Fake
Member
But I'm not let down which circles back to my original comment.
Fair point. Neither I btw.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry - Playstation 5 Pro specs analysis, also new information
- Thread starter Gaiff
- Start date
Fair point. Neither I btw.
Mr.Phoenix
Member
Yes and no. The PS5pro can do either of those two of three possible things.
- It can improve IQ of performance mode by either, increasing rez to say 1440p, or by rendering it at 1080p, then using PSSR to reconstruct it to 4K. While maybe fixing most of the geometry or draw distance concessions were made to get 60fps to work.
- In a situation where all you have is one mode, usually a quality mode in a game that is CPU bottlenecked, it can increase IQ and maybe get the game running to up to 40fps. The 40fps should be possible because even in a CPU bottlenecked game running at 30fps, the game engine would have to be able to accommodate a higher average internal framerate.
- And finally, it can significantly increase performance across the board and IQ, where they would take the quality mode, and drop its rez to like 1440p, then use PSSR to take that back to 4K and up the framerate from 30fps to anywhere between 40-60fps. While at the same time doing (1) for the performance mode and getting that to well above 60fps.
Last edited:
Kataploom
Gold Member
Frame generation is only for smoothing presentation though, so people like me, who like high frame rates for the sake of aesthetic are good, but it won't serve well the input lag fellas, one is not a substitute for the other
nosoynadie22
Member
I missed the news where Rockstar says that GTA VI cannot run at 60Fps on consoles
Quantum253
Gold Member
That's a good point, about reducing the CPU strain in the current configuration, then an additional 10% on top of that, you're really looking at a jump of 30%. I haven't seen that point of view discussed
Bojji
Member
It will only free resources compared to native resolution.
So 4K native game can have similar image quality with 1080p + PSSR, this give you TONS of free GPU resources.
But many games are already below even 1440p, we have 1080p and even 720p games, only thing PSSR will change here is image quality.
For games that are 720p even that 45% uplift won't be enough to bring them to 1080p and then use PSSR to achieve very good 4k image, they will still have to use lower resolution than 1080p as a base for upscaling.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
A couple of dudes said reconstruction would free up resources. I am simply saying FSR, DLSS and PSSR all have a cost of their own so they cant free up resources because they will be taking resources. Something sony themselves mentioned in the leaked docs.
Ashamam
Member
Forget DLSS, PSSR has its own dedicated compute as compared to FSR on the PS5. So by definition in comparison to the standard machine it does free up resources. How much and what can be done with that headroom remains to be seen.
MisterXDTV
Member
But they free up resources compared to the 4K native resolution otherwise these technologies wouldn't even any reason to exist...
Again, the point of PS5 Pro is to take existing and future PS5 games and make them look better in IQ and/or frame-rate.
The upgraded GPU + PSSR with Machine learning + RT based on RDNA 4 should be plenty enough for that
Last edited:
kruis
Exposing the sinister cartel of retailers who allow companies to pay for advertising space.
PC users should be. When PS5 Pro games can use more advanced graphics features than the regular PS5 version, those improvements will also be available in the future PC port.
rickybooby87
Member
I believe it will free up resources in the sense that FSR is currently ran across shader cores (when FSR is actually used), whereas DLSS/PSSR are ran in dedicated tensor cores. So, looks like the actual performance hit is 2ms~ frame time and a 250MB memory footprint.
Last edited:
Xtib81
Member
Though to read but you're spitting facts sadly.
Physiognomonics
Member
13.7 GB of 576 GB/s memory (100% unified) is very good news. I really see no big problems now in the design and what they want to achieve.
Last edited:
The DF crew doesn't seem adverse to the idea. Also as pointed out by others,if the DF crew can accept the Series S with its shortcomings,why can't they and any naysayer accept the Pro as it has the opposite problem of the Series S.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Were they supposed to disable a feature that comes with it
? Do not see them shouting about it from the rooftops. They have a capable suite of alternatives including pretty powerful multi resolution render targets HW support, they will be fine . Thanks for the concern though .
Salty Popsicle
Banned
Because the Series S costs less than the core console X console while the PS5 Pro will cost more than the core PS5 console. Different expectations for each.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
RT, image quality, frame generation (potentially).
James Sawyer Ford
Member
PSSR has a 2ms cost which is the same as FSR
The net effect is no different than the current techniques they are using anyway, but with much better results
tmlDan
Member
you can't deny its a gorgeous games with far better combat than RDR2 could dream of with its point and click shooting and terrible ragdoll horses that crumble like wet paper when it comes an inch near a tree
It's really annoying. And the fact that the assumption that the original Pro only existed because of 4k screens isn't even proven, let alone relevant, makes it even more so.
Do they just not want to admit they're wrong or are they really that stupid?
FoxMcChief
Gold Member
I’m not saying there’s something wrong with the CPU. Just that not enough tech upgrades for me to warrant spending another $500-$600 on hardware for this generation.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Also, rendering at a lower resolution in heavily GPU limited scenarios is likely to free more than 2 ms
.
Last edited:
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
As I said, I don't like Rockstar games and think they're a borefest. However, I cannot deny that they push the envelope further than almost everyone else when it comes to technology. Horizon Forbidden West still runs on a PS4 and the NPC interactions are pretty much non-existent. I can absolutely guarantee you that GTA VI will not be able to run on a PS4 and will be without a shadow of a doubt far more impressive than Horizon Forbidden West.
Last edited:
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
They are not, but rockstar will.
tmlDan
Member
Are you confident in that? from my recollection Rockstar has never really been on the cuitting edge of anything apart from RDR2 (which is a beautiful game). Past GTA games were pretty mid graphically until people modded them.
Why are we so sure it will be so demanding?
James Sawyer Ford
Member
They haven’t in the past. What makes you think that’s going to change?
GTA6 is going to be a pretty open world story driven game with mechanics from the 360 era, nothing more or less
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Yes, without a doubt.
GTA V on PS360 looked amazing for its time. GTA IV looked great and was widely praised for its "living and breathing" city. To this date, no other game has NPC interactions like Rockstar games, a robust police system like them, and a vibrant open-world like they do. Their games control horribly and are dull as hell but what they do is almost unmatched. The game that came the closest is probably Sleeping Dogs.
I have almost no doubt GTA VI will be the most advanced game when it hits the market but it'll still be more effective than sleeping pills and making me fall asleep.
Also, how good a game looks doesn't necessarily have much to do with CPU demands. HFW looks great mainly because of the nearly unmatched texture work, granular details, and art direction, none of which are CPU-intensive. In terms of how interactive the world is, it doesn't even come close to BOTW.
Last edited:
sncvsrtoip
Member
Im little surprised df was so concerned with no cpu boost when they often compare ps5 gpu to nvidia gpus comined with monter cpu, suggetsting there is no such a thing like cpu limitation on ps5 ;d
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Not sure why that is.
Console volume expectations for consumers are limited (in size I mean,) inflation is what it is for everyone, it should have been clear that semiconductor tech improvement are slower and slower (and costlier) and we are well into diminishing returns phase (where the performance required to deliver meaningful graphical and IQ improvements is growing at faster than linear rates).
It has only been little over three years since the PS5 launched. Generations ought to be longer not shorter if you want devs to max the consoles out and to get meaningful generational jumps.
RAIDEN1
Member
At this rate the Playstation 6 is right round the corner too, and that'll probably last 18 months..
So the Series X shouldn't exist? The base PS5 is better than the Series S and competes with X,the Pro is just extra if anyone wants to buy it.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
PS6 is 2028 likely, they could try to rush it forward but it would be a mistake I think.
ChiefDada
Member
Also, rendering at a lower resolution in heavily GPU limited scenarios is likely to free more than 2 ms
Exactly! Which is why I am confused by the recent back and forth.
TLOU Pt. 1 is the game that comes to mind when thinking about the few games that don't use reconstruction: On PS5, the game runs native 4k @30-35fps vs 1440p 60-80fps. That's going from 30ms to 14ms. Over 2x faster. Being worried about 2ms render cost when upscaling from 1080p to 4k (and likely <1ms when upscaling from 1440p) while achieving great IQ is the epitome of missing the forest for the trees.
yamaci17
Member
not everything is being reduced to the internal render resolution with upscalers. certain things stay at native resolution which is why dlss/fsr (or pssr in this case) performance benefit is not a a fixed value between games. no need to chase after runtime costs. runtime costs are not that heavy. this is why certain people do not understand why a game that hits native 4k 30 fps may not be able to hit 60 fps with ultra performance mode (720p internal)
here's a experiment that may teach you about how upscalers function and how differently they behave depending on the game and context and HOW MUCH output resolution matters for the performance in the end for certain games
tests are done 3070 locked at 100w to ensure no cpu limitation gets in the way (emulating a 2060 super)
rdr 2
native 4k 26 FPS
native 1440p 41 FPS
native 1080p 54 FPS
1080p dlss quality 65 FPS
4k dlss quality (internal 1440p) 33 FPS
4k dlss performance (internal 1080p) 40 FPS
4k dlss ultra performance (internal 720p) 46 FPS
as you can see, 4K DLSS ultra performance is more costly than running the game at native 1080p
and running the game 4k dlss performance is more costly than running the game at native 1440p
you can also see native 1080p and 4k dlss performance has a massive %25 performance cost between them in this specific title
also you can see here, in RDR 2, you need 1080p/upscaling to hit 60 FPS in this scenario despite being able to get 4k/26 FPS.
meanwhile in cyberpunk, it scales differently;
native 4k 20 FPS
native 1440p 41 FPS
native 1080p 70 FPS
1440p dlss quality 68 FPS
4k dlss quality (internal 1440p) 34 FPS
4k dlss performance (internal 1080p) 50 FPS
4k dlss ultra performance (internal 720p) 70 FPS
In these examples, you can see that 4K DLSS performance gives a solid 2.5x performance multiplier in Cyberpunk while only giving a mere 1.5x multiplier in RDR 2.
There are games that will scale and behave differently because each developer will implement upscalers differently. And Cyberpunk is the best case scenario while RDR2 is the worst case scenario as performance scaling is concerned.
We can see that in Cyberpunk, game scales well with both output and internal resolution. We still see a massive %30 performance difference between native 1080p and 4K DLSS performance which operates at the same resolution technically.
Even in the best case scenario, 4K DLSS ultra performance in Cyberpunk at 720p internal performs like native 1080p
This is why some people do not understand why some games use extremely low internal resolutions despite being able to hit 4K 30 FPS. In RDR 2, GPU is capable of 4K 26-30 FPS. But to hit 60 FPS reliably, you need 1080p dlss quality. even 4k dlss ultra performance still gets you to 46 FPS there which is far cry from hitting 60. You need the output resolution reduction in RDR 2 to even have a chance at 60 FPS (with 100w limit of course, the 3070 turns into a 2060 super, as such)
here's a experiment that may teach you about how upscalers function and how differently they behave depending on the game and context and HOW MUCH output resolution matters for the performance in the end for certain games
tests are done 3070 locked at 100w to ensure no cpu limitation gets in the way (emulating a 2060 super)
rdr 2
Imgsli
imgsli.com
native 4k 26 FPS
native 1440p 41 FPS
native 1080p 54 FPS
1080p dlss quality 65 FPS
4k dlss quality (internal 1440p) 33 FPS
4k dlss performance (internal 1080p) 40 FPS
4k dlss ultra performance (internal 720p) 46 FPS
as you can see, 4K DLSS ultra performance is more costly than running the game at native 1080p
and running the game 4k dlss performance is more costly than running the game at native 1440p
you can also see native 1080p and 4k dlss performance has a massive %25 performance cost between them in this specific title
also you can see here, in RDR 2, you need 1080p/upscaling to hit 60 FPS in this scenario despite being able to get 4k/26 FPS.
meanwhile in cyberpunk, it scales differently;
Imgsli
imgsli.com
native 1440p 41 FPS
native 1080p 70 FPS
1440p dlss quality 68 FPS
4k dlss quality (internal 1440p) 34 FPS
4k dlss performance (internal 1080p) 50 FPS
4k dlss ultra performance (internal 720p) 70 FPS
In these examples, you can see that 4K DLSS performance gives a solid 2.5x performance multiplier in Cyberpunk while only giving a mere 1.5x multiplier in RDR 2.
There are games that will scale and behave differently because each developer will implement upscalers differently. And Cyberpunk is the best case scenario while RDR2 is the worst case scenario as performance scaling is concerned.
We can see that in Cyberpunk, game scales well with both output and internal resolution. We still see a massive %30 performance difference between native 1080p and 4K DLSS performance which operates at the same resolution technically.
Even in the best case scenario, 4K DLSS ultra performance in Cyberpunk at 720p internal performs like native 1080p
This is why some people do not understand why some games use extremely low internal resolutions despite being able to hit 4K 30 FPS. In RDR 2, GPU is capable of 4K 26-30 FPS. But to hit 60 FPS reliably, you need 1080p dlss quality. even 4k dlss ultra performance still gets you to 46 FPS there which is far cry from hitting 60. You need the output resolution reduction in RDR 2 to even have a chance at 60 FPS (with 100w limit of course, the 3070 turns into a 2060 super, as such)
Last edited:
darrylgorn
Member
I can make a tweet about it so looks like news.
Let's be honest (albeit speculative) here. This is the perfect setup for PS5 @ 30fps and PS5 Pro @ 60 fps.
The hardware's biggest technological leap seems to be its scaling method, which fits nicely into the focus on performance.
Makes sense too, considering Sony will get those additional players without alienating its base.
It's a workable model for future generations too. You get your rofifs and people who want those high res, super graphics but are okay with 30fps for the initial release and then 60fps stalwarts will go for the Pro.
Last edited:
Neo_game
Member
For a refresh releasing 4yrs later these specs are disappointing. But having said that they have limited budget to work with so I am giving them the benefit of doubt. SX is more expensive than PS5 but it hardly performs better, they are more or less the same. Moreover I do not think Sony is expecting too many sales so I guess they did not want to risk to make high end upgrade, like the last gen X. Eventhough it had impressive specs it was a failure in terms of sales and profits. If PSSR works well and is exclusive for the pro ? it might be worthy upgrade. Looks like the Pro should be 40fps console with improved IQ. if PS5 and SX are low-medium settings, the Pro should be able to run higher settings, RT with improved IQ due to PSSR and still get 40fps instead of 30.
Ashamam
Member
Helps if you read a couple of pages of the thread before dropping in a low information hot take.
Kacho
Gold Member
Expectations changed when the majority of games launched with 60fps modes at the start of this generation. The idea of regressing back to 30fps in CPU intensive games is unattractive. Especially on expensive hardware. Makes it a tough sell.
Synless
Member
I’m not going to read several pages of the thread when I read the entire section of the DF portion covering it.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
But no one argued against that. What they mean by upscaling techniques, "freeing" resources is that upscaling to a target resolution always costs less than the target resolution itself, thus freeing resources.
ChiefDada
just mentioned TLOU Part I. Let's assume for an instant PSSR looks almost as good as DLSS and is running on the regular PS5.PS5 at native 4K: 30fps or 33.33ms
PS5 at native 1440p: 60fps or 16.66ms
PS5 at 1440p upscaled to 4K: 40fps or 25ms.
If the target frame rate at a 4K output is 30fps, you just "freed" up 8ms of rendering time for what is essentially the same image quality. You're arguing that 1440p upscaled to 4K takes up more resources which is true...when compared to native 1440p but this isn't what is being discussed. What matters in this case is the output resolution, not the internal one.
Last edited:
Senua
Member
What the hell am I even reading, do you not remember GTA V on release? It was a miracle that thing even ran on those butt-fuck old consoles from 2005. It was so, so impressive.
Ashamam
Member
You didn't watch the youtube video did you? The CPU is covered there and the general consensus was ok, makes sense, bit disappointing but whatever. Then they move on to all the different things that the Pro does that could be really impactful.
SlimySnake
Flashless at the Golden Globes
GTAV was the best looking game on PS3 and 360.
GermanZepp
Member
Yep, the things one must read here.. RDR2 can't be touched on level of details and simulation of the world.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Not sure what you are on about, games will not run slower on PS5 Pro.
You enjoyed last gen / cross generation games at faster framerates because well, developers were aiming lower. Many games will still deliver 30 FPS games and beyond, some with something like frame generation might get “visually” close to the range you want that were not before…
Some devs will make games that on any console will run at 30/40 FPS. Maybe, but if it is for games like GTA VI you will buy it, enjoy it, and be glad you got it early next year than later.
Again, you know as well as I do that the market is not there for much much bigger and more expensive consoles and get upset at physics because Moore’s Law is well… really not what it used to be
. Again, I refer to what I posted earlier in the thread and in other threads where we had super high expectations for the Pro console.
yamaci17
Member
it started with "gta 6 will have the same game logic as rdr 2/gta 5 so it should run at 60 fps"
now it is going to "if they cant hit 60 fps its all their fault because it is the same as death stranding/forbidden west and those games hit 60 fps on ps5!1"
they already prepare for the inevitable fact of GTA 6 running at 30 fps even on ps5 pro.
if it runs at 60 fps "i told ya so"
if it does not run at 60 fps "it has no rights to run at 30 fps, i told ya so!"
(my personal opinion is that rockstar will destroy all other studios as they always did and game will run at 30 fps and push console CPU to its limits. geometric density, npc counts and draw distance is going to be insane. people just remember things fondly. gta 5 was above most other games but its draw distance and geometric density and NPC density was actualyl lackluster, but lackluster in a way that it was still beyond other games)
Last edited: