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

Forums - Sony - PS4 Pro: Titanfall Downsampled V Standard Direct Capture PS4

newsynthetic on 08 November 2016

It is a big difference but not a massive difference. While be that its only $400, good buy if you have a good TV and no PS4 yet. Expect diffrence from new games, not old games though.



Around the Network
starcraft on 08 November 2016

I'll check this out later on on a 4k screen. On a 1080p screen there is virtually no difference, even in stills. Would likely be even harder to discern in motion.

Scorpio is going to need to have a significant performance dividend to justify its price tag, not clear to me at this stage that the Pro has one.



starcraft - Playing Games = FUN, Talking about Games = SERIOUS

Slimebeast on 08 November 2016
Zekkyou said:
Slimebeast said:

When you do it like this the difference is enormous, but if you just look at the OP and don't change the size of the images there the difference is very small.

I am confused. What is the truth??

Also, I hate when people don't provide the original source for the material in their threads. What actually means "PS4 Pro downsampled image to 1080p"? Is that a screen capture of a true PS4 Pro running Titanfall 2 at 1080p, or is it a screenshot of the game originally running in 4k but downsampled to 1080p in a photo editing program?

And how come that in your post, the right picture is named "720p - 1000p"? What is it that we see actually?

What do you mean by "don't change the size of the image"? The comparison i have there is just cropped, the pixels themselves are 1:1 with the original (no zoom). I cropped them to allow for a better comparison, since VGC squishes images down to fit into the thread, and so i could line up a similar section of the image.

I can't give a definitive answer to the second point, but it should look similar regardless to if it's downscaled by the console or an editing program. It'd be surprised if the Pro is apply much (if anything) in the way of post-processing while the image is being scaled down.

As to your last point, TF2 runs at a dynamic resolution, with 720p to 1000p being the range in which it moves. I can't be certain what the exact resolution in either is (since both are scaled to 1920x1080), so i put the full range for the standard version (with a note that i think it looks closer to the 720p end), and added a ??? for the Pro version since at the time we knew nothing about it's range, or technique. 

By "don't change the size of the image" I meant the OP's, GribbleGrungers images, which are compressed down to 755x425 here unless you right-click and choose "show image" whereupon you see the original full-sized 1920x1080p screenshots.

So if I just casually browse and come to this thread and see the 755x425 images in the OP, then my reaction will be "wow, there's almost no difference", but when seeing them like you presented them, cropped and aligned for best possible comparison while keeping the scale, all of a sudden the difference between the regular version and PS4 Pro version becomes quite enormous.

So my conclusion is that compressed/downscaled images aren't very good for platform comparisons like this. In order to see "the truth" as I called it, it's important to compare screens in the original resolution.

I also eventually understood that there's a second factor at play here, the dynamic resolution of Titanfall 2, and that one of screenshots of the regular PS4 running the game might have cathed the game rendered in as low as 720p in the specific moment that screen was taken. Which made this whole thread even more complicated but I commend you for clearing up and elborating all the details in an excellent way Zekk.

Very interesting.



Zekkyou on 10 November 2016
Slimebeast said:

By "don't change the size of the image" I meant the OP's, GribbleGrungers images, which are compressed down to 755x425 here unless you right-click and choose "show image" whereupon you see the original full-sized 1920x1080p screenshots.

So if I just casually browse and come to this thread and see the 755x425 images in the OP, then my reaction will be "wow, there's almost no difference", but when seeing them like you presented them, cropped and aligned for best possible comparison while keeping the scale, all of a sudden the difference between the regular version and PS4 Pro version becomes quite enormous.

So my conclusion is that compressed/downscaled images aren't very good for platform comparisons like this. In order to see "the truth" as I called it, it's important to compare screens in the original resolution.

I also eventually understood that there's a second factor at play here, the dynamic resolution of Titanfall 2, and that one of screenshots of the regular PS4 running the game might have cathed the game rendered in as low as 720p in the specific moment that screen was taken. Which made this whole thread even more complicated but I commend you for clearing up and elborating all the details in an excellent way Zekk.

Very interesting.

Ah, gotcha. Yeah you're right, image quality comparisons really demand native viewing. The further you shrink the images, the more relative detail you lose. In this instance, anyone viewing the OT on a 1080p screen is seeing the images at just a 6th its final render.

By the way, i figure you'll be interested to hear (if you haven't already) that DF have done some playing about with the Pro version on a 4k screen, and believe it's running at 1440p. It's apparently still a dynamic resolution, but at the time of their original video they hadn't witnessed any shifts from 1440p yet (we'll probably hear more on the latter point once they get around to doing an in-depth comparison).

Thanks for the kind words o/ It's always a pleasure.