By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony Discussion - I think the PS4.5 wont run games at 4K but 3K

Ruler on 27 March 2016

 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-in-theory-playstation-4k-is-real-but-why-is-sony-making-it

Option #1: A new, more powerful PlayStation

The current-gen console processors are an assemblage of off-the-shelf AMD components with some level of customisation requested by Sony. In the move to 14/16nm production technology, there's a 2x increase to transistor density compared to 28nm, meaning that Sony can produce a microprocessor the same size as PS4's current Liverpool chip, but theoretically twice as powerful. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions

2160p (4K UHD) 3840 × 2160 16:9 16:9 1:1 8,294,400 Pixels

 

HD 1080 (1080i, 1080p), FullHD (FHD) 1920 × 1080 16:9 16:9 1:1 2,073,600 Pixels

x2 = 4,147,200 pixels

 

PS4.5 2720 × 1530 16:9 16:9 1:1 4,161,600 Pixels 

Plus they could improve and increase the GGDR5 ram. So its 2720x1520+ @30FPS max (upscalled to 4K) for games like Bloodborne and Uncharted 4, smaller games could hit true 4K resolution like the Remasters or many JRPGs.

Whats your opinion?



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

Around the Network
ArchangelMadzz on 27 March 2016

It's not going to run games at a higher resolution than 1080p. It'll play 4K media, but if they make it powerful enough to play higher than 1440p they'll have the steambox problem.

Too expensive for console audience, too basic and non-customizable for the PC audience.



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

Ruler on 27 March 2016
ArchangelMadzz said:
It's not going to run games at a higher resolution than 1080p. It'll play 4K media, but if they make it powerful enough to play higher than 1440p they'll have the steambox problem.

Too expensive for console audience, too basic and non-customizable for the PC audience.

its possible dueto the smaller size of the AMD APU. They could double the performacne at 500$~ price tag next year



Why i left PC gaming

 

(2015) Question for PS4 owners: if the situation would be reverse? would you still play on PS4?

(2015) The "I don't care PS4 is the most powerful console" thread

ArchangelMadzz on 27 March 2016
Ruler said:
ArchangelMadzz said:
It's not going to run games at a higher resolution than 1080p. It'll play 4K media, but if they make it powerful enough to play higher than 1440p they'll have the steambox problem.

Too expensive for console audience, too basic and non-customizable for the PC audience.

its possible dueto the smaller size of the AMD APU. They could double the performacne at 500$~ price tag next year

E3 is only a couple months away so we'll see then, It being smaller doesn't necessarily mean cheaper. a 300gb HDD or SDD is a lot cheaper than a 300gb SD card (if it existed). 

$500 is still really steep, especially if their hoping to sell PSVR's this year. It's a lot of money for most people. $400 is the perfect sweet spot. Especially if it's going to run games higher than 1440p which isn't really a thing in the living room. It's either 1080p or 4K. 



There's only 2 races: White and 'Political Agenda'
2 Genders: Male and 'Political Agenda'
2 Hairstyles for female characters: Long and 'Political Agenda'
2 Sexualities: Straight and 'Political Agenda'

MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016

As a 4K TV owner and 4K gamer, I can tell you, anything else then full native 3840x2160 looks like somebody smeared vaseline over your TV. I've tried 2560x1440 and 3200x1800 and they still don't look remotely close to real 4K.

It would rather be smart to focus on 1920x1080 60FPS first.



Around the Network
Mummelmann on 27 March 2016
Ruler said:
ArchangelMadzz said:
It's not going to run games at a higher resolution than 1080p. It'll play 4K media, but if they make it powerful enough to play higher than 1440p they'll have the steambox problem.

Too expensive for console audience, too basic and non-customizable for the PC audience.

its possible dueto the smaller size of the AMD APU. They could double the performacne at 500$~ price tag next year

It's just not doable on mainstream devices yet, not even close. My 4000$ rig is running games in 1440p with max effects at around 70-80fps, if I up the resolution to 4k, those figures drop into the 30's. 3k isn't too far off in terms of hardware requirements and any mainstream device is at least half a decade behind my rig in sheer hardware output.

Put shortly; it won't happen. Not yet. Heck; the PS4 and One are still struggling with 1080p and 60fps gaming with any effects enabled.



MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016
Mummelmann said:
Ruler said:

its possible dueto the smaller size of the AMD APU. They could double the performacne at 500$~ price tag next year

It's just not doable on mainstream devices yet, not even close. My 4000$ rig is running games in 1440p with max effects at around 70-80fps, if I up the resolution to 4k, those figures drop into the 30's. 3k isn't too far off in terms of hardware requirements and any mainstream device is at least half a decade behind my rig in sheer hardware output.

Put shortly; it won't happen. Not yet. Heck; the PS4 and One are still struggling with 1080p and 60fps gaming with any effects enabled.

4000$? Somebody bought a Alienware. 4000$ gets you triple Titan X with 5820K rig that will able do to 8K gaming with no problems.

But I hope they release a 1080P 60FPS PS4 then I might finally get one...



HoloDust on 27 March 2016

Your math is correct, it's just that it doesn't work that way - real life benchmarks are showing that you need 3x GPU for 1080 to 4k UHD jump (which is 4x pixel count) with same settings.

Also, that resolution is way too weird, choices are 2560x1440 or 2880x1620.



MortienGerrux on 27 March 2016
HoloDust said:
Your math is correct, it's just that it doesn't work that way - real life benchmarks are showing that you need 3x GPU for 1080 to 4k UHD jump (which is 4x pixel count) with same settings.

Also, that resolution is way too weird, choices are 2560x1440 or 2880x1620.

3x is a little too much.

To be able to run games at 4K locked 30FPS with the same settings, the PS4.5 would need to atleast have a R9 380/R9 380X or prefereably a R9 390.



Frogger on 27 March 2016

There's not a dirty chance in hell they are getting any game people care about running in 4k anytime in the next 4 years at an affordable price range on a console.

I don't know what 3k is, but probably not even that.