-
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.
PS5 Pro Benchmark Leak. Moore's Law Is Dead
- Thread starter Wooxsvan
- Start date
Doctor Hades
Member
PSSR could be transformative for PS5 games and the inclusion in the Pro is basically an admission by Sony that AMD's FSR2 is, well, crap (which it is, in my opinion, based on my experience of PS5 games and using it in PC games that only support that and not the far superior DLSS). I also get how the performance boost of the Pro coupled with PSSR upscaling will give better looking games and more stable framerates.
My only question is how many games will actually be able to use PSSR. I really hope this is a system level override that can be 'injected' into every game and not something that needs to be patched in on a per-game basis because that could mean not every third-party developer will use it. PS4 Pro had hardware checkerboard rendering but almost no games used it (Red Dead Redemption 2 certainly didn't which is why its own upscaling looks so soft and blurry).
My only question is how many games will actually be able to use PSSR. I really hope this is a system level override that can be 'injected' into every game and not something that needs to be patched in on a per-game basis because that could mean not every third-party developer will use it. PS4 Pro had hardware checkerboard rendering but almost no games used it (Red Dead Redemption 2 certainly didn't which is why its own upscaling looks so soft and blurry).
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
His source is also saying that it got patched and it is now looking better than beforeLOL mate GAF says otherwise:
Analysis - PS5 Pro/PSSR Appears to Provide Better Image Reconstruction than DLSS Running on a 4090 GPU
Problem on clarity comparisons here is that one video feed is of a 60fps game, therefore having completly diffrent motion blur effects then a 30fps game. Well for starters in that Ratchet shot have a look at the damaged wall texture. Can't tell me that the texture differences are due to motion...www.neogaf.com
.Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
I am curious what did they deliver there. Cerny’s team is quite conservative when they give estimates so if they say in their docs that there are optimisations that allow the effective bandwidth improvement to go above the 28% you get from the faster clocked memory I would love to know what they are (we know they increased the size of L1 and L2 caches, but did they do other changes in the GPU?).
Last edited:
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
To be fair there was a good group here, now either banned or silent, that was boosting that same narrative.
MostlyPeaceful
Banned
Pretty sure a lot of PS4 Pro enhanced games ran with 2160p checkerboard, notably games such as Horizon Zero Dawn and God of War.
2160p checkerboard uses a base resolution of 1920x2160
…which is exactly 100% more pixels than what the base PS4 rendered.
saintjules
Gold Member
I'd actually like to get more info on this. I've watched his videos for a while now. Is it the way he talks sounds like bullshit or what? There are times when he speaks I feel like he's gloating/strutting his own shit, but does sound knowledgeable on the tech. At least to my ears.
In no way I am aficionado on the PC language. I built a few PCs, but all the technical jargon admittedly goes over my head sometimes.
cormack12
Gold Member
The great war of 9tf
Zathalus
Member
Most people are not sporting a 3060.
Topher
Gold Member
5.36% is not "most" my man. The spread of GPUs across PC gamers varies so much that there is little point trying to make any kind of arguments from that data. You are going to be adding up dozens of GPU percentages most of which are under 1%.
Why are you so threatened by consoles getting AI upscaling techniques?
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
FSR2 isnt crap at higher resolutions. 4k FSR Quality renders at 1440p is rather good. Ive played it in Star Wars Jedi, Starfield and a couple of other games and its fine. it's when they drop to 1080p and in many cases 720p internal resolution where it simply falls apart.
even dlss which doesnt introduce a lot of artifacts at 720p still looks very soft and loses all its sharpness. these solutions are not meant to go that low. I hope PSSR sticks to 1080p as the lowest base resolution to reconstruct from.
Zacfoldor
Member
Every time I hear about real world performance of the Pro it's impressive. People who don't want to afford it don't want it to be a big upgrade but it is. It just obviously is. How games will take advantage of it is yet to be seen, but the technology in this is a significant upgrade and we will see this same tech in PS6.
HeisenbergFX4
Gold Member
AI can close the gap
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
He was wrong about Ampere, wrong about RDNA 3, wrong about Ada efficiency and power consumption, seemingly wrong about Intel quitting the GPU race. He just throws a lot of shit at the wall and hopes some of it sticks.
Traxtech
Member
Should be locked 60 just by brute power. Same with all the fps dropping games, remnant 2, lords of the fallen, wukong etcI wonder how the RE2 and 3 ports with RT will perform on the Pro. I'm betting they will be a locked 60 when tapping into the Pro hardware. On a base PS5 they can chug:
saintjules
Gold Member
Got it. I guess I just would have to have seen the video / article where he talks about these and then see the actual facts side by side to see the bullshit.
Do people really go back to see what he said or take notes to then catch him on his shit later on?
There is a collection of things he got wrong here:
Tqaulity
Member
Please do! The specs of the PS5 PRO GPU is clearly superior to a 7700XT in virtually every way. Not to mention the RT performance and NPU power is non existent in the 7700XT. Outside of that, the core specs for raster are far superior:
7700XT vs PSP5 Pro
54CU vs 60CU
192bit vs 256bit memory bus
432Gb/s bs 576 GB/s mem bandwidth
128KB vs 256 KB L1 cache
I think everyone keeps pointing to that due to the "45%" rendering performance figure that Sony has suggested. But that number is taking into account other factors of the "system" performance such as memory bandwidth. Sony is implying that the 28% memory bandwidth increase won't be enough to fully realize the ~67% greater compute power in practice. But A) Not all games will be mem bandwidth bound. And B) This is true on the PC as well by definition. There are hundreds of different configurations of system components that can affect the GPU performance of a given GPU. But just looking at the GPUs in isolation, there is NO comparison between the 7700XT and PS5 Pro.
I've said it multiple times but the PS5 Pro has the potential to be a much bigger difference than the PS4 Pro was over the PS4. Honestly IMO, the PS4 Pro was pretty much a waste of time as the vast majority of games just doubled the resolution to 1440p and called it a day. No increase in fidelity since all the GPU power was going toward trying to get to 4K and often times no FPS increase due to the extreme CPU bottleneck. The PS5 doesn't have those problems and the PRO should have a much bigger difference because:
- No jump from 1080p to 4K (4x the GPU power). Base PS5 is already at "4K" so the resolution bumps are smaller this time around. That leaves more GPU power for "other" more meaningful increases
- PS5 generation is NOT CPU bound like the PS4 generation was. How do we know? Because literally 98% of all games released on PS5 have a 60 fps mode at least and are not limited to 30fps. Where on the PS4, the vast majority of games were limited to 30fps. WIth GPU boundess, that increase in GPU power can actually take 30fps fidelity modes to 60fps which in itself will be a great improvement. But also, since nearly all games on PS5 already run at 60fps, the greater GPU power can be used to add more meaningful detail, IQ fidelity, and RT
- Additonal RT will be more impactful to the A/Bs than the 2x resolution bump on the PS4
- PSSR is essentially a much more advanced version of what checkerboard rendering was trying to accomplish in the PS4. The difference will be much greater with PSSR than CB rendering ever was.
Last edited:
Heisenberg007
Gold Journalism
Which makes sense. DLSS is the 3rd iteration by Nvidia who has been at it for years. Nvidia is also a very AI-heavy company.
This is Sony's first AI-upscaled attempt at an upscaler. I don't expect it to be be as good as DLSS. And it's not a bad thing.
Topher
Gold Member
As a PC gamer first and foremost, I hope so.
FIREKNIGHT2029
Member
I'm loving what I'm seeing here. This is the kind of performance boost I was expecting. Comes nowhere near a high-end PC but it's giving very great performance and you can't beat the price to performance you're getting out of it. Looking forward to having much better performance in my PS5 games with the Pro.
hinch7
Member
Clocks speeds and TGP matter. AMD RDNA 2 and 3 DGPU's also have a large L3 cache (Infinity Cache) that consoles don't have. CPU limitations are a thing too.
Fahdis
Member
I'll rephrase it to, low/mid end GPU's with 76% of Steam users using Nvidia cards. Enthusiast cards like 4090 is at 1% and 3090 at .5%. You reach Desktop level 4060's and 3070s many spaces down to even consider mid tier cards viable. So you're looking at almost 23-24% (not precise) of the market using ok enough cards to do DLSS with anomalies being GTX 1650 in there as well along with the 4060 laptop. Perhaps look at the % more properly.
I'm not threatened
I just think you guys are getting scammed and you can't even see it. If they can close the gap, cool, what's it to me that you can finally play a game at 60 FPS consistently? It still doesn't take away the benefits of free games, free online, mods, regional pricing, multi-publishers and other things. The reason I switched from console anyways was due to this reason. Not DLSS or stuff that came much later.Your average pleb doesn't even know what DSR, DLSS, DLAA and other shit is.
Last edited:
I wouldn't say a lot - initial batch of 1st party titles was exclusively 1800p CB or 1440p (all NDD games), and vast majority of 3rd parties overall were 1080p-1440p range with occasional exception using CB 4k (TR, Helldivers). Also let's not forget the compute&ROP ratio was over 2.3x, so even 100% is 'underperforming' if you take that metric literally.
The significant spread in there (even in 1st parties) is also indicative that the idea of 'scaling = linear correlation to TFlops' is obviously false. It was highly dependant on particulars of rendering pipeline and the types of rendering load that the games had - NDD didn't focus on 1440p for the fun of it - their best result with CB was in 1800p range and they picked 1440p as the higher IQ option over it.
The variability of performance was quite large - there were workloads that ran over 3x faster on the PS4Pro (despite nothing in the paper-spec saying that was even possible) - but also workloads that barely ran faster at all (20% or so) and then everything in between.
Last edited:
Topher
Gold Member
You telling me that when you just said 5% accounted for "most" of GPU users? Come on now.
I'm not threatened
Your average pleb doesn't even know what DSR, DLSS, DLAA and other shit is.
Obviously this isn't targeting the "average pleb", now is it? I don't get you though. One minute you are mocking consoles for "finally" getting consistent 60fps then you turn around and talk about stuff that has nothing to do with that tech at all. So where is the scam again? Is it PS5 Pro or just consoles in general? I'm not going to go round and round with silly PC vs console arguments again if that's what this is. So incredibly boring with the same shit repeated every time.
MostlyPeaceful
Banned
I would.
Go look up the resolutions of PS4 Pro enhanced titles.
You’re gonna see a lot of 2160cb, 1620p, 1800p titles.
Yes, there’s a lot of 1440p and under titles, but I doubt they make up the majority of Pro enhanced games.
I would wager the majority of PS4 Pro enhanced titles ran at resolutions that were at least 100% more pixels than what PS4 ran at.
Last edited:
Fabieter
Member
Eh, I fucking wish a $200 upgrade in PC land would grant me twice the frames at improved settings and IQ.
Calling it complete fantasy would be an hilarious understatement.
It's an 800 euro upgrade. If you already have a PC you can get a new high end gpu at that price.
AngelMuffin
Member
Mark Cerny told his team what would happen to their families if PSSR didn't get better before the reveal.
It worked.
DeepEnigma
Gold Member
PCMRectile dysfunction.
HogIsland
Member
I was never impressed by mlid, but since reported that Intel was cancelling its Arc discrete gpu initiative one month before it actually launched I ignore them entirely. So should you lot.
Sept 10 2022:
Oct 4 2022:
Putonahappyface
Gold Member
I can actually visualize my wallet talking to me now since the PS5 Pro reveal.
Topher
Gold Member
cormack12
Gold Member
The PCMR stuff is tiring. Most people on forums/enthusiast subs agree that splashing out on bleeding edge or top of the range kit is stupid - aside from SLI bros who are still hurting.
Usually you'll see most people asking for builds that are mid range, and can do 1080/60 or 4k/60 depending on their native res. You get a small minority interested in downsampling or similar.
I think now with PSSR or Future FSR you're seeing that consoles are now the best value/power proposition for the majority of the market.
So now the narrative is 'oh, you need 120fps lulz' or 'a PC has benefits of not just playing games'. If anything the diminishing returns of a top end video card should be scrutinised more.
cormack12
Gold Member
Might be of interest. Gaf fucking ignored it
What could PS5 Pro Enhancements look like? (experiments ran on PC equiv)
Source: https://x.com/theterk (Ex Playstation/Xbox Hardware dev, now at AMD) Was posted prior to the official reveal buit interesting and he called some things spot on. Verdict: Impressive on paper, but not cut and dry. Biggest improvements are higher fps and more stable DRS Legacy...
PSSR Doesn't have to match the latest version of DLSS. But if it can equal say DLSS 2.3 in performance, that would be a huge win for consoles.
Topher
Gold Member
The PCMR stuff is tiring. Most people on forums/enthusiast subs agree that splashing out on bleeding edge or top of the range kit is stupid - aside from SLI bros who are still hurting.
Usually you'll see most people asking for builds that are mid range, and can do 1080/60 or 4k/60 depending on their native res. You get a small minority interested in downsampling or similar.
I think now with PSSR or Future FSR you're seeing that consoles are now the best value/power proposition for the majority of the market.
So now the narrative is 'oh, you need 120fps lulz' or 'a PC has benefits of not just playing games'. If anything the diminishing returns of a top end video card should be scrutinised more.
Think it goes both ways really. The whole PC vs console debate is tiring and repetitive and console gamers can give as much as they get. The only difference in that whole debate with PS5 Pro is that now we are seeing improved visual quality and performance in a console at the expense of affordability. So two key talking points in the PC vs console discussion are impacted. Either way, I really don't see much point in my fellow PC gamers getting triggered here unless they are just yearning to battle. But I expect there will be a lot more fighting in the coming weeks if/when we see some real benchmarks across multiple games. DF will be here to fan the flames, I'm sure.
cormack12
Gold Member
Fahdis
Member
It's PS5 Pro. Consoles are a gateway for most gamers.
Then don't. Have a good day
I have nothing to prove to you. Enjoy your box. I'll enjoy mine.
ap_puff
Member
It might be PlayStations first attempt but not Sony, they've been doing AI image reconstruction and upscaling in their TVs for a couple years now.
Topher
Gold Member
Fahdis
Member
You sure didn't follow that advice coming into this thread.
You're not very smart. I literally can deduce the pros and cons of both platforms because I was mostly on Sony's ecosystem for 2 decades. Its basically a polite way of saying, arguing with you at this point is just stupid. You're right and I'm wrong. Whatever makes you sleep better at night
Topher
Gold Member
You're not very smart. I literally can deduce the pros and cons of both platforms because I was mostly on Sony's ecosystem for 2 decades. Its basically a polite way of saying, arguing with you at this point is just stupid. You're right and I'm wrong. Whatever makes you sleep better at night
Likewise, if insulting my intelligence makes you feel better the you do you.
Doctor Hades
Member
FSR2 is mostly poor in my experience. Looks fine in static screenshots but as soon as the camera moves then I see a pixelated mess around characters and objects as well as shimmering. It is easily the worse upscaling tech out of FSR, XeSS and DLSS. Quality FSR2 is just about passable but if better options exist then I'd rather use them. If not then I'd rather reduce graphical quality and stick with native rendering.
ap_puff
Member
depends on the implementation, FSR2 looks pretty decent in black myth wukong (not perfect ofc but way better than most of the out-of-the-box implementations). But yeah most of the times it's shit and I'd rather take the performance hit running native and turn down settings
SolidQ
Member
Yeah, because FSR3 in cyberpunk 2077. worse, than 2.1
Best implementation for me was GhostWire Tokyo even at 1080p looks nice.