Obliterator
Member
DF said that they think many of the games are rendering at around 1800p and then going up to 4k so yeah should be an improvement over 1440p.
Still pretty damn impressive for a $400 box.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Tomb Raider PS4 Pro version vs PC Maxed out 4k screenshot comparison
- Thread starter Wishmaster92
- Start date
DF said that they think many of the games are rendering at around 1800p and then going up to 4k so yeah should be an improvement over 1440p.
Still pretty damn impressive for a $400 box.
Lol for real? So it's not a 4k machine. This is some misleading marketing. I will tell my friends. Thanks.
wtf sony
ViolentP
Member
That 1% however should not be what defines the console. The majority performer should. We're going to have a bunch of consumers buying this claiming they are running 4K and believing they are voices of authority due to experience.
It's unfortunate that they get away with it. More unfortunate the consumers that justify its usage.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
It uses a Pro upscaler to 4K.
ViolentP
Member
So no.
potatohead
Member
Yes.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
That's like complaining the PS3/360 (HD-twins, anyone?) weren't true HD machines or indeed the XB1 isn't as a lot of its titles are 900p or 700p. I mean who really gives a shit if the result is very close to 4K and it puts HDR (exclusive to 4K) to good use?
Also, some people are complaining why they bothered with 4K and not just upped the fps. They can't win.
ViolentP
Member
I'm not saying it's a bad product. On the contrary, I think it's a worthwhile purchase for anyone who doesn't already own a PS4. What I am saying however is that the marketing is misleading and it would be a mistake for us to say it is justified.
Even the 360/PS3 ran a majority of their games at 720p and up. That is a valid use of the term HD. Calling this 4K however is simply not accurate.
For AAA games nope, we will probably see some games that are low poly and no texture heavy doing native 4k on the Pro, something like Journey.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
Whos calling it 4K? It's not called PS4K that was started from a leak. Also, as someone above pointed out, there ARE native 4K games being released for it. In any case, I wouldn't get worked up about it (not saying you are).
adamsapple
Or is it just one of Phil's balls in my throat?
Information is super unclear or maybe I'm not that technically minded, but isn't Checkerboard rendering when the system automatically generates pixels or 'information' to fill in every alternating pixel to fill out a 4K frame buffer ?
If that's the case .. doesn't that mean that you're still getting the same amount of pixels being rendered that would be in a nave 4K ? and not blowing up a lower resolution which is traditionally called 'upscaling' ?
I need a Linus Tech Tips video on the topic to make sense I guess
ViolentP
Member
It's the first question on their official FAQ:
And again, I don't have a horse in this race as I've determined this product is not for me, I just hope to have potential consumers actually know what they are getting. Again, I don't think it's a bad product, I just think the marketing is inaccurate.
ViolentP
Member
No offense taken. But your statements were incorrect. I could go into it with you if you'd like to know.
rokkerkory
Member
Mhh yes, 4k may be awesome.
But I need a really huge TV and sit close to it.
Am I wrong?
This applies to all human eyes, equally im sure
It says capable of outputting to 4K. And we have confirmed games that are doing native 4K, like the Last of Us, SMITE, and Elder Scrolls Online. So I really don't understand the issue here.It's the first question on their official FAQ:
And again, I don't have a horse in this race as I've determined this product is not for me, I just hope to have potential consumers actually know what they are getting. Again, I don't think it's a bad product, I just think the marketing is inaccurate.
Not entirely - there will be a minority of 4K native games - older games / less demanding should be feasible. The vast majority will not be and will be upscaled from a lower resolution (but likely higher than 1080p) such as 1440p using the checkerboard technique. This will cause reduced image quality / fidelity / artifacts, but clearly thus far the results are good for something priced at $400.
ViolentP
Member
Look around. Do you really deny the fact that both Pro and Scorpio are being sold as 4K devices? Look at the front page of Gaf alone and you'll see where marketing is pushing consumer perception.
I think I'm the minority here when I say this becomes a bad value once it becomes an upgrade. Let's say you get $200 back from your PS4. A hefty return. But your cost still accumulates to $600 for a Pro. At $600, I would hope a larger increase in performance. The only real justification I see is the performance increase this is sure to apply to Sony's new venture into VR.
It is sold as a 4K device. It has 4K games. And like every single console before it, it also has lower resolution than advertised games.
There is literally nothing here that is deceiving. Nothing.
Coulomb_Barrier
Member
It's the first question on their official FAQ:
And again, I don't have a horse in this race as I've determined this product is not for me, I just hope to have potential consumers actually know what they are getting. Again, I don't think it's a bad product, I just think the marketing is inaccurate.
'Capable of outputting 4K graphics'? That's true isn't it?
I mean you can hardly expect them to put on the marketing '*non-native 4K in AAA titles' you know what big companies are like.
ViolentP
Member
So you and I are in agreement in that there is a more accurate way of portraying the realistic capabilities of the device. I wouldn't expect them to do it either, of course.
It is not a 4K device, however. It is capable of upscaling so that it can be used on a 4K TV, but it is no 4K device. The handful of games that run natively are exceptions and the device should not be defined as such. This is just my personal opinion, of course.
Show me a company that has actually done this. No one has ever done this.
It is absolutely a 4K device. I mean, this is a really weird argument. I don't know what else to tell you.
There's nothing inaccurate about it! I'm done with this argument, it's bizarre and has no basis in reality. ._.
ViolentP
Member
And that somehow justifies inaccuracies?
Xander Crews
Member
Well they're not lying about it. From Digital Foundry it sounds like a worthy improvement and you need 4k TV to see it. It's not native 4k, but it's a big improvement.
ViolentP
Member
In a world where 4K devices exist and the Playstation 4 Pro is not one of them. That is the reality that I live in.
Totally an improvement and certainly a viable use for a 4K TV. I just don't consider upscaling to be true to the resolution it outputs is all.
lowhighkang_LHK
Member
1800p, what a weird native resolution. So then from their it's upscaled via software/hardware to 2160p?
What's the next step above 2160p btw? How long in terms of years can we expect TV's to start rolling out in that regard.
Caayn
Member
Your GPU is in the same performance range. Your CPU however is a whole lot stronger.
If the argument is that the presence of non-native 4K games means a system can't be marketed as a device for 4KTV owners, then no device can be probably for another decade. Or more.
I think it's fairly obvious and fine to characterise these as 'early 4K' games machines, in the same way PS3/360 were arguably 'early HD' games machines. They're designed to be able to feed a 4K TV well, in a way that is impressively better than a standard PS4, and it sounds like it does that from impressions.
And in fairness to Sony, their press releases and the presentation itself were filled with qualifications about the underlying rendering techniques being used - way more transparency than, say, the early days claims about PS3 as a '1080p machine', for example.
Confused Cheeseburger
Member
From what I understand, the Pro upscaler is pretty amazing? Is that rendering technique patented?
ViolentP
Member
I believe Sony owns the patent.
SapientWolf
Trucker Sexologist
BF1 at 1080p looks better. Pixels aren't everything.
ShutterMunster
Junior Member
What's the build price on a PC to play RotTR maxed out at 4K/30?
ViolentP
Member
I would guess between the $800-$900 mark.
According to the leaked documents, Sony recommends rendering at that resolution as it neatly upscales to 4K.
pixelation
Member
Well this is stupid, can you honestly see a company printing that on the box of their product?. The PS4 Pro will display in native 4K for streaming content that supports it and a selection of games, so they are not lying.
chromatic9
Member
Looks a ways off even PC at 1440p with artifacts,
Top PS4 Pro, PC 1440, PC 2160
Top PC 2160, PC 1440, PS4 Pro
Top PS4 Pro, PC 1440, PC 2160
Top PC 2160, PC 1440, PS4 Pro
AcademicSaucer
Member
Compare the framerates now
TLOU is already 4K on it. I'm assuming many PS3 level games would run at full 4K on this machine if they ran at 30fps
Caayn
Member
Lara's arm is ridden with artifacts on the PS4P here.Looks a ways off even PC at 1440p with artifacts,
Top PS4 Pro, PC 1440, PC 2160
Peterthumpa
Member
Hahahaha, I can't believe some replies we're getting here.
"Sony is lying, PS4 Pro sucks, etc, etc".
Does it really fucking matters if the thing is running a game at native 4K or upscaling it using their proprietary method if the final IQ is almost as good as a PC running the game @ 4K, specially when you're looking at the final image from 2, 3m away instead of comparing 300% crops from a game which is an aliased mess at 4K even on PC?
Just watch the raw Horizon gameplay that Sony released (if possible in your 4K TVs) and tell me, REALLY, if the IQ is bad to justify such nonsense.
"Sony is lying, PS4 Pro sucks, etc, etc".
Does it really fucking matters if the thing is running a game at native 4K or upscaling it using their proprietary method if the final IQ is almost as good as a PC running the game @ 4K, specially when you're looking at the final image from 2, 3m away instead of comparing 300% crops from a game which is an aliased mess at 4K even on PC?
Just watch the raw Horizon gameplay that Sony released (if possible in your 4K TVs) and tell me, REALLY, if the IQ is bad to justify such nonsense.
Principate
Saint Titanfall
Judging by the comparisons it seems worse than 1400p. Though we'll see closer to the time, the comparisons aren't exactly flattering.
thelastword
Banned
Has it been confirmed that Tomb Raider's 4k mode is using checkerboard rendering?
Ha, lol, not really. The TR guy said there's a 4k mode, I'm just saying regardless of whether it's native or not it looks pretty close to the native PC version seen in the OP. I'm sure the final version of this port with direct feed videos and PNG screens will give us a better comparison where we will see and compare the .Pro version at it's optimum.
Yet, another thing people fail to realize is that games being compared must be playable. It makes no sense to max everything on PC to do screenshots comparisons against pro when the PC version is running 20fps as per the OSD.
Oh yeah TressFX on the arms, PS4Pro is the future.