Killroyskbg
Member
Yeah games they would not get anyway is a sane reason.
PS4K information (~2x GPU power w/ clock+, new CPU, price, tent. Q1 2017)
- Thread starter OsirisBlack
- Start date
Yeah games they would not get anyway is a sane reason.
SneakyStephan
Banned
Quantum break doesn't need more than an i5 2500k and 8GB ram
(which is what pc users were buying in 2011)If it did then a skylake cpu wouldn't help you as it's only about 20-30 percent faster...
Maybe you misunderstood what I said: cpus have not gotten meaningfully faster in the last 5 years, so if you bought a good quad core in 2011 it's still just as good today as it was then. You need to know that a 4.5ghz i5 2500k is 3-4x more powerful than the ps4 cpu, that is plenty to brute force even poorly optimised multiplatform games and then some.
It's a big change to how it used to be, the days of rapid advancement for cpus have been over for years. We might see a big (one time) bump next year , hopefully, if amd brings powerful 8 core cpus to the mainstream, if that happens you'll be right again
bitbydeath
Member
I know but people will still be upset if/when the announcement occurs.
I'm sure others have mirrored my same complaints.
If the original PS4 is only going to be a ~4 year console it is a failure. Sure, it's selling well, but software has been nowhere remotely close to the quality or quantity of the PS3 or PS2 days. We are over two years in, and the only first party games to impress was The Order. Infamous and LBP3 were okay, but a bit disappointing. Resogun and Velocity 2X were great indies. This year finally looks promising - reminiscent of Sony's past years - with Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted (finally), No Man's Sky, and hopefully a few others like Horizon and The Last Guardian. Other than that, everything else has been remasters, delayed, or stuck in longer development times. (I fully expected more info from SSM on God of War by now.)
I fail to see how 4k is the future. Developer's cannot even make games that run at 1080p/60fps feasibly. Cerny touted that the PS4 would be easier to develop for but so far we haven't seen that. New IP has been slow to progress. Delays have stuck multiple franchises. Nothing about that backs up that the PS4 is easy to develop for. Development has only become more and more expensive, and more and more bloated. Boosting resolution to 4K will only exacerbate the issue.
This seems exactly like the hubris of the PS3 all over again (or the hubris of the Xbox One or WiiU). It's far too early to release a new console when the PS4 has sold so well and is just starting to pick up some steam when it comes to software. If the PS4k comes to fruition, it's a really fucking dumb decision that plain and simple taints the original PS4 and sours Sony in my eyes.
If the original PS4 is only going to be a ~4 year console it is a failure. Sure, it's selling well, but software has been nowhere remotely close to the quality or quantity of the PS3 or PS2 days. We are over two years in, and the only first party games to impress was The Order. Infamous and LBP3 were okay, but a bit disappointing. Resogun and Velocity 2X were great indies. This year finally looks promising - reminiscent of Sony's past years - with Ratchet and Clank, Uncharted (finally), No Man's Sky, and hopefully a few others like Horizon and The Last Guardian. Other than that, everything else has been remasters, delayed, or stuck in longer development times. (I fully expected more info from SSM on God of War by now.)
I fail to see how 4k is the future. Developer's cannot even make games that run at 1080p/60fps feasibly. Cerny touted that the PS4 would be easier to develop for but so far we haven't seen that. New IP has been slow to progress. Delays have stuck multiple franchises. Nothing about that backs up that the PS4 is easy to develop for. Development has only become more and more expensive, and more and more bloated. Boosting resolution to 4K will only exacerbate the issue.
This seems exactly like the hubris of the PS3 all over again (or the hubris of the Xbox One or WiiU). It's far too early to release a new console when the PS4 has sold so well and is just starting to pick up some steam when it comes to software. If the PS4k comes to fruition, it's a really fucking dumb decision that plain and simple taints the original PS4 and sours Sony in my eyes.
SmiteOfHand
Member
You keep saying this and nobody is saying it will. Who are you fighting against?
Badlucktroll
Member
My main concern is, how will i get P.T. on this thing?! I am serious this is not a joke. Maybe swap out hard drives?
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
if that's a case then it still doesn't make any difference though, except that now it is split into 2 upgrade pattern. 6 and 6s is generally considered to be gen of its own, same goes for 5 and 5s. Going from 5/5s to 6 is a generation jump.
If the PS4 can play PS5 game but with lower setting, they should be cheering. It wasn't possible previously. An iphone 6 can still play most current top end games very well, i dont see why it'll be a problem here, considering that console games take longer to make in general.
When more and more PS4 games start to show cracks on the og PS4 yet run well for PS4.5, a PS5 will be out or announced by then.
Mailenstein
Member
Glad I didn't buy a PS4 yet. Would be annoyed by this if I had.
bitbydeath
Member
Backup and Restore or just switch the HDDs over.
gundamkyoukai
Member
The market place will decide if this is going to work or not .
There is no right and wrong here .
Also people seem to bring up apple but forget that everything else has upgrades every year or two.
This is not a apple thing it's tech a thing .
Also i don't see how this is going to split the user base .
So my version of the game looks better than your what is the big deal ?
On the CPU side, Puma (updated Jaguar) maxes out at 2.4 GHz.
PS4's Jaguar runs at 1.6 GHz, a bit slower than in Xbox One (1.75 GHz). If PS4K got the Puma, the cost should be minimal for a 1.5x speed bump. Probably better, cost wise, than getting a whole new AMD CPU, and better than nothing. The shink to 14nm would probably take care of energy consumption and cooling.
Am I way off?
PS4's Jaguar runs at 1.6 GHz, a bit slower than in Xbox One (1.75 GHz). If PS4K got the Puma, the cost should be minimal for a 1.5x speed bump. Probably better, cost wise, than getting a whole new AMD CPU, and better than nothing. The shink to 14nm would probably take care of energy consumption and cooling.
Am I way off?
I'm happy to drop another $400 for a new PS4, wouldn't even care if there are PS4K exclusive games, I really hope it does run better than 30fps though.... I'm not expecting 4K resolution (LOL) Have a look at the benchmarks for the 980 Ti 4K native is not attainable on a console at an affordable price.... Still a better PS4 with new revisions coming every 2-3 years is perfectly acceptable to me. I have disposable income and am keen to keep getting improved visuals/performance. If you can't afford it or don't want to buy it fine... Don't insist of arbitrary console generation life-spans because that suits you or get all pissy because it creates a environment of Have and Have nots. Pony up the money or enjoy a sub-par experience.... It's not like you haven't already been getting a sub-par experience (compared to PC)
Suddenly the PS4 isn't the #1 console and you complain... I don't see Xbox One owners crying, they still enjoy their games, it won't fragment development all that much. "Turn resolution down to 900p and make it 30fps" It's no different to how the console versions get made today, certain sacrifices have to be made and they will continue to be made.
Suddenly the PS4 isn't the #1 console and you complain... I don't see Xbox One owners crying, they still enjoy their games, it won't fragment development all that much. "Turn resolution down to 900p and make it 30fps" It's no different to how the console versions get made today, certain sacrifices have to be made and they will continue to be made.
Wolfgunblood Garopa
Member
I didn't realize 4k TVs were selling like that.
They also might have found out the PS4 is not up to the task for the more ambitious games that would make PSVR lot more successful.
They also might have found out the PS4 is not up to the task for the more ambitious games that would make PSVR lot more successful.
But in the end id rather them do it right then go halfway.
An old boss of mine said about an expensive coffee machine, it either works for you or it doesnt.
Id rather shell out for more to get the proper experience than get something half decent. I think alot of people would agree.
Hawk269
Member
Well the OP stated something that if they went with a better CPU which has not been confirmed that they are doing but it would add $100.00 to the price. To me, that sounds very expensive for a CPU upgrade. I would think the GPU would be the thing that cost the most...unless the CPU is an incredible CPU (for consoles).
Killroyskbg
Member
Quantum break doesn't need more than an i5 2500k and 8GB ram
If it did then a skylake cpu wouldn't help you as it's only about 20-30 percent faster...
Maybe you misunderstood what I said: cpus have not gotten meaningfully faster in the last 5 years, so if you bought a good quad core in 2011 it's still just as good today as it was then. You need to know that a 4.5ghz i5 2500k is 3-4x more powerful than the ps4 cpu, that is plenty to brute force even poorly optimised multiplatform games and then some.
It's a big change to how it used to be, the days of rapid advancement for cpus have been over for years. We might see a big (one time) bump next year , hopefully, if amd brings powerful 8 core cpus to the mainstream, if that happens you'll be right again
http://www.game-debate.com/games/index.php?g_id=8075&game=Quantum Break
Says otherwise but hey perhaps they wont force you to have them but how will it run without it? And yes I know about the slow CPU advancments and the power difference between a i5 and Jaguar like I said earlier I have build serveral computers in my days but not one has lasted for 6 years without a more or less complete overhaul if I wanted to play new games. My 8800 ultra for 600$ lasted for about 5 but by then it was just scraping by. The q6600 lasted about the same and when that went so did my mobo and had to add more ram. And all of that was top of the line more or less at the time.
SmiteOfHand
Member
Yeah, and then 160 pages happened, literally nobody is arguing it anymore.
PdotMichael
Banned
It's kind of unlikely that the Jaguar will get that much cheaper in the future. And with all the fixed costs of a modern console (BD-drive, hard disk, license fees etc.) it's the better deal for all people involved just to release an updated version with modernized hardware.
Keihart
Member
Keep going, now justify cross gen games being the norm or in the opposite situation, exclusives for this new fast iterations.
I bet most won't be happy being early adopters if any of those two escenarios become the norm, wich seems likely looking at similar situations in the past.
If it is only slight performance diferences, almost no one will care thus making PS4K kinda irrelevant.
Mr. Nice_Guy
Member
What do you mean by halfway? Do you mean you would them rather have skipped the 4.5 iteration and just gone straight to the PS5? Because to me the 4.5 does feel "halfway".
Killroyskbg
Member
When will people understand this is not a new gen? It is only a beefier PS4. The same games will run on both except if there is a case were the PS4 one could not and that game would not exist anyway. It is the same architecture not Cell to X86. This is god for developer since they dont have to have large teams working on different versions buy only 2 very similar ones were one can have some higher settings. This means no more remasters since from now on there is no reason everything not should be BC compatible. And is not Sony who decides at what resolution or fps a game will run it is the developers and what they belive is most important. For some it is resolution for some fps other want more effects.
Currently if you aim for 1080p gaming, cards rated for great 4k gaming at good settings will net a really long life for 1080p. Then again I'm not sold on 4k except for productivity.
Wishmaster92
Member
Yep, or just do a backup and restore. Easy
bitbydeath
Member
Updated:
Pros
Backwards and forwards compatibility;
No more restarting OS from scratch;
Less risk with introducing new (costly) tech;
Less chance of PS2/3 situations for devs having to learn alien tech;
Closer to the bleeding edge (for those that want it);
Consumer choice regarding how much to spend;
No/less need for remasters.
Cons
Faster transitions.
Exclusives on PS4K due to not being possible on PS4.
Pros
Backwards and forwards compatibility;
No more restarting OS from scratch;
Less risk with introducing new (costly) tech;
Less chance of PS2/3 situations for devs having to learn alien tech;
Closer to the bleeding edge (for those that want it);
Consumer choice regarding how much to spend;
No/less need for remasters.
Cons
Faster transitions.
Exclusives on PS4K due to not being possible on PS4.
SneakyStephan
Banned
If it releases in 2017 they might be able to catch zen, but only if it's not in an APU
Since the new gpu will be polaris they only have one apu for this year as far as I know, polaris gpu + excavator cpu (an iteration on the same old shitty bulldozer cpus)
Anyone have any guesses to if they'll use an apu again, and what the cpu choices can be? (considering they'll use polaris for the gpu, what with them saying the chip is 2x more powerful, is clocked higher and is smaller to boot)
Did they mention a 14nm apu anywhere still using jaguar? The newer puma apu is still 28nm according to google.
That's what i've been trying to explain , a 2500k with a decent overclock is more powerful than that 3.2ghz i5 4460, it's also as powerful as the recommended spec 3.9ghz i5 4690
The q6600 is a LONG time ago, there was a sizeable performance jump from the core2quads to the nehalem i7s (i7 920 etc), then another good performance jump to the i5 2500k (and they overclocked amazingly well, easy 4.5ghz), but since then? nothing... a 5 percent incremental performance boost and a 10 percent price hike each time. Times have changed
I have a 4690k and it's only a good 10 percent faster than the 2500k from 2011.. and it doesn't overclock better either. a 5 year old i5 2500k is not scraping by at all it's still up there and still up for providing 100+ fps in games
You can't upgrade if there is nothing to upgrade to. People only upgrade from a 2500k if they need a 6 or 8 core cpu for video editing or work related stuff, or if they are some enthusiast power user who is a stickler for getting the lowest possible frame times and are willing to spend 500 euros on a new mobo+cpu+ram for a 20 percent performance boost... not many people do that. In the old days a 5 year time span would mean cpu performance tripled.
You can swap hard drives on the PS4? I know on the PS3 you can't do this without formatting.
Not happening.
I'm going to say this, I'm sorry for being a bitter sport about this new system.
I was upset about the issues, but I forgot a big factor that is the reason I held out on not getting a PS4 for so long; pricing.
If this new PS4K launches this fall/early next year at 399$, it will hopefully lower the price of the OG PS4 dramatically.....to maybe 200$. That will be when I jump in and get a PS4 for the games I really want to play.
I never considered a few factors like the Xbox One being supported and just sheer logic (people and social media will keep Sony in line about releasing badly running PS4 games; that happened with Just Cause 3 and that latter got patched for example).
So, not that upset anymore about this. Can be excited about E3 again and look forward toward PS4 games like Crash Bandicoot and Ratchet & Clank
.
I could see issue with PS VR though, as I could easily see PS4K being the intended system for many VR games.....but I don't care about VR honestly. So, not really much of a factor to me personally.
Sorry if I was sour on this subject for a few weeks, not cool of me and to people who are really looking forward to the PS4K.
Still don't like the idea behind it honestly, but if it makes the PS4 200-250$, will deal with it.
I will say this, I ate my crow and moving on from this topic.
I was upset about the issues, but I forgot a big factor that is the reason I held out on not getting a PS4 for so long; pricing.
If this new PS4K launches this fall/early next year at 399$, it will hopefully lower the price of the OG PS4 dramatically.....to maybe 200$. That will be when I jump in and get a PS4 for the games I really want to play.
I never considered a few factors like the Xbox One being supported and just sheer logic (people and social media will keep Sony in line about releasing badly running PS4 games; that happened with Just Cause 3 and that latter got patched for example).
So, not that upset anymore about this. Can be excited about E3 again and look forward toward PS4 games like Crash Bandicoot and Ratchet & Clank
. I could see issue with PS VR though, as I could easily see PS4K being the intended system for many VR games.....but I don't care about VR honestly. So, not really much of a factor to me personally.
Sorry if I was sour on this subject for a few weeks, not cool of me and to people who are really looking forward to the PS4K.
Still don't like the idea behind it honestly, but if it makes the PS4 200-250$, will deal with it.
I will say this, I ate my crow and moving on from this topic
.Killroyskbg
Member
Cross gen? There will be no more gens just like on PC or IPhone. Games will be made to run on all devices until they cant be made on that plattform and can developers to this day still produce real cross gen games with the power difference between the PS4 and its weird architecture and a X86 plattform doing it to a new x86 one is a cake walk compared to that. No one will make an exklusive and miss 40 mil potential customers if they could. Exclusives would never have made it to the PS4 anyway. And I have no problem buying it for the power alone but the 4k video is icing on the cake. The regular PS4 will probably sell better in the beginning but sooner or later it will be the other way around.
Wishmaster92
Member
I know most people won't care about it but it is also a 4k UHD Blu-ray player and believe it or not that does add value to it. Cheapest are around the $400 range, and you can bet the PS4K will be one of if not the best 4k blu ray player because of constant firmware updates. The ps3 was regarded as the best Blu-ray player because of this.
• Can still play multiplayer games with friends even if some haven't upgraded;
• Don't have to rebuy extra controllers for local multiplayer every 5 years;
• Games which otherwise wouldn't be portable to PS4 can now be played on a console (i.e. PC games which require a GTX 970);
• Console can last even longer (10+ years!) if you don't want to play games which require new hardware. Same OS/network means it will still be well supported;
• Games with low system requirements will still come out for the current consoles 10+ years from now, as the API/architecture will be the same.
ArtHands
Thinks buying more servers can fix a bad patch
Its still relevant, considering that there's still a massive amount of gamers yet to buy a PS4.
It's inevitable.
Badlucktroll
Member
I bet gamestop will offer some kind of $200 credit thing. If Sony won't do it, various retailers will offer some kind of upgrade program. Many Sony will announce an "authorized retailer" trade in program. What are the odds of full Ps3 backwards compatibility on this thing?
katsubento
Member
This is true...the PS3 was the best player for many years and still remains a great one. Though I suspect, UHD Blu-ray won't have as much of a selling point as original BD.
I would get one for that if I could find a 4K TV with little lag that I want. I am not fond of the Samsung models, and Sony's TVs for 2016 seemed to have picked up lag instead of being the ones with the least.
Orthogonal
Member
PSVR will improve regardless of your TV.
Sure, until they release an even better console a year later.
Then I'll just buy that as well?? No one said gaming was going to be cheap... If the product is out there and is a meaningful upgrade then I'll buy.
Wishmaster92
Member
No, on a 1080p set it may yield higher framerates,better aa, etc...but as far as the core game everything will be the same. Think of it as a ps4 game vs a pc version.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Marty Chinn
Member
We're talking about the same company who also released the Vita and PlayStation TV and botched both of those. Companies can make mistakes and be misguided.
According to your sources? What proof do you have of that?
That's a big reason why I'm going to buy one. UHD bluray players cost $400, might as well get the PS4k and play games on it at the same price point.
Oh it sure will, but it will be called PS5.
Shifty1897
Member
For games you probably won't even notice the 4K part because nothing will run at 4K natively.
Right now I think you have to chain together 4 $1,000 Titan X GPU's just to get Witcher 3 running at 30fps in 4K.
Right now I think you have to chain together 4 $1,000 Titan X GPU's just to get Witcher 3 running at 30fps in 4K.
Killroyskbg
Member
And if they tank and turn into Sega2.0
What then? Can we say "Warned ya"
It will sell POORLY. Just because a few gaffers say they would doesnt mean the general consumer is going to rush out and buy one.
2reasons why
Confusion
Price Difference
Look at the Steam machines, it's a confusing due to there being a million different variations and
Price of the original will look far more appealing than the new price which goes back to confusion.