And it's a totally viable option as you will still receive the same game as everyone else even if they are an iteration above.
-
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.
Kotaku: Sony is working on a PS4.5; briefing devs on plans for a more powerful PS4
- Thread starter shinobi602
- Start date
I think it was because Intel is high cost/power, and at the time of X360's release their direction was high performance gaming and PowerPC was a viable option. When they were designing X360, Intel had recently abandoned years of work on Netburst when it proved to not scale IPC with clockspeed, and rolled back to an improved Pentium 3 design running around 1.5 GHz. Though I suppose they could have approached AMD because their chips were competitive back then.
If AMD & Sony make a APU for 4K /VR they can do it at a cheaper price than the cards made to brute force it's way to 4K /VR why is this so hard for people to understand?
Are the dev APIs for PS4 really that closed off that they don't have control over how hardware is utilized? Even if they were I'm sure Naughty Dog would get a pass to get full control as they'll tweak anything they can per stage or cutscene to improve visuals.
How much cheaper? It's not like the GPU is the only thing going in there.
THE:MILKMAN
Member
Titan X= Funny car drag racer. A beast. Can you tame it!?
Console APU= Lotus Evora. Sweet handling, lovely balance and easy to drive fast. Only a bit slower than the fastest hyper car(d)s around a track.
X360 and PS3 sold at heavy losses whereas at least PS4 I believe was sold around how much it cost to produce/market/sell. Also PowerPC beat Intel's netburst design failure, whereas now consoles are using AMD chips which have only a bit more than half the IPC of current Intel designs. The only way you could beat at least CPU performance of typical desktops, you'd have to get a custom E5 xeon (6-8 core, speed binned) or LGA 2011 -E processor from Intel, which would cost hundreds of dollars alone.
Negotiator
Member
Could you elaborate on that?
I imagine those $500 video cards cost no more than $220 to produce.
Lotus Evora: top speed 186mph
Fastlane Software Jim Read Racing dragster: 329mph
Sounds about right.
CosmicQueso
Member
You lasted just over 4 hours. Good start!
I couldn't resist that one!
David Ricardo
Member
I think if this PS4.5 is real, it won't be about 4k. It will be about VR. If PS4.5 can render any PS4 game at 4k, it will probably also be able to run them 90fps 1080p. So you are no longer limited to PS3 level graphics for VR. You can just get any new PS4 game, and make it run in VR.
Think Battlefield 5, Red Dead Redemption 2, Uncharted 4, Battlefront, No Man's Sky...
If PS4.5 is being floated around as the codename it's definitely a revised PS4.
-ImaginaryInsider
Member
Per a few pages back, the author of Kotaku article (I think) said he specifically asked about it being the PS5 and was told this product was not related to that.
RadicalVelocity
Member
Not sure I understand. It's a much smaller jump. PS3 to PS4 is much greater than a PS4 to PS4+ (in 4k) would be, if we're talking about just rendering at 4x the resolution with no other changes.
It's only greater (well, much closer to equal jump) if you consider the time involved, as the first jump was after 7 years and this would be 3-4 years (exponential rather than linear improvements)
Glorified G
Member
This doesn't seem logical at all. There is no flip switch that can automatically turn any game into VR because the hardware can allow it. Devs have to put in resources to allow it and every game you listed are from big publishers who haven't attempted any big VR titles. At most it would be built from the ground up and a separate title focused on VR like Battlefront, not the mainline titles.
This is most likely about 4K since Zoetis hasn't said anything about VR. And you would be locking out 36 million+ users who currently have a PS4 and telling them spend upto $1000 or more just for VR, just for more polygons. And that would directly contradict what Sony presented at GDC:
Hey guys, kinda off-topic but I didn't want to make a thread for this.
In retrospect, what do you guys think about the leap from PS2 to PS4?
If PS3 never existed, or put another way, keeping the PS2 as PS2 in 2000, and in 2006 we got a PlayStation equal to PS4 -- Is PS2 to PS4 as big of a leap from PS1 to PS2?
PS1 to PS2 was a massive leap, not only in raw specs, but what was actually achieved in games.
In retrospect, what do you guys think about the leap from PS2 to PS4?
If PS3 never existed, or put another way, keeping the PS2 as PS2 in 2000, and in 2006 we got a PlayStation equal to PS4 -- Is PS2 to PS4 as big of a leap from PS1 to PS2?
PS1 to PS2 was a massive leap, not only in raw specs, but what was actually achieved in games.
For some yes. But others no
If people are buying it at $399, why drop the price?
GamerMax73
Member
That's the confusing bit. Why is there a rumored GPU boost for that? It shouldn't be needed. Why is the rumor calling a .5 console? If it's just getting existing games outputing in 4k then all thats needed is a decent upscaler and HDMI 2.0. The could do that with a slim revision. It just doesn't fit other aspects of the rumor.
qualitydisc
Member
Legit question, do you think "Playstation 4.5" is a good final consumer-facing name? It's important to convey "this is a half-step upgrade" to consumers without confusing them or making them think it's a brand new system. Apple seems to have hit a sweet spot with their iPhone 5S/6S nomenclature that is easy to understand. I'm just wondering what Sony might do that would convey the same idea succinctly. Presumably it would be named Playstation 4-something, right? "Playstation 4K" would be a pretty damn clever name, I know it has been mentioned here many times already.
Glorified G
Member
It's not upscaling but rendering in 4K. Which definitely needs an upgraded GPU.
GamerMax73
Member
But that suggests a much bigger GPU upgrade, has a knock on effect on RAM, and games need to be specifically written or patched to render in 4K. So you create a two tier system. Also, if you have the GPU and RAM for 4K rendering, why cant devs use that power to create a better 1080p experience? 900p30 on PS4, 1080p60 or 4k30 on PS4.5?
Now I'm fine with this as part of an ongoing iteration cycle and stepping stone to PS5. But to be worthwhile PS5 needs to be a little further away than we first thought, closer to 2021 than 2019. Otherwise why not just jump in with a PS5 in the 2018 timescale?
The ongoing R&D required for that kind of GPU jump means this has been in the works for a very long time. Which again leads to a .5 step and moving to console iterations.
It's seems to be that different parts of the rumor contradict themselves.
Also question the value in releasing a machine that renders 4K in the 2016/7 time frame. Upscalling, yes, rendering - a lot of expense for a small target market. For rendering a PS5 in the 2018/9 when TVs are more embedded in peoples homes makes more sense.
So Eurogamer heard about this as well from their sources
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...ystation-4k-is-real-but-why-is-sony-making-it
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/d...ystation-4k-is-real-but-why-is-sony-making-it
QuickSilverD
Member
how much more powerful would the GPU need to be to render current 1080p games in 4K, how much more RAM would be needed?
Good technical summary and another separate re-affirmartion that this is genuine.
They are overthinking it with their conclusion.
Better visuals and performance combined with 4K media is its selling point. End of story.
So they are developing a new system for the handful of 4K owners out there ?
I can´t really believe that.
hooijdonk17
Member
This has certainly been an epically disappointing console generation.
GamerMax73
Member
The Kotaku rumor sounds an aweful lot like Option 3 to me, the worst of all worlds. I've been quiet vocal in liking the idea of Option 2 as a stepping stone to PS5. Option 1 sound more like what PS5 should be if you wait another year-eighteen months.
This isn't a 'one-off'. The console industry is changing.
GamerMax73
Member
I'm probably way out here but I'd have thought..
You render 1080p games in 1080p and upscale to 4k
You render 4k games in 4k
The screen size is 4x bigger so the frame buffer needs to be 4x bigger. While that should easily fit in the PS4's existing 8Gb ram (and then some), the memory space may already be allocated to other functions. Rob Peter to pay Paul, or full back on slower virtual ram on the hard drive.
On top of that you either have 4x as many polygons to shift around the screen, or you have the same number of polygons but they are 4x bigger - may actually look a bit blocky and ugly compared to 1080p, Looks like a PS3 game at 4K - upscaling may be better.
I don't know, I'd imagine a RAM boost to 12Gb would more than cover it.
digoutyoursoul
Member
Especially given how long the previous one was too
Don't forget that devs can't use all the RAM as a huge part is still allocated to the OS.
Screaming Meat
Unconfirmed Member
Sorry for the late reply: because I'd rather have saved my money for the more powerful console that won't be obsolete as quickly. Its a huge investment and I'd rather "future-proof" to a certain extent. Granted the Eurogamer news may change things.
lightchris
Member
The number of polygons doesn't change in either case, nor does their "size". The final number of fragments/pixels per polygon after projection increases, but that doesn't change the look - in the end jaggies become less noticeable as pixel size decreases with increased resolution, and thats it.
There will always be a cheaper or more powerful console down the road if you wait long enough, and nothing about iterative consoles says they'd be obsolete any faster. Software support can continue for exactly the same length of time if that's the business model Sony and/or Microsoft have in mind.
Your console would no longer be "top of the line", sure, but that has always been the case. They get smaller, quieter, more reliable, have more disk space, and there's even precedent for added features like HMDI output and dedicated Kinect connectors on mid-cycle Xbox 360 models.
I'm far from convinced that Sony will introduce a PS4.5 that is significantly more powerful, and I'm almost certain they won't cut software support short for the PS4.
It doesn't confirm anything. They know nothing of the specs. They are only speculating whats possible based on current parts. They are really only saying that its not possible to do PS4 quality graphics in 4K in a console sized box.
No it doesn't
So every PS4 game is made in Unity now?
Sometimes he is in Jeff Rigby Land.
CyberPunked
Member
Last generation was waayy too long.
except it wasn't for Sony:
PS1 1994
|
6 years
|
PS2 2000
|
6 years
|
PS3 2006
|
7 years
|
PS4 2013
just one year difference