Friday, March 20th 2026

Sony Says PlayStation Will Get Frame Generation "At Some Point"

Sony recently introduced Upgraded PSSR—aka PSSR 2.0—on its PlayStation 5 Pro consoles with the launch of Resident Evil, finally unlocking the additional AI chops of the PS5 Pro's APU. If recent comments by Sony's Mark Cerny to Digital Foundry are anything to go by, PlayStation's console hardware will be following a similar trajectory to gaming PCs when it comes to these ML and AI-based features. Specifically, it seems as though frame generation will be one of the next advancements to make its way to the PlayStation platform, although it seems as though gamers will need to wait a little longer for that to be implemented—if it is implemented during this console generation at all.

Addressing a question regarding FSR Frame Generation on PlayStation, Cerny commented that "FSR Frame Generation is also based on co-developed technology...and an equivalent frame generation library should be seen at some point on PlayStation platforms." He goes on to say that frame generation will not be making it to Sony's consoles in 2026, stating that "we have no more releases planned for this year." Given that the next-generation PlayStation hardware is slated to arrive somewhere between 2027 and 2028, it almost seems likely that Sony will announce FSR Frame Generation at the same time as the PlayStation 6 with a cut-back version available for the PS5, although it's potentially possible for Sony to update the current PS5 Pro with FSR Frame Generation, since FSR Redstone was developed in partnership with Sony, to begin with. There have already been modders who have run FSR 4 Redstone Frame Generation on RDNA 3, as well, so it may be possible for the PS5's RDNA 2 APU, as well, although at the cost of a higher performance penalty.
Source: Mark Cerny via Digital Fountry
Add your own comment

27 Comments on Sony Says PlayStation Will Get Frame Generation "At Some Point"

#2
FreedomEclipse
~Technological Technocrat~
lexluthermiesterBut can it be disabled?
Maybe. With the power of Ai. /s
Posted on Reply
#3
N/A
the moment AAA games can't reach more than 15 FPS, I bring them back to life at 30 FPS with FSR FG.
Posted on Reply
#4
ZoneDymo
It makes sense to have for 120+ hz screens.
Posted on Reply
#5
freeagent
I foresee hardcore hardware stagnation coming to us in the future.
Posted on Reply
#6
Recus
No 100+ posts about fake frames and increased latency? I wonder why?
Posted on Reply
#7
freeagent
RecusNo 100+ posts about fake frames and increased latency? I wonder why?
Temp ban, that is why.
Posted on Reply
#8
zus
It could be nice for games like Elden Ring that can't hold 60 FPS all the time, at least it wouldn't fall outside the VRR window with frame gen. It could also bump some PS4 games from 60 to 120 FPS, maybe 30 to 60 FPS? At least it would be fun to have the option. I wonder if they can make it like it is on PC, one version that is implemented by the devs and a simpler version that can be toggled in the PS5 settings. But I think the OS-level toggle would increase VRAM usage beyond what the game originally expected.
Posted on Reply
#9
chrcoluk
zusIt could be nice for games like Elden Ring that can't hold 60 FPS all the time, at least it wouldn't fall outside the VRR window with frame gen. It could also bump some PS4 games from 60 to 120 FPS, maybe 30 to 60 FPS? At least it would be fun to have the option. I wonder if they can make it like it is on PC, one version that is implemented by the devs and a simpler version that can be toggled in the PS5 settings. But I think the OS-level toggle would increase VRAM usage beyond what the game originally expected.
One of the major flaws with FG is it doesnt solve any useful problems, other than maybe CPU bottlenecking.

Going from 60to 120 is far less useful than going from 30 to 60, but FG doesnt work well at low base frame rates. It doesnt even work well at high, with the artefacts, but even worse at low.
Posted on Reply
#10
zus
chrcolukOne of the major flaws with FG is it doesnt solve any useful problems, other than maybe CPU bottlenecking.

Going from 60to 120 is far less useful than going from 30 to 60, but FG doesnt work well at low base frame rates. It doesnt even work well at high, with the artefacts, but even worse at low.
Sure, it's more of a workaround instead of being a proper solution, but PC gamers at least have the option to choose between FG on vs off and decide if the tech is useful for them or not. PS5 gamers are stuck with what they have. If FG has the potential to work around CPU bottlenecks then it's already worth implementing for this reason alone in my opinion.

60 -> 120 FPS might not be that necessary but hey, if you have a 120Hz screen, you might as well enjoy the extra smoothness, as long as you can ignore the trade-offs (I bet many PS5 players wouldn't feel them that much). The TPU community in general apparently can't stand the trade-offs of FG, but the emulation community seems to have a more positive view of it, I see many people recommending LSFG to bypass 60 FPS locks on emulators (that's a similar use case to PS4 games stuck at 60FPS on PS5).

30 -> 60 FPS is a stretch indeed, it would be the best use case theoretically, but in practice is not that useful.
Posted on Reply
#11
Vayra86
AMD could have written this press release. 'At some point'... the only thing missing is 'maybe'

top tier marketing at work here boys. I'll try presenting my plans to management next time in the company I work at, telling them 'its not ready' without a follow up saying 'the new planned date is X'. That'll really work out well, I think management team will give me a raise then and there.
Posted on Reply
#12
QUANTUMPHYSICS
I see no point in consoles anymore. They are obsolete by the time you open the box. PC gaming makes way more sense.
Posted on Reply
#13
lexluthermiester
freeagentI foresee hardcore hardware stagnation coming to us in the future.
Yeah, this should be obvious to most people.

It's not all bad news though. With the current level of hardware, truly spectacular games can be made.
Posted on Reply
#14
Apocalypsee
Frame gen for consoles could be, in a sense, good if you wanted to run it on high refresh rate display. Using controller having less of an impact from the input lag increase from enabling it, from what I personally experiencing.I can't stand it using keyboard and mouse but its just fine with a controller, even to extreme of 4x FG.
Posted on Reply
#15
lexluthermiester
ApocalypseeFrame gen for consoles could be, in a sense, good if you wanted to run it on high refresh rate display.
ONLY if latency is not a problem!.
Posted on Reply
#16
melkor_unlimited
QUANTUMPHYSICSI see no point in consoles anymore. They are obsolete by the time you open the box. PC gaming makes way more sense.
Sure. Console may be obsolete even before put into box in fab.
But ...

Game publishers will do (or at least pretend doing) some optimizations.
No one will bother to do optimizations for PCs of similar performance.
Posted on Reply
#17
AleXXX666
RecusNo 100+ posts about fake frames and increased latency? I wonder why?
remember sh*tsole gamers thing they are "elite" ones so they accept everything console-related as a "God's gift", despite of PC's superiority over any feature :D
Posted on Reply
#18
Apocalypsee
lexluthermiesterONLY if latency is not a problem!.
True, we've yet to see how latency gonna affect consoles.
Posted on Reply
#19
Sithaer
ApocalypseeTrue, we've yet to see how latency gonna affect consoles.
Yeah but I would imagine that it wouldn't be that bad depending on the game ofc.
Personally I don't really find issues with x2 FG even with a keyboard+mouse as long as the base FPS is around 60 and its a singleplayer game. That and I'm not really sensitive to that so called latency and x2 feels perfectly playable to me in the games where I've tried it and to me it feels better to have it enabled on my 200Hz monitor with a 120 FPS cap via RTSS.
For example Borderlands 4 is totally fine and it does not affect my gameplay and aim whatsoever and its the same in Cyberpunk so I can actually play with path tracing on top and the game looks great and plays well.
Posted on Reply
#20
trsttte
As long as we're talking "maybe" and "at some point" they could also fix the rendering pipeline so we could have a performance benefit on a 1440p displays instead of just getting a downsampled supersampled image. It's great they eventually brought up 1440p support, but internally the console is just downscalling the 4k render so there's no advantage.

Maybe ultrawide support as well, don't even need to fix the game field of view, let users have a sidebar on unsupported games for example and give developers the choice to support a wider fov.
Posted on Reply
#21
TheinsanegamerN
The fact these consoles are going to be getting FSR4 based upscaling and FG when rDNA3 is left in the cold really does smart.
SithaerYeah but I would imagine that it wouldn't be that bad depending on the game ofc.
Personally I don't really find issues with x2 FG even with a keyboard+mouse as long as the base FPS is around 60 and its a singleplayer game. That and I'm not really sensitive to that so called latency and x2 feels perfectly playable to me in the games where I've tried it and to me it feels better to have it enabled on my 200Hz monitor with a 120 FPS cap via RTSS.
For example Borderlands 4 is totally fine and it does not affect my gameplay and aim whatsoever and its the same in Cyberpunk so I can actually play with path tracing on top and the game looks great and plays well.
Right......but nobody needs FG if you can already hit 60. The major use case it to make unplayable games playable, and because FG makes latency worse, it will forever be this tech that only appeals to people chasing uber high framerates. For a console where most games run at 25-30 FPS, FG is largely useless due to latency issues.
QUANTUMPHYSICSI see no point in consoles anymore. They are obsolete by the time you open the box. PC gaming makes way more sense.
2010 wants its talking point back.

Consoles appeal to a totally different market to PCs: not everyone wants to build a PC or work with steam and optiscaler to play their vidya, and cheating is far rarer on consoles then PC, even today with all our absurd kernel level lockdowns.
Posted on Reply
#22
TheGoodDave
I'd take 30fps any day over 60fps where a quarter of those frames are AI slop
Posted on Reply
#23
Sithaer
TheinsanegamerNRight......but nobody needs FG if you can already hit 60. The major use case it to make unplayable games playable, and because FG makes latency worse, it will forever be this tech that only appeals to people chasing uber high framerates. For a console where most games run at 25-30 FPS, FG is largely useless due to latency issues.
Lets just agree to disagree about that nobody part, while 60 is totally fine and I've used to play like that for a long time but 120 simply hits different on a high refresh rate display once you get used to it and FG does give you that smoother feeling than native 60 and that is something I've been experimenting with for a while now to find out my sweet spot. 'Personally I can't really feel the difference between 120 and 200 so thats why I cap my FPS at 120 via RTSS'
Sorry but if you've never experienced that in person on your own monitor then you can't properly judge it. 'I would bet money that if I were to sit some of you down infront of my PC and play those games where I'm using x2 FG most of you couldn't even tell the difference in a blind test..'
Nvidia FG actually does work in the right games even if most ppl hate it around here.

As for consoles and 30 FPS yeah that I can agree that scaling from 30 FPS could be an issue but who knows maybe they will make it work differently than how it is on PC + using a controller should also help mitigating the latency related problems.
Posted on Reply
#24
lexluthermiester
melkor_unlimitedNo one will bother to do optimizations for PCs of similar performance.
Moose Muffins! MOST devs do optimizations for PC games. To say otherwise is evidence that one is not paying enough attention to the PC gaming space.
Posted on Reply
#25
_roman_
I wonder why people need to use upscaling with double frames when their expensive television sets should implement it differently. television sets are just microcontroller with standard display panel technology. televisions should have dp with freesync already builld it, which seems not the case.

i wonder if anyone ever made a 20kHz Video Sequence of a freesync enabled 40Hz display vs those double 60hz fake 120hz television sets and compare picture by picture. i think only 5 seconds * 20k Frames/second = 100k in totalFrames should be enough to judge the technology.

the core task what tech outlets should do. is there a visible difference, quality, etc between 40hz freesync vs 120hz, doubled 60hz no freesync sony paystation amd mode fabulous 2.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 12th, 2026 07:33 PST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

TPU on YouTube

Controversial News Posts