PS4 Pro Official Specifications (Codename NEO)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, it's a mid-gen refresh, unless you want to use some marketing tainted semantics.

If MS are honest about wanting to move to a more constantly evolving platform, then no, it's not a mid generation refresh because the traditional generations of the kind Sony are explicit about wishing to stay with don't apply.

They can't look to simply expand X1 in one particular area because Scorpio has to exist beyond the X1, and look to the constantly evolving PC platform. Neo is a parallel branch of the PS4, designed to attract or retain users in the later part of the generation. Again, Sony have been explicit about this. Different goals.

I'm not talking about specs here, I'm talking about the way the platforms move forwards. Sony and MS are not approaching this in the same manner.

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)

There are a number of ways to combine memory and bus width. For example, 10 gHz GDDR5X on a 256-bit bus would give 320 GB/s and allow 8GB, and would likely be cheaper than 12 GB GDDR5 on a 384-bit bus. In that PC space that was Nvidia's preferred option.

MS wanting more memory is an absolute requirement if they want the higher quality assets that that PC games already support, and they've stated categorically that they do want to do this. I don't see increased memory as an accident, just as keeping it the same wasn't an accident for Sony. MS need more memory to achieve their particular 2017 goal, while Sony didn't to achieve their particular 2016 goal.

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.

With Zen not being ready, I'm inclined to agree that Sony couldn't have done significantly better for a 399 console in 2016. By late 2017 I'm hoping that Zen will be the CPU and that production and yield increases will keep the cost of a larger chip down and allow clocks to creep up within the same power envelope.
 
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.
Battflefield 1 at 1800p with checkerboard rendering will surely look great! But I hope they will improve their traditional upscaling hardware for the 1800p -> 2160p last step.

Please no more of that terrible bilinear interpolation upscaling.
 
Battflefield 1 at 1800p with checkerboard rendering will surely look great! But I hope they will improve their traditional upscaling hardware for the 1800p -> 2160p last step.

Please no more of that terrible bilinear interpolation upscaling.

I expanded on the table a bit more:
https://forum.beyond3d.com/threads/...tions-codename-neo.59621/page-11#post-1943667

I think they said on twitter they're doing a custom reconstruction, but they might be able to reconstruct directly to 4k and have roughly the same pixel quality as PS4. Obviously I'm greatly simplifying things to make that statement, but maybe it's possible besides other potential issues like rops, bandwidth, cpu etc.

Code:
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,

...

60Hz only
                                   360   XB1   PS4   PRO   SCO
================================= ===== ===== ===== ===== =====
**removed all sub 1080p resolutions for clarity**
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 seriously doubt we'll see any checkerboard rendering at resolutions other than 4K(pro) and 1080p(ps4). Otherwise you're chaining filters, which is bad.

Sony discourages devs from using 1440p, and recommend using checkerboard IF you can't reach at least 1800p. This seems to imply they consider 4K checkerboard crispness visually equivalent to 1800p. Eurogamer corroborates this with their discussions with devs and hands-on impressions.
 
Last edited:
I updated the table for 900p so you could easily compare a game like Battlefield 1 on PS4 to potential targets on PS4 Pro. Games that are currently 900p60 on PS4 look like they might have tough targets on PS4 Pro. Obviously this is very much an over-simplification, but the 60fps case does look more challenging.

Code:
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**
1600 x 900   @  30 Hz =  43 Mpix/s    x     x    42    98  140  *** Added ***
1920 x 1080 @  30 Hz =  62 Mpix/s    4    19  __29_   68    96
1600 x 900   @  60 Hz =  86 Mpix/s    x     x     21  __49_    70  *** 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**
1600 x 900   @  30 Hz =  43 Mpix/s    x     x    42    98  140  *** 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**
1600 x 900  @  60 Hz =  86 Mpix/s    x     x     21  __49_    70  *** 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
 
Last edited:
I updated the table for 900p so you could easily compare a game like Battlefield 1 on PS4 to potential targets on PS4 Pro. Games that are currently 900p60 on PS4 look like they might have tough targets on PS4 Pro.

Code:
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
It's 1600*900 isn't it ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
So, if I'm reading this right - you're suggesting that BF1 will likely run 900p60 on PS4 and 1080p60 on Pro?

Honestly have no idea. I guess when the games are out and they can be compared we'll be able to see how close this to the real thing. Sounds like Frostbite is going to have a custom reconstruction for 4k, so who knows what it is.
 
https://www.unrealengine.com/blog/leveraging-playstation-4-pro-for-your-ps4-game
For Paragon on PS4 Pro, Epic has added dynamic lighting along with enhanced geometry and scene complexity. The game also utilizes new volumetric effects such as light shafts and fog; motion blur; enhanced HLOD (hierarchical level of detail) and increased view distance; screen space reflections; contact shadows; procedural grass; and advanced light bloom.

“From a rendering perspective it lets us more closely realize our vision for the game by reducing the number of compromises we have to make for performance,” he said.

Paragon runs at a rock solid 60fps in full 1080p on PS4 Pro, which includes a faster processor, improved graphics and 4K-streaming capabilities, for starters.
 

Games that are already available for PS4, such as Paragon, which is in Open Beta, can still take advantage of PS4 Pro capabilities thanks to the console’s forward compatibility.

“Supporting PS4 Pro for enhanced 1080 is as easy as enabling the support in the Sony publishing tools,” according to Marcus Wassmer, Epic’s core rendering team lead.

“Unreal Engine 4.13 is already fully capable of taking advantage from that perspective. Doing this will give you an immediate large performance boost on a title running on PS4 Pro. What you choose to do with the extra performance is totally up to you.”

So we at least get a confirmation that porting between PS4 -> Pro is really easy if you want a cheap perf upgrade.
 
Well certainly Unreal Engine has always had options to enable or disable features just in the configuration files, as you can do on PC to tailor for the specs of the hardware. So no real surprises there for games using that engine. Similar features could well be there in other game engines when they are multi-platform, but it may be more work.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Of course he's gonna say its easy. He works with epic, he is promoting their engine's scalability and ease of deployment. It's not so much about the PS4 pro as it is about Unreal engine 4...

Yeah i get PR and marketing their engine and all that but it shouldn't too hard, most devs teams that disclosed their "working on pro patch" dev number is 1 or 2 people. It can't be that hard, like i said previously Sony probably need to make this transition between systems very easy for the majority of developers. One or two "bad" Pro patches and it could be a PR disaster.
 
Yeah i get PR and marketing their engine and all that but it shouldn't too hard, most devs teams that disclosed their "working on pro patch" dev number is 1 or 2 people. It can't be that hard, like i said previously Sony probably need to make this transition between systems very easy for the majority of developers. One or two "bad" Pro patches and it could be a PR disaster.
Also agree, shouldn't be too bad, but integration of checkerboard rendering and HDR would require more effort. Well the checkerboard will obviously be a larger effort I think.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Nice. They said they can't tell the difference at 3 or 4 feet from a 60" TV. Much less noticeable than the difference between 900p and 1080p.

Not surprising, since it appears only during panning, and the motion resolution is horrible in 4K anyway. Resolving the full 4K visually requires the image to be practically still at 30fps. I think that's another reason to use checkerboard instead of dynamic resolution. It should provide a much better image when it counts, and artifacts happen at such a small scale they would be masked by motion blur, since they only appear during significant motion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top