Sources: The Upgraded PlayStation 4 is Codenamed NEO, Contains Upgraded CPU, GPU, RAM

harmattan said:
Now that PS4 Pro (Neo) has been announced, any guesses on the specific hardware? We know the GPU is Polaris-based pushing 4.2 GFLOPs, 8GB DDR5, and a "higher-clocked" CPU...
Click to expand...
Digital foundry did a bunch of videos. Most likely a downclocked RX 480.
 
No 4K Bluray drive. :ROFLMAO:

What a massive oversight for a console that is promoting 4K as one of its main features.
 
TaintedSquirrel said:
7970 GHz: 4.3 tflops.
PS4 Pro: 4.2 tflops.

Gotta be cut/downclocked RX 470.
Click to expand...

That's my guess as well. Rx 470 puts out 4.9 TFlops, and expect they'll be going for yields over a full-fat downclocked chip -- yeah, don't think it's going to be a down-clocked rx 480. At most it's a subtly cut down rx 480 (maybe a couple blocks disabled) with a hefty downclock. It's definitely not rx 460 as that only puts out 2.15.

I don't get it. Why not go for a full-fat rx 480 for more longevity? It's like they picked the GPU solely based on a marketing point to make it "2x MOAR power" as the cut-down hd 7850 Pitcairn in the old PS4. A cut-down rx 470 is gonna get you jack and sh£te at 4k. I have no interest in this "upgrade".

Wonder what the CPU is? If it's just the same Jaguar with a clock increase... well, that's just pathetic.
 
harmattan said:
That's my guess as well. Rx 470 puts out 4.9 TFlops, and expect they'll be going for yields over a full-fat downclocked chip -- yeah, don't think it's going to be a down-clocked rx 480. At most it's a subtly cut down rx 480 (maybe a couple blocks disabled) with a hefty downclock. It's definitely not rx 460 as that only puts out 2.15.

I don't get it. Why not go for a full-fat rx 480 for more longevity? It's like they picked the GPU solely based on a marketing point to make it "2x MOAR power" as the cut-down hd 7850 Pitcairn in the old PS4. A cut-down rx 470 is gonna get you jack and sh£te at 4k. I have no interest in this "upgrade".

Wonder what the CPU is? If it's just the same Jaguar with a clock increase... well, that's just pathetic.
Click to expand...

Yeah, kinda an odd choice going with a chip that has the power of a card from top-of-the-line 3years ago.

I'm hoping this is the start of a more natural tick/tock console generation. Instead of the prior 8-10year generation that stagnated the industry. A release / upgrade schedule to span that 8 years works way better.
 
I'm still not sure what I think of the concept. I still want to see how this affects titles going forward, especially for those that stick to the original PS4.
Do I really want to wait to buy new systems going forward because "they're just going to release the PS5 Pro in 18 months anyway" ? Either that or be constantly behind the 8-ball having to trade in brand new'ish systems and eating a 50% loss each time. Option 3 is to stick to older hardware and potentially end up playing gimped versions of everything that are 2 full generations behind the PC instead of 1.

Probably not feasible, but I'd rather have some system of upgrades that doesn't involve having to get rid of your current machine each time...like a PC.
 
Spidey329 said:
Yeah, kinda an odd choice going with a chip that has the power of a card from top-of-the-line 3years ago.

I'm hoping this is the start of a more natural tick/tock console generation. Instead of the prior 8-10year generation that stagnated the industry. A release / upgrade schedule to span that 8 years works way better.
Click to expand...

Why? It's a sizable upgrade from the previous model, while still allowing them to keep the same launch price as the original. You want full RX 480 performance? You need more expensive 8GHz GDDR5 and a more expensive chip, which would raise the price to around $450. And the power consumption would rise to almost launch-day PS3 levels :eek:

Remember, they're not just downclocking it to increase yields. There's a much lower voltage target they want to hit here versus the desktop part, to lower power consumption and make it fit in that small case.

As for "tick-tock," don't get your hopes up. This is simply Sony recognizing the fact that we'll be stuck on 14/16nm for the next few years AND the fact that this is a "node and a half" shrink. And they can take advantage of the early availability of the RX 480 to feed the sudden demand for VR headsets and 4k TVs.

It's the same reason they reused and overclocked the Jaguar chips - because Zen isn't ready yet. Fastest shipping Jaguar part is 2.2 GHz, so that provides about 30% faster CPU performance.

Just increase the speed of the existing 5.5 GHz GDDR5 to say 7 GHz (same speed as RX 470), and you have a decent upgrade for only $100, capable of 1440p native gaming. Good idea to get in first, since we have no idea how long it's going to be to the next decent process node.

They decided to jump first rather than wait next year like Microsoft is doing with Scorpio (likely cut Vega, and Zen CPU).
 
Last edited:
exlink said:
No 4K Bluray drive. :ROFLMAO:

What a massive oversight for a console that is promoting 4K as one of its main features.
Click to expand...
Initially I thought the same thing, but I bet the 4k BD would add $100 to the cost of the system. 4K UHD players are $300 and media is not common. Sony knows $399 is the sweet spot and streaming 4k is the future anyways.
 
This read makes it sound like the PS4 Pro will be worth every penny if you own 4k TV.

Digital Foundry: Three hours with PlayStation 4 Pro

"In common with the other titles using this technique, the demo code we saw can switch in real-time between 1080p and '4K' at the press of a button, with HDR on and off also selectable. There is a clear, unambiguous night and day difference between 1080p and the 4K mode, which is clearly resolving more than the basic 2x increase in pixel throughput being generated at the base level. In fact, the detail increase is almost revelatory - and that applies equally to both Days Gone and Horizon Zero Dawn."
 
bigdogchris said:
This read makes it sound like the PS4 Pro will be worth every penny if you own 4k TV.
"
Click to expand...

...with a high-end panel that actually natively supports HDR. One does not guaranteed the other.

Otherwise I doubt that people will spend that kind of money for a simple resolution bump, when most people have trouble telling the difference between 1080p and 4k source material at your typical TV viewing distance.
 
defaultluser said:
And they can take advantage of the early availability of the RX 480 to feed the sudden demand for VR headsets and 4k TVs.
Click to expand...

What demand? I see a trickle for 4K TVs (4K monitors are a different story). I see next to nothing for VR.
 
Sulphademus said:
What demand? I see a trickle for 4K TVs (4K monitors are a different story). I see next to nothing for VR.
Click to expand...

I never said it was REAL :D

I just said "sudden demand." That demand is mostly imaginary, but based on the existence of PSVR, Sony is taking this non-existent demand very seriously.

And the demand for 4k TVs is mostly caused by bigger vendors abandoning 1080p sets, after they got priced out of the midrange market by this:

https://www.amazon.com/TCL-40FS3800-40-Inch-1080p-Smart/dp/B00UB9UJFQ

It doesn't matter if the 4k push or VR push is real, it still costs Sony time and money attempting to be early.
 
Last edited:
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Almost anyone in the market for a medium to large TV right now is going 4K. That's what all of the major manufacturers have swapped to and it's not like it makes the price go up much (if at all).
I don't know how much of a "rush" there is, but it's at least accounting for normal business. I ended up with one a few years ago because it was only like $200 more even then.

VR's a different story because there isn't a normal audience for it. It's not like people are out buying a new VR setup because their old one died. The only people I know that have it have the low-end version for Samsung phones.
 
The deal maker/breaker for me is honestly the HD interface. If it's SATA3 I'll buy it just so I can pop in a SSD. Other than that, anything else is a bonus.

I havent found any source that says it is SATA3. I figured they would have touted it if it was. I really dont get it, do they save anything by sticking with a SATA2 interface?
 
For me it'll come down to how much I can get for my current PS4. If I can get $200 on Craigslist, I'll bite. That's 1/2 the cost and makes it a $200 system. I can live with that. Even the $165 they're supposedly giving out on Amazon isn't that bad. Anything less and I'll just skip out. It's not like most of those games won't be on PC, too.
 
are there any official numbers for how many people own a 4K TV (in the USA)?...I'm curious how low it is...I don't see 4K adoption taking off for a few more years...wouldn't MS and Sony have been better off holding off on these updated 4K consoles until the next-gen (PS5 etc)?
 
so games like Uncharted 4 and Last of Us will be getting PS4 Pro Enhanced patches that improve graphics/performance...not really fair to OG PS4 owners...the main advantage to consoles has always been that they don't need to be upgraded like PC's and would last 5-10 years...now the line between consoles and gaming PC's are getting blurred
 
polonyc2 said:
so games like Uncharted 4 and Last of Us will be getting PS4 Pro Enhanced patches that improve graphics/performance...not really fair to OG PS4 owners...the main advantage to consoles has always been that they don't need to be upgraded like PC's and would last 5-10 years...now the line between consoles and gaming PC's are getting blurred
Click to expand...
How is it "not fair"? Should they just not release a patch and not take advantage of the better hardware?
 
bigdogchris said:
How is it "not fair"? Should they just not release a patch and not take advantage of the better hardware?
Click to expand...

Yeah, This is such an entitled attitude. It's not like Uncharted 4 and and TLoU will run WORSE on regular PS4 now that the ProS4 is a thing. They will still run exactly how they did when you voluntarily spent money on them.
 
bigdogchris said:
How is it "not fair"? Should they just not release a patch and not take advantage of the better hardware?
Click to expand...

it's not fair because this is not PC where it's expected that to get better graphics/performance that you would need to upgrade...with consoles it has always been good for 5-10 years until the next major revision...now they are changing that established model...people buy consoles with the expectation that they will not need to upgrade...yes you can still play all your current games on OG PS4 but you know that it's not the best version of the game...and my main point is that this has never happened before, ever, in the history of consoles
 
polonyc2 said:
it's not fair because this is not PC where it's expected that to get better graphics/performance that you would need to upgrade...with consoles it has always been good for 5-10 years until the next major revision...now they are changing that established model...people buy consoles with the expectation that they will not need to upgrade...yes you can still play all your current games on OG PS4 but you know that it's not the best version of the game...and my main point is that this has never happened before, ever, in the history of consoles
Click to expand...

It's completely fair. And Consoles have had revisions and upgrades for ages. You are still getting the EXACT GAMES you paid for. The performance isn't going to get any WORSE. it's not like the games are going to be gimped now. Your PS4 is still a PS4. The ProS4 did not suddenly turn it into a PS3. This console has NO EFFECT on the compatibility and release schedules of new and old games, It's not like a next-generation leap where your favourite game's sequel will ONLY run on the new console. You're whining because you want the newest thing, and now there is a newest thing out sooner than you expected. Nothing unfair about that.
 
KazeoHin said:
It's completely fair. And Consoles have had revisions and upgrades for ages...You're whining because you want the newest thing, and now there is a newest thing out sooner than you expected. Nothing unfair about that.
Click to expand...

there has never been a significant revision such as this...you know that..."sooner then you expected"...again there has never been a console revision such as this (and the upcoming Scorpio) so there is nothing in history to compare it to...which is my point
 
polonyc2 said:
there has never been a significant revision such as this...you know that..."sooner then you expected"...again there has never been a console revision such as this (and the upcoming Scorpio) so there is nothing in history to compare it to...which is my point
Click to expand...
So because it hasn't been done before you should never do it? Sounds like limiting innovation for no reason other than to spare peoples feelings who think it's unfair.

I would completely agree with you if the PS4 Pro plaed games that PS4 doesn't.
 
bigdogchris said:
Initially I thought the same thing, but I bet the 4k BD would add $100 to the cost of the system. 4K UHD players are $300 and media is not common. Sony knows $399 is the sweet spot and streaming 4k is the future anyways.
Click to expand...

I agree Sony was aiming for $399, and it's definitely smart to have the Pro priced at what the original PS4 came out at, at launch. However, there's no way they saved $100 by omitting the UHD drive. IHS Markit did a teardown of the Xbox One S and said the UHD drive cost $34.50, compared to $18 for the standard Blu-ray drive in the original Xbox One. A difference of $16.50.
 
Jerome36 said:
I agree Sony was aiming for $399, and it's definitely smart to have the Pro priced at what the original PS4 came out at, at launch. However, there's no way they saved $100 by omitting the UHD drive. IHS Markit did a teardown of the Xbox One S and said the UHD drive cost $34.50, compared to $18 for the standard Blu-ray drive in the original Xbox One. A difference of $16.50.
Click to expand...
$34.50 wholesale which probably translates to at least $50 retail, plus additional R&D. There may of been other features on the board as well and when that $399 price tag is the most important piece, and the new APU and 1TB HDD is taking up most of that cost, they had to start cutting little things here and there if they could not make the case it's absolutely critical to success.

Xbox One S probably has it to give it an advantage due to slacking sales.
 
I think the system is "fair" (not like my opinion matters to Sony) but I'm still not sure I like it. It sets an annoying precedent where we're stuck either waiting for new revisions, buying new consoles every 2 years, or having the lousy first-gen version of things.
 
bigdogchris said:
$34.50 wholesale which probably translates to at least $50 retail, plus additional R&D. There may of been other features on the board as well and when that $399 price tag is the most important piece, and the new APU and 1TB HDD is taking up most of that cost, they had to start cutting little things here and there if they could not make the case it's absolutely critical to success.

Xbox One S probably has it to give it an advantage due to slacking sales.
Click to expand...

It's $15.50 increase from a standard Bluray to UHD Bluray in the Xbox One. Not sure how $15.50 would translate to $50 retail, that's a 69% upcharge. The bill of materials for the 2TB Xbox One S is $324, if there is an upcharge of 69% for retail then the console would've cost $550. However, the console is only $399 so I'd imagine a $15.50 increase would be closer to only a $25 increase in retail price at the very most. And I would've gladly paid $425 opposed to $400 if it included an UHD Bluray drive as it would've saved me $200-300 from buying a standalone UHD Bluray Player (or Xbox One S).
 
Sony says PC, not the Xbox, pushed it to create Ps4 Pro

Sony debuted its sorta-new PlayStation 4 Pro console earlier this week, a moment relevant to us primarily because shortly thereafter it also unveiled the first proper Mass Effect: Andromeda gameplay trailer. But in the wake of that event, Sony Interactive Entertainment chief Andrew House said something very interesting: He told the Guardian that it wasn't competing consoles like the Xbox One S or looming Scorpio that drove the decision to release an upgraded version of the PS4. It was the PC.

“I saw some data that really influenced me,” House said. “It suggested that there’s a dip mid-console life cycle where the players who want the very best graphical experience will start to migrate to PC, because that’s obviously where it’s to be had. We wanted to keep those people within our ecosystem by giving them the very best and very highest [performance quality]. So the net result of those thoughts was PlayStation 4 Pro—and, by and large, a graphical approach to game improvement.”...

Sony says the PC, and not the Xbox, pushed it to create the PS4 Pro | PC Gamer
 
At first I was pretty shocked about the lack of UHD Blu-Ray, but I barely even buy normal Blu-Rays as it is. Pretty much the only 15 Blu-Ray discs I own are 3D Blu-Rays for when I wanted to demo on my 3D projector, but I don't really watch movies on a disc.

I agree it would have been a nice feature, but it seems Sony was aggressive with the $399 price and I can understand cutting corners for video features to focus on gaming. Though now I'm trying to decide if I can be OK with streaming or if I need to buy a stand-alone or Xbox S. So there's that.
 
cybereality said:
At first I was pretty shocked about the lack of UHD Blu-Ray, but I barely even buy normal Blu-Rays as it is. Pretty much the only 15 Blu-Ray discs I own are 3D Blu-Rays for when I wanted to demo on my 3D projector, but I don't really watch movies on a disc.

I agree it would have been a nice feature, but it seems Sony was aggressive with the $399 price and I can understand cutting corners for video features to focus on gaming. Though now I'm trying to decide if I can be OK with streaming or if I need to buy a stand-alone or Xbox S. So there's that.
Click to expand...

This. Would have been a big issue when BD was first hitting the scene, as I was one who amassed a huge quantity of BDs, but no UHD drive now is like, meh. Who cares. I havent bought physical media in a long time now, and even tho there are videophiles that are flipping shit over this whining, they are in the extreme minority. In the annals of history this will not be a big deal.
 
Seems to be a lot of misinformation out there about the HDMI cables needed to do 4k 60FPS. Many people say "Just High Speed HDMI (1.4 spec) is enough" yet Sony claims it's not and includes a Premium HDMI cable that can do 60FPS @4k.

For maximum quality, you’ll need a PS4 Pro system, a 4K TV with a Premium HDMI input port (often marked in blue), and a Premium HDMI cable. A Premium HDMI cable is included with PS4 Pro, but those who need to purchase a longer cable should remember to get one that meets the Premium HDMI spec.

The newer Premium HDMI format can display a 4K signal at up to 60 frames per second (60Hz). Older High Speed HDMI cables (aka HDMI 1.4) can technically display a 4K signal on a 4K TV, but the performance will be limited to just 30 frames per second (30Hz).
Click to expand...

SOURCE

*edit*

For those interested, here is a link to certified premium HDMI cables that will do 60hz @ 4k.:

Certified Premium High Speed HDMI® Cable, 3ft - Monoprice.com

You can read more about the certified premium HDMI program here:

HDMI :: Premium HDMI Cable Certification Program :: FAQs
 
Last edited:
TheToE! said:
Wouldn't surprise me if you had to buy the "pro" versions of games.
Click to expand...

Most games released near the end of this year and going forward are going to be "Pro" versions if the developer added features to take advantage of the system. But since "Pro" games will run just fine on a normal PS4 according to Sony I don't see the issue.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top