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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Rumour: PS4 to feature AMD GPU a gen ahead of nextbox

archbrix on 29 March 2012
zero129 said:
amaral_slb said:

I am sorry, but if you think Sony would win anything with a $350 you are insane.

I'm insane for thinking a $300-350 system will sell, but you're sane for thinking a $600+ system will sell better O_o . You think the PS4 has to be a power hungry beast and sell for $600+ and have games that's so far ahard of both the WiiU and Nextbox for it to win??, the PS1 and 2 says hi to you -_- ...

This should be evidence enough right here.

Also, one of the reasons the PS3 was so expensive at launch was because blu-ray was in its infancy and still pricey (stand alone players ranged from the price of the PS3 to $1000).  There is no reason that the PS4 should have to be $600 to do well or have impressive power.



Around the Network
GameAnalyser on 29 March 2012
archbrix said:
Jega said:

not by 2012 but by 2016, possible. a developer has to make the game that will run that resolution and you will have to have a tv capable of 2160p to see it by 2015 those tvs should be on the market.

Just like in 2006 when the ps3 was released many people could not afford a hdtv but by 2008 2009 more people had the hdtvs.

@bolded:  Adoption rates span several years from market introduction... 

HDTVs (as well as the first HD broadcasts) were first available to consumers in the US in 1998, but it wasn't until several years later that they became widely adopted into households, hence why the Dreamcast, PS2, GC and Xbox weren't designed to support 720/1080 resolution.  It wasn't until 2005 when HDTVs were far more prevalent in homes that the Xbox360 supported HD resolution.

If 2160p TVs are introduced into the market in 2014/15, it will be at least 2020 before they are purchased en masse by consumers.  By that time we will be into/expecting the 9th generation of game consoles. 

And this is regarding movies and content viewing, not games, which is a far more taxing beast.  As it is, the difference between 720p and 1080p is over a million pixels (720p = 921,600 pxls / 1080p = 2,073,600 pxls).  There is a lot more rendering for that increase in resolution.  Even just a 2K HDTV (2,048 x 1,536p) = 3,145,728 pxls.  The res you're talking about (3,840 x 2,160p) is a whopping 8,294,400 pxls.  Needless to say, it would be absurd to expect games on consoles to run in that res anytime soon.

Most of the games will only be running at 1080p, atleast those of the initial launch. Then as 2K HDTV start replacing current HDTVs, we can expect games being playable on 1536p upscaled. And towards middle of 8th generation, 1536p will be the standard res on how we play games. It's a far cry as of now, to even be considering the then games being playable at 2160p with the then textures/level of detail, maybe God of War 3 remastered all the way up.



brendude13 on 29 March 2012
Andrespetmonkey said:

Question for people who know their stuff: Let's say this rumour is right, and along with the GPU mentioned here it has 3-4gb RAM (2gb vram, 1-2gb main ram) and a quad-core cpu at around 3.2 GHz. Will this be able to run BF3 on its highest settings at 1080p & 60fps with AA on? (you can determine how much AA)

It should do (without AA though, because it isn't really needed at that resolution), especially when you factor in optimisation for consoles.



Teo on 29 March 2012

If the Sony's next console will come out in 2013, then we will see/hear about it at THIS YEAR'S E3, otherwise it will be a 2014/15 release.



GameAnalyser on 29 March 2012
Teo said:
If the Sony's next console will come out in 2013, then we will see/hear about it at THIS YEAR'S E3, otherwise it will be a 2014/15 release.


That's why it's already time to start a thread on E3 2012 hype...



Around the Network
amaral_slb on 29 March 2012
zero129 said:

I'm insane for thinking a $300-350 system will sell, but you're sane for thinking a $600+ system will sell better O_o . You think the PS4 has to be a power hungry beast and sell for $600+ and have games that's so far ahard of both the WiiU and Nextbox for it to win??, the PS1 and 2 says hi to you -_- ...

Also a $600 system doesn't mean it's games are going to look so much better then what the Nextbox is going to have, it would just be like the 360 and PS3 when they launched.  As games on both the PS4 and the NextBox are going to look alot better then this gen games anyway even if the next consoles from them 2 companys cost $300-350 in 2013.

You see, this post is full of defensive posture for some reason, stop putting words in my mouth.

- I NEVER said that the PS4 should have $600 as a target price. The only one talking about a target price was you with the 300-350, I said that there is an audience for a big priced console that has their hole price invested in POWERFUL HARDWARE, instead of having another console inside (for the vocal minority that demand BC) plus a very expensive fancy CPU and expensive Bluray player at the time, LIKE THE PS3.

- AGAIN, I didn´t say that 300-350 systems don´t sell, we are talking about SONY SONY SONY. From a gaming stand point, what is the strongest thing about SONY software? What makes Sonys big franchises sell? Is it the main character? Is it a fancy controller?

Gamers are not even good for themselves, if people want variety, people would be pushing for a powerful PS4, since Wii U will most probably go fancy as usual, Xbox will be as powerful as possible considering Kinect 2.0 in every box, and the Ps4 should go rationally all out on power adding whatever gimmick they want as an alternative like they did with Move this Gen.

Sony will not beat Nintendo (considerable underpowered machine) nor Microsoft (alternative experience with Kinect) at their game, so in my eyes Sony has to prove from day 1 unique 1st party games that make you go wow for the console regardless of controllers, specs, and price.

This is not about my opinion about what Sony should be as a gaming company, this is what they are right now, they need the hardware more then both MS and Nintendo at this juncture.



archbrix on 29 March 2012
GameAnalyser said:
archbrix said:
Jega said:

not by 2012 but by 2016, possible. a developer has to make the game that will run that resolution and you will have to have a tv capable of 2160p to see it by 2015 those tvs should be on the market.

Just like in 2006 when the ps3 was released many people could not afford a hdtv but by 2008 2009 more people had the hdtvs.

@bolded:  Adoption rates span several years from market introduction... 

HDTVs (as well as the first HD broadcasts) were first available to consumers in the US in 1998, but it wasn't until several years later that they became widely adopted into households, hence why the Dreamcast, PS2, GC and Xbox weren't designed to support 720/1080 resolution.  It wasn't until 2005 when HDTVs were far more prevalent in homes that the Xbox360 supported HD resolution.

If 2160p TVs are introduced into the market in 2014/15, it will be at least 2020 before they are purchased en masse by consumers.  By that time we will be into/expecting the 9th generation of game consoles. 

And this is regarding movies and content viewing, not games, which is a far more taxing beast.  As it is, the difference between 720p and 1080p is over a million pixels (720p = 921,600 pxls / 1080p = 2,073,600 pxls).  There is a lot more rendering for that increase in resolution.  Even just a 2K HDTV (2,048 x 1,536p) = 3,145,728 pxls.  The res you're talking about (3,840 x 2,160p) is a whopping 8,294,400 pxls.  Needless to say, it would be absurd to expect games on consoles to run in that res anytime soon.

Most of the games will only be running at 1080p, atleast those of the initial launch. Then as 2K HDTV start replacing current HDTVs, we can expect games being playable on 1536p upscaled. And towards middle of 8th generation, 1536p will be the standard res on how we play games. It's a far cry as of now, to even be considering the then games being playable at 2160p with the then textures/level of detail, maybe God of War 3 remastered all the way up.

Not gonna happen.  The possibility of upscaling or simpler games at 30fps, perhaps, but the same problem remains:  the adoption rate for said TVs just won't be there to justifiy 1536p being the native standard resolution.  It would be way too much power needed for a vast minority.

Look at the 7th gen: standard = 720p with a few exceptions running at 1080 res... and that's with 1080p TVs already prevalent in households.  In the 8th gen (particularly from Microsoft and Sony) we will see 1080p at 60fps being the standard, with possible upscaling for the few households that early adopt 2K (or 2160p, if available) TVs.  Remember, the 9th gen will be starting around 2020 when these TVs will have a much higher adoption rate and be far more relevant to support their resolutions.  Again, upscaling is not out of the question, but we won't see 1536p resolution (or higher) as a native standard until the 9th gen.



Viper1 on 29 March 2012
Jega said:

@ Andrespetmonkey

not by 2012 but by 2016, possible. a developer has to make the game that will run that resolution and you will have to have a tv capable of 2160p to see it by 2015 those tvs should be on the market.

Just like in 2006 when the ps3 was released many people could not afford a hdtv but by 2008 2009 more people had the hdtvs.

No.  You will not see a single game run natively at 4,096 x 2,160 on PS4.

1. Horsepower needed to run a game at that resolution smoothly is greater than what PS4 will have under the hood.

2. TV adoption rate for 720 and 1080 resolution TV's were spurred on by the increase in HD content.   Movies, broadcasts, games, etc...   There is no plan for mass content at 4096x2160 resolution for a long time.  It would cost hundreds of billions (if not trillions) of dollars to upgrade (again) all the equipment needed for the industries to support that resolution.

3. At best, you may see some upcsaling to 4096x2160 but most of that will be from PSN type games that won't tax the PS4 too hard to begin with.

Scoobes said:

Are you talking about the console as a whole? PS3 released with a 380 Watt PSU:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_hardware

I know it did.  But that's not relevent to how much power the PS4 will operate under.  Just because you can include a 380 watt PSU does not mean it's OK to produce a console that consumes 350 watts of power. 

I will say it was rather odd of Sony to launch with a 380 watt PSU despite the console only consuming 180 watts because that's wasting efficiency.



The rEVOLution is not being televised

amaral_slb on 29 March 2012
zero129 said:

You never?? could of fooled me.....  "If someone comes out tomorrow, with a $600 machine, with brand new IPs with solid gameplay, 20 hour long games, addicting MP and Samaritan level graphics, that machine would sell like crazy from the get go."  "Sony can demand $600 for a machine, if there is gaming content that can´t be reproduced on any other machine, on consumers eyes, that is enough to justify price point." "You can demand $600 for a gaming machine, just make sure that money is invested in powerful hardware" "I am sorry, but if you think Sony would win anything with a $350 you are insane" "U4 game running on a $350 hardware machine would not impress anybody but you (apparently) in the year 2013"

They are all quotes from you, but it seems maybe you have a short memory??, . Now also i have to ask are you Ken Kutaragi in disguise??.

You seemed to have have dodged a number of my questions, Such as if it was all about Power and people didn't mind spending $600+ on consoles, then them same people would be buying PC's over consoles. and are you forgeting the fact that many people where impressed with Gears of War when it first launched??, something that was running on a $300 system and that was in 2006.

I think that by the time 2013-2014 comes around anything that's running on a $300-400 system will blow away any game that was running on a 2005-2006 system.

And like i said before the PS1 and the PS2 didn't need the best graphics to win their gens. They launched with a good price, and had alot of good games, So even if you do call me insane again i will say it one more time, if sony dont want to finish in 3rd place again, they will launch their system with a price of $300-350, and will have some good games from the get go or not long after the system launched.

And trust me the is nothing defensive about what im saying, maybe you are feeling defensive somehow and that's making you think that way??.

- In those quotes  in no way shape or form did I suggest that Sony should release a PS4 with a precise price of $600. I used the 600 figure since it was aprox the release price point of the PS3 to suggest that IMO PS4 can be released with a hight price but they have to make those dollars count, instead of going exotic in the design and  put a hole console in there.

- People buy consoles over PCs because it is easier to do so, there is no need to update ram, GPUs, etc, people actually have to be informed about the machine, instead of just plug in and play like consoles. It has nothing to do with price believe me. If it was about price no one would be playing consoles regardless of console price, just the money that you save for games alone on the PC makes up for the best GPUs you have to get from time to time, so don´t come at me with this "at $600" people would buy PCs", because you know it is BS

- Can you tell me why were people impressed with gears? For me the question is obvious, I just think you think you are talking to a restarted person.

- Did you just say that a 300-400 machine in 2013 will blow off what 2005 consoles are doing now? WOW, unbelievable. There is one thing called..... competition, yes, and when PS4 launches the next xbox will be out (or close to it), now you tell me, I can purchase a $300 PS4 or a $400 XBOX 720 with KINECT 2.0, tell me who sells more? PS4? what about a $300 Wii U with Mario games out the butt?

- You think I am Ken because you think all I want is power. I say it AGAIN and AGAIN because you refuse to listen. PS1 and PS2 Sony doesn´t exist anymore, gaming is a lot different from those days, Gimmicks and Major popular gaming figures sell, unfortunately Sony doesn´t have any of those 2 RIGHT NOW.

I am talking about a personal opinion based on the position Sony is right now, I am not saying that Nintendo or MS should do that. Sony strong point? ND, Santa Monica, Guerrilla Games, etc, and believe it or not, the only reason why they managed to save the PS3 was because they proved that some games can only be done (until today) on that machine. These guys need the hardware edge over the competition to continue to sell future Playstations. If you are telling me LBP is the new Mario franchise, or Move 2.0 will be a popularity phenom like Kinect is, then go cheap, unfortunately I don´t see that happening.



VGKing on 29 March 2012
disolitude said:
VGKing said:
disolitude said:

Here is a way for Microsoft and Sony to sell gazillion next gen consoles and come out at affordable price point and still satisfy the power/performance hungry users.

Launch Xbox 720/PS4 with lower tier hardware and 299 price point. All current gen and next gen games are compatible with it, with next gen games running 30 fps and 720p.

However allow enthusiasts to SLI/Crossfire 2 their consoles together for hefty performance boost. Making next gen games 1080p and up to 60 FPS with other goodies like dual screen support.

You want power, fork out 600 bucks and buy 2 consoles. Problem solved.


UGH. No. That whole point of a console is to avoid stuff like that. There's a reason PC gaming isn't mainstream..its too complicated and you never know if your computer is up to date and able to run that new game at good speeds.

There is nothing complicated about it.

Nintendo 64 had the RAM cart which you was essentially the same thing as did Sega Saturn. An add on which you connect to make existing games look better.

You know as a kid I did have that RAM thing. It came with the Donnkey Kong game right?
I never really knew what is was for.

Anyway the N64 was not the most successful of consoles. A lot of bad decisions made on with that console. The RAM thing is one of them.