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

SvennoJ on 28 March 2016
OneKartVita said:

I'd say 2k is more likely. But open world games would probably go from 1080p 30FPS to 1080p 60FPS instead.

 

Edit: random thought.  

 

I wonder how long until 8k 240FPS will be possible on a VR device that costs under $1000. 

 

I wonder when 4k 60FPS open world games can be played on a 500$ or lower setup.  

 

A decade maybe.

Once eye tracking catches on the render requirement will vastly diminish with foveated rendering, meaning 8K 240 fps rendering could be as cheap as 1080p 120 fps. The trick, you only see sharp in 5.2 degrees of your visual field.
http://www.getfove.com/ Eye tracking VR headset with 2560x1440

8K screens already exist, not at 5.7" yet but that won't be long.
http://www.gizmag.com/japan-display-17-inch-8k-monitor/39690/

6" 4K screen last year.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/06/ever-display-4k-ambled-screen/

5" 11K screen to be ready in 2018
http://english.etnews.com/20150710200002

It won't be long before VR games look better than games on TV



Around the Network
OneKartVita on 28 March 2016
SvennoJ said:
OneKartVita said:

I'd say 2k is more likely. But open world games would probably go from 1080p 30FPS to 1080p 60FPS instead.

 

Edit: random thought.  

 

I wonder how long until 8k 240FPS will be possible on a VR device that costs under $1000. 

 

I wonder when 4k 60FPS open world games can be played on a 500$ or lower setup.  

 

A decade maybe.

Once eye tracking catches on the render requirement will vastly diminish with foveated rendering, meaning 8K 240 fps rendering could be as cheap as 1080p 120 fps. The trick, you only see sharp in 5.2 degrees of your visual field.
http://www.getfove.com/ Eye tracking VR headset with 2560x1440

8K screens already exist, not at 5.7" yet but that won't be long.
http://www.gizmag.com/japan-display-17-inch-8k-monitor/39690/

6" 4K screen last year.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/06/ever-display-4k-ambled-screen/

5" 11K screen to be ready in 2018
http://english.etnews.com/20150710200002

It won't be long before VR games look better than games on TV

You know that's really not too long.  The great news is in 10 years we should have the average game made in a resolution of FPS that's at the limit of what our eyes can see.  So they're will be no need for increased performance meaning developers can focusing on improving other aspects of games.  Exciting times ahead. 



MortienGerrux on 28 March 2016
FallingTitan said:
right now if you want a single gpu you need a titan 4k which is about 1300 dollars for the card alone. So 4k get it out of you mind for gaming for next gen or longer!

You can run games at settings lower then Ultra you know?
Console versions usually run at Medium settings with a couple of High settings trown in.

I doubt they are gonna take the time to change textures, shadow settings etc. for each game out there, the only thing that will change is the resolution and framerate if a PS4.5 comes out.



iLikeEggs on 28 March 2016

impossible. It will never be able to play 4k games. A ps4 is currently $350 and doesn't even play every game at 1080p or 60 fps. 4K is a HUGE jump. It will never happen. The ps5 most likely won't even be able to do anything even near 4k either.



Hi

Normchacho on 28 March 2016

I just don't think that's needed to be honest. I think they'd be better off just getting everything (first party at least) running at 1080p/60fps and make it a little easier to make PSVR games. They should easily be able to put out a machine that does that and is still affordable.



Bet with Adamblaziken:

I bet that on launch the Nintendo Switch will have no built in in-game voice chat. He bets that it will. The winner gets six months of avatar control over the other user.

Around the Network
SvennoJ on 28 March 2016
OneKartVita said:
SvennoJ said:

A decade maybe.

Once eye tracking catches on the render requirement will vastly diminish with foveated rendering, meaning 8K 240 fps rendering could be as cheap as 1080p 120 fps. The trick, you only see sharp in 5.2 degrees of your visual field.
http://www.getfove.com/ Eye tracking VR headset with 2560x1440

8K screens already exist, not at 5.7" yet but that won't be long.
http://www.gizmag.com/japan-display-17-inch-8k-monitor/39690/

6" 4K screen last year.
http://www.idownloadblog.com/2015/08/06/ever-display-4k-ambled-screen/

5" 11K screen to be ready in 2018
http://english.etnews.com/20150710200002

It won't be long before VR games look better than games on TV

You know that's really not too long.  The great news is in 10 years we should have the average game made in a resolution of FPS that's at the limit of what our eyes can see.  So they're will be no need for increased performance meaning developers can focusing on improving other aspects of games.  Exciting times ahead. 

That's not the limit yet. Human vision covers almost 170 degree horizontally per eye (210 degrees wide combined) and 150 degrees vertically. The human eye can spot differences upto 200 pixels per degree, which comes to a screen of 34,000 x 30,000 per eye.
fps limit is harder to tell yet tests have shown that flashing pictures for 1/300th sec can still be identified, and flashes at upto 1/1000th of a second.
Resolution is only one part, humans can see a lot more colors and contrast than screens can provide nowadays.
Plus 3D vision is a lot more sophicticated than how sterographic displays work.

There is obviously an end point to refining displays that look as good as the real thing. Or maybe not, feeling the warmth of the sun shining through the window, wouldn't even know how to reproduce that.

Developers can already focus on improving other aspects, yet graphics sell best. There are still plenty performance sinks to overcome, real time raytracing, realistic skin, hair, clothes, water interaction. The graphics race won't finish any time soon.