Sony announces PlayStation ‘Technical Presentation’ after teasing a PS5 Pro
Posted by dabocx@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 131 comments
Posted by dabocx@reddit | hardware | View on Reddit | 131 comments
deusXex@reddit
According to the current rate, EUR is worth 1.1 US dollars and yet they are going to sell it for 800 EUR in Europe? So in Europe, the PS5 Pro will actually cost 880 US dollars! Why is nobody even mentioning this? What has become of Europe? Why are we, European customers, constantly being fcked by foreign companies?
Strazdas1@reddit
in Europe we display prices after tax. In US you display prices before tax. So a 800 EUR price would be equivialent to 727 USD price.
deusXex@reddit
"The five states with the highest average combined state and local sales tax rates are Louisiana (9.56 percent), Tennessee (9.55 percent), Arkansas (9.45 percent), Washington (9.38 percent), and Alabama (9.29 percent)"
By that logic its 766 USD vs 880 USD, so still a 15% price difference.
Strazdas1@reddit
The VAT in Europe ranges from 15% in Cyprus to 23% in some countries. European final sale taxes are higher. This does not account for all price difference, but it usually accounts for most of it.
From-UoM@reddit
Funny coincidence
2013 - Gtx 770 and ps4 - $399 both
2016 - Gtx 1070 and Ps4 pro - 379 and 399
2020 - Rtx 3070 and Ps5 - 499 both
2024 - Rtx 4070s and PS5 pro - $599 and $599?
The GTX/RTX 70 series and Playstation x86 has been almost the same prices.
My guess is $599 for the digital edition and $650/700 for the disk edition or non existant (you buy it separately)
virtualmnemonic@reddit
I wouldn't be surprised if there is no disk edition or even a separate drive. It's just not profitable to sell a console where people can exchange games easily.
WACKY_ALL_CAPS_NAME@reddit
Otoh sony owns the patent for Blu-ray and they get a cut when someone buys a movie
Stahlreck@reddit
Does that really matter much to them in terms of the PS though? They were always pretty slow in comparison to Xbox to even support this stuff in the first place (and that was years ago when physical discs arguably had a bigger relevance overall still)
Strazdas1@reddit
well PS were alwlays Blu-Ray players since Blu-Ray was available. Altrough the earnings for that is probably minimal now.
Stahlreck@reddit
You're right, I was thinking of the UHD Blu-Ray stuff where the Xbox One S was funny enough the cheapest player available for a time.
Initial-Hawk-1161@reddit
its still cheaper long term to get the disc-version because physical games are cheaper.
easier to find on sale
you can buy used games
and shopping around etc.
digital games are a scam
Strazdas1@reddit
Physical games are more expensive and have worse sales unless you live in a few very specific countries.
You are right on the resell/used value
From-UoM@reddit
It's cheaper in the long term for the consumer
Not for Sony or Microsoft
Initial-Hawk-1161@reddit
Indeed
but i happen to not care about multibilliondollar corporations long term benefits
im just kinda selfish i guess
imaginary_num6er@reddit
Which generation was the $599 PS3?
UsernameAvaylable@reddit
PS3 was before the GPU was the cost driver, though. The better comparison would be that the PS3 was the cheapest bluray player you could buy on release...
From-UoM@reddit
Would be the Geforce 7 or 8 series. (Not to be confused with the Geforce GTX 700 series)
There were no xx70 class during that time
The PS3 did use a modified Geforce 7800 GTX after Sony found out the SPU wasn't good enough.
The Geforce 7800 GTX was funnily the very first GTX branded card and was launched in 2005 for $599.
Dangerman1337@reddit
2028 - RTX 6070 (Super)/RTX 7070 - ??? Both.
omicron7e@reddit
$1,200
Ar0ndight@reddit
Which will be $599 in 2024 adjusted for inflation 💀
996forever@reddit
It will be the excuse thrown around on these subs once again for sure
GhostMotley@reddit
My bet would be $549 for the PS5 Pro digital edition and $599 for the PS5 Pro disc edition.
Straight $100 increases over the PS5 'Slim'.
I don't think a PS5 Pro at $649 - $699 would sell well enough.
From-UoM@reddit
This is also possible.
Straight $100 over the Digital and Disk edition.
Vb_33@reddit
Sounds like it's going to support the optional removable disc drive, let's hope it comes with one in 1 sku.
ShadowRomeo@reddit
And just like back on 2020 i'd be choosing again which hardware i am going to be buying it is either RTX 5070 or a PS5 Pro but this time a bit of delayed on early - mid 2025.
i_max2k2@reddit
I think it’s going to launch at the current PS5 price point and they will make the OG one at $400 for the digital only and this will be $500 for digital and $550 or so for the disc version.
Saneless@reddit
I think it has to be $500 to get any sizable amount of people to care about it
From-UoM@reddit
Extremely unlikely the OG ps5's drop in price considering they just increased the ps5 price in Japan, their home nation.
ConcreteSnake@reddit
That was a price adjustment for the weak value of the yen (which Japan did to itself) and the price “increase” just made it the equivalent of $500 USD
From-UoM@reddit
The fact they made it equivalent just 3 months before the ps5 pro tells you everything doesn't it?
GhostMotley@reddit
I hope you're correct, but I can't see it, I don't think the PS5 or Xbox Series X|S will receive price cuts this generation, like we've come to expect.
The only exceptions I can see are temporary sales and maybe before the PS6/next-Xbox launch, they slash prices to clear inventory.
Ghostsonplanets@reddit
Not going to happen.
OliveBranchMLP@reddit
inflation has adjusted people's perception of what is affordable.
also, this is the Pro. the standard, which is a perfectly feature complete console that isn't missing anything critical, will still be available at $500. if people don't want the $600 Pro, they'll just buy the $500.
whiffle_boy@reddit
Were the slides showing 599/699 USD not faked? It was so close to what is believable I figured it was just correct, I mean they aren’t going to charge less for these things and they sure aren’t getting lineups for anything if it’s close to a grand.
Flaimbot@reddit
cant wait for the aftermarket shells that will fuse the drive into the console as it has been all those years before.
ishsreddit@reddit
those prices would be really bad. Most people would not want a second PS5. And people who have held off a PS5 will certainly not be more interested in an even more expensive PS5.
onlyslightlybiased@reddit
Gamestops doing a pretty darn good trade in on the ps5 atm, I think a lot of people would be happy to trade in a ps5 and pay the $100 - $200 extra for the upgrade
ishsreddit@reddit
that would be great if Sony can somehow push trade-ins deals across all retails.
Alucard400@reddit
you had mentioned 4070s. I'm thinking it's going to be $549 which matches the regular 4070 and the disc add on will probably be $50 making it $600. the regular PS5 could drop to $429 or $449 to boost sales. But at the same time, I don't see a major console price reduction for a while because of the way the economy is right now and inflation.
From-UoM@reddit
There is little chance the ps5 drops. They just recently increased the price in Japan.
gartenriese@reddit
I agree that PS5 won't drop in price, but they only increased the price in Japan because of the currency conversion, right?
Alucard400@reddit
They raised the price on pretty much most regions recently, except USA. I don't remember if MS did the same for Xbox but I think had considered it too for their console.
gartenriese@reddit
They didn't raise the price in Europe
onlyslightlybiased@reddit
There's not a huge difference in the silicon costs between this and the standard ps5 so I'd expect $499 digital, $599 bundles with a drive
Nicholas-Steel@reddit
Since the disc drive is detachable, it wouldn't really cost them a whole lot more to ship consoles with the drive pre-attached to sell as a bundle (console & drive).
It would be a different situation if the drive wasn't detachable and they'd have needed separate manufacturing lines for each variation of the console.
CrimsoniteX@reddit
When I built my PC in 2020 I tried to spec it in such a way that it would not be outdone by a mid-gen refresh of the main consoles. 5900X w/3070. About to see how I did.
jasonwc@reddit
We know that it will be about 45% faster in rasterization from information provided to developers, placing it around the performance of the RX 6800, and a few percent faster than a 3070 Ti. It’s supppsed to bring sizable gains in RT as well, but that will need to be tested.
HulksInvinciblePants@reddit
Feels like to large of a gap though unless the library is ready for unlocked framerate on RT modes.
RamonaNonGrata-@reddit
This is what pushed me to PC. Like what’s the point of buying a new console when all your games are stuck at 900p 30fps. Going back and playing some last gen classics like Prey at 4K 120fps was absolutely glorious!
Strazdas1@reddit
playing old games on modded settings (beyond what ingame menu allows) in high resolution/framerate is absolutely glorious.
ibeerianhamhock@reddit
I have both ps5 and a 4080 equipped PC and tbh ps5 and xsx are the closest consoles have ever been to PC.
Honestly usually I find the graphical fidelity pretty much equal to my PC, just at 1080p and 60 fps usually. It’s basically just a low resolution half FPS version of the best PC has to offer, only with less RT and no path tracing.
Malygos_Spellweaver@reddit
I get what you mean but it is a bit contradictory.
ibeerianhamhock@reddit
Yeah I get that. I just mean prior gens like there were huge settings compromises on consoles I’m just not seeing now. Just resolution and fps unless you have a really beast computer (which I guess I do but I probably have like a top 5% level gaming PC)
Malygos_Spellweaver@reddit
Oh for sure yes, it's not a big deal, just like medium and high sometimes. The big difference is framerate and choice.
RamonaNonGrata-@reddit
What display are you using? I use a 65inch tv and at the size the differences are very noticeable.
ibeerianhamhock@reddit
I have a 65 inch 4k OLED on my PS5 and a 34 inch 1440p ultrawide QD-OLED on my PC
iindigo@reddit
There are times where I can deal with the reduced framerate/fidelity for the convenience tradeoff compared to PC. What’s had my PS5 collecting dust is instead lack of exclusives, because if it’s going to be on PC too I may as well wait for a Steam sale and get it for half or quarter price.
jasonwc@reddit
Same. As someone that plays exclusively on PC, I find it odd that a lot of games do not get upgraded to run at a higher resolution/FPS on the Pro consoles. PS4 Pro was more than 2x the raster performance of the PS4 but not all games were upgraded to benefit from this. In contrast, I just played a 10-year old PC game and had no issues running it at 4K maxed settings at nearly 200 FPS (ended up capping at 120 FPS since the higher FPS wasn't noticeable in this type of game). It's often also possible to mod older games for ultrawide support.
The PS5 Pro will offer 45% greater raster performance, claimed 2x RT (from a low base), and machine-learning upscaling. However, it offers only a 10% increase in CPU performance. As such, games like Warhammer 40K: Space Marine 2 are likely to see minimal benefits since they are primarily CPU-bound. Going from a Ryzen 3600 (similar performance to the PS5 CPU) to a 7800x3D offers about a doubling in FPS in that game, for example. This was also a weakness on the PS4 Pro because the extremely weak Jaguar cores simply couldn't manage 60 FPS, so you got a much better looking 30 FPS mode instead.
Ghostsonplanets@reddit
Why you choose the equivalent GPU of the PS5 if you didn't wanted the Pro to outdone it?
Darkknight1939@reddit
The PS5 seems to perform more like a 2070 Super-2080 these days.
The Pro will likely outperform the 3070.
Ghostsonplanets@reddit
My point was that 3070 is basically 2080 in raster, which isn't that further from PS5.
Of course the 3070 is a much beefier GPU and has much higher RT performance and access to best in class upscaling. But I'm not sure if it was a good choice for future proofing against PS5 Pro.
Of course I don't take against your purchase. 3070 is still insanely fast.
NeroClaudius199907@reddit
3070 is 26% faster than 2080
ps5 pro is targeting 7700xt perf which is 7% faster than 3070.
sever27@reddit
Closer to RX 7700, the leaked specs match something below the 7700XT. but RT will be a little better than 7700XT since it will be using some RDNA4 architecture for it. The PS5 has an RX 6700 equivalent, which AMD didn't even sell until much alter than 6700XT release. Expect the same trend for this refresh.
Vb_33@reddit
Yes and the PS5 is slower than the RX 6700 because it lacks the infinity cache and runs at lower clocks.
Vb_33@reddit
According to techpowerupa review:
"The 3070 is also 35 percent faster than the 2070 Super, 53 percent faster than the 2070 FE, 130 percent faster than the GTX 1070, and 95 percent faster than the Vega 56."
Keep in mind that these are older games from 2020 that don't leverage the strengths of Ampere as well as modern games like Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, Alan Wake 2 and Cyberpunk Phantom Liberty. As I said earlier the 3070 at PS5 settings is about 50% than the PS5 in Alan Wake 2.
conquer69@reddit
The 3070 performs like a 2080 ti. That was the selling point back when it launched, a 2080 ti for $500.
jerryfrz@reddit
Where did you get the blatantly wrong info lol, the 3070 performs similar to the 2080 Ti.
No_Backstab@reddit
The 3070 is a bit faster than the 2080Ti. Even the 3060Ti was as fast as the 2080 Super. The 3070 should be faster than the PS5 GPU.
Vb_33@reddit
Digital Foundry has found the 3070 to be around 50% faster at raster than the PS5 in games like Alan Wake 2.
The closest GPU to the PS5 is the RX 6700 (non XT) and in practice even that's noticeably faster than the PS5 since it has an infinity cache and higher clocks. As others have said the PS5 performs at 2070 Super/2080 levels in raster but in RT it performs worse than a 2060 Super. The 3070 is on a whole other class.
Velgus@reddit
3070 is stronger than the PS5. PS5 is roughly equivalent to a 2070 Super/3060. No clue how big of an upgrade the PS5 Pro is going to be compared to that though.
That said, in terms of game performance, it fluctuates a lot game-to-game depending on the quality of the port.
Vb_33@reddit
The PS5 Pro will still have the crippled Zen 2 (cut down cache and clocks) but now clocked up to 3.85Ghz vs the up to 3.5Ghz of the PS5. This will will mean the PS5 Pro will still be pumping out Skylake era performance.
This will hurt CPU limited games, maximum frame rates and ray tracing.
ibeerianhamhock@reddit
Pretty sure your cpu will be better, if the GPU in the ps5 pro is better, it won’t be by much.
ShadowRomeo@reddit
I'd say it held up pretty well, the 3070 is just slightly weaker about 8% compared to a 7700 XT and considering the PS5 Pro is said to have better Ray Tracing performance than 7700XT, the 3070 or more closer 3070 Ti pretty much can be considered the GPU performance that is going to be in PS5 Pro.
deusXex@reddit
According to current rate, EUR is worth 1.1 US dollars and yet they are going to sell it for 800 EUR in Europe? So in Europe, The PS5 Pro will actually cost 880 US dollars! Why is nobody even mentioning this? What has became of Europe? Why are we, European customers, constantly being fcked by foreign companies?
EmilMR@reddit
This thing is getting destroyed for the price tag right now. It is not surprising at all that it cost $1000 CAD if you were paying attention but to the console market it is a shock still.
hey_its_meeee@reddit
Please bring support for ultrawide resolutions such as 3440x1440 21:9. There's no chance I'm going back to 16:9
Nicholas-Steel@reddit
You'll be waiting a long time, they're currently struggling to maintain 30 FPS at less than 720p (before upscaling applies) in some already available PS5 games lol.
Adding a wider view port to show more stuff is going to make the situation much worse xD
Eclipsetube@reddit
In what games exactly?
Vb_33@reddit
60fps games like FF16, Immortals of Aveum, Jedi Survivor, Avatar Frontiers of Pandora, Star Wars Outlaws and basically any 60fps UE5 game.
Nicholas-Steel@reddit
Oh, I didn't realize the resolution dropping below 720p was limited to games targetting 60 FPS but that makes sense, still abysmal of course.
Vb_33@reddit
It's even worst than that because pretty much all of these games are using FSR2 to upscale back up to higher resolutions and upscaling from low resolutions is FSRs worst weakness. They generally don't use UE5s TSR because FSR2 is cheaper frame time wise. DLSS would do a far better job here but for obvious reasons that's not possible on AMD consoles.
Velgus@reddit
Even worse in FFXVI's case, where they're actually using FSR 1, not 2 (confirmed by the FSR 1 setting in the PC port demo being called "Legacy").
I always found the game looked like a blurry mess, especially in performance mode, despite the visual praise some people give it. Bizarre how they went with such dated tech.
JensensJohnson@reddit
Yup the tragic performance comes with tragic image quality thanks to FSR upscaling
someguy50@reddit
All I want is for console games to not need a patch/developer update to take advantage of extra hardware.
dparks1234@reddit
I downplayed the PS5’s architecture when it was revealed, but the design has proven to be a good one. The RDNA1-derived GPU, “dynamic” clockspeed, slower memory and low CU number felt cost cutty compared to the 12TF Series X. For mysterious reasons the PS5 tends to run games better despite worse theoretical performance, and the smaller chip has allowed Sony to be more efficient from a manufacturing perspective.
Curious to see what PS5 Pro brings to the table.
MrGunny94@reddit
I’m always ready for more Cerny
NoobFace@reddit
He's got a knack for this.
iwannasilencedpistol@reddit
Knack 3 babyyyy
JensensJohnson@reddit
can't wait for more technically true claims either!
fatso486@reddit
Recent rumors suggest that the PS5 Pro might have a 56-60 CU GPU, potentially offering raster performance similar to a 7700XT. This seems rather low for 4K gaming.
I'm wondering if the included PSSR could significantly boost the GPU's performance to surpass the performance of a 7800XT? I'm envisioning it as a much better version of RSR that doesn't have a performance cost because of hardware acceleration units.
From-UoM@reddit
Pssr wont magically improve performance.
It will just make upscaling quality better.
fatso486@reddit
Why not? DLSS/FSR have cost on performance GPU performance. If Sony includes dedicated PSSR hardware, wouldnt that relive the GPU a bit to hit higher performance targets?
From-UoM@reddit
Dlss runs on dedicated hardware and it has costs.
And if Sony is using an NPU it will additional latency hits as it would take time to from gpu to npu back to gpu.
fatso486@reddit
yeah but (Like FSR) doesn't it still has a significant cost on the rendering budget of the GPU. im thinking if Sony has fixed hardware for PSSR, it will add a bit of latency only.
I Don't see significant value for PSSR if it ends being a slightly better quality version than fsr3 without improved performance.
From-UoM@reddit
In the leaked documents they were already saying a 2ms cost of PSSR.
So you can stop with thinking it will have no cost.
https://cdn.videocardz.com/1/2024/03/PS5-PRO-HERO.jpg
Its basic logic there will be cost. The hardware only produces rendering data. The render itself will take place on the GPU like always.
fatso486@reddit
I never claimed there would be no cost. I said that dedicated PSSR hardware should ideally introduce minimal latency, unlike current FSR implementations that incur both latency and performance hits. The link you provided doesn't refute this.
From-UoM@reddit
Fsr and dlss dont have latency hits as they are on gpu block.
They only have processing costs for the rendering data. Dlss here does more calculations with its harderware and is faster.
Fsr2/3 does less processing on shaders and that's why it can be close to dlss overall performance but at quality sacrifice.
Fsr 3.1 does more processing but it makes much slower than dlss due to no hardware acceleration
For the PS5 pro An NPU (if the ps5 pro uses one)is a separate block so naturally there will latency hits going from gpu to npu to gpu. This on top of the processing costs for the rendering data.
If the ai hardware is inside the PS5 Pro GPU like Nvidia and Intel does, there won't be a latency hit, but the processing cost will still remain.
Again as I said previously.
PSSR WILL NOT IMPROVE PERFORMANCE.
It will only improve upscaling quality.
Performance improvements will only come from the additional compute performance.
Boring_Paper_3572@reddit
"Fsr 3.1 does more processing but it makes much slower than dlss due to no hardware acceleration"
I dont understand this part. I my testing Quality FSR (1080p->4k) has identical performance uplift to Quality DLSS (1080p->4k). Both are faster than than xess. I basically get 4K image with identical performance to native 1440P
From-UoM@reddit
Fsr 3.1 is certainly slower than Dlss 3.7
https://www.techspot.com/review/2860-amd-fsr-31-versus-dlss/#1-png
https://www.techspot.com/review/2860-amd-fsr-31-versus-dlss/#2-png
Nicholas-Steel@reddit
Yeah, but currently FSR has awful performance cost. Dedicated hardware for the upscaling should bring things to near or similar to DLSS performance cost assuming latency is kept low/upscaling hardware is baked in to the existing video hardware.
Captobvious75@reddit
I hope there is a setting to force it to upscale to 4k. Almost like a driver level setting
ConfusionContent9074@reddit
No Idea about pssr hardware function, but At the risk of sounding overly optimistic. why wouldn't 60 CU RDNA4 be faster than 7700xt (48CU rdna3).
Vb_33@reddit
Clocks and infinity cache were the reason the PS5 was slower than the RX 6700. The PS5 had no infinity cache and power clocks.
ShadowRomeo@reddit
Clock speeds and power consumption is making the difference, it is the same reason why Xbox Series X's 52 CU RDNA 2 is slower compared to 6700 XT's 40 CU but clocked much higher and is consuming more power.
YNWA_1213@reddit
Clock speeds most likely. A PS5 Pro will likely have TBP around the same as just a 7700XT.
Ghostsonplanets@reddit
The PS5 Pro documents already showed that the GPU can clock around 2.35GHz, which is in-line with 7700XT clocks.
TheNiebuhr@reddit
It has 54.
ea_man@reddit
Isn't FSR 3.1 with frame generation ported to consoles about now?
That alone would be a pretty upgrade for the current, what do they want to archive as performance with this PS5 Pro?
Or maybe they want to have hardware Frame Generation on this PS5P and forbid software FSR on the old gen?
Vb_33@reddit
Yea Immortals of Aveum uses far frame gen as does Black Myth Wukong.
ConsistencyWelder@reddit
RT. Massive upgrade to RT is the rumor. Some say 3-4X current RT performance, and this should come to RDNA 4 as well.
fatso486@reddit
I totally fail to see Sony's optimism for the PS5 Pro, especially given the recent hardware like the PSVR2 and PS Portal. With a large installed base of over 60 million PS5s, requiring specific optimization for such a tiny user base seems like a significant (unnecessary?) undertaking. Sony will need to provide a straightforward method for developers to quickly achieve a substantial performance boost with minimal effort and validation.
That seems like a tough sell to me. I believe I read that the PS4 sold at a ratio of 10:1 compared to the PS4 Pro, and even that had a clear reason to exist: supporting new 4K TVs at the time.
Vb_33@reddit
The portal has sold above expectations gor Sony. I find the device wholely unappealing but it's selling. As for the Pro I welcome more powerful hardware, anything that lets us run games better is a good thing in my book. The PS4 pro sold 1/5 what the PS4 sold, that's a pretty decent number, let's see if the PS5 Pro can match or exceed it.
GOOGAMZNGPT4@reddit
Don't look at the marketing side and look at the manufacturing side.
My guess is that the new chips are cheaper, the margins are higher, the manufacturing and assembly process has a smaller and cheaper bill of materials, optimized assembly, easier cooling requirements = smaller heatsinks = less copper & aluminum, smaller size = less plastic using in plastic molding the chassis, smaller PCB, etc. The smaller size and weight could reduce their shipping costs (and shipping heavy things around the world has massive costs), they can fit more in a truck, fit more in an order. Then there is speed - they may be able to make them twice as fast as the old model, or make the same volume with half as many people working in the plant.
This is a moment for them to renegotiate all of their supplier contracts - they could mass bargain for cheaper thermal paste, cheaper screws.
OG Console launches are often sold at a loss, because it's more important for them to compete for an installed user base, and because the hardware at launch is closer to the bleeding edge of tech.
Mid-gen refreshes are how they realize 5 years of CPU efficiency gains and grow their manufacturing margins, while drumming up renewed sales hype by tossing in some marketing to bring in more buyers. It may be an opportunity for them to sell at a higher price, again double dipping on the margin increase per unit. The consumer benefit can be sold as a completely overhyped gain - give them a 10% faster chip, slap 'PRO' on the model name, then set completely arbitrary standards for framerate minimums and resolution scaling that is infinitely tweakable by developers through locked video settings that aren't even presented to the end user. Lower the LOD, halve the raytracing, lower the particle effect resolutions - bam '120FPS PS5 PRO MODE ONLY! BUY TODAY'.
Manufacturing a PS5 Pro model may actually reduce their capex and opex costs. The OG PS5 may actually be more costly for them. Analogy; imagine manufacturing cassette tapes for $0.90 apiece when you could move to manufacturing CDs for $0.07 apiece, at 10x the rate and volume, and ship more units at an equal or lesser cost, and create more units at an equal or lesser investment.
reallynotnick@reddit
That's more what the "slim" style models have been historically about, and there were a ton of revisions to the phat PS5 to reduce production cost such as smaller heatsinks too. The PS5 Pro being a bigger chip than the standard and a bigger overall chasis, means it will always cost more money to make. The Pro is not going to leapfrog the PS5 slim in driving down production cost. At best it could be cheaper to make than the original model PS5, but even then the cost of silicon is not dropping like it used to.
GOOGAMZNGPT4@reddit
Well, in either direction, it's all speculation unless we have access to the internal Sony financials.
The only iffy napkin math really available to us is the RX 6800 (comparable to the OG PS5 graphics) launch MSRP ($579) vs current cost of an RX 6800 ($359).
This isn't quite useful to us to make any real financial calculation with confidence, but as a shoddy frame of reference it tells us that it's 38% cheaper to make a comparable graphics chip in 2024 as it was in 2020.
If the PS5 launched at $499, and if the PS5 PRO launches at $499, but uses a comparable but 38% cheaper chip on a new supplier contract - that measuring stick alone tells us lower production costs and higher margins, before even considering any other manufacturing changes or pricing changes.
There's no way it can fathomably cost Sony more to produce unless, unless they reached so high on the hardware bump that it's closer to a new console generational bump, rather than a mid-gen marginal refresh.
And of course, there's rumors of $599 and $699 price points.
I'm just betting on the simple calculation that Sony wouldn't do it if it wasn't financially advantageous for them to do so. This is a different calculation than betting on PS2VR to penetrate the VR market, or betting on Concorde being successful. This is brick and mortar console unit sales. There's a manufacturing cost, there's a sale price, and there's market demand - they don't have a more predictable business model than that one.
reallynotnick@reddit
Firstly the PS5 is comparable to the RX 6700, secondly the launch prices of the 6000 series meant nothing as it was during a mining boom and they could charge any price and they would sell out. The margins on cards during that time were much higher than usual, so you can't really compare the prices between those years.
TSMC's wafer price has gone up, not down, and these are bigger chips, so it costs more, simple as that. https://www.techpowerup.com/324323/tsmc-to-raise-wafer-prices-by-10-in-2025-customers-seemingly-agree
And you continue to ignore the fact that any price decreases would and have happened with the regular PS5. It's not cheaper to make than the current PS5, maybe the OG PS5, but definitely not the current.
The simple financially advantageous part is it keeps a portion of people from switching to PC to seek out better graphics, and it gives them the halo product status of most powerful console potentially grabbing some sales that would have gone otherwise to Xbox, or for people who own both it makes the PS5 Pro the place to buy games since they have better graphics and Sony gets a cut of every game sold on their platform. They aren't competing with themselves, they are competing with everyone else.
Captobvious75@reddit
If you have a game that runs on dynamic resolution scaling, you will have benefits with PS5 Pro out of the box. A lot of games use this so it’ll be nice.
As a PC gamer with a 7900xt- i’ll be buying a Pro.
conquer69@reddit
The improved hardware is welcome. Especially when games are already hitting 720p on the base PS5. If they have a decent AI upscaler, the image quality improvements from 720p FSR to 1080p AI upscaled will be massive.
The biggest issue for me is the hardware. No point in buying better hardware if I can't increase the settings in the older games that ran badly. Have to beg devs for patches when changing the settings would take me 30 seconds.
dabias@reddit
With many games already giving the choice between 60 fps or 30 with a higher resolution, those should be easy enough to patch. Some game offer unlocked framerates, which will see improvements without any developer intervention.
ConcreteSnake@reddit
Marketing - Xbox can’t say they have the most powerful console if the PS5 Pro exists
Fidelity - with the CPU mostly unchanged this is more of a GPU upgrade than anything else. This will allow for games in performance mode to run at a higher native fidelity and games running in fidelity mode to have ray tracing and better post processing effects.
PSSR - a hardware accelerated upscaling technique that will probably be fairly easy to implement like DLSS or FSR. This will not only get developers familiar with it, but use this as the standard in future consoles.
GTA 6 - If it’s the best way to play, people will buy it without question
Nicholas-Steel@reddit
Yeah currently a lot of the games seem to be GPU bottlenecked. With this upgrade it'll prolly swing to being CPU bottlenecked while significantly improving the visuals.
YNWA_1213@reddit
Makes me wonder how those original UE5 games will be running on the Pro, e.g., Remnant 2. Render resolution was dropping below 1080p on performance mode back then while the CPU was still able to deliver 60fps, so it'll be interesting if the Pro will be around the 1440p mark. That + PSSR could mean a marked increase in visual fidelity for GPU-bound scenarios.
bubblesort33@reddit
I wonder if RDNA4 launching possibly earlier than we thought, has something to do with Sony. I mean if they start talking about the PS5 pro, and release it by like November, then they have to talk about RDNA4 more or less. And Sony would get RDNA4 before desktop, which would look weird.
coolyfrost@reddit
Sony already got RDNA2 on the PS5 before launch, so not that weird
bubblesort33@reddit
True, about 6 days before the RX 6800 XT launched, the PS5 launched. And the Xbox about 8 days. But if RDNA4 isn't coming to desktop until CES 2025, that's quite the gap, unless the Ps5 Pro has also been delayed until a post CES release date.
coolyfrost@reddit
I actually did not realize the gap was that tiny! That is weird
surf_greatriver_v4@reddit
and just like the PS4 Pro, it will barely make a difference.
ShadowRomeo@reddit
If you are talking about sales then sure probably, but visual quality? It will make a huge difference, PSSR alone is going to clean up the blurry ass FSR 720p native games we are getting today. And if the game is GPU bottlenecked, it for sure will give a nice hefty boost 50% performance uplift is nothing to sneeze at.
The_King_of_Okay@reddit
I guess it's subjective but, to me, playing games at 1440p/1800p instead of 1080p felt like a big difference on a 4K TV.
bobbie434343@reddit
Do we know if Mark Cerny is actually an AI ? He only pops up every few years.
KirillNek0@reddit
Mid-gen refresh. About time.