Phantom Blade Zero FPS Optimization & Graphics Settings

This is the full breakdown of Phantom Blade Zero performance and image quality across 21 graphics settings. I tested these at 1440p on an RTX 5080. The guide starts with Quality Preset and upscaling, followed by individual settings ordered roughly from the largest FPS impact to the smallest. Use the charts and screenshot comparisons below to decide which options to adjust for your system.

Quality Preset

As expected, Quality Preset has a large impact on performance and image quality because it adjusts several settings at once.

Most of the visible changes come from ambient occlusion, texture quality, and Environment Detail Quality, which controls the amount of clutter in a scene.

Upscaling (Native)

At native resolution, these comparisons averaged around 55 to 59 FPS on my RTX 5080. If you need more performance, upscaling is worth considering. There is no option to disable the upscaling system completely, so I’ve compared all of its native modes here.

Even at native quality, FSR shows some flickering in the distance that I didn’t see with the other options. Apart from that, the native modes look comparable.

Upscaling (DLSS)

Native modes keep the render resolution unchanged. Choosing a lower upscaling quality reduces the render resolution and GPU workload, which can improve FPS when you’re GPU limited.

On my RTX 5080 at 1440p, switching from DLAA to Quality increased average FPS from 56.6 to 76.1. Ultra Performance produced another large jump, with a loss in image quality. I’d start with Quality at 1440p or consider Balanced at 4K. The intermediate steps below Quality gave smaller gains on my system.

Shadow Quality

Lowering Shadow Quality usually makes shadows less detailed at every step, but here the most obvious change in sharpness is between Ultra and Very High.

High removes some depth and makes shadows slightly blurrier. At Medium, the objects casting shadows appear less detailed, possibly because they use a lower level of detail. Low looks almost identical to Medium.

High performs about the same as the lower options, so that’s the lowest I’d go. Dropping from Ultra gives a useful FPS boost for relatively little loss in image quality.

Lighting Quality

Lighting Quality is another setting worth adjusting. The flickering candlelight makes direct screenshot comparisons difficult, but most of the visual changes are subtle. Medium improves performance with little visible change in this scene. I’d choose High if you want to keep more of the lighting detail.

Ray Tracing Quality

Ray tracing reduces performance here, though the visual differences between Off, Ray Tracing, and Ray Tracing with Ray Reconstruction are small in this scene. Path Tracing makes the clearest visual difference, adding more ambient occlusion and shadow detail around objects. Even so, I don’t think the performance cost is worth it for most systems.

If you have performance to spare, consider Path Tracing. It reduced average FPS by about 11% compared with Off in my test. Surprisingly, Ray Tracing with Ray Reconstruction was more expensive, reducing average FPS by about 22% compared with Off.

Depth of Field

Depth of Field appears to be used mainly during cutscenes. Quality differences are subtle until the drop from High to Medium, where pixelation becomes noticeable. High is the lowest I’d go. Since this mainly affects cutscenes, I’d prioritize image quality here.

Material Quality

Material Quality makes subtle changes to detailed textures nearby. The clearest change is between Very High and High, where lighting affects distant fabric differently. I also noticed changes in ambient occlusion.

I’d keep this at Very High or Ultra for image quality. The main FPS improvement comes from dropping from High to Medium.

Environment Texture Quality

Environment Texture Quality controls texture resolution. Most options averaged around 93 FPS in this test, but Ultra performed slightly better at 97.5 FPS. I’m not sure what caused that result.

I’d keep texture quality high if you have enough VRAM. Lowering this option mainly saves video memory, with VRAM usage on my system dropping from 6.1 GB on Ultra to 5.3 GB on Low.

View Distance

View Distance is hard to judge during much of the gameplay because the valleys limit how far you can see. Even in more open scenes, I couldn’t see a visual difference between these options. Lowering it gave a small FPS improvement, so I’d use Very High at most.

Post-Processing Quality

In these screenshots, Post-Processing Quality mainly affects bloom and related effects. Bloom becomes less noticeable when dropping from Very High to High, but it remains present at every setting.

Dropping from Very High to High gives a small FPS gain, but I think the visual improvements at the higher settings are worth keeping.

Effects Quality

Combat is where Effects Quality is likely to matter most, but it’s difficult to benchmark consistently. Even without locking onto an enemy, the camera rotates and moves as enemies move. For a repeatable comparison, I stood still and looked toward particle sources, as shown in the screenshots.

In this stationary test, average FPS increased from 83.2 on Ultra to 86.3 on Low. That’s a small gain, so I’d leave this at Very High.

Character Texture Quality

Character Texture Quality controls texture clarity on your character and other characters. Each step down reduces resolution; on Low, fabric looks smooth and blurry. I’d leave this as high as your VRAM allows. FPS differences were small on my system, so I’d use Ultra, though a crowded scene could behave differently.

Reflection Quality

Reflection Quality has a visible effect for little performance cost. Everything below Very High looks smoother and flatter, so I’d leave it at Very High. If you need more performance, High gave about a 4% FPS increase over Very High in this test.

Character Model Quality

Character Model Quality should affect the detail of character meshes. In my tests, visual differences and changes in VRAM usage were subtle, and FPS barely changed. I doubt the setting is broken, but I couldn’t see or feel much difference in the scenes I tested.

Environment Detail Quality

Environment Detail Quality controls clutter in a scene. Each step down removes leaves, scattered objects, broken pieces of wood, and other details that give the environment depth. I saw little to no VRAM saving or FPS improvement from lowering it, so I’d leave this on Ultra.

Ambient Occlusion

Ambient Occlusion usually adds depth around objects, but changing these options produced almost no visible difference in my tests. FPS also stayed about the same. I’m not sure whether the setting is working as intended.

Environment Model Quality

Environment Model Quality should affect the detail of terrain and other environment meshes. Changing it produced no visible difference in the scenes I tested, and I didn’t notice a change in VRAM usage or FPS either.

Motion Blur Quality

I saw almost no world motion blur while rotating the camera. I’d expect most of the effect to appear during combat, such as when swinging a weapon. Changing Motion Blur Quality made almost no difference to FPS in this test.

I’d use one of the higher settings for smoother-looking combat.

High-Quality Hair

High-Quality Hair made little difference in my tests, both in how the hair looked and moved and in FPS.

Anti-Aliasing

Anti-Aliasing is generally controlled by the selected upscaling method. Even with TSR selected, changing Anti-Aliasing Quality had almost no effect on FPS. It likely makes little visual difference here either.

I’d focus on the choice of upscaling method instead.