Support NeoGAF

[MazingerDUDE]

PS5 pro is much more relevant. When PS4 pro was around people just didn't have the 4K TV, but now everyone's got one and about 75% of PS5 gamers play their game on 60fps performance mode, which means the majority of PS5 owners play their games in QHD or lower resolution. Unfortunately, things aren't much better for the other 25% who play their games at 30, because PS5 is just too underpowered to deliver neither the 60fps 4K nor the ray traced 4K.

PS5 pro is capable of providing them both, 4K 60 with the ray tracing turned on. So, while the actual raw GPU power is only about 45% more, the actual perception would be more like quadruple of what PS5 has to offer.

As for the PS4 pro enhancement, the experience wasn't very consistent as the supported resolution varied vastly between games. On one hand you got someone like Sony Santa Monica Studio that provided a clean 4K like experience, while others would provide something much lesser with tons of on screen artifacts. At least we can expect something more uniform from the PS5 pro with its PSSR support, and it is very important that we keep things coherent. The reason people care so much about the rendering resolution in video game is that we're just so used to certain set of rendering resolution (ie. 720P for PS3, 1080P for PS4) that anything lower you'll instantly notice and feel uncomfortable adjusting. On that front, the PS4 pro was a total mixed bag.

As for the pricing, PS4 pro was $400 when PS4 was $300 costing 33% more. PS5 is just 40% more than $500 PS5. And if you ask me, you could do a lot more with $400 back then compared to what you can do with $700 now.

 

[chokotoureiki]

Can we all just agree that both PC and PS5 Pro curbstomp the shit out of the Switch graphics wise?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

PS5 pro is much more relevant. When PS4 pro was around people just didn't have the 4K TV, but now everyone's got one and about 75% of PS5 gamers play their game on 60fps performance mode, which means the majority of PS5 owners play their games in QHD or lower resolution. Unfortunately, things aren't much better for the other 25% who play their games at 30, because PS5 is just too underpowered to deliver neither the 60fps 4K nor the ray traced 4K.

PS5 pro is capable of providing them both, 4K 60 with the ray racing turned on. So, while the actual raw GPU power is only about 45% more, the actual perception would be more like quadruple of what PS5 has to offer.

As for the PS4 pro enhancement, the experience wasn't very consistent as the supported resolution varied vastly between games. On one hand you got someone like Sony Santa Monica Studio that provided a clean 4K like experience, while others would provide something much lesser with tons of on screen artifacts. At least we can expect something more uniform from the PS5 pro with its PSSR support, and it is very important that we keep things coherent. The reason people care so much about the rendering resolution in video game is that we're just so used to certain set of rendering resolution (ie. 720P for PS3, 1080P for PS4) that anything lower you'll instantly notice and feel uncomfortable adjusting. On that front, the PS4 pro was a total mixed bag.

As for the pricing, PS4 pro was $400 when PS4 was $300 costing 33% more. PS5 is just 40% more than $500 PS5. And if you ask me, you could do a lot more with $400 back then compared to what you can do with $700 now.

It's so interesting seeing people make the argument that 4K favored PS4 Pro despite 4KTV adoption rates being low then and high now...

That more games aren't running the equivalent of 4K today because they can't do that and hit 60 fps, but that the PS5 Pro will be able to better deliver that experience due to PSSR and a bit more horsepower.

It'll be very interesting to see how SIE studios above all manage the PS5 and Pro. They don't tend to use FSR on consoles they use their own solutions. Balancing these solutions for the base unit and PSSR will be interesting.

 

[Gaiff]

According to Steam September Survey

RTX 4070: 2.91%
RTX 3080: 1.94%
RTX 4070S: 1.47%
RTX 4070 Ti: 1.18%
RTX 4090: 0.93%
RTX 4080: 0.72%
RTX 3080 Ti: 0.69%
RTX 4080S: 0.56%
RTX 4070 Ti S: 0.48%
RTX 3090: 0.48%
RX 7900 XTX: 0.36%
RTX 4080 laptop: 0.20%
Total: 11.92% (excluding 6950 XT, 6900 XT, and 6800 XT)

Steam Monthly Active Users: 132 million
Owners of GPUs as fast or faster than the PS5 Pro's GPU: 15.734 million

Even assuming the PS5 sells another 50 million units, the Pro accounting for 25% of the total would only bring it to 12.5 million. Do keep in mind that the number of GPUs represents the current situation whereas the Pro's are the projected total should be anywhere between 10-15 million. The number of GPUs is likely to grow significantly over the next few years, so the odds of the Pro outselling equivalent or faster GPUs when it gets discontinued are close to 0. At $700 and no disc drive, I reeeally doubt it gets anywhere near that large of a market share, but crazier things have happened. Whatever the case, those who love dismissing high-end GPUs so much will also have to dismiss the Pro from talks if they aren't utter hypocrites, but we know they won't do such a thing. I personally won't because why would I? The fact that most people opt for the $450 base machine doesn't erase the $700 machine that still represents a better value than an equivalent PC in terms of price/performance.

 

[Zathalus]

I counted 8% Mr Wayne...

3080+
4070+
7900 XTX (this one hardly matters)
4080/4090 laptops.

That’s 11. something.

You realize FSR3 is also on consoles right?

Yes, never claimed otherwise.

The PS5 is right up there with a 2070 Super. Not sure where you got your math on 70% being able to use XeSS/DLSS, but assuming your math was better on your PS5 Pro equivalent or better cards, that still doesn't mean they're at or above the quality of the base PS5.

For DLSS that is every single RTX card, even the 2060s. For XeSS that is every AMD card that is RDNA2 or better. The numbers are for the ability to use the feature, to show how common it is on PC. Not a comparison in power. GPUs equal or better then the PS5 make up a smaller number of course, around 34%-40% depending on how strictly you define it.

Most Steam users are still on video cards weaker than a PS5, which is fine, but what so much of the argument surrounding PC is that games run better on PC, which is misleading. They run better on PCs with hardware more advanced that the PS5, but the majority of gamers running PCs have worse hardware and the ports on PC tend to be worse albeit many have options that allow the better hardware to take advantage of the power difference.

Yes, but that number of weaker GPUs is shrinking, one to one and a half years from now that number would break 50%. Just as PS4 users upgrade to PS5, so do PC users eventually upgrade GPUs. Or buy a new laptop/desktop.

If the argument is the number of users that have GPU equal to or better then the PS5 then there are actually more PC users. 68-80 million PC GPUs vs ~64 million PS5s.

PS5 Pro refreshes the alignment on power vs price. I'm willing to bet the PS5 Pro outsells the 4070, 4080, and 4090 desktop cards and their AMD equivalents and even when that happens people aren't going claim benefits for the PS5 that are exclusive to the PS5 Pro.

Those GPUs by themselves are already at 17.5 million sold. Sales are also not suddenly going to stop either. With RTX 5000 and RDNA4 launching next year there will never be more Pros then PCs more powerful then it.

 

[RickMasters]

Just a reminder....

This thread was started by a comment from Alex of Digital Foundry stating this.

People are (for the most part) just discussing the basis of his comments and stating their arguments for or against.

No need to come into this thread (in particular) and gaslight people about the very foundation of this fucking thread.

Good point. But I still came to watch the warriors duke it out!

 

[Zathalus]

Steam Monthly Active Users: 132 million
Owners of GPUs as fast or faster than the PS5 Pro's GPU: 15.734 million

Not quite correct, that is monthly active accounts from early 2021. Steam hasn’t given updated numbers since then. Peak users have increased from 25 million to 38 million though. The number of those in-game are even higher.

That puts us at 200 million active accounts. Sure, extrapolation and all that, but the peak user and monthly users have risen at the same pace before, in 2016 it was 62 million.

 

[Gaiff]

Yes, never claimed otherwise.

Is FSR3 frame generation even in non-UE5 games on PS5? I don't even think Forspoken has it. The list of games supporting it is insanely tiny. Moreover, Frame Generation without Reflex increases latency significantly, but most games that have FSR Frame Generation also have Reflex as an option. You toggle DLSS for IQ, FSR Frame Generation to boost the frame rate, and Reflex to decrease the latency. This is available on every RTX 20 card and above for NVIDIA.

Not only is FSR almost non-existent on consoles, but they so far don't have a means of offsetting the added latency.

Not quite correct, that is monthly active accounts from early 2021. Steam hasn’t given updated numbers since then. Peak users have increased from 25 million to 38 million though. The number of those in-game are even higher.

That puts us at 200 million active accounts. Sure, extrapolation and all that, but the peak user and monthly users have risen at the same pace before, in 2016 it was 62 million.

Would bring the total to close to 24 million then. I'm sure it's over 20 million though, meaning the Pro has virtually no chance of closing that gap.

 

[PandaOk]

PS5 pro is much more relevant. When PS4 pro was around people just didn't have the 4K TV, but now everyone's got one and about 75% of PS5 gamers play their game on 60fps performance mode, which means the majority of PS5 owners play their games in QHD or lower resolution. Unfortunately, things aren't much better for the other 25% who play their games at 30, because PS5 is just too underpowered to deliver neither the 60fps 4K nor the ray traced 4K.

PS5 pro is capable of providing them both, 4K 60 with the ray tracing turned on. So, while the actual raw GPU power is only about 45% more, the actual perception would be more like quadruple of what PS5 has to offer.

As for the PS4 pro enhancement, the experience wasn't very consistent as the supported resolution varied vastly between games. On one hand you got someone like Sony Santa Monica Studio that provided a clean 4K like experience, while others would provide something much lesser with tons of on screen artifacts. At least we can expect something more uniform from the PS5 pro with its PSSR support, and it is very important that we keep things coherent. The reason people care so much about the rendering resolution in video game is that we're just so used to certain set of rendering resolution (ie. 720P for PS3, 1080P for PS4) that anything lower you'll instantly notice and feel uncomfortable adjusting. On that front, the PS4 pro was a total mixed bag.

As for the pricing, PS4 pro was $400 when PS4 was $300 costing 33% more. PS5 is just 40% more than $500 PS5. And if you ask me, you could do a lot more with $400 back then compared to what you can do with $700 now.

This is absurdly well stated. It’s why I never found the Pro to be worth much as an upgrade. Ultimately a stop gap that addressed an issue that barely existed at the time and for its time.

It really was a great try at adapting to the idea of where things would go for improving resolution and image quality (though it wasn’t an upsampled per se). Had ML not taken off they might have been right! I have a lot of respect for the attempt, and its failures weren’t its fault (blame AMD at the time), but it failed all the same for most consumers.

PS5 to PS5 Pro nails the needs of the market by comparison and unlike the PS4 Pro.

Even the PS5 Pro ‘black eye’ the CPU side? As a base the PS4 Jaguar cores sucked far worse as a base than Zen2 in the PS5. So much so that the bump far less of a bottleneck than the Jaguar cores ever were with devs and PR pushing the idea of relying on GPGPU before the consoles launch.

 

[RavionUHD]

I haven't had any major stutters on PS5 — certainly nothing worse than what I had on PC (which, at times, were full on pauses and stops).

Look at the Digital Foundry analysis, the PS5 Version has major traversal and animation stutters, and the 60 FPS mode is below 40FPS in many areas.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

3080+
4070+
7900 XTX (this one hardly matters)
4080/4090 laptops.

That’s 11. something.

4080 laptops are not more powerful than a 4070. Pretty questionable to put it on there and your friend's numbers are completely off on basically every card and he counts the 4090 twice. Regardless, you're right it does look like 11 something.

Yes, never claimed otherwise.

...You were trying to use that as a reason for cards being better than PS5...

For DLSS that is every single RTX card, even the 2060s. For XeSS that is every AMD card that is RDNA2 or better. The numbers are for the ability to use the feature, to show how common it is on PC. Not a comparison in power. GPUs equal or better then the PS5 make up a smaller number of course, around 34%-40% depending on how strictly you define it.

But who cares what cards can use the feature if it doesn't put them above the PS5, which is what we were discussing?

Yes, but that number of weaker GPUs is shrinking, one to one and a half years from now that number would break 50%. Just as PS4 users upgrade to PS5, so do PC users eventually upgrade GPUs. Or buy a new laptop/desktop.

Right but there is no guarantee that they buy/build a new PC rather than getting a PS5 Pro.

If the argument is the number of users that have GPU equal to or better then the PS5 then there are actually more PC users. 68-80 million PC GPUs vs ~64 million PS5s.

The argument was MOST PC users have a GPU less than the PS5. If we want to add XSX to better inflate numbers, we can do that too, but it's silly.

Those GPUs by themselves are already at 17.5 million sold. Sales are also not suddenly going to stop either. With RTX 5000 and RDNA4 launching next year there will never be more Pros then PCs more powerful then it.

PS5 Pro is only one product, but what it will do in market share is considerable because its a better value than any of these GPUs. That's the point. That's the point of the whole thread.

 

[Gaiff]

4080 laptops are not more powerful than a 4070.

Yes, it is. The 4070 is also faster than the Pro's GPU by 10-15% if we use Cerny's 45% figure.

Pretty questionable to put it on there and your friend's numbers are completely off on basically every card and he counts the 4090 twice. Regardless, you're right it does look like 11 something.

Typo. Was a 3090. "completely off" by 0.48%...disingenous indeed.

 

[PandaOk]

Is FSR3 frame generation even in non-UE5 games on PS5? I don't even think Forspoken has it. The list of games supporting it is insanely tiny. Moreover, Frame Generation without Reflex increases latency significantly, but most games that have FSR Frame Generation also have Reflex as an option. You toggle DLSS for IQ, FSR Frame Generation to boost the frame rate, and Reflex to decrease the latency. This is available on every RTX 20 card and above for NVIDIA.

Not only is FSR almost non-existent on consoles, but they so far don't have a means of offsetting the added latency.

Framegen will be much more common with the added compute power and the ML Block.

it wasn’t until recently that FSR3.1 FG really got up to snuff in terms of frame pacing either. Really the Pro is coming at the perfect time for FG, it’s just a matter of developer will.

Also in terms of latency AntiLag 2 now exists and the base latency on consoles is typically much lower than native on PC to begin with. Heck anti lag 1 was a disaster simply because of the prevalence of anti cheating flags due to the open nature of PC. To this day I wonder if a whitelist was possible, it also was only a ban issue for multiplayer games.

So it’s not as bad as it seems.

Also of note: Latency is less perceptive when using a controller

I’d also argue that within a decent range, especially if FG is being used to boost up from near 100 or even 60, that it’s near imperceptible latency for Joe casual on a console.

Would bring the total to close to 24 million then. I'm sure it's over 20 million though, meaning the Pro has virtually no chance of closing that gap.

The pro isn’t intended to peel away people that own a stronger PC. The pro is targeting the millions with systems worse, don’t have a system, need to consider substantial upgrades or a complete rebuild, if not a full upgrade.

Why care about how it sells in relation to stronger PCs?

 

[Gaiff]

The pro isn’t intended to peel away people that own a PC better than it, it’s targeting the millions of PC owners with systems worse than it or who don’t have a system at all.

I know it's not. It was just to refute this nonsense that since high-end GPUs represent a fraction of the total market, they should be ignored. I often see the "but only x % have high-end PCs" which, if it starts with the 4070, still will likely outnumber the Pro's lifetime sales.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Yes, it is. The 4070 is also faster than the Pro's GPU by 10-15% if we use Cerny's 45% figure.

You're focusing purely on rasterization... We're not going to know how the PS5 Pro stacks up against the 4070 until actual benchmarking is done.

Typo. Was a 3090. "completely off" by 0.48%...disingenous indeed.

All of your percentages are off too.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

I know it's not. It was just to refute this nonsense that since high-end GPUs represent a fraction of the total market, they should be ignored. I often see the "but only x % have high-end PCs" which, if it starts with the 4070, still will likely outnumber the Pro's lifetime sales.

No one said they should be "ignored" There is a big difference between ignoring them and equating them with the entire PC experience.

 

[Gaiff]

You're focusing purely on rasterization... We're not going to know how the PS5 Pro stacks up against the 4070 until actual benchmarking is done.

Considering it's only 2-3x faster than the PS5 in pure RT workloads, it's highly doubtful the PS5 Pro will be any faster, but sure, we'll see.

All of your percentages are off too.

Don't think so? I looked at the September results.

No one said they should be "ignored" There is a big difference between ignoring them and equating them with the entire PC experience.

And no one equated them to the entire PC existence either, but your kind loves playing the game of handwaving them because they don't make up a significant portion of the market. Guess what? The Pro will have even lower raw numbers, but you won't catch me dead trying to dismiss it.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Considering it's only 2-3x faster than the PS5 in pure RT workloads, it's highly doubtful the PS5 Pro will be any faster, but sure, we'll see.

Absolutely we will see.

Don't think so? I looked at the September results.

Double check your numbers. I looked at each of your values and you're off CONSTANTLY. It doesn't matter that you were off, but it is telling that when you're off it's always by a higher number except for 1 instance where you were lower by 0.1

And no one equated them to the entire PC existence either, but your kind loves playing the game of handwaving them because they don't make up a significant portion of the market. Guess what? The Pro will have even lower raw numbers, but you won't catch me dead trying to dismiss it.

You absolutely did dude.

You said here is the PS5 experience and here is the PC experience and listed experiences that were exclusive to Nvidia cards, Nvivdia RTX cards, and high end Nvidia RTX cards. These are not PC experiences, they're Nvidia PC experiences and high end ones at that. You obfuscate the difference because the increased fractionality of PC gaming breaks the PCMR mythos, which is funny because PC actually has massive brand wars on specific websites.

The real reason why you're here and why you're arguing is because you're threatened that PS5 Pro puts an end to PCMR not by outperforming the best cards, but by highlighting that so many console players are going to have a much better time with this for a much more affordable price than on PC.

 

[Hohenheim]

I played at 165 fps on my PC, got all the achievements and DLC, i played more than enough. The fact that the port is broken to the core is already documented, nothing to do with opinion, maybe you're not sensible to stutter and if your PC is strong enough it can mitigate, but the frame pacing is still crap, PS5 Pro version is a lock for being the definitive version of the game.

Well, two very simple mods fixes everything that's broken with it, and makes it a lot smoother than the PS5 version.
I have played both (and the xbox version), and my experience on PC was definitely a LOT better than the consoles.
A reshade mod does wonder for the colours and contrast too. Makes the whole game pop in a beautiful way.

Without a few quick fixes (mods) that FromSoft obviously should have fixed themselves in a patch, you're probably right. (I never played the PC version without the stutterfix mod)

 

[willothedog]

Absolutely we will see.



Double check your numbers. I looked at each of your values and you're off CONSTANTLY. It doesn't matter that you were off, but it is telling that when you're off it's always by a higher number except for 1 instance where you were lower by 0.1



You absolutely did dude.

You said here is the PS5 experience and here is the PC experience and listed experiences that were exclusive to Nvidia cards, Nvivdia RTX cards, and high end Nvidia RTX cards. These are not PC experiences, they're Nvidia PC experiences and high end ones at that. You obfuscate the difference because the increased fractionality of PC gaming breaks the PCMR mythos, which is funny because PC actually has massive brand wars on specific websites.

The real reason why you're here and why you're arguing is because you're threatened that PS5 Pro puts an end to PCMR not by outperforming the best cards, but by highlighting that so many console players are going to have a much better time with this for a much more affordable price than on PC.

What data are you looking at to say the percentages are wrong

 

[Vick]

Thread still open, and going?

Look at the Digital Foundry analysis, the PS5 Version has major traversal and animation stutters, and the 60 FPS mode is below 40FPS in many areas.

Well, HeWhoWalks is actually playing the game first hand on both PS5 and PC, doesn't need DF analysis.

Those significant drops to the low 40's (around 43fps, not below that) happening in the forest area or that multiple enemies fight in the pool (not "many areas" anyway) are due to excessive computational cost and have nothing to do with stutter.

This has been already posted more than once, but as an example of actual stutter here a 77800X3D + 4090 using DLSS Performance drops to 52 because of traversal stutter, when same traversal on PS5 stay at locked 60fps even in presence of enemies or drop a single frame to 59 and in the worst cases to 58.

By opening/watching these videos you'll see PS5 version basically always holds a solid 60fps when traversing the city, and when stutter eventually and rarely occurs it only manifests as instantaneous drops to 59fps or 58fps at max. In the first video there's that guardrail zone which is the most covered area to show stutter on PC and it stays at locked 60fps on PS5 or at worse 59 for a fraction of a second.
Many reports in the OT and elsewhere here of GAF suggest the stutter situation only gets worse and worse progressing through the game reaching their peak in the Prison, where some users were forced to turn RT entirely off just to make it more playable. This doesn't happen on Console.

Unfortunately PS5 version has distracting/shimmering reflections lower than any possible PC setting, and in Performance Mode lighting takes a significant hit. Not as crude and compromised as PC RT Off because Lumen settings are higher on Console for some reason, but only barely better still.

Edit:

Luckily, as often happens in these cases, a PC patch is currently in the works to address or at least mitigate the stutter issues:

 

[awwr999999]

I don't think Sony has even shown any games that had been using FSR at this point. I don't know....seems to me like they have kept away from those comparisons purposefully.



I don't think I'm following you here man. You are suggesting Sony revert back to the PS2?

"Reopen" both PS2 and PS1 as continuous platforms baked into every new x86 PS console generation.
Unchanging companion platforms that would give studios faster/cheaper development targets with a large audience that only gets bigger.
$800k-1.7mil per PS1 game and $5-10mil per PS2 game, adjusted for inflation, is still relatively low and the time required for both PS1/PS2 is relatively very low.
Sony could mandate that all new PS1/PS2 game development (excluding PS1/PS2 rereleases) would be PS exclusives.
Sony restarts Net Yaroze ("Let's Do It Together) initiative looking for the best PS1/PS2 games from small studios.
PS quickly becomes the "Console with the Most Exclusive Games".

 

[Mibu no ookami]

What data are you looking at to say the percentages are wrong

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

video card description

 

[Gaiff]

Double check your numbers. I looked at each of your values and you're off CONSTANTLY. It doesn't matter that you were off, but it is telling that when you're off it's always by a higher number except for 1 instance where you were lower by 0.1

I didn't highlight them all, but I believe I got most of them correctly. Where are your numbers from?

You absolutely did dude.

No.

You said here is the PS5 experience and here is the PC experience and listed experiences that were exclusive to Nvidia cards, Nvivdia RTX cards, and high end Nvidia RTX cards. These are not PC experiences, they're Nvidia PC experiences and high end ones at that. You obfuscate the difference because the increased fractionality of PC gaming breaks the PCMR mythos, which is funny because PC actually has massive brand wars on specific websites.

Lolno. Frame Generation is available on damn near every card thanks to ADM Frame Generation which can be used on NVIDIA cards. DLSS is available on every RTX card dating back to 2018. The lowest among them is the RTX 2060. RTX 20 and above cards have the lion's share of the gaming GPU market, so fuck no, none of what I listed is a "high-end" thing, especially not playing Black Myth Wukong at 40fps. You did mention that Frame Generation is also available on PS5, which is correct, but how many games have it? Spoilers: that list is even a smaller % than the number of RTX 4090s.

The example I gave was a fairly pedestrian rig with DLSS, Frame Generation, and the ability to play Black Myth Wukong at 40fps. If you think that's a rare or high-end experience, then you're even more clueless about PCs than I believed.

The real reason why you're here and why you're arguing is because you're threatened that PS5 Pro puts an end to PCMR not by outperforming the best cards, but by highlighting that so many console players are going to have a much better time with this for a much more affordable price than on PC.

The real reason I'm here is because you and your posse post a bunch of nonsense about a platform you know fuck-all about and I feel compelled to correct you. I couldn't care less about your thoughts on the matter because you're an irritating console fanboy who doesn't know a damn thing about PC. I have no problem with the Pro. I pre-ordered one the day it became available and anyone here can tell you I've been a staunch defender of its existence and people attempting to downplay its capabilities. What I can't stand are those like you who peddle ignorance and lies under the guise of being impartial when they clearly aren't. That's obvious when I see how much you flip-flop and how you accused me of several things I never did.

 

[willothedog]

Steam Hardware & Software Survey

video card description

Do you know how to read a table?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

What data are you looking at to say the percentages are wrong

I didn't highlight them all, but I believe I got most of them correctly. Where are your numbers from?

No.

Lolno. Frame Generation is available on damn near every card thanks to ADM Frame Generation which can be used on NVIDIA cards. DLSS is available on every RTX card dating back to 2018. The lowest among them is the RTX 2060. RTX 20 and above cards have the lion's share of the gaming GPU market, so fuck no, none of what I listed is a "high-end" thing, especially not playing Black Myth Wukong at 40fps. You did mention that Frame Generation is also available on PS5, which is correct, but how many games have it? Spoilers: that list is even a smaller % than the number of RTX 4090s.

The example I gave was a fairly pedestrian rig with DLSS, Frame Generation, and the ability to play Black Myth Wukong at 40fps. If you think that's a rare or high-end experience, then you're even more clueless about PCs than I believed.

The real reason I'm here is because you and your posse post a bunch of nonsense about a platform you know fuck-all about and I feel compelled to correct you. I couldn't care less about your thoughts on the matter because you're an irritating console fanboy who doesn't know a damn thing about PC. I have no problem with the Pro. I pre-ordered one the day it became available and anyone here can tell you I've been a staunch defender of its existence and people attempting to downplay its capabilities. What I can't stand are those like you who peddle ignorance and lies under the guise of being impartial when they clearly aren't. That's obvious when I see how much you flip-flop and how you accused me of several things I never did.

 

[sachos]

This shit looks phenomenal.

It does look much better than Insomniacs upscaler and the original RT Performance mode but it is a shame that it cant achieve Fidelity quality at 60 FPS. I hope Insomniac gives us a sharpening slider option. I really hate how sharpening looks but it seems they may have gone too soft on the image on this one.

 

[Kings Field]

This is worse than the gun forums I'm on arguing calibers, wound channels, depth, etc etc.

And I'm enjoying every minute of it. LMFAO

 

[Topher]

"Reopen" both PS2 and PS1 as continuous platforms baked into every new x86 PS console generation.
Unchanging companion platforms that would give studios faster/cheaper development targets with a large audience that only gets bigger.
$800k-1.7mil per PS1 game and $5-10mil per PS2 game, adjusted for inflation, is still relatively low and the time required for both PS1/PS2 is relatively very low.
Sony could mandate that all new PS1/PS2 game development (excluding PS1/PS2 rereleases) would be PS exclusives.
Sony restarts Net Yaroze ("Let's Do It Together) initiative looking for the best PS1/PS2 games from small studios.
PS quickly becomes the "Console with the Most Exclusive Games".

Interesting idea, but I think the world has moved on.

 

[PandaOk]

Yes, it is. The 4070 is also faster than the Pro's GPU by 10-15% if we use Cerny's 45% figure.

As I recall 45% is raster, not RT.

Look at the Digital Foundry analysis, the PS5 Version has major traversal and animation stutters, and the 60 FPS mode is below 40FPS in many areas.

We can cherry pick individual titles, that’s easy. Yet even Alex agrees that PS5 Pro is the alternative to dealing with all the ever more frequent and troubled PC ports. Between port quality, price, performative to requirements, and the delta relative to consoles, PC gaming has been getting worse not better.

I know it's not. It was just to refute this nonsense that since high-end GPUs represent a fraction of the total market, they should be ignored. I often see the "but only x % have high-end PCs" which, if it starts with the 4070, still will likely outnumber the Pro's lifetime sales.

Oh if that’s your point that’s fair. I’d argue there is a difference between ‘totally ignored’ and refuting the point that it’s a ‘distinct minority’.

The rub is it appeals to a certain segment of customer, drives innovation, and sounds awfully similar to the appeal of a PS5 Pro eh?

Off topic then: Consoles have always traded exceptionally well on value proposition. PS5 Pro may or may not sell as well as the PS4 Pro, but even that sold very well and the PS5 Pro appears to be picking up a lot of steam in the run up to release.

On official comments in 2017 PS4 Pro sold more than the PS4 Slim if you can believe it. Later on Sony said PS4 Pro sold 20% of lifetime PS4 sales.



So if the PS5 Pro sells similar figures or marginally less (not unlikely but people are more price tolerant/conditioned now and there’s arguably a larger market appeal beyond relatively low upgrading to 4K during that time— offsetting pricing somewhat) that puts it firmly within the area of the total combined sales of those high end GPU

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Do you know how to read a table?

Hilarious that my numbers were actually correct because I CAN read a table.

the table I was reading is a percentage of all steam users as opposed to percentage of PC users. It would be fine to use that but not if you later add in all steam users and those percentages to get your numbers based on that, least of all to mention people with multiple accounts on individual computers...

 

[willothedog]

why would you include mac and linux

 

[SKYF@ll]

The PS5 Pro does not require driver updates or complicated settings, and updates(OS & games) are automatic, so I can immediately play PSSR 4K/60fps (V-Sync) games that are optimal for TVs.
I like a power-saving console that allows me to play all my games while sitting on the couch.
I don't mind that the PS5 Pro is 10-15% slower than the RTX 4070.
It's enough to upgrade PS5 games (FSR 40-60fps) to the high-quality PSSR 4K/60fps.

 

[Mibu no ookami]

why would you include mac and linux

Because we're talking about percentage of steam users.

Why are you questioning this but not questioning extrapolating these percentages across all steam users to get the numbers sold when those total steam users include linux and mac?

 

[GoldenEye98]

So if the PS5 Pro sells similar figures or slightly less (not unlikely but people are more price tolerant/conditioned now and there’s arguably a larger market beyond upgrading to 4K— offsetting pricing somewhat) that puts it firmly within the area of the total combined sales of those high end GPUs

ehhh I am skeptical it can hit 20% of PS5 sales. PS4 Pro was $399.....

 

[Guilty_AI]

"Reopen" both PS2 and PS1 as continuous platforms baked into every new x86 PS console generation.
Unchanging companion platforms that would give studios faster/cheaper development targets with a large audience that only gets bigger.
$800k-1.7mil per PS1 game and $5-10mil per PS2 game, adjusted for inflation, is still relatively low and the time required for both PS1/PS2 is relatively very low.
Sony could mandate that all new PS1/PS2 game development (excluding PS1/PS2 rereleases) would be PS exclusives.
Sony restarts Net Yaroze ("Let's Do It Together) initiative looking for the best PS1/PS2 games from small studios.
PS quickly becomes the "Console with the Most Exclusive Games".

thats a extremely convoluted solution for problems that have already been solved in much simpler and more flexible manners. Why bother emulating ps1 and ps2 platforms when you can just make low-spec games using modern tools that'll run natively on anything?

 

[Mibu no ookami]

ehhh I am skeptical it can hit 20% of PS5 sales. PS4 Pro was $399.....

I'm skeptical of an vague article with no follow up questions. It seems like a lot of people get themselves in trouble with Japanese articles, especially Japanese commentators.

I don't think the PS4 Pro sold 23.4 million units.

That being said while it was cheap, it wasn't available for very long after the PS5 launched due to supply chain issues. It also didn't have any games to the level of GTA6 pushing it. It also had competition from the spec superior Xbox One X.

We're in the wild west right now on PS5 Pro and anyone who definitively says anything about how its going to sell down the road is fooling themselves.

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

PS4 Pro turned out to be 13% of PS4 owners, and it had a lot more to offer than PS5 Pro. The idea that PS5 Pro is going to be a big success in general, let alone that it puts pressure on PC in some way is wild cope man.

If PS5 sells north of 100 million and Pro sells 5-10% of that it will be a success.

A GTA PS5 Pro bundle could make that percentage even higher.

 

[Gaiff]

Good catch. Didn't even notice. I just clicked on PC. Doesn't change much though. I got 11.62% instead of 11.92%, so nothing really changed.

As I recall 45% is raster, not RT.

Yes, but as I said, if the 2-3x faster ray tracing number is to be believed, that would still put its RT performance behind the 4070 by a significant margin. For now, at least, I think in the ballpark of a 4070 is fair. Besides, the RTX 4080 laptop is actually a bit faster than the RTX 4070 desktop.

So if the PS5 Pro sells similar figures or slightly less (not unlikely but people are more price tolerant/conditioned now and there’s arguably a larger market beyond upgrading to 4K— offsetting pricing somewhat) that puts it firmly within the area of the total combined sales of those high end GPU

Perhaps, but as Zathalus pointed out, 132 million is from 2021 and the number of users has grown since then. It's very likely that we're closer to 20 million or even above, which is quite a bit more than what the Pro would sell. Regardless, my point was simply to illustrate that "high-end" GPUs at the moment might surpass the Pro's lifetime number, so people need to stop acting like they're irrelevant and every one games on a potato rig. Likewise, I almost never brought up the number of Pro users because it doesn't change the fact that the Pro still exists.

 

[PandaOk]

ehhh I am skeptical it can hit 20% of PS5 sales. PS4 Pro was $399.....

Very fair, it does seem to be somewhat of an experiment in greed. That said PS5 has mostly matched PS4 lifetime sales without a Pro and never having a price drop. Interesting times.

 

[PandaOk]

I'm skeptical of an vague article with no follow up questions. It seems like a lot of people get themselves in trouble with Japanese articles, especially Japanese commentators.

I don't think the PS4 Pro sold 23.4 million units.

That being said while it was cheap, it wasn't available for very long after the PS5 launched due to supply chain issues. It also didn't have any games to the level of GTA6 pushing it. It also had competition from the spec superior Xbox One X.

We're in the wild west right now on PS5 Pro and anyone who definitively says anything about how its going to sell down the road is fooling themselves.

Tbf I have an audio link as well it’s from an investors call

 

[Mibu no ookami]

Tbf I have an audio link as well it’s from an investors call

I'm not saying he didn't say it. What I'm saying is it's unclear what he meant. Whether that was 20% of PS5 total sales or 20% of sales since it launched, which are two VERY different things.

 

[Gaiff]

ehhh I am skeptical it can hit 20% of PS5 sales. PS4 Pro was $399.....

If I'm not mistaken, this was 20% following the Pro's launch, not the total.

The Pro was discontinued the following year and the PS4 went on to sell another 11 million units by the PS5's launch (that did include a few Pros). We're probably looking at around 15 million in total.

 

[PandaOk]

If I'm not mistaken, this was 20% following the Pro's launch, not the total.

The Pro was discontinued the following year and the PS4 went on to sell another 11 million units by the PS5's launch (that did include a few Pros). We're probably looking at around 15 million in total.

Fair enough a third party fork estimates sakes at 14.5 million.

Shame the Insomniac leak never revealed this. Or is this from the leak?

 

[Three]

Perhaps, but as Zathalus pointed out, 132 million is from 2021 and the number of users has grown since then. It's very likely that we're closer to 20 million or even above, which is quite a bit more than what the Pro would sell. Regardless, my point was simply to illustrate that "high-end" GPUs at the moment might surpass the Pro's lifetime number, so people need to stop acting like they're irrelevant and every one games on a potato rig. Likewise, I almost never brought up the number of Pro users because it doesn't change the fact that the Pro still exists.

You can't turn "users" into hardware sales like this. Otherwise my house bought 4 PS5s, 4 PS4 Pros, etc (I only have 1).

 

[digdug2]

ehhh I am skeptical it can hit 20% of PS5 sales. PS4 Pro was $399.....

It's wild to me that people aren't taking inflation into account. The inflation rate between 2017 and now is 28%.

Edit: Where I'm going with this is that PS5 Pro would have cost $503.28 in 2017 when you account for inflation. People would have been all about a console like this for that price point 7 years ago.

Edit 2 - Electric Boogaloo: The inflation rate between 2013 and now is 35%, meaning OG PS4 would cost $541.13 today.

Eff me, here's edit #3: The 20GB PS3 at launch would have cost $780.82 in today's money. 60GB = $934.44 (56%)

 

[PandaOk]

You can't turn "users" into hardware sales like this. Otherwise my house bought 4 PS5s, 4 PS4 Pros, etc (I only have 1).

We’ve also had a relatively large volume of sales for AI and circumventing import restrictions etc. The most common language on Steam Hardware survey is Chinese. Or perhaps that is a recent change due to Black Myth?

I wish I had your money to buy 4 of each console!

 

[kevboard]

You can't turn "users" into hardware sales like this. Otherwise my house bought 4 PS5s, 4 PS4 Pros, etc (I only have 1).

My PS5s both have 5 user profiles on them lol.

main account, US account, Japan account, and 2 other family member accounts.

so I alone am 3 users basically I'm single handedly keeping Sony alive.

 

[Three]

I wish I had your money to buy 4 of each console!

Not sure if you were joking (I suck at picking up cues) but I don't actually have 4 of each console. I have 1 PS5, 1 PS4 Pro, 2 PS4, 1 Switch, 1 Gaming/workstation PC (have a lot of PCs in general though) and a PS5 Pro soon.

I was just saying if you were to start using "users" to calculate hardware sales for my household you would end up quadrupling the actual hardware sales because there are 4 household users on these devices.

Gaiff is using monthly active users to extrapolate hardware sales for PC GPUs when some (likely not that small) portion of users are sharing the same single hardware throughout a month and he's putting it up against actual hardware numbers for PS.

 

[PandaOk]

Not sure if you were joking (I suck at picking up cues) but I don't actually have 4 of each console. I have 1 PS5, 1 PS4 Pro, 2 PS4, 1 Switch, 1 Gaming/workstation PC (have a lot of PCs in general though) and a PS5 Pro soon.

I was just saying if you were to start using "users" to calculate hardware sales for my household you would end up quadrupling the actual hardware sales because there are 4 household users on these devices.

Gaiff is using monthly active users to extrapolate hardware sales for PC GPUs when some (likely not that small) portion of users are sharing the same single hardware throughout a month and he's putting it up against actual hardware numbers for PS.

I’m on day 2 of anesthesia induced insomniac with no sleep so I’m a bit out of it