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

Forums - Sony - PS4 Neo Could Be 5.5tf ($399 - $599)

DonFerrari on 27 June 2016
Pemalite said:
Flouff said:

Do you think a power difference between a ps4 slim and xbone slim is important ? Ps4 vanilla is already seen as more powerful than the xbox.

And a better slim won't see any graphic improvement since it'il be restricted by the vanilla specs. They won't ask dev to make graphic patches for a neo and a neo+.

Maybe there will be 2 new ps4 but i can't see the weakest one be anything else than a refreshing model.

The Xbox One slim gets a few graphics enhancements. (HDR).
Sony could tread that same path.

DonFerrari said:

MP differences on PS360? Sure, from the 3rd year and forward they were irrelevant (on the 2 first years there were severe issues on PS3 MPs). Between PS4 and X1 for some people the difference isn't inconsequential, but I would agree that for most gamers it was.

The differences were so small that people needed images to compare the minute details.
It's not a gap like what we have between PC and Console or the differences between the Wii U, Xbox One and Playstation 4.

At no point during that entire generation did the "Power of the Cell" show it's "power" in any great or meaningful way over the Xbox 360.

And it's certainly not like today where you can see readily apparant differences between the Xbox One and Playstation 4 either, which is mostly attributed to resolution, giving Xbox One games a blurrier or more aliased image.

Intrinsic said:

you missed the point of what i was saying. My point was that no matter how stupid something is, or how baseless.... if the rumor suits what someone wants to hesr they will believe it and denounce everything else. 

Well. If someone was knowledgable in hardware, they would know better. :P But not everyone is so proactive in keeping up with technology.

I would totally agree on MP from year 3 and onward... but the first party titles on PS3 late life were a "lot better" in graphics than X360 (and I agree it isn't because of the CELL... but considering the weaker GPU, and memory issues I would say CELL contributed a little to make the graphics better), not about resolution of framerate but the whole package.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

Around the Network
Intrinsic on 27 June 2016
walsufnir said:
GribbleGrunger said:
Some people seem desperate for this to be wrong ... Just saying.

I hate this "some people"-posting attitude.

Be concrete and talk to these guys and address what you think is wrong with their attitude or even prove them wrong. Otherwise, this is just an unnecessary post, in my opinion. 

Also, there is a difference between people being desperate for this to be wrong and to criticize what the whole thread is based on. Even Osiris took the 55.tf value back.

Btw, are you desperate for being right on that case?

Just asking.
walsufnir said:

Holy shit, proelite is now an insider? This game me a good laugh.

What I am wondering is that if power is not that huge of a deal and doesn't translate into sales, why would they even consider an upgrade?

Scorpio will release later so it will be more powerful. If Sony thinks they have to keep the power gap as close as possible, then they actually care for the power difference which makes people saying that it isn't important look somewhat off.

Funny.... i think you do it too...... 



Flouff on 27 June 2016
Pemalite said:
Flouff said:

Do you think a power difference between a ps4 slim and xbone slim is important ? Ps4 vanilla is already seen as more powerful than the xbox.

And a better slim won't see any graphic improvement since it'il be restricted by the vanilla specs. They won't ask dev to make graphic patches for a neo and a neo+.

Maybe there will be 2 new ps4 but i can't see the weakest one be anything else than a refreshing model.

The Xbox One slim gets a few graphics enhancements. (HDR).
Sony could tread that same path.

DonFerrari said:

MP differences on PS360? Sure, from the 3rd year and forward they were irrelevant (on the 2 first years there were severe issues on PS3 MPs). Between PS4 and X1 for some people the difference isn't inconsequential, but I would agree that for most gamers it was.

The differences were so small that people needed images to compare the minute details.
It's not a gap like what we have between PC and Console or the differences between the Wii U, Xbox One and Playstation 4.

At no point during that entire generation did the "Power of the Cell" show it's "power" in any great or meaningful way over the Xbox 360.

And it's certainly not like today where you can see readily apparant differences between the Xbox One and Playstation 4 either, which is mostly attributed to resolution, giving Xbox One games a blurrier or more aliased image.

Intrinsic said:

you missed the point of what i was saying. My point was that no matter how stupid something is, or how baseless.... if the rumor suits what someone wants to hesr they will believe it and denounce everything else. 

Well. If someone was knowledgable in hardware, they would know better. :P But not everyone is so proactive in keeping up with technology.

If i understand the discussions HDR won't imply any developpers involvement so it's realy a refreshing. There is no "scorpio" or "neo" codename for the new xbox, it's just called a slim.



Pemalite on 27 June 2016
DonFerrari said:

I would totally agree on MP from year 3 and onward... but the first party titles on PS3 late life were a "lot better" in graphics than X360 (and I agree it isn't because of the CELL... but considering the weaker GPU, and memory issues I would say CELL contributed a little to make the graphics better), not about resolution of framerate but the whole package.

It was still not a generational, heck even a massive difference.
And sure... The Playstation 3 had Uncharted/The Last of Us, but the Xbox 360 showed it could keep up with Halo 4 and Gears 3 in the graphics stakes.

Owning both a Playstation 3 at the time as it was the best Blu-ray player money could buy for a long time... And an Xbox 360, the differences, even late in the generation was not even worth talking about... Especially by that point when the PC was running games like Battlefield 3 which looked almost next-generation by comparison.

The Cell didn't really contribute much to rendering, it was used mostly for doing simpler framebuffer effects such as morphological anti-aliasing, CPU's have just never been good for rendering games, ever, the Cell is no exception.

Flouff said:

If i understand the discussions HDR won't imply any developpers involvement so it's realy a refreshing. There is no "scorpio" or "neo" codename for the new xbox, it's just called a slim.

Wut.

HDR requires developers to take advantage of the feature and requires new hardware for it, including television support. (The competing standard is actually Dolby Vision) which is why it won't get backported to the original Xbox One, only the Slim console and newer will feature it.

Scorpio is the codename for the upcoming Xbox One console to be released next year as confirmed by Microsoft.

Neo is Sony's device.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

SWORDF1SH on 27 June 2016
GribbleGrunger said:
Some people seem desperate for this to be wrong ... Just saying.

The insecurity on these boards has been off the chartz lately.

All this goes to show is Sony are doing a stellar job with the Neo.



Around the Network
SWORDF1SH on 27 June 2016
walsufnir said:
GribbleGrunger said:
Some people seem desperate for this to be wrong ... Just saying.

I hate this "some people"-posting attitude.

Be concrete and talk to these guys and address what you think is wrong with their attitude or even prove them wrong. Otherwise, this is just an unnecessary post, in my opinion. 

Also, there is a difference between people being desperate for this to be wrong and to criticize what the whole thread is based on. Even Osiris took the 55.tf value back.

Btw, are you desperate for being right on that case?

Just asking.

You've read the thread right? It's not like he's referring to people in different threads. 



DonFerrari on 27 June 2016
Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:

I would totally agree on MP from year 3 and onward... but the first party titles on PS3 late life were a "lot better" in graphics than X360 (and I agree it isn't because of the CELL... but considering the weaker GPU, and memory issues I would say CELL contributed a little to make the graphics better), not about resolution of framerate but the whole package.

It was still not a generational, heck even a massive difference.
And sure... The Playstation 3 had Uncharted/The Last of Us, but the Xbox 360 showed it could keep up with Halo 4 and Gears 3 in the graphics stakes.

Owning both a Playstation 3 at the time as it was the best Blu-ray player money could buy for a long time... And an Xbox 360, the differences, even late in the generation was not even worth talking about... Especially by that point when the PC was running games like Battlefield 3 which looked almost next-generation by comparison.

The Cell didn't really contribute much to rendering, it was used mostly for doing simpler framebuffer effects such as morphological anti-aliasing, CPU's have just never been good for rendering games, ever, the Cell is no exception.

Flouff said:

If i understand the discussions HDR won't imply any developpers involvement so it's realy a refreshing. There is no "scorpio" or "neo" codename for the new xbox, it's just called a slim.

Wut.

HDR requires developers to take advantage of the feature and requires new hardware for it, including television support. (The competing standard is actually Dolby Vision) which is why it won't get backported to the original Xbox One, only the Slim console and newer will feature it.

Scorpio is the codename for the upcoming Xbox One console to be released next year as confirmed by Microsoft.

Neo is Sony's device.

Sure I agree the differences weren't that visible (even if I disagree on Halo or Gears coming anywhere close to Last of Us in graphical aspects, but surely they are minute differences compared to a gen gap)



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

davygee on 27 June 2016

I don't see the point in delaying the release by 6 months and increasing the cost by $100-$200. Firstly a $599 is a no go....remember the PS3. Sony will not go there again. The PS4 is currently RRP $349 and is due a price-cut, especially considering the XBox One S starting price is $299 now and comes with a 4K BR player.

If the original specs are in fact true and real, then they should just stick with the 4.2tf & upclocked Jaguar and release it at $399 max. I personally see no reason why we can't have a $299 1TB PS4 and a $399 2TB Neo. Actually, in an ideal world it would be $249 and $349.

If the Neo releases in November (which I expect), that gives it a whole 12 months on the market before the Scorpio. So the Neo should have a healthy head start on the market and of course it's fully compatible with the PS4 which will continue to sell loads.

Yes, again in an ideal world, for Sony, the Neo would be even faster than the Scorpio, but thats not going to happen this year.

Also, look at the compatibility of the consoles? The Scorpio HAS to be compatible with the One, although it's 4x as powerful. Multi-player games will have to run at the same framerate etc and this is where the One has been struggling. All in all, the One will hold back development on titles for the Scorpio, due to the compatibility. Whereas the PS4 has a much better chance to get a decent resolution and standard at 60fps so the Neo version can push for better visuals and effects. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing One titles being capped at 900p to try and guarantee 60fps....or they may even push down to 720p.



Prediction (June 12th 2017)

Permanent pricedrop for both PS4 Slim and PS4 Pro in October.

PS4 Slim $249 (October 2017)

PS4 Pro $349 (October 2017)

LordLichtenstein on 27 June 2016
CGI-Quality said:
* Thread Attention *

Please keep the personal attacks at bay, everyone.

Thanks :)



Intrinsic on 27 June 2016
davygee said:
I don't see the point in delaying the release by 6 months and increasing the cost by $100-$200. Firstly a $599 is a no go....remember the PS3. Sony will not go there again. The PS4 is currently RRP $349 and is due a price-cut, especially considering the XBox One S starting price is $299 now and comes with a 4K BR player.

If the original specs are in fact true and real, then they should just stick with the 4.2tf & upclocked Jaguar and release it at $399 max. I personally see no reason why we can't have a $299 1TB PS4 and a $399 2TB Neo. Actually, in an ideal world it would be $249 and $349.

If the Neo releases in November (which I expect), that gives it a whole 12 months on the market before the Scorpio. So the Neo should have a healthy head start on the market and of course it's fully compatible with the PS4 which will continue to sell loads.

Yes, again in an ideal world, for Sony, the Neo would be even faster than the Scorpio, but thats not going to happen this year.

Also, look at the compatibility of the consoles? The Scorpio HAS to be compatible with the One, although it's 4x as powerful. Multi-player games will have to run at the same framerate etc and this is where the One has been struggling. All in all, the One will hold back development on titles for the Scorpio, due to the compatibility. Whereas the PS4 has a much better chance to get a decent resolution and standard at 60fps so the Neo version can push for better visuals and effects. I wouldn't be surprised if we start seeing One titles being capped at 900p to try and guarantee 60fps....or they may even push down to 720p.

The point of delaying and incresing the price is all about more powah!!! And that point is a big deal csuse sony isnt in this alone. Even more relevant when its considered how essy it would be to make that more powerful box.

A mistake you are making is that you are treating the neo/scorpio like they are new consoles. It doesnt matter if the neo comes in at $400/$500/$600. There is a cheaper alternative oit there. People that go to buy a $300 PS4 won't miss out on anything. They just chose to get a 1080p version of the PS4. 

As with above, it doesnt matter if sony comes out a year before or a year after with the neo, game sales arent going to reflect whst sku of the PS4/XB1 they are played on. If by the time the neo is released there are 60M PS4s out there and it sells 1M units in one day (big if), the amount of PS4s out there will be 61M. 

Just look at these new consoles as nothing more than 4k boxes with added IQ stuff for more eye candy. I can almost gaurabtee you that both the neo and scorpio, even though outputting in 4k, will not run anygame natively at 4k. Its just a waste of resources.