PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)

Considering I just preordered an accessory(PSVR) that costs more than how much I bought my PS4 for and the fact that I don't have a 4K TV and also the fact that I have a pretty beefy PC, I have no interest in this thing.

Despite that, I welcome it only for the fact that it will prolong the life of my PS4.

Now if games go exclusive to it... then we'll have a problem >:(

I'm going to wait for the PS5 to get my 4K fix, but with this move, Sony is making me reconsider getting one until later in its life.
 
Would it make since they would miss holiday 2016 if this new PS4 is using the 14nm node?

I suppose but 14nm chips from AMD are supposed to be hitting this year so it would be possible for it to hit this year even using the 14nm process.

Missing holiday and VR seems a little strange to me, especially if they already have dev kits at developers.
 
Can't say I'm a fan of this. Guess I'll wait for official word from Sony. They're definitely playing a dangerous game by doing this. This generation couldn't be going any better for them and now they want to take this kind of risk.
 
For sure I won't but a PS4k for exclusive games. No way at all.
And if the future games run like shit, I won't buy those either.

SONY is ok with it though I'm sure, or they wouldn't be doing this.
 
Feeling really iffy about the "significant" line. God of War 4 on PS4K looking like a full gen leap above the game on the original PS4 would cause a lot of uproar from original PS4 owners.

A few improvements and more stability is fine, but anticipated games being made for the PS4K and then essentially down ported to PS4? Wasn't expecting that so soon (If true).

Xbox Two or whatever the fuck they call it will be doing the exact same thing. Not understanding the "iffy" feeling about it.
 
Publishers needing to invest even more into optimizing a single SKU to work well on both PS4 and PS4K. Yeah, I'm sure that ends well for everyone. Surely no corners will be cut.
 
I'm a little curious right now if it's even "safe" to buy PS4 games for those that are buying the PS4K. Though, i guess if you're double dipping on the console you'd be okay with double dipping on the games.

I don't think it is a concern as they run fine just now and will be compatible with the new console. No need to double dip.
 
Wow. Watch Microsoft flip the tables by coming out on stage and saying the Xbox One you bought at launch will be the same Xbox One before the next generation. but they supposedly have there own initiative here so who knows how the general public will respond to this. I might be able to get a PS4 and Bloodborne for cheap sooner then I thought.

As I've yet to get a PS4 or Xbox One the news it self is intriguing to me and convinces me to wait for now.
 
Sony to original PS4 owners

giphy.gif
.
 
Would it make since they would miss holiday 2016 if this new PS4 is using the 14nm node?

Hardware is locked in long before production, there's a reason the technology used in ps4 and xboxone isn't cutting edge and was old even for their time.
 
So fucking lame, early adopters get shit on AGAIN

You must be new to this game. That's the definition of an early adopter, so wear it as a badge, or learn a lesson

That said, this isn't an early adopter issue here. This is a paradigm shift in how Sony sees the structure of the market and the importance to support VR. It's a bit weird and different.
 
Well I sure dodged a bullet by not buying a PS4 at launch. Will get the PS4k somewhere down the line I guess, when and if I clear enough of my Steam backlog.

Surprising move by Sony, unprecedented as well. Would really be interested in seeing if the console userbase would adopt this tactic in similar fashion to the smartphone userbase. If they do this would indeed become a trend with yearly iterative hardware.
 
All your posts in this thread call people here insular and reactionary for simply discussing their worries/not going along with PS4K yet your perspective comes from a non-consumer point of view.

Brushing off people who bought a PS4 for the first ~3 years concerns as insular and niche because your curiosity of the "new paradigm for consoles" is ridiculous.

I think I've made two posts, but yes, I did say insular in both because it's been a common theme in what I've read. I'm not telling people to simply accept ps4k as some great thing, what I am saying is that we've already seen market trends accept product shifts like this before, and eagerly. That's why I said insular, because of the assumption the market will abandon or crush this because they're not happy with the idea is silly. We've got market trends showing otherwise.

Regarding my comment on a new paradigm, that's what this is. All the console makers are looking at this, and it's possibly to be handled differently by each of them. Sony apparently intends to use the exact same architecture, with enhanced hardware, which remains to be seen how that will impact existing consumers. That's still a new paradigm, whether you're happy about it or not. I'm not dismissing anyone. Please read my posts more carefully if you're going to give me crap.

My irrational fear would be developers actually stopping developing for old PS4s, if Sony can't ensure at least that then they are willingly destroying goodwill.

I understand the fear, but until that actually comes to pass, all you're doing us expending energy on that fear and concern for no reason. Making it known that you don't want your existing purchase to stop being supported (and since it still has a shared architecture, it would take something ridiculous to not work at all) is the best course. Rather than being irrational.

Just my thoughts.
 
Not sure what to think about this...having to buy a new 500 dollar(CAD) console every 2 years now to keep up performance wise is a small slap in the face...you dont have to but just the same...

If what he says is true it would be more like 4 years.If it opens it up for even smaller hardware revisions a PS 4.525 would just get annoying. Sony needs to get concrete about the next 10 years asap.
 
Yeah... the release date hints are honestly the one thing of all of it I just can't believe lol.
I'm wondering if it was meant more like "We will be releasing it by late Q1 2017" so they knew it was coming this fiscal year at worst, with an intention to hit the holiday period.
 
And I find it funny some consider this a bigger jump from PS3-PS4.

Going from 512MB of ram to 8GB and quad core cpus....is smaller than this?
 
~2x the GPU power and faster? In a closed system like a console?
So with which PC graphics card can we compare all this?

Sorry if already asked. I'm currently reading through this thread.

Something like a 280X or 380X. (a bit slower than a 970)

This is quite interesting as a PC user, this only means graphic advancement for the upcoming games which is never a bad thing.
 
~2x the GPU power and faster? In a closed system like a console?
So with which PC graphics card can we compare all this?

Sorry if already asked. I'm currently reading through this thread.

280x or 380/380x, the people saying 970 is out of their goddamn minds.
 
Yeah... the release date hints are honestly the one thing of all of it I just can't believe lol.

I'm with you. The Q1 date does not sound right to me. Especially to launch new hardware in, though I guess it could work if they are planning on coinciding with tax returns for potential upgrades?

Still that would hurt Holiday Q4 sales.

Something doesn't sound right there.
 
~2x the GPU power and faster? In a closed system like a console?
So with which PC graphics card can we compare all this?

Sorry if already asked. I'm currently reading through this thread.

AMD Radeon7970 or R280X
Nvidia GTX680.

Don't compare AMD FLOPS directly to Nvidia's. Some people comparing 2X PS4 to GTX970, which is not even remotely true.
 
I suppose but 14nm chips from AMD are supposed to be hitting this year so it would be possible for it to hit this year even using the 14nm process.

Missing holiday and VR seems a little strange to me, especially if they already have dev kits at developers.

Yields would make this really hard to believe.

And the GCN generation leap would be a clusterfuck.
 
It's understandable that current owners are apprehensive about this news. But personally, I think it's a bit premature to assume that this automatically means that the base PS4 will become the poor man's edition of the platform. Depending on how this actually plays out, it could just as likely go the other way where early adopters of the 4K edition wind up looking like a bunch of rubes who are eager to jump on board the hype train to pay for overpriced new hardware that mostly goes ignored by devs. When assessing the long term impact of this kind of move, it could go well, it could go poorly, or it could just wind up being a pretty neutral thing wherein it's good for people who want the 4K features, but people who don't can still sleep well knowing that they don't really need to upgrade.

To sum that up in one sentence, I'm going to need some PS4 vs. PS4K comparisons of real software before I know how to react to this.
Either scenario is pretty shitty which is basically why I'm not excited about this at all.
 
Bottom line is that when consoles got on the mainstream x64 technology path, this sort of change became a no-brainer.

When consoles used bespoke hardware there was no impetus to fund technology improvement outside of a 5 year cycle, now they are part of what the PC scene is doing it would be perverse to deliberately ignore gains made in the larger scheme of things over shorter time-frames.

Its not like compatibility is an issue, or the baseline set performance-wise by the PS4/Xbone is problematically low.

Original Xbox was underpowered celeron and it was still pumping out performance rivaling PC at the time


How can you optimize a target that's changining every 2 years?

Duke Nukem forever should be the outlier, not the standard
 
Top Bottom