Digital Foundry: Battlefield 6 Open Beta Tested - Performance, Features + More - PS5/PS5 Pro/Xbox Series X|S

Imtjnotu said:
Sharpness to 25.....


What Wtf GIF by avalbano
Click to expand...
So i should just put it back to 50. Haha Probably right! The weeeeeeed be letting me know!
 
adamsapple said:
I think in this case it's more that they're using a poor FSR on base consoles.

If this were a UE5 game, it'd use the much superior TSR instead.
Click to expand...
TSR it's neither that good at lower resolution than 1080p, don't expect much sharper presentation with it. Unfortunately there is nothing comparable to PSSR on base consoles (for obvious reasons) although it's more harshly criticized than praised.
 
Last edited:
Karim said:
TSR it's neither that good at lower resolution than 1080p, don't expect much sharper presentation with it. Unfortunately there is nothing comparable to PSSR on base consoles (for obvious reasons) although it's more harshly criticized than praised.
Click to expand...
I am sorry, but that's not true. CBR when well implemented can directly compete against PSSR. Like in Days Gone. And CBR has not the noise seen in PSSR.
 
Last edited:
Physiognomonics said:
I am sorry, but that's not true. CBR when well implemented can directly compete against PSSR. Like in Days Gone. And CBR has not the noise seen in PSSR.
Click to expand...
Lol no. CBR required really high base resolution and it has even more artifacts than PSSR with post processing/transparencies effects. The only reason because Days Gone OG it's "better" is the lack of indirect lighting in the ps4 version which prevent the infamous artifacts of the remaster version.
 
Last edited:
Karim said:
Lol no. CBR required really high base resolution and it has even more artifacts than PSSR with post processing effects.
Click to expand...
CBR requires half the pixels of whatever your target resolution is. As for artifacts with post-processing, sure they can exist (for example, performance mode in HFW was really quite nasty in motion at launch), but they can be worked around (as was the case with said performance mode and later patches).
 
Last edited:
nowhat said:
CBR requires half the pixels of whatever your target resolution is. As for artifacts with post-processing, sure they can exist (for example, performance mode in HFW was really quite nasty in motion at launch), but they can be worked around (as was the case with said performance mode and later patches).
Click to expand...
As PSSR. But CBR at lower resolution is awful. You can see it in Avengers on base ps5 in performance mode. Sorry but CBR is even more useless than FSR or TSR with low resolution.
 
Last edited:
nowhat said:
CBR requires half the pixels of whatever your target resolution is. As for artifacts with post-processing, sure they can exist (for example, performance mode in HFW was really quite nasty in motion at launch), but they can be worked around (as was the case with said performance mode and later patches).
Click to expand...
What? CBR resolves terribly when motion is too quick. There's a reason no one is using it anymore.
 
Lagspike_exe said:
What? CBR resolves terribly when motion is too quick. There's a reason no one is using it anymore.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it depends of the implementation. In some games like the last Tomb Raider or Days gone, the implementation is very good notably when it's aiming for native 4K output. Days gone showed us how good CBR could be even compared to PSSR. Problem is it's not a easy plug and play API like DLSS or even PSSR. It needs more optimization.
 
Last edited:


The PC version, running at ultra settings on a high-end rig, is naturally the visual benchmark , with unmatched texture quality, shadow detail, and overall rendering precision.
That said, the PS5 Pro holds its ground impressively. Visual fidelity is high, lighting and effects are strong, and performance remains smooth even in large-scale battles.
While PC still leads in raw graphical power, the PS5 Pro delivers a surprisingly close and highly optimized experience , a testament to the developers' excellent work.
 
Caio said:


The PC version, running at ultra settings on a high-end rig, is naturally the visual benchmark , with unmatched texture quality, shadow detail, and overall rendering precision.
That said, the PS5 Pro holds its ground impressively. Visual fidelity is high, lighting and effects are strong, and performance remains smooth even in large-scale battles.
While PC still leads in raw graphical power, the PS5 Pro delivers a surprisingly close and highly optimized experience , a testament to the developers' excellent work.
Click to expand...

Well as far as the DF article goes.. theres no difference between any of the top consoles aside from some bump in final resolution and pssr. So no more "effects" whatsoever. Or maybe I missed something
 
Bernardougf said:
Well as far as the DF article goes.. theres no difference between any of the top consoles aside from some bump in final resolution and pssr. So no more "effects" whatsoever. Or maybe I missed something
Click to expand...
Not exactly, while the differences aren't massive, there's still more to it than just resolution and PSSR.
On PS5 Pro, you're getting a higher baseline resolution, improved image stability thanks to PSSR, and slightly better asset sharpness in certain scenarios compared to the base PS5 or Series X.
No, it's not a night-and-day leap in effects, but in a fast-paced game like Battlefield 6, the cleaner image and sharper detail can make a noticeable difference during gameplay.

These observations are well-grounded in verified reports, not speculation.


1. PS5 Pro clearly stands out in Battlefield 6.
Trusted outlets like Wccftech note that the PS5 Pro delivers a higher average resolution, more debris and particle effects during destruction, and longer draw distances compared to other consoles.


2. The visual boost goes beyond PSSR and resolution.
In addition to sharper visuals, the console benefits from enhanced environmental fidelity, which is noticeable during fast-paced sequences where detail and clarity matter in motion, as reported by developers.


3. All of this is confirmed by reliable tech analysis, no guesswork here.
We're not guessing, these conclusions come from hands-on comparisons and observant render tests, not rumors.


So yes, the PS5 Pro doesn't just tick a "resolution + PSSR" checkbox. It genuinely elevates the visual scale and quality of Battlefield 6 in meaningful and measurable ways, especially when every element on screen counts.
 
Caio said:
Not exactly, while the differences aren't massive, there's still more to it than just resolution and PSSR.
On PS5 Pro, you're getting a higher baseline resolution, improved image stability thanks to PSSR, and slightly better asset sharpness in certain scenarios compared to the base PS5 or Series X.
No, it's not a night-and-day leap in effects, but in a fast-paced game like Battlefield 6, the cleaner image and sharper detail can make a noticeable difference during gameplay.

These observations are well-grounded in verified reports, not speculation.


1. PS5 Pro clearly stands out in Battlefield 6.
Trusted outlets like Wccftech note that the PS5 Pro delivers a higher average resolution, more debris and particle effects during destruction, and longer draw distances compared to other consoles.


2. The visual boost goes beyond PSSR and resolution.
In addition to sharper visuals, the console benefits from enhanced environmental fidelity, which is noticeable during fast-paced sequences where detail and clarity matter in motion, as reported by developers.


3. All of this is confirmed by reliable tech analysis, no guesswork here.
We're not guessing, these conclusions come from hands-on comparisons and observant render tests, not rumors.


So yes, the PS5 Pro doesn't just tick a "resolution + PSSR" checkbox. It genuinely elevates the visual scale and quality of Battlefield 6 in meaningful and measurable ways, especially when every element on screen counts.
Click to expand...
I didnt watch the DF video just saw adams summary... so its good to know its not only resolution/pssr
 
Last edited:
Caio said:


The PC version, running at ultra settings on a high-end rig, is naturally the visual benchmark , with unmatched texture quality, shadow detail, and overall rendering precision.
That said, the PS5 Pro holds its ground impressively. Visual fidelity is high, lighting and effects are strong, and performance remains smooth even in large-scale battles.
While PC still leads in raw graphical power, the PS5 Pro delivers a surprisingly close and highly optimized experience , a testament to the developers' excellent work.
Click to expand...


Balanced mode on Pro does look really good with PSSR, not too far off what I was getting on PC outside of framerate. Tried the performance mode last night but it looked noticeably softer to me so may be ditching PSSR for FSR, could just be bugged tho given it also has screen tearing even on a VRR display
 
Bernardougf said:
I didnt watch the DF video just saw adams summary... so its good to know its not only resolution/pssr
Click to expand...

Form what I found, it's not only about Res and pssr; by the way, the best has yet to come...

Based on confirmed technical roadmaps and official statements, future iterations of the PS5 Pro, starting in late 2026, could deliver a significantly more impressive experience compared to both the base PS5 and the Xbox Series X. This is not about minor resolution bumps or marketing spin; rather, it's about introducing a new class of AI-driven upscaling and rendering enhancements that can fundamentally change how games look and perform on Sony's mid-gen platform. If Project Amethyst performs as intended, the visual gap could be more noticeable than any mid-generation upgrade we've seen in the past two console cycles.


Project Amethyst

  • Purpose: This initiative is intended to deliver a drop-in upgrade to the current PSSR (PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution) system—Sony's AI-powered upscaling tech used in the PS5 Pro. The aim is to enhance visual fidelity and performance without major alterations to existing titles.
    Reddit, Tom's Guide, The Verge
  • AI-driven tech: The new algorithm leverages machine learning to deliver the "full-fat version" of upscaling that was co-developed with AMD and released as FSR 4 on PC. This is not a simplified version—it's intended to bring superior image clarity and frame rates.
    The Verge, Wccftech, Reddit
  • Launch timeline: Sony has confirmed that this upgrade is expected to arrive on PS5 Pro in 2026. It is meant to directly replace the existing PSSR system without requiring developers to overhaul their rendering pipelines.
    Wccftech, Tom's Guide
  • Sony–AMD collaboration: Project Amethyst is a multi-year partnership between Sony and AMD that started around 2023. Cerny and AMD engineers worked closely together, integrating RDNA5/next-gen GPU features and upscaling innovations into both platforms. The goal is not locked to proprietary use—these improvements are designed to benefit broader technology ecosystems (e.g., FSR 4 on PC).
    Creative Bloq, The Verge, ResetEra

Summary: No Speculation — Just Facts

TopicVerified Insight
TechnologyFull-version FSR 4-level upscaling, not a scaled-down variant
Release TimelineConfirmed arrival in 2026 on PS5 Pro, replacing current PSSR
CollaborationClose Sony–AMD partnership (Project Amethyst), driving upscaling and hardware evolution
This isn't guesswork, it's what the lead architect Mark Cerny and reputable tech outlets like Tom's Guide and Wccftech have confirmed.
 
Caio said:
Form what I found, it's not only about Res and pssr; by the way, the best has yet to come...

Based on confirmed technical roadmaps and official statements, future iterations of the PS5 Pro, starting in late 2026, could deliver a significantly more impressive experience compared to both the base PS5 and the Xbox Series X. This is not about minor resolution bumps or marketing spin; rather, it's about introducing a new class of AI-driven upscaling and rendering enhancements that can fundamentally change how games look and perform on Sony's mid-gen platform. If Project Amethyst performs as intended, the visual gap could be more noticeable than any mid-generation upgrade we've seen in the past two console cycles.


Project Amethyst

  • Purpose: This initiative is intended to deliver a drop-in upgrade to the current PSSR (PlayStation Spectral Super Resolution) system—Sony's AI-powered upscaling tech used in the PS5 Pro. The aim is to enhance visual fidelity and performance without major alterations to existing titles.
    Reddit, Tom's Guide, The Verge
  • AI-driven tech: The new algorithm leverages machine learning to deliver the "full-fat version" of upscaling that was co-developed with AMD and released as FSR 4 on PC. This is not a simplified version—it's intended to bring superior image clarity and frame rates.
    The Verge, Wccftech, Reddit
  • Launch timeline: Sony has confirmed that this upgrade is expected to arrive on PS5 Pro in 2026. It is meant to directly replace the existing PSSR system without requiring developers to overhaul their rendering pipelines.
    Wccftech, Tom's Guide
  • Sony–AMD collaboration: Project Amethyst is a multi-year partnership between Sony and AMD that started around 2023. Cerny and AMD engineers worked closely together, integrating RDNA5/next-gen GPU features and upscaling innovations into both platforms. The goal is not locked to proprietary use—these improvements are designed to benefit broader technology ecosystems (e.g., FSR 4 on PC).
    Creative Bloq, The Verge, ResetEra

Summary: No Speculation — Just Facts

TopicVerified Insight
TechnologyFull-version FSR 4-level upscaling, not a scaled-down variant
Release TimelineConfirmed arrival in 2026 on PS5 Pro, replacing current PSSR
CollaborationClose Sony–AMD partnership (Project Amethyst), driving upscaling and hardware evolution
This isn't guesswork, it's what the lead architect Mark Cerny and reputable tech outlets like Tom's Guide and Wccftech have confirmed.
Click to expand...
Well these are promises ... we will have to wait and see.. a lot of the bullshit they told regarding the Pro and the first pssr didnt come to fruition... so better take everything with a grain of salt this days
 
From watching my kid play this last weekend ain't nobody got any time to be picking out minor graphical glitches or sub par shadow maps, the game looked frantic as hell with shit popping off left right and center, the screen was constantly filled with debris, explosions and players, it looked great and younger me would've loved this when I played Quake3 arena on mouse keyboard back in the day, nowadays id just be a bullet sponge able to hit or react to fuck all, whereas my kid he's just tearing up the map with a bloody joypad killing all round him... It looks like they've made a pretty decent Battlefield tbf
 
viveks86 said:
For the genre, this is on a league of its own. This was what I though BF6 was going to be like. Guess we'll have to wait another generation.
Click to expand...

the issue with The Finals' destruction that devs have to overcome is the synchronisation of it with all players.

The Finals solved it by making all player movement be calculated on the server, and then sending the updated position to the client.
this is the opposite of how other games do it. usually everything you control runs locally, and then gets sent to the server.

calculating movement server side like in the Finals has the sideffect that all your movement inputs are slightly delayed. so you basically have input lag for your movement, that's as long as whatever ping you have.

so if you got a ping of below 10ms, it's probably fine and you won't notice it too much. but if you get a server with a ping of 30 or even 50ms it will start feeling very unresponsive.

but it is kinda necessary to do it this way, because with so many physics based chunks that all have collision, if player movement and server-side physics weren't synchronised at all times, you'd get some serious glitches
 
Last edited:
kevboard said:
the issue with The Finals' destruction that devs have to overcome is the synchronisation of it with all players.

The Finals solved it by making all player movement be calculated on the server, and then sending the updated position to the client.
this is the opposite of how other games do it. usually everything you control runs locally, and then gets sent to the server.

calculating movement server side like in the Finals has the sideffect that all your movement inputs are slightly delayed. so you basically have input lag for your movement, that's as long as whatever ping you have.

so if you got a ping of below 10ms, it's probably fine and you won't notice it too much. but if you get a server with a ping of 30 or even 50ms it will start feeling very unresponsive.

but it is kinda necessary to do it this way, because with so many physics based chunks that all have collision, if player movement and server-side physics weren't synchronised at all times, you'd get some serious glitches
Click to expand...
Interesting... I guess that prevents any game from having large maps and player counts?

I'm sure some smart engineer will figure out a hybrid solution down the line. Having one source for all computations, when a lot of them may have no dependency on each physics based interaction seems like bruteforce overkill, even though it would be the easiest way to go about it...
 
kevboard said:
the issue with The Finals' destruction that devs have to overcome is the synchronisation of it with all players.

The Finals solved it by making all player movement be calculated on the server, and then sending the updated position to the client.
this is the opposite of how other games do it. usually everything you control runs locally, and then gets sent to the server.

calculating movement server side like in the Finals has the sideffect that all your movement inputs are slightly delayed. so you basically have input lag for your movement, that's as long as whatever ping you have.

so if you got a ping of below 10ms, it's probably fine and you won't notice it too much. but if you get a server with a ping of 30 or even 50ms it will start feeling very unresponsive.

but it is kinda necessary to do it this way, because with so many physics based chunks that all have collision, if player movement and server-side physics weren't synchronised at all times, you'd get some serious glitches
Click to expand...
How many players have a match in The Finals?
 
nowhat said:
CBR requires half the pixels of whatever your target resolution is. As for artifacts with post-processing, sure they can exist (for example, performance mode in HFW was really quite nasty in motion at launch), but they can be worked around (as was the case with said performance mode and later patches).
Click to expand...
Also, I´ve grown to like Ghost of Tsushima's 4K CB implementation. It´s basically 1440p but much sharper than TAA and has less artifacts than MSAA.
 
for the third post... the vegetation looks absolutely AMAZING in this game. Especially the way the sun goes thru the leaves of the plants, making them brighter. It looks the best i´ve ever seen in a game. I know a lot about plants, stop playin wit me.
 
Lagspike_exe said:
Another test on Pro.
Flying the helicopter on the mountain map, with FoV maxed out in 3rd person vehicle model, the game definitely drops frames heavily and from what I can see has tearing on 120 FPS VRR TV in performance mode. It could be that the FoV influences performance heavily.
Click to expand...
Higher fov means the image is wider with more to see. That means ur machine has to render more, still worth it tho in a mp game
 
SkyHighTrees said:
for the third post... the vegetation looks absolutely AMAZING in this game. Especially the way the sun goes thru the leaves of the plants, making them brighter. It looks the best i´ve ever seen in a game. I know a lot about plants, stop playin wit me.
Click to expand...

I think vegetation looked of greater fidelity in BFV. Specular highlights are really lacking in this new game, possibly an artistic choice, but that will affect fauna realism first.
 
DirtInUrEye said:
I think vegetation looked of greater fidelity in BFV. Specular highlights are really lacking in this new game, possibly an artistic choice, but that will affect fauna realism first.
Click to expand...
You must have played it on PC. On PS4 and them it was just ok. Especially in Iwo Jima, it was quite bland on consoles
 
Caio said:


The PC version, running at ultra settings on a high-end rig, is naturally the visual benchmark , with unmatched texture quality, shadow detail, and overall rendering precision.
Click to expand...


It isn't really ultra settings across the board though, as SSGI is very obviously disabled in this visual comparison video. The visual difference with that upgraded but rather heavy AO technique is pretty striking, but I suppose it's not as if deceptive practice is new to ElAnalista, so not really surprising.
 
DirtInUrEye said:
It isn't really ultra settings across the board though, as SSGI is very obviously disabled in this visual comparison video. The visual difference with that upgraded but rather heavy AO technique is pretty striking, but I suppose it's not as if deceptive practice is new to ElAnalista, so not really surprising.
Click to expand...
You're correct , SSGI is clearly absent in the PC footage shown here. This is a heavier AO technique that adds subtle ambient lighting and depth, so disabling it inevitably flattens the image and makes the gap vs PS5 Pro smaller.
However, SSGI is an optional PC setting and may have been disabled for performance parity, stability, or build-specific reasons, not necessarily to mislead. Still, its absence is worth noting, as true PC Ultra with SSGI enabled can look visibly richer.
Bottom line: yes, SSGI off softens the gap. That's why raw visual comparisons need proper context.
 
Physiognomonics said:
Yes, but it depends of the implementation. In some games like the last Tomb Raider or Days gone, the implementation is very good notably when it's aiming for native 4K output. Days gone showed us how good CBR could be even compared to PSSR. Problem is it's not a easy plug and play API like DLSS or even PSSR. It needs more optimization.
Click to expand...
Again PSSR has big limits and it's not matter of implementations. Otherwise you would see CBR instead of FSR... it works fine just at very high resolution and with raytracing would be a total fuzzy mess.
 
Last edited:
Physiognomonics said:
Yes, but it depends of the implementation. In some games like the last Tomb Raider or Days gone, the implementation is very good notably when it's aiming for native 4K output. Days gone showed us how good CBR could be even compared to PSSR. Problem is it's not an easy plug and play API like DLSS or even PSSR. It needs more optimization.
Click to expand...
Nobody is using CBR anymore for a reason. I thought it was good enough for PS4 Pro, but comparing its quality to PSSR is nonsense. The ML upscalers are clearly superior in motion, which is why everyone is moving towards them.
 
Will the PC version be steam with no other crap on top?

If it needs EA launcher, web browser to join games (lmao) etc. I'll go for PS5 Pro.

Dead Space done away with the shitty launchers so I'm hoping they continue that trend.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Digital Foundry: Wuchang: Fallen Feathers - Digital Foundry Review - PS5/PS5 Pro/Xbox Series X|S
2
95
496
Pedro Motta replied
Digital Foundry: STALKER: Legends of the Zone Trilogy - Enhanced PS5/PS5 Pro/Xbox Series X|S Patch Tested!
23
2K
Gp1 replied
Digital Foundry: Senua's Saga: Hellblade 2 Enhanced - DF Review - PS5/ PS5 Pro/ Xbox Series X/ Steam Deck!
2 3
111
195
Darsxx82 replied
Digital Foundry: Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 - DF Review - PS5/PS5 Pro/Xbox Series X|S - An Exceptional Achievement
2 3
104
7K
Herr Edgy replied
  • Locked
[Digital Foundry] Clair Obscur: Expedition 33 - DF Review - PS5/PS5 Pro/Xbox Series X|S - An Exceptional Achievement
News Analysis Review 
2
1K
adamsapple replied
Top Bottom