Support NeoGAF

[Skifi28]

Such a dumb console. Who gives a shit about a pro version when there's a single digit next gen games on the current machine?

It's been 3 years since release. When do we expect the next-gen games? Year 7?

 

[Sethbacca]

I still don't see what the point is. The PS4Pro had 4k as the application. This half-assed update just says, "Your Base PS4 Sucks and all the 4k 60 RT shit we promised you was bullshit, but trust us now and again in a few years when we launch PS6."

It’s really more saying “We know that in order to meet certain price points the PS5 was delivered with a certain set of components that allowed it to meet the desired price threshold. Now we’re offering you a more performant premium completely optional SKU that will give your games more performance until PS6 drops. It’s not required but there if you want it, and if you don’t, your existing ps5 will continue to work just fine until ps6 drops.”

 

[Tsaki]

>RedGamingTech
Traaaash. Has he leaked anything that wasn't leaked by someone else before or could be easily deduced with simple logic?

 

[Topher]

Nothing wrong with that CPU, it's fully what I expected it to be anyway. I can't help but feel that people want a better CPU simply because its well.. better, but not really thinking about what they're supposed to do with it.

First off, all the current Zen 2 CPU needs, is an upclock, and more cache. Thats it. It's lije we are forgetting that all the PS5pro has to do, is run gams at a max of 120fps. MAX. And probably only needs to reliably achieve that at 1080p-1440p at best. When doing native 2160p or even FSR`ed 1440p up rezzed to 2160p, the target would be 60fps. You do not need a much better CPU to do that.

It's not like the PS5 Pro is going for 240hz or something.

And remember, the base is the PS5, so whatever the Pro is, it's running PS5 code first and foremost.

And then there is the RT, if the PS5pro is doing with RT what I hope Sony and AMD are finally going to do, the PS5pro would have ~4x the RT performance compared to the PS5 OG.

Good points. Thanks.

 

[winjer]

RedGamingTech throwing crap at the wall, to see if it sticks.

 

[tusharngf]

if its comparable to 7700xt then its around 35 TF

 

[SegaSnatcher]

if its comparable to 7700xt then its around 35 TF

It will be about 2x the performance for GPU and that will be good enough for a mid gen pro console.

 

[Yoboman]

What does any of it mean?
Does it eat monsters for breakfast or for lunch?

 

[UltimaKilo]

Yeah. This specs sounds like 599$ for Digital Edition and 699$ for Disc Edition.

More like $699 and $799

This is part of the reason I doubt a Pro will release.

Apart from a small benefit in performance, it will likely be quite expensive.
PS4 didn't see a pricedrop when PS4 Pro released and I don't see PS5 getting one either. Difference being that the current economic climate is drastically different and it's likely going to get worse.

I seriously doubt it's worth a Pro release.

There will most certainly be a “pro” model. The margins are so much higher and it helps drive sales for people who have yet to purchase a console, are VR enthusiasts, or simply want an upgrade.

It's been 3 years since release. When do we expect the next-gen games? Year 7?

I understand for wanting a move to next-gen given these consoles were underpowered from day 1, but enjoy the current gen. It’s going to be years before we see a PS6.

 

[Rykan]

It’s really more saying “We know that in order to meet certain price points the PS5 was delivered with a certain set of components that allowed it to meet the desired price threshold. Now we’re offering you a more performant premium completely optional SKU that will give your games more performance until PS6 drops. It’s not required but there if you want it, and if you don’t, your existing ps5 will continue to work just fine until ps6 drops.”

Yeah, good luck making a marketing slogan out of that.

 

[Sethbacca]

Yeah, good luck making a marketing slogan out of that.

Most people don’t need the message because they’re smart enough to recognize that without being told. The average person realizes that the existence of a 2024 Mercedes doesn’t render the 2023 a piece of garbage.

 

[SlimySnake]

lol rgt is a hack.

 

[SegaSnatcher]

I still don't see what the point is. The PS4Pro had 4k as the application. This half-assed update just says, "Your Base PS4 Sucks and all the 4k 60 RT shit we promised you was bullshit, but trust us now and again in a few years when we launch PS6."

There are plenty of PS5 games that don't quite hit their 60fps targets, or need to drop resolution pretty drastically with DRS to hit that target. PS5 Pro would smooth over all those issues.

Spider-Man 2 for example will drop below 1080p in some situation to maintain 60fps, not good.

 

[Mowcno]

if its comparable to 7700xt then its around 35 TF

TF comparisons are incredibly misleading with the jump to RDNA3. Like the ROG Ally being 8TF... yeah. With RDNA3 TF numbers doubled but performance did not.

Timespy Scores
6700XT (13.2TF) - 12,818
7700XT (35.2TF) - 17,008

So +166% Teraflops but only +32% performance. Half the RDNA 3 card TF to 17.6 and you get +33% teraflops, +32% performance.

So an RDNA3 GPU with 35.2TF performs like an RDNA2 GPU with 17.6TF.

 

[Godot25]

They're going up because demand allows it. I'm taking could Sony potentially sell for profit at less. Obviously if they feel people will pay 600 in high enough numbers they will charge that no matter how much cheaper it is to make.

No. They are going up, because unlike previous generation, where price of components went down during console generation, price of components now remains stagnant or is going up which was driven by chip shortage during 2021 and now it is driven by inflation.
So it is basically foolish to expect that current PS5 will go down in price during this gen. And it is foolish to expect PS5 Pro for anything less then 600 for Digital Edition. That console will have
- smaller node (probably) with bigger chip (way higher price)
- more RAM (higher price)
- bigger chasis (higher price)
- bigger cooling requirements (higher price)

Also. There is no reason for Sony to price PS5 Pro competitively. It will be premium product for premium price. There is no competition since Microsoft will probably not make Series X Pro. If you can't afford "premium" product, you can buy base PS5.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

I still don't see what the point is. The PS4Pro had 4k as the application. This half-assed update just says, "Your Base PS4 Sucks and all the 4k 60 RT shit we promised you was bullshit, but trust us now and again in a few years when we launch PS6."

I don't get people and this excessively negative attitude towards things.

What is the point? Here, this is the best PS5 we can make in 2020 at $500. But hey, tech moves forward, so in 2024, this is the best PS5 we can make for $599. It's more expensive because you don't need it, and as such we don't have to sell it at a loss. Your OG PS5 works just fine. But if you want to get the absolute best gaming experience you can get on a PS5, this is it.

What better reason do they need for that? Companies sell whole new more expensive products with the only difference being that one has more storage space than the other, or one has a few more cores than the other, or a little more RAM than the other, and that is perfectly okay. But when a console does it, it needs some sort of justification.

You know what I find most disturbing about your type of mindset... so you would be okay, getting an OG PS5 at say $400, but willing to pay $500 for it, the same damn thing, if they told you that it has double the storage space and comes in a new color, but if they told you to pay $100 more so all the games you play on it, runs at higher framerates and higher rez.... its a problem????

TF comparisons are incredibly misleading with the jump to RDNA3. Like the ROG Ally being 8TF... yeah. With RDNA3 TF numbers doubled but performance did not.

Timespy Scores
6700XT (13.2TF) - 12,818
7700XT (35.2TF) - 17,008

So +166% Teraflops but only +32% performance. Half the RDNA 3 card TF to 17.6 and you get +33% teraflops, +32% performance.

So an RDNA3 GPU with 35.2TF performs like an RDNA2 GPU with 17.6TF.

For now...

But yeah, you're spot on.

 

[Allandor]

Still don't believe this. Especially rdna3 wouldn't make any sense as parts of the PS5 GPU CUs are internally differently structured which might cause some "incompatibilities" with newer CUs and we saw with PS4 pro how Sony handled compatibility.
I don't mean this in any bad manor, but this alone sounds to risky.

Also this would be a 500€ GPU (7800xt like) in a stationary console. How much should than the console cost?

Main problem I see for the current gen is memory bandwidth. So thus might get also a big cost factor.

Also what should a pro console be for? 4k? Than Sony marketing must degrade the PS5 as fullhd console, that would not be good from a marketing standpoint.
There were good reasons for the PS4 pro back than (because of the rise of 4k TVs) but bowi don't see anything that this could be useful.

 

[Akuji]

People complaining about 700€/$ for a "pro" model, dont seem to understand what a pro model actually is. The PS5 is NOT the PS4. The PS5 is still a very capable device. The ps4 was already very budget level hardware when the Pro released.
This will give an OPTION for buyers that want more and/or just have the money to buy something more powerfull.

As for me, day 1. Need another ps5 anyway. My only one sits at the Home theatre. Need one for the living room. Gonna wait for the Pro to buy it

 

[T-Cake]

I have a hard time discerning between graphical effects like RT without Digital Foundry pointing them out, so I think in the case of PS5 Pro I won't be purchasing this time. The PS4 Pro was good in that we had 1080p to 4K upscaled but the basic PS5 looks and performs well enough for my weary eyes. I'd rather spend the money on getting a new Alienware box.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

Still don't believe this. Especially rdna3 wouldn't make any sense as parts of the PS5 GPU CUs are internally differently structured which might cause some "incompatibilities" with newer CUs and we saw with PS4 pro how Sony handled compatibility.
I don't mean this in any bad manor, but this alone sounds to risky.

Also this would be a 500€ GPU (7800xt like) in a stationary console. How much should than the console cost?

Main problem I see for the current gen is memory bandwidth. So thus might get also a big cost factor.

Also what should a pro console be for? 4k? Than Sony marketing must degrade the PS5 as fullhd console, that would not be good from a marketing standpoint.
There were good reasons for the PS4 pro back than (because of the rise of 4k TVs) but bowi don't see anything that this could be useful.

None of what you said, is why this could be hard to believe. None at all.

eg... the PS5 GPU is based on a 40CU 6700xt, a $500 GPU. That didn't stop such a GPU from being in the PS5 did it? And mind you, the PS5 APU has a CPU in it too, along with a wider bus than even that $500 GPU had, 256bit vs 192bit.

The absolute worst thing you can do is look at GPU pricing and use that to extrapolate on what a console may cost. When you see a GPU retailing for $500, just have it in mind that it probably costs AMD/Nvidia... around $300 to make that GPU.

Memory bandwidth also isn't an issue, again, I think people forget what these consoles are designed to do.

As for the rest, you said...ah well, beginning to feel like a broken record.

 

[LordOfChaos]

60 CUs * 16 ALUs per CU * 2 * 2800 = 53 Tflops at the top?

Seems like a massive boost, but recent architectures have doubled the number of paper flops without raising performance that much too

 

[ChuckeRearmed]

I guess it will be around 599 or 649.

The question is how big this thing will be.

 

[Shifty1897]

Meh. If you thought the upgrade to PS5 was disappointing, this upgrade isn't going to wow you at all.

 

[SEGAvangelist]

Yeah. This specs sounds like 599$ for Digital Edition and 699$ for Disc Edition.

Is a digital version rumored? Also, they've established a $50 difference for a digital version with new PS5 release.

 

[Loxus]

I'd like you all to remember how we got the PS5 specs.
It wasn't leaked, it came directly from Sony in Road to PS5.
RGT wasn't even close to leaking anything.

As for Kepler_L2, I'll like to believe he's keeping his sources safe. He hasn't confirm it's exactly Zen2, just Zen4c wasn't ready on time.


This isn't confirmation either, he's just stating the obvious.


Also, we must remember this.




So going by Kepler_L2, it's 60/60CU with 3 Shader Engines.
So either Sony will use the full chip, which is highly unlikely or disable some for yields. 54/60CUs makes more sense than RGT.

7800xt chip is what the PS5 Pro is likely based on and we know it has 60CUs max.

 

[Wandering Leopard]

Even though I have doubts about the source, this seems reasonable to me (if we look back at what they did with the ps4pro).

But I get that people get excited and develop unrealistic expectations.

Just hope they have some custom components that allows for:

• Higher faux-K resolutions
• something that makes a lot of checkerboard ray tracing (or possibly path tracing) "cheaper" for Devs to implement

And in case anyone is wondering, it's very unlikely this thing will do (native) 4k @ 60.

 

[DaleinCalgary]

I'll spend up to $1000 for it

 

[Dream-Knife]

That's roughly 7800XT perf (maybe slightly above it if the CUs and clocks are real) which puts the PS5 Pro GPU between 3080 and 3090 performance in rasterization. Sounds good to me!

Depends on the game.

If the CPU is up for it, it looks like this will be a solid 1080p 60 unreal 5 machine.

 

[Physiognomonics]

There are plenty of PS5 games that don't quite hit their 60fps targets, or need to drop resolution pretty drastically with DRS to hit that target. PS5 Pro would smooth over all those issues.

Spider-Man 2 for example will drop below 1080p in some situation to maintain 60fps, not good.

In that case it's likely GPU limited when there are a lot of alphas and such. But there are always drops like this in all games including on PC. Those are rare occurences here and taken care by the DRS.

 

[nial]

PS4 didn't see a pricedrop when PS4 Pro released

The slimmer model released around the same time.

 

[Bojji]

That's roughly 7800XT perf (maybe slightly above it if the CUs and clocks are real) which puts the PS5 Pro GPU between 3080 and 3090 performance in rasterization. Sounds good to me!

Yeah but that fucking zen 2 and 16gb of memory are ruining the show.

This is as medicore as PS4 to PS4 pro or even worse. It's less than double the power of PS5 GPU.

 

[NEbeast]

I still don't see what the point is. The PS4Pro had 4k as the application. This half-assed update just says, "Your Base PS4 Sucks and all the 4k 60 RT shit we promised you was bullshit, but trust us now and again in a few years when we launch PS6."

You don't have to buy it. Keep enjoying the base model while I'm playing on my fancy pants ps5 Pro.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

RedGamingTech throwing crap at the wall, to see if it sticks.

He does this a lot so he can circle back and say see I had it all along

That said I think this one sticks

We will get more leaks very soon though

Yeah. This specs sounds like 599$ for Digital Edition and 699$ for Disc Edition.

I think you are right

if its comparable to 7700xt then its around 35 TF

It wont near have that amount of TF but it will have around a 4070 level or real world performance

 

[ChorizoPicozo]

Play Station going for the double-kill

 

[diffusionx]

I don't get people and this excessively negative attitude towards things.

What is the point? Here, this is the best PS5 we can make in 2020 at $500. But hey, tech moves forward, so in 2024, this is the best PS5 we can make for $599. It's more expensive because you don't need it, and as such we don't have to sell it at a loss. Your OG PS5 works just fine. But if you want to get the absolute best gaming experience you can get on a PS5, this is it.

What better reason do they need for that? Companies sell whole new more expensive products with the only difference being that one has more storage space than the other, or one has a few more cores than the other, or a little more RAM than the other, and that is perfectly okay. But when a console does it, it needs some sort of justification.

You know what I find most disturbing about your type of mindset... so you would be okay, getting an OG PS5 at say $400, but willing to pay $500 for it, the same damn thing, if they told you that it has double the storage space and comes in a new color, but if they told you to pay $100 more so all the games you play on it, runs at higher framerates and higher rez.... its a problem????


For now...

But yeah, you're spot on.

Every time I try to explain this I feel like I start going into crazy man mode but what it comes down to is what are we getting for the $600? A slightly higher base resolution before FSR? Who cares? Like, I got a PS4 Pro when it came out, and even on an old 1080p TV, the improvements in IQ were immediately noticeable, right away. It was so much better, because it was running at higher than 1080p and then rendering down. Then when I got a 4K TV and Horizon, it was probably the best looking game I had played to that point. But that was a long time ago, and nowadays rendering at sub-native is extremely common and well a 1080p game today looks much cleaner than a 1080p game then. Compare say Batman Arkham Knight on a PS4 to a PC game running at 1080p native and DLSS just for a very stark difference. So, when I read comments on threads like this saying, oh Spiderman 2 dips below 1080p, is this actually noticeable or are people just going full OCD based on what they read on Digital Foundry? Sure, Sony will sell you a $600 console to temporarily alleviate your OCD for those split-seconds the game dips below native that you don't even notice, but is it actually to the end of a better experience?

I've said it before but it's kind of hilarious that people playing vidya on high end 4090 cards that cost $1600 are totally fine playing with subnative resolution while people playing on $500 consoles are demanding native resolution.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

Every time I try to explain this I feel like I start going into crazy man mode but what it comes down to is what are we getting for the $600? A slightly higher base resolution before FSR? Who cares? Like, I got a PS4 Pro when it came out, and even on an old 1080p TV, the improvements in IQ were immediately noticeable, right away. It was so much better, because it was running at higher than 1080p and then rendering down. Then when I got a 4K TV and Horizon, it was probably the best looking game I had played to that point. But that was a long time ago, and nowadays rendering at sub-native is extremely common and well a 1080p game today looks much cleaner than a 1080p game then. Compare say Batman Arkham Knight on a PS4 to a PC game running at 1080p native and DLSS just for a very stark difference. So, when I read comments on threads like this saying, oh Spiderman 2 dips below 1080p, is this actually noticeable or are people just going full OCD based on what they read on Digital Foundry? Sure, Sony will sell you a $600 console to temporarily alleviate your OCD for those split-seconds the game dips below native that you don't even notice, but is it actually to the end of a better experience?

I've said it before but it's kind of hilarious that people playing vidya on high end 4090 cards that cost $1600 are totally fine playing with subnative resolution while people playing on $500 consoles are demanding native resolution.

I want the Pro right now for one game, Hell Let Loose as it really starts to chug on the PS5 and it needs the extra horsepower

And no I want play it on PC because with how slow progression is I am not starting over

 

[ShakenG]

I want the Pro right now for one game, Hell Let Loose as it really starts to chug on the PS5 and it needs the extra horsepower

And no I want play it on PC because with how slow progression is I am not starting over

I want it primarily for GT7, mostly to smooth over any hiccups with wet races and a certain daytona track that needs optimising
I dont have a proper VRR teli and this option is cheaper with more benefits.

I was slow getting the PS4 Pro, getting this day1.

 

[Pagusas]

Ill glady buy it if its the best way to play FF7 Rebirth.

 

[SegaSnatcher]

In that case it's likely GPU limited when there are a lot of alphas and such. But there are always drops like this in all games including on PC. Those are rare occurences here and taken care by the DRS.

Well a PS5 Pro will ensure we don't see that level of drop on Spider-Man 2.

 

[Buggy Loop]

>RedGamingTech
Traaaash. Has he leaked anything that wasn't leaked by someone else before or could be easily deduced with simple logic?

I was about to comment this

Redgamingtech is a joke

Don't fall for it folks. The guy has a worst track record than Moore's law is dead and that is saying something.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Been thinking about getting rid of the PSVR2 lately after getting the Quest 3 for VR.
Might just go ahead and trade in both PS5 and PSVR2 and skip Spiderman 2 till the Pro comes out.

 

[SegaSnatcher]

Every time I try to explain this I feel like I start going into crazy man mode but what it comes down to is what are we getting for the $600? A slightly higher base resolution before FSR? Who cares? Like, I got a PS4 Pro when it came out, and even on an old 1080p TV, the improvements in IQ were immediately noticeable, right away. It was so much better, because it was running at higher than 1080p and then rendering down. Then when I got a 4K TV and Horizon, it was probably the best looking game I had played to that point. But that was a long time ago, and nowadays rendering at sub-native is extremely common and well a 1080p game today looks much cleaner than a 1080p game then. Compare say Batman Arkham Knight on a PS4 to a PC game running at 1080p native and DLSS just for a very stark difference. So, when I read comments on threads like this saying, oh Spiderman 2 dips below 1080p, is this actually noticeable or are people just going full OCD based on what they read on Digital Foundry? Sure, Sony will sell you a $600 console to temporarily alleviate your OCD for those split-seconds the game dips below native that you don't even notice, but is it actually to the end of a better experience?

I've said it before but it's kind of hilarious that people playing vidya on high end 4090 cards that cost $1600 are totally fine playing with subnative resolution while people playing on $500 consoles are demanding native resolution.

It's simple, you are getting a system that will smooth over FPS or Resolution dips and take those unlocked frame rates to a higher default. It will give you the best experience to play 1st party Sony titles for the price. You'd have to pay way more for a comprable experience on PC. Imagine playing Spider-Man 2 quality 40fps unlocked mode and that swings between 40 - 60fps maintaing a base of 60fps and higher.

 

[SimTourist]

It's gonna a big and hot boy. If you though the base PS5 was large then prepare for shock.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

The slimmer model released around the same time.

Yes, you're right. I stand corrected. Must've misremembered.

 

[Rykan]

Most people don’t need the message because they’re smart enough to recognize that without being told. The average person realizes that the existence of a 2024 Mercedes doesn’t render the 2023 a piece of garbage.

The PlayStation 4 Pro only made up a small portion of all PlayStation 4 sales. Official numbers suggest it might have been as low as 20% of total PS4 sales. This data covers sales after the PS4 Pro was released, not the entire PS4 sales figure.

This happened when 4K TVs were becoming popular and the marketing message was basically: 'Here's a 4K-capable PlayStation 4 for your new 4k TV.'

However, the upcoming PS5 Pro won't have the same luxury as the PS5 already has 4k support. The message of 'It's the same system, just a bit more powerful' hasn't been very convincing to a lot of consumers. Also, 'Pro' versions of consoles typically don't sell well, and the profit margins on hardware are pretty slim, so it's a fair question to ask, 'Why?'"

 

[Sleepwalker]

Ill glady buy it if its the best way to play FF7 Rebirth.

I would too but no way im making it until the end of the year without playing rebirth lol.

 

[diffusionx]

It's simple, you are getting a system that will smooth over FPS or Resolution dips and take those unlocked frame rates to a higher default. It will give you the best experience to play 1st party Sony titles for the price. You'd have to pay way more for a comprable experience on PC. Imagine playing Spider-Man 2 quality 40fps unlocked mode and that swings between 40 - 60fps maintaing a base of 60fps and higher.

Like I said, are these "resolution dips" even material, or just people being upset at what they read on Digital Foundry?

"resolution dips" are not what they were on 360 or even early PS4. People with $1600 GPUs are essentially playing games with a permanent resolution dip.

 

[Skifi28]

The PlayStation 4 Pro only made up a small portion of all PlayStation 4 sales. Official numbers suggest it might have been as low as 20% of total PS4 sales. This data covers sales after the PS4 Pro was released, not the entire PS4 sales figure.

This happened when 4K TVs were becoming popular and the marketing message was basically: 'Here's a 4K-capable PlayStation 4 for your new 4k TV.'

However, the upcoming PS5 Pro won't have the same luxury as the PS5 already has 4k support. The message of 'It's the same system, just a bit more powerful' hasn't been very convincing to a lot of consumers. Also, 'Pro' versions of consoles typically don't sell well, and the profit margins on hardware are pretty slim, so it's a fair question to ask, 'Why?'"

To retain the userbase that would have moved over to PC for more performance. They won't be making any money on the hardware, but that 20% are users they could have lost from their platform. And these are the" hardcore" user that buy the most games instead of just fifa and cod. It's that 30% PSN tax that they're after really.

 

[Sethbacca]

The PlayStation 4 Pro only made up a small portion of all PlayStation 4 sales. Official numbers suggest it might have been as low as 20% of total PS4 sales. This data covers sales after the PS4 Pro was released, not the entire PS4 sales figure.

This happened when 4K TVs were becoming popular and the marketing message was basically: 'Here's a 4K-capable PlayStation 4 for your new 4k TV.'

However, the upcoming PS5 Pro won't have the same luxury as the PS5 already has 4k support. The message of 'It's the same system, just a bit more powerful' hasn't been very convincing to a lot of consumers. Also, 'Pro' versions of consoles typically don't sell well, and the profit margins on hardware are pretty slim, so it's a fair question to ask, 'Why?'"

Yeah, you're kind of operating under the assumption that people that will be interested in buying these are too stupid to understand why they're doing so. Hardware is hitting the wall of diminishing returns, and realistically gaming going forward is incremental upgrades while trying to solve the problem of lighting and raytracing without brute force. Those of us interested in the Pro know that we want native 4k (or as close to it as we can get) and 60fps across the board with better lighting and raytracing capabilities.

What you're saying now will equally apply to the the next PS and Xbox hardware. Evolutionary upgrades rather than evolutionary upgrades are basically status quo going forward. At this point it makes more sense (at least in my mind) to be on 4 year cycles rather than 8-10 year cycles.

 

[StereoVsn]

CPU still being Zen 2 is disappointing as we are already seeing issues with Zen 2 performance.

Oh well, guess time will tell.