• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PS5 Pro: $699 Is It Worth it? - The Digital Foundry Take

Eszti

Banned
it still hurts lol.

Alex: "What if put the money I invest for a disc drive into a PC"

Like wtf are you talking about.
he really did say that wtf? even when its a pain in the ass to get uhd bluray disc to play off on pc....god that girl.....


jz7nv3t.png
 
Last edited:

Danjin44

The nicest person on this forum
If you have enough money to burn I guess? But for me I will choose Nintendo’s next system over Pro.

It’s brand new system with new games like Monolith Soft’s next game which I can’t effort to miss out.

Meanwhile with Pro still old system which still going to get all the games that base PS5 will get and I’m not graphic whore enough to spend $950 + $100 for disc drive.
 
Last edited:

twilo99

Member
Don't listen to these clowns for anything gaming related.

It's worth it if you want it.

The PS5 pro will do very well and it will clock some really solid revenue for the company. The profit margins on this thing must be healthy to say the least, so it will help their profits as well.

Personally I would never spend $700+ on a machine with such an outdated CPU, it just makes no sense, but that's likely because I'm used to building my own PCs, most people on this forum prefer to buy the boxes, so if you want a bit of extra fidelity, this is your only choice, for now..
 

Vick

Member
how about that disc drive and price though?
Disc drive sucks, bad.
But they had their figures to realize a TB increase made more sense than a disc drive at this point in time in the market.
Again, sucks for me as I'm a 100% physical guy.. but this is what gamers™ decided.

Price is perfecty fine for what it could be able to do.

People expecting Sony to necessarily sell their products at a loss, even "premium" ones, are confusing to me.

Personally I would never spend $700+ on a machine with such an outdated CPU, it just makes no sense, but that's likely because I'm used to building my own PCs, most people on this forum prefer to buy the boxes, so if you want a bit of extra fidelity, this is your only choice, for now..
The whole CPU narrative could be already outdated. As already explained by many users:

Not gonna get dragged into the whole CPU limited argument again, but what I will say is that most things we say are CPU limited... aren't. They are just poorly optimized for a multi-core CPU. Has always been the case. In a manner of speaking, the PS5 would benefit more from a Zen2 CPU running at 4.5Ghz than from a Zen4 one running at 3.5Ghz in the current development climate.

But the fix is now to just brute force everything, that is what the misguided fix to "CPU bottlenecks" has become, just throw in the fastest CPU you can in there (in hindsight this has always been the PC thing). Whereas, if anyone takes anything more than a cursory glance at CPU usage and utilization charts while running their games, they would see what we should be doing is asking devs to optimize their shit better.
Regarding CPU limited games, something you should be aware of is that devs can, and have been using GPU resources to perform tasks that would typically be handled by the CPU for ages. Pointing out that the games are CPU limited comes with the asterisk that, AS CURRENTLY CODED the games are CPU locked. If the devs had chosen to do so, they could have tapped into the GPU to offload some of the CPU tasks as well.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter how much brute strength CPU and GPU power you give the devs, the end result is dependent on how well the devs harness that power.
Vast majority of PS5 games already offer a 60fps mode so the CPU can't be an issue. The 4K30 and 1440p60 split is a popular configuration for a lot of titles, and the former being 30fps is likely because the game is being GPU limited.

Not only is the GPU better in the Pro, PSSR will take a lot that load off anyway AND it's 2-3x faster at ray tracing.

The only AAA game off the top of my head to really hammer the CPU as of late is Dragon's Dogma 2. But that's the case even on top end rigs and is an outlier.

... Also who the fuck wants to play Dragon's Dogma 2?

Most CPU limited games actually aren't. And apparently who designed this machine is full aware of what's needed to maintain 60fps even in those instances, in titles more CPU-dependent:

6t1HGEG.png


Time-Stamped:

 
Last edited:
Honestly, 350€ more than PS5 for, lets say 6-7 years of better performing games? It's just a bit over 50€ per year, and the difference seems big enough.

It sucks that it's the first Sony console following the Nintendo route, making money per hardware sold since day 1, compared to the standard PS5 that was 400€ and no PC under 1000€ could match it, but Sony's looking for more ways to raise their profits, and this was one of the most obvious steps to do it.
 

Romulus

Member
Disc drive sucks, bad. But they had their figures to realize a TB increase made more sense than disc drive. Price it's perfecty fine for it could be able to do.
People expecting Sony to necessarily need to sell their products at a loss, even Premium ones, get me confused.

$400 vs $700 minus a disk drive is a massive pill to swallow.

And the main point being it will run games at 60fps locked isn't known as a fact. Sony said that, but it will be proven after DF and others get their hands on it. It's entirely possible that "performance" modes using base PS5 still run at 45-60fps. Most do. So even PS5 pro is flawless 60fps, you're netting +15fps in most cases, usually far less when looking at averages.

So you're essentially left with a slight FPS/IQ bump

That sounds alot like PS4 pro, except PS4 pro actually had a disc drive and was priced reasonably.
 
Last edited:

twilo99

Member
The whole CPU narrative could be already outdated. As already explained by many users:

You are buying CPU architecture from 5 years ago (with the intention of using it for at least another ~5) , and it's not even the top of the line chip or anything, it's a horrible proposition no matter how you spin it.

If this wasn't an issue, why upgrade to a new CPU for the PS6? Just keep using Zen 2...
 
Last edited:

Little Mac

Gold Member
Dr Steve Brule Yes GIF


I was shocked by the price at first but everyday we are learning more about it and I’m starting to think it’s a good upgrade at a fair price (US atleast).

It’s not the price we are accustomed to obviously … but that doesn’t mean the Pro is overpriced. Gaming is just a very expensive hobby now.

I said this in another thread but how are we going to act when Nintendo announces a $400 dollar console in 2024-2025 that’s rumored to be comparable in power to a PS4?

DF said that the gpu in the Pro compares to a GPU that costs around $600 bucks. I recently spent $150 on a 2 TB Western Digital Black SSD for my PS5 Slim. Those two components, which are in the Pro, alone cost more than the PS5 Pro’s asking price (in US).

Again, our beloved hobby is getting very, very expensive. It’s not just Sony consoles.
 
Last edited:

Fbh

Member
Good video IMO.
- I like how they point out the price in other regions, everyone keeps talking about this being $700 but that's only true for the US, pretty much everywhere outside the US this is going to be the equivalent of $800+ ($900+ in the UK)
- I overall agree with the sentiment that at this price point PCs become a more interesting alternative. It's not about building a stronger PC for the exact same price (which you can't... at least at launch) but about the fact that it gets into the territory where building a PC isn't THAT much more expensive anymore specially once you factor in stuff like free multiplayer and cheaper games
- Overall it's still a good upgrade and offers decent value, at least with the US pricing

As a side note I also find it funny that yesterday everyone was spamming that video where Richard was supposedly "destroying and humiliating" that IGN dude for suggesting PC as an alternative....and in this video it's him actually arguing in favor of PC as avalid alternative.


Honestly, 350€ more than PS5 for, lets say 6-7 years of better performing games? It's just a bit over 50€ per year, and the difference seems big enough.

It sucks that it's the first Sony console following the Nintendo route, making money per hardware sold since day 1, compared to the standard PS5 that was 400€ and no PC under 1000€ could match it, but Sony's looking for more ways to raise their profits, and this was one of the most obvious steps to do it.

Ps6 is probably coming out in less than 6 years though. I doubt anyone who is going to buy a $700+ midgen upgrade is the type of buyer that will wait 3 years before getting a Ps6.
 
Last edited:

midnightAI

Member
Honestly, 350€ more than PS5 for, lets say 6-7 years of better performing games? It's just a bit over 50€ per year, and the difference seems big enough.

It sucks that it's the first Sony console following the Nintendo route, making money per hardware sold since day 1, compared to the standard PS5 that was 400€ and no PC under 1000€ could match it, but Sony's looking for more ways to raise their profits, and this was one of the most obvious steps to do it.
They made money on PS4 Pro from day one, they are also making money on all hardware peripherals such as controllers, Portal, PSVR2. It's only the main console they ever subsidise afaik.
 
Ps6 is probably coming out in less than 6 years though. I doubt anyone who is going to buy a $700+ midgen upgrade is the type of buyer that will wait 3 years before getting a Ps6.

Yes, was talking about the crossgen period that will last 2-3 years for sure, but i agree the typical Pro buyer will also get a PS6 on day 1, but well, they will be able to sell the Pro at a higher price then in 3-4 years from now.
 

peek

Member
I WANT to like it... I did buy the PS4 pro back then when it released. If this new one proves to be a massive increase in fps stability and makes my favorite games have no frame drops...

Then maybe. We shall see.
 

Vick

Member
$400 vs $700 minus a disk drive is a massive pill to swallow.\
It is.

But as always, you want power, you want 60fps, you want 4K, you want RT.. you pay.

And the main point being it will run games at 60fps locked isn't known as a fact. Sony said that, but it will be proven after DF and others get their hands on it. It's entirely possible that "performance" modes using base PS5 still run at 45-60fps. Most do. So even PS5 pro is flawless 60fps, you're netting +15fps in most cases, usually far less when looking at averages.

So you're essentially left with a slight FPS/IQ bump
Eh.. not really.

We know for a fact TLOU Part II runs on Pro at higher settings/better IQ than the Fidelity PS5 Mode, but at double the framerate. I know it's a Remaster of an old gen game, but runs at native 4K.

There is evidence of software going from Med to High setting and 45-60fps on a PS5, to Max settings, locked 60fps, and higher resolution (with no PSSR). Gran Turismo 7 runs at 8K even.

We'll see. Personally, if Pro won't be able to turn every Fidelity Mode into a Performance one, I'll be disappointed.

I've always said the only reason I would get a Pro would be to play Fidelity at 60fps, and I've been told many times that would be impossible and unrealistic to expect because it would cost thousands. The moment Cerny said this is the sole purpose of the Pro, I was instantly hooked no matter the price.

You are buying CPU architecture from 5 years ago, and it's not even the top of the line chip or anything, it's a horrible proposition no matter how you spin it.

If this wasn't an issue, why upgrade to a new CPU for the PS6? Just keep using Zen 2...
I get what you mean.. but PS6 would be a new generation entirely. For what we get now, they thought their solution to the CPU problem is sufficient. I trust Mark Cerny.
 
Last edited:
They made money on PS4 Pro from day one, they are also making money on all hardware peripherals such as controllers, Portal, PSVR2. It's only the main console they ever subsidise afaik.
Not sure about the Ps4 Pro, maybe, they also said in like 2021 that they were making money on PS5, but in some of their latest quarter finantials they claimed that some of the reasons for the lower profits were that they were selling more PS5's (or that they made more money because they sold less PS5's than usual, i don't remember 100% now) i expect this to not happen anymore, not just for Nintendo but for all the console manufacturers.
 

twilo99

Member
I get what you mean.. but PS6 would be a new generation entirely. For what we get now, they thought their solution to the CPU problem is sufficient. I trust Mark Cerny.

No, you are trusting that the enormous install base would force most developers to try and optimize for those particular systems, which is a safe bet overall.
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom