Scalping wasn’t a thing with the PS4 Pro.
I guess where I live then? Getting a PS4 Pro was difficult for a couple of weeks until some retailers started selling them officially. It's no first world so that could be it.
I said the same thing a couple pages ago and some people didn't like it
However, there is also the fact that the Pro seems to be using lower clocked memory than the 7800 XT, doesn't have any Infinity Cache and the available bandwidth has to be shared with the CPU.
Even if we assume this generation will be 7 years long (I personally believe it will be longer) - 7 years is 2555 days.
I think the real yardstick for this question is how long after the Switch 2 releases will Sony wait to release the PS6. I'm pretty sure Sony like to remain half a gen out of step with Nintendo after the Wii situation, and I suspect if the Switch 2 had already launched last year then a PS5 Pro might have been in the market too for the last 10months.
The Pro uses unified memory and in all likelihood still has cache scrubbers making memory bandwidth demands less on the Pro IMO.
It's not optimized for any platform lmao.
I'm not sure how much console-centric development is nowadays to be honest with you. I often hear about lead platforms and the like, but I've never actually seen a developer say how the whole process works. There are examples such as Callisto Protocol where Sony assisted in the development, but this doesn't seem to be the norm.
Personally, i’m more interested in the charts of all the folks claiming the Pro got canceled.
For this to be the case and only if it is, those "low-to-mid spec" PCs would still need to be faster than a PS5 by a significant margin. Consoles are likely at the forefront like they always were, devs just no longer give af about image quality or performance and it shows in every platform.
Not sure what you mean? Why would those lower-end PCs need to be faster than the PS5? It's much easier to target a lower-end machine than a higher-end one. Far easier to scale up than down.
The 7800XT is actually faster then that, the average clock speed of a 7800XT is around 2550Mhz or so (as usual, GPU clocks of the offfical specs for both Nvidia and AMD are very conservative) which makes the real compute number 39/19.5 TF. It also has 624.1 GB/s of memory coupled to 64 MB of infinity cache, so a commanding lead in memory bandwidth. It’s a bigger difference then the regular PS5 and a 6700 (especially in terms of memory speed and capacity) and those are basically tied in the majority of cases.
Because the lower end PCs you speculate about would actually result in much higher resolutions than what we're currently getting. They're clearly not doing that, the consoles are the target. Why else would we be hitting 720p, unless the target PCs were so much faster?
You have to think like a hardware company, which is what Sony primarily is.
I remember some rumors said PS5 Pro had 56CUs.
Navi48 is rumored to rumored to have 4 Shader Engines. Shader Engines has to be symmetrical with the same amount of CUs in each Shader Engine.
56CU SKU has 1WGP/2CU disabled per SE.
48CU SKU has 2WGP/4CU disabled per SE.
PS5 Pro is most likely full RDNA4 with 68CUs total with 4SE and 1WGP/2CU disabled per SE.
Note:
This is just a thought and not to be taken seriously.
Also, it seems RDNA4 RT now has the same capabilities as Turing and Ampere.
People still buying the ps4. Why wouldn’t the ps5 go on for next 7 years as well?? Not everyone gets current gen’s due to costs etc, plus a ps5 pro if it can do 4k/60 many might not feel the need to get another console for a long time
Post is irrelevant with out a chart.
I would argue the consoles should be capable of much more, but they're poorly utilized exactly because they're not the target platform. Devs do it for lower to mid-range machines (which aren't far from the consoles these days) and when they get running it on consoles, they just go, "good enough" and call it a day.
Unfortunately without real proof it's hard to claim this is the case. The GPUs are being definitely maxed out, just not efficiently per see. Many of these games are shipping with raytracing on consoles, that definitely counts as being utilized, they just can't keep up with this and 60 frames per second.
Yeah, I know. As I said before, it's conjecture on my part, but I also haven't really seen proof of consoles being the target or the other way around. It's a logical assumption. I'm not sure if there is a general trend within the industry or if it just varies widely to the point that no pattern can be said to exist.
We know one thing at least and it's from Cerny himself. He did not expect devs to utilize raytracing as much as they have this generation.
How is PS6 releasing in 2027, rushing?
That's still going to release on PC with a wide variety of GPU specs.
It drives me insane to read people's nonsense when they say "why are we rushing to PS6, this generation just began, etc." Seven years is the norm, and I do not understand why people seem to think otherwise (some people at least). I actually think seven years is TOO long, PS1 being 5 years was the sweet spot to me. The 8 year Switch nonsense is idiotic, I haven't touched my switch since TOTK and it is because I just cannot stand the graphics on a 4K OLED TV (not to mention no HDR or Dolby Atmos). The longer the generation the more I dislike it toward the end. Then again, I'm also the kind of person who would pay pretty much any price for a new console every year like I do with iPhone. To each his own I suppose. Now, I realize that those of us on NeoGaf are largely old farts, many of us in late 30s, 40s and 50s with some 60s mixed in. Given that is the case, we also have far more disposable income to buy things that younger folks cannot. Perhaps the people who are screaming "it is too early" are youngsters in their late teens and early 20s who may live paycheck to paycheck in which case I should have more sympathy for them. . .maybe I SHOULD BUY one of them a PS5 Pro as a gesture of goodwill to help sway their way of thinking.
PS2 was ~7 years, really. And in Japan, PS4 lasted as much as it (February 2014 - November 2020).
HW evolution is still slowing down pace wise thus it takes longer and longer (and more costly) to make the same kind of improvement gen on gen.
That's the gist I got from one of heisenbergs posts. Can't be long now.
Agreed, but unless we assume that the norm going forward is never to have a price drop, then its safe to say that whatever drops we are seeing now is because this is the first time that we have been this far into a gen with no official proper price drops.
You are already specifying the clock speed in the example, so that "advantage" is already off the board.
That's a good question, but (PSSR) AI upscaling inference is a very compute intensive task for the milliseconds it is running per second, so external bandwidth demands will reduce proportionally because you can't be recursively modifying L1 and L2 GPU caches in that time to maximise compute utilisation and be copying/emptying/refilling those caches to/from unified RAM at the same time.
