All PS4/Xbox One consoles compared - and stacked up against current-gen successors.
But what of the older consoles, the millions of PS4s and Xbox Ones that remain in use?
And what about the enhanced consoles, the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X?
Let’s start with the base PS4.
That’s a different story, sadly.
Frame-rates of 40-60fps are common, and this drops into the 30s in the most frenetic moments of combat.
In turn, the low frame-rate has a deleterious effect on input latency.
The two premium consoles, One X and PS4 Pro, fare much better.
This isn’t a locked 60fps, but it’s surprisingly close.
c’mon enable JavaScript to use our comparison tools.
PS4 Pro, though, is the best-balanced option that’s most likely to deliver 60fps.
One final point concerns the field of view (FOV) setting in the PS4 version.
The default 80 is quite narrow, so does a wider setting incur a performance penalty?
Based on two tests comparing 80 and 120 parameters, yes - but it depends.
Series X/S sustain a locked 60fps, while also having greater grass density and longer grass draw distances.
Interestingly though, image quality on Series S isn’t as sharp as on the older One X.
With this testing behind us, the scalability of the IW Engine is (as ever) hugely impressive.
The fact we’re seeing such a range of differently-specced machines output the same world is remarkable, really.
Warzone 2.0 doesn’t hideInfinity Ward’s intentions.
It’s writ large in the sub-40fps drops on Xbox One and the texture pop-in which afflicts even PS4.
Warzone 2.0 will tide the series' fans over in the interim as a major cross-platform, cross-generation effort.
Who knows, but I hope we see an unabashedly next-gen Call of Duty in 2024.
