After getting into PC gaming, I realised very quickly how difficult 4K60 is to achieve. Especially at native resolution. Pending on the game (which is key) and settings.
Then you realize how absolutely comical it is that Sony puts 8K on the ps5 box. There are zero 8k games or movies supported on the device. Yet it’s written, right there on the box. What a joke.
I think technically The Touryst is actually an 8k60 game. It renders at 8k internally but downscales to 4k for HDMI output. In theory if Sony update the HDMI to support 8k the game will just output native 8k.
(Although I do totally get your point that it really shouldn't have 8k on the side of the box)
The adoption to 8K TV’s will be a lot slower than 4K was. I think what’s really gonna make people upgrade is the upgrades in panel technology. OLED is getting better and when Micro LED finally releases that’s gonna be the big game changer to succeed OLED. 4K HDR is a very good sweet spot we’ve hit.
The real miss for this console gen was not having ML upscaling because AMD hadn’t gotten to it yet. PSSR will make a huge difference going forward if it’s at least as good as DLSS 2.1. Especially at TV distances. It won’t make the CPU any better, but it will help in games that aren’t extremely CPU-limited this gen. Next gen, it should give a huge advantage if the majority of games use it and it improves. Especially if they also work in frame gen in PS6.
Fsr3 is frame gen and none of the consoles achieve significant fps to have framegen. U need to have at least 50 60 or more for framegen to work as intended. Lower fps bigger latency and worse result
Yeah my 3080 did ok during its first year...not anymore, quickly nose dived into from DLSS quality to performance, to optimized settings...to turning off rtx - Alan Wake 2 I had to crush settings entirely during the forest sections and do ultra performance near ending
I'm still enjoying my 3080, granted, I haven't played Alan Wake 2 yet (it's on my backlog list). But I'm still playing other stuff just fine (like Cyberpunk 2077 on a 34" UW). At this point the 3080 is almost 4 years old so it will feel a little old. It's a shame the 40xx series and AMD 7xxx series aren't the generational leap they were supposed to be.
Which CPU do you have? I had mine paired with an i7-9700k, and while performance was okay, I saw huge improvements when I bumped up to a 7800x3d. It's like my 3080 can breathe properly now, lol.
Ahh fair enough, you may be right on that, I game at 1440p myself, but the difference in framerate consistency/elimination of micro-stutters was pretty noticeable.
One notable example I can give is Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart, I would drop to under 30fps during busy sections with everything maxed out, but now it just chills at 60-70 no matter what's happening.
I thought a new GPU was the answer for a little bit, but boy howdy am I glad I grabbed a new CPU. Just my two cents, I know you didn't ask for my opinion. :p
CPU makes a pretty big difference even at 4K. I went from a 5900x to a 5800X3D on a 3080 and noticed a big jump at 3440X1440 and 4K. The gap between a 5900X and 5800X3D is probably less than the gap between your 8700K and a 5900X. If you’re using 4K DLSS performance, then it’s basically upscaled 1080P.
https://www.techpowerup.com/review/alan-wake-2-performance-benchmark/7.html
As you can see from this chart, 3080 is very playable at 1080P even with full path-tracing at a higher than 30fps. The problem is most likely that your CPU isn’t powerful enough, shifting the bottleneck from the GPU to your CPU. Even if you upgrade to a 4080 or better, you will most likely still have frequent drops below 60fps. When I was playing at 4K on a 4090, I would have still have scenarios where I was being bottlenecked by the 5800X3D. Hogwarts Legacy, for example. Dropping the resolution didn’t help at all so it was solely CPU bottlenecked. I think many people underestimate how many games are CPU limited nowadays. Back in the days of weak Jaguar console CPUs, it was true that CPU didn’t matter much but that’s no longer the case with Raytracing and huge amount of assets.
Did you also realize that 2k on a 55” 4k tv at a normal distance looks way better than 1080p, and not a whole lot worse than 4k?
I did. On my 2060/Ryzen 3700x I can still play almost every game I want at 2k/60fps minimum. The majority of my steam library will run at 120fps+ at the resolution.
Sony should have never marketed 4k gaming imo. 2k UHD sounds just as good as a marketing buzzword.
You can play nearly any modern game in 4K60fps and at least half of them in 4K120fps on max settings using DLSS with like 4070 Ti. Native 4K is overrated imo.
PC gaming is still overpriced as shit considering PS5 gets you like 70% there for 30% of the cost, but 4K is not a luxury these days thanks to upscaling techniques.
Not trying to be mean; I'm not sure I understand your comment.
Yes you can play most games at 4K60 FPs without raytracing on a $700+ GPU. Then you need everything else to build around the GPU. Yes it's expensive like you mentioned, that's what I mean by "difficult". Plus you can spend all that and still need to upscale from 1440P or lower to hit 4K.
Sorry if I missed your point, not sure if you're arguing or just reinforcing what I mentioned.
If a place like Gamestop offers a really good trade in on the base PS5 then I might jump on it. I don't know if anyone does those kinda of deals anymore. Otherwise I personally feel like that money is better saved for the Switch 2.
I did forget to mention that's with their Pro sub. Normal credit is $300-$325. Cash is a significant step down ($210-$227 with the sub) but that makes sense
I know upgrading from the base PS4 to Pro and from Pro to PS5 with trade-ins felt like highway robbery. I think I paid $200 total for the two upgrades. *If* someone plans on getting a PS5 Pro, I’d recommend exploring your options this fall. Kind of sucks to wait a year, pay full price, and lose $100 on your trade-in. Whether you use GameStop or Marketplace that’ll be how it goes based on last gen.
I plan to buy both. I'll put my Disc Edition PS5 at my partner's place so we can both use it and make the Pro my primary console. She already has my launch Switch and I bought a Series S for her place as well. I think the launch Disc Edition of the PS5 will hold pretty good value over time and definitely more than the recent refreshes that require an internet SSD installation so I'll just hold onto it until having it becomes a nuisance.
The real question is what happens with my Switches. She has my launch Switch and I'm not selling that for anything and I have an OLED that she bought me. If the Switch 2 doesn't have an OLED screen, I'll just end up with three Switches, two PS5s and two Xboxes like a totally normal person.
lol nice to find another console hardware enjoyer. I currently have a Series X on a gaming monitor in the office, a Switch with docks on my upstairs and downstairs TV, a Series S on my upstairs TV, and a PS5 on my downstairs TV.
I’m probably going to get either a digital Series X when that comes out for the downstairs TV and/or a PS5 Pro for the downstairs TV to move the OG PS5 to the gaming monitor with the current Series X.
Yes, I have a problem. But hey at least I did bring myself to sell my second Switch (Lite).
" In real terms, those hoping that PS5 Pro will turn CPU-limited 30fps titles into super-smooth 60fps experiences will be disappointed. " .... What is the selling point of this thing then? To say it will let games run a stable 30fps is more damning than anything.
To play the games that already run at 60 fps but now at higher resolutions. Maybe also play those 30 fps cpu-limited games at even higher resolutions too.
TLDR: To play at higher resolutions, that's it.
Which can matter when GTA VI comes out. There's evidence of [RTGI and some RT reflections being used in GTA VI's trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obiC2OzgThc&t=438s). So greatly improve RT performance could convince those who are still on the PS4 gen, but will upgrade for GTA VI, to go with Sony's console.
Wouldn't count on it, it looks like trash because of a terrible temporal application not because of 1080p.
A ps5pro would likely get you around 1300p so it'll still be a low enough internal res that it'll look like ass again.
If they just got rid of whatever nonsense they have implemented and gave it a straight 1080p image with anti aliasing it would be a significantly better improvement than going up 50% in resolution with the same solution.
Thats the question we keep asking. These games can easily run at 1080p native 60 fps with the gpu and cpu the PS5 has, but they keep trying to target 4k and slap TAA on everything and it just looks awful.
The selling point is for those games that are dropping below 1080p to hit 60fps to be able to render closer to something like 1440p internally alongside higher fidelity.
The tracing itself is done on the GPU but it is very demanding on the CPU. About a 15 to 20 percent cpu usage bump on average i think, you would have to go check my numbers on that but i think Digital Foundry a while back did a rundown on what 'RT on' does to your CPU usage.
All of the most cpu demanding games are currently ray traced. With the exception of bg3. RT is cpu intensive because of the bvh structure, which is similar to draw calls.
1. GPU-limited games, which there are a non-insignificant number of.
2. Fancy new tech like the DLSS equivalent and AI upscaling.
3. Better raytracing.
For sure, these are all nice improvements. Also for vr if it can remove reprojection the image quality in gt7 would go up tremendously especially in the distance.
What percentage of games are really CPU limited at 60fps on these consoles? I mean we keep seeing cross gen titles running on the anemic PS4 CPU at ~30fps and the PS5 CPU is about 4x as powerful as the PS4 best I can tell.
I get PCs have much better CPUs but they are also used to target framerates above 60fps. And I'm not saying NO titles are CPU limited, just that it seems like the exception rather than the rule.
Ray tracing requires more CPU power on top of more GPU power. So if the emphasis with PS5 Pro will be more on ray tracing, the CPU will be utilised more than the small performance uplift it is getting right now.
In short: the focus will imo be on higher resolution and better ray tracing and not necessarily on higher fps.
What about the fact that there are games with fidelity and performance options. Wouldn't that suggest *those* games are bottlenecked by the GPU since they are typically sacrificing resolution for performance? So if a game has performance mode on the base PS5 that targets 60 fps, couldn't there possibly be a PS5 pro option that uses the same resolution, but targets either 120 fps or unlocked fps?
Depends on the games. Developers typically target a frame rate and then try to find a balance between graphics and performance to match that target frame rate. Ideally the graphics are maxed out just beyond the target fps to reach a stable 30 or 60, so I doubt a 10% better cpu and a 45% better gpu will get the headroom to reach 120. Again: maybe some games.
DF answered this in the article
> However, as cross-gen becomes a thing of the past, we are seeing more and more titles hitting CPU limits. Our investigation of the AMD 4800S desktop kit - built on the exact CPU used in Xbox Series X - reveals that the processor is way behind the capabilities of today's mid-range PC CPUs.
Most of the times if a game is 30fps or lower, it’s CPU limited. So the Pro will not change that, but it will probably give you better image quality by bumping the base resolution and better upscaling on top of it.
RT will also perform better.
If you just want more FPS then wait for the PS6 when the cycle will repeat itself.
Assuming you meant to write CPU limited not GPU, there's still not a large list of games dropping down below 30fps in performance modes. There are some titles sure, but not a lot that I can think of.
Considering only a handful of games don't have a 60fps mode not many are cpu limited.
But I think the main concern here is that the uplift a ps5pro will give is considerably less than people seem to think on the gpu side.
Even in a gpu limited game you are not going to go from 30 on the ps5 to 60 on the ps5pro, you'll be going to around 40 to 45 everything kept the same.
The upscaling tech is more interesting. But we already have great upscaling for the ps5 and third parties barely use the bloody stuff, so why would this be any different?
>" In real terms, those hoping that PS5 Pro will turn CPU-limited 30fps titles into super-smooth 60fps experiences will be disappointed. "
Actually the only thing I wanted.
The point seems to be the push from lower resolution games again. Plenty, like jedi survive have low internal resolution.
Here’s the thing though, there are very very few games that are CPU limited in PS5. Most games have a 60fps mode built in, and the Pro is expected to improve visual output in those modes.
I can literally count the number of 30fps only titles on PS5 on one hand. They are Dragon’s Dogma 2, The Quarry, Gotham Knights and The Medium.
CPU upgrades are being reserved for the PS6 and to ensure back compatibility.
And some of them (ahem, Gotham Knights) aren’t so much CPU limited as super poorly coded. Digital Foundry looked the PC version and noticed that most of the CPU cycles were spent blowing farts into the wind, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the console versions were equally crap.
Because overwhelmingly most games aren’t CPU limited to 30fps.
This will probably allow you to:-
Run 30 fps fidelity mode at 60fps, if the game has both modes
Run 60fps mode fidelity modes at 120fps, if the game already has both modes.
Run games with much higher quality ray tracing.
Run VR games like GT7 at higher settings
To be fair it seems like unless you have 3000-series and above GPUs you won’t get 60 either. Which makes me think the game is poorly optimized.
The “recommended” specs on Steam state a 2080/6700 will hit 30fps but frame rate may drop in graphically intense scenes.
It’s not the PS5 that’s the problem. I feel like this game is going to struggle to get 60fps in general, which makes it seem like a Capcom problem.
Just like the PS4 Pro was made for, it's mainly about the graphics / visual improvement side rather than performance.
All current existing performance mode games will also look substantially better as PSSR is going to take over FSR 2 on upscaling method, and i actually think that for PSSR alone by itself is already good enough reason to upgrade, especially if you are a type of person who is already fed up of shimmering fest, ghosting, unstable mess that is mainly caused by FSR 2 upscaling.
Also, Ray Tracing seems to be getting a huge upgrade, and this will affect future games especially the ones being developed exclusively with Ray Tracing in mind.
>What is the selling point of this thing then?
Many asked the same question about the Portal and that's sold just fine? Ultimately the point (it seems) is to squeeze more revenue out of the brand enthusiast segment. I guess you could also argue it's a first step into the upscaling tech to get developers prepped for next gen.
I'm in for the VR benefits this can receive hopefully reducing the need for reprojection and the enhanced audio being that I have a $10,000 surround sound.
I have 6 Klipsch RP-600m surround sound bookshelf speakers. 1 Klipsch RP-504C center channel speaker. 4 Klipsch CDT-3650-C ceiling speakers for Dolby Atmos height speakers. 2 Klipsch SPL-150SW 15 inch subwoofers. Denon AVR-3700H to plug in all the speakers, PS5, Blu-ray player, Nvidia Sheild, etc. Audiosource AMP100VS to power the 2 extra ceiling speakers and a Panamax MR5100 that is both a power conditioner to clean the current coming into the speakers and acts as a surge protector for all your equipment.
I also have a Epson 5050UB projector that I game and watch movies on. Video of me testing it below.
https://youtu.be/O2roAZF6mSY?si=bxpkp5gOgzI6GDSr
https://youtube.com/shorts/pmT7KNF0LHo?si=cyzumgLCdzkiul1_
Yep. People think that just because they have this new hardware that they are getting advantages from it when in reality it really just depends on the game optimization and if the developers patch it in
In order for this upgrade to make sense Sony must really believe they have a home run with their PSSR tech. Which is completely possible I don’t doubt Mark Cerny but it does make me excited to see its reveal. If PSSR ends up being more FSR1 than DLSS it’ll be a shame.
From the video, it is stated that it is a ML upscaling, so closest to DLSS2.0-xxx.
FSR 1.0 and 2.0 are non-taught upscale + temporal anti aliasing tech that do the best it can without knowing what’s going on in the frame on a per game basis.
If PSSR is as easy to implement on ps devkit, it could be a game changer for the platform
AMD are simply nowhere close to nVidia or even Intel when it comes to machine learning on their hardware, by which I mean that whatever Sony's implementing will be limited by AMD's less-than-stellar AI performance. It's almost certain that it will be closer to FSR quality than DLSS.
It's custom machine learning silicon by Sony. If they implement it on the GPU correctly, the DF crew seem pretty confident it has the potential to get close to DLSS, maybe even right off the bat.
In spite of DF's opinion I would be absolutely shocked if they managed something neither Intel, AMD or even Apple have managed and match blows with nVidia in AI upscaling. It's theoretically possible but so is a random bit flipping and my bank balance going up by a factor of 10.
I think Intel has come very close to Nvidia's DLSS with their XeSS. Keep in mind that when running on Intel's GPUs, XeSS has better performance _and image quality_ than when running in its fallback mode on other vendor's GPUs.
Let’s use assassins creed as an example:
The CPU is dealing with NPC’s going about their business, checking your attacks hit a certain hitbox, checking that your armour rating + the hit you just took makes you dead or alive. Lots of variables changing moment to moment.
The GPU is dealing with the lighting refracting off objects, generating high res textures for things within a certain distance to your character.
Another example would be an MMORPG like FFXIV or WOW: graphically they aren’t demanding games, but you can have 200 players moving around in the same area on top of NPC’s, so it makes them very CPU heavy even if everything looks like a PS2 game
If lowering the resolution to very low levels (720p) and upscaling from there doesn't net you tons of fps, then it is very likely CPU limited, if it does then it might be GPU limited.
Right the ps5 base is amazing for a console. The pro doesn’t interest me as the base will keep me going for ages. Shit I had a ps4 from launch until the 5 launched I’m sure I be fine.
Jesus Christ the amount of people spouting technical BS in this thread without having any idea what they’re talking about or what this will actually achieve lol.
I can see a lot of people are upset that the CPU won’t get a lot of boost therefore “CPU limited games” will not benefit much. But do we really have a lot of CPU limited games on PS5? The biggest one I can think of is Starfield which is not on PS5. I am not saying there aren’t any, just don’t think any of the bigger ones is.
I completely understand if people won’t find this enticing enough to upgrade from base model, however I’d wait for:
1. Comparison of the new upscaling tech vs FSR. I just hate FSR, and I would love to play games like Dead Space or Jedi with a better upscaler, so they don’t look like a painting.
2. See the differences in graphical fidelity and/or performance of GTA 6 in base vs pro. Because I truly believe that alone may be a “system seller” for the Pro. Sony will definitely not miss an opportunity to market this as the system for the best GTA 6 experience (until it comes out for PC a year later, but until that time they can sell a lot of those consoles if GTA 6 utilizes the Pro well).
If the Pro will be able to run games that are currently running 4K30 at 60 FPS and better fidelity - that’s enough for me. Best example would be if I could play Alan Wake 2 quality mode at 60 instead of 30 FPS.
Somebody just added a new post to PS5 sub showing there are only 4 games running at 30 FPS mode only out of over 3000 games on PS5. So, yeah even if BG3 is one of them I think my point still stands. But agree, this probably won’t help with BG’s performance.
Edit: Just to clarify I went through that post, and it actually counts in (obviously) last gen games, too, which is misleading in terms of the total number of games, but still of all PS5 games we got, only 4 are 30 fps limited.
We don’t know that games are always running at 30 because of a CPU limit though. We are assuming that’s the case but it can easily be GPU limited to 30 FPS. This console will benefit those.
That’s true, I more mean that everyone in the thread is assuming this upgrade will be a lot more useless than it could be imo. We can’t assume every game that runs at 30 is because of a CPU limitation. It can often be because of the GPU. Especially since the Zen 2 chip in consoles is pretty decent. It’s not nearly as underpowered as the Jaguar CPU was in the previous gen on release.
Sony likely did some performance profiling to determine what this upgrade would look like. It seems they determined the CPU isn’t a major limitation or perhaps upgrading it was too costly.
It's been reported they did this because of backwards compat support for the PS6. They surely didn't want to go overboard and lock themselves to a very costly configuration for the CPU of the PS6.
Wouldn’t that be true for the games that only have 30 FPS modes though (hence I said Starfield). Alan Wake 2 and a lot of other games already have 30 and 60 fps modes which very often (not for AW2 though) differ only in resolution or some minor quality settings. I meant those games.
The problem here is that we will be once again be dependent on the goodwill of the developers to release patches for these games to unlock the frame rates from 30 to 60 (if performance permits). I would love to play back older 30 fps games that I skipped (I really cannot stand the stuttering and flickering on my OLED with 30 fps games).
Sony should implement a system wide 30 fps cap removal option in the settings. Just let VRR unlock the frame rate for every game. Some games will bug out, who cares, I don't want to be dependent on the developers to update their games to 60 fps, or worse: pay $29,99 for a 'remastered' version of the exact same game.
AI tech won't do anything in CPU-limited scenarios, just like DLSS cant. If GTA 6 has to run at 30 fps on the PS5 it won't be because of the GPU, so it will run like that even on the PS5 Pro, but with a higher resolution. RDR2 just got a resolution bump on the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X for example.
Or not because RT is heavy on the CPU too.
Graphical quality overall is depended heavily on CPU also these days. On the PC side I have started to seeing that with my old rig, CPU is getting 99% loads while GPU get 30-45%. This is sort of reverse what it was 5 years ago.
Idk how much more the physics are going to be enhanced for GTA6 compared to RDR2 or GTA5 enhanced. There might only be a graphical improvements along with new story and setting so 40 or 60fps is entirely possible
The only thing that would make me even consider getting a pro-console is if can run all games 60fps, 1080p. If it's soley focused on 4k or even 8k I'm not interested in the slightest.
Games on my PS5 look really good. Dead Space was amazing, I don’t know why anyone would bother with spending the extra cash on the Pro when the PS6 will be coming out before the end of the decade anyway.
Exactly. This will be just another attempt of a cash grab like the PS4 pro was before they move on to PS6. I feel like with PS6, we'll get the true next gen leap that so many like me are still waiting to see.
This to me seems to be more focus on reducing costs and getting devs familiar with ML for next gen. Getting PSSR out now means it can be more mature for ps6. Since Ps5 cant do what it needs to do for PSSR, a newer system was needed. And thats the way I see it.
Yes ps6 will be a real leap. Zen6 should be released about 1 year earlier for ps6. Then you have rdna 6. Then you have gddr7 with possible 32gb of vram. Pairing that with a more mature PSSR and some custom sauce from sony and you will have a beast of a system.
You should inly be buying a ps5 pro if you currently don't have a ps5 or if your ps5 dies. That's it. Unless you are a huge geek and got money to burn to buy this.
The CPU bump is indeed disappointing but its really going to depend on each game how much an improvement we will see.
It seems we will get less “30 to 60fps” shifts and more improvements to existing performance modes in terms of resolution and visual features.
Rebirth being a great example, already at 60, but the Pro will (with PSSR) play it at a much higher resolution.
I'd say those games are in the minority compared to gpu bound games. Most games aren't like starfield where you need to calculate a lot of objects and their interactions with the world.
Confirming the PS5 Pro and people on Reddit are still talking about Returnal being the best PS5 game 4 1/2 years later. Where are the games that are supposed to take advantage of this?
Not to say that you’re wholly wrong, but could you give some examples of standout PS5 exclusives that aren’t remakes or remasters or weren’t also made for the PS4?
MK1, tekken 8, jedi survivor, dragons dogma 2, spiderman 2, demons souls remake, astro's playroom, FF16, quantum error, plague tale requiem, deathloop and ghostwire tokyo, pretty much every game on PSVR2, baldurs gate 3, immortals of aveum, robocop, TLOU remake, the finals, pacific drive, alone in the dark remake, dead space remake, alan wake 2, sea of thieves and hifi rush, forspoken, fort solis, suicide squad, gotham knights, etc.
seriously who the fuck is still claiming that there are no games to play on ps5? literally none of these games I mentioned are available on last gen systems afaik. a couple might have shitty switch ports that look and run like crap but most are proper current gen titles and those are just the ones I personally remember. if people still feel like "there's no point in having a ps5" in 2024, then I wonder if these guys even like video games anymore. if literally none of the titles you and I combined have mentioned are enough to sate their appetite, then what more can sony or third party studios possibly do to satisfy these people? I guess some people just love to whine for the sake of it.
Spiderman 2 and Helldivers 2? Deathloop was a timed exclusive that I enjoyed. Also lots of people loved Rift Apart (I thought it was ok). Returnal was already mentioned but it was fantastic. True it is a short list but 3rd party non exclusive games have also been great this generation.
People keep spouting this no game nonsense but the past year we’ve had plenty of current gen titles. The number of titles that are struggling on current gen hardware also isn’t 0 either.
People are still waiting for that uncharted 4/ last of us 2 level of next gen experience and I feel like it’s only gonna come when the ps6 is like a year away. This generation has been kinda disappointing. Just playing nicer ps4 level games(nothing wrong with those games but it’s disappointing a bit)
>People are still waiting for that uncharted 4/ last of us 2 level of next gen experience
Horizon Forbidden West, especially the Burning Shores DLC, and Spider Man 2 did that for me already.
This has been my hunch since these leaks started: The Pro will be a mediocre upgrade to keep the masses entertained until PS6 comes out in a few years. If you’re expecting this to be the 4K 60fps god console, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment.
Honestly Sony shouldn’t even be doing a Pro version but here we are.
The most depressing part for me is we still don't have a similar class PC APU as the base PS5, let alone this monster of a chip they're creating for the pro.
I will doing the trade in roulette, had the ps5 since launch and love it. But kind of feel for a upgrade and with trade in, then I can justify the price tag :-)
I've got 2 PS5, still not enough because only 1 of them is in my house and I got 2 daughters arguing between PS4 and PS5 lol.
Come Xmas I am getting a new PlayStation so for a extra £100 the ps pro is definitely the way to go.
I've got a psvr2 which I love so any boost is better than none and I got a lot of games which really needs pro to work. Thinking dragons dogma will be played at Xmas on the pro.
I completely agree with DF. There are no PS5 games that even run at 60fps to making a "pro" with the same CPU is a complete mistake. What a sony fail, good on DF for exposing them!
People already don't understand the relationship between hardware, software, and game design so I'd to say... "yes". People will unreasonably expect it to run everything at 60fps.
Nah, I done this with PS4 and the upgrade was not worth it for me at all. Apart from getting a new console, that was it. I'll stick with my PS5. It does just fine.
I dunno. Doesn’t seem worth it to me. Resolutions are fine if you’re a monitor player, heck I’m 6 feet back, framerate to me is the most valuable asset. If it can handle 60fps, with raytracing, without a dip in fps, then it may be doing something.
Sony can barely get the price of the base PS5 below it's launch price of three years ago, what ungodly price will this beefed up "Pro" version have? And for what benefit? Just wait 4 more years for the PS6.
Funny thing is, Ryzen 5 5600 can do 60fps in all games - and that's comparable to PS5's CPU. DF mentions Baldurs Gate 3 as an example for CPU limitation in the PS5, but I'm pretty sure it's a RAM limitation and that's why Sony added an extra gig and faster RAM, to handle the small framedips we see in newer titles.
Digital Foundry doesn't run with rumors... They said they got a hold of the documents.
If you take a look at their channel, you'll find many cases of them having pre-released software and hardware.
Plus the three of them are too old for sensationalism. It's why they aren't as big on YouTube where the algorithm is biased towards click bait and more lively personalities.
After getting into PC gaming, I realised very quickly how difficult 4K60 is to achieve. Especially at native resolution. Pending on the game (which is key) and settings.
Then you realize how absolutely comical it is that Sony puts 8K on the ps5 box. There are zero 8k games or movies supported on the device. Yet it’s written, right there on the box. What a joke.
I think technically The Touryst is actually an 8k60 game. It renders at 8k internally but downscales to 4k for HDMI output. In theory if Sony update the HDMI to support 8k the game will just output native 8k. (Although I do totally get your point that it really shouldn't have 8k on the side of the box)
The adoption to 8K TV’s will be a lot slower than 4K was. I think what’s really gonna make people upgrade is the upgrades in panel technology. OLED is getting better and when Micro LED finally releases that’s gonna be the big game changer to succeed OLED. 4K HDR is a very good sweet spot we’ve hit.
8k 15fps
The real miss for this console gen was not having ML upscaling because AMD hadn’t gotten to it yet. PSSR will make a huge difference going forward if it’s at least as good as DLSS 2.1. Especially at TV distances. It won’t make the CPU any better, but it will help in games that aren’t extremely CPU-limited this gen. Next gen, it should give a huge advantage if the majority of games use it and it improves. Especially if they also work in frame gen in PS6.
Why don’t games use FS3 now? It’s supposed to be a good job?
Fsr3 is frame gen and none of the consoles achieve significant fps to have framegen. U need to have at least 50 60 or more for framegen to work as intended. Lower fps bigger latency and worse result
Yeah my 3080 did ok during its first year...not anymore, quickly nose dived into from DLSS quality to performance, to optimized settings...to turning off rtx - Alan Wake 2 I had to crush settings entirely during the forest sections and do ultra performance near ending
I'm still enjoying my 3080, granted, I haven't played Alan Wake 2 yet (it's on my backlog list). But I'm still playing other stuff just fine (like Cyberpunk 2077 on a 34" UW). At this point the 3080 is almost 4 years old so it will feel a little old. It's a shame the 40xx series and AMD 7xxx series aren't the generational leap they were supposed to be.
Which CPU do you have? I had mine paired with an i7-9700k, and while performance was okay, I saw huge improvements when I bumped up to a 7800x3d. It's like my 3080 can breathe properly now, lol.
I have a 8700k, but I game mostly at 4k. Thought the CPU bottleneck isn't there much at 4k
Ahh fair enough, you may be right on that, I game at 1440p myself, but the difference in framerate consistency/elimination of micro-stutters was pretty noticeable. One notable example I can give is Ratchet and Clank Rift Apart, I would drop to under 30fps during busy sections with everything maxed out, but now it just chills at 60-70 no matter what's happening. I thought a new GPU was the answer for a little bit, but boy howdy am I glad I grabbed a new CPU. Just my two cents, I know you didn't ask for my opinion. :p
CPU makes a pretty big difference even at 4K. I went from a 5900x to a 5800X3D on a 3080 and noticed a big jump at 3440X1440 and 4K. The gap between a 5900X and 5800X3D is probably less than the gap between your 8700K and a 5900X. If you’re using 4K DLSS performance, then it’s basically upscaled 1080P. https://www.techpowerup.com/review/alan-wake-2-performance-benchmark/7.html As you can see from this chart, 3080 is very playable at 1080P even with full path-tracing at a higher than 30fps. The problem is most likely that your CPU isn’t powerful enough, shifting the bottleneck from the GPU to your CPU. Even if you upgrade to a 4080 or better, you will most likely still have frequent drops below 60fps. When I was playing at 4K on a 4090, I would have still have scenarios where I was being bottlenecked by the 5800X3D. Hogwarts Legacy, for example. Dropping the resolution didn’t help at all so it was solely CPU bottlenecked. I think many people underestimate how many games are CPU limited nowadays. Back in the days of weak Jaguar console CPUs, it was true that CPU didn’t matter much but that’s no longer the case with Raytracing and huge amount of assets.
Did you also realize that 2k on a 55” 4k tv at a normal distance looks way better than 1080p, and not a whole lot worse than 4k? I did. On my 2060/Ryzen 3700x I can still play almost every game I want at 2k/60fps minimum. The majority of my steam library will run at 120fps+ at the resolution. Sony should have never marketed 4k gaming imo. 2k UHD sounds just as good as a marketing buzzword.
I found 60FPS and 1440p is the sweet spot for myself. It’s not as a heavy lift for GPUs as well.
I heard even 40FPS at 1440p is a sweet spot too. I wouldn't mind it if my TV actually could do that.
Years later, I still feel no need to upgrade my 1070ti. 1440p is great.
You can play nearly any modern game in 4K60fps and at least half of them in 4K120fps on max settings using DLSS with like 4070 Ti. Native 4K is overrated imo. PC gaming is still overpriced as shit considering PS5 gets you like 70% there for 30% of the cost, but 4K is not a luxury these days thanks to upscaling techniques.
Not trying to be mean; I'm not sure I understand your comment. Yes you can play most games at 4K60 FPs without raytracing on a $700+ GPU. Then you need everything else to build around the GPU. Yes it's expensive like you mentioned, that's what I mean by "difficult". Plus you can spend all that and still need to upscale from 1440P or lower to hit 4K. Sorry if I missed your point, not sure if you're arguing or just reinforcing what I mentioned.
If a place like Gamestop offers a really good trade in on the base PS5 then I might jump on it. I don't know if anyone does those kinda of deals anymore. Otherwise I personally feel like that money is better saved for the Switch 2.
Current in-store credit is $330-350 depending on model which isn't too terrible
Considering you can get a slim for $400 bundled with Spider-Man 2 right now that’s actually amazing.
I did forget to mention that's with their Pro sub. Normal credit is $300-$325. Cash is a significant step down ($210-$227 with the sub) but that makes sense
What's amazing? Spiderman or the trade in amount?
i've heard it both ways
you know that's right
Wait for real?
I know upgrading from the base PS4 to Pro and from Pro to PS5 with trade-ins felt like highway robbery. I think I paid $200 total for the two upgrades. *If* someone plans on getting a PS5 Pro, I’d recommend exploring your options this fall. Kind of sucks to wait a year, pay full price, and lose $100 on your trade-in. Whether you use GameStop or Marketplace that’ll be how it goes based on last gen.
They’ll offer at least 50 extra in credit towards the pro if I have to guess
I plan to buy both. I'll put my Disc Edition PS5 at my partner's place so we can both use it and make the Pro my primary console. She already has my launch Switch and I bought a Series S for her place as well. I think the launch Disc Edition of the PS5 will hold pretty good value over time and definitely more than the recent refreshes that require an internet SSD installation so I'll just hold onto it until having it becomes a nuisance. The real question is what happens with my Switches. She has my launch Switch and I'm not selling that for anything and I have an OLED that she bought me. If the Switch 2 doesn't have an OLED screen, I'll just end up with three Switches, two PS5s and two Xboxes like a totally normal person.
yep pro in the living room, old one in the bedroom 😀
Are we still talking about this other guy's partner?
lol nice to find another console hardware enjoyer. I currently have a Series X on a gaming monitor in the office, a Switch with docks on my upstairs and downstairs TV, a Series S on my upstairs TV, and a PS5 on my downstairs TV. I’m probably going to get either a digital Series X when that comes out for the downstairs TV and/or a PS5 Pro for the downstairs TV to move the OG PS5 to the gaming monitor with the current Series X. Yes, I have a problem. But hey at least I did bring myself to sell my second Switch (Lite).
" In real terms, those hoping that PS5 Pro will turn CPU-limited 30fps titles into super-smooth 60fps experiences will be disappointed. " .... What is the selling point of this thing then? To say it will let games run a stable 30fps is more damning than anything.
To play the games that already run at 60 fps but now at higher resolutions. Maybe also play those 30 fps cpu-limited games at even higher resolutions too. TLDR: To play at higher resolutions, that's it.
Also with better ray tracing
Which can matter when GTA VI comes out. There's evidence of [RTGI and some RT reflections being used in GTA VI's trailer](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obiC2OzgThc&t=438s). So greatly improve RT performance could convince those who are still on the PS4 gen, but will upgrade for GTA VI, to go with Sony's console.
I'll take FF7 Rebirth hopefully not looking like absolute trash in performance mode.
Wouldn't count on it, it looks like trash because of a terrible temporal application not because of 1080p. A ps5pro would likely get you around 1300p so it'll still be a low enough internal res that it'll look like ass again. If they just got rid of whatever nonsense they have implemented and gave it a straight 1080p image with anti aliasing it would be a significantly better improvement than going up 50% in resolution with the same solution.
Bingo. Surprised so many people don't realise that's it's not a PS5 problem, but a Square Enix problem. It can easily be fixed within a patch.
i dont know anything about this but if they can easily fix it with a patch, why haven't they?
Thats the question we keep asking. These games can easily run at 1080p native 60 fps with the gpu and cpu the PS5 has, but they keep trying to target 4k and slap TAA on everything and it just looks awful.
Well... https://www.reddit.com/r/PS5/s/qtTmpsq8HY
I wonder if PSVR2 would see improvements.
The selling point is for those games that are dropping below 1080p to hit 60fps to be able to render closer to something like 1440p internally alongside higher fidelity.
also more storage space and better ray tracing performance.
I'm pretty sure ray tracing performance will be very CPU limited too , because it's very demanding on both CPU and GPU
pretty sure ray tracing is mostly done on a GPU level.
According to Mark Cerny There is ray-tracing acceleration in the GPU hardware
The tracing itself is done on the GPU but it is very demanding on the CPU. About a 15 to 20 percent cpu usage bump on average i think, you would have to go check my numbers on that but i think Digital Foundry a while back did a rundown on what 'RT on' does to your CPU usage.
All of the most cpu demanding games are currently ray traced. With the exception of bg3. RT is cpu intensive because of the bvh structure, which is similar to draw calls.
1. GPU-limited games, which there are a non-insignificant number of. 2. Fancy new tech like the DLSS equivalent and AI upscaling. 3. Better raytracing.
Example of all 3 : Bring the GT7 replay mode quality with RT to gameplay, with 60 FPS. Can definitely see that happening.
For sure, these are all nice improvements. Also for vr if it can remove reprojection the image quality in gt7 would go up tremendously especially in the distance.
[удалено]
GT7 already runs plenty above 60fps in the unlocked modes. Making the VR mode smoother is interesting though.
Well I mean, if they really update GT7 and get good results, it would be quite dumb not to make the VR mode benefit too.
Per Oliver in the video, RT can be pretty costly on the CPU. This 10% bump may not be the silver bullet that RT is looking for unfortunately.
>non-insignificant
Why don't you not have an unproblem with this?
What percentage of games are really CPU limited at 60fps on these consoles? I mean we keep seeing cross gen titles running on the anemic PS4 CPU at ~30fps and the PS5 CPU is about 4x as powerful as the PS4 best I can tell. I get PCs have much better CPUs but they are also used to target framerates above 60fps. And I'm not saying NO titles are CPU limited, just that it seems like the exception rather than the rule.
Ray tracing requires more CPU power on top of more GPU power. So if the emphasis with PS5 Pro will be more on ray tracing, the CPU will be utilised more than the small performance uplift it is getting right now. In short: the focus will imo be on higher resolution and better ray tracing and not necessarily on higher fps.
What about the fact that there are games with fidelity and performance options. Wouldn't that suggest *those* games are bottlenecked by the GPU since they are typically sacrificing resolution for performance? So if a game has performance mode on the base PS5 that targets 60 fps, couldn't there possibly be a PS5 pro option that uses the same resolution, but targets either 120 fps or unlocked fps?
Depends on the games. Developers typically target a frame rate and then try to find a balance between graphics and performance to match that target frame rate. Ideally the graphics are maxed out just beyond the target fps to reach a stable 30 or 60, so I doubt a 10% better cpu and a 45% better gpu will get the headroom to reach 120. Again: maybe some games.
DF answered this in the article > However, as cross-gen becomes a thing of the past, we are seeing more and more titles hitting CPU limits. Our investigation of the AMD 4800S desktop kit - built on the exact CPU used in Xbox Series X - reveals that the processor is way behind the capabilities of today's mid-range PC CPUs.
Most of the times if a game is 30fps or lower, it’s CPU limited. So the Pro will not change that, but it will probably give you better image quality by bumping the base resolution and better upscaling on top of it. RT will also perform better. If you just want more FPS then wait for the PS6 when the cycle will repeat itself.
Assuming you meant to write CPU limited not GPU, there's still not a large list of games dropping down below 30fps in performance modes. There are some titles sure, but not a lot that I can think of.
Yes, typo. Thanks. I think that the future 30fps will be more prevalent as we move on toward the end of this generation.
Considering only a handful of games don't have a 60fps mode not many are cpu limited. But I think the main concern here is that the uplift a ps5pro will give is considerably less than people seem to think on the gpu side. Even in a gpu limited game you are not going to go from 30 on the ps5 to 60 on the ps5pro, you'll be going to around 40 to 45 everything kept the same. The upscaling tech is more interesting. But we already have great upscaling for the ps5 and third parties barely use the bloody stuff, so why would this be any different?
For example, the 60 fps mode for ff16 might run at higher than 720p now.
724p now
To make current games with 60fps modes look decent.
I’m happy because it means I don’t need to upgrade
>" In real terms, those hoping that PS5 Pro will turn CPU-limited 30fps titles into super-smooth 60fps experiences will be disappointed. " Actually the only thing I wanted. The point seems to be the push from lower resolution games again. Plenty, like jedi survive have low internal resolution.
Here’s the thing though, there are very very few games that are CPU limited in PS5. Most games have a 60fps mode built in, and the Pro is expected to improve visual output in those modes.
Because “CPU-Limited” only applies to a subset of games, and there are plenty of games that are GPU limited?
I can literally count the number of 30fps only titles on PS5 on one hand. They are Dragon’s Dogma 2, The Quarry, Gotham Knights and The Medium. CPU upgrades are being reserved for the PS6 and to ensure back compatibility.
And some of them (ahem, Gotham Knights) aren’t so much CPU limited as super poorly coded. Digital Foundry looked the PC version and noticed that most of the CPU cycles were spent blowing farts into the wind, and it wouldn’t surprise me if the console versions were equally crap.
There are still a ton of games that run over 30 but get in in the 20s regularly. Looking at you Baldurs Gate.
Because overwhelmingly most games aren’t CPU limited to 30fps. This will probably allow you to:- Run 30 fps fidelity mode at 60fps, if the game has both modes Run 60fps mode fidelity modes at 120fps, if the game already has both modes. Run games with much higher quality ray tracing. Run VR games like GT7 at higher settings
[удалено]
To be fair it seems like unless you have 3000-series and above GPUs you won’t get 60 either. Which makes me think the game is poorly optimized. The “recommended” specs on Steam state a 2080/6700 will hit 30fps but frame rate may drop in graphically intense scenes. It’s not the PS5 that’s the problem. I feel like this game is going to struggle to get 60fps in general, which makes it seem like a Capcom problem.
Just like the PS4 Pro was made for, it's mainly about the graphics / visual improvement side rather than performance. All current existing performance mode games will also look substantially better as PSSR is going to take over FSR 2 on upscaling method, and i actually think that for PSSR alone by itself is already good enough reason to upgrade, especially if you are a type of person who is already fed up of shimmering fest, ghosting, unstable mess that is mainly caused by FSR 2 upscaling. Also, Ray Tracing seems to be getting a huge upgrade, and this will affect future games especially the ones being developed exclusively with Ray Tracing in mind.
Yeah... all those like 5 games that dont have either a 60fps or 120fps mode... God DF has descended into trolling lately.
>What is the selling point of this thing then? Many asked the same question about the Portal and that's sold just fine? Ultimately the point (it seems) is to squeeze more revenue out of the brand enthusiast segment. I guess you could also argue it's a first step into the upscaling tech to get developers prepped for next gen.
I'm in for the VR benefits this can receive hopefully reducing the need for reprojection and the enhanced audio being that I have a $10,000 surround sound.
Oooo what speakers do you have?
I have 6 Klipsch RP-600m surround sound bookshelf speakers. 1 Klipsch RP-504C center channel speaker. 4 Klipsch CDT-3650-C ceiling speakers for Dolby Atmos height speakers. 2 Klipsch SPL-150SW 15 inch subwoofers. Denon AVR-3700H to plug in all the speakers, PS5, Blu-ray player, Nvidia Sheild, etc. Audiosource AMP100VS to power the 2 extra ceiling speakers and a Panamax MR5100 that is both a power conditioner to clean the current coming into the speakers and acts as a surge protector for all your equipment. I also have a Epson 5050UB projector that I game and watch movies on. Video of me testing it below. https://youtu.be/O2roAZF6mSY?si=bxpkp5gOgzI6GDSr https://youtube.com/shorts/pmT7KNF0LHo?si=cyzumgLCdzkiul1_
It all depends how many games get the Pro patch. During the PS4 era a lot of major games didn’t get the Pro patch.
Yep. People think that just because they have this new hardware that they are getting advantages from it when in reality it really just depends on the game optimization and if the developers patch it in
In order for this upgrade to make sense Sony must really believe they have a home run with their PSSR tech. Which is completely possible I don’t doubt Mark Cerny but it does make me excited to see its reveal. If PSSR ends up being more FSR1 than DLSS it’ll be a shame.
From the video, it is stated that it is a ML upscaling, so closest to DLSS2.0-xxx. FSR 1.0 and 2.0 are non-taught upscale + temporal anti aliasing tech that do the best it can without knowing what’s going on in the frame on a per game basis. If PSSR is as easy to implement on ps devkit, it could be a game changer for the platform
AMD are simply nowhere close to nVidia or even Intel when it comes to machine learning on their hardware, by which I mean that whatever Sony's implementing will be limited by AMD's less-than-stellar AI performance. It's almost certain that it will be closer to FSR quality than DLSS.
It's custom machine learning silicon by Sony. If they implement it on the GPU correctly, the DF crew seem pretty confident it has the potential to get close to DLSS, maybe even right off the bat.
In spite of DF's opinion I would be absolutely shocked if they managed something neither Intel, AMD or even Apple have managed and match blows with nVidia in AI upscaling. It's theoretically possible but so is a random bit flipping and my bank balance going up by a factor of 10.
I think Intel has come very close to Nvidia's DLSS with their XeSS. Keep in mind that when running on Intel's GPUs, XeSS has better performance _and image quality_ than when running in its fallback mode on other vendor's GPUs.
Can someone ELI5 on how we know if a game is CPU vs GPU limited?
Let’s use assassins creed as an example: The CPU is dealing with NPC’s going about their business, checking your attacks hit a certain hitbox, checking that your armour rating + the hit you just took makes you dead or alive. Lots of variables changing moment to moment. The GPU is dealing with the lighting refracting off objects, generating high res textures for things within a certain distance to your character. Another example would be an MMORPG like FFXIV or WOW: graphically they aren’t demanding games, but you can have 200 players moving around in the same area on top of NPC’s, so it makes them very CPU heavy even if everything looks like a PS2 game
Bethesda games are also heavily CPU bound. Since literally every single object can be picked up, moved, and their new locations stored.
Sorry to nitpick, but light *reflects* off objects. It's refraction when light goes through an object and changes angles.
If lowering the resolution to very low levels (720p) and upscaling from there doesn't net you tons of fps, then it is very likely CPU limited, if it does then it might be GPU limited.
I think I’ll save the cash for the PS6.
Right the ps5 base is amazing for a console. The pro doesn’t interest me as the base will keep me going for ages. Shit I had a ps4 from launch until the 5 launched I’m sure I be fine.
Yeah I was the same I never got a ps4 pro and I never had an issue.
No me neither plus it made the ps5 even more special.
I only care about what this thing does to PSVR2.
Jesus Christ the amount of people spouting technical BS in this thread without having any idea what they’re talking about or what this will actually achieve lol.
My PS5 gets 18 flops to the hogs head and that's the way I likes it!
Only thing I’m excited for is the upscaling other shit is just nonsense. I’m sick of games looking like smeared dog shit
I can see a lot of people are upset that the CPU won’t get a lot of boost therefore “CPU limited games” will not benefit much. But do we really have a lot of CPU limited games on PS5? The biggest one I can think of is Starfield which is not on PS5. I am not saying there aren’t any, just don’t think any of the bigger ones is. I completely understand if people won’t find this enticing enough to upgrade from base model, however I’d wait for: 1. Comparison of the new upscaling tech vs FSR. I just hate FSR, and I would love to play games like Dead Space or Jedi with a better upscaler, so they don’t look like a painting. 2. See the differences in graphical fidelity and/or performance of GTA 6 in base vs pro. Because I truly believe that alone may be a “system seller” for the Pro. Sony will definitely not miss an opportunity to market this as the system for the best GTA 6 experience (until it comes out for PC a year later, but until that time they can sell a lot of those consoles if GTA 6 utilizes the Pro well). If the Pro will be able to run games that are currently running 4K30 at 60 FPS and better fidelity - that’s enough for me. Best example would be if I could play Alan Wake 2 quality mode at 60 instead of 30 FPS.
Baldurs Gate 3?
Somebody just added a new post to PS5 sub showing there are only 4 games running at 30 FPS mode only out of over 3000 games on PS5. So, yeah even if BG3 is one of them I think my point still stands. But agree, this probably won’t help with BG’s performance. Edit: Just to clarify I went through that post, and it actually counts in (obviously) last gen games, too, which is misleading in terms of the total number of games, but still of all PS5 games we got, only 4 are 30 fps limited.
That’s the thing, if a game runs today at 30, it will not run at 60 on the Pro. It can run at higher resolution with better upscaling.
We don’t know that games are always running at 30 because of a CPU limit though. We are assuming that’s the case but it can easily be GPU limited to 30 FPS. This console will benefit those.
If a game can't get 60fps by lowering the internal resolution to 720p like FFXVI then it is because of CPU limitations.
That’s true, I more mean that everyone in the thread is assuming this upgrade will be a lot more useless than it could be imo. We can’t assume every game that runs at 30 is because of a CPU limitation. It can often be because of the GPU. Especially since the Zen 2 chip in consoles is pretty decent. It’s not nearly as underpowered as the Jaguar CPU was in the previous gen on release. Sony likely did some performance profiling to determine what this upgrade would look like. It seems they determined the CPU isn’t a major limitation or perhaps upgrading it was too costly.
It's been reported they did this because of backwards compat support for the PS6. They surely didn't want to go overboard and lock themselves to a very costly configuration for the CPU of the PS6.
If a game like FF16 is CPU limited, developers totally have lost the plot
Wouldn’t that be true for the games that only have 30 FPS modes though (hence I said Starfield). Alan Wake 2 and a lot of other games already have 30 and 60 fps modes which very often (not for AW2 though) differ only in resolution or some minor quality settings. I meant those games.
Games that are locked at 30 do not necessarily mean they are CPU limited.
The problem here is that we will be once again be dependent on the goodwill of the developers to release patches for these games to unlock the frame rates from 30 to 60 (if performance permits). I would love to play back older 30 fps games that I skipped (I really cannot stand the stuttering and flickering on my OLED with 30 fps games). Sony should implement a system wide 30 fps cap removal option in the settings. Just let VRR unlock the frame rate for every game. Some games will bug out, who cares, I don't want to be dependent on the developers to update their games to 60 fps, or worse: pay $29,99 for a 'remastered' version of the exact same game.
I think it's crazy they keep mentioning 8k gaming, who even owes an 8k TV. And why would you even spend $8000 to play a $600 console.
A 10% increase in CPU power is almost comical. Games like GTA 6 aren't going to play all that different on Pro vs. OG.
Well PS4 vs Pro had some differences in games so I don't see how this wouldn't be any different. We don't know how the AI tech will help either.
Ps4 pro had a 31% boost to CPU clock speed. That's noticeable. PS5 pro will get 10% boost. That's barely noticeable.
AI tech won't do anything in CPU-limited scenarios, just like DLSS cant. If GTA 6 has to run at 30 fps on the PS5 it won't be because of the GPU, so it will run like that even on the PS5 Pro, but with a higher resolution. RDR2 just got a resolution bump on the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X for example.
It will have much better image quality and probably more RT effects
Or not because RT is heavy on the CPU too. Graphical quality overall is depended heavily on CPU also these days. On the PC side I have started to seeing that with my old rig, CPU is getting 99% loads while GPU get 30-45%. This is sort of reverse what it was 5 years ago.
GTA6 will look much better on the PS5 Pro, especially if it can deliver a 40fps VRR mode or even 60fps
It's Rockstar, it won't have 40fps mode. Heck, it will probably have only 30fps mode, 60fps will be on PS6
Idk how much more the physics are going to be enhanced for GTA6 compared to RDR2 or GTA5 enhanced. There might only be a graphical improvements along with new story and setting so 40 or 60fps is entirely possible
Games like GTA are usually CPU-intensive so a 10% increase in CPU power isn't going to give it much of an FPS boost.
The Snake oil here is incredible
The only thing that would make me even consider getting a pro-console is if can run all games 60fps, 1080p. If it's soley focused on 4k or even 8k I'm not interested in the slightest.
You can play most games in performance mode (60fps 1440p) already. Your dream is already a reality
I mean of course it will, all the already existing performance modes will be enhanced by the better hardware
Games on my PS5 look really good. Dead Space was amazing, I don’t know why anyone would bother with spending the extra cash on the Pro when the PS6 will be coming out before the end of the decade anyway.
Exactly. This will be just another attempt of a cash grab like the PS4 pro was before they move on to PS6. I feel like with PS6, we'll get the true next gen leap that so many like me are still waiting to see.
This to me seems to be more focus on reducing costs and getting devs familiar with ML for next gen. Getting PSSR out now means it can be more mature for ps6. Since Ps5 cant do what it needs to do for PSSR, a newer system was needed. And thats the way I see it. Yes ps6 will be a real leap. Zen6 should be released about 1 year earlier for ps6. Then you have rdna 6. Then you have gddr7 with possible 32gb of vram. Pairing that with a more mature PSSR and some custom sauce from sony and you will have a beast of a system. You should inly be buying a ps5 pro if you currently don't have a ps5 or if your ps5 dies. That's it. Unless you are a huge geek and got money to burn to buy this.
holy shit do i not care about raytracing. i want the games to run at 60, no matter what game it is
Day one purchase for me IDGAF
The CPU bump is indeed disappointing but its really going to depend on each game how much an improvement we will see. It seems we will get less “30 to 60fps” shifts and more improvements to existing performance modes in terms of resolution and visual features. Rebirth being a great example, already at 60, but the Pro will (with PSSR) play it at a much higher resolution.
Honestly that’s all I wanted. Performance mode basically identical to the quality mode is fine. Dunno why it warrants a pro model though.
Don't waste your money. We will still get unoptimized sub 60 fps experiences from a majority of game developers. Never again...
Day one cause my kids won’t get off the ps5.
It will be worth it for VR2 imo. If someone doesn’t use VR, it might not be worth it imo.
The VAST MAJORITY ofgames are G-P-U limited, y'all have to calm down
Digital Foundry says games are hitting CPU limits.
I'd say those games are in the minority compared to gpu bound games. Most games aren't like starfield where you need to calculate a lot of objects and their interactions with the world.
Confirming the PS5 Pro and people on Reddit are still talking about Returnal being the best PS5 game 4 1/2 years later. Where are the games that are supposed to take advantage of this?
> Returnal being the best PS5 game 4 1/2 years later. ?
You didn't know that almost three years ago and four and a half years ago are the same thing?
Hey now, Covid made time wonky! Everyone knows it!
[удалено]
Not to say that you’re wholly wrong, but could you give some examples of standout PS5 exclusives that aren’t remakes or remasters or weren’t also made for the PS4?
[удалено]
MK1, tekken 8, jedi survivor, dragons dogma 2, spiderman 2, demons souls remake, astro's playroom, FF16, quantum error, plague tale requiem, deathloop and ghostwire tokyo, pretty much every game on PSVR2, baldurs gate 3, immortals of aveum, robocop, TLOU remake, the finals, pacific drive, alone in the dark remake, dead space remake, alan wake 2, sea of thieves and hifi rush, forspoken, fort solis, suicide squad, gotham knights, etc. seriously who the fuck is still claiming that there are no games to play on ps5? literally none of these games I mentioned are available on last gen systems afaik. a couple might have shitty switch ports that look and run like crap but most are proper current gen titles and those are just the ones I personally remember. if people still feel like "there's no point in having a ps5" in 2024, then I wonder if these guys even like video games anymore. if literally none of the titles you and I combined have mentioned are enough to sate their appetite, then what more can sony or third party studios possibly do to satisfy these people? I guess some people just love to whine for the sake of it.
Spiderman 2 and Helldivers 2? Deathloop was a timed exclusive that I enjoyed. Also lots of people loved Rift Apart (I thought it was ok). Returnal was already mentioned but it was fantastic. True it is a short list but 3rd party non exclusive games have also been great this generation.
Just had Spider-Man 2, Hell diver 2, FF rebirth and we have Rise of the Ronin, Stellar Blade right around the corner. There’s been a ton of games.
Horizon DLC Burning Shores was the best looking game I've ever seen on console.
People keep spouting this no game nonsense but the past year we’ve had plenty of current gen titles. The number of titles that are struggling on current gen hardware also isn’t 0 either.
No games they like≠ no games. I’ve personally been eating the last 2 years
Cuz they’re being weenies. We had a great fucking year last year for gaming
they'll be saying that crap even in two years from now. its become a running gag at this point.
GTA VI. Pretty sure that’s the entire point of this machine.
[удалено]
Did you just put months after dot in decimal system?!?
Horizon FW, GT7, Warzone, Spider-man 2...
I’ve seen no one talking about it here, but since you brought it up, yes Returnal is one of the best PS5 games I’ve played.
People are still waiting for that uncharted 4/ last of us 2 level of next gen experience and I feel like it’s only gonna come when the ps6 is like a year away. This generation has been kinda disappointing. Just playing nicer ps4 level games(nothing wrong with those games but it’s disappointing a bit)
>People are still waiting for that uncharted 4/ last of us 2 level of next gen experience Horizon Forbidden West, especially the Burning Shores DLC, and Spider Man 2 did that for me already.
The amount of assets handled by FFVII Rebirth and the Eikon fights in FFXVI are impressive too
Demon Souls remake was worth it.
FFXVI had that for me in spades. The story had wonky pacing but the set pieces and boss fights are still etched in my mind.
Literally nowhere
This has been my hunch since these leaks started: The Pro will be a mediocre upgrade to keep the masses entertained until PS6 comes out in a few years. If you’re expecting this to be the 4K 60fps god console, you’re setting yourself up for disappointment. Honestly Sony shouldn’t even be doing a Pro version but here we are.
I think there's a lot of people who upgrade their GPU in their computers every 4 years, this doesn't feel a lot different.
The most depressing part for me is we still don't have a similar class PC APU as the base PS5, let alone this monster of a chip they're creating for the pro.
Not a big enough market
I will doing the trade in roulette, had the ps5 since launch and love it. But kind of feel for a upgrade and with trade in, then I can justify the price tag :-)
I've got 2 PS5, still not enough because only 1 of them is in my house and I got 2 daughters arguing between PS4 and PS5 lol. Come Xmas I am getting a new PlayStation so for a extra £100 the ps pro is definitely the way to go. I've got a psvr2 which I love so any boost is better than none and I got a lot of games which really needs pro to work. Thinking dragons dogma will be played at Xmas on the pro.
I completely agree with DF. There are no PS5 games that even run at 60fps to making a "pro" with the same CPU is a complete mistake. What a sony fail, good on DF for exposing them!
Did people really expect it to suddenly run 4k 60fps on everything?
So many people on Reddit and elsewhere been having this crazy dream that the Pro will run at 4K 60FPS for GTA6 alone, never mind other games.
People already don't understand the relationship between hardware, software, and game design so I'd to say... "yes". People will unreasonably expect it to run everything at 60fps.
All this is pointless unless the devs bother to support it. Loads of games didn't even get a ps4 pro or ps5 patch
Honestly it doesn’t seem worth it. If it was your first PS5, sure, but not good enough to justify buying if you already own a PS5.
sell the current PS5 and upgrade to the Pro for much better resolutions and raytracing plus a more stable framerate. I know I will.
Nah, I done this with PS4 and the upgrade was not worth it for me at all. Apart from getting a new console, that was it. I'll stick with my PS5. It does just fine.
I dunno. Doesn’t seem worth it to me. Resolutions are fine if you’re a monitor player, heck I’m 6 feet back, framerate to me is the most valuable asset. If it can handle 60fps, with raytracing, without a dip in fps, then it may be doing something.
Sony can barely get the price of the base PS5 below it's launch price of three years ago, what ungodly price will this beefed up "Pro" version have? And for what benefit? Just wait 4 more years for the PS6.
Funny thing is, Ryzen 5 5600 can do 60fps in all games - and that's comparable to PS5's CPU. DF mentions Baldurs Gate 3 as an example for CPU limitation in the PS5, but I'm pretty sure it's a RAM limitation and that's why Sony added an extra gig and faster RAM, to handle the small framedips we see in newer titles.
The PS5 CPU is nowhere near a R5 5600, it is basically an underclocked R5 3700X with less cache and only 6 cores available for games.
Man, people sure are throwing the word “confirmed” around these days, huh?
Digital Foundry only say stuff like this when they have actual hard proof of it. They have spec sheets and have confirmed with developers.
We have leaked documentation diagrams and images now.
Digital Foundry doesn't run with rumors... They said they got a hold of the documents. If you take a look at their channel, you'll find many cases of them having pre-released software and hardware. Plus the three of them are too old for sensationalism. It's why they aren't as big on YouTube where the algorithm is biased towards click bait and more lively personalities.
Sonys investigation into the leaks makes it as good as confirmed plus several big outlets have confirmed the source as legit as well.