6TF is too much power for a mid-gen upgrade that has to keep its graphics capability within range of a 1.2TF machine. Either go next gen full stop or don't do it at all.
Huh? The S is a smaller Xbox One. How is that comparable to the Neo?
I'd rather they go 1080/60 full screen AA and a fuck tonne of effects.
I just want my favorite games like GTAV or W3 to run a more perfect 1080p/60FPS.
I'd much rather they target a lower resolution (1080p or 1440p) with the highest possible performance (highest graphical settings and solid 60fps).
Otherwise why not concentrate your efforts and new processing power to make 60fps, nicely aliased, flicker-less games ?
60fps is very unlikely if Sony and Microsoft use the weak Jaguar CPU.I was just wanna play Bloodborne at 1080p 60 with great IQ.
Or have all games that were designed on a 1.3TF machine just in 1080p@60FPS or 4k on the Scorpio to justify Scorpio's existence!6TF is too much power for a mid-gen upgrade that has to keep its graphics capability within range of a 1.2TF machine. Either go next gen full stop or don't do it at all.
IMO, 1080p already steps into "diminishing returns" territory. On standard sized TVs, 4K will be barely noticeable. On a huge screen it could make a difference.
I'm not against the existence of Scorpio or Neo, but the power should be used for something else.
Whether they are a mistake will depend on how the market at large receives them. We don't really know how Sony is going to regard Neo as part of the lineup. Does it get an enormous marketing push months ahead of time, like the vanilla PS4 did? Or does it just get presented as an option like all of the later PS3 skus did?These half step consoles just seem like a huge mistake.
Definitely not getting one at launch, esp if they play all the same games.
Of course everyone said the same thing about the last 2 gens...
Not 60fps.But Neo is rumored to not be targeting 4K despite what the article claims. Rumor is that while Scorpio is targeting 4K, Neo is less powerful and strictly targeting 1080p 60fps across the board.
6TF is too much power for a mid-gen upgrade that has to keep its graphics capability within range of a 1.2TF machine. Either go next gen full stop or don't do it at all.
60fps is very unlikely if Sony and Microsoft use the weak Jaguar CPU.
A few GPU-dependent games can hit 60fps, but most will be too CPU-capped after 30fps.
Several current games barely hold 20-30fps due to Jaguar CPU.
Question! Which do you prefer?
- 4K Medium
- 1080p Ultra
Not 60fps.
More likely 1080p/30 with higher settings.
At the rumored specs the Neo is roughly equivalent to something like 2.5x the power of the PS4, isn't it? And most PS4 games run near-enough to 1080p30fps currently. Doesn't seem outside the realm of possibility to me that 1080p60fps with a bump in image quality (PC Ultra settings or slightly less) would be achievable.
That's not how 'power' works unfortunately, like if I double the CPU power in my computer it wont let me run a game in 4K that was previously performance capped at 1080p.
IMO, 1080p already steps into "diminishing returns" territory. On standard sized TVs, 4K will be barely noticeable. On a huge screen it could make a difference.
I'm not against the existence of Scorpio or Neo, but the power should be used for something else.
If you doubled the power of everything it still wouldn't get you to run 4k from 1080, as 4k needs 4x the power.
Resolution is just marketing, it doesn't make things look better. If it did we could all just cheaply upscale to instantly get PS5 graphics. We need art and post processing, not pointless pixels.
Until we have pixar quality visuals (and lets not kid ourselves that any 4K game looks better than a pixar move at 720p, or even on DVD) we shouldn't be upping the resolution. If image quality was the primary concern and gamers were smarter than to fall for the marketing then 1080p would be all we need at least for the next few generations.
Yeah that was a bad example heh, was focused on pointing out that the 'power' of a platform exists in multiple areas and cannot be measured in simple tflops, though linear scaling isn't quite accurate either for resolution with architecture changes etc.
Basically what I meant to say is you cannot make a CPU performance capped game go from 30 > 60 fps by increasing the GPU performance by 2.5x.
Not sure how many games you've compared at 720p/1080p/2160p but many modern games have such impressive detail that simply increasing resolution does actually make them look significantly better. I think Uncharted 4 would look magnificent at 4K.
Not sure how many games you've compared at 720p/1080p/2160p but many modern games have such impressive detail that simply increasing resolution does actually make them look significantly better. I think Uncharted 4 would look magnificent at 4K.
Thats why i am hoping, praying in fact, that the Neo does have the rumoured 2.1ghz Zen Lite CPU.
You are not thinking.
Games need to be built from the ground up to be better looking at lower resolutions. Of course taking current games that just bolt on texture packs for higher resolutions but do nothing at all for lower resolutions will look better with higher resolutions. Which game have you tested that does for more complex post processing and more accurate lighting the lower you make the resolution?
According to the Steam hardware survey, 95 per cent of PC gamers are using 1080p or lower resolution screens. 1440p and 4K displays barely register, neither failing to hit even one per cent of the audience. 4K may well gain more traction in the living room, but the inescapable conclusion from the PC market is that the majority of gamers simply don't care about higher resolution screens. And with that in mind, the RX 480 is AMD's audacious play at targeting the mainstream PC gamer - and there is some irony that the same core technology is fuelling Sony's 4K aspirations.
I think Uncharted 4 would look magnificent at 4K.
Microsoft are in a bit of a trickier situation after their Scorpio video. Phrases like "4K at 60FPS" and "uncompressed pixels" will probably come back to bite them.
Actually, it's not just your opinion, but the opinion of several experts. There are even charts which state what is the optimal 1080p viewing distance for different TV sizes:
https://www.avforums.com/article/tv-full-hd-ultra-hd-4k-viewing-distance-guide.10704
http://referencehometheater.com/2013/commentary/4k-calculator/
As you can see, you are correct in your assumption that "On standard sized TVs, 4k will be barely noticeable" (and I would add "if at all").
Pretty sure the reduced aliasing produced by a 4k display (displaying a 4k game) would make it worth it.
As an avid PC user who regularly games on a single GTX 980 ti, which is a 6 terraflop card, this much power is definitely enough for 4K, especially for games with current-gen visuals. In fact, this card, equipped with the right CPU will often do 40fps+ on ultra settings. There should be more than enough power in the Scorpio to do a very solid 4k, especially if games are optimized for it. I think Eurogamer are smart guys, but even they are going on very sparse info when it comes to Scorpio.