get a picture like they did with metro exodus enhanced



Volga Level Opening Train Scene - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Caspian Level Driving - PS5: 2560x1440, Series X: 2844x1600
Taiga Level Exploration - PS5: 2176x1224, Series X: 2400x1350
Taiga Level Forest Demanding Scene - PS5: 1792x1008, Series X: 1920x1080

for example if he were to say he recorded 3 800-900p shots in random open world sections, you would have to believe that most of the time it runs betwen 800-1080p in such locations. for example DF practically confirmed that SX and PS5 runs metro exodus ee in Taiaga Forest @1080p all the time. These resolution counts will be consistent with what you usually get. A specific location in-game will not differ greatly in terms of performance profile

Halo Infinite open world performance profile also tend to not differ much because most of the locations are copy pasted (yes) a situation like Volga and Taiga where you get 1600p in one and 1080p in another won't happen between different sections of open world in Halo Infinite. That situation happens between indoor and outdoor sections instead in our specific case, which is why you're seeing a wide resolution scope between 720p and 1440p. then again, i think 720p is indeed a very rare occurance. it has to be above 800p MOST of the time even in open world sections. i'm just making a reasonable estimation that it runs between 800 and 1080p in most of the open world sections. that's about it. if you don't find my arguments reasonable, I have all the respect for you.
 
Last edited:

SlimySnake

Flashless at the Golden Globes
The game is one of the worst optimized games ive played on PC. No wonder its dropping to 720p on series x. In my experience, the game almost had a hard cap around 80 fps. After that, the returns on resolution drop vs framerate gain pretty much disabled.

The last time i saw this was on Horizon. I think these games werent meant to run past 60 fps.
 

yamaci17

Member
The game is one of the worst optimized games ive played on PC. No wonder its dropping to 720p on series x. In my experience, the game almost had a hard cap around 80 fps. After that, the returns on resolution drop vs framerate gain pretty much disabled.

The last time i saw this was on Horizon. I think these games werent meant to run past 60 fps.
wish it looked like anything like horizon though

that's the problem, lmao. my beef is completely with 343. not with the xbox or hardware. something is very broken with their engine. just abandon it and use idtech's brilliant engine that pushes a brilliant 1620p 120 fps with ultra settings on these consoles.

doom eternal has levels that has more variety and detail than chunks of halo infinite's open world sections. these devs have to be smart, not waste resources. it is clearly their engine is wasting resources for something that is not giving any viable returns

disable async btw. its broken on PC
 
Last edited:
In the 120hz mode ?

How many other console games are doing 120 fps with a 1440p target ? Most just do a flat 1080P with DRS.
It brings to light how silly the complaints about the XSS are. High refresh rates = lower resolutions. Something has to give. Not going to be a whole lot of 4K/120fps titles.
 

elliot5

Member
How did 343 manage to break the sharpening slider 🤧 that’s probably why people looked at 120hz in s2 and said they downgraded it not knowing
 

yamaci17

Member
How did 343 manage to break the sharpening slider 🤧 that’s probably why people looked at 120hz in s2 and said they downgraded it not knowing

i wish they used fidelityfx sharpening instead, its the best sharpening method in the industry. to my knowledge, back 4 blood used it and it looks very good.

being an online game, i cannot use reshade to inject fx cas into it. nvidia sharpening is pretty bad too. so..
 

adamsapple

Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Call of Duty



Tony Hawk



Yeah but like I said before, none of them have nearly the kind of open and complex world that Halo: Infinite does.

The Uncharted Legacy Collection even runs at 1080p for its 120 FPS mode and that's a straight up corridor/small arena shooter.
 

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
Yeah but like I said before, none of them have nearly the kind of open and complex world that Halo: Infinite does.

The Uncharted Legacy Collection even runs at 1080p for its 120 FPS mode and that's a straight up corridor/small arena shooter.
Complex world? Are we really talking about Halo Infinite there?
 

yamaci17

Member
Complex world? Are we really talking about Halo Infinite there?
i've played the campaign myself, actually enjoyed it, but i personally think that it was a bland, copy pasted world, a cheap Far Cry knockoff at times. it was also quite small, to me. i compare this game to something like far cry 3 and even that seems gigantic compared to halo infinite. i'd expect them to have some proper forerunner structures but instead its mostly towers and bases and only one specific structure copied over and over

but these are my personal opinions so i'm entitled to them.

practically, halo infinite's world is expansive and big as some of the battlefield 5 64 player maps. i'm not exaggerating. i'm very serious

maybe some
 
Last edited:

azertydu91

Hard to Kill
i've played the campaign myself, actually enjoyed it, but i personally think that it was a bland, copy pasted world, a cheap Far Cry knockoff at times. it was also quite small, to me. i compare this game to something like far cry 3 and even that seems gigantic compared to halo infinite. i'd expect them to have some proper forerunner structures but instead its mostly towers and bases and only one specific structure copied over and over

but these are my personal opinions so i'm entitled to them.

practically, halo infinite's world is expansive and big as any battlefield 5 64 player map. i'm not exaggerating. i'm very serious
Yeah I had trouble diferenciating zones in the game because they all looked the same (alien ship or very sparse forrest).I do get the Far cry comparison in its structure but Far cry feels huge in comparison.So I don't see complexity there , especially compared to "corridor shooters", I can see more diversity in 15 min of Cod than in an hour of Halo Inifinite.
 

Mr Moose

Member
Yeah but like I said before, none of them have nearly the kind of open and complex world that Halo: Infinite does.

The Uncharted Legacy Collection even runs at 1080p for its 120 FPS mode and that's a straight up corridor/small arena shooter.
That's not what you asked though, is it?
How many other console games are doing 120 fps with a 1440p target ? Most just do a flat 1080P with DRS.
Complex, ha.
 
Last edited:
Making an already amazing game even better. I would still continue to play in the 60fps mode, though. I love the graphic and art style of this game too much.
 
Top Bottom