PlayStation 4 Pro SoC Discussion

[superstition]

I've also noticed that, the second you can no longer hold up your end of any argument, no matter the instance, you come back screaming "ad hominem", over, and over, and over again.

And another ad hominem.

 

[superstition]

Anecdotal evidence vs science...believe what you want, it doesn't make it true. And as William Gaatjes said, it matters greatly what panel is used and what source. Crapy 1080p vs 4k of course there is a difference because the later uses better electronics all over and probably also better software (firmware, panel control).

And I doubt you actually took the same source to compare side-by-side with same lightning conditions and so forth. Go ahead and rationalize why you need a 4K TV, but that doesn't chance science or the biology of the human eye and brain.

It's a little more complex than that. 1080 is on the low side for vertical resolution, which is generally more important for perceived clarity. 1440 would have been sufficient for HDTV but 1080 is low enough that people with good eyesight will see an improvement from overkill like 4K.

I think people should read this article: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/articles/visual_acuity.htm

1080 is probably fine for people will average eyesight for HDTV at normal viewing distances but for people with better eyesight 1440 would have been a much better standard. It also would have not led to the death of plasma, a tech that offers better motion blur reduction and contrast ratio than LCD (with less of a lifespan issue than OLED, most likely). Plasma also typically has better color fidelity than LCD HDTVs. And, as I mentioned before, next-gen consoles would be much more likely to deliver good framerate with high-quality settings at 1440 versus 4K.

Given the loss of plasma and the apparent impossibility of seeing good framerates at good quality settings with even the next iteration of consoles at 4K, 1440 would have not only saved people the waste of investing in 1080 (an increment that was not enough over 720, particularly given the dearth of television programming beyond 720 and the inability of current-generation consoles to impress at 1080) it would have stabilized the HDTV standard for a lot longer than 1080, in terms of pixel density, enabling consumers to have manufacturers focus more on more important quality factors like input lag, contrast ratio, blur, and gamut. All of those things are benefited by the existence of plasma with the exception of input lag which tends to not be any better than with LCD.

 

[myocardia]

And I doubt you actually took the same source to compare side-by-side with same lightning conditions and so forth. Go ahead and rationalize why you need a 4K TV, but that doesn't chance science or the biology of the human eye and brain.

Go ahead, link us to some science. I've seen no science so far in this thread, from either side. You have my permission to be the first.

 

[myocardia]

And another ad hominem.

I've also noticed that, the second you can no longer hold up your end of any argument, no matter the instance, you come back screaming "ad hominem", over, and over, and over again. I quite sure than anyone reading your responses who has more than a few brain cells of the threads in which you post has also noticed this. It's readily apparent to anyone with a brain that "ad hominem" in your brain equates to nothing less than "mea culpa".

You continue to prove me correct. Thank you.

 

[gsilver]

I'm mostly hoping for UHD disk support and 60fps @ 1080 for existing and future titles (especially Bloodborne).

Deliver that, and they've sold me a PS4k.


(I do not currently own a PS4)

 

[superstition]

You continue to prove me correct. Thank you.

Ad hominem is a fallacy. A fallacy is incorrect. Posting three or four in a row is also spam.

 

[myocardia]

I'm mostly hoping for UHD disk support and 60fps @ 1080 for existing and future titles (especially Bloodborne).

Deliver that, and they've sold me a PS4k.


(I do not currently own a PS4)

I have the feeling that you are much closer to the average console buyer than most of the people who post regularly at this site would ever admit to [edit:] you the average console buyer[/edit] being. What the majority of the people posting in this thread don't seem to comprehend is that the next generation of console does not need to be able to game @ 4k.

It only needs to be able to playback a UHD/4k Blu Ray, and look good doing so. Of course, it would help the sales a lot if it could also game @ either 1440P, or at least be able to pull off 1080P @ 60 FPS. 1440P upsampled to 4k would make 1080P upsampled to 4k look horrible, since 1440P has very close to twice the pixels as 1080P. I personally don't think we'll be seeing consoles pulling off 1440P gaming until the next real generation, though. I wouldn't be surprised if the Sony PS4k could pull off higher framerates in 1080P gaming.

 

[myocardia]

Ad hominem is a fallacy. A fallacy is incorrect. Posting three or four in a row is also spam.

I'm not the one who keeps spamming the same thing over, and over, and over again. That would be you.

 

[William Gaatjes]

I was wondering about input lag, it makes sense to me that a interlaced video stream will always have more input lag because of the de-interlacing that the tv must perform. The image is always build up from the current and previous still frame field.

But then again, it is no different then processing two different progressive pictures. So interlacing should not cause any more input lag then progressive pictures.

 

[Rakehellion]

I was wondering about input lag, it makes sense to me that a interlaced video stream will always have more input lag because of the de-interlacing that the tv must perform. The image is always build up from the current and previous still frame field.

But then again, it is no different then processing two different progressive pictures. So interlacing should not cause any more input lag then progressive pictures.

Don't interlace games, you interlace TV.

 

[monstercameron]

Hmm, what about hdmi freesync support? Tvs that support vrr and games with unlocked framerate giving a psuedo 60fps feel.

 

[Sweepr]

This is getting interesting:

According to The Wall Street Journal (via GameSpot), “people familiar with the matter” say the new system will make a debut “before the planned October release of PlayStation VR” headset.

This latest report corroborates previous reports from Kotaku, which first brought this new and improved PlayStation 4.5 to light, reporting that it would come with an upgraded graphics card, which would allow for smoother performance, better graphics, and 4K resolution on games, and from Eurogamer, which “independently established that it’s real,” and is codenamed PlayStation 4K, further adding that it will almost certainly use “semi-custom versions of AMD’s CPU and GPU technology integrated into a single, console-friendly processor,” just like the current console.

The latest report from WSJ claims that the new PlayStation 4 console will be capable of delivering “ultra-high definition resolution graphics,” and that “Sony’s goal with the upgraded PlayStation 4 console is to capture gamers willing to pay for a richer gaming environment, including a high-end virtual reality experience.” This apparently points towards Sony’s two-tier approach, which will likely see the current PlayStation 4 sold at a lower price than the upgraded version. Sony will also reportedly not let the new system create a division, and will offer exact same game library on both consoles.

www.wsj.com/articles/sony-plans-new-playstation-for-graphics-heavy-games-1459152941

 

[SPBHM]

this might be a good move, high end PS4 and "mainstream" PS4 running the same games at a different res, specially if the cheaper model gets a price drop, it will be quite attractive

 

[cytg111]

this might be a good move, high end PS4 and "mainstream" PS4 running the same games at a different res, specially if the cheaper model gets a price drop, it will be quite attractive

Good luck enforcing that? That whatever runs on the 4.5 runs on the 4.0 too at at-least 30fps.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Well, maybe all the hype about 4k is correct after all. I still am surprised if they have the technology for native 4k, but it is possible I guess if they are willing to introduce a higher end more expensive model. Or maybe some sort of upscaling.

 

[t0mt0m]

Option 5 - they can't do 4k within the box, so they go eGPU chassis, offer it separately as something people can buy if they want, and bring better 1080p graphics from a bump in GPU within the console.

 

[redzo]

Option 5 - they can't do 4k within the box, so they go eGPU chassis, offer it separately as something people can buy if they want, and bring better 1080p graphics from a bump in GPU within the console.

It's a very good idea:
Sell all base units with a eGPU port. Give everyone the option to purchase a eGPU further down the road. Off course that games will run just fine on the base model. The eGPU will help a lot pushing for 60fps and higher resolutions with improved image quality.
This shouldn't up the base model price by much. I'm thinking that everybody is going to have to pay for that additional eGPU port, but it shouldn't increase the base unit price too much.

 

[cytg111]

Option 5 - they can't do 4k within the box, so they go eGPU chassis, offer it separately as something people can buy if they want, and bring better 1080p graphics from a bump in GPU within the console.

What would that mean in terms of added latency? - That thing that makes weak souls vomit and feel sick in VR land.

 

[Blitzvogel]

Whether it's called the PS4K or not, my thoughts are that it won't be so focused on 4K gaming as much as 4K media content. Sony would have to accept massive a large and possibly catastrophic loss-lead model unless they really think people are going to pay $600 for it.

Looking at 4K benchmarks for many mainstream games like Fallout 4 & The Witcher 3, getting ~30 FPS gameplay at medium-high settings is the realm of the Radeon R9 290X. 1080p benchmarks often put the R9 290X at 3x the framerate of 4K resolution, so for the PS4K to output current PS4 visuals at 4K is going to require 3x the PS4's current graphical horsepower (1.8 GFLOPS). Depending on where GCN graphics are mostly-bound in 4K situations could mean specific tweaking of that particular part of the GPU (# of ROPs vs # of Stream Processors). The size and power of the R9 290X puts it squarely in that class of processing, which also translates to 90 FPS/Hz for Sony's 1080p VR Headset. The R9 290X, is a possible GPU configuration without considering the expected rendering efficiency advantages of 4th gen GCN.

Whether Sony and AMD can enable that kind of graphics and a logical bump in general processing power to feed the GPU is somewhat dubious, but not impossible. The issue, once again is what do you charge for the bloody thing. A new APU with 4x high GHz Zen Cores, 2500+ Stream Processors, & possibly HBM/HBM2 does not sound cheap, even at 14nm. However having one processing stack to rule them all does mean a simplified motherboard with no memory module traces.

 

[Rakehellion]

^Sources are saying it's 60%-100% faster than the PS4, so no 4K gaming.

 

[Subyman]

I like the name PS4K. Pretty good marketing.

No way will it play games in 4k native. It will justify the 4K name plate with UHD blue ray. Perhaps it has a scaler to make 4k screens directly compatible (as in the 4k screen receives a 4k signal.)

I'm kind of excited to see where this goes. I'm all for a quick update cycle for consoles. The 360 and PS3 were dead to me for the last 4-5 years of their life because of how bad games looked on them. A new console every 2-3 years with backward support for the last model would be plenty. That way a console will last about 6 years but they will have a new product more often.

I'm a bit more interested in the upgraded Xbox One since I haven't purchased one yet.

 

[xthetenth]

Ad hominem is a fallacy. A fallacy is incorrect. Posting three or four in a row is also spam.

If you want to look up what you're doing, the technical term is either "argument from fallacy" or "Argumentum ad logicam".

 

[mizzou]

4K is a myth for modern day eye candy. Tone it down a bit, 4K is pretty reasonable.

In my opinion, what is happening is that the PS4/Xbone series came out just too underpowered for the generation...especially the Xbone. The GPU's are probably just fine but the CPU's were just terrible.

I imagine this refresh is solely for VR/AR attachments.

Part of the reason console games performed so much more reliably then PC games was because developers could expect 100% of the games would run on the exact same hardware. If Console developers start messing with that, it is going to ruin the appeal.

 

[jpiniero]

For real 4K you would need something closer to Fury X. Way too expensive.

More realistic would be to add the 4K decoding block, 50% more GCN 1.1 shaders, and up the clocks on the CPU and GPU a bit? It'd be Doable on 14FF and would make VR work a bit better.

 

[mizzou]

I loved the 32X for what it was. I remember putting in these games and feeling amazed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pX-EIO0G7IQ
VIRTUA FIGHTER


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MUyTGmzKCN0
Star Wars Arcade


The amazement was pretty short lived though.