-
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.
PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)
- Thread starter OsirisBlack
- Start date
GlamFM
Banned
I wasn´t referring to you specifically, but to the general vibe I get from the "outrage crew".
But what if it were 140% more powerful for only 100 bucks more? Could have gone very well.
Plus they also have to push PS VR. A lot is riding on them being able to juggle everything correctly.
Yeah? how well do you think this move is going to go over?
It will go over amazing for PC for next gen but what about Sony?
Why buy a launch PS5?
That's not news. That's just his interpretation of the info.
Iorv3th
Member
More likely that instead of having frame rate issues it would have loss of visual fidelity. I suppose a single player game could get away with different frame rates but a multiplayer game would be tough, a lot of bitching would be had.
It does setup a weird precedent. If they do this of the PS4, would people potentially hold back on a Day 1 PS5 if they possibility of a PS5.5 is out there 2 or 3 years down the line?
TheSlySoul
Member
Yeah, they have plenty riding on both ideas.
Which is why I may just wait it out and get it on the cheap when PS5 hits.
Sucks I will have to adapt a mobile mentality for consoles, but what can you do?
I don't think we will see a PS5 for a very long time. Things may just stay forward compatible with more incremental upgrades for the next decade until we see a dramatic hardware change.
FiveMinuteHero
Member
This.
They should just drop "4", call it PlayStation and release a new one every other year.
GlamFM
Banned
I would assume that everything will be done to keep an even playing field in MP modes/games.
This was coming from overheard devs - the terminology they use is not always the same that consumers use. Until we have confirmation otherwise, it's logical to assume 'considerable sacrifices made to performance' means what a layman would call 'lower settings' in PC gamer-speak. Which of course is what should be expected.
There is no reason to assume it would mean the games have bad performance in terms of actual gameplay. ie. the framerates are unplayable, etc. From a business standpoint there is nothing to be gained by alienating what is your existing mass-market. A PS4K userbase will be dwarfed by the standard PS4 for quite some time.
SEGAvangelist
Member
In this case Sony would be fine with a purchase every 6 years if you're still buying games.
Because at moment X it will be the most affordable (supposedly) way to play 3rd party AAA on your TV at that level of power, plug and play with simple interface, with Sony exclusives and 4K support (including UHDBD) to boot?
I think with a move like this it will betray trust for next gen launch and possibly cause the console space to collapse or give Xbox a boost if they dont (though MS seems more interested in slowly backing out it seems)
Who knows but I sense if all this is true it's going to hurt Sony and all the doom and gloom speak will be true
potatohead
Member
I did that after it was edited and it didn't really mention some of the things people are talking about like this dual GPU rumor. I was more curious about those things.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
That's the real puzzler. It's the one thing that doesn't make any sense at all in all this.
Sure VR no doubt could always use more power but surely you'd wait at least a year before doing another massive hardware launch.
Unless there is a vital reason we aren't aware of that means it must launch very close to PSVR?
qa_engineer
Member
There is no dual gpu rumor... at least I don't think. Any reference to "2x GPU" simply refers to 2x the power.
Question is, are they going to use a full Tonga chip or a cut down version (Tonga pro)?
I don't think that a Polaris chip would be ready for the PS4k even though it's possible. However, I thought Sony and MS only used off the shelve parts to keep costs down. This is where a Tonga (380/380X) GPU makes more sense.
I don't think that a Polaris chip would be ready for the PS4k even though it's possible. However, I thought Sony and MS only used off the shelve parts to keep costs down. This is where a Tonga (380/380X) GPU makes more sense.
RoadHazard
Gold Member
Which has nothing to do with resolution, but other things that are CPU-limited. You could lower the resolution of the PS4 version to 720p and it still wouldn't run any better in those cases, because that's not where the bottleneck is.
Another puzzling thing is the whole ban on VR games not running 60fps. Are devs expected to optimize 2 different settings and hardware differences?
Xander Crews
Member
To enjoy the games? Why buy a PS4k if PS5 is next? Why buy a PS6?
They (Microsoft included) seem to be setting a new expectation of refresh cycle. If it's every 3-4 years, the trick will simply be to not buy towards the end of a cycle.
Buying at launch would actually make the most sense so you have more time with the cycle.
Gumbie
Member
The APU the ps4 currently has is custom modified. I wouldn't be surprised if it has a either a custom Tonga or a custom Polaris APU that's secretly been in the works for awhile.
GlamFM
Banned
The more I think about this the more I love it.
Devs could actually use the power to increase the IQ.
IQ is super important for me and often sacrificed.
Having the base game being defined by the PS4´s capability, the extra power could be used for AA - finally!
This could mean a lot of clean looking games.
Devs could actually use the power to increase the IQ.
IQ is super important for me and often sacrificed.
Having the base game being defined by the PS4´s capability, the extra power could be used for AA - finally!
This could mean a lot of clean looking games.
GamerMax73
Member
But then why not wait for the PS6 2-3 years later, or the PS 6.5 2-3 years after that?
Drat, there's never a good time to buy. Got to take the plunge sometime. It's worse on PC with new CPU's and Graphics Cards, Ram technology or motherboards, being released every quarter. How do you possibly keep up?
GlamFM
Banned
Yes. With both systems having the exact same architecture this isn´t this big of a deal.
You think so?
Why buy something potentially weaker than something a couple years later for the same price?
Also this year looks to be the year most have been really have been waiting for with all the hyped games rolling out.
potatohead
Member
It might be part custom or part Polaris almost like the PS4 GPU itself was somewhat customized for extra compute functionality or whatever.
It may have some features of Polaris while others are omitted.
PdotMichael
Banned
The fact that you have for 3 years no console is maybe reason enough for all non concern trolling forum posters.
Could be 60 with reprojection on PS4 versus 90 with added downsampling or native 120 on PS4k.
GamerMax73
Member
I agree, but every year might give the devs a bit of an headache on working out what aim for with a 3-year+ development cycle. We've got to give Rockstar a fighting chance of completing Red Dead Redemption 2...
Then Sony would have been losing a ton of money per console sold and likely not have seen ANY more significant bump in sales over what they enjoy now. I mean, it's already one of the fastest selling home consoles ever released - if they beefed it up to the PS4K level - it would NOT have launched at $399. Remember, Sony wasn't exactly doing so hot back then, closing down more than half the company. They would have launched at $499 or even $599.
I never get this kind of logic. We have lived with sub 720p and most sub 30 fps games for 3-4 years. To play at 60 fps you have to play with an SD res just upscaled.
Now we gained 1080p with more stable 30 fps and more 60 fps games, but not counts anymore just because hardware it's underpowered, fuck that CPU suck and it's all because ps360 were powerful at launch. This kind of mindset give me tons of headaches.
FiveMinuteHero
Member
I have always bought PlayStation consoles on day one, for the simple reason that the higher price is worth the longevity of the product, as I will be still playing games the exact way developers made them, 5 or even 7 years later.
Incremental revisions of the same consoles changes the rules completely for me, as now I would be no longer sure that I will be getting the best of the platform throughout its entire lifetime, and that puts me unease when deciding if to buy another new console on launch day.
Incremental revisions of the same consoles changes the rules completely for me, as now I would be no longer sure that I will be getting the best of the platform throughout its entire lifetime, and that puts me unease when deciding if to buy another new console on launch day.
joecanada
Member
hey can someone answer this I've been wondering ever since I built a new pc (sort of - I bought and then replaced some stuff)....
Why did Sony go for "8 GB GDDR5!!!!"..... it seems the CPU and maybe other stuff doesn't really match up to that impressive number, like what is the benefit to so much RAM on the GPU for that particular system? like if you have a GPU equivalent to say a 750ti is there a point to it having the 8 GB?
Insane Metal
Gold Member
Where did you get the $599 from? We don't know how much it could have cost. The XBox One was sold for $499 and it still did reasonably well, even with all the Kinect and Always On bullshit. That's a situation we simply don't know.
Yes, I remember people laughing about the 8GBs, but no one expected them to have shitty CPUs as they do as well.
And no, it wasn't 'very good' 3 years ago. It wasn't ever. Since the leaks people knew they had really weak CPUs.
The RAM on PS4 is unified, it's not just for the GPU. Devs can use it how they see fit and GDDR5 allowed them to use more bandwidth.
What changed my mind on all of this was playing the FF XV demo today. It looks good, but it's framerate is abysmal. It wasn't unplayable, but it definitely hurt my experience. The idea of being able to trade in my old PS4 for $200 (assuming retailers play ball and don't tank it's value as soon as the PS4K comes out) and then get a PS4K for $200 and be able to play a game like FF XV at 60 FPS doesn't seem so bad now, honestly. I still think there are a ton of ways this could end very badly for Sony, but there's potential here that I didn't see before.
Every other year = every 2 years.
Still too fast IMO. 3 years seems more reasonable.
N30RYU
Member
FiveMinuteHero
Member
Yes, so instead of making sure the game plays fine on the system, they try and sell us a better PS4.
Then that would be amazing. It is rumored that a Polaris Pro chip (cut-down with Compute Units disabled) has 2304 SPs at a die size of ~232mm2.
That's very similar (die size) to a 270/7870/7850 which is what's inside the PS4.
I think this makes the most sense. I honestly don't see why Sony/AMD wouldn't go for it given that Polaris is almost ready. PS4k would benefit from the new GCN architecture.
If it's a tonga chip then I don't see how the PS4k will be able to do 4k...
Insane Metal
Gold Member
This is simply to make devs' work easier (and get better, faster results as well). The PS2 and the PS3 had different memory pools for the system RAM and the video RAM which made developing games for them a nightmare, at least in the beginning of their generations.
Thats the problem I have. It's like "Oops the system we released to too weak, here's what we meant to pass out"
He posted again later mentioning the date.
TheOfficeMut
Unconfirmed Member
Because every game plays fine as is it is, right?
GamerMax73
Member
lol, the word other was hiding behind the word every when I first read the sentence, I miss read it
