Support NeoGAF

[Durante]

I think we're going to have to.

Well, please don't do it wrong.

Explain to people what shaded samples are, how many of them are generated per frame with various techniques, how that affects performance, and how you can reuse those samples, and what the tradeoffs are.

Crucially, at least try to make them understand on a surface level how all of this actually works. Attributing technology to "secret sauce" is no better than attributing it to magic.

From what I thought (and I could be wrong), the game is doing more like 1800p on PS4

Why did you think that?
If you insist on a p-value (although IMHO it hurts more than helps to actually understand the topic), the number of shaded samples per frame is equivalent to 1527p (assuming a 0.5-ratio checkerboard implementation).

Also, everyone, please don't quote this in the future as "Durante said it's 1527p". If you insist on this type of comparison, say that the number of shaded samples is equivalent to a traditional frame rendered at 1527p.

 

[Equanimity]

I think we're going to have to.


That's actually a really good question.

From what I thought (and I could be wrong), the game is doing more like 1800p on PS4 which is indeed higher resolution than 1440p. So it's not clear why the image is softer but I do know that this technique can show artefacts in still shots. I'm going to finally see for myself in a week and a half.

That's good to hear. I'll be looking forward to your tech analysis.

 

[64bitbros]

For $ 399? Close enough.

 

[Beerman462]

"Durante said it's 1527p".

CTRL-C

 

[Forever Changes]

CTRL-C

Make a thread quick!

 

[platina]

I think we're going to have to.


That's actually a really good question.

From what I thought (and I could be wrong), the game is doing more like 1800p on PS4 which is indeed higher resolution than 1440p. So it's not clear why the image is softer but I do know that this technique can show artefacts in still shots. I'm going to finally see for myself in a week and a half.

Goddamn pathetic Sony didn't do this themselves. I expect the digital foundry video to be stellar as always. Can't wait.

 

[Forever Changes]

Goddamn pathetic Sony didn't do this themselves. I expect the digital foundry video to be stellar as always. Can't wait.

Their presentation was a complete joke. How do a company like Sony screw up so badly?

 

[platina]

Their presentation was a complete joke. How do a company like Sony screw up so badly?

I really don't know. I'm thinking in my brain right now that in the eyes of the consumer you need a 4k tv and hdr for the ps4 pro to be of any value. They literally spend 90% of their time talking about it and 10% talking about how there is some improvement in 1080p mode but didn't even go into detail. Abysmal. Hopefully that new cerny presentation in the next coming weeks will clear things up.

 

[Celcius]

CTRL-C

Make a thread quick!

LOL

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Off topic but Mankind Divided screenshot was released and it's not pretty:

Similar from PC for comparison:

This is pretty bad, the most obvious difference (to me) is the lighting and far away objects, textures are pretty bad too, but damn the backround though:

This is a gigantic difference jesus.

 

[chromatic9]

If you have to blow the image up to this level - should anyone really care?

Though damn I expected a much bigger difference b/w 4k and 1440p, will have to see more examples but maybe I will hang on to my old monitor for a bit longer

I've not blown any image up, merely cropped out a section to highlight an area.

Having played the game on PC with mostly highest settings at 1620p I noticed just looking at the full screenshot the missing sand texture, how soft it is and some simple shapes missing tess.

I'm intrigued to see what the checkboard scaling or whatever is actually bringing over a simple upscale. If PS4 Pro was up there I'd be saying how it is but it's like ~280x (4tflops) capability which is a cheap GPU off the shelf and there's no wonder at all it appearing in a $400 box at the end of 2016.

 

[DESTROYA]

Love how people compare a $400 console to screen shots from PC's that cost thousands.
Looks fine to me and once the action starts on screen will be less noticeable.

 

[Forever Changes]

Love how people compare a $400 console to screen shots from PC's that cost thousands.
Looks fine to me and once the action starts on screen will be less noticeable.

Riiiiiiight.

 

[PFD]

Very impressive considering the price of the console. Glad I waited before jumping into this generation

 

[johnnydrama]

Love how people compare a $400 console to screen shots from PC's that cost thousands.
Looks fine to me and once the action starts on screen will be less noticeable.

lmao. You can buy a native 4K/30FPS/ultra PC with a 1TB hard drive and Windows 10 for less than $1000, but please, tell me more about these PCs that cost thousands of dollars.

 

[ShooterMcTavish]

This is pretty bad, the most obvious difference (to me) is the lighting and far away objects, textures are pretty bad too, but damn the backround though:

This is a gigantic difference jesus.

Yeah but I think we could see identical look minus the res if they do a 1080p bells and whistles mode. Not sure if they are doing more then two modes though

 

[Noctis3]

lmao. You can buy a native 4K/30FPS/ultra PC with a 1TB hard drive and Windows 10 for less than $1000, but please, tell me more about these PCs that cost thousands of dollars.

Yeah thousands was a bit of an overstatement but I think it's fair to say more than $400.

 

[johnnydrama]

Yeah thousands was a bit of an overstatement but I think it's fair to say more than $400.

I still don't think <$1000 is outrageous for a machine that can do native 4K/30fps with very high settings. Hell, the GTX 1070 can do GTA V at 4K 60FPS with most settings maxed out.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

Yeah thousands was a bit of an overstatement but I think it's fair to say more than $400.

Well, that's why pcs are an investment, because anyone with half a decent 5 year old one can just buy a new videocard with that money and have clearly superior performance.

 

[R10Neymarfan]

Yeah thousands was a bit of an overstatement but I think it's fair to say more than $400.

For less than $700 yes you can.

 

[DESTROYA]

lmao. You can buy a native 4K/30FPS/ultra PC with a 1TB hard drive and Windows 10 for less than $1000, but please, tell me more about these PCs that cost thousands of dollars.

I'm sure you can but you can't honestly tell me most PC gamers that go for a 4K build spend under $1000, the "thousands" part was tongue in cheek just to get my point across.

 

[martino]

I'm sure you can but you can't honestly tell me most PC gamers that go for a 4K build spend under $1000, the "thousands" part was tongue in cheek just to get my point across.

to do in same kind of crap i image ps4 gamer going for 4k get thoses 4k tv for free

 

[Noctis3]

I'm sure you can but you can't honestly tell me most PC gamers that go for a 4K build spend under $1000, the "thousands" part was tongue in cheek just to get my point across.

Yeah I find that hard to believe as well, for 400? Like really guys let's be real. Someone needs to get a PC for 400 and show me this 4K set up.

For less than $700 yes you can.

$400 though

 

[LordOfChaos]

I'm sure you can but you can't honestly tell me most PC gamers that go for a 4K build spend under $1000, the "thousands" part was tongue in cheek just to get my point across.

But to reach the IQ the Pro is putting out, an RX470 and i3 build would likely do just fine. It's not PC native 4K here, so why compare it to the cost of a 4K capable PC.

 

[Always-honest]

I don't know... 4K doesn't look like it's that big of a deal. I'd rather just have 1080p with all the bells and whistles and smooth gameplay if I was on a lower end machine and/or PS4Pro

Yep, the PRO is a great 1080P machine. Basicly what PS4 should have been.

Off topic but Mankind Divided screenshot was released and it's not pretty:

Similar from PC for comparison:

Yeah that doesn't look good.
I'm rather convinced that i'll buy a PS4-PRO for 1080P with extra bells and whistles and downsampling.

Maybe when native 4K machines come out i'll be thinking about a 4K TV (or rather, projector.)

 

[johnnydrama]

Well, that's why pcs are an investment, because anyone with half a decent 5 year old one can just buy a new videocard with that money and have clearly superior performance.

Absolutely agree. Built my PC in 2012, and with a 980Ti, it can easily do 4K/30, even though I prefer to play at 1440p/60.

I'm sure you can but you can't honestly tell me most PC gamers that go for a 4K build spend under $1000, the "thousands" part was tongue in cheek just to get my point across.

They can build a 1080p/1440p/60 PC for less than $1000, *and* also do 4K/30fps on it. Not everyone wants or can afford a 4K/60fps machine.

Yeah I find that hard to believe as well, for 400? Like really guys let's be real. Someone needs to get a PC for 400 and show me this 4K set up.

$400 though

People are constantly overlooking the fact that native 4K is not the same as reconstruction. What Sony have achieved is very impressive, but it is not what is being done on PCs.

 

[Beerman462]

Riiiiiiight.

With 240hz auto motion plus turned on it will look the same as everything else.

 

[Noctis3]

People are constantly overlooking the fact that native 4K is not the same as reconstruction. What Sony have achieved is very impressive, but it is not what is being done on PCs.

This is really all some people in this thread is saying, but some people keep using hyperbole to describe the comparisons between PC and the Pro and saying it looks bad when it really doesn't. It's a marginal leap as planned.

 

[icecold1983]

A 980 can average 30FPS maxed out on PC at 4K. That's definitely what PS4 Pro is aiming for.

I don't understand your argument - of course the PS4 Pro will look worse than a beefy PC running at native 4k. Noone is saying that the PS4 Pro is bad at that price for what it does/the specs.

It's just that the PC version (with a decent port) will always out do it. This isn't a big surprise, it's common sense and that come's from someone who's owned every Playstation and preordered a Pro.

no it cant

 

[dark10x]

Well, please don't do it wrong.

Explain to people what shaded samples are, how many of them are generated per frame with various techniques, how that affects performance, and how you can reuse those samples, and what the tradeoffs are.

Crucially, at least try to make them understand on a surface level how all of this actually works. Attributing technology to "secret sauce" is no better than attributing it to magic.

Why did you think that?
If you insist on a p-value (although IMHO it hurts more than helps to actually understand the topic), the number of shaded samples per frame is equivalent to 1527p (assuming a 0.5-ratio checkerboard implementation).

Also, everyone, please don't quote this in the future as "Durante said it's 1527p". If you insist on this type of comparison, say that the number of shaded samples is equivalent to a traditional frame rendered at 1527p.

Definitely do not want to get it wrong.

...and the thought about resolution stems from a discussion that was had at the Pro reveal with the dev team (not by me, though). Not from any actual examination of the game. Nobody should read into that.

This is pretty bad, the most obvious difference (to me) is the lighting and far away objects, textures are pretty bad too, but damn the backround though:

This is a gigantic difference jesus.

To be fair, the PC shot is from the benchmark, I believe, which looks better and runs MUCH slower than that same section in the actual game. The Pro shot would look significantly better (though softer) with the awful sharpening disabled.

They are comparing a native 4k PC shot on ultra to a screenshot of PS4Pro which DF said all screenshots and footage is an inaccurate representation as you can't actually capture what PS4Pro does

I'm not sure that's what Richard was trying to say there.

I think he was talking about the image as a whole primarily focused on HDR - which is something you cannot accurately see on your PC monitor.

There is something to be said for actual and perceptual difference - perceptual taking into account your viewing distance. That doesn't change what's actually on screen, however.

 

[martino]

This is really all some people in this thread is saying, but some people keep using hyperbole to describe the comparisons between PC and the Pro and saying it looks bad when it really doesn't. It's a marginal leap as planned.

but when released it will still be what sony caim it to be : "the best way to experience games on console with a 4K tv"

 

[Forever Changes]

no it cant

Maybe he meant to type 980 TI.

 

[Reizo Ryuu]

To be fair, the PC shot is from the benchmark, I believe, which looks better and runs MUCH slower than that same section in the actual game. The Pro shot would look significantly better (though softer) with the awful sharpening disabled.

It didn't run much slower for me at all, and the textures still look like hot garbage, sharpening or not.

 

[dark10x]

I know Nvidia is working on it, but do we have any idea when the PC will offer HDR support? I'm dying to play games in HDR now.

It didn't run much slower for me at all, and the textures still look like hot garbage, sharpening or not.

Hmm...that's interesting.

On my setup, I was getting 47fps average in the benchmark with moderately high, but not maxed, settings. That same area delivers a completely steady 60fps when exploring it within the game itself, however. There's a HUGE difference there.

 

[Deaf Spacker]

Maybe he meant to type 980 TI.

Yeah a normal 980 can't, a 980 TI can just about.

 

[Durante]

I know Nvidia is working on it, but do we have any idea when the PC will offer HDR support?

"PC" offers HDR support right now. When individual games will be patched I don't know, but TR will probably be soon.

 

[dark10x]

Yeah a normal 980 can't, a 980 TI can just about.

A 980Ti can definitely deliver a good 30fps Rise of the Tomb Raider 4K experience on the PC. You cannot do it maxed out, but "maxed out" is a waste anyways and the few settings that make a difference ultimately have minimal direct impact on the game unless you're flipping back and forth.

A 980, however, really can't quite get there.

...and the 970? It's basically a slide show.

"PC" offers HDR support right now. When individual games will be patched I don't know, but TR will probably be soon.

Is there any content or way to output this then?

I believe Obduction is supposed to support it? Have not downloaded it (and Steam forums suggest that nobody has it working). Have not been able to actually play any HDR video files either (they playback in SDR)

Would really like to find a way to enable this.

 

[paperspace]

Obduction is supposed to support HDR, but I can't verify that.

 

[Forever Changes]

"PC" offers HDR support right now. When individual games will be patched I don't know, but TR will probably be soon.

When will we start seeing HDR monitors!?

 

[Deaf Spacker]

A 980Ti can definitely deliver a good 30fps Rise of the Tomb Raider 4K experience on the PC. You cannot do it maxed out, but "maxed out" is a waste anyways and the few settings that make a difference ultimately have minimal direct impact on the game unless you're flipping back and forth.

A 980, however, really can't quite get there.

...and the 970? It's basically a slide show.

Yeah, if I play Tomb Raider in 4K on my rig I have no AA but every other setting is maxed I believe and it's a solid 30 FPS.

Using a 980 TI.

 

[ItIsOkBro]

I feel like we need some PS4 screenshots to put this all into perspective.

 

[Soltype]

I'm confused here, people in here are saying 1440p looks better than the checkerboard 4k, so why doesn't Sony just use 1440p and be done with it.

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I'm confused here, people in here are saying 1440p looks better than the checkerboard 4k, so why doesn't Sony just use 1440p and be done with it.

Because 1440p scales poorly with 4K displays and there's no 1440p TVs

 

[Rotch Crot]

Yeah a normal 980 can't, a 980 TI can just about.

I have a 980TI. You can't run tomb raider on high at 30 4k.

 

[Enter the Dragon Punch]

I have a 980TI. You can't run tomb raider on high at 30 4k.

 

[thuway]

It depends on the scene. Geo thermal valley is an absolute destroyer. ALSO VXAO legit kills performance. Rise of the tomb Raider is demanding enough that it can't consistently hit 4k 30 on a 1070 or last Gen Titan X on very high.

 

[dark10x]

"PC" offers HDR support right now. When individual games will be patched I don't know, but TR will probably be soon.

I stand corrected, this viewer actually does output properly in HDR.

https://developer.nvidia.com/getting-know-new-hdr

I might give Obduction a shot and see if it's possible.

 

[icecold1983]

I have a 980TI. You can't run tomb raider on high at 30 4k.

you have to be smart about the settings. you will probably need 1 or 2 mediums in there, it definitely wont be maxed.

 

[Deaf Spacker]

I have a 980TI. You can't run tomb raider on high at 30 4k.

It's definitely do-able.

 

[onQ123]

Where's onQ123 saying that the PS4 Pro will do 4K native more than we expect because 'uprendered' = native?

Yes please show me saying that uprendering = native

in fact if uprendering = native what would be the point of uprendering?