PS5 Pro *spawn

[Shifty Geezer]

Feel this is a fundamental change in how consoles handled QA and certification. Maybe Sony allowed games out without proper testing just to fill the Pro launch roster with more than a handful of titles? Could create lists of lots more titles that offer 'support' even if it's broken support.

Very hard to know who to blame, but by golly I want to blame someone!

 

[snc]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1858610797871513693

 

[Gamer09]

you'll create a specific narrative about the new hardware

There is no specific narrative going on. When you accuse users of creating a specific narrative then you should back that up. The PS5 Pro is a nice upgrade, however we shouldn't forget it's price tag and 700 dollars, or 800 to a 1000 euro's is alot of money for the actual upgrade we get. It's a fact that digital foundry, or atleast the two mentioned reviewers have been praising it highly. At the moment the uplift in graphics and features doesn't really represent a 700, or 800 dollars or more 'tag.

The 4 Pro offered a 225% uplift in GPU power, a larger CPU clock increase from 1.6ghz to above 2.1ghz. It launched three years after the base console and included a disc-drive. While also offerering upscaling technology which at the time was good, good enough to go from 1080p all the way to 4k. All for 399 dollars.

Ray tracing atleast as it is in the PS5 Pro isn't that impactful, and PSSR, which is in it's infancy, does come at a cost eating away from the 45% gpu uplift the Pro got. HZ's TAA solution isn't that much worse, heck it's probably doing a better job.

There is no narrative, there is no Xbox to speak about in the mid-gen and Nintendo doesn't care about this 'enthusiast' market. The Pro is a nice uplift and worth it to those who care about it as much as those from the DF team.

 

[Globalisateur]

There is no specific narrative going on. When you accuse users of creating a specific narrative then you should back that up. The PS5 Pro is a nice upgrade, however we shouldn't forget it's price tag and 700 dollars, or 800 to a 1000 euro's is alot of money for the actual upgrade we get. It's a fact that digital foundry, or atleast the two mentioned reviewers have been praising it highly. At the moment the uplift in graphics and features doesn't really represent a 700, or 800 dollars or more 'tag.

The 4 Pro offered a 225% uplift in GPU power, a larger CPU clock increase from 1.6ghz to above 2.1ghz. It launched three years after the base console and included a disc-drive. While also offerering upscaling technology which at the time was good, good enough to go from 1080p all the way to 4k. All for 399 dollars.

Ray tracing atleast as it is in the PS5 Pro isn't that impactful, and PSSR, which is in it's infancy, does come at a cost eating away from the 45% gpu uplift the Pro got. HZ's TAA solution isn't that much worse, heck it's probably doing a better job.

There is no narrative, there is no Xbox to speak about in the mid-gen and Nintendo doesn't care about this 'enthusiast' market. The Pro is a nice uplift and worth it to those who care about it as much as those from the DF team.

GPU boost was the biggest hoax of the century, and that was 128% more Tflops BTW, don't twist the maths here. On PS4 Pro without boost modes games were having a paltry 7% to 30% better performance depending of the bottleneck to be compared vs 7% to 40% better perf and 70% better resolution on PS5 Pro and without patches. Most games had about zero improvements on PS4 Pro because of the 30fps cap and lack of DRS anyways. For instance Bloodborne on PS4 Pro? barely any improvements to be compared with Elden Ring noticeable improvements on PS5 Pro (up to 40% higher fps in graphics mode and much higher resolution in performance mode).

In patched games difference can be bigger on PS5 Pro thanks to PSSR. Basically 100% better performance. Some have better IQ and more RT (and it's just the start).

People are complaining about 45% more rendering with 62% more TFLOPS on PS5 Pro? That's actually pretty efficient! On PS4 Pro, with 128% more compute most games only had 77% better resolution with patches, from 1080p to 1440p. And do not forget the terrible ports like RDR2 on PS4 Pro where the base PS4 actually had sharper IQ for some than on PS4 Pro.

Games that had the biggest improvements on PS4 Pro were the CPU limited games that had an uncapped framerate. But those were quite rare like GoW at 1080p and maybe MHW.

 

[Boss]

There is no specific narrative going on. When you accuse users of creating a specific narrative then you should back that up. The PS5 Pro is a nice upgrade, however we shouldn't forget it's price tag and 700 dollars, or 800 to a 1000 euro's is alot of money for the actual upgrade we get. It's a fact that digital foundry, or atleast the two mentioned reviewers have been praising it highly. At the moment the uplift in graphics and features doesn't really represent a 700, or 800 dollars or more 'tag.

I don't know what world you live in but $700 is not a lot of money at all especially in the electronics sector. Covid inflation + AI inflation + slowing down of Moore's law means the price is logical and expected. They're making a smaller margin on this than any of the big electronic producers like Apple, Nvidia, etc. That I'm sure of.

The 4 Pro offered a 225% uplift in GPU power, a larger CPU clock increase from 1.6ghz to above 2.1ghz. It launched three years after the base console and included a disc-drive. While also offerering upscaling technology which at the time was good, good enough to go from 1080p all the way to 4k. All for 399 dollars.

You mean the PS4 Pro that took us from 1080p on the ps4 to 1440p-1600p? So it's not a real 225% uplift. We had to wait for the XB1X to give us true 4k. One must also consider the state of AMD in 2016. Zen 1 wasn't even out yet and AMD was in a much worse financial condition that they are today. Their margins were slim and that meant you could get a way better deal.

Ray tracing atleast as it is in the PS5 Pro isn't that impactful, and PSSR, which is in it's infancy, does come at a cost eating away from the 45% gpu uplift the Pro got. HZ's TAA solution isn't that much worse, heck it's probably doing a better job.

Ray tracing in general is not impactful barring a handful of games and I'd argue that ray tracing benefits developers more than it benefits the end user. The only reason this ray tracing push is occurring is due to the increase in man hours and cost when developing games nowadays. While the desired fidelity has increased, a strong argument could be made that this spike in dev time is caused by lack of developer restraint. A game with baked GI, good SSR, accurate cube maps and good shadow maps is sufficient for the average user. The issue is that these things don't grow linearly as the scope of the game increases. As a result developers are making bigger games for an audience who didn't ask for them and an audience who barely finishes the games. All while doing this, they're driving the cost of hardware up in the name of RT to speed up development times. The annoying part is they hoard the savings to themselves and don't pass it onto customers.