PS4 NewsSources: The Upgraded PS4 Is Codenamed NEO, Contains Upgraded CPU, GPU, RAM - PS4 News

Members Login: Register | Why sign up? | Forgot Password?

Sources: The Upgraded PS4 Is Codenamed NEO, Contains Upgraded CPU, GPU, RAM

We heard back in March that an upgraded PS4 might be in the works, and now the PS4.5 rumors have gotten a bit juicier.  Reports from Giant Bomb indicates that the "PS4.5" is codenamed "Neo" and features upgraded CPU, GPU, and RAM. No price was provided, but previous reports indicate that the NEO would sell at $399.

 

According to Giant Bomb, the Neo will come with a faster clock speed, an improved GPU, and faster memory. It says the HDD will be the same as the current PS4, though it's not been confirmed if that means the capacity or disk speed is the same. Every PS4 game will be required to ship with two different modes - one where the game will run on the current PS4 and one that will run on the upgraded console. The Neo mode will utilize the superior hardware to increase and stabilize frame rates, while also offering higher resolutions. 4K output will be supported, but games won't be required to run at 4K resolution. Those who own 4K televisions should expect to see their games upscaled to fit the resolution, though everyone should expect to see an increase in frame rate. The report claims that Sony requires games in Neo mode to run at a higher frame rate than they would on the original PS4.

You could check out the Neo's specifications below:

 

  Original PS4 Neo
CPU 8 Jaguar Cores at 1.6 GHz 8 Jaguar Cores at 2.1 GHz
GPU AMD GCN, 18 CUs at 800 MHz Improved AMD GCN, 36 CUs at 911 MHz
Memory 8 GB GDDR5, 176 GB/s 8 GB GDDR5, 218 GB/s

 

Despite the upgrades, this new console will not replace the PS4 and will instead exist alongside it. There will be no Neo-only games and Sony will not let developers separate Neo users from those playing on original PS4. That also means Sony won't let developers offer exclusive options or unlockables for Neo players. This includes peripheral support, which means it won't offer exclusive VR modes, either.

If this "Neo" version of PS4 is indeed true, I'm not certain if I'm going to buy it once it comes out. I just bought my PS4 last May 2014 and I don't feel like replacing it anytime soon. Not unless if my PS4 got broken or something, then that could be the time that I'll buy this "Neo" version of PS4. How about you guys? Will you buy this "Neo" version of PS4 immediately if it will be released this year?

 

 

Related Game(s): PlayStation 4

4/19/2016 3:32:11 AM Drew Constantino

Put this on your webpage or blog:
Email this to a friend
Follow PSX Extreme on Twitter

Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on Google Share on MySpace Share on Delicious Share on Digg Share on Google Buzz Share via E-Mail Share via Tumblr Share via Posterous




New Comment System


Legacy Comment System (54 posts)


TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:09:25 AM
Reply

Interesting. I think I said before that the only way you could realease actualky better hardware would be to offer a cast iron guarantee that owners of original PS4s would not be left behind by PS4k only games. If thise numbers hold, the CPU will be about 30% faster,and the GPU will crank out about 220% of current performance, and that is assuming no architecture improvements so the actual numbers could be a fair bit better.

You might not push full 4K gaming, but you'd be getting far closer than you might think depending on effects. But you could go higher than 1080p60 with better resolution and post processing, and upscale to 4K.

Sony will need to lock performance in original PS4 mode to ensure 100% parity with original systems.

Last edited by TheHighlander on 4/19/2016 4:10:30 AM

Agree with this comment 4 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Ben Dutka PSXE [Administrator]
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 10:19:45 AM

If you had to guess based on these stats, how much do you think Sony is going to charge for this thing?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:30:45 AM

I think that since we know that there has been at least one die-shrink in the life of the PS4 APU, production costs of the chipset have decreased since launch. With this potentially being a new 4K/VR focused SKU, I think this one will come in at $399, and the current PS4 system which will more than likely become the 'core' system will see a price reduction to $299 (or possibly less) to match Microsoft's current Xbox One move.

I think it's possible Sony will lock out any performance past current PS4 levels unless you are connecting to a 4K display, that will enforce platform stability and prevent millions upon millions of pissed off customers. By doing that, Sony can also clearly delineate the PS4K as a 4K/VR device, leaving the PS4 standing as the current generation game console.

So, $399.99 for the PS4.5 or PS4K or Neo, or whatever it get's called...and $299.99 for the PS4 core system. There is a chance that Sony might make a killer pricing move and go for $349.99 and $249.99. But I think that they will go $399.99 and $299.99 at the PS4K launch and perhaps Q2 2017 we'll see a reduction to $349.99 and $249.99.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:33:33 AM

If they really want to sell this thing, they better price this at current PS4 prices and slash the price of the original model.

If not, I'm betting it'll be around a $100ish more than the original.

EDIT:

^ What he said.

Highlander posted just about ahead.

Last edited by HANZ64 on 4/19/2016 11:34:42 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 1:01:33 PM

For the record, I'd like to state that It was I who said the PS4k would adopt the 360 approach. Where the game is rendered ad sub 4k and then up-scaled to 4k.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:24:08 PM

Highlander,
I sincerely hope you're wrong about Sony making a performance lock on the new hardware unless it is connected to certain hardware, cause that would be pure, plain idiocy.

4k screens are not *that* common in the livingroom today. For consumers to learn that their new console is not running on all engines because of some highly artificial limits set by the system software - how do you think that would have been received?

Not to mention the potential sales for those who would want to upgrade to the new PS4 - it's quite likely that this is a quite good share of the current PS4 owners. How many of those got a 4k screen today? No way Sony would want to miss out on that sale.

This new console will obviously annoy some current ps4 owners, but they'll get over it when they understand that the games will still play roughly as good as they would without the PS4.5 on the market.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:49:41 PM

I think you're wrong there BeamBoom, and the reason is simple, fragmentation of the customer base. If you hard lock performance to within 10 % of the original PS4 you are protecting your existing customers. But you're not affecting customers who have screens capable of higher resolutions.

As for how console owners would feel about some cores being locked out in certain modes, we've had that since the PS3, even with PS4 Sony unlocked a 7th CPU core for developers. most console gamers are not in this to geek out on the hardware, all they care about is the game and how well it runs. If the PS4K is constantly being touted in game reviews as better than PS4, it will create an instant divide and negative wave of customer feeling and publicity for Sony.

If the PS4K is marketed as a 4K device with additional GPU power to handle 4K, I don't honestly think that any console gamers will care - except for PC gamers with PS4s and geeks like us.
4K screens are coming to the market in ever greater numbers at lower prices. Since it's just a resolution upgrade and the technology for producing the panels is the same as for producing 1080p panels, the pricing will drop quickly. I think you're making a bad assumption about 4K adoption, and also about sensitivity among the majority of users.

Last edited by TheHighlander on 4/19/2016 3:52:15 PM

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:12:48 PM

4K TVs are coming down in price rapidly...

Vizio has 50-inch 4K HDR screens for $850 now...

http://www.techhive.com/article/3058693/home-tech/vizios-latest-4k-tvs-make-eye-popping-hdr-more-affordable.html?google_editors_picks=true



Last edited by TheHighlander on 4/19/2016 4:13:53 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:43:14 PM

Sorry but that's just wishful thinking from someone already owning a PS4. :) It would be madness from Sony to do such a move.

The fragmentation is there, and it's real. The new machine will provide better performance, it's how an "upgraded" console *should* behave.

But the PS4 owners are already protected by the requirement from Sony for all releases on the platform to always support the PS4 with a version that meets the quality requirements.
Ergo, all is fine in both camps.

This new console might pull on board a good share of those who hasn't already purchased a PS this gen. But that won't happen if it requires you to go buy a new TV as well, in order to unleash the full power of it - especially when it's totally artificial reasons. Surely it's pretty obvious when you think about it.

I think you're spot on in regards to the price though. It should be around there.


Last edited by Beamboom on 4/19/2016 4:45:29 PM

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 6:41:19 PM

BeamBoom,

The fragmentation is not there, nor is it real, because the PS4 is the PS4 is the PS4. Until this product whatever they call it arrives, no fragmentation of their users exists.

I believe that you are very wrong to dismiss the issues of fragmenting the customer base in the console gaming arena. Consoles make money based on larger numbers. Splitting user populations creates more work for developers and publishers and reduces the return on any one group of gamers. Economically it doesn't make sense. There are far too many apparent risks for Sony here for you to blithely wave them aside as you do.

When you wrote this " The new machine will provide better performance, it's how an "upgraded" console *should* behave." There is a simple problem with your statement. you got a word wrong, it should be worded;
" The new machine will provide better performance, it's how an "upgraded" PC *should* behave."

You're applying the logic of the PC upgrade treadmill to the world of game consoles. That's not how game consoles have ever operated as a market, nor how game console users have ever behaved as a group.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Neo_Aeon666
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 10:11:27 AM

@Highlander

The cap will not happen. The article just mentionned they would require devs to have games detect hardware and adjust settings according to the profile of the console :D It's pretty much like I think it would be if you remember our past conversation :P

Also I don't know why you think it will segment the userbase. It won't. PS4 games will be PS4 games. So what if they are borrowing the concept of a PC by allowing different hardware to run the same games. The PC is borrowing concept of the consoles and releasing in the living room. Nothing is set in stone. What they are doing is for the best and allowing you to keep playing in the Playstation environment while still competing with current tech. Some people stopped playing consoles after 3-5 years in the lifespawn because PC would start to leave a huge gap. Now these people (like me) can just purchase a better version of PS4 and enjoy multiplat games on a Sony secure environment while still being not too far away from PC performance. People who don't care can keep playing the original PS4 because Sony made it clear all games will still be optimised and have same features as the Neo model :P

Other than that I think what you say about price/performance and stuff is pretty accurate!

Last edited by Neo_Aeon666 on 4/20/2016 10:15:15 AM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 12:08:14 PM

How will it fragment users? Easy.

My friend just got a new pS4.5, I have a PS4, we both have the same 1080p screen. When he plays the game, it looks appreciably better than it does on my screen, why? Because his PS4 isn't a PS4 it's a PS4.5

I'm not going to run out and lay down another $400 on a PS4.5 for that, but I am gonna be pretty bloody pissed off that my console I got a few months back is obsolete. And it doesn't help that the jerks at Eurogamer keep trashing games running on the inferior PS4 platform.

The reason you and BeamBoom can't see or understand this is that you're PC gamers at heart and you're used to the treadmill mentality of always having inferior hardware or empty pockets. Neither of you seem to 'get' console gaming.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Thursday, April 21, 2016 @ 11:18:38 AM

I have to agree with Highlander here.

PC is all about having options which adds complexity (thus fragmentation). But it's great for people who are really into their technology and always want the best of the best. (but be willing to pay for that privilege)

On the other side, simplicity, ease of mind, hassle free, doesn't break the bank and 'it just works' kind of platform is what console gaming is all about.

When I buy a PS4 game, it should play exactly the same on my console as it should do on my friends console. Now with the PS4.5, this is no longer the case. This is just one step closer to what the PC does (and arguably PC does it better because you don't have to purchase an entire system for marginal improvements/you can just swap out the GPU)

Consoles are about adhering to a common standard. What that standard is, changes after each generation (which is supposed to take around 5-7 years or so). But with the advent of the PS4.5, that standard now is going to change more frequently.

And before you know it, all you will have is a mid-range closed PC system with your favourite companies logo on it, which you will have to renew every 2-3 years if you want the latest and greatest. (which is precisely equivalent to the PC GPU upgrade cycle...)

We're going to look back one day and say, remember the times when we could just buy one system and we were sorted for the rest of the generation?

If the PS4.5 trend continues, say goodbye to any meaningful generational upgrades.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:42:42 AM
Reply

Haha - this has VR written all over it. It's a significant upgrade that should benefit all though.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Gamer46
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:49:45 AM
Reply

I might upgrade if there's some good trade-in programs at one of the local game stores I frequent. The important thing is Sony and third parties don't create games exclusively for the updated model. Still all rumors and speculation, E3 can't come soon enough so all the real details can get out there.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

big6
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 9:56:09 AM
Reply

While I don't agree with this practice, cellphone companies have been doing this for years with much success.

That said, I'll just have to adapt to this and treat it as a cellphone (only cheaper). My plan is to sell the old one and put money towards the new one.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 10:07:49 AM
Reply

Make way for the PS Master Race!

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

wackazoa
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:31:28 AM

It's really not that bad. As long as you keep Microsoft at arms length you should be fine.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:41:05 AM

How dare you...

'PC' will always be the true Master Race...

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

shaytoon
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 10:32:04 AM
Reply

:(

Agree with this comment 0 up, 2 down Disagree with this comment

wackazoa
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:30:32 AM
Reply

Help help!! The sky is falling! The sky is falling!!!!!

Still dont think that "real" 4K is a possibility with this, at least in gaming. Unless they use low graphical settings. This looks to be using a new Bristol Ridge mobile APU, which I dont think could push 4K games. Be interested in how this works.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:42:22 AM

Specs are not even close to push native 4K games.

Maybe PS5.

Maybe.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:54:48 AM

The new GPU - if it matches this information will consist of 36 compute units and a 15% clock uptick plus architecture enhancements. I'd have to go back and double check to determine which AMD mainstream GPU that is equivalent to, however if the current one can push true 1080p60 that's 2M Pixels at 60fps, then the upgraded one will be capable of about 2 and a half times that, which is still not true 4K resolution, but it's a lot closer.

However, as you suggested, if they cut back on either the additional effects or the render resolution, they could conceivably hit 4K. I think that developers will work on dynamic resolution rendering allowing them to render certain aspects of the frame at lower resolutions, and therefore using less GPU, allowing the complete scene to be rendered in 4K, even though the GPU falls short of the raw performance needed.

That's a fairly complex approach though, and I think most devs will opt for rendering at 2560x1440 and up-scaling to 4K. I also think that will be how the Nintendo NX will claim to hit 4K resolutions as well, rendering below 4K and scaling from there.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 12:31:06 PM

Honestly though, I personally don't think we're at a point where 4k (or even 2560x1440) is necessary.

On the PC I only game at 1080p despite the fact that my GPU can easily handle a higher resolution. Because I think even the most graphically intense games currently available are no where close to justify the higher resolution.

Instead of uber resolutions, I would much prefer higher/smoother framerates and/or higher quality in game graphics/effects/rendering/assets/larger worlds etc.

With current games, whenever I look closely at the screen and do some pixel peaking, the first thing that comes to my mind is not:

"Wow, look how much better everything looks with the higher resolution."

But rather it's:

"This game doesn't look as good as I thought it did..."

Until in game graphics gets to a point where it looks like real time ray tracing, I think only then will it be reasonable to up the resolution all the way to 4K beyond.

Other than movies, the only other case scenario that makes sense to up the resolution beyond 1080p is on very large displays. But even then, 1080p is more than adequate unless you happen to have a 100inch TV and are sitting way too close than you ought to.

4K simply takes too much power. Power that could be used elsewhere onto more important aspects I believe.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 1:15:04 PM

I agree Hanz, they'd be better throwing more filtering anti-aliasing motion blur, and other effects at the games instead of higher resolutions. I'll take higher image quality and steady framerate at a lower resolution over 4K resolutoin with bare bones post processing and frame rate instability.

Agree with this comment 6 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

wackazoa
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 2:26:46 PM

Now here is the trick. If they go for a 21:9 aspect ratio then they can mimic 4K kind of decently. I think it falls in the 2K category but a 32" ultra wide monitor in 1080p is really nice as it allows more of the peripheral to show. I played on one one time and it was a good bit of difference between regular 1080p. And that is all this is going for anyways right? For the casual person to look and go "whoa"...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 2:53:48 PM

@hanz64: You're saying that you got a PC monitor with a higher resolution and a rig that can handle it but prefer to use a non-native resolution, 1080p, on that screen?
That's... Odd, to say the least. I'm tempted to call your bluff.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:26:48 PM

No, I didn't say anything about having such a monitor. I was talking about my GPU being perfectly capable of running games at higher resolutions, but the point was that there wouldn't be a 'point' because other factors besides the resolution are more important.

I have seen the differences in resolutions, and I am in no rush to upgrade.

Currently, I still have my 1080p monitor (had it for a number of years). It's easy on the eye and great for work/general browsing (not so great for gaming).

I only game on my 55" HDTV. I have a separate rig hooked up in the living room and the TV isn't the latest and greatest, so it's only capable of 1080p.

My point was, at this stage, 1080p is more than adequate, and any extra power should be used to further in-game quality rather than needlessly upping resolutions.

So I'd much rather prefer to use my GPU to run a game on maximum settings at 1080p, rather than sacrifice image quality in favour of a higher resolution.

I hope you got the point.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:32:22 PM

So you only game at 1080p because you can't go higher, and don't think it's worth upgrading. That's fair enough but slightly different from how you expressed it. :)

I'd say it's clearly worth it on a monitor above 25". 1440 does give a notably less grainy and smoother picture then. But 4K isn't worth it (imo) until we reach at least 35", maybe even 40".

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 6:44:41 PM

That's not what he said BeamBoom.

What he said was;

image quality is more important than resolution
frame rate is more important than resolution
additional effects/quality improvements to the image are more important than resolution.

Resolution is not the be all, and end all when it comes to image quality and user experience. Once you hit 1080p60, it's good enough that you do not really need more pixels or frames, what you need is better image quality and post processing/filtering.

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:33:55 AM
Reply

If my PS4 craps out, I might consider buying the PS4K. I'm not interested in upgrading to a 4K tv since there's nothing wrong with the 50" that I have now.

I wonder if they'll eventually phase out the PS4 when the PS4K gets cheaper to manufacture.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:35:54 AM
Reply

See? I told you guys. It'll be mostly about the framerates.

Does anybody still feel cheated?

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

tes37
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:42:01 AM

I feel cheated out of something to complain about. I have a strong feeling I'll get over it though.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

big6
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:47:24 AM

You're not cheated, because you aren't forced to purchase the PS4K.

It's entirely optional. Sony has ensured that all games will be made for both, and PS4K will have no advantages at all, other than better specs and smoother game experience.

It's like buying a higher model of TV... or any appliance for that matter. lol

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 12:01:01 PM

Actually if I had bought the PS4 recently and Sony went ahead and slashed the price of the original model, and priced the new PS4K at the same price at which I had bought a regular PS4...

I would feel a little cheated.

Just a little bit...

I guess it all depends on pricing.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

daus26
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 9:38:28 PM

Yeah, but that happens every time when someone buys something and soon after the price drops. Just hope your retail supports price protection for 30 days at least.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

jimmyhandsome
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 12:54:10 PM
Reply

Is this Sony's attempt at backwards compatibility? I'm not really sure how they plan on marketing this thing. How are are they gonna show off the differences in games without making the normal PS4 title look like garbage?

My real worry is how much this affects game development. There will 100% be delays with games now to make sure that all of Sony's guidelines are met for the Neo version. Kinda crappy for those that don't want to or can't upgrade to a new PS4.

Looking forward to more details from E3.

Last edited by jimmyhandsome on 4/19/2016 12:55:01 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Cesar_ser_4
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 12:57:27 PM
Reply

And yet the Neo version of Uncharted 4 will still only run @30fps.

But honestly if this means that older games could get a patch to run @60 fps (GTA5, Batman:AK, etc.) then I'm in.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 2:19:42 PM
Reply

I'm still trying to figure out the real purpose for this minor console upgrade.

I mean, why do it?

Is it really because of VR? Won't that work on the regular PS4 anyways?

Perhaps it's due to Nintendo's upcoming console? But does that really warrant a whole new console release? (last time I checked, it takes a lot for these companies to bring in a new console into the market, so they better think that this will make a valuable return.)

Or perhaps it is just that time in this generation where where they want to do a 'slim refresh'? But instead of putting out a cheaper/slimmer console, perhaps they wanted to upgrade it a little?

With this PS4.5 out, I don't think we'll be seeing a PS5 until around 2019-2020.

But I think I would have preferred a PS5 earlier in the cycle, rather than a slightly bumped up PS4...

Or maybe the consoles really have turned into PC's...

Think about it, if PS4.5 is fully backwards compatible (incorrect to say, as it is fully native with PS4 games), why wouldn't PS5 be the same? Just pop in a PS4 game into a PS5 and play the old game at a higher resolutions and fps, just like a PC...

R.I.P consoles...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

wackazoa
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 2:35:19 PM

I think it has more to do with it now being easier for Sony to do. Before hand, especially the PS3, the tech was kind of proprietary so them upgrading the hardware was kind of difficult. Now they are closer to using regular PC parts it becomes easier to do. Also when your competitors move and money is your concern you try and keep up.

Im kind of excited by it. Maybe the PS5 will allow users themselves to upgrade their consoles. If you want better performance you do it, if not you buy what Sony gives you. Without the hassle of an OS, and no Microsoft, the consoles are really where the dream of gaming lies. Thats why I was so excited about SteamOS. But it is not really where it needs to be yet.

Agree with this comment 1 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Temjin001
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 2:41:55 PM
Reply

What's gonna happen when one mode of a game doesn't have regular performance problems, say like FFXV? Or say when one version has lots more bugs than the other? More bugs abound with twice the hardware to configure.

Riots and Insanity!

Last edited by Temjin001 on 4/19/2016 2:43:41 PM

Agree with this comment 0 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:35:04 PM

The world will end.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:10:37 PM
Reply

Been reading a bit more on this. The GPU will likely be about 3 times as powerful as what's in the PS4 today. It's reportedly using Polaris Compute Units (CUs), which is the current iteration, version 1.3, of AMD's GCN architecture. The original APU apparently uses Pitcairn CUs which are from version 1.0 of the GCN architecture.

The Polaris Compute Units are the same ones used on the Radeon RX400 series of GPUs from AMD. So, this new GPU is not only clocked higher and doubles the number of compute units, but it's 3 design iterations ahead of the original GPU. That's 3 generations of improvement in performance.

Just based on the enhanced clock speed and number of CUs, the new GPU would be capable of about 2.5 times the performance of the original. If you factor in a 15% increase in performance for the actual CUs based on design improvements, the total improvement in performance is knocking on the door of 3 times the original GPU performance.

It seems that the same CPU cores will be present, but implemented using smaller geometry and clocked higher. So CPU performance should scale with the clock speed improvement.

The report I was reading suggests something puzzling, it claims that there will be no Ultra BluRay drive. That makes very little sense to me. Incorporating a UHD BD player in the PS4K would be a killer move in keeping PS4(K) front and center for the 4K wave of products. I still expect to see an UHD BD drive, but we'll have to wait and see.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

wackazoa
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:41:14 PM

Digital Foundry?

Also the concept of CPU/GPU is starting to confuse me. I keep reading the PS4 is a APU. However when I first look at the spec 2 years ago I thought it was a GPU doubling as a CPU for the OS. Now it seems that the Playstation runs a mobile CPU and a mobile GPU since the CPU is clocked so low and they keep referring to the GPU as separate. Im confused.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 3:54:42 PM

Ah yes, I've been waiting to read a post like this from you Highlander.

You do a great job of breaking down much of the technical jargon, so it is a lot easier for the rest of us mere mortals to digest.

So basically from your findings, what you're saying is that, it wouldn't be so far-fetched to call this new console a 'PS4.5'?

It's not enough of an improvement to warrant a '5', but it is an improvement.

You've also revealed another potential reason for this console. It may exist to push 4K content (similar to what the PS2 did for DVD's, and the PS3 for blurays). Though the lack of a UHD BD drive would be very strange if this were the case.

Do you think this console would be worthwhile?

What I fear is that when the PS5 comes out, it will just be a marginal improvement just like this one, and so on... Until these companies basically try and milk out new consoles every 2-3 years. (sounds a lot the upgrade cycle of PC GPU's, huh?)

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Beamboom
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 4:48:47 PM

Hanz - the prime reason for this console is not to push 4k content - it's *all* about VR. Trust me, this is not powerful enough for a good 4k gaming experience. This is totally, completely pushed forward by the VR wave.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 5:01:55 PM

But isn't VR already compatible with the regular PS4?

I'm assuming it is as I haven't heard otherwise.

The point still stands. What is the point of this console besides a marginal upgrade?

And is it really necessarily to release an entirely new console just to perhaps improve the VR experience by a bit?

It just doesn't make sense to me, unless they plan to continue to do this, (PS5 > PS5.5 > PS6 etc).

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

TheHighlander
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 6:53:33 PM

@wackazoa
APU is a fusion of the CPU and GPU that would normally be separate. It's cheaper to make, and in effect creates a system on a chip. If the information I read today is true then AMD has created a new APU for Sony that incorporates all the lessons learned with other CPU & GPU designs used in their APU line of products, as well as the latest GPU core itself. They didn't alter the CPU portion much, it was simply producing them in a smaller size, but the changed up the GPU part by leaping forward 3 complete generations, increasing the amount of GPU hardware available, and speeding the whole thing up.

Hanz I think this is a large enough upgrade (assuming it's correct) to be a PS4.5. If they do not include a ultra HD BD player, then really all this thing can eb about is an upgrade. But that seems illogical to me, and a missed chance. PS VR already has a price and platform, including the external coprocessor. 4K is the logical next move, supporting 4K output, is certainly part of this new system. We'll have to wait and see whether they include an Ultra HD BD player or not. If they do, then this system is designed to take us to PS5 in 3 years time. If they do not, then they will have to make the jump to PS5 sooner than that because they'll fall behind as mainstream TVs move to 4K. You're 100% right about PS/2 and DVD, and PS3 with BluRay. This is their pattern.

BeamBoom, as Hanz points out PS VR is already compatible with PS4, there is no need fr a PS4K to make PSVR work. with 4K streaming, 4K TVs and 4K Ultra HD BluRay all coming out of Sony now, it makes far more sense to do a hardware refresh, take advantage of the GPU update and bump everything up beyond 1080p towards 4K.

Agree with this comment 2 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:45:23 PM

Great points. Not much to add.

Let's just wait and see what kind of differences there are between the 'Neo' and 'Standard' versions of games.

And of course, let's see what they end up doing with the pricing.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Kevin555
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 10:32:35 PM
Reply

If we're going to be getting PS4.2 PS4.3 PS4.4 etc throughout the PS4 cycle i think i will just wait for the actual PS5 to come out.

Why do they even need to do this?? It's not like the PS4 isn't powerful enough in it's current form nor is it like PS4 is down on sales for them to churn out another upgraded model.

By the time PS4.9 comes out is the upgrade to PS5 going to be worth it? ;D

Last edited by Kevin555 on 4/19/2016 10:34:27 PM

Agree with this comment 1 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Tuesday, April 19, 2016 @ 11:40:55 PM

Of course not, you'll have to wait for the PS5.1 obviously. I mean who would settle for the base PS5 model right?

And if you really want your money's worth, your going to want to upgrade to the PS5.2 Turbo edition (overclocked for a massive 1% improvement in graphics). And you'll be finally be able to play videos on it, because for some strange reason it was omitted from the base model.

But if your really really want your moneys worth, you'll want to wait for the Super PS5.5 8K Ultra Turbo HD Remix Edition, with music playback.

I mean c'mon, by then 4K would be so last year and who wouldn't want to play music via USB?

And then there's the PS5.9...

Agree with this comment 2 up, 1 down Disagree with this comment

Kevin555
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 12:44:27 AM

Capcom would be happy as they could release every Super, Ultra, Remix & Deluxe edition of SFV on each PS4 model that's released.

8K res? That is so 2019 old timer.

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

HANZ64
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 2:02:46 AM

Lol.

I'm so digging that pic.

Is it you?

lol...

Agree with this comment 0 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Breadlover
Wednesday, April 20, 2016 @ 12:54:47 AM
Reply

'Accidentally' steps on PS4. Oh gee, oh my, I broke it! :(((

I guess I better get a new one.

Say.. this PS4K seems really enticing!

Agree with this comment 3 up, 0 down Disagree with this comment

Leave a Comment

Please login or register to leave a comment.

Our Poll

How often do you visit the site?
Once a day
Several times a day
Every few days
Once a week
This is my first visit
I've never been here, even now I am not here

Previous Poll Results