PS4 Pro Official Specifications (Codename NEO)

[Clukos]

So what is it about the XO that would cause the Scorpio to be unbalanced if you had to support it?
If your saying that you wouldn't be able to make say a hugely expansive open world game that you may have been if you only supported the scorpio, that that's fair enough, but that doesn't make the machine unbalanced.

Edit - Sorry this probably will derail thread. I don't think you can say because PS4P made certain decisions that MS's machine will be doomed architecturaly also?

If they want the Scorpio to be fully compatible with existing X1 games without emulation they'll have to use similar hardware. If they don't want to alienate the current user base some rules must be kept, such as same framerate in multiplayer games between XB1 and Scorpio. We know the Scorpio will have VR exclusive games (all of them) so there's that. We also know that Microsoft are trying to unify the platforms (or at least make the differentiation less transparent) through UWP but we haven't really seen that work yet.

In short, any console "refresh" is limited by the previous hardware because it has to support it natively. Sony went the route of Ps4+ with some clever tricks (that we'll have to evaluate at launch) to achieve 4k, but at the same time kept the gameplay experience between the two systems largely the same. It is yet unclear what Microsoft are trying to do and we'll probably learn more at E3 next year.

 

[AlNom]

What the fuck happened to this thread.

This is a Pro thread.

 

[3dilettante]

Oh, and "Mem Bandwidth: Must be bumped due to the increase in resolution, memory compression also another way of solving the issue" - we've learnt PS4 has this.
https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1943430/
Because PS4 was a carefully designed, balanced system pushing tech.

For whatever reason, slides about optimizing for GCN that included the PS4 at the time left the bandwidth limits as if they were the same. There could be many explanations for this, such as just going by the raw counts but it would be nice if a more clear description of what the features were in Orbis and how they changed for Neo showed up.

 

[Globalisateur]

The goal of the Ps4 Pro is very clear, it is offering an improved experience at 4k. Not altered, improved. Meaning that 30 fps games which fail to hit the target often should be able to do so on the Pro. At that price point there's not much they could've done imo. And improving the GPU significantly over the CPU or the mem b/w is not only easier for Sony but also developers/publishers that have invested resources/time on the current Ps4 (the systems strongest point being the GPU, like the Pro). And the biggest factor in increasing native resolution is the GPU, if PC gaming is anything to go by. I think the pro is balanced to offer a similar experience to Ps4 but with an increased native resolution. It is not balanced for 1080p output, although there are ways to use the extra GPU power at 1080p, supersampling being the easy route.

tl;dr The Pro is a Ps4 running games at 4k with more stable framerate and it is balanced around that

That was very clear once we got the leaked specs (with only 30% more CPU than OG PS4). Never had a doubt it would be different that this. Except it would be more accurate to change 'games at 4K' with:
'reconstructed 4K' or 'higher res' or '1440p instead of 1080p' or 'patented compressed pixels'.

 

[one]

Back OT, the Pro is apparently using the Tiger (not Jaguar) CPU - is this a missinformation on the webs? If not does anyone know if that will mean much (ie anything over a standard overclock - maybe cooler running?)

It's in another 4gamer article by Zenji Nishikawa
https://forum.beyond3d.com/posts/1942453/

4gamer reported the APU of PS4 Pro is fabricated in TSMC 16nm. As for the CPU side, an insider said "The basic architecture isn't different." "The composition of transistors is FinFET based, and the physical design is refined. Therefore you may not be able to declare strictly a Jaguar core and identical architecture."

Now the goal of PS4 Pro is I think just to make the PS4 userbase as broad as possible, not bringing a breakthrough that is kept for PS5.
The same 8GB RAM size ensures better compatibility between PS4 and PS4 Pro and less game development cost.
4K support is discussed a lot but I think VR is more important to Sony, after all all PSVR are sold by Sony but 4K TVs are not, VR is a new medium and HMD is the new TV.
2x GPU performance is a good fit for VR, also there should be a reason Geforce GTX 970-level GPU is the minimum recommended spec of Oculus Rift for a while.

 

[Nesh]

What's the point of 4Pro? To make Sony money. If it enables them to make more money this gen than without 4Pro, selling to a subset of their audience and increasing market penetration through hand-me-downs and trade-ins (and cheaper 2nd consoles), it'll have served its point nicely.

It is self evident that companies sell products to make money and to increase market share. But this doesnt explain much when it was a reaction to the PC market penetrating into their market share. The console itself doesnt provide a strong case as a PS4 upgrade or substitute for a more powerful PC.

 

[Jay]

If they want the Scorpio to be fully compatible with existing X1 games without emulation they'll have to use similar hardware. If they don't want to alienate the current user base some rules must be kept, such as same framerate in multiplayer games between XB1 and Scorpio. We know the Scorpio will have VR exclusive games (all of them) so there's that. We also know that Microsoft are trying to unify the platforms (or at least make the differentiation less transparent) through UWP but we haven't really seen that work yet.

In short, any console "refresh" is limited by the previous hardware because it has to support it natively. Sony went the route of Ps4+ with some clever tricks (that we'll have to evaluate at launch) to achieve 4k, but at the same time kept the gameplay experience between the two systems largely the same. It is yet unclear what Microsoft are trying to do and we'll probably learn more at E3 next year.

Code is running via a hypervisor, not written to the metal to a totally different architecture.
The main difference will be how the esram is handled.
It's about the newer console being balanced and still being able to run the same code, very far from an impossible task.

The only reason people think that the ps4p may be a bit unbalanced is due to the huge gpu upgrade compared relatively to the rest of the system, not because it had to support the ps4.

 

[iroboto]

As much as this table is informative, there are many areas of both designs XBO and scorpio that make this flops comparison incomplete.

Is the small ESRAM and the low main bandwith a bottleneck to reach better res??
Are 16 rops enough?

I mean, many unknowns at this point

we're just looking at available operations per pixel. It's going to be less than the amounts listed unless you are perfectly optimized, it's rare that a program will hit everything without missing a beat.

That being said we just want to look at the numbers per pixel. And that number would ultimately determine how complex/quality of that pixel could be. At 1080p or less, we are quite high in terms of operations that can be performed on a single pixel.

Honestly if he is the lead graphics programmer from ID, than, he's probably using a table like this to ball park how much they can achieve with their engine and what can be achieved.

I would definitely use this is a strong gauging stick on quality/resolution/performance if this is something released by a lead programmer.

Yup, I wouldn't question it much unless you needed to get into the nitty gritty, which is situational for each game.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Shifty Geezer]

And unless Microsoft decide to completely abandon the X1 userbase (which is possible but not probable) Scorpio is also "doomed" to be imbalanced...

Why the word 'doomed'? And what has Scorpio being 'unbalanced' got to do with Pro being unbalanced? MS's machine is another discussion. And PS4 PRo isn't 'doomed' in any way. It's just a different engineering problem to creating a new console, addressed in a different way with different priorities. IMO, which is all I'm expressing, the chief priority wasn't a certain res or quality but "what can we get with minimal effort/interference with PS4?" The final outcome fits that perfectly AFAICS. As such, there's no point trying to interpret the CPU or RAM amount or BW as 'why this choice to solve what problem' as I.S.T. was trying and how we normally pick apart a system's specs.

 

[iroboto]

RAW DATA
========

Using "Google Supplied" numbers for Tflops,

360 -> .24 Tflops [Xbox 360    ]
XB1 -> 1.2 Tflops [Xbox One    ]
PS4 -> 1.8 Tflops [PS4         ]
PRO -> 4.2 Tflops [PS4 Pro     ]
SCO -> 6.0 Tflops [Xbox Scorpio]

And looking at flop/pix in units of 1000,

                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
960 x  540 @  30 Hz =  16 Mpix/s   15    77   116   270   386
1280 x  720 @  30 Hz =  28 Mpix/s    9    43    65   152   217
960 x  540 @  60 Hz =  31 Mpix/s    8  __39_   58   135   193
1600 x 900 @ 30 Hz = 42 Mpix/s    8  *29.0*    *43.0*  100   142
1280 x  720 @  60 Hz =  55 Mpix/s    4    22    33    76   109
960 x  540 @ 120 Hz =  62 Mpix/s    4    19    29    68    96
1920 x 1080 @  30 Hz =  62 Mpix/s    4    19  __29_   68    96
1600 x 900 @ 60 Hz = 84 Mpix/s       2.8   14.2   21.4   50   71
1280 x  720 @ 120 Hz = 111 Mpix/s    2    11    16    38    54
1920 x 1080 @  60 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_
1920 x 1080 @ 120 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
3840 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
3840 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 498 Mpix/s    0     2     4     8    12
3840 x 2160 @ 120 Hz = 995 Mpix/s    0     1     2     4     6

Added 1600 * 900 as a resolution to this chart.

So here's what I'm thinking. For any given game where you may think ESRAM may have been a culprit in achieving resolution, lets first make sure that these numbers line up.

You can see clearly that 720@60 for XBO ~ 900@60 for PS4 in terms of quality per pixel. That's pretty accurate for a lot of titles that we've seen.

Once again, this lines up perfectly for 900@60 for XBO and 1080@60 for PS4, again we've seen this happen quite a bit.

As soon as XBO dips well below equivalent numbers, then ESRAM is likely a culprit. If we look at the Witness that was just released, 1080@30 for XBO; 900@60 for PS4. It's still quite similar and there is some available flops for additional processing on PS4s side. If you're ESRAM is perfect, you're likely to hit close to this. If not, yea you're going to have a harder time making PS4 and XBO feature set equal.

I think this is a pretty great chart to go by. I'll look at performance this way from now on. It gives you a strong idea of what features and what resolution and framerate you can get away with.

                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
1920 x 1080 @  60 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_
1920 x 1080 @ 120 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
3840 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
3840 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 498 Mpix/s    0     2     4     8    12

These numbers here should be very interesting to anyone looking to skip mid-generation and looking to buy a new video card. Effectively 1080p@120 vs 4K @ 30. That's the trade off. Or get ultra quality at 60fps.

 

[function]

And unless Microsoft decide to completely abandon the X1 userbase (which is possible but not probable) Scorpio is also "doomed" to be imbalanced because it has to take into account the X1 architecture and support it fully. That's the thing with mid-gen refresh consoles, they are mostly luxury items, not supposed to stand on their own. That doesn't mean they can't be great value on their own though.

Scorpio isn't a mid generation refresh, unlike PS4P. Sony can push for only one thing because it's a mid gen luxury bump.

MS want to take advantage of the PC in the years following 2017, so they need more memory as well as faster GPU ... and they could damn well do with a faster CPU too. Sony are taking advantage of the PS4, so their baseline for memory and CPU stays very close to where it already was.

 

[Scott_Arm]

From Timothy Lottes, and expanded on this forum
http://timothylottes.blogspot.com/2016/09/thinking-clearly-about-4k.html

And looking at flop/pix in units of 1000,

                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
**removed most sub 1080p resolutions for clarity**
1440 x 900   @  30 Hz =  39 Mpix/s    x     x    46    108   154  *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @  30 Hz =  62 Mpix/s    4    19  __29_   68    96
1440 x 900   @  60 Hz =  78 Mpix/s    x    x    23    54     77  *** Added ***
1600 x 1800 @  30 Hz =  86 Mpix/s    x     x     21  __49_    70  *** Added ***
2560 x 1440 @  30 Hz = 111 Mpix/s    x     x    16   __38_   54  *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @  60 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_
1920 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_  *** Added ***
1600 x 1800 @  60 Hz = 173 Mpix/s    x     x    10    24  __35_ *** Added ***
2560 x 1440 @  60 Hz = 221 Mpix/s    x     x     8    19    27   *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @ 120 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
1920 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24   *** Added ***
3840 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
3840 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 498 Mpix/s    0     2     4     8    12
3840 x 2160 @ 120 Hz = 995 Mpix/s    0     1     2     4     6

30Hz only
                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
**removed most sub 1080p resolutions for clarity**
1440 x 900   @  30 Hz =  39 Mpix/s    x     x    46    108   154  *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @  30 Hz =  62 Mpix/s    4    19  __29_   68    96
1600 x 1800 @  30 Hz =  86 Mpix/s    x     x     21  __49_    70  *** Added ***
2560 x 1440 @  30 Hz = 111 Mpix/s    x     x    16   __38_   54  *** Added ***
1920 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_  *** Added ***
3840 x 2160 @  30 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24


60Hz only
                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
**removed most sub 1080p resolutions for clarity**
1440 x 900   @  60 Hz =  78 Mpix/s    x    x    23    54     77  *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @  60 Hz = 124 Mpix/s    2    10    14  __34_ __48_
1600 x 1800 @  60 Hz = 173 Mpix/s    x     x    10    24  __35_ *** Added ***
2560 x 1440 @  60 Hz = 221 Mpix/s    x     x     8    19    27   *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @ 120 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24
1920 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 249 Mpix/s    1     5     7    17    24   *** Added ***
3840 x 2160 @  60 Hz = 498 Mpix/s    0     2     4     8    12
3840 x 2160 @ 120 Hz = 995 Mpix/s    0     1     2     4     6

I added several rows to Timothy Lottes table that also demonstrate why something like 1920x2160 with reconstruction could be a decent target. Whether you're @ 30Hz or 60Hz, it's slightly more flops per pixel on PS4 Pro than PS4 is at the equivalent framerate at 1080p. Basically pixel quality on PS4 Pro will not suffer (generally) relative to the native 1080p mode on PS4.

 

[Clukos]

You should also add 1600x1800 since it'll probably be the new "900p" for the PS4Pro.

 

[Scott_Arm]

You should also add 1600x1800 since it'll probably be the new "900p" for the PS4Pro.

Why 1600x1800?

1440p would be 111 Mpix/s @ 30Hz and 221 Mpix/s @ 60Hz.

2688 x 1512 would be 122 Mpix/s @ 30Hz and 244 Mpix/s @ 60Hz (very close to 1920x2160)

 

[Clukos]

Why 1600x1800?

1440p would be 111 Mpix/s @ 30Hz and 221 Mpix/s @ 60Hz.

2688 x 1512 would be 122 Mpix/s @ 30Hz and 244 Mpix/s @ 60Hz (very close to 1920x2160)

Because Sony explicitly said in their documents that if you are not able to hit at least 1800p with the Pro version you should contact them iirc. I'm assuming this is a 3200x1800 with checkerboard as the lowest resolution the Ps4 pro will run on a 4k TV on a Pro enabled game. Which should be reconstructed from a native res of 2x900p or 1600x1800 or whatever you want to call it.

 

[Arwin]

Sony targetted the best they could do with a 399 upper limit, easy PS4 compatibility and an aggressive release data. I think they probably did pretty well even if they had to compromise (no UHD, no additional memory) and took a comprehensive software plus hardware view.

Depending on how easy it turns out to be for them to support PS4, PS4 PRO and all combinations with VR and 1080p/4K display modes, they can then release new models every two years or so.

Right now the most impressive about the PS4 may well be hitting that 399 price point (33% over the org PS4), hitting it this year, and still giving a serious performance boost.

 

[MrFox]

Scorpio isn't a mid generation refresh, unlike PS4P. Sony can push for only one thing because it's a mid gen luxury bump.

MS want to take advantage of the PC in the years following 2017, so they need more memory as well as faster GPU ... and they could damn well do with a faster CPU too. Sony are taking advantage of the PS4, so their baseline for memory and CPU stays very close to where it already was.

Yes, it's a mid-gen refresh, unless you want to use some marketing tainted semantics. 1.5x the memory is dictated by the bus width, which is dictated by the 6TF, which is affecting launch date and price. (well, this is speculation, maybe it's 10TF and 24GB, and the size of an AppleTV)

I don't think there's any way to make something significantly better in a 399 console in 2016. Ditto for whatever MS end up with in 2017 for whatever price they chose. And I expect the same for the PS5 in 2019.

 

[Scott_Arm]

@Clukos Well, 1600 x 1800 @ 30 Hz = 86 Mpix/s and 1600 x 1800 @ 60 Hz = 173 Mpix/s. Added it to my table. Should cover more than enough now.

 

[Scott_Arm]

Native 1440p looks like a pretty good option on PS4 Pro if a regular upscale to 4k is acceptable. If you compare just 60Hz performance to 1080p @ 60Hz on PS4, the PS4 Pro will actually have a few viable options. I'm thinking of sports titles, cod, Battlefield and other games that already target 60Hz as a baseline. Added that table to my previous post. Then I split off a 30Hz table, just because.

 

[Scott_Arm]

brain went weird.