Support NeoGAF

[Sniffynose]

Man, I hope this thing comes with Sata III so it can actually take advantage of a SSD

This is almost a deal breaker for me if it doesn't!

 

[orochi91]

I'm very happy with new hardware but i expected a little more for the hardware upgrade especially the cpu.

I'm going to buy it.

Specs probably haven't been finalized yet, and if so, I hope they increase the clock a bit more.

 

[Im_So_Pringles]

Soooooo..... I should be able to get a regular ps4 for pretty cheap used now right? lol

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

It is interesting what Richard Leadbetter says and the end of the article.

When I last reported on this new hardware, I wasn't quite sure why Sony was making it, bearing in mind its current domination of the console sector. Even with access to a treasure trove of Neo information, I'm still not sure.

Might be that there are other aspects of this we don't know about yet that may explain things.

It does seem that most everyone on the press side is perplexed about this.

 

[driver116]

So they are not already testing the game on numerous PC specs already?

It's not like they have to build the Neo spec either. Devs can completely ignore it if they want to.

 

[Lylo]

This is pretty much exactly what you are getting with the ps4k/neo. After reading through this thread I do think people are underestimating how big a deal the beefier gpu is even tied to the current cpu running a bit faster. I wouldn't expect much difference in third party games outside of resolution and framerates but when studios put in the effort it is definitely going to show.

The problem i see is that some devs may become lazy when it comes to make the game run well on the original PS4, this will force people to ugrade to have the better experience or frustrate the ones that cannot upgrade their system and honestly i don't like this approach.

 

[Curufinwe]

It is interesting what Richard Leadbetter says and the end of the article.



Might be that there are other aspects of this we don't know about yet that may explain things.

It does seem that most everyone on the press side is perplexed about this.

That's a good sign. Most everyone in the press weren't sure if consumers wanted new consoles in 2013. Turns out they did.

 

[xaeroxcore]

I don't want a PC. I want a more powerful console.

I rather have a console with moderate power, but with a great lineup of software that take it beyond it´s tech limits and with a wide lifespan, than a more powerful console, with most of its games poorly optimized to take real advantages of its capabilities and a shorter life cycle. Think about it, if they still do not take full advantage of OG PS4 hardware (or tell me how many games look at the level of The Order or Driveclub right now?), what makes you think that they are taking full advantage of NEO?

 

[icespide]

The problem i see is that some devs may become lazy when it comes to make the game run well on the original PS4, this will force people to ugrade to have the better experience or frustrate the ones that cannot upgrade their system and honestly i don't like this approach.

as long as this new PS4 is seen as a premium product along side the old PS4, not replacing it, I think the opposite will be the case. You'll see dev's focus more on the baseline PS4 and you'll get minor improvements on the more powerful PS4

unless there's a huge demand for the more powerful PS4 and it somehow ends up with the larger install base

 

[vpance]

It is interesting what Richard Leadbetter says and the end of the article.



Might be that there are other aspects of this we don't know about yet that may explain things.

It does seem that most everyone on the press side is perplexed about this.

Not that surprising. Games journalists are often lacking in skills to put pieces together.

 

[Movalpolos]

wrong thread

 

[Krusenstern]

Has anyone asked themselves how Sony is going to cool this upgraded hardware?

PS4's cooling solution was already borderline and the fan could turn into hair dryer mode when playing graphically demanding games.1.3 times the CPU clock and the doubling of GPU compute units at higher clock speeds as well should produce significantly more heat, no?
Unless they spend more on a better designed cooling solution this thing will either be bigger than the normal PS4 or unpleasantly louder.

 

[meanspartan]

Im with Colin Moriarty. Shitcan this fucking dumb idea. Abort it. Up the specs even more and just do a proper PS5 in 2018, giving the Ps4 a fair 5 year lifespan.

I can afford a 4.5. My 16 year old cousin who spent 8 months saving to buy a ps4 a few months ago? Not so much. He feels fucked over, as he should.

 

[aadiboy]

I don't know why everyone is so mad. This basically just seems like a PS4 slim with some added bonuses. It's the version you should get if you're going to buy a new console (like the New 3DS) but it doesn't replace the old one (OG 3DS).

 

[onQ123]

It is interesting what Richard Leadbetter says and the end of the article.



Might be that there are other aspects of this we don't know about yet that may explain things.

It does seem that most everyone on the press side is perplexed about this.

It's simple & it's even explained in the documents it's for 4K.

How is that not registering with them?

 

[Dictator93]

I rather have a console with moderate power, but with a great lineup of software that take it beyond it´s tech limits and with a wide lifespan, than a more powerful console, with most of its games poorly optimized to take real advantages of its capabilities and a shorter life cycle. Think about it, if they still do not take full advantage of OG PS4 hardware (or tell me how many games look at the level of The Order or Driveclub right now?), what makes you think that they are taking full advantage of NEO?

Not every game is the same. You are making a core assumption which IMO is ill-advised.

Devs are definitely still maxing out the hardware in many games, even if they do not reach the same momentary visual heights as DC or TO:1886. Not every game is a corridor shooter with baked lighting everywhere, and not every game is a 30fps racer.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Im with Colin Moriarty. Shitcan this fucking dumb idea. Abort it. Up the specs even more and just do a proper PS5 in 2018, giving the Ps4 a fair 5 year lifespan.

I can afford a 4.5. My 16 year old cousin who spent 8 months saving to buy a ps4 a few months ago? Not so much. He feels fucked over, as he should.

The tech will not be there to do a proper bump... the whole, "just bump the specs for PS5 in 2 years" is easy to say for those not following graphics and performance tech. We are hitting a huge power wall, and the shrinks are not happening fast enough.

It's simple & it's even explained in the documents it's for 4K.

How is that not registering with them?

Oh we know why.

I refuse to believe he is that 'obtuse' and 'naive' with his history in game publications.

Not to mention generational shifts are much more painful as the effective userbase is zero, and you truly do have to do thorough testing as most games will be cross-gen.

Yep.

To add, it would be the SAME DAMNED THING if they are not 'starting from scratch' with software that we are getting now, or we have another RESET that is even worse that is not that big of a leap tech wise to be worth it.

You won't get that much of a boost in 2018 because technology and die shrinks aren't moving that fast. Outside of insecurity, there is no reason not to do it this year because the next die shrink isn't expected until 2019- and with how they push things out, won't be real and viable for consoles until 2020.

Bingo. Unless a some tech miracle [breakthrough] happens between now and then... this is the realistic scenario.

 

[chromatic9]

I'm more excited for Gran Turismo now.

 

[thuway]

Im with Colin Moriarty. Shitcan this fucking dumb idea. Abort it. Up the specs even more and just do a proper PS5 in 2018, giving the Ps4 a fair 5 year lifespan.

I can afford a 4.5. My 16 year old cousin who spent 8 months saving to buy a ps4 a few months ago? Not so much. He feels fucked over, as he should.

You won't get that much of a boost in 2018 because technology and die shrinks aren't moving that fast. Outside of insecurity, there is no reason not to do it this year because the next die shrink isn't expected until 2019- and with how they push things out, won't be real and viable for consoles until 2020.

 

[mugurumakensei]

The tech will not be there to do a proper bump... the whole, "just bump the specs for PS5 in 2 years" is easy to say for those not following graphics and performance tech. We are hitting a huge power wall, and the shrinks are not happening fast enough.

Not to mention generational shifts are much more painful as the effective userbase is zero, and you truly do have to do thorough testing as most games will be cross-gen.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

Im with Colin Moriarty. Shitcan this fucking dumb idea. Abort it. Up the specs even more and just do a proper PS5 in 2018, giving the Ps4 a fair 5 year lifespan.

I can afford a 4.5. My 16 year old cousin who spent 8 months saving to buy a ps4 a few months ago? Not so much. He feels fucked over, as he should.

Why not just up the specs of the given PS4 and have it so that older PS4 games and newer PS4 games all work on the same system and extend the life of the PS4 name? Imagine if they did it again 4 years after the NEO came out with the PS4 name still attached. It would basically eliminate the need for BC of older PS4 games (or PS4 games in general) because they will all still work natively with the system. It's just that newer games will get the graphics boost. It could potentially extend the life of the PS4 brand way further than the normal 6 or 7 years.

Plus, would you want to have your PS4 for 5 years, and then get a PS5 where more than likely it won't have BC of PS4 games? In a way, this allows the PS5 idea to be on the backburner for much longer and create more longevity for the PS4.

 

[Militaratus]

Do we have any clue on when it is coming??

Edit* I know the second paragraph says "unclear". Curious if there are any rumors?

With native Neo support being required for games coming out in October, and Neo support required to be patched in at Day One patches for games coming out in September, I'd say the New release is to be in this November.

 

[blastprocessor]

I'm more excited for Gran Turismo now.

Man now you have me excited now. Going to be glorious. But first Driveclub 60fps in the rain.

 

[ZOONAMI]

You won't get that much of a boost in 2018 because technology and die shrinks aren't moving that fast. Outside of insecurity, there is no reason not to do it this year because the next die shrink isn't expected until 2019- and with how they push things out, won't be real and viable for consoles until 2020.

14nm arguably isn't real and viable for a console releasing this fall then, by your own logic. A 14nm gpu with hbm2 in a console in 2018 will be several times more powerful than the ps4, instead of only 2x as powerful with the 4tflop 14nm gpu Sony is using for ps4k.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

Has anyone asked themselves how Sony is going to cool this upgraded hardware?

PS4's cooling solution was already borderline and the fan could turn into hair dryer mode when playing graphically demanding games.1.3 times the CPU clock and the doubling of GPU compute units at higher clock speeds as well should produce significantly more heat, no?
Unless they spend more on a better designed cooling solution this thing will be either bigger than the normal PS4 or unpleasently louder.

If 14nm and Polaris based I expect it to come in around the same watts at the wall as the current PS4 i.e. 120-130W, maybe a bit more.

Speculation on dGPU Polaris 10 at much higher clocks have it coming in at ~110W-135W total board power.

 

[SolidSnakeUS]

14nm arguably isn't real and viable for a console releasing this fall then, by your own logic. A 14nm gpu with hbm2 in a console in 2018 will be several times more powerful than the ps4, instead of only 2x as powerful with the 4tflop 14nm gpu Sony is using for ps4k.

Get the NEO by the end of 2016 and then have all that nice stuff (and maybe more) by 2020 for the last PS4 iteration.

 

[Sheroking]

This whole thing smacks of the same kind of arrogance that got them into trouble 10 years ago.

Let's ask consumers to spend >$1000 on hardware in a single generation cycle, and make the ones who don't feel marginalized - eliminating the one advantage console has over PC and potentially squandering our huge marketshare lead.

Plus, would you want to have your PS4 for 5 years, and then get a PS5 where more than likely it won't have BC of PS4 games? In a way, this allows the PS5 idea to be on the backburner for much longer and create more longevity for the PS4.

You know what's better than either of these options? Nothing. Literally doing nothing is better.

 

[ZOONAMI]

Get the NEO by the end of 2016 and then have all that nice stuff (and maybe more) by 2020 for the last PS4 iteration.

My point is that releasing this fall is rushing the 14nm node to the point of having minimal gains, especially if they are sticking with a shit Jaguar cpu. I'd rather have a 12tflop plus ps5 in 2018 and zen cpu than a 4tflop ps4k in 2016 and a 15tflop ps5 with zen cpu in 2020.

 

[Marty Chinn]

Just like they charged more for PS2 and PS3 games because they were harder to make than for the competition. Just like they charge more for PC games because there are so many different configurations to deal with. Makes sense.

You're missing the point. I'm not saying they aren't going to charge more; in fact they won't. I was trying to point out how you can't hand waive the costs involved like it's nothing just like he was dismissing the issue of planning. It's also not unheard of to pass the cost on. You mention PC games, and well PC games tend to be cheaper than the console version because they don't have the license fee rolled into it. So there is precedence for additional costs to be passed on to the user.

 

[AstroNut325]

I'm more excited for Gran Turismo now.

Yeah. More than anything else I just want Gran Turismo.

 

[Elios83]

It is interesting what Richard Leadbetter says and the end of the article.



Might be that there are other aspects of this we don't know about yet that may explain things.

It does seem that most everyone on the press side is perplexed about this.

Reasons to do this are pretty obvious.
They want to switch to a business model that is way more lucrative in the long term. Now that they have a dominant position, that people have fully embraced the same model with mobile devices and PCs, knowing that competition from MS and Nintendo is going in the same way, they think it's the right time to do it.
PS4 sales are destined to decline at some point, if they wanted to keep sales high with the current PS4 the only way would be to progressively cut the price down.
That requires constant reengineering to cut manufacturing costs (something that right now is also made difficult by the fact that things are slowing down considerably with manufacturing process technology, so you can't rely anymore on shrinking your chips every two years) and in any case even cutting the price without something new you're bound to a curve where your product peaks in year 3 or 4 and then sales start to decline while the R&D expenses to design the next product ramp up.
I think they don't want this anymore, they want a stable business and a stable source of income.
In this way they have found a way to keep the interest high with something new, they have raised the price back to 399$ (although the base model will still be offered as a cheaper mass market alternative), many of the current owners will upgrade as well (and those whining and crying hard here will probably be the first in line to upgrade otherwise they wouldn't care and they would stick with what they have).

From my point of view there's nothing wrong in offering something better to people willing to pay.
But they need to respect their current customers by making sure that their future experience isn't gimped by the new product. This is fundamental.
People crying because they can't deal with the fact that if they want the best box around they'll have to pay sooner than they expected, have really no point.
The guidelines that Sony is creating (no exclusive games, no exclusive gameplay features) are definetly a sign that they understand this situation.
The rest is a up to developers and we'll see how things will evolve.

 

[Rival]

I think the only thing that will make me buy this is the inclusion of 4K bluray playback since I have a 4K tv already and have been holding out on buying a player. I'd like them to take the opportunity with a console revision to also pack in a more premium dual shock controller.

 

[thuway]

14nm arguably isn't real and viable for a console releasing this fall then, by your own logic. A 14nm gpu with hbm2 in a console in 2018 will be several times more powerful than the ps4, instead of only 2x as powerful with the 4tflop 14nm gpu Sony is using for ps4k.

No offense, but HBM won't do jack shit for a 4 TF GPU. The R9 Fury is a good example of this in synthetic benchmarks. Sony is putting in double the CU's onto the GPU which probably means this is only possible because of a die shrink.

My point is that releasing this fall is rushing the 14nm node to the point of having minimal gains, especially if they are sticking with a shit Jaguar cpu. I'd rather have a 12tflop plus ps5 in 2018 and zen cpu than a 4tflop ps4k in 2016 and a 15tflop ps5 with zen cpu in 2020.

AND LOL you will not get a 15 TF PS5 in 2020.

 

[THE:MILKMAN]

It's simple & it's even explained in the documents it's for 4K.

How is that not registering with them?

They are talking about Sony being in a dominant position this gen. Normally you would expect the underdog or lesser performing competition to do something like this i.e. Microsoft.

I don't think 4K is anywhere near enough of a reason and I love me some 4K games and movies. Like I say...must be more to this than anyone knows.

Or Sony has gone crazy.

 

[Halph n Halph]

That´s why it exists something called PC. And there, you can upgrade everytime you want and can build the ultimate system as you wish. You buy a console to avoid all those kind of things. Console market is not smartphone, TV or PC market. The reason of existence of a console is to deliver the best videogaming experience for the money paid, during the maximum time possible. Not less than three years after the OG release date.

I am happy to upgrade every 3 years if it means that my console can give me a similar/ only slightly worse experience than a decent pc. I don't want to wait 7 years with the same outdated hardware and I don't want to game on my pc.

 

[LordOfChaos]

Still wondering where the PS4K gets 512MB more to play with if it's the same 8GB RAM. Are they moving more to the ARM part?

 

[ShutterMunster]

Reasons to do this are pretty obvious.
They want to switch to a business model that is way more lucrative in the long term. Now that they have a dominant position, that people have fully embraced the same model with mobile devices and PCs, knowing that competition from MS and Nintendo is going in the same way, they think it's the right time to do it.
PS4 sales are destined to decline at some point, if they wanted to keep sales high with the current PS4 the only way would be to progressively cut the price down.
That requires constant reengineering to cut manufacturing costs (something that right now is also made difficult by the fact that things are slowing down considerably with manufacturing process technology, so you can't rely anymore on shrinking your chips every two years) and in any case even cutting the price without something new you're bound to a curve where your product peaks in year 3 or 4 and then sales start to decline while the R&D expenses to design the next product ramp up.
I think they don't want this anymore, they want a stable business and a stable source of income.
In this way they have found a way to keep the interest high with something new, they have raised the price back to 399$ (although the base model will still be offered as a cheaper mass market alternative), many of the current owners will upgrade as well (and those whining and crying hard here will probably be the first in line to upgrade otherwise they wouldn't care and they would stick with what they have).

From my point of view there's nothing wrong in offering something better to people willing to pay.
But they need to respect their current customers by making sure that their future experience isn't gimped by the new product. This is fundamental.
People crying because they can't deal with the fact that if they want the best box around they'll to pay sooner than expected have really no point.
The guidelines that Sony is creating (no exclusive games, no exclusive gameplay features) are definetly a sign that they understand this situation.
The rest is a up to developers and we'll see how things will evolve.

Thank you. It's so refreshing to see some reasoned thought applied to this situation. A lot of the "discussion" around these leaks have been headache inducing.

 

[Team Andromeda]

To me, this will be SONY's vey own PC Engine SuperGrafx style screw up

 

[orochi91]

I'm more excited for Gran Turismo now.

Yup.

Sony's 1st-party games in general should benefit most from this NEO console.

Exciting times ahead.

 

[LordOfChaos]

As with the current PlayStation 4, one core and a time-slice from another is reserved for the operating system.

Ok, so do we know what this time slice is? When it was leaked that the PS4 SDK was revealing a 7th core to developers, I wondered if it was a full core or a partial core like the XBO, now we know it was partial, but what's the share?

 

[meanspartan]

The tech will not be there to do a proper bump... the whole, "just bump the specs for PS5 in 2 years" is easy to say for those not following graphics and performance tech. We are hitting a huge power wall, and the shrinks are not happening fast enough.

Cool. Then wait til 2020.

 

[Pestilence11]

My biggest concern is these incremental jumps are going to cost twice as much for people buying into each one but still be less of a power jump than the traditional model.

PS3 > PS4 ($399) compared to PS4 > PSNeo ($399) > PS5 ($399) at roughly 2X the power each time, how is that good value?

Am I way off base here? It seems like nobody else has this concern, so I very well could be. Was the jump from PS3 to PS4 not as significant as I'm thinking?

 

[xaeroxcore]

I am happy to upgrade every 3 years if it means that my console can give me a similar/ only slightly worse experience than a decent pc. I don't want to wait 7 years with the same outdated hardware and I don't want to game on my pc.

Decent PC? Your current PS4 should be meant for deliver that already...i mean, being fair, i don´t see on PC to much games with the look of Uncharted 4. Why could not have more games of that visual/gameplay experience tier?

 

[Respawn]

This

That being said, I'm a bit sad that Sony didn't opt for a better CPU (instead of just overclocking their pre-existing one), but oh well.

Overclocking? Why even post...

 

[ZOONAMI]

No offense, but HBM won't do jack shit for a 4 TF GPU. The R9 Fury is a good example of this in synthetic benchmarks. Sony is putting in double the CU's onto the GPU which probably means this is only possible because of a die shrink.



AND LOL you will not get a 15 TF PS5 in 2020.

Did you even read my post? In 2018 it wouldn't be a 4tflop gpu, and thus the hbm2 would be welcome. My tflop estimates are just guesses, but I'd say you're just as likely to eat crow as I would be. 12-15 tflops for ps5 would be right in line, or less than, previous Sony console power increases. 16gb of hbm2 and better than a fury x by 2020 is not unthinkable.

 

[Dyson Industries]

lol

Ban them all.

 

[potatohead]

Reasons to do this are pretty obvious.
They want to switch to a business model that is way more lucrative in the long term. Now that they have a dominant position, that people have fully embraced the same model with mobile devices and PCs, knowing that competition from MS and Nintendo is going in the same way, they think it's the right time to do it.
PS4 sales are destined to decline at some point, if they wanted to keep sales high with the current PS4 the only way would be to progressively cut the price down.
That requires constant reengineering to cut manufacturing costs (something that right now is also made difficult by the fact that things are slowing down considerably with manufacturing process technology, so you can't rely anymore on shrinking your chips every two years) and in any case even cutting the price without something new you're bound to a curve where your product peaks in year 3 or 4 and then sales start to decline while the R&D expenses to design the next product ramp up.
I think they don't want this anymore, they want a stable business and a stable source of income.
In this way they have found a way to keep the interest high with something new, they have raised the price back to 399$ (although the base model will still be offered as a cheaper mass market alternative), many of the current owners will upgrade as well (and those whining and crying hard here will probably be the first in line to upgrade otherwise they wouldn't care and they would stick with what they have).

From my point of view there's nothing wrong in offering something better to people willing to pay.
But they need to respect their current customers by making sure that their future experience isn't gimped by the new product. This is fundamental.
People crying because they can't deal with the fact that if they want the best box around they'll have to pay sooner than they expected, have really no point.
The guidelines that Sony is creating (no exclusive games, no exclusive gameplay features) are definetly a sign that they understand this situation.
The rest is a up to developers and we'll see how things will evolve.

Thoughtful post about what their strategy might be here, I like it.

Perhaps we're simply at a time where 7 or 8 years between generation is too long. Stabilizing the sales momentum by filling in the gap halfway during the generation might solve some of the issues of being too dependent on the success of a newer console so many years later which is not guaranteed.

Hedge now.

 

[cragarmi]

The problem I have is if we are still going to use the current model of console generations along with this refresh then it will not be able to run the latest games after 2 or 3 years when the ps5 launches, or do Sony just refresh again and then allow devs to target the neo as the base model? Otherwise a new buyer may as well pay less money and go for something not quite as good if it's only going to be relevant for a few years?

As a current owner with a TV that is not even full HD I've no desire to upgrade, the TV will have to come first!

 

[Metfanant]

It's simple & it's even explained in the documents it's for 4K.

How is that not registering with them?

Except, Richard is smart enough to know that this thing still isn't really powerful enough for native 4k...

And you don't really need anything like this spec bump just to upscale to 4k...

So really, most of your benefits are probably going to come in the form of:

- more stable frame rates
- maybe moving games from 900p to 1080p
- games like Second Son maybe getting to 60fps

So yes...this console is absolutely aimed at people with 4k sets (I refuse to even entertain the idea that it won't support UHD for media)...but as a gaming platform, you're still looking at AAA titles at 1080/60 at best

 

[pastrami]

My biggest concern is these incremental jumps are going to cost twice as much for people buying into each one but still be less of a power jump than the traditional model.

PS3 > PS4 ($399) compared to PS4 > PSNeo ($399) > PS5 ($399) at roughly 2X the power each time, how is that good value?

Am I way off base here? It seems like nobody else has this concern, so I very well could be. Was the jump from PS3 to PS4 not as significant as I'm thinking?

The traditional model is dead. Computer technology is just not progressing as quickly as it used to. Why do you think people are saying the 2500k is still good enough, five years after its release? Because the new processors, while better, are not substantially so. Even Intel has signaled the end of faster processors, with a larger focus on efficiency.

https://thestack.com/iot/2016/02/05/intel-william-holt-moores-law-slower-energy-efficient-chips/