Pachter Reckons PS4 Can Render Games At 240 FPS

[drop2]Michael Pachter, Wedbush Securities analyst, is convinced that Sony will show the PlayStation 4 to the eager press on February 20th.

That’s hardly a huge leap of faith, of course, most of us are convinced the same. However, speaking to Bloomberg Pachter also says that the PS4 will offer “hyper-realistic games” and “be able to put a lot more characters on the screen”.


The weird thing is that the same interview cites the analyst as saying the new console will contain “processors capable of rendering games at 240 frames a second.”

As you’ll no doubt know, most games run at 30 FPS this generation, with a few double that 60 FPS. On consoles, anyway – PC owners will be well aware of higher frame rates.

So 240 FPS is quite the statement. There aren’t any TVs that run at that speed, and current HDMI standards won’t even take a signal that high resolution. Indeed, it appears that that may have been a bit of a slip after all, and perhaps he was just trying to find a way to express how much more powerful the machine will be over the PS3. Right?

“To be honest with you, I have no idea how many frames per second the human eye can process, am pretty sure it’s more than 60 fps, since we can all see the difference between 30 and 60, but I have no clue if we can see more than 120 fps, or if we can even see that,” he said afterwards, when pressed.

“I was merely explaining that four times the processing power would make the machine capable of rendering at that speed. I have no idea what the games will look like, which features they will incorporate, but my guess is that the specs will be sufficiently powerful that developers won’t be particularly constrained from getting the look and feel that they desire.”

“I’m pretty sure what I said is right,” he said in another reply, “and that the new consoles will be capable of rendering at that speed.”

My guess? Most games will still run at 30 FPS, with fancier graphics. A few will run at 60 FPS. And that’s it. We’d be lucky if we even manage a steady 1080p next gen. Four times the processing power doesn’t instantly translate to four times the frame rate at all.



  1. I’ve not commented on this site for what feels like a year, but this guy has made me log in

    Why does anybody listen to him. Only a fraction of what he says comes true which anyone could do through guess work.
    I really don’t understand how he has become a mini celebrity in the gaming world or why anyone pays the slightest bit of interest in what he says

    • Here here? Hear hear? Hear here? Here hear? I don’t know which one of those is correct, what I mean is I totally agree. It’d be so much easier if +1 wasn’t so frowned upon on this site! Either thator bring back tthe like button.
      Anyway, +1!

  2. Since we already know Pachter is pointless I’d like to take this moment to express my excitement about Feb.20th: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

  3. The framerate of 240 is probably for 3D viewing, which honestly isn’t a mind blowing stat. to produce 120fps in 3D you would need a 240fps processing rate. since most TVs refresh at 120fps that 240 processing rate would make perfect sense.

    • Also its around the 100fps when the human brain stops to notice the difference and that most tvs are tailored to cinema fps of 24, 30, because thats the fps for movies but the higher end TVs can refresh at 300fps

  4. Please don’t start reporting everything this guessing buffoon says. I bloody hate him. He has no more knowledge than the average gamer but all the other gaming websites seem to believe everything he says.
    I remember him claiming GTA5 coming out in 2010 along with a Wii HD. Berk. Rant over.

    • He’s not my favourite ‘Games reporter’ either, actually it’s an insult to games reporters calling him one

  5. More than 2000 characters? AnvilNext, yo. This guy is talking out of his backside. If next gen can do 1080p @ a solid 30FPS with 3D, Ill be a happy man.

    • “This guy is talking out of his backside.”

      Very much so.

      PS3 can handle about 500 objects and 1.3 million triangles per second. A powerful PC these days can cope with about 2.6 million triangles per frame at 30~60 fps at 1080p. In terms of objects I have no idea. The next gen will not be capable of 2000 characters + objects. It won’t even be able to handle 3 digit figures as the AI calculations would be crazy.

  6. Dribble. The machine could probably run Gran Turismo 2 at about 2000fps. We don’t actually know what spec the PS4 is. But the unreal engine 4 is said to be designed for 8-20 core machines. With the next gen we’ll not only get the polygons of the 6th gen and the shaders of the 7th gen, but advanced particle and light diffusion techniques. I’d guess that we may look at 30/60fps at 1080p.

    Technology is difficult to predict as the technological leap between generations greatly varies with the new designs we see. With GDDR5, APU and multicore/thread technology there has been significant results in performance-temperature-power ratios. So we may see something with 60fps, then again it may just be the usual struggle with 30 but I do think there will at least be a push to render games in full 1080p as opposed to up-scaling; that alone will take up a fair bit of CPU/GPU power.

    • That’s an important point, it’s not just about the performance (or price) it’s also about heat/energy consumption relevant to the console form factor. Yes the new PC graphics cards are very good in this respect, but the top end ones are still 200W+ Then add the cpu and other components into the mix and that’s a lot of heat to get rid of…
      I realise that it wasn’t just the heat that was cause of the problems with early examples of this gen, but it didn’t help ;)

      • Yeah I’m running an AMD APU (CPU+GPU) at the moment and it runs most console games on high and uses less power than a light bulb and keeps at a cool temperature.

        If speculation proves to be right and the PS4 uses an APU (obviously one that is more powerful than current models) then it will be incredibly efficient and powerful but it won’t be chugging out power quite to the level of a 16 core CPU + 200w + GPU that we could see in a couple of years running a game say, Far Cry 3 at 120fps.

  7. He’s back and as brilliant as ever!

    PS4 will offer “Hyper-realistic games”? Christ, he really is in the know. I’d keep an eye on this one, he knows what he’s talking about.

  8. You can’t be serious about that 30 FPS statement. If they don’t nail a steady 60 FPS at 1080p on the PS4 then they can keep it.

    • I doubt PS4 will offer 60 FPS at 1080p with all the fancy visual effects we’ll be expecting.

      • Actually I think people will prefer 1080p 60fps over ‘fancy visual effects’.

        There’s not a lot more that can be done anyway, we already have most visual effects – lighting, shadows, lens flares, partical physics etc. – check the current effects in 1080p and no one will complain.

        What really need to be sorted is the shitty Unreal engine. That had better get a decent upgrade.

      • Agreed. It’s to do with what the audience will tolerate and 30 FPS is obviously something a lot of people are happy with (or at least won’t kick up a fuss about). :-)

      • 60fps became such a bragging right this gen that people will want 1080/60. I can see the web bashing any game at 720/32 just because that was “last gen”. You hear it all the time with PS3 games, that they look like a PS2 game, so I don’t see any 1st party games being less than 1080/60.

    • I’d prefer better visuals as the proposed techniques that have already been concepted look amazing and can pave the way for incredible storytelling/art design capabilities. 60fps and bog-standard looks are OK in stuff like CoD where its just shooting, but what will get me excited will be the advances made where light bounces of objects and begins to illuminate other parts of a room, or the flurry of sparks from fire or a magic spell.

  9. @KeRaSh
    Agreed. you’d have thought that the console industry would try to move at least towards a 60fps standard to rival current a future PC specs. Otherwise, as you say ‘they can keep it’ while I pay less or equivalent to the PS4 for a PC that does more (visually).

  10. Only 17!!! :P more days of this dross(i.e pointless people saying what they think the PS4 will be like) to go!!! LoL:D

Comments are now closed for this post.