Support NeoGAF

[Tqaulity]

$550 GPU (4070) exceeds PS5 Pro. $600 GPU (4070 Super) exceeds it further. That's a fact, since Nvidia had the wherewithal to include good raster, RT and ML.

The last few pages of this thread are just absurd. How ridiculous is it to be arguing specs as "fact" for a console that hasn't even officially been announced never mind released yet. Sony hasn't even acknowledged the existence of a PS5 Pro yet so to try to label anything about that console as "fact" is beyond ridiculous. Everything we've heard is from "insider" leaks and while some of it may turn out to be true, none of it is fact until Sony announces it. Those "leaks" could be outdated, intentionally misleading, or just plain wrong in many cases. Those Dev Portal specs are FULL of incomplete specs and contradictions that lack context and detail so it's likely that the final specs may be very different than what people have been inferring for the past few months.

So again, until Sony says anything concrete about the existence of a PS5 Pro and it's release, calling anything "fact" now is just beyond silly.

 

[Leonidas]

The last few pages of this thread are just absurd. How ridiculous is it to be arguing specs as "fact" for a console that hasn't even officially been announced never mind released yet. Sony hasn't even acknowledged the existence of a PS5 Pro yet so to try to label anything about that console as "fact" is beyond ridiculous. Everything we've heard is from "insider" leaks and while some of it may turn out to be true, none of it is fact until Sony announces it. Those "leaks" could be outdated, intentionally misleading, or just plain wrong in many cases. Those Dev Portal specs are FULL of incomplete specs and contradictions that lack context and detail so it's likely that the final specs may be very different than what people have been inferring for the past few months.

So again, until Sony says anything concrete about the existence of a PS5 Pro and it's release, calling anything "fact" now is just beyond silly.

Okay I went a little overboard there... how about this 4070 exceeds PS5 Pro, based on Sony's perported meagre 45% uplift.

 

[MarkMe2525]

The only way PSSR won't be superior to DLSS is if it is not profitable to achieve it in a PS5 Pro priced console with that silicon budget

Is that really the only way?

 

[bitbydeath]

On all points, what about points 3. You think FSR will be better than PSSR?!?
What about point 4. You think PS5 Pro will offer a meaningful benefit for the thousands of unpatched PS4 games?!?

1. Too many unknowns
2. BC games are only important at the beginning of a new gen. I barely get time to play new games, I don’t see the point of drudging up old games that look and play outdated even if they receive a small patch. IMO

 

[Gaiff]

This thread reminds me of when people were saying the consoles’ SSDs and I/Os would make every PC obsolete and newer PCs would need 64GB of RAM to keep up.

It’s like people never learn no matter how many times we do this exercise. Pro will erase the advantages of high-end PCs? PSSR will 100% be superior to DLSS barring a disaster? The craziest part is that some of these takes are posted by people who should know better, yet the fanboy in them makes them completely blind.

Here we are all waiting for a nice and affordable machine that will be significantly better than the base PS5, yet some just can’t help themselves by poisoning the well by parading complete nonsense. The Pro is an upgraded PS5. It won’t revolutionize gaming hardware.

I was curious why this thread had been revived, but the last 5-10 pages are pure stupidity (including hilariously incorrect assertions by our resident NVIDIA shill Leonidas).

 

[Leonidas]

2. BC games are only important at the beginning of a new gen. I barely get time to play new games, I don’t see the point of drudging up old games that look and play outdated even if they receive a small patch. IMO

And what about PS5 games that won't get patches. Doesn't it suck to know that those games will only marginally be improved if at all? Glad I have a machine where I can choose my own settings and not be held down by limitations.

 

[Leonidas]

I was curious why this thread had been revived, but the last 5-10 pages are pure stupidity (including hilariously incorrect assertions by our resident NVIDIA shill Leonidas).

Tell me where I told lies.

First I'm Intel shill, now Nvidia, can't wait till someone calls me an AMD shill (my first GPU was AMD, and I had several AMD CPUs )

 

[bitbydeath]

And what about PS5 games that won't get patches. Doesn't it suck to know that those games will only marginally be improved if at all? Glad I have a machine where I can choose my own settings and not be held down by limitations.

I’ll keep playing new games. I’m surprised you’re interested in old outdated games.

 

[ChiefDada]

And what about PS5 games that won't get patches.

Why is your mindset so ass backwards to worry about games that won't get a patch? Most games target 60fps/VRR with dynamic resolution. They won't even need the typical patch.

First I'm Intel shill, now Nvidia, can't wait till someone calls me an AMD shill (my first GPU was AMD, and I had several AMD CPUs )

Do you also have tons of black friends?

 

[schaft0620]

The last few pages of this thread are just absurd. How ridiculous is it to be arguing specs as "fact" for a console that hasn't even officially been announced never mind released yet. Sony hasn't even acknowledged the existence of a PS5 Pro yet so to try to label anything about that console as "fact" is beyond ridiculous. Everything we've heard is from "insider" leaks and while some of it may turn out to be true, none of it is fact until Sony announces it. Those "leaks" could be outdated, intentionally misleading, or just plain wrong in many cases. Those Dev Portal specs are FULL of incomplete specs and contradictions that lack context and detail so it's likely that the final specs may be very different than what people have been inferring for the past few months.

So again, until Sony says anything concrete about the existence of a PS5 Pro and it's release, calling anything "fact" now is just beyond silly.

Don't try to reason with them. I check this thread every day so see if there is news and every day it's the same argument.

 

[bender]

Glad I have a machine where I can choose my own settings and not be held down by limitations.

If only we had threads talking about PC gaming.

 

[Skifi28]

If only we had threads talking about PC gaming.

They're not that fun, you gotta be able to flaunt your superiority to the peasantry, otherwise it's meaningless.

 

[Gaiff]

Tell me where I told lies.

First I'm Intel shill, now Nvidia, can't wait till someone calls me an AMD shill (my first GPU was AMD, and I had several AMD CPUs )

You didn’t tell lies. You firmly believe the stupid shit you type, which is worse.

You also have no interest in the PS5 Pro so why are you even here?

 

[bitbydeath]

If I was stuck playing older games at console settings, I wouldn't, but its amazing what much higher settings, resolution and framerate can do for some titles.

I also tend to wait for things to be ironed out before buying a game, I'd hate to have bought Horizon Forbidden West at launch, only to have to buy the DLC to have the complete package later. I want it all in one package, which is what Sony provides to the PC (after some time).

Differences are very minimal between consoles and PC today anyway.

It’s not like how PS3 could barely run Crysis, or how PS2 wasn’t powerful enough to run Doom 3. The gap between consoles and PC keeps shrinking every gen.

 

[Loxus]

Why must the PS5 Pro have to beat the 4070? Like I don't get it.

Being on par with the 3070TI is good enough.

Speaking about that 45% faster rendering, it made me remember this tweet.


AMD Radeon RX 6700
The 6700 has 36CUs making it the PS5's desktop equivalent.

AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT
The 7700XT has 54CUs and has 42% faster rendering than the 6700.

The leak states the PS5 Pro has 45% faster rendering than the PS5.

Looking at clock speeds, the the 7700XT (2.544 GHz) has a 4% faster frequency than the 6700 (2.450 GHz).

Applying that same 4% to the PS5 GPU clock frequency lands pretty close to Digital Foundry's 2.35 GHz.

2.23 GHz + 4% = 2.32 GHz
2.23 GHz + 5% = 2.34 GHz

Is the PS5 Pro really just a 7700XT with RDNA4 RT/ML?

Nah, most likely just a coincidence.

 

[ChiefDada]

In many cases the difference will be marginal, I'd hate to not be in control of the settings I use.

So you want control over the graphical presets? Yeah, you shouldn't be wasting anyone's time (including your own) in the console threads.

BTW 60 FPS in 2024 is abysmal.

Okay buddy.

 

[Gaiff]

Why must the PS5 Pro have to beat the 4070? Like I don't get it.

I don't think anyone said it must be. That's kind of what many of us are expecting. The PS5 was >2070 which was a generation old when it launched. The Pro being around the level of a 4070 which will also be a generation old when it launches would align with that.

If NVIDIA doesn't shit the bed again, the 5060 will be on the level of a 4070 somewhere in late 2025. PS5 Pro around the level of a 5060 makes a lot of sense.

 

[drganon]

If I was stuck playing older games at console settings, I wouldn't, but its amazing what much higher settings, resolution and framerate can do for some titles.

I also tend to wait for things to be ironed out before buying a game, I'd hate to have bought Horizon Forbidden West at launch, only to have to buy the DLC to have the complete package later. I want it all in one package, which is what Sony provides to the PC (after some time).


In many cases the difference will be marginal, I'd hate to not be in control of the settings I use. BTW 60 FPS in 2024 is abysmal.

 

[ChiefDada]

Why must the PS5 Pro have to beat the 4070? Like I don't get it.

Being on par with the 3070TI is good enough.

Speaking about that 45% faster rendering, it made me remember this tweet.


AMD Radeon RX 6700
The 6700 has 36CUs making it the PS5's desktop equivalent.

AMD Radeon RX 7700 XT
The 7700XT has 54CUs and has 42% faster rendering than the 6700.

The leak states the PS5 Pro has 45% faster rendering than the PS5.

Looking at clock speeds, the the 7700XT (2.544 GHz) has a 4% faster frequency than the 6700 (2.450 GHz).

Applying that same 4% to the PS5 GPU clock frequency lands pretty close to Digital Foundry's 2.35 GHz.

2.23 GHz + 4% = 2.32 GHz
2.23 GHz + 5% = 2.34 GHz

Is the PS5 Pro really just a 7700XT with RDNA4 RT/ML?

Nah, most likely just a coincidence.

If you look at the memory subsystem setup of the 6700XT vs 7700XT, you will have your answer as to why the performance uplift for the RDNA 3 card is so pathetic.

6700XT: 40CUs, 384 GB/s, 96MB Infinity Cache
7700XT: 54CUs, 432 GB/s, 48MB Infinity Cache

Seriously, I thought we were over looking at TF in isolation.

 

[Loxus]

If you look at the memory subsystem setup of the 6700XT vs 7700XT, you will have your answer as to why the performance uplift for the RDNA 3 card is so pathetic.

6700XT: 40CUs, 384 GB/s, 96MB Infinity Cache
7700XT: 54CUs, 432 GB/s, 48MB Infinity Cache

Seriously, I thought we were over looking at TF in isolation.

TechPowerUp sort the cards by performance in games not TF.

The 7700XT is 42% better in games than the 6700.

Note: 6700 (36CUs) not 6700XT (40CUs).

 

[Leonidas]

You didn’t tell lies. You firmly believe the stupid shit you type, which is worse.

You also have no interest in the PS5 Pro so why are you even here?

I do have interest in PS5 Pro, if it enhances my backwards compatible titles.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

PS5 Pro will be limited to PS4 settings when running PS4 software. Games like Arkham Knight, Just Cause 3, and many others, will run much better on a PC equiped with a $200 GPU than they will on a PS5 Pro, running backwards compatible PS4 games. PS5 Pro can't escape the limitations of PS4 games.

And so what? Like how is this even relevant? Guess what? PS7 will be limited to PS4 settings when running PS4 games too? The same way the PS5 is limited to PS4 settings. So what exactly is your point?

Do you really think the people that are buying a PS5 or even a PS5pro... are doing it primarily because they wanna play PS4 games? Like this BC nonsense hasn't aged enough yet? For some perspective... the PS4 didn't have any form of BC at all. And the XB1 was the baby jesus of BC... look how much good that did the XB1.

I know you don't agree because you really want one and that's okay, but this doesn't make the point you think it does.
Sony's reasons for the PS4 Pro can't be applied to a PS5 Pro because they made it redundant.

And I don't know why it has to have the same reasons applied to it that were applied to the PS4pro.

This thing is not complicated at all, some sort of new thing... or groundbreaking in any way.

"For $100 more, you get the best PlayStation gaming experience with the PS5pro. Better graphics, higher rez and higher framerates. Experience your PlayStation games the best way possible and the way the developers intended with the PS5pro"

Thats it. Sold. It doesn't have to be anything more than that. Any more than the 7800 needs to be anything more than what it is compared to the 7700. Or the 4080 needs to be anything more than what it is compared to the 4070. Or the iPhone 14pro needs to be compared to the iPhone 14... I can go on.

The point is, this isn't the first time, nor will it be the last, that for a little more money, an OEM makes a "premium" product that is the exact same as a lower model... but better. And that can't be denied, if you are gaming on PlayStation, or want to game on PlayStation, and want the best PS gaming experience possible, the PS5pro is where you will get it.

I don't understand why everyone else, can make different SKUs of the same product or a line of products in the same family with slightly varying specs, but when consoles do it they somehow need to justify themselves. Nor do I understand how this is any different from Xbox releasing two different speced consoles on the same day.

 

[Leonidas]

So you want control over the graphical presets? Yeah, you shouldn't be wasting anyone's time (including your own) in the console threads.

More accurately, I'd hate to be locked to console settings. I wouldn't have played through many last gen games if I was forced to play them at 30 FPS at 900p/1080p at medium settings, which was typical of last gen.

And so what? Like how is this even relevant? Guess what? PS7 will be limited to PS4 settings when running PS4 games too? The same way the PS5 is limited to PS4 settings. So what exactly is your point?

And that is exactly why I buy all my games on PC, so I'm not stuck to those limitations. My copy of Just Cause 3 and Arkham Knight can run at 120 FPS and at much higher than console settings.

Do you really think the people that are buying a PS5 or even a PS5pro... are doing it primarily because they wanna play PS4 games? Like this BC nonsense hasn't aged enough yet? For some perspective... the PS4 didn't have any form of BC at all. And the XB1 was the baby jesus of BC... look how much good that did the XB1.

I bring it up because there are thousands of PS4 games. There are only hundreds of PS5 native games. The majority of games playable on PS5 come from PS4.

When I had PS+ Extra a bunch of games on there were PS4 games. I think someone who buys such a service would try out some of those games, and if they do, many of them will be at low settings and FPS.

 

[Mr.Phoenix]

And that is exactly why I buy all my games on PC, so I'm not stuck to those limitations. My copy of Just Cause 3 and Arkham Knight can run at 120 FPS and at much higher than console settings.

So remind us why you are here in this thread again?

I bring it up because there are thousands of PS4 games. There are only hundreds of PS5 native games. The majority of games playable on PS5 come from PS4.

No, you bring it up because you are trolling. Simple as that.

Thsi BC nonsense is just your cover. When has any new PS console drastically improved the BC gaming experience of games from previous consoles? When has that ever happened... in the almost 3 decades of PS existence? And here you are trying to make a mountain out of an anthill that has not only never happened before, but that no sane thinking person that understand anything about how consoles work would be expecting what you are saying.

When I had PS+ Extra a bunch of games on there were PS4 games. I think someone who buys such a service would try out some of those games, and if they do, many of them will be at low settings and FPS.

And when they do, they would play it as if it were a slightly improved PS4 game and at PS4 settings. And not somehow expect Sony or devs to go in and patch in support for newer hardware.

Please stop it... I am one post away from reporting you.

 

[reinking]

This thread reminds me of when people were saying the consoles’ SSDs and I/Os would make every PC obsolete and newer PCs would need 64GB of RAM to keep up.

It reminds me of every console thread where people have to come in to downplay the consoles comparing them to PCs.

I think most of us know that PCs are more powerful than consoles. What is interesting about consoles is to learn about their hardware efficiency to overcome their lack of power. You bring up the consoles I/O. I thought that was pretty impressive for this console generation.

 

[Leonidas]

So remind us why you are here in this thread again?

Responding at people like you responding to me... and holding out hope that Sony announces that they did something to improve BC so that I might buy one to play the handful of games that weren't ported from my PSN account.

No, you bring it up because you are trolling. Simple as that.

Its not trolling. PS4 has thousands of games, 99% playable on PS5. PS5 only has hundreds of native games. Majority of games on PS5 Pro will be PS4 games. Hopefully Sony enhances them in some way.

Thsi BC nonsense is just your cover.

Actually, BC was one of the main reasons I bought PS5 for the first time (before selling it when it had a high trade-in value). And I will most likely buy either a PS5 or PS5 Pro at some point in the future, to access my PS4 games. So I really am hoping Sony does something to improve the BC.

And when they do, they would play it as if it were a slightly improved PS4 game and at PS4 settings.

And that would be an abysmal experience on PS5 Pro. Playing with the same settings and FPS target as a 2013/2016 machine is abysmal.

 

[Leonidas]

When has any new PS console drastically improved the BC gaming experience of games from previous consoles? When has that ever happened... in the almost 3 decades of PS existence? And here you are trying to make a mountain out of an anthill that has not only never happened before, but that no sane thinking person that understand anything about how consoles work would be expecting what you are saying.

Sony never really has, but that doesn't mean it can't happen.

Microsoft enhanced enough backwards compatible games for me to keep my Series X, and even doubled frame-rate in some cases. Sony could do it too if they wanted to. Some hackers successfully did it in various titles, did you forget about that? Why can hackers do it but not Sony?

BC is a huge issue for me. That is pretty much all I use these consoles for.

Please stop it... I am one post away from reporting you.

For what, saying that most games playable on PS5 Pro probably can't use its power (since PS4 has over 3000 games, yet PS5 has less than 1000)? Or me hoping that PS5 Pro has enhanced BC, something I truly do hope for.

 

[bender]

I was having drinks with Mark and he told me that the Pro will enhance all PS4 titles to an abysmal 60FPS.

 

[ChiefDada]

Well, if we're subscribing to precedent then we are exactly 2 months away from official reveal.

 

[Gaiff]

I was having dinner with Mark Cerny when I told him, "You know, Mark, you should put an SSD in the PS5."

and then he went, "Wow, you’re a genius my friend."

And that’s how I saved Sony.

True story.

 

[Zathalus]

This thread reminds me of when people were saying the consoles’ SSDs and I/Os would make every PC obsolete and newer PCs would need 64GB of RAM to keep up.

It’s like people never learn no matter how many times we do this exercise. Pro will erase the advantages of high-end PCs? PSSR will 100% be superior to DLSS barring a disaster? The craziest part is that some of these takes are posted by people who should know better, yet the fanboy in them makes them completely blind.

Here we are all waiting for a nice and affordable machine that will be significantly better than the base PS5, yet some just can’t help themselves by poisoning the well by parading complete nonsense. The Pro is an upgraded PS5. It won’t revolutionize gaming hardware.

I was curious why this thread had been revived, but the last 5-10 pages are pure stupidity (including hilariously incorrect assertions by our resident NVIDIA shill Leonidas).

Better than DLSS does seem to be a stretch. The thing that makes DLSS (and XeSS/PSSR) good is the ML part. This allows for the elimination of ghosting and blur, and enhances image stability. Nvidia has been developing the ML model for over 5 years at this point and has been throwing tons of supercomputer processing at it. And considering it is Nvidia, nobody does it better then them.

Expecting a competing technology to be better right out of the gate seems to be naively optimistic. I personally think PSSR is going to be really good, especially when comparing at regular TV viewing distances, but beating DLSS seems to be a tall order. Although I do wonder if PSSR will find its way to PC as well.

 

[Panajev2001a]

It reminds me of every console thread where people have to come in to downplay the consoles comparing them to PCs.

I think most of us know that PCs are more powerful than consoles. What is interesting about consoles is to learn about their hardware efficiency to overcome their lack of power. You bring up the consoles I/O. I thought that was pretty impressive for this console generation.

Considering consoles are 16 GB of RAM, find PC with 16 GB of total RAM (main RAM + VRAM) performing anywhere near as good as that for a similar price . Of course the claim has to be exaggerated, there is always money you can throw at the problem: more RAM (not 64 GB, but how many PCs are advisable at 16 GB of RAM and not something sensible like 32 GB… excluding GPU VRAM too), bigger and bigger GPUs (for the few games supporting DirectStorage on PC and GPU based decompression), etc…

 

[PeteBull]

It'll be outdated in a few months once Nintendo release the next Switch.

I know its a joke post(hopefully ) but on a srs note we had leaks about switch succesor too, and for a while, they said roughly ps4 power in handheld mode, ps4pr0 docked, which checks out for 2025 nvidia based handheld device (ofc dlss and other nvidia features will be included- except frame gen, again, info based on leaks so not official ).

For comparision ps4pr0 is roughly as strong as xbox series s, gpu wise, cpu wise and features wise series s is obviously miles ahead, since its newer archi, doesnt have that thing as its central processing unit

 

[winjer]

Considering consoles are 16 GB of RAM, find PC with 16 GB of total RAM (main RAM + VRAM) performing anywhere near as good as that for a similar price . Of course the claim has to be exaggerated, there is always money you can throw at the problem: more RAM (not 64 GB, but how many PCs are advisable at 16 GB of RAM and not something sensible like 32 GB… excluding GPU VRAM too), bigger and bigger GPUs (for the few games supporting DirectStorage on PC and GPU based decompression), etc…

Truth be told, 16Gb or ram are needed just to run Windows with all it's bloatware and spyware, and all the crap that the user installs and runs in the background.

 

[PaintTinJr]

Is that really the only way?

Well we've got reliable posters like HeisenbergFX4 that have senior industry friends - amazingly informed throughout the ATVI acquisition - that have in all likelihood seen PSSR first hand in a behind the scenes PlayStation presentation, and they are indicating that the Pro makes the talk of Terfaflops comparisons meaningless, and haven't been downplaying the leaked specs as wrong which on paper shouldn't achieve that.

So unless we have a repeat of PS3 specs and batpad getting changed after reveal, it is pretty safe to say PlayStation has the in-house capability for PSSR to achieve making talk of teraflops meaningless - a feat which DLSS since its beginning on a base RTX 2060 hasn't done with the scramble to 4090s and beyond - so, yes delivering that capability seems purely about cost for Sony.

The other way - and we can already see the Nvidia supporters circling in the thread - is that DF Richard and Alex do what they always do. They'll claim to be experts on the topic and then immediately hand the win to anyone but PlayStation, and then double down on that view when the next iteration of DLSS arrives.

 

[Toots]

I don't care for your parochial hatreds, I've got a PS5 pro sized hole in my life and 700€$ in excess on my bank account and the release date cannot come too soon.

 

[TheRedRiders]

I don't care for your parochial hatreds, I've got a PS5 pro sized hole in my life and 700€$ in excess on my bank account and the release date cannot come too soon.

Join the party my friend, me and HeisenbergFX4 are going to get the drinks ready.

 

[Zathalus]

Well we've got reliable posters like HeisenbergFX4 that have senior industry friends - amazingly informed throughout the ATVI acquisition - that have in all likelihood seen PSSR first hand in a behind the scenes PlayStation presentation, and they are indicating that the Pro makes the talk of Terfaflops comparisons meaningless, and haven't been downplaying the leaked specs as wrong which on paper shouldn't achieve that.

So unless we have a repeat of PS3 specs and batpad getting changed after reveal, it is pretty safe to say PlayStation has the in-house capability for PSSR to achieve making talk of teraflops meaningless - a feat which DLSS since its beginning on a base RTX 2060 hasn't done with the scramble to 4090s and beyond - so, yes delivering that capability seems purely about cost for Sony.

The other way - and we can already see the Nvidia supporters circling in the thread - is that DF Richard and Alex do what they always do. They'll claim to be experts on the topic and then immediately hand the win to anyone but PlayStation, and then double down on that view when the next iteration of DLSS arrives.

PSSR doesn’t make teraflops meaningless rather it makes it meaningless in comparison to GPUs that don’t have ML upscaling. In context you shouldn’t judge the 18 teraflops of the Pro vs the 10 Terflops of the regular PS5 as PSSR allows for a much better final image then you would expect from just the compute increase alone. Hence those complaining about the meagre compute increase are missing the point. The rough PC equivalent would be comparing the 1080 vs the 2080, only a mere 40% increase in ‘regular’ performance but thanks to DLSS the 2080 can offer far more in either image quality or performance then the raw specs would indicate.

It's absolutely still the case that compute matters when comparing GPUs that both have ML upscaling capabilities. I assume the PS6 will have PSSR as well, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have a significant increase in compute either. ML upscalers don’t replace the need for more powerful hardware, it just augments the capabilities of what is already there.

 

[Gaiff]

Well we've got reliable posters like HeisenbergFX4 that have senior industry friends - amazingly informed throughout the ATVI acquisition - that have in all likelihood seen PSSR first hand in a behind the scenes PlayStation presentation, and they are indicating that the Pro makes the talk of Terfaflops comparisons meaningless, and haven't been downplaying the leaked specs as wrong which on paper shouldn't achieve that.

So unless we have a repeat of PS3 specs and batpad getting changed after reveal, it is pretty safe to say PlayStation has the in-house capability for PSSR to achieve making talk of teraflops meaningless - a feat which DLSS since its beginning on a base RTX 2060 hasn't done with the scramble to 4090s and beyond - so, yes delivering that capability seems purely about cost for Sony.

The other way - and we can already see the Nvidia supporters circling in the thread - is that DF Richard and Alex do what they always do. They'll claim to be experts on the topic and then immediately hand the win to anyone but PlayStation, and then double down on that view when the next iteration of DLSS arrives.

This doesn't even begin to make sense and you perfectly know this.

You went from "making teraflops comparisons" meaningless to "making teraflops meaningless" period. There's a big difference there. DLSS can make teraflops comparisons meaningless because while a 1080 Ti has more compute power than a 2060, a 2060 can in some cases achieve better results if running at a lower resolution and upscaling using DLSS. This effectively makes direct comparisons meaningless, but the compute certainly doesn't become useless a lot a sudden. By "teraflops" I also assume they don't only mean compute but power in general, which is nonsensical. The Pro won't make 360p look 4K no matter how good PSSR is so why would base performance ever become meaningless? It can seriously mitigates the importance of base specs, which is what DLSS and to a lesser extent, FSR do. Within the context of the PS5 vs PS5 Pro, teraflops comparisons are meaningless because for one, we got the whole dual-issue ordeal, and for two, even if you just rely on the 40% figure, you must factor PSSR which isn't easy to represent in numbers. So yes, I would argue comparing the teraflops of the Pro to the base PS5 is effectively meaningless. This, however, suggests none of what you're saying and you're making some seriously flawed leaps of logic with little info to go on.

I don't know how anyone can sit there and seriously pretend that upscaling will suddenly mean the Pro, or any machine for that matter, will suddenly erase the need for good base specs, especially when DLSS is already excellent.

 

[PaintTinJr]

PSSR doesn’t make teraflops meaningless rather it makes it meaningless in comparison to GPUs that don’t have ML upscaling. In context you shouldn’t judge the 18 teraflops of the Pro vs the 10 Terflops of the regular PS5 as PSSR allows for a much better final image then you would expect from just the compute increase alone. Hence those complaining about the meagre compute increase are missing the point. The rough PC equivalent would be comparing the 1080 vs the 2080, only a mere 40% increase in ‘regular’ performance but thanks to DLSS the 2080 can offer far more in either image quality or performance then the raw specs would indicate.

It's absolutely still the case that compute matters when comparing GPUs that both have ML upscaling capabilities. I assume the PS6 will have PSSR as well, but that doesn’t mean it won’t have a significant increase in compute either. ML upscalers don’t replace the need for more powerful hardware, it just augments the capabilities of what is already there.

The people giving these opinions are rocking very high-end PCs and replacing them frequently, so them being impressed with PSSR/Pro to the way they have should tell us something.

It makes me think we are hitting a wall for precision of image at 4K60 HDR and that the remaining differentiator going forward is the layering of fx at native to be ML upscaled, which in the world of gaming is one where PlayStation first party console exclusives probably win out against the majority of PC ports because working at lower native on fixed hardware allows them to push much harder with Dual Issue and be complimented with PSSR more than DLSS because of quality hi-res compression texturing used on both PS5 and PS5 Pro.

 

[PaintTinJr]

This doesn't even begin to make sense and you perfectly know this.

You went from "making teraflops comparisons" meaningless to "making teraflops meaningless" period. There's a big difference there. DLSS can make teraflops comparisons meaningless because while a 1080 Ti has more compute power than a 2060, a 2060 can in some cases achieve better results if running at a lower resolution and upscaling using DLSS. This effectively makes direct comparisons meaningless, but the compute certainly doesn't become useless a lot a sudden. By "teraflops" I also assume they don't only mean compute but power in general, which is nonsensical. The Pro won't make 360p look 4K no matter how good PSSR is so why would base performance ever become meaningless? It can seriously mitigates the importance of base specs, which is what DLSS and to a lesser extent, FSR do. Within the context of the PS5 vs PS5 Pro, teraflops comparisons are meaningless because for one, we got the whole dual-issue ordeal, and for two, even if you just rely on the 40% figure, you must factor PSSR which isn't easy to represent in numbers. So yes, I would argue comparing the teraflops of the Pro to the base PS5 is effectively meaningless. This, however, suggests none of what you're saying and you're making some seriously flawed leaps of logic with little info to go on.

I don't know how anyone can sit there and seriously pretend that upscaling will suddenly mean the Pro, or any machine for that matter, will suddenly erase the need for good base specs, especially when DLSS is already excellent.

I'm meaning it could make PC brute forcing meaningless, which has been the PC go to every mid-gen.

Instead it could require a developer to focus on just the top 10% of the PC market hardware and set native at 1080p and see just how much fidelity by layering fx they could cram in so that the upscaled result was noticeably beyond the PS5 Pro or future consoles, but ML upscaling relies heavily on quality texturing (hi res) AFAIK and even on those top 10% of PCs many of them fall short of besting the base PS5 io complex capabilities to check-in resources and in general the best polished software for generations has been console first party stuff because of the size of target market, and that's unlikely to change, so whenever we reach a stage that production level is the limiting factor - because TV resolution and frame-rate, and hdr and ML upscaling are all at diminishing returns, which platform do you think will showcase new fidelity content at its best, then?

 

[Gaiff]

I'm meaning it could make PC brute forcing meaningless, which has been the PC go to every mid-gen.

But this isn't true and people need to stop saying that. How is DLSS "brute forcing" anything? It's the most innovative image upscaling technique ever released in the gaming space and is the exact opposite of brute forcing. How is ray reconstruction brute forcing? How is silicon specifically dedicated to handling ray tracing brute forcing? We have DirectStorage in the pipeline that is meant to take advantage of existing hardware features and make them more efficient (though that still needs work). We got frame generation which is slowly making its way to consoles. I'm also almost certain that techniques such as tesselation also saw the light of day on PC first, as did technologies such as VRR. PC over the past few years has consistently been innovating with technologies that later made their way to consoles, but people pretend that all PC parts do is just power through everything. What?

And if I misread that, are you saying that Sony has been brute-forcing its mid-gen refreshes every time? But it's only had one, so I'm not sure what you mean here.

Instead it could require a developer to focus on just the top 10% of the PC market hardware and set native at 1080p and see just how much fidelity by layering fx they could cram in so that the upscaled result was noticeably beyond the PS5 Pro or future consoles, but ML upscaling relies heavily on quality texturing (hi res) AFAIK and even on those top 10% of PCs many of them fall short of besting the base PS5 io complex capabilities to check-in resources and in general the best polished software for generations has been console first party stuff because of the size of target market, and that's unlikely to change, so whenever we reach a stage that production level is the limiting factor - because TV resolution and frame-rate, and hdr and ML upscaling are all at diminishing returns, which platform do you think will showcase new fidelity content at its best, then?

Why are we pretending that we aren't already there? The Pro won't take us anywhere new. Many industry enthusiasts made the claim years ago that DLSS Quality is sometimes better than native. It's reconstructing from a 1440p image up to 4K while being much more performant (upwards of 40% in some extreme cases). So why are you here acting like we aren't already seeing this? I think it was yamaci17 who was making comparisons between DLSS Performance vs native 4K and concluding that DLSS came out looking really good, except the performance was like 60% higher. When debating buying a comparable AMD or NVIDIA GPU, do you know the first topic that is brought up? Yeah, DLSS and ray tracing. Doesn't that already tell you that teraflops comparisons have already become meaningless in the PC space? Almost every game ships with DLSS and no one is skipping it.

The last part which I find hilarious is the sheer hypocrisy of this whole discussion. Remember that throughout the years when people were comparing the PS5 to PC parts, DLSS was almost never factored in which is why when people built a PC comparable to a PS5, they often picked a 2070S. Here's the catch though, anyone who has a 2070S will use DLSS when it's available. That didn't stop the popular discourse from blatantly ignoring DLSS though and pretending that the 2070S was the bare minimum needed to match the PS5 even though if you use DLSS, it's not close anymore. But now, PSSR which is 4 years late to the party, is making teraflops comparisons meaningless. Right.

This discussion is seriously baffling.

 

[Perrott]

Funny to see Leonidas crying about "bUt MuH Ps4 bC gAmEs" when at this rate it does seem like Sony will end up remaking even the Knack series in full PSSR 4K 60FPS glory just to fuck with the fans expecting them to touch up Bloodborne in any way, shape or form.

 

[Bojji]

If you look at the memory subsystem setup of the 6700XT vs 7700XT, you will have your answer as to why the performance uplift for the RDNA 3 card is so pathetic.

6700XT: 40CUs, 384 GB/s, 96MB Infinity Cache
7700XT: 54CUs, 432 GB/s, 48MB Infinity Cache

Seriously, I thought we were over looking at TF in isolation.

6700XT: 40CUs, 384 GB/s, 96MB Infinity Cache
7700XT: 54CUs, 432 GB/s, 48MB Infinity Cache = 6800: 60CUs, 512GB/s, 128MB Infinity Cache

So yeah it's all about clocks when it comes to these GPUs, 7700XT has worse specs but thanks to higher clock it's on par with 6800.

Clocks can overcome some hardware differences (PS5 is doing just that). So far everything is pointing up to PS5 Pro being around 6800 in raster power, it has almost the same specs and even 2.2GHz clock is almost the same, it may be faster in some cases thanks to being RDNA4 (vs RDNA2) but overall performance should be similar.

Of course RT is a different story...

 

[PaintTinJr]

But this isn't true and people need to stop saying that. How is DLSS "brute forcing" anything? It's the most innovative image upscaling technique ever released in the gaming space and is the exact opposite of brute forcing. How is ray reconstruction brute forcing? How is silicon specifically dedicated to handling ray tracing brute forcing? We have DirectStorage in the pipeline that is meant to take advantage of existing hardware features and make them more efficient (though that still needs work). We got frame generation which is slowly making its way to consoles. I'm also almost certain that techniques such as tesselation also saw the light of day on PC first, as did technologies such as VRR. PC over the past few years has consistently been innovating with technologies that later made their way to consoles, but people pretend that all PC parts do is just power through everything. What?

And if I misread that, are you saying that Sony has been brute-forcing its mid-gen refreshes every time? But it's only had one, so I'm not sure what you mean here.

Why are we pretending that we aren't already there? The Pro won't take us anywhere new. Many industry enthusiasts made the claim years ago that DLSS Quality is sometimes better than native. It's reconstructing from a 1440p image up to 4K while being much more performant (upwards of 40% in some extreme cases). So why are you here acting like we aren't already seeing this? I think it was yamaci17 who was making comparisons between DLSS Performance vs native 4K and concluding that DLSS came out looking really good, except the performance was like 60% higher. When debating buying a comparable AMD or NVIDIA GPU, do you know the first topic that is brought up? Yeah, DLSS and ray tracing. Doesn't that already tell you that teraflops comparisons have already become meaningless in the PC space? Almost every game ships with DLSS and no one is skipping it.

The last part which I find hilarious is the sheer hypocrisy of this whole discussion. Remember that throughout the years when people were comparing the PS5 to console parts, DLSS was almost never factored in which is why when people built a PC comparable to a PS5, they often picked a 2070S. Here's the catch though, anyone who has a 2070S will use DLSS when it's available. That didn't stop the popular discourse from blatantly ignoring DLSS though and pretending that the 2070S was the bare minimum needed to match the PS5 even though if you use DLSS, it's not close anymore. But now, PSSR which is 4 years late to the party is making teraflops comparisons meaningless. Right.

This discussion is seriously baffling.

You completely misread the first part. Console players leaving for PC at the mid-gen, whether there is a mid-gen console was the context of brute forcing - nothing to do with DLSS either just gamers using expensive PC hardware whether at native or upscaled to justify playing 3rd party games on PC instead.

You are also completely wrong about the origins of frame-gen which was a graphics paper by a console programmer for a proposed technique for SW: Force Unleashed 2 to frame-gen 30fps to 60fps on PS3/360, an article which DF covered at the time. Tessellation was also pioneered on PS2 - in hardware before Opengl extensions - and with the original procedural geometry paper SCEE did featuring early procedural bosses similar to Shadows of the Colossus IIRC - but it is nearly 2 decades since I clapped eyes on that paper. An adjacent technique that lead to VRR was first used in PS3 Wipeout HD on PS3 where the screen scaled resolution dynamically to maintain a frame-rate, and the only proper implementations AFAIK of VRR are in games like Morales/Spiderman 2 where they have a 40fps mode, which was its real design intention to have a fixed alternative to 30 and 60, rather than a fluctuating frame-rate catcher with broken colour precision and random frame-pacing.

As for "the Pro won't take us anywhere". Well its intention is to drive the development on the base PS5, so we'll have to wait and see, but in relation to my previous post, I can see PS5 and PS5 Pro native res on games being the same but with the fx fidelity and fx layers being a tier above on the Pro, and the PSSR taking the native image and making it look like native 4K30/60, so if that is the outcome it will have done a good job utilising the base Ps5 to its potential and allowing the Pro to present that base PS5 output at its very best on a big screen at 4K, which doesn't take us to a next-gen but still would be good for a refresh for all PlayStation owners IMO.

 

[diffusionx]

Some of you really expecting a top end PC experience out of this? Pssr better than dlss? Really? I think you need to lower your expectations.

You should go back to the PS5/XS announcement threads. Same thing.

 

[Taycan77]

And so what? Like how is this even relevant? Guess what? PS7 will be limited to PS4 settings when running PS4 games too? The same way the PS5 is limited to PS4 settings. So what exactly is your point?

Do you really think the people that are buying a PS5 or even a PS5pro... are doing it primarily because they wanna play PS4 games? Like this BC nonsense hasn't aged enough yet? For some perspective... the PS4 didn't have any form of BC at all. And the XB1 was the baby jesus of BC... look how much good that did the XB1.

And I don't know why it has to have the same reasons applied to it that were applied to the PS4pro.

This thing is not complicated at all, some sort of new thing... or groundbreaking in any way.

"For $100 more, you get the best PlayStation gaming experience with the PS5pro. Better graphics, higher rez and higher framerates. Experience your PlayStation games the best way possible and the way the developers intended with the PS5pro"

Thats it. Sold. It doesn't have to be anything more than that. Any more than the 7800 needs to be anything more than what it is compared to the 7700. Or the 4080 needs to be anything more than what it is compared to the 4070. Or the iPhone 14pro needs to be compared to the iPhone 14... I can go on.

The point is, this isn't the first time, nor will it be the last, that for a little more money, an OEM makes a "premium" product that is the exact same as a lower model... but better. And that can't be denied, if you are gaming on PlayStation, or want to game on PlayStation, and want the best PS gaming experience possible, the PS5pro is where you will get it.

I don't understand why everyone else, can make different SKUs of the same product or a line of products in the same family with slightly varying specs, but when consoles do it they somehow need to justify themselves. Nor do I understand how this is any different from Xbox releasing two different speced consoles on the same day.

I will say this, PS5 Pro has put on hold any plans I had to get back into PC gaming.

I’m quite happy with PS5 but 3-4 years into the gen I am ready for an upgrade. If the 5000 series of GPU’s were due this year, and for a reasonable price, I may have been tempted.

PS5 Pro would hold less interest if, like PS4 Pro, the target was just a resolution bump. Much improved RT performance and the possibilities of PSSR are far more exciting. Especially in the context of a console where 1st Party studios can really push the features.

I imagine we’ll get a GT7 PS5 Pro update and I’m very curious to see what they can deliver.

 

[HeisenbergFX4]

I will say this, PS5 Pro has put on hold any plans I had to get back into PC gaming.

I’m quite happy with PS5 but 3-4 years into the gen I am ready for an upgrade. If the 5000 series of GPU’s were due this year, and for a reasonable price, I may have been tempted.

PS5 Pro would hold less interest if, like PS4 Pro, the target was just a resolution bump. Much improved RT performance and the possibilities of PSSR are far more exciting. Especially in the context of a console where 1st Party studios can really push the features.

I imagine we’ll get a GT7 PS5 Pro update and I’m very curious to see what they can deliver.

This is the whole reason Pro consoles are made, to keep people like us in their ecosystem

 

[Euler007]

Let's pop in to the thread to see if there's new rumors or news about the Pro!

 

[MarkMe2525]

Well we've got reliable posters like HeisenbergFX4 that have senior industry friends - amazingly informed throughout the ATVI acquisition - that have in all likelihood seen PSSR first hand in a behind the scenes PlayStation presentation, and they are indicating that the Pro makes the talk of Terfaflops comparisons meaningless, and haven't been downplaying the leaked specs as wrong which on paper shouldn't achieve that.

So unless we have a repeat of PS3 specs and batpad getting changed after reveal, it is pretty safe to say PlayStation has the in-house capability for PSSR to achieve making talk of teraflops meaningless - a feat which DLSS since its beginning on a base RTX 2060 hasn't done with the scramble to 4090s and beyond - so, yes delivering that capability seems purely about cost for Sony.

The other way - and we can already see the Nvidia supporters circling in the thread - is that DF Richard and Alex do what they always do. They'll claim to be experts on the topic and then immediately hand the win to anyone but PlayStation, and then double down on that view when the next iteration of DLSS arrives.

Please correct me if wrong, it seems as if you're saying you're assuming it to be true, which is fine. The way you asserted your position made it seem like you were going off of info beyond conjecture.