Anyways, we do have a dedicated Switch 2 speculation thread: https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/switch-2-speculation.61414/
Current Generation Hardware Speculation with a Technical Spin [post GDC 2020] [XBSX, PS5]
- Thread starter Proelite
- Start date
- Status
DavidGraham
Veteran
More “concerns” about next-gen games running at 30fps: its an aesthetic choice to be “filmic”, like pixel art, but also constrained by what TVs people have. A popular line of cheap TVs can only do 4:2:0 HDR @ 4K 60hz. If a game pushes HDR, 4:2:2 @ 4K 30hz helps more people see it
@DavidGraham Shitty. Makes sense, but shitty.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
Output mode isn't defined in-game. It's defined in the console options.
Yah, but he's saying game companies will likely target 4k30 HDR because they know a lot of people have TVs that can't support 4k60 HDR. Whatever the console output mode is won't matter if the games are being designed around 4k30 HDR.
Yes wonder the same.
Why not?
Even if it can, I think the point is devs won't target it because you're essentially not giving those users the optimal experience for their display.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
Surely there are more 4k60 TVs than 4k30HDR TVs?
I don't know. It's what that Matt Hargett guy is suggesting, and he worked in the console industry on Playstation.
D
Deleted member 11852
Guest
This seems really surprising, I always had the impression that HDR was really quite niche but reflecting on it, I have no idea why I thought that.
It could be limitation on hdmi input not being able to take in the 4k60 hdr signal on cheaper/older tv's.
Its not about if a tv is 4k30 hdr or 4k60 hdr.
The tv will be 4k60 hdr, but its about what it can support compared to 4k30. 4:2:2 compared to 4:2:0.
He's saying that 4:2:2 looks a lot better and and most popular 4k tv's only support that at 4k30 not 60.
So better of going for the 30 option which will look better on a wider range of displays.
Why push for 60 if it's going to look worse for majority of people?
Now, I'm not saying I agree as there's other benefits to 60fps but the case he gives is reasonable, and I'm sure it's the sort of things that teams will be discussing and taking into account.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
I think I should have explained this better.
What Matt Hargett is claiming is that there are many 4K HDR TVs that only support YCbCr 4:2:0 color format due to their HDMI 2.0 bandwidth limitations and not many that support YCbCr 4:2:2, let alone full RGB 4:4:4 (for HDMI 2.0b TVs this isn't a problem).
My older Hisense TV had this very problem, for example.
The problem with the color format carrying less information is that it theoretically shows colors that are less punchy with less contrast. So if the developers want to make sure that their games have great contrast and they worked a lot on e.g. tone mapping, they should push for the highest bandwidth-per-pixel color format on the TV. And if the HDMI bandwidth isn't enough for 4K60 4:4:4, then it's definitely enough for 4K30 4:4:4. So far this makes sense.
My problem with Matt Hargett's logic is two-fold:
1 - AFAIK color format on consoles isn't defined by each game. It's defined in the console's system settings. The console does a handshake with the TV to see how high the color format can be at the TV's maximum resolution and 60Hz, plus whether or not it supports HDR. The console then always sends a signal at those settings, even if the game is only rendering at 480p. My PS4 Pro is always sending a HDR signal to my TV, whether or not it's running a game that has HDR.
Matt is assuming each game will be able to do a handshake with the TV and redefine the color format on the fly. I don't know if that's possible nor if that's even a good idea.
2 - TVs that only support 4K60 at YCbCr 4:2:0 usually don't have panels that gain much from higher color formats, so there's little reason to force 4K30 YCbCr 4:2:2 or even RGB 4:4:4.
D
Deleted member 7537
Guest
It looks like it's going to be very close to the OG PS3. So in the big side.
Using the D pad and sticks as a reference, I get 360mm tall by 87mm at the thickest side.
It looks like it's going to be very close to the OG PS3. So in the big side.
I measured my OG ps3 at 326 x 99mm.
Some takes on trying to size scale the console hardware:
Larger Picture: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaREHicXYAAT62M?format=jpg&name=large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaRUxAwXYAAcaKc?format=jpg&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaRUxAwXkAYybsm?format=jpg&name=medium
Larger Picture: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaREHicXYAAT62M?format=jpg&name=large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaRUxAwXYAAcaKc?format=jpg&name=medium
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EaRUxAwXkAYybsm?format=jpg&name=medium
Series X likely bigger by volume, maybe even a fair bit bigger. Depends how deep that PS5 is, but I'd be very surprised if the xbox is not bigger by a fair amount. Overall I'd say the dimensions of the PS5 are just weird. I'd like to see a PS3 fat comparison. Seems like the biggest console we've ever had in terms of the 2D surface area it would take up on a tv stand, or a shelf. Upright may actually end up being the most popular way to orient it. Overall, I think the size of it doesn't matter much as long as it's relatively quiet. It's just fucking ugly.
XSX: 15.1cm x 15.1cm x 30.1cm = 6860 cm3
PS5: 41.5cm x 10.1cm x Z = ?
If the depth is 15cm or greater, by volume would be larger than XSX. I think it's likely deeper than 15 sort of eyeballing it.
Silent_Buddha
Legend
Do we know that the dimensions of that haven't changed WRT to the DS4 controller? Or do we have specs for the DS5 controller now?
Is it likely that the optical drive slot would be different from other optical drive slots in other consoles?
Just curious.
Regards,
SB
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
