Time will tell how it will shake out though. The way I see it, either the original PS4 starts getting back ports which aren't fully optimized for it (see Hyrule Warriors at a whopping 15fps on the OG 3DS), or the Pro never gets to fully stretch its legs. The latter is preferable.
I think they may stick to an n-1 cycle. PS4+PS4 Pro supported. Next cycle, PS4 Pro + PS5 supported. Etc. Always two boxes, a master and an apprentice.
I doubt Sony is going to change it's certification standard so all new game will have to meet the current PS4 standards before its ships and given it's basically the same exact CPU as the PS4 at a higher clock the CPU will still be the systems weakest point.
GPU wise the difference will be in min FPS and eye candy. I highly doubt developers will add extra stuff to games outside of dynamic stuff like ground clutter since all of the game will use the same discs.
This isn't like porting a game from the PS4 to XBOX and PC where developers can drastically modify the games between models they have one disc and one version for both console versions
Which is why they will adjust the eye candy and resolution first and foremost.
The PS4 Pro is more likely to be receiving inferior content, rather than the other way around. It will just run the same game at a higher resolution and framerate, even if it could handle much more eye candy.
I hope so. The nail in the coffin for this console revision "concept" going on right now in the industry is when exclusive features, not just additional eye candy, require the faster consoles. That is going to be one hell of a way to alienate gamers back to PC gaming where the upgrades are at least modular.
If Sony is smart they will literally lock down the dev kits to only add antialiasing, higher output resolution, or some basic graphics optimization to the Pro mode of the game. Any further optimizations for Pro hardware such as exclusive game modes or split screen gaming are going to be outright bullshit.
okay. not build a system for $400 new and make it equal to or better than a PS4 Pro. That's my problem with people who hate on consoles. They present way better value for people who only have that much cash for their gaming setup. And this is coming from someone with a $5K gaming PC. I am definitely a fan of PC gaming. But I also respect the validity of consoles (and own some myself)
Sure it can. "Problem" here is, almost any PC can do everything but gaming for most users. My Surface Pro 4 can. My work Acer Travelmate P645s can. My old work EliteBook 8570p (which I was allowed to keep after it reached replacement age) can.
I do have a gaming desktop at home, but that's me... and I'm on geeky side. Many individuals cannot settle down for having gaming rig as their only machine, and many also don't want to own multiple computers. Manage multiple updates, software licenses, subscriptions.
Console makes a lot of sense. It is simple, strait-forward. It might end up more expensive on software side, though even that can be avoided with some patience and effort. I've just purchased Doom for PS4 for NZ$36. If I wanted pre-owned, I could have done with NZ$26. Game was over NZ$100 ($109 or $119?) on release, and neither of local gaming shops sell pre-owned PC games. Best PC DOOM price currently is NZ$66. It was a bit cheaper on release than PS4 version, but... for whatever reason, here we are.
Exactly. And it is not just a cost of good gaming PC build. Some people already have good non-gaming laptop, for example, or AIO - and don't want another PC just for gaming, since laptop/AIO covers all other needs and complements their lifestyle better.
Yeah, but... when you "upgrade" to PS4 Pro, you end up with 2 fully independent, complete machines. You can make your original PS4 into BD player, Netflix box, or simply a guest-room console for some gaming with visiting friends and relatives. PS4 SharePlay kind of plays nicely with this scenario.
When you upgrade your GPU, you end up with spare GPU that isn't of much worth, unless you have another PC capable of using it (sufficient space, power and other resources to make it in to gaming machine).
I guess you can sell old GPU. If it wasn't top shelve part (in which case it did cost more than PS4), it will not hold price nicely. 2nd hand PS4 are selling quite solid, at least here in New Zealand.
And... you do get a bit more from this PS4 Pro than just faster GPU. Being complete machine, not just a part, you get CPU boost, faster RAM, new controller. And you still end up with your original PS4 untouched, be it for selling it or re-purposing it. If you'd be upgrading other parts of your PC with GPU, you still end up with handful of old parts not enough to build another machine without further investments.
Literally locking down your product is not a good idea - the additional costs of shipping all those chains and padlocks would significantly increase the price of the end product.
It would be stupid on Sony's part to force PS5 games to run on PS4 because it would hold back PS5 from realizing its true potential. I know both companies are pushing for iterative consoles (smartphone business model) without console generations but even if that happens, it will mean the generational leaps between consoles will become completely blurred.
I'm pretty sure Kazuo Hirai mentioned on PS4 release that there might never be a PS5. I remembered that because it sounded very... gloomy. Reflecting on that now, it is very possible that Sony plans to release upgraded versions for unforeseen time, staying within same number. PS4 Ultra. PS4 Trinity. PS4 TurboFX. Or just "new PlayStation" in the future.
Additionally... this is the first dual-config setup they have and they are introducing it carefully. Trying not to alienate many gamers. Thus promise that there will be no extra from games on PS4 Pro beside better visuals. When next upgrade is released, they might loosen or drop this requirement. Yes, devs can make game run differently on next PS4. Have more players in multiplayer. Have bigger maps. Extra content.
Sticking with x86 platform, they can easily keep backward compatibility... but they can even completely drop forward compatibility, or let it to devs to decide. Next PS4 can be made to run all the old PS4 games, but older PS4 versions might not necessarily be able to run all new games.
Achilles heel of consoles' generational changes in the past was usually introduction of new platform, where there are not many games at start, and not many gamers to motivate devs into fully focusing on developing them. They usually have sort of slow start, before they ramp up. With backward compatibility, this problem is pretty much gone. Enough games to play before new exclusive content starts coming up.
This is already fleshed out. New games that are patched or designed for the pro run above 1080p and are scaled to 4k with many of them being HDR. For people with 1080p[ Tvs and the pro the framerate will be higher, more stable, or both. All games must have 100% compatibility with the original PS4 and it will also support HDR.
I've been speculating this same thing for both PS and XB since the rumors started last year. If well executed this could work just fine. Time will tell.
I think PS5 will replace the entire PS4 platform, just like it would have in a traditional console cycle, with an upgraded PS5 coming a few years later to extend the entire PS5 platform like the Pro does for the PS4.
"As a PS4 owner since its launch I feel betrayed with this PS4 Pro release. Its been released way too early!"
I am really not getting that at all. I am a PS4 owner and am glad the PS4 pro is coming. We get better graphics if we want. If not, the old one still works with all the latest games. it has 4.2 tflops of GPU goodness. that puts it between the Geforce 970 and 980. That is pretty damn impressive for a console.
It's a simple static rating that can be expressed in a single sentence rather than 10 pages of benchmark graphs... So, yeah, it's not everything... Its not good comparing against different generations of cards years apart, but comparing like to like, the PS4 has 1.8 tflops, where the PS4 Pro has 4.2
I've thought this is what made sense all the way since they picked APUs for the consoles to begin with.
Why would they not use the latest and greatest APU? That would be completely stupid. Why hold back when it's a standard component which can easily be replaced?
Just make some good standard settings for each console and slap an information box on the game description which tell which Playstation models are supported and you're fine.
My PC is very different from a lot of others but we still can play about the same games and new PCs can play old games and old PCs can play new games as long as their performance is good enough.
Why? its not replacing the PS4 the Pro will only offer better visuals and likely higher min FPS then Original and Slim at 1080p but will both play and have exact the same game as the Pro with just lower settings which is what you would of still gotten even if the Pro never existed. Outside of "4k" the only other thing the Pro will likely be better at then the PS4 is VR.
The last generation of consoles (PS3 and Xbox 360) had an extended life span two years longer than more consoles before their successors arriving. The PS4 Pro is a mild reset to that regular cadence (PS3 + PS4 -> is the correct time for PS4 Pro's arrival).
This isn't a new generation of console. It's clearly to the same level of performance jump that happens(2X+ GOU even less for CPU) because even Sony is still calling it the PS4. This is a new more iterative world for consoles. Only time will tell if it is accepted by the gaming market.
Why? PS4 Pro and Xbox Scorpio are NOT next generation consoles because they will not have exclusive titles. Sony won't even allow multiplayer games to run at faster FPS on PS4 Pro than on the PS4. It would be completely different if these were true next generation consoles, that had their own exclusive game library in a way PS4/XB1 were compared to PS3/XB360. If existing PS4/XB1 owners want better graphics of these refresh consoles, they can just sell their old console and buy a new one, just like PC gamers upgrade CPUs/GPUs as games become more demanding.
I know right? If you dont want it, dont buy it... But "betrayed" is laying it on too thick. The old PS4 didnt suddenly lose functionality because a faster version came out. it's called progress.
they are betrayed because they bought into a platform that has made some bad decisions on hardware. Sure they will have the fastest console for a year, but after that year is up, they are going to be sorely behind in graphics capability.
The Xbox Project Scorpio will have exclusives to scorpio, i dunno why people think microsoft is following sony's strategy on this. they arent. What Microsoft did say is, all xbox one games will work on scorpio, and not the other way around.
But that is how things work. If faster stuff doesnt come out, then we are all slow forever. Again, The old PS4 didnt suddenly lose functionality because a faster version came out. Faster computers are always out, faster phones, tablets, and pretty much everything else tech related improves over time. It's part of life. Getting upset over a new product that somewhat replaces a 3 year old product is ridiculous.
Value proposition for consoles always was a standartised level of quality for a long period of time. Now that goes out of the window, so of course they feel that way.
"Value proposition for consoles always was a standardized level of quality for a long period of time." - IMO that was completely broken and not only holding consoles back, but gaming as a whole... Now MS and Sony have somewhat fixed it... Or at least improved it.
Console customers don`t see shortened upgrade cycle as an improvement, and in money terms it`s like PC market. Quite a lot to lose.
It's not a shortened cycle, it's exactly the opposite. I'm not sure why this is so hard for console gamers to understand. By increasing performance of the PS4 platform with the Pro, and ensuring all games run on both consoles, the life of the PS4 gets extended by guaranteed software support for as long as the more powerful hardware remains relevant.
I still game on my 8-year old PC. I can even run Doom on it and it's very playable. My old PC doesn't get less software support just because newer, faster hardware came out for the same platform.
In console world, 6 years of support is a _standard_. Trying to peddle that as a feature now simply reeks. Plus, you have to be really gullible to believe both versions will get the same amount of testing and support. Performance creep on PC around PS2/original XBOX timeframe is exactly what gave console side a lot of new customers in the first place.
We are talking about the same game on the same platform with (likely) higher res textures and a few other graphics settings notched up a bit. It's not like an entirely new console... I look at it this way... No-one is forcing it, if you don't like it, don't buy it. If you feel "betrayed" that somehow the PS4 Pro lessens the experience of your PS4, then sell your old PS4 and enjoy your principals. I will be enjoying my PS4 Pro and playing games on it.
I am a console owner, a PS4 owner and I am happy to pay another $400 for a PS4 pro and extremely happy I dont have to wait until the year 2020 to do it, sooooooo......
Actually the hardware decisions were very smart, unless you want to run your console business into the ground by releasing another overpriced, power-hungry, failure-prone platform that you have to sell at a loss just to move.
There is nothing smart about using 5 year old CPU cores in a next gen console. There is nothing smart about omitting a 4K HDR Blu Ray player, especially when you are part owner of the Blu Ray Spec. Instead they license the 4K HDR player to their competitor Their Next Gen PS4 is less capable than a refreshed Last gen product in home theater capabilities.
Sony was already sorely lacking in software capabilities such as Backward compatibility. Instead they offer alternatives that require you to have very fast internet with low latency by running a virtual machine in the cloud. When microsoft can do it on the console, with virtually identical hardware capabilities.
Yes, betrayed. I played ps3 for 6 years. I would expect ps4 to stay exclusive for 6 years too...but no they had to release this "ps4 pro" after 3 years.
Most PC gamers will not have the graphical performance of the Playstation4 Pro at launch. Most PC gamers may not even have the graphical performance of the old Playstation 4.
Sure some do have as good or even better systems but there's plenty of laptops, Dota2, HotS, CS:GO and so on players who play what their system is capable of,
How does the PS4 Pro's existence change your PS4's experience? Is it just like Morawka alluded to that you are just upset because it isnt the fastest thing out? Or do you have an actual tangible complaint about newer faster stuff?
I personally thought 6 years was a horribly long cycle. by the last 3 years of it's lifespan, the PS3 was awful. XB360 as well.
You can still play Playstation 4 for 6 years if you want too.
Or you could had bought a PC and upgraded when you wanted to, kinda like you will be able to do with the consoles now too but with the option at any time and for many budgets.
Newsflash: all of the new software still works on your PS4. In fact, the Pro will likely keep your PS4 relevant longer than it would have been on its own. That's the ENTIRE POINT of the Pro.
Also, your console expectations were absurd if you thought the PS4 hardware would have a 6-year cycle on its own. Maybe research your purchase better next time. Let me guess: you didn't pay $399 for your PS3, did you?
It will just offer a better experience, won't really hurt you. If Sony is smart they do a bundle for this one with the PS VR at 599$. They would have a year to take massive share from Xbox in markets where Microsoft is still doing ok and they would popularize VR, taking a clear lead.
I don't get it. That's like feeling betrayed when you buy a GTX 960 and the GTX 1060 comes out 3 years later. You got to play those games all this time and now something more powerful comes out. As is the norm with technology. Granted, Sony could fuck it up and publish exclusively for the Pro, but that has already been denied. With current technology, it should be easy to handle the thing "PC like" and have games that run @ 60fps on the Pro and @ 30FPS on the OG console. Or have it be a 1080p /1440p split. Or a texture/FOV/draw distance thing. Currenty games are very modular and the current console generation is also very modular. So it makes sense that this PC-ization of the console market is a good thing, in my opinion. Maybe we even get custom video settings like on the PC, where we can decide between eye candy (high res/textures) and smoothnes (more frames). Maybe someone like TotalBuiscuit will start playing PS4 games. :D
You're feeling betrayed, because hardware and games improve faster than you expected?!? Should we feel betrayed because Apple & Samsung replace their flagship phones every year with better ones? ;)
I think that is a dumb attitude to have. The Pro isn't changing the PS4 experience. This is not like going from PS3 to PS4 where the developers stopped making PS3 games. You are getting the same games you got before. You wont miss out on anything that you wouldn't otherwise have missed out on. The longevity of your PS4 if anything is going to be longer now, for as long as they stay on this AMD x86 path, they can make a new console every 2-3 years and still support your PS4 with new games, not all of them, but more than if they just cut you off after 5-6 years with the old model.
You sound like an nVidia marketing stooge. How can you feel 'betrayed' by a company that's building on the platform you've bought into? Would you rather than switch the architecture again to something incompatible with all the games you've bought? Sony has to bulk up their console, and they're doing it, in order to remain competitive. You should be glad they're doing this and not sitting on their hands while Microsoft blows past them with a faster XBox.
As a PS4 owner since launch, I don't think you understand why they did this.
How are you betrayed? You've owned the console for three years. You've enjoyed its games for three years. You can continue to enjoy all the new games without having to buy the new console.
Your statement is like saying "I feel betrayed, I paid $400 for this hardware three years ago and now the same hardware is $100 cheaper!"
Since all the other spec leaks were right, and they said on stage the cores were clocked higher, I assume it's the same old Jaguar cores with the rumored 20% boost.
That means that most 30fps games won't be able to be converted to 60fps, unless the CPU was sitting idle a huge chunk of the time in the base game.
Dissapointing there. I'd rather 1080p 60fps gaming with balls out visuals than wasting all the extra GPU power on extra pixels.
And it's not even like it's doing native 4K, the internal docs called out targeting 2560x1400 or dynamic res and using checkerboard rendering to upscale the final output.
They even said on stage that "the PS4 is basically maxing out what we can do on 1080p tvs". Lol no? Consoles area already using mid-low PC asset qualities, there's shader effects to improve (alpha chokes both up), AA, AF, so many things to improve on 1080p, let alone 60fps.
I think history has shown that people will still buy consoles even if the games run at 30fps. Unless people stop buying them, there is no reason for console companies to change. That's why the PS4 Pro is designed like this, large graphics upgrade and small CPU upgrade.
A 1.6GHz 8 small-core CPU isn't the same as a gamers OC'ed 4+GHz 4core/8threads big-CPU. They lacked in both departments, CPU and GPU compared to enthusiast gamers, since many tasks still rely on single core performance to some degree or another.
6 and a half 1.6GHz Jaguar cores *may* reach about an i3 if every thread is well used...The developer complaints were all about the CPUs from the start. GPUs you can scale on at least, CPUs hold back game design.
When bench-marked on a PC yes, but this isnt a PC. The GPU is the bottleneck on the PS4. The CPU is improved, but the GPU (which is what really needed it) is a bigger jump.
Some of my fondest console memories are GoldenEye N64 multiplayer (15fps), Perfect Dark N64 multiplayer (9fps), Vigilante 8 (15fps), Twisted Metal (20fps), Halo Xbox multiplayer (15-30fps). I mean... a LOT of hours and so much fun. Likewise, I have plenty of console memories that were 60fps. Fun games are fun, period. I played just as much UT99 at 160fps on my CRT monitor as I played Perfect Dark at 22fps and loved them both.
Funny thing is that now that I've played the PD remake on XBLA, the 60fps lock makes it almost unplayable... I'm terrible at it. LOL
I'm fine with 30FPS, and dipping down from that, but I couldn't handle a lot of N64 games because of the horrific framerates. Banjo 2 didn't run well enough for me to play it (although also it's way too hard, aside from that). Although in Banjo 2's case, I have to wonder if it was designed for 8MB, and then they shoehorned it in to 4MB, because Banjo 1 and Donkey Kong 64 ran solidly...
It's possible, I know that a few games late in the N64 cycle basically required the memory expansion pack. Perfect Dark actually ran OK in single player without the high resolution textures enabled, but once you turned it on and in 4-player split screen, the frame rate really tanked. I guess I put up with it because my friends and I had so much fun getting together to play it. None of them were into PC gaming, so they had no frame of reference for how smooth gameplay could be.
The problem is that VR is the 'next big thing' and that necessitates higher frame rates. With the PS4 Pro being positioned for VR, hitting 60 FPS is more of a requirement.
60fps is viable with reprojection (to put in crudely: redisplaying frames adjusted for headset orientation and/or position changes), which I think is the point of the 120Hz PSVR max refresh rate. Very few if any games will be 120fps native, they will either be 60fps with reprojection (for 120Hz output) or 90Hz native. There may be 45fps with reprojection but that's probably getting into bad VR experience territory for most styles of games.
Yeah...HMMMMMMMMMMM. I'm seriously wondering how Sony thinks they can pull this off. Is even the Pro enough hardware to really do VR? They'd really need to do 90FPS at whatever resolution PlayStation VR is, and I'm not sure the Pro can do that, much less the original...
you people... hardware has nothing to do with performance in that way, the decision to put a certain amount of graphics is the performance target
killzone3 had 3D on a ps3, but your logic implies that's impossible since kz3 looks so good & is 30fps with dips in the first place... of course the reality was that graphics was adjusted, why would a dev be stupid enough to run their VR game at 15fps? it's entirely up to them, not the hardware
people want small quiet devices, developers want to make visuals, console companies want to hit both targets & be sanely priced, but why are they the ones getting blamed?
there are plenty of 60fps games btw, seems more than last gen, sounds like consoles already changed for the better
That's not how modern game architectures work. Much of the game logic such as physics and AI can run at a fixed rate independent of frame rate, so targeting 60 fps vs 30fps doesn't require a doubling of processing power. For example Physics may run at 100 updates/s, AI at 30/s, but input and UI are updates per frame. If most of the intensive CPU work is in physics and AI bumping from 30 to 60 fps may only require 10-30% more CPU speed. This is highly dependent on the specific game and implementation of course.
I should clarify I'm not saying most games would only need 10-30% CPU boost to move from 30 to 60fps, that's more like the best case scenario based on the game features, engine, implementation etc.
It isn't, compared to where its performance hits its not bad at all. Granted it isn't as low as the 1060, but neither one of the two are going to drive you crazy from their power consumption, and would be totally manageable in an enclosure like the PS4's.
A PC running a Core i7 6700K with a Radeon RX 480 (an upclocked version of the Pro's core GPU tech) draws just 270W. I'm guessing 310 is just a theoretical PSU max, not typical.
The original PS3 had a 380W PSU for perspective. That's for the total system which includes a hard drive, optical drive, IO chips and memory. The 310W figure for the PS4Pro is in the same context of the PSU for the entire system.
That's true, but given the complaints about the PS4s noise I hope the cooling is overkill. Remember the original PS3s heatsink? That was massive.
My CUH-1215 PS4 is pretty good, I can't hear it at TV distance, but at a desk I can definitely hear it ramp up and down and it's mildly annoying. The XBO wins on fan noise. I hope the Pro doesn't regress and gets even quieter.
Yeah, people insulted the Xbox One's size, but in reality it wasn't that big at all, and WHO CARES if it's way way quieter. (Granted the GPU is also much smaller, but regardless.) I'd take a 5x larger PS4 if it made it quieter.
I didn't remember that it was so high. I could have sworn that the last gen systems started at more like 200 watts? (And went down from there in newer revisions.)
That strongly suggests it's not using polaris cores. It's using the same GN1.1 gpu cores as PS4, double the count, add the same clock speed boost as the cpu cores get but use a smaller more efficient process and 310W sounds about right.
Look at the specs on the GPU, its a lower clocked RX 480 with slow memory. Unless AMD has another random custom GPU that isn't polaris and also happens to have 2304 shaders.
IMO the original PS4 is way too loud. Xbox One (original) is about my limit. I don't want to hear my consoles (or PCs). So...yeah, hope the cooling is much better.
The most enthusing thing about this is...Polaris has already had the substantial legwork put into making it for TSMCs 16nm process, and AMD just payed for a hole to be poked in their wafer silicon agreement with GoSlo. So, TSMC Polaris+Vega chips sooner rather than later?
AMD has been migrating their GPUs to Global Foundries for while but using TSMC for this chip may come at the request of Sony or another client. This would enable AMD to essentially have their clients pay for the alteration in the GF wafer agreement.
One thing not mentioned here is that the PS4 and Xbox One hardware were based around GCN 1.1 hardware. The PS4 Pro gets the Polaris update which includes better compression. While I would expect only a modest increase in GDDR5 clock speed, with the compression the effective bandwidth could be close to double. That'll help keep the SoC fed with data.
Other benefits of Polaris vs. earlier GCN chips include a larger L2 cache for the GPU and more geometry throughput.
There is a good argument that many of the larger gains come from a doubling of geometry throughput independent of the shader cores. The real interesting tidbit is that even in shader limited scenarios, Polaris is still a few percentage faster. Good to see some IPC increases even in the shader pipeline.
" The PS4 Pro gets the Polaris update which includes better compression."
It may not be, and really that's half the point of this article. We know it's getting some aspects of Polaris, but Polaris is a combination of many parts. Using Polaris (GCN 4/IP v8) shader cores or the newer memory controller is not guaranteed, and depending on the the minutiae of compatibility, may not be possible at all.
I think they're both great. I'm still quite amazed by PS4 graphics, and I was amazed by Xbox 360 class graphics for YEARS. (And am kind of amazed that I'm finally no longer amazed LOL)
I guess thats why we don't see GPU reviews anymore? I forgot that everyone I know builds PCs for things other than gaming and not the other way around.
Sorry, but reviews 2+ months after launch means that the review has become irrelevant. People who wanted one early didn't get the benefit of a review, and people who wait have a lot more info to choose from. I've been reading AT for over a decade... they were the most useful when they provided quality articles in a *timely* manner. PcPer publishes articles when NDA lifts and they're quality reviews... so why can't AT be bothered to attempt the same? I'd wait a week or two, but MONTHS is absurd. I just wish they'd give up the charade and admit that they don't care anymore rather than stringing loyal readers along
"For reference, the fastest desktop Jaguar desktop processor topped out at 2.2GHz."
Actually, the A8 7410 Carrizo-L will "turbo" up to 2.5GHz.
Sure, that's a "Puma", though the difference between Jaguar and Puma should (arguably) be little more than the implementation of a "Turbo" mode and higher clocks due to 28nm being more mature.
I wonder if the iterative consoles are a bit more puma-ish since the core is largely compatible. Though, consoles aren't the best place for Turbo Boost, consistent performance is more important.
And then replace the XBox One S with Scorpio when it comes out for >1080p gaming?
Sony probably skipped the UHD Blu-Ray player because they expect streaming and downloads to replace plastic discs. It already has for many of us. I own a couple of BluRay players, and have only used them a couple of times. My HD and 4K content comes via the Internet.
Yeah, exactly. I feel weird using my consoles for "mere" video playback, BUT when I need a 4K Blu Ray player anyway, and it's literally the same price, and I'd just as soon support a game console and have another game console...why not?
Yeah, it's super weird to me that it doesn't have 4K Blu Ray. I guess it's a cost savings thing, but I need a 4K Blu Ray player anyway, and the Xbox One S is roughly the same price as a stand alone player, soooo.....
The PS4 PRO is a complete and otter B***S**T! As a current PS4 owner this does not offer Nothing over my current system. Why do I need PRO if my A/V system can upscale to 4K? ....and the fact that there's no UHD BluRay player, it puts a nail on the coffin.
I feel that Sony should had the PRO features in the original PS4, this is an insult , a $400 insult! Sony KMA!!!!
......and to add to my frustration, PS4 Slim! why couldn't the original PS4 be slim to begin with? WTF are the designers/engineers are doing? ..playing XBOX OnE? geez...
<<<As a current PS4 owner this does not offer Nothing over my current system.>>>
It does, actually.
<<<Why do I need PRO if my A/V system can upscale to 4K? ....and the fact that there's no UHD BluRay player, it puts a nail on the coffin.>>>
Well, this is going to run games better than the current model does. Remains to be seen how much the extra power will really be used though. Will vary on a case by case basis probably, but it may be failry significant in some games.
<<<I feel that Sony should had the PRO features in the original PS4, this is an insult>>>
How could they? They were losing money at $400 3 years ago, were at close to the limit of the manufacturing process, and you expected them to throw in 2x more GPU?
aside from native 4K and HDR and lets put the cpu/gpu aside, it offers nothing! I can play everything on my current system. I have NO bottlenecks whatsoever..
4K was out well before the PS4 originally came out.. and the talk was at that time is Sony wud include it but dint!
please.... tell me what the advantages are?
"They were losing money at $400 3 years ago" they were NOT!!! cmon!
I already shelled out $400 for my last system so every 3 years Im supposed to shovel out another $400 pleeeeese! for 4K right!
people need to wake up this is how they make $$$ iteration to iteration...
@JeffFlanagan @tipoo typical trolls... you guys need education...
....If anything, this system should have been cheaper then $400! the price of mem/cpu drop on a daily basis and dont forget when it comes to parts, consumer costs <> Sony costs! They built these systems on a dime.
Why does this system cost $100 more? for essentially the same cpu overclocked?
You're not making any sense. Some version of PS4 has to be on sale from now until it is replaced. Whether it's just PS4, PS4 Pro, or both is irrelevant. Both systems will play every game as best they can, PS4 is still available at $299, and now you have a choice of some improved performance and quality if you want to spend an extra hundred. Your PS4 will still play every game exactly how it would have before PS4 Pro's existence.
As a consumer, PS4 Pro is nothing buy an absolute positive. If PS4 Pro didn't exist, you'd still have already shelled out $400 3 years ago and you'd still have the system you did.
Now you get a choice -- keep your PS4 and enjoy it till end of life or sell it and buy the new one until end of life. Nothing about your situation has changed at all.
Yes, it could do 4K, but only very loosely speaking. Not even all PS4 games are 1080p. What's the point of scaling 900p to 4K? The PS4 Pro will have potentially far higher resolutions to start with, which it can then scale to 4K.
As for HDR, it's actually probably far more important than 4K. Everyone will tell you that for most viewing distances, HDR will be vastly more noticeable than higher resolution. Unless you sit really close or play on 70-80 inch TVs from moderately close, 4K isn't that big of a deal. HDR on the other hand provide a much wider color gamut.
Color gamut and dynamic range are some of the most important aspects of a display. You'll also see less color banding to a significant improvement in bit depth.
Sorry, but you really don't know what you're talking about.
Microsoft: Xbox 'Scorpio' will support true 4K gaming, unlike PS4 Pro 28 Sep 2016 | Rasmus Larsen The GPU in the new PlayStation 4 Pro is "not enough to do true 4K", argues Microsoft. Next year’s Xbox "Scorpio" on the other hand will, the company claims
The thing is, will developers actually take advantage of the additional CU's at the possible expensive of screwing up the gameplay on older consoles.
The definitive benefit of consoles has always been consistency. With the exception of the N64 RAMBUS memory upgrade and possibly the 32x for Genesis, now that they are making huge advancements within console generation revisions toward performance, do developers make two games modes (low quality and high quality) and how will this alienate players? I think the Xbox refresh was a little more straightforward with a mild update...but Sony effectively doubling the performance makes this outrageously bias, and even if they update their development platform to assist with multi console consistency, where do developers draw the line.
We may think future titles will have the line drawn at graphics quality. But don't forget how poorly titles that depended on upgrade components (Turok 2 for N64 comes to mind) just for basicfeatures like split screen multiplayer; the long term concern is the Pro's existence is going to make dev's lazy at optimization for the OG hardware, with the excuse "everyone needs to just upgrade"
Time will tell.
The reason this is an issue is because unlike PC gaming, the older PS4 is not upgradable to new PS4 specs. It isn't s mild $200 videocards upgrade (where you can sell your old $100 videocard) it's a $400 Replacement where you can sell your old $200-$300 previous console.
The Gameboy Color, the DSi, and the New 3DS also probably qualify (the former and latter espectially).
There were actually Gameboy games that ran poorly on the original GB versus the color (Megaman X was pretty good on GBC, really terrible on GB, for example), and someone on here said Hyrule warriors runs at only 15fps on the original 3DS.
Soooo...we'll have to see.
I'm STILL not sure how I feel about updates like this, and I'm still not really clear on what the Xbox One S is (since it actually DOES have upgraded hardware that can make a difference in games) nor Scorpio.
Thanks so much for this article! Unsurprisingly, it's 52 billion times more informative than anything else I've seen about the Pro.
I'm kind of disappointed it doesn't have 4K Blu Ray support. Weird, given as I understand it, the Xbox One S DOES. I'm hooking up a 4K/HDR TV soon, so I'd like 4K Blu Ray anyway...
Sweet GPU horsepower on that thing! Its good for PC gamers, as now developers will invest in decent graphics.
I was already betrayed when my XBOX 360 S wasn't supported by games like GTA V and Needs for Speed Rivals, because of the lack of an internal HDD so I'm OK with more splintering. Just stick to PCs.
Ryan: Regarding clockspeeds of the CPU cores... there's very little difference between Jaguar and Puma/Puma+. The main difference is higher clocks. So who is to say that they're not using a fast Puma core? Did they explicitly say they're using Jaguar cores? That seems silly. Puma in the embedded Steppe Eagle line is up to 2.4 in a quad core, at 25W - and that's on 28nm. Basically it's too early to tell. They might have kept it conservative to save power and make room for more GPU horsepower at a given TDP. Or they might have gotten a little aggressive to make more headroom for devs, and hit 2.5+. I would bet the former but in either case the clocks won't be limited to a low-2's range just because it's a cat-core.
"Did they explicitly say they're using Jaguar cores?"
Yes. The exact text is, and I quote: 'CPU: x86-64 AMD "Jaguar", 8 Cores'
And I should note that everything in that spec table that doesn't have a question mark besides it is confirmed. So the power, the GPU throughput, memory capacity, etc.
This analysis is much worse than old Digital Foundry analysis.. Anandtech is nowdays, good only for new architecture / lineup CPU analysis and new Apple devices performance analysis once per year and sometimes for some ARM / iOS comparison, otherwise days of AT glory are gone..
The performance boost isn't actually as unprecedented as everyone is making it out to be.
While there was no generational lockstep back then, so we can't exactly call it "mid-generation", this happened with the Sega Genesis. Early models have hardware issues which result in CPU performance that is significantly below spec. Later revisions don't have these issues and exhibit significantly less slowdown because of it. While it was not advertised, and is a result of fixing flaws instead of changing specs, the effect is the same: the Genesis received a CPU upgrade after just one year on the market.
What exactly is the downside to this upgrade? PS4 exists. It will continue to exist in the same form it always has, more or less. PS4 Pro's creation does not make the PS4 any less capable than it is. The games going forward will still run on it as best they could have even if PS4 Pro didn't exist.
The upgrade is merely a choice for gamers who want a little something extra. I'll probably buy one and just give me PS4 to someone else in the family or just sell it. I see no downside to having more choice.
Not really. The developers still work with the systems in a way that can't for the PC. 40 million PS4s all have the same hardware. Another 20 million will have PS4 Pro hardware, and it's still going to be similar to develop for both.
And at the end of the day, console gaming is about more than just hardware.
Two and a half decades ago. I don't care either way about the drama(Which happens any time anyone adds, subtracts, or modifies anything. Or when nothing at all changes.). I am just saying that calling it an unprecedented change is wrong.
Wondering in future if the following approach is not better:
1. Release baseline console, with pluggable upgrade port (nearly like the old cartridges for consoles back in the day). This port is empty on initial launch.
2. Mid-life, release a GPU within a cartridge that uses the port.
3. Due to the controlled nature of the design (2 fixed GPUs with fixed resources), using a crossfire or SLI solution shouldn't be a problem, even if the GPU power is mismatched between internal and cartridge.
It would mean no console at launch is going to be "left-behind" mid-cycle. Of course, OEMs would have to limit themselves to a single upgrade over the course of the machine life, otherwise the options would become too complex for the console market.
It is, 4k is 2x the horizontal resolution ( 2*1920 = 3840 ), and 2x the vertical resolution ( 2*1080 = 2160 ), so 4k is a matrix of 2x2 Full HD, so it's 4 times the resolution...
in another words: 1920*1080 = 2073600 pixels, almost 2 millions, that's why it's some times called 2MP 3840*2160 = 8294400 pixels, that's exactly 4 times 2073600 pixels in fHD
What I used to like about consoles was the way in time game devs squeezed everything out of the hw, which is why in its latter stages the PS2 had such excellent games such as, "Black". This new vogue of multiple in-life hw changes will mean the days of optimised coding are coming to an end. Consoles are going to adopt the same brute force approach to achieving better fidelity, ie. just up the raw performance. It's already bad enough that modern consoles require OS updates, etc. Definitely not what consoles used to be.
However, someone pointed out earlier that it's really about the games, and I've certainly played plenty that were a lot of fun even if the visuals were lacking, which certainly includes a number of N64/PS2 games (still like playing PS2/Mercenaries, though I thought Goldeneye looked quite good at the time). I hope console gamers don't become blinded by specs; if a game is not fun to play, having 4K support won't matter one way or the other. It's why I never bothered with Skyrim; great visuals, but after reading a lot about its gameplay, I decided to stick with Oblivion.
The way this Pro is being described though, it reminds me of the "HD-ready" nonsense that was banded about for many years wrt TVs, models that used 1336x768 or similar. So many people bought them thinking they were getting genuine HD. I can see games for the Pro touting 4K "support" when behind the scenes it's just upscaling from 1080p or 1440, a very misleading approach which shouldn't be allowed. And not including an Ultra HD capable BR drive is just bizarre; one can hardly say the future is streaming when consumers don't even have the ability to make the choice.
Oh well, either way, it's up to consumers in the end. If people buy the Pro and Sony makes a success of this whole approach, then that's the way it will be. I just think it's sad that the original PS4 will never have its own "Black" moment, as it were. However, with more frequent hw updates for consoles, the rationale for spending the same money on PC tech does become stronger IMO; alas, the PC side is going through its own price gouging frenzy in recent years.
the PS4P is somehow in weird position, The console is strong enough to be 4K capable, but not strong enough to be a true 4K gaming machine, while this is expectable in terms of the requirements of 4K gaming in current time, but looking at how thing are now in the move for the new architecture, which in only few months would be possible to be integrated into the APU, and also the Zen core which can be also integrated into the APU in few months... after all AMD them self are expecting to have Zen+Polaris APU in next year...
In the other hand, not having a UHD Blu-ray support is a big let down... If the reason is just a need for a faster ODD then it's unforgivable mistake by Sony,, how much this will cost more ?
Sony excuse is : What the market demand, hell it's not... since PS3, PS has been known as a complete home entertainment solution. PS3 stood as a very good media player too.. PS4 was a let down in the beginning duo to lack of Media capabilities... and now they're not supporting UHD BD for what ? few bucks ? I know that Physical disks are becoming less and less common now but why when it's only a matter of few bucks only to be complete media solution !!
The Pro was designed to run VR. What would be the point of creating a fancy VR headset and sell it for $600 if the current PS4 can't run games made for it ?
It's more that there's a whole secondary discussion on what this means for PS4 game development and what it means for current PS4 owners that we're not a position to discuss.
I think they ought to add FreeSync support, either via DisplayPort, or via HDMI (as they've shown is possible). That would be nice for cases of frame-rate dips.
The HDR back port was surprising, and I truly welcome it, I believe it was a good time to adopt 4k and that Sony made the right call, would have been a considerable challenge to expect it to render everything at 4k, as an OG PS4 owner, I don't understand the people complaining, they are offering a console to take advantage of a new technology, it does the exact same thing as the old PS4, your console isn't obsolete, but it takes advantage of a 4k TV if you have one
So I've seen devs on Sony's blog and their PS4 "meeting" talk about checkerboard rendering not necessarily being the best use of resources and some talk about MSAA. A couple questions...where does MSAA occur? On the shaders or on the ROPs and backend stuff?
I'm wondering because other than twice the shaders I don't think Sony's said what else is different?
Are people really expecting native 4k 60fps console for under $400? Sure I guess Sony could throw in a core i7 and Titan XP. But then would you buy a console for $2000?
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
207 Comments
Back to Article
Drakoid - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
As a PS4 owner since its launch I feel betrayed with this PS4 Pro release. Its been released way too early!tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Time will tell how it will shake out though. The way I see it, either the original PS4 starts getting back ports which aren't fully optimized for it (see Hyrule Warriors at a whopping 15fps on the OG 3DS), or the Pro never gets to fully stretch its legs. The latter is preferable.I think they may stick to an n-1 cycle. PS4+PS4 Pro supported. Next cycle, PS4 Pro + PS5 supported. Etc. Always two boxes, a master and an apprentice.
SunLord - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I doubt Sony is going to change it's certification standard so all new game will have to meet the current PS4 standards before its ships and given it's basically the same exact CPU as the PS4 at a higher clock the CPU will still be the systems weakest point.GPU wise the difference will be in min FPS and eye candy. I highly doubt developers will add extra stuff to games outside of dynamic stuff like ground clutter since all of the game will use the same discs.
SunLord - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
This isn't like porting a game from the PS4 to XBOX and PC where developers can drastically modify the games between models they have one disc and one version for both console versionslooncraz - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Which is why they will adjust the eye candy and resolution first and foremost.The PS4 Pro is more likely to be receiving inferior content, rather than the other way around. It will just run the same game at a higher resolution and framerate, even if it could handle much more eye candy.
Samus - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I hope so. The nail in the coffin for this console revision "concept" going on right now in the industry is when exclusive features, not just additional eye candy, require the faster consoles. That is going to be one hell of a way to alienate gamers back to PC gaming where the upgrades are at least modular.If Sony is smart they will literally lock down the dev kits to only add antialiasing, higher output resolution, or some basic graphics optimization to the Pro mode of the game. Any further optimizations for Pro hardware such as exclusive game modes or split screen gaming are going to be outright bullshit.
Peskarik - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Dude, the modular upgrade on a PC (which for eye candy means discrete GPU) is more expensive than buying a new PS4.João - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Dude, new PS4 Pro = 400$ vs new GPU (Rx 480) = 280$ (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N8... which allows better graphicstarfeef101 - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
okay. not build a system for $400 new and make it equal to or better than a PS4 Pro. That's my problem with people who hate on consoles. They present way better value for people who only have that much cash for their gaming setup. And this is coming from someone with a $5K gaming PC. I am definitely a fan of PC gaming. But I also respect the validity of consoles (and own some myself)Ultraman1966 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
That's because a PC can do a whole lot more in addition to being a gaming machine; then the games are also a whole lot cheaper.nikon133 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
Sure it can. "Problem" here is, almost any PC can do everything but gaming for most users. My Surface Pro 4 can. My work Acer Travelmate P645s can. My old work EliteBook 8570p (which I was allowed to keep after it reached replacement age) can.I do have a gaming desktop at home, but that's me... and I'm on geeky side. Many individuals cannot settle down for having gaming rig as their only machine, and many also don't want to own multiple computers. Manage multiple updates, software licenses, subscriptions.
Console makes a lot of sense. It is simple, strait-forward. It might end up more expensive on software side, though even that can be avoided with some patience and effort. I've just purchased Doom for PS4 for NZ$36. If I wanted pre-owned, I could have done with NZ$26. Game was over NZ$100 ($109 or $119?) on release, and neither of local gaming shops sell pre-owned PC games. Best PC DOOM price currently is NZ$66. It was a bit cheaper on release than PS4 version, but... for whatever reason, here we are.
nikon133 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
Exactly. And it is not just a cost of good gaming PC build. Some people already have good non-gaming laptop, for example, or AIO - and don't want another PC just for gaming, since laptop/AIO covers all other needs and complements their lifestyle better.nikon133 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
Yeah, but... when you "upgrade" to PS4 Pro, you end up with 2 fully independent, complete machines. You can make your original PS4 into BD player, Netflix box, or simply a guest-room console for some gaming with visiting friends and relatives. PS4 SharePlay kind of plays nicely with this scenario.When you upgrade your GPU, you end up with spare GPU that isn't of much worth, unless you have another PC capable of using it (sufficient space, power and other resources to make it in to gaming machine).
I guess you can sell old GPU. If it wasn't top shelve part (in which case it did cost more than PS4), it will not hold price nicely. 2nd hand PS4 are selling quite solid, at least here in New Zealand.
And... you do get a bit more from this PS4 Pro than just faster GPU. Being complete machine, not just a part, you get CPU boost, faster RAM, new controller. And you still end up with your original PS4 untouched, be it for selling it or re-purposing it. If you'd be upgrading other parts of your PC with GPU, you still end up with handful of old parts not enough to build another machine without further investments.
DarthVulva - Monday, November 14, 2016 - link
Literally locking down your product is not a good idea - the additional costs of shipping all those chains and padlocks would significantly increase the price of the end product.cmdrdredd - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The Pro can render the game at resolutions above 1080p then scale that to 4k with HDR. The original PS4 will get an HDR update next week.gopher1369 - Wednesday, September 14, 2016 - link
VR, the PS4 Pro is for VR content.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yeah, but they COULD still end up with versions that look or run dramatically different. Or not.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Certification already allows a lot of sub 30fps games to slip through. I don't trust that.RussianSensation - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
It would be stupid on Sony's part to force PS5 games to run on PS4 because it would hold back PS5 from realizing its true potential. I know both companies are pushing for iterative consoles (smartphone business model) without console generations but even if that happens, it will mean the generational leaps between consoles will become completely blurred.FourEyedGeek - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Yes / no.What if the PS5 games worked on PS4 Pro but not PS4, the games being compatible one generation either way?
That way, the PS5 games could work on the PS4 Pro, but with reduced graphics and gameplay that utilise the CPU and RAM.
nikon133 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
I'm pretty sure Kazuo Hirai mentioned on PS4 release that there might never be a PS5. I remembered that because it sounded very... gloomy. Reflecting on that now, it is very possible that Sony plans to release upgraded versions for unforeseen time, staying within same number. PS4 Ultra. PS4 Trinity. PS4 TurboFX. Or just "new PlayStation" in the future.Additionally... this is the first dual-config setup they have and they are introducing it carefully. Trying not to alienate many gamers. Thus promise that there will be no extra from games on PS4 Pro beside better visuals. When next upgrade is released, they might loosen or drop this requirement. Yes, devs can make game run differently on next PS4. Have more players in multiplayer. Have bigger maps. Extra content.
Sticking with x86 platform, they can easily keep backward compatibility... but they can even completely drop forward compatibility, or let it to devs to decide. Next PS4 can be made to run all the old PS4 games, but older PS4 versions might not necessarily be able to run all new games.
Achilles heel of consoles' generational changes in the past was usually introduction of new platform, where there are not many games at start, and not many gamers to motivate devs into fully focusing on developing them. They usually have sort of slow start, before they ramp up. With backward compatibility, this problem is pretty much gone. Enough games to play before new exclusive content starts coming up.
gopher1369 - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
I'm holding out for the Super Ultra Mega Playstation 4 Turbo 64 Championship Edition.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Wow, I didn't know Hyrule Warriors (or any games) were actually being optimized for New 3DS!This is sort of similar to the Gameboy > Gameboy Color situation too (and there were actually games that ran VERY poorly on the original Gameboy).
Will be interesting to see how this plays out...
cmdrdredd - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
This is already fleshed out. New games that are patched or designed for the pro run above 1080p and are scaled to 4k with many of them being HDR. For people with 1080p[ Tvs and the pro the framerate will be higher, more stable, or both. All games must have 100% compatibility with the original PS4 and it will also support HDR.Colin1497 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I've been speculating this same thing for both PS and XB since the rumors started last year. If well executed this could work just fine. Time will tell.rarson - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I think PS5 will replace the entire PS4 platform, just like it would have in a traditional console cycle, with an upgraded PS5 coming a few years later to extend the entire PS5 platform like the Pro does for the PS4.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
"As a PS4 owner since its launch I feel betrayed with this PS4 Pro release. Its been released way too early!"I am really not getting that at all. I am a PS4 owner and am glad the PS4 pro is coming. We get better graphics if we want. If not, the old one still works with all the latest games. it has 4.2 tflops of GPU goodness. that puts it between the Geforce 970 and 980. That is pretty damn impressive for a console.
SwaggerLIlyJohnson - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
4.2 tflops is also right behind a 7970 ghz edition tflops can be misleading.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
It's a simple static rating that can be expressed in a single sentence rather than 10 pages of benchmark graphs... So, yeah, it's not everything... Its not good comparing against different generations of cards years apart, but comparing like to like, the PS4 has 1.8 tflops, where the PS4 Pro has 4.2tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Polaris is also up to 40% more efficient per core per clock than GCN 1, PS4 seems to use a hybrid of 1.1 and 1.2 with the 8 ACEs.aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I've thought this is what made sense all the way since they picked APUs for the consoles to begin with.Why would they not use the latest and greatest APU? That would be completely stupid. Why hold back when it's a standard component which can easily be replaced?
Just make some good standard settings for each console and slap an information box on the game description which tell which Playstation models are supported and you're fine.
My PC is very different from a lot of others but we still can play about the same games and new PCs can play old games and old PCs can play new games as long as their performance is good enough.
SunLord - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Why? its not replacing the PS4 the Pro will only offer better visuals and likely higher min FPS then Original and Slim at 1080p but will both play and have exact the same game as the Pro with just lower settings which is what you would of still gotten even if the Pro never existed. Outside of "4k" the only other thing the Pro will likely be better at then the PS4 is VR.Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The last generation of consoles (PS3 and Xbox 360) had an extended life span two years longer than more consoles before their successors arriving. The PS4 Pro is a mild reset to that regular cadence (PS3 + PS4 -> is the correct time for PS4 Pro's arrival).Jumangi - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
This isn't a new generation of console. It's clearly to the same level of performance jump that happens(2X+ GOU even less for CPU) because even Sony is still calling it the PS4. This is a new more iterative world for consoles. Only time will tell if it is accepted by the gaming market.RussianSensation - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Why? PS4 Pro and Xbox Scorpio are NOT next generation consoles because they will not have exclusive titles. Sony won't even allow multiplayer games to run at faster FPS on PS4 Pro than on the PS4. It would be completely different if these were true next generation consoles, that had their own exclusive game library in a way PS4/XB1 were compared to PS3/XB360. If existing PS4/XB1 owners want better graphics of these refresh consoles, they can just sell their old console and buy a new one, just like PC gamers upgrade CPUs/GPUs as games become more demanding.smartthanyou - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Betrayed? ROFL.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I know right? If you dont want it, dont buy it... But "betrayed" is laying it on too thick. The old PS4 didnt suddenly lose functionality because a faster version came out. it's called progress.Morawka - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
they are betrayed because they bought into a platform that has made some bad decisions on hardware. Sure they will have the fastest console for a year, but after that year is up, they are going to be sorely behind in graphics capability.The Xbox Project Scorpio will have exclusives to scorpio, i dunno why people think microsoft is following sony's strategy on this. they arent. What Microsoft did say is, all xbox one games will work on scorpio, and not the other way around.
goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
But that is how things work. If faster stuff doesnt come out, then we are all slow forever. Again, The old PS4 didnt suddenly lose functionality because a faster version came out. Faster computers are always out, faster phones, tablets, and pretty much everything else tech related improves over time. It's part of life. Getting upset over a new product that somewhat replaces a 3 year old product is ridiculous.Michael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Value proposition for consoles always was a standartised level of quality for a long period of time. Now that goes out of the window, so of course they feel that way.goatfajitas - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
"Value proposition for consoles always was a standardized level of quality for a long period of time."- IMO that was completely broken and not only holding consoles back, but gaming as a whole... Now MS and Sony have somewhat fixed it... Or at least improved it.
Michael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Console customers don`t see shortened upgrade cycle as an improvement, and in money terms it`s like PC market. Quite a lot to lose.rarson - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Console customers don`t see shortened upgrade cycle as an improvement, and in money terms it`s like PC market. Quite a lot to lose.It's not a shortened cycle, it's exactly the opposite. I'm not sure why this is so hard for console gamers to understand. By increasing performance of the PS4 platform with the Pro, and ensuring all games run on both consoles, the life of the PS4 gets extended by guaranteed software support for as long as the more powerful hardware remains relevant.
I still game on my 8-year old PC. I can even run Doom on it and it's very playable. My old PC doesn't get less software support just because newer, faster hardware came out for the same platform.
Michael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
In console world, 6 years of support is a _standard_. Trying to peddle that as a feature now simply reeks.Plus, you have to be really gullible to believe both versions will get the same amount of testing and support. Performance creep on PC around PS2/original XBOX timeframe is exactly what gave console side a lot of new customers in the first place.
goatfajitas - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
We are talking about the same game on the same platform with (likely) higher res textures and a few other graphics settings notched up a bit. It's not like an entirely new console... I look at it this way... No-one is forcing it, if you don't like it, don't buy it. If you feel "betrayed" that somehow the PS4 Pro lessens the experience of your PS4, then sell your old PS4 and enjoy your principals. I will be enjoying my PS4 Pro and playing games on it.goatfajitas - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I am a console owner, a PS4 owner and I am happy to pay another $400 for a PS4 pro and extremely happy I dont have to wait until the year 2020 to do it, sooooooo......Michael Bay - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
So Sony is rubbing hands and counting shekels, yes.rarson - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Actually the hardware decisions were very smart, unless you want to run your console business into the ground by releasing another overpriced, power-hungry, failure-prone platform that you have to sell at a loss just to move.Morawka - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
There is nothing smart about using 5 year old CPU cores in a next gen console. There is nothing smart about omitting a 4K HDR Blu Ray player, especially when you are part owner of the Blu Ray Spec. Instead they license the 4K HDR player to their competitor Their Next Gen PS4 is less capable than a refreshed Last gen product in home theater capabilities.Sony was already sorely lacking in software capabilities such as Backward compatibility. Instead they offer alternatives that require you to have very fast internet with low latency by running a virtual machine in the cloud. When microsoft can do it on the console, with virtually identical hardware capabilities.
Drakoid - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yes, betrayed. I played ps3 for 6 years. I would expect ps4 to stay exclusive for 6 years too...but no they had to release this "ps4 pro" after 3 years.Makaveli - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
lol suck it up buttercup.Now that console are effectively low end PC's you can expect more of this in the future.
aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
They are at-least mid-range PCs.Most PC gamers will not have the graphical performance of the Playstation4 Pro at launch.
Most PC gamers may not even have the graphical performance of the old Playstation 4.
Sure some do have as good or even better systems but there's plenty of laptops, Dota2, HotS, CS:GO and so on players who play what their system is capable of,
goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
How does the PS4 Pro's existence change your PS4's experience? Is it just like Morawka alluded to that you are just upset because it isnt the fastest thing out? Or do you have an actual tangible complaint about newer faster stuff?I personally thought 6 years was a horribly long cycle. by the last 3 years of it's lifespan, the PS3 was awful. XB360 as well.
aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
You can still play Playstation 4 for 6 years if you want too.Or you could had bought a PC and upgraded when you wanted to, kinda like you will be able to do with the consoles now too but with the option at any time and for many budgets.
rarson - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Newsflash: all of the new software still works on your PS4. In fact, the Pro will likely keep your PS4 relevant longer than it would have been on its own. That's the ENTIRE POINT of the Pro.Also, your console expectations were absurd if you thought the PS4 hardware would have a 6-year cycle on its own. Maybe research your purchase better next time. Let me guess: you didn't pay $399 for your PS3, did you?
jjj - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
It will just offer a better experience, won't really hurt you.If Sony is smart they do a bundle for this one with the PS VR at 599$. They would have a year to take massive share from Xbox in markets where Microsoft is still doing ok and they would popularize VR, taking a clear lead.
Death666Angel - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I don't get it. That's like feeling betrayed when you buy a GTX 960 and the GTX 1060 comes out 3 years later. You got to play those games all this time and now something more powerful comes out. As is the norm with technology. Granted, Sony could fuck it up and publish exclusively for the Pro, but that has already been denied. With current technology, it should be easy to handle the thing "PC like" and have games that run @ 60fps on the Pro and @ 30FPS on the OG console. Or have it be a 1080p /1440p split. Or a texture/FOV/draw distance thing. Currenty games are very modular and the current console generation is also very modular. So it makes sense that this PC-ization of the console market is a good thing, in my opinion. Maybe we even get custom video settings like on the PC, where we can decide between eye candy (high res/textures) and smoothnes (more frames). Maybe someone like TotalBuiscuit will start playing PS4 games. :Dcmdrdredd - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
At least you get a free update next week for HDR on the old models.Rezurecta - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Why do you feel betrayed? You don't have to buy a PS4 Pro and all games will be compatible with both systems. This is choice and choice is good.OreoCookie - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
You're feeling betrayed, because hardware and games improve faster than you expected?!? Should we feel betrayed because Apple & Samsung replace their flagship phones every year with better ones? ;)Sttm - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I think that is a dumb attitude to have. The Pro isn't changing the PS4 experience. This is not like going from PS3 to PS4 where the developers stopped making PS3 games. You are getting the same games you got before. You wont miss out on anything that you wouldn't otherwise have missed out on. The longevity of your PS4 if anything is going to be longer now, for as long as they stay on this AMD x86 path, they can make a new console every 2-3 years and still support your PS4 with new games, not all of them, but more than if they just cut you off after 5-6 years with the old model.Craig234 - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I bought a PS4 a year ago and haven't taken it out of the box yet. So, the new model...aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
A friend bought a Playstation 4 and No man´s sky for it like three weeks ago.Even though he has an i5 4690K and GTX 970 PC.
Owned twice.
boozed - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Betrayed!Has your PS4 suddenly stopped working?
anubis44 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
You sound like an nVidia marketing stooge. How can you feel 'betrayed' by a company that's building on the platform you've bought into? Would you rather than switch the architecture again to something incompatible with all the games you've bought? Sony has to bulk up their console, and they're doing it, in order to remain competitive. You should be glad they're doing this and not sitting on their hands while Microsoft blows past them with a faster XBox.rarson - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
As a PS4 owner since launch, I don't think you understand why they did this.How are you betrayed? You've owned the console for three years. You've enjoyed its games for three years. You can continue to enjoy all the new games without having to buy the new console.
Your statement is like saying "I feel betrayed, I paid $400 for this hardware three years ago and now the same hardware is $100 cheaper!"
Ethos Evoss - Thursday, September 22, 2016 - link
yeah... why there is no PS 5 with 4k playing ? proper mega nvidia GPU proper intel CPUtipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Since all the other spec leaks were right, and they said on stage the cores were clocked higher, I assume it's the same old Jaguar cores with the rumored 20% boost.That means that most 30fps games won't be able to be converted to 60fps, unless the CPU was sitting idle a huge chunk of the time in the base game.
Dissapointing there. I'd rather 1080p 60fps gaming with balls out visuals than wasting all the extra GPU power on extra pixels.
And it's not even like it's doing native 4K, the internal docs called out targeting 2560x1400 or dynamic res and using checkerboard rendering to upscale the final output.
tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
They even said on stage that "the PS4 is basically maxing out what we can do on 1080p tvs". Lol no? Consoles area already using mid-low PC asset qualities, there's shader effects to improve (alpha chokes both up), AA, AF, so many things to improve on 1080p, let alone 60fps.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
We haven't maxed out STANDARD definition TVs yet.Flunk - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I think history has shown that people will still buy consoles even if the games run at 30fps. Unless people stop buying them, there is no reason for console companies to change. That's why the PS4 Pro is designed like this, large graphics upgrade and small CPU upgrade.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
To be fair it needed a GPU upgrade, as all consoles do. This is a nice one.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The CPU was already the weaker point though. This exaggerates the difference more.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
CPU? Both XBO and PS4 have 8 core Jaguar's. They are hardly lacking there. The integrated GPU's are what lags far behind PC's.Death666Angel - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
A 1.6GHz 8 small-core CPU isn't the same as a gamers OC'ed 4+GHz 4core/8threads big-CPU. They lacked in both departments, CPU and GPU compared to enthusiast gamers, since many tasks still rely on single core performance to some degree or another.goatfajitas - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
The GPU is far FAR further behind than the CPU.aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Not necessarily, but GPU progress is much larger than CPU one.tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
6 and a half 1.6GHz Jaguar cores *may* reach about an i3 if every thread is well used...The developer complaints were all about the CPUs from the start. GPUs you can scale on at least, CPUs hold back game design.goatfajitas - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
When bench-marked on a PC yes, but this isnt a PC. The GPU is the bottleneck on the PS4. The CPU is improved, but the GPU (which is what really needed it) is a bigger jump.aliquise - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
They do lack in the CPU department. AMD CPUs suck for now and the console CPUs are even worse.nathanddrews - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Some of my fondest console memories are GoldenEye N64 multiplayer (15fps), Perfect Dark N64 multiplayer (9fps), Vigilante 8 (15fps), Twisted Metal (20fps), Halo Xbox multiplayer (15-30fps). I mean... a LOT of hours and so much fun. Likewise, I have plenty of console memories that were 60fps. Fun games are fun, period. I played just as much UT99 at 160fps on my CRT monitor as I played Perfect Dark at 22fps and loved them both.Funny thing is that now that I've played the PD remake on XBLA, the 60fps lock makes it almost unplayable... I'm terrible at it. LOL
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I'm fine with 30FPS, and dipping down from that, but I couldn't handle a lot of N64 games because of the horrific framerates. Banjo 2 didn't run well enough for me to play it (although also it's way too hard, aside from that). Although in Banjo 2's case, I have to wonder if it was designed for 8MB, and then they shoehorned it in to 4MB, because Banjo 1 and Donkey Kong 64 ran solidly...nathanddrews - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
It's possible, I know that a few games late in the N64 cycle basically required the memory expansion pack. Perfect Dark actually ran OK in single player without the high resolution textures enabled, but once you turned it on and in 4-player split screen, the frame rate really tanked. I guess I put up with it because my friends and I had so much fun getting together to play it. None of them were into PC gaming, so they had no frame of reference for how smooth gameplay could be.Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The problem is that VR is the 'next big thing' and that necessitates higher frame rates. With the PS4 Pro being positioned for VR, hitting 60 FPS is more of a requirement.JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
90fps is considered a requirement for VR. At 60fps, more people would get VR sickness.Huacanacha - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
60fps is viable with reprojection (to put in crudely: redisplaying frames adjusted for headset orientation and/or position changes), which I think is the point of the 120Hz PSVR max refresh rate. Very few if any games will be 120fps native, they will either be 60fps with reprojection (for 120Hz output) or 90Hz native. There may be 45fps with reprojection but that's probably getting into bad VR experience territory for most styles of games.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yeah...HMMMMMMMMMMM. I'm seriously wondering how Sony thinks they can pull this off. Is even the Pro enough hardware to really do VR? They'd really need to do 90FPS at whatever resolution PlayStation VR is, and I'm not sure the Pro can do that, much less the original...kn00tcn - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
you people... hardware has nothing to do with performance in that way, the decision to put a certain amount of graphics is the performance targetkillzone3 had 3D on a ps3, but your logic implies that's impossible since kz3 looks so good & is 30fps with dips in the first place... of course the reality was that graphics was adjusted, why would a dev be stupid enough to run their VR game at 15fps? it's entirely up to them, not the hardware
Death666Angel - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
3D isn't the same as VR, please get informed.kn00tcn - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
people want small quiet devices, developers want to make visuals, console companies want to hit both targets & be sanely priced, but why are they the ones getting blamed?there are plenty of 60fps games btw, seems more than last gen, sounds like consoles already changed for the better
Huacanacha - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That's not how modern game architectures work. Much of the game logic such as physics and AI can run at a fixed rate independent of frame rate, so targeting 60 fps vs 30fps doesn't require a doubling of processing power. For example Physics may run at 100 updates/s, AI at 30/s, but input and UI are updates per frame. If most of the intensive CPU work is in physics and AI bumping from 30 to 60 fps may only require 10-30% more CPU speed. This is highly dependent on the specific game and implementation of course.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That's user perceptible though. See 30fps enemies in 60fps Halo 5.Too many compromises. I'd rather have them wait a year for 4C/8T Zen and a better GPU at the same time.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That might need a new die process though that won't exist...kn00tcn - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
there should be interpolation, are you saying halo5 enemies are like bioshock1 physics!?tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
If scenes got busy, enemies would start to refresh at half of the frame rate, which was a very visible effect. Not quite like Bioshock 1 Physics.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Thanks for that info. (Seriously, I'm not being sarcastic...hard to tell on the Internet LOL)Huacanacha - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
I should clarify I'm not saying most games would only need 10-30% CPU boost to move from 30 to 60fps, that's more like the best case scenario based on the game features, engine, implementation etc.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
310 watts was odd to me if it's using TSMC 16nm. That's a lot of watts for a console. I hope the heatsink is overkill so it's not super loud.beginner99 - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Agree. 310 seems very high especially if we look at RX 480 power usage which isn't that high and 14 nm from GF also worse than TSMC 16.The_Assimilator - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
> RX 480 power usage which isn't that highThanks for the laugh.
artk2219 - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
It isn't, compared to where its performance hits its not bad at all. Granted it isn't as low as the 1060, but neither one of the two are going to drive you crazy from their power consumption, and would be totally manageable in an enclosure like the PS4's.Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
RX 480 is half the figure for the PS4 Pro. Granted one is just a video card while the other is a complete system, it does provide perspective.goatfajitas - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
4.2 T-flops GPU. 310w isnt out of the expectation for that kind of power.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
A PC running a Core i7 6700K with a Radeon RX 480 (an upclocked version of the Pro's core GPU tech) draws just 270W. I'm guessing 310 is just a theoretical PSU max, not typical.Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The original PS3 had a 380W PSU for perspective. That's for the total system which includes a hard drive, optical drive, IO chips and memory. The 310W figure for the PS4Pro is in the same context of the PSU for the entire system.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That's true, but given the complaints about the PS4s noise I hope the cooling is overkill. Remember the original PS3s heatsink? That was massive.My CUH-1215 PS4 is pretty good, I can't hear it at TV distance, but at a desk I can definitely hear it ramp up and down and it's mildly annoying. The XBO wins on fan noise. I hope the Pro doesn't regress and gets even quieter.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yeah, people insulted the Xbox One's size, but in reality it wasn't that big at all, and WHO CARES if it's way way quieter. (Granted the GPU is also much smaller, but regardless.) I'd take a 5x larger PS4 if it made it quieter.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I didn't remember that it was so high. I could have sworn that the last gen systems started at more like 200 watts? (And went down from there in newer revisions.)Dribble - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That strongly suggests it's not using polaris cores. It's using the same GN1.1 gpu cores as PS4, double the count, add the same clock speed boost as the cpu cores get but use a smaller more efficient process and 310W sounds about right.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The rumors were spot on for everything else, so I think it's 90% likely Polaris.
artk2219 - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Look at the specs on the GPU, its a lower clocked RX 480 with slow memory. Unless AMD has another random custom GPU that isn't polaris and also happens to have 2304 shaders.http://www.anandtech.com/show/10663/analyzing-sony...
http://www.amd.com/en-gb/products/graphics/radeon-...
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
IMO the original PS4 is way too loud. Xbox One (original) is about my limit. I don't want to hear my consoles (or PCs). So...yeah, hope the cooling is much better.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The most enthusing thing about this is...Polaris has already had the substantial legwork put into making it for TSMCs 16nm process, and AMD just payed for a hole to be poked in their wafer silicon agreement with GoSlo. So, TSMC Polaris+Vega chips sooner rather than later?Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
AMD has been migrating their GPUs to Global Foundries for while but using TSMC for this chip may come at the request of Sony or another client. This would enable AMD to essentially have their clients pay for the alteration in the GF wafer agreement.powerarmour - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
And still waiting for a full Polaris review...eddieobscurant - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
don't worry we'll get it around vega time.powerarmour - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Nah, that'll just be another preview.Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
One thing not mentioned here is that the PS4 and Xbox One hardware were based around GCN 1.1 hardware. The PS4 Pro gets the Polaris update which includes better compression. While I would expect only a modest increase in GDDR5 clock speed, with the compression the effective bandwidth could be close to double. That'll help keep the SoC fed with data.Other benefits of Polaris vs. earlier GCN chips include a larger L2 cache for the GPU and more geometry throughput.
tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yep, Polaris is a fair bit more efficient than GCN 1. Per core per clock, up to 40%https://www.computerbase.de/2016-08/amd-radeon-pol...
Kevin G - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
There is a good argument that many of the larger gains come from a doubling of geometry throughput independent of the shader cores. The real interesting tidbit is that even in shader limited scenarios, Polaris is still a few percentage faster. Good to see some IPC increases even in the shader pipeline.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That, and the compression removing the bandwidth bottleneck of early GCN 1.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I love this site. I love actually being on a site with posters who know more than I do on this stuff. :-DKalost - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
"Think they know more"powerarmour - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
It's ironic that we now have to link to other sites for proper tech info.Ryan Smith - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
" The PS4 Pro gets the Polaris update which includes better compression."It may not be, and really that's half the point of this article. We know it's getting some aspects of Polaris, but Polaris is a combination of many parts. Using Polaris (GCN 4/IP v8) shader cores or the newer memory controller is not guaranteed, and depending on the the minutiae of compatibility, may not be possible at all.
tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
GNM (PS4s high performance API) is pretty low level so I had been wondering that, but the leaks were spot on for everything else and said Polaris.tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Then again, semi-custom doesn't exclude improvements over even Polaris's compression too. Cerny should be talking about it this week I think.jabber - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The smart money was not to buy either PS4 or Xbox.JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
If you can't afford them, sure, but those of us with the cash are able to get a lot of use out of either console.jabber - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
My point was both are disappointing lacklustre machines.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Eh, I can't play Bloodborne on my PC. I'd like to, but I can't. So both machines have uses.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
I think they're both great. I'm still quite amazed by PS4 graphics, and I was amazed by Xbox 360 class graphics for YEARS. (And am kind of amazed that I'm finally no longer amazed LOL)owan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
"Anandtech is not a gaming website"I guess thats why we don't see GPU reviews anymore? I forgot that everyone I know builds PCs for things other than gaming and not the other way around.
Dr. Swag - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Maybe it's not that they don't do GPU reviews anymore, but that it takes time to write the best GPU review of any site on the Internet?I suggest you read this if you haven't already: http://www.anandtech.com/home/about/
owan - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Sorry, but reviews 2+ months after launch means that the review has become irrelevant. People who wanted one early didn't get the benefit of a review, and people who wait have a lot more info to choose from. I've been reading AT for over a decade... they were the most useful when they provided quality articles in a *timely* manner. PcPer publishes articles when NDA lifts and they're quality reviews... so why can't AT be bothered to attempt the same? I'd wait a week or two, but MONTHS is absurd. I just wish they'd give up the charade and admit that they don't care anymore rather than stringing loyal readers alongToTTenTranz - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
"For reference, the fastest desktop Jaguar desktop processor topped out at 2.2GHz."Actually, the A8 7410 Carrizo-L will "turbo" up to 2.5GHz.
Sure, that's a "Puma", though the difference between Jaguar and Puma should (arguably) be little more than the implementation of a "Turbo" mode and higher clocks due to 28nm being more mature.
tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I wonder if the iterative consoles are a bit more puma-ish since the core is largely compatible. Though, consoles aren't the best place for Turbo Boost, consistent performance is more important.Azusis - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
No UHD BluRay player? Why? Seems like such an oversight.If I have a 4K TV and want to take advantage of it I can:
1) Buy an Xbox One S for $299 and get updated games and play 4K blu rays on my new TV,
or
2) Buy a PS4 Pro for $400, a UHD BluRay Player for $300, and now I'm out more than twice as much money as grabbing an xbox.
JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
And then replace the XBox One S with Scorpio when it comes out for >1080p gaming?Sony probably skipped the UHD Blu-Ray player because they expect streaming and downloads to replace plastic discs. It already has for many of us. I own a couple of BluRay players, and have only used them a couple of times. My HD and 4K content comes via the Internet.
doubledeej - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Streaming content isn't anywhere near the quality of disc-based content.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
FYI 1080p Blu Ray is still better than 4K streaming. Plus I *also* need a 4K streaming box anyway, and One S gets me both.BPB - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Why would you spend $300 on a UHD BluRay player and not get and Xbox One S for the same price?Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yeah, exactly. I feel weird using my consoles for "mere" video playback, BUT when I need a 4K Blu Ray player anyway, and it's literally the same price, and I'd just as soon support a game console and have another game console...why not?jabber - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Why buy disks? Most movies just are that good these days. Streaming is the future. Havent bought a DVD or BD in years. In fact skipped BD totally.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
They saved about 15 per console on the laser. Maybe they struggled to hit 400.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Do you know that for a fact? If it's really a $15 difference, that would be pretty massive by the standards of like consumer electronics gear.tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
All I know is it's what IHS supply estimated, and I don't know any better to doubt them.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Yeah, it's super weird to me that it doesn't have 4K Blu Ray. I guess it's a cost savings thing, but I need a 4K Blu Ray player anyway, and the Xbox One S is roughly the same price as a stand alone player, soooo.....Teknobug - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
That thing is bloody ugly! I'll stick to my original PS4.LarsBars - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Xbox One S plays Ultra HD Blu Rays. I can't believe Sony didn't pack that into this console.Frodo_ - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The PS4 PRO is a complete and otter B***S**T!As a current PS4 owner this does not offer Nothing over my current system.
Why do I need PRO if my A/V system can upscale to 4K? ....and the fact that there's no UHD BluRay player, it puts a nail on the coffin.
I feel that Sony should had the PRO features in the original PS4, this is an insult , a $400 insult! Sony KMA!!!!
Frodo_ - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
......and to add to my frustration, PS4 Slim! why couldn't the original PS4 be slim to begin with? WTF are the designers/engineers are doing? ..playing XBOX OnE? geez...JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
You've lost your mind completely.tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Because heat? Be thinner and even louder? No thanks. 16nm enabled slim.Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Uuuuuh, is this supposed to be satire? Other sites I'd be surprised by comments like this, but presumably people reading Anandtech know better LOL.JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
No it's not (whatever "otter B***S**T" is supposed to mean), but of course some people will go crazy regarding any new product.Your feelings have nothing to do with the real world. Maybe get yourself some help rather than raging irrationally in public.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
<<<As a current PS4 owner this does not offer Nothing over my current system.>>>It does, actually.
<<<Why do I need PRO if my A/V system can upscale to 4K? ....and the fact that there's no UHD BluRay player, it puts a nail on the coffin.>>>
Well, this is going to run games better than the current model does. Remains to be seen how much the extra power will really be used though. Will vary on a case by case basis probably, but it may be failry significant in some games.
<<<I feel that Sony should had the PRO features in the original PS4, this is an insult>>>
How could they? They were losing money at $400 3 years ago, were at close to the limit of the manufacturing process, and you expected them to throw in 2x more GPU?
<<<a $400 insult!>>>
Why?
Frodo_ - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
@Wolfpupaside from native 4K and HDR and lets put the cpu/gpu aside, it offers nothing!
I can play everything on my current system. I have NO bottlenecks whatsoever..
4K was out well before the PS4 originally came out.. and the talk was at that time is Sony wud include it but dint!
please.... tell me what the advantages are?
"They were losing money at $400 3 years ago" they were NOT!!! cmon!
I already shelled out $400 for my last system so every 3 years Im supposed to shovel out another $400 pleeeeese! for 4K right!
people need to wake up this is how they make $$$ iteration to iteration...
@JeffFlanagan @tipoo
typical trolls... you guys need education...
Frodo_ - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
....If anything, this system should have been cheaper then $400! the price of mem/cpu drop on a daily basis and dont forget when it comes to parts, consumer costs <> Sony costs! They built these systems on a dime.Why does this system cost $100 more? for essentially the same cpu overclocked?
noone2 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
You're not making any sense. Some version of PS4 has to be on sale from now until it is replaced. Whether it's just PS4, PS4 Pro, or both is irrelevant. Both systems will play every game as best they can, PS4 is still available at $299, and now you have a choice of some improved performance and quality if you want to spend an extra hundred. Your PS4 will still play every game exactly how it would have before PS4 Pro's existence.As a consumer, PS4 Pro is nothing buy an absolute positive. If PS4 Pro didn't exist, you'd still have already shelled out $400 3 years ago and you'd still have the system you did.
Now you get a choice -- keep your PS4 and enjoy it till end of life or sell it and buy the new one until end of life. Nothing about your situation has changed at all.
Frodo_ - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
I think you are missing the point!4K could have been with the original PS4! HDR is not important to gaming! The PRO is just a refresh!
Save your $$ and go buy a nVidia Shield!
noone2 - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Yes, it could do 4K, but only very loosely speaking. Not even all PS4 games are 1080p. What's the point of scaling 900p to 4K? The PS4 Pro will have potentially far higher resolutions to start with, which it can then scale to 4K.As for HDR, it's actually probably far more important than 4K. Everyone will tell you that for most viewing distances, HDR will be vastly more noticeable than higher resolution. Unless you sit really close or play on 70-80 inch TVs from moderately close, 4K isn't that big of a deal. HDR on the other hand provide a much wider color gamut.
Color gamut and dynamic range are some of the most important aspects of a display. You'll also see less color banding to a significant improvement in bit depth.
Sorry, but you really don't know what you're talking about.
Notmyusualid - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Agreed. As someone else said - he has lost his mind.Frodo_ - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
....Idiot nuff said!Frodo_ - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
????? HDR for movies Yes!!! I agree! but when it comes to video games/Animation I beg to differ!you are confusing Movies with games!
"ITS JUST A GAME" graphics dont need to be
This is a gaming system! NOT a movie media player! It does Not even support the most popular Audio files! No TrueHD,DTS, DTSMA...
you guys are idiots! clueless!
Videos
When using a USB storage device, your video files need to be in a folder for your PS4™ system to recognize them.
MKV
Video: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level4.2
Audio: MP3, AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)
AVI
Video: MPEG4 ASP, H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level4.2
Audio: MP3, AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)
MP4
Video: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level4.2
Audio: AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)
MPEG-2 PS
Video: MPEG2 Visual
Audio: MP2 (MPEG2 Audio Layer 2), MP3, AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital), LPCM
MPEG-2 TS
Video: H.264/MPEG-4 AVC High Profile Level4.2, MPEG2 Visual
Audio: MP2 (MPEG2 Audio Layer 2), AAC LC, AC-3 (Dolby Digital)
AVCHD (.m2ts, .mts)
noone2 - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
Um, what? HDR and color gamut apply to everything, whether it's movies or games. Bit depth is bit depth, whether it's a movie or a game.Frodo_ - Tuesday, September 13, 2016 - link
You are correct! I stand corrected! .....which is probable the most accurate thing I've said in this wild rant! LOL Tx ALL!Frodo_ - Wednesday, September 28, 2016 - link
Quote:Microsoft: Xbox 'Scorpio' will support true 4K gaming, unlike PS4 Pro
28 Sep 2016 | Rasmus Larsen
The GPU in the new PlayStation 4 Pro is "not enough to do true 4K", argues Microsoft. Next year’s Xbox "Scorpio" on the other hand will, the company claims
Read more at http://www.flatpanelshd.com/#ociAMseJaytcUeYu.99
Another reason NOT to get PS4 PRO!
ciparis - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
"Given Sony’s stake in the development of the Blu-Ray standards, this is a bit surprising."A bit surprising? More like astonishing & confounding.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Although...Sony doesn't actually sell a 4K Blu Ray player at all yet, I don't think (!)Samus - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The thing is, will developers actually take advantage of the additional CU's at the possible expensive of screwing up the gameplay on older consoles.The definitive benefit of consoles has always been consistency. With the exception of the N64 RAMBUS memory upgrade and possibly the 32x for Genesis, now that they are making huge advancements within console generation revisions toward performance, do developers make two games modes (low quality and high quality) and how will this alienate players? I think the Xbox refresh was a little more straightforward with a mild update...but Sony effectively doubling the performance makes this outrageously bias, and even if they update their development platform to assist with multi console consistency, where do developers draw the line.
We may think future titles will have the line drawn at graphics quality. But don't forget how poorly titles that depended on upgrade components (Turok 2 for N64 comes to mind) just for basicfeatures like split screen multiplayer; the long term concern is the Pro's existence is going to make dev's lazy at optimization for the OG hardware, with the excuse "everyone needs to just upgrade"
Time will tell.
The reason this is an issue is because unlike PC gaming, the older PS4 is not upgradable to new PS4 specs. It isn't s mild $200 videocards upgrade (where you can sell your old $100 videocard) it's a $400 Replacement where you can sell your old $200-$300 previous console.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
The Gameboy Color, the DSi, and the New 3DS also probably qualify (the former and latter espectially).There were actually Gameboy games that ran poorly on the original GB versus the color (Megaman X was pretty good on GBC, really terrible on GB, for example), and someone on here said Hyrule warriors runs at only 15fps on the original 3DS.
Soooo...we'll have to see.
I'm STILL not sure how I feel about updates like this, and I'm still not really clear on what the Xbox One S is (since it actually DOES have upgraded hardware that can make a difference in games) nor Scorpio.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Thanks so much for this article! Unsurprisingly, it's 52 billion times more informative than anything else I've seen about the Pro.I'm kind of disappointed it doesn't have 4K Blu Ray support. Weird, given as I understand it, the Xbox One S DOES. I'm hooking up a 4K/HDR TV soon, so I'd like 4K Blu Ray anyway...
Lolimaster - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
In the event they said "with the help of the polaris arq" so it's not just a bumped up HD7000 gpu.webdoctors - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Sweet GPU horsepower on that thing! Its good for PC gamers, as now developers will invest in decent graphics.I was already betrayed when my XBOX 360 S wasn't supported by games like GTA V and Needs for Speed Rivals, because of the lack of an internal HDD so I'm OK with more splintering. Just stick to PCs.
Alexvrb - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
Ryan: Regarding clockspeeds of the CPU cores... there's very little difference between Jaguar and Puma/Puma+. The main difference is higher clocks. So who is to say that they're not using a fast Puma core? Did they explicitly say they're using Jaguar cores? That seems silly. Puma in the embedded Steppe Eagle line is up to 2.4 in a quad core, at 25W - and that's on 28nm. Basically it's too early to tell. They might have kept it conservative to save power and make room for more GPU horsepower at a given TDP. Or they might have gotten a little aggressive to make more headroom for devs, and hit 2.5+. I would bet the former but in either case the clocks won't be limited to a low-2's range just because it's a cat-core.Ryan Smith - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
"Did they explicitly say they're using Jaguar cores?"Yes. The exact text is, and I quote: 'CPU: x86-64 AMD "Jaguar", 8 Cores'
And I should note that everything in that spec table that doesn't have a question mark besides it is confirmed. So the power, the GPU throughput, memory capacity, etc.
ruthan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link
This analysis is much worse than old Digital Foundry analysis.. Anandtech is nowdays, good only for new architecture / lineup CPU analysis and new Apple devices performance analysis once per year and sometimes for some ARM / iOS comparison, otherwise days of AT glory are gone..hrishi.baba - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Which other site you prefer??KoolAidMan1 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
No UHD Blu Ray is surprising and disappointingMichael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
"Pro" is aboutthe dumbest possible moniker. Literally pro couch potato device.LordOfTheBoired - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
The performance boost isn't actually as unprecedented as everyone is making it out to be.While there was no generational lockstep back then, so we can't exactly call it "mid-generation", this happened with the Sega Genesis. Early models have hardware issues which result in CPU performance that is significantly below spec. Later revisions don't have these issues and exhibit significantly less slowdown because of it. While it was not advertised, and is a result of fixing flaws instead of changing specs, the effect is the same: the Genesis received a CPU upgrade after just one year on the market.
Michael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
And it was how many decades ago exactly? There is a good reason for this "upgrade" to be taken so badly.noone2 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
What exactly is the downside to this upgrade? PS4 exists. It will continue to exist in the same form it always has, more or less. PS4 Pro's creation does not make the PS4 any less capable than it is. The games going forward will still run on it as best they could have even if PS4 Pro didn't exist.The upgrade is merely a choice for gamers who want a little something extra. I'll probably buy one and just give me PS4 to someone else in the family or just sell it. I see no downside to having more choice.
Michael Bay - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
The whole point of gaming console is being destroyed before your very eyes and you`re asking.noone2 - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Not really. The developers still work with the systems in a way that can't for the PC. 40 million PS4s all have the same hardware. Another 20 million will have PS4 Pro hardware, and it's still going to be similar to develop for both.And at the end of the day, console gaming is about more than just hardware.
Lord of the Bored - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
Two and a half decades ago.I don't care either way about the drama(Which happens any time anyone adds, subtracts, or modifies anything. Or when nothing at all changes.). I am just saying that calling it an unprecedented change is wrong.
Atari2600 - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Hmmmm...Wondering in future if the following approach is not better:
1. Release baseline console, with pluggable upgrade port (nearly like the old cartridges for consoles back in the day). This port is empty on initial launch.
2. Mid-life, release a GPU within a cartridge that uses the port.
3. Due to the controlled nature of the design (2 fixed GPUs with fixed resources), using a crossfire or SLI solution shouldn't be a problem, even if the GPU power is mismatched between internal and cartridge.
It would mean no console at launch is going to be "left-behind" mid-cycle. Of course, OEMs would have to limit themselves to a single upgrade over the course of the machine life, otherwise the options would become too complex for the console market.
Alabaster Croft - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
4K is not 4x the pixels. It's 2x.TheFlyingSquirrel - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Type into Google (3840*2160) / (1920*1080)The length is 1920*2 and the width is 1080*2
Xajel - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
It is, 4k is 2x the horizontal resolution ( 2*1920 = 3840 ), and 2x the vertical resolution ( 2*1080 = 2160 ), so 4k is a matrix of 2x2 Full HD, so it's 4 times the resolution...in another words:
1920*1080 = 2073600 pixels, almost 2 millions, that's why it's some times called 2MP
3840*2160 = 8294400 pixels, that's exactly 4 times 2073600 pixels in fHD
u.of.ipod - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Do you think the PS4 will support 21:9 aspects now?namechamps - Friday, September 9, 2016 - link
Um no. They are consoles designed to be hooked up to TVs. When 21:9 TVs are mainstream (aka never) they will support it.mapesdhs - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
What I used to like about consoles was the way in time game devs squeezed everything out of the hw, which is why in its latter stages the PS2 had such excellent games such as, "Black". This new vogue of multiple in-life hw changes will mean the days of optimised coding are coming to an end. Consoles are going to adopt the same brute force approach to achieving better fidelity, ie. just up the raw performance. It's already bad enough that modern consoles require OS updates, etc. Definitely not what consoles used to be.However, someone pointed out earlier that it's really about the games, and I've certainly played plenty that were a lot of fun even if the visuals were lacking, which certainly includes a number of N64/PS2 games (still like playing PS2/Mercenaries, though I thought Goldeneye looked quite good at the time). I hope console gamers don't become blinded by specs; if a game is not fun to play, having 4K support won't matter one way or the other. It's why I never bothered with Skyrim; great visuals, but after reading a lot about its gameplay, I decided to stick with Oblivion.
The way this Pro is being described though, it reminds me of the "HD-ready" nonsense that was banded about for many years wrt TVs, models that used 1336x768 or similar. So many people bought them thinking they were getting genuine HD. I can see games for the Pro touting 4K "support" when behind the scenes it's just upscaling from 1080p or 1440, a very misleading approach which shouldn't be allowed. And not including an Ultra HD capable BR drive is just bizarre; one can hardly say the future is streaming when consumers don't even have the ability to make the choice.
Oh well, either way, it's up to consumers in the end. If people buy the Pro and Sony makes a success of this whole approach, then that's the way it will be. I just think it's sad that the original PS4 will never have its own "Black" moment, as it were. However, with more frequent hw updates for consoles, the rationale for spending the same money on PC tech does become stronger IMO; alas, the PC side is going through its own price gouging frenzy in recent years.
Xajel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
the PS4P is somehow in weird position, The console is strong enough to be 4K capable, but not strong enough to be a true 4K gaming machine, while this is expectable in terms of the requirements of 4K gaming in current time, but looking at how thing are now in the move for the new architecture, which in only few months would be possible to be integrated into the APU, and also the Zen core which can be also integrated into the APU in few months... after all AMD them self are expecting to have Zen+Polaris APU in next year...In the other hand, not having a UHD Blu-ray support is a big let down... If the reason is just a need for a faster ODD then it's unforgivable mistake by Sony,, how much this will cost more ?
Sony excuse is : What the market demand, hell it's not... since PS3, PS has been known as a complete home entertainment solution. PS3 stood as a very good media player too.. PS4 was a let down in the beginning duo to lack of Media capabilities... and now they're not supporting UHD BD for what ? few bucks ? I know that Physical disks are becoming less and less common now but why when it's only a matter of few bucks only to be complete media solution !!
cocochanel - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
The Pro was designed to run VR. What would be the point of creating a fancy VR headset and sell it for $600 if the current PS4 can't run games made for it ?Soundgardener - Saturday, September 10, 2016 - link
"As AnandTech is not a gaming website, I’m going to skip the gaming ramifications"So the fact that the PLAYstation 4 is a GAMING CONSOLE doesn't inform the rhetorical context...?
Ryan Smith - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
It's more that there's a whole secondary discussion on what this means for PS4 game development and what it means for current PS4 owners that we're not a position to discuss.DanaGoyette - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
I think they ought to add FreeSync support, either via DisplayPort, or via HDMI (as they've shown is possible). That would be nice for cases of frame-rate dips.Fidelator - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
The HDR back port was surprising, and I truly welcome it, I believe it was a good time to adopt 4k and that Sony made the right call, would have been a considerable challenge to expect it to render everything at 4k, as an OG PS4 owner, I don't understand the people complaining, they are offering a console to take advantage of a new technology, it does the exact same thing as the old PS4, your console isn't obsolete, but it takes advantage of a 4k TV if you have oneevilpaul666 - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
So I've seen devs on Sony's blog and their PS4 "meeting" talk about checkerboard rendering not necessarily being the best use of resources and some talk about MSAA. A couple questions...where does MSAA occur? On the shaders or on the ROPs and backend stuff?I'm wondering because other than twice the shaders I don't think Sony's said what else is different?
Ryan Smith - Monday, September 12, 2016 - link
MSAA occurs in the ROPs. 4x MSAA for example is 1x pixel shading, 4x color sampling of triangles.Pewzor - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
Are people really expecting native 4k 60fps console for under $400?Sure I guess Sony could throw in a core i7 and Titan XP.
But then would you buy a console for $2000?
Kalost - Sunday, September 11, 2016 - link
Exactly, these console scrubs know nothing about hardware.ad7das - Sunday, November 6, 2016 - link
After unboxing ssd upgrade!Bolang - Friday, March 10, 2017 - link
Ps4 is the best.and get free ps4 http://ps4giveaway.win
tigerlovenmd - Tuesday, December 5, 2017 - link
Sony PS4 console plus the VR system, you will get fantastic enjoyment.If you want to buy replacement parts for sony PS4, here is a best referral.
http://www.eeshops.net/ps4-replacement-part-c-6_71...