PS4 Pro Speculation (PS4K NEO Kaio-Ken-Kutaragi-Kaz Neo-san)

[Shortbread]

I'm hoping that Sony/MS will release a premium system, while offering a more slim down and cooler running version of their current platform. I'm truly a diehard gamer who would spend $700 (or more) if the technology and games are worth it. I really hope Sony/MS will aim at the top-end of the spectrum (while keeping foward/backwards compatibility), rather than playing it safe.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'm not going to pay the stupid paywall for WSJ click bait. Is there a transcript anywhere which shows exactly what their source confirmed, and what is their speculation?

Here is the Eurogamer report on the WSJ report on other random reports. We've have achieved full circle jerk!

Allegedly:

• "ultra-high definition resolution graphics" and is looking "to capture gamers willing to pay for a richer gaming environment, including a high-end virtual-reality experience."
  
• will be revealed before October.

 

[Grall]

Allegedly:

I'll believe it when I see it... "Ultra-high definition" graphics would need a dGPU pretty much, wouldn't it. 4k has ~3x the pixels of 1080P IIRC, so ~5.5TF shading and 300% rasterization resources would need a ridiculous APU, especially where memory is concerned.

A split system where iGPU and dGPU shares burden (with iGPU running compute tasks for latency reasons) would be more realistically capable of handling 4k at gaming-friendly framerates. Not that I'm convinced any "PS4k" would necessarily run at 4k... Maybe it'd settle for say, 1440P, and then upscale to 4k. Then you could probably manage with just a single chip APU. Hook some 7GHz GDDR up to it, add a proportional amount of shader arrays and ROPs... Maybe some increased internal efficiency as well from latest-generation GCN tech.

Yeah, let's dream on, shall we!

 

[MrFox]

If this is true, I'm preordering it.

I'm also strongly against it's existence.

I'm confused, somebody help me.

 

[London Geezer]

Day 1 if we get, say, full Until Dawn visuals on PSVR.

But it's not right. I will feel bad for girls with an old ps4.

J/k

 

[Deleted member 86764]

If a PS4k is released and it has works better with the PSVR, then I would imagine it's more likely to run the same games/settings at a native 120hz.

 

[ZeroEx]

With all this news of a new PS4, I guess I should hold off on buying one in the near future?

 

[DieH@rd]

I wonder if the games will get automatic "framerate smoothing" when played on PS4K. I mean, without devs adjusting anything, just with the game taking advantage from faster hardware [like on PC]. That would fix low framerate in Until Dawn and fix stuttering in Bloodborne. I would prefer that over having each dev tweaking each game manually.

If a PS4k is released and it has works better with the PSVR, then I would imagine it's more likely to run the same games/settings at a native 120hz.

Yes, I expect all VR games running fine on PS4, but on PS4K most of them will not be limited to 60>120 reprojection.

 

[Globalisateur]

With all this news of a new PS4, I guess I should hold off on buying one in the near future?

It's probably better not to make decisions based on any rumor read on Internet.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

I'll believe it when I see it... "Ultra-high definition" graphics would need a dGPU pretty much, wouldn't it. 4k has ~3x the pixels of 1080P IIRC

'UHD' covers two resolutions: UHD 4K (3840×2160) has 4 times as many pixels as 1080p and there is UHD 8K (7680×4320). Make it rain, Sony!

 

[Michellstar]

I'll believe it when I see it... "Ultra-high definition" graphics would need a dGPU pretty much, wouldn't it. 4k has ~3x the pixels of 1080P IIRC, so ~5.5TF shading and 300% rasterization resources would need a ridiculous APU, especially where memory is concerned.

!

Make it 4.

A ps whatever with ps4 fidelity at 4k res won't be economicaly feassible until a mature hbm 2... And maybe 10nm

 

[Deleted member 11852]

A ps whatever with ps4 fidelity at 4k res won't be economicaly feasible until a mature hbm 2... A maybe 10nm

Let's take the ludicrous rumour at face value:

"to capture gamers willing to pay for a richer gaming environment, including a high-end virtual-reality experience."

Job done.

 

[cheapchips]

I cant remember which podcast it was where they talked about over hearing devs chatting about a 4.5 PlayStation in queue at GDC (the lovely One Life Left I think).

Wonder if Devs will start using future conferences to play rumour bingo.

 

[rabidrabbit]

I don't think it would be wise from Sony to release a more powerful PS4 and PSVR so close to one another if they want to maximise PSVR sales. It just gives a wrong message, that the PS4 really isn't powerful enough for a good VR experience and that you'd really need this new PS4 too. So actually it'll be $899 thank you!
A "slim" PS4K with 4K media support and possibly a build-in PSVR splitter box makes total sense, but a more powerful gaming machine... not much in this economy.
Next year maybe, when PSVR has got more of a foothold. Even if the VR flops, a souped-up PS4 might still sell well.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

A "slim" PS4K with 4K media support and possibly a build-in PSVR splitter box makes total sense, but a more powerful gaming machine... not much in this economy.

Why are VR headsets OK in "this economy" but more powerful consoles are not?

 

[deathindustrial]

4K is so stupid and unnecessary in the consumer realm. I completely do not understand why Sony would risk one of their few profitable businesses just to try to bring back the TV business from the realm of the dead.

MS must be loving this as that is who it will help the most since any hardware refresh allows them back in the game big time (plus this must have perked up the ears of Apple, Google and even Amazon too).

Sony own goal incoming.

 

[London Geezer]

We are all dazed and confused.

 

[MrFox]

4K is so stupid and unnecessary in the consumer realm. I completely do not understand why Sony would risk one of their few profitable businesses just to try to bring back the TV business from the realm of the dead.

MS must be loving this as that is who it will help the most since any hardware refresh allows them back in the game big time (plus this must have perked up the ears of Apple, Google and even Amazon too).

Sony own goal incoming.

I award you no points.

 

[Deleted member 11852]

4K is so stupid and unnecessary in the consumer realm. I completely do not understand why Sony would risk one of their few profitable businesses just to try to bring back the TV business from the realm of the dead.

I don't think this has much to do with selling 4K TVs. Who is to say a PS4K owner would but a Sony TV?

But 4K is an interesting target for a number of reasons. Firstly, for the people who own a 4K (like me) who want to buy one of the three 4K UHD discs (not me), then the console should be able to do that Ditto it should support Netflix 4K for people who don't understand the importance of bitrates in encoding Secondly, for PSVR so you can drive two 1080p supersampled displays at decent quality at 90 or 120Hz. Thirdly, to play 1080p games at higher frame rates or with more going on onscreen

4K TV isn't dead, it's the inevitable future. Just like you couldn't buy 720p HD sets by around 2010, in a few years actual 1080p sets will be in far fewer numbers compared to 4K sets.

 

[DieH@rd]

It just gives a wrong message, that the PS4 really isn't powerful enough for a good VR experience and that you'd really need this new PS4 too.

Except, PS4 is perfectly capable to deliver good VR. PS4K will probably just increase framerate so that highprofile games are not rendered internally at 60fps. That would be a nice boost, but user experience would not be dramatically better. According to everyone who tried it, 60>120 feels great.