TW3 upgrade for PS4 Pro?

+
Status
Not open for further replies.
@Fieldcrab

@release_15

Have you guys had a chance to see the PS4Pro live in action? Is the visual upgrade substantial enough to merit the cost of entry? It's very hard for me to tell because I'm watching the console reveal on a very old and very low resolution TV. If you can actually see a decent jump in graphical performance, I might go ahead and get it. I was going to purchase a 4K TV in the near future anyways. Honestly, I do think buying a console upgrade every 3 years or so is still a heck of a lot cheaper than PC gaming. Back when I had a gaming rig, I would swap out the video card once every several years, and that would typically run me about $300, which is close to the ask for the PS4 Pro.

You wanna take a look at this article. It explains pretty well, what the PS4 pro has to offer as an 4K capable console.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-three-hours-with-playstation-4-pro

Pros and cons pairing the console with an 4K capable TV.

At the end, it relies completely on the user if he wants to go with Sony's up-scaling technique over a 4K capable RIG.

Obviously we will know more if the console hits the market.

---------- Updated at 02:20 PM ----------

@release_15


I had my previous PS4 console for almost three years without any problems at all.

From this point of view, Sony seems to have done a fantastic job!
 
You wanna take a look at this article. It explains pretty well, what the PS4 pro has to offer as an 4K capable console.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-three-hours-with-playstation-4-pro

Pros and cons pairing the console with an 4K capable TV.

At the end, it relies completely on the user if he wants to go with Sony's up-scaling technique over a 4K capable RIG.

Obviously we will know more if the console hits the market.

---------- Updated at 02:20 PM ----------

@release_15


I had my previous PS4 console for almost three years without any problems at all.

From this point of view, Sony seems to have done a fantastic job!

That was super helpful, thanks! They make an interesting point that I bet a lot of folks over look: in order to truly take advantage of the PS4 Pro, you not only need a 4K TV, you need one that supports HDR. I'm gonna have to mull over my options as I go forward.
 
@Fieldcrab

@release_15

Have you guys had a chance to see the PS4Pro live in action? Is the visual upgrade substantial enough to merit the cost of entry? It's very hard for me to tell because I'm watching the console reveal on a very old and very low resolution TV. If you can actually see a decent jump in graphical performance, I might go ahead and get it. I was going to purchase a 4K TV in the near future anyways. Honestly, I do think buying a console upgrade every 3 years or so is still a heck of a lot cheaper than PC gaming. Back when I had a gaming rig, I would swap out the video card once every several years, and that would typically run me about $300, which is close to the ask for the PS4 Pro.

Haven't seen it or tested it so all of my more or less educated assumptions are based on the specs and personal experiences. I would hold off buying it for a few months after the release to see if developers shift towards the new console and how games run etc. Maybe see if some shop has it on display to try it out.

The resolution increase makes the image better in every way which one needs to experience themselves to appreciate. The question is how much they're willing to sacrifice the effects etc in favour of the higher resolution. For example witcher could really benefit from increased settings for example to foliage distance and foliage shadow distance which is a noticeable difference between PC and console.
 
The resolution increase makes the image better in every way which one needs to experience themselves to appreciate. The question is how much they're willing to sacrifice the effects etc in favour of the higher resolution. For example witcher could really benefit from increased settings for example to foliage distance and foliage shadow distance which is a noticeable difference between PC and console.
I agree. Personally, I don't mind exchanging resolution for better foliage (shadow) distance. Anything above 1080p is stunningly sharp anyway, so if CDPR make some tradeoffs, or include something approaching Ultra settings for the 1080p mode, I'm very cool with that.

@Pug.:
I've run a few of Sony's native/checkerboarded 4K vids (belonging to their presentation) through my TV, and I'm VERY pleased with them. Image is crisp, fine and provides a very noticeable difference. Then again, I'm an easy guy to please when it comes to resolution, so take that with a grain of salt. It's always a good idea to have a more powerful console, imo. 4.2 Teraflops is roughly still equivalent to a very decent PC, so it'll be great to have games that take advantage of that power, whether it be in 4K or 1080p mode.

Regarding 4K TVs, however... Be careful what you buy. There's some debate about the amount of input lag HDR and 4K adds to your screen. Certain sets, for instance, automatically switch to Cinema Mode when they detect a 4K signal, and only provide that option for 4K HDR content (unless you manage to switch it off somehow, but then you lose the advantage of UHD). For some TVs, that means over 100ms of input lag in 4K HDR. That amounts to a VERY bad playing experience.

The best thing to do for now is to wait for 4K TVs to better adapt to gaming. That said, there ARE good options out there right now. My mid-range LG has 30 ms of input lag in game mode, which is pretty great for most games. I'm pretty sure 4K upscaling is in effect, since I've enabled 4K HDR for my PS4's chosen HDMI port and the game looks better than ever, but I have no idea what'll happen when I run PS4 Pro's actual signal through it. That TV was an impulse buy for me at its low price point, so I might upgrade again in a year or two.

Whatever you buy, don't go for the latest technology or the highest price point. Find a good value proposition: price balanced with input lag, balanced with a pleasant viewing experience. TVs are a lot like computers and smartphones, in the sense that you will always pay WAY too much for the best and latest technology. Find that sweet spot. You'll be impressed either way, and something better is always just around the corner.
 
Last edited:
I agree. Personally, I don't mind exchanging resolution for better foliage (shadow) distance. Anything above 1080p is stunningly sharp anyway, so if CDPR make some tradeoffs, or include something approaching Ultra settings for the 1080p mode, I'm very cool with that.

@Pug.:
I've run a few of Sony's native/checkerboarded 4K vids (belonging to their presentation) through my TV, and I'm VERY pleased with them. Image is crisp, fine and provides a very noticeable difference. Then again, I'm an easy guy to please when it comes to resolution, so take that with a grain of salt. It's always a good idea to have a more powerful console, imo. 4.2 Teraflops is roughly still equivalent to a very decent PC, so it'll be great to have games that take advantage of that power, whether it be in 4K or 1080p mode.

Regarding 4K TVs, however... Be careful what you buy. There's some debate about the amount of input lag HDR and 4K adds to your screen. Certain sets, for instance, automatically switch to Cinema Mode when they detect a 4K signal, and only provide that option for 4K HDR content (unless you manage to switch it off somehow, but then you lose the advantage of UHD). For some TVs, that means over 100ms of input lag in 4K HDR. That amounts to a VERY bad playing experience.

The best thing to do for now is to wait for 4K TVs to better adapt to gaming. That said, there ARE good options out there right now. My mid-range LG has 30 ms of input lag in game mode, which is pretty great for most games. I'm pretty sure 4K upscaling is in effect, since I've enabled 4K HDR for my PS4's chosen HDMI port and the game looks better than ever, but I have no idea what'll happen when I run PS4 Pro's actual signal through it. That TV was an impulse buy for me at its low price point, so I might upgrade again in a year or two.

Whatever you buy, don't go for the latest technology or the highest price point. Find a good value proposition: price balanced with input lag, balanced with a pleasant viewing experience. TVs are a lot like computers and smartphones, in the sense that you will always pay WAY too much for the best and latest technology. Find that sweet spot. You'll be impressed either way, and something better is always just around the corner.

Thanks for the very thorough and very informative response. I will keep revisiting this thread as I do my research. I did come across a site a while back which has pretty comprehensive breakdowns and reviews of various TV sets out there: http://www.rtings.com/I was thinking of spending about $1,000 USD on the tv, so nothing super crazy. I'd be happy with a 55-60" set that has a nice picture and is decent for gaming. Pretty much anything is a massive upgrade from what I have now hehe.
 
Thanks for the very thorough and very informative response. I will keep revisiting this thread as I do my research. I did come across a site a while back which has pretty comprehensive breakdowns and reviews of various TV sets out there: http://www.rtings.com/I was thinking of spending about $1,000 USD on the tv, so nothing super crazy. I'd be happy with a 55-60" set that has a nice picture and is decent for gaming. Pretty much anything is a massive upgrade from what I have now hehe.
You're very welcome. It's definitely a great idea to do some research in advance. Rtings is a good site, and I recently read that they're planning on factoring in HDR when calculating input lag, so hopefully this whole 4K HDR debacle will be much more transparent soon. http://www.displaylag.com/ is also a reliable site with a pretty impressive database regarding input lag.

If you're looking to upgrade in 2016, I've been hearing a lot of good things about this year's Samsung sets. PS4 "regular" gets a 4.00 patch today with built-in HDR functionality, so that should inform us on current HDR capable sets' gaming prowess. $1,000 USD should net you a pretty awesome 4KTV, either way. Don't know about 55-60", but 50" should definitely be attainable without any compromises. I know exactly what you mean. Upgrading only once every 5-6 years will ensure you a maximum wow factor when you switch that TV on for the first time. ;)
 
I did some thinking about this and while I'm welcoming a Pro patch for TW3 because this game deserve all the best thing it can get, I don't think I'm going to buy a PS4 Pro anytime soon.
The reason for that is that you would need to buy a new 4K TV to take full advantage of the new console, I do believe there is no much sense for people with 1080p TV to upgrade to Pro.

Where I live good 4K TVs are around 600€ and combined with a PS4 Pro being around 400€ that would be 1.000€ in one go. That's IMO too much in one go for something that doesn't even offer 4K native resolution.

I like gaming but I need also to spend my wage wisely, although PS4 Pro is nice I don't think it's worth at the moment. My PS4 regular is working perfectly and my 1080p TV is still relatively new. I might end up keeping what I have and wait for the next PS console (PS5?) who will hopefully feature True 4K and a 4K Blue-Ray reader. In the meantime 4K TVs prices will decline and I'll be able to find a good deal. If my regular PS4 will break I'll buy a slim one.

In truth I think they went too early with the whole 4K HDR thing because it's still a new and expensive tech and the current gen can't run like a true 4K console. Still I welcome all the occasion for CDPR to improve on the base game.
 
60fps is out of question, the CPU is too weak, 4k is more manageable, PSpro is really good at that specific task, it has some custom hardware designed just for that

and dont mistake PSpro 4k with PC native 4k , what PSpro is doing is an upscale from 1440p (2560x1440) to 4k, while you're truly rendering straight into 4k naitvely for PC (3840x2160) wich cost way more horsepower

so yeah, current consoles settings 30fps upscaled to 4k is definitly doable, but for someone who's already been playing the game at 4k since ages now, the difference is not striking, the game has too many low quality textures/models to take advantage of 4k

however HDR should be something really great, but you need a very expensive TV ...
 
Last edited:
60fps is out of question, the CPU is too weak

Some say that's a miracle the game can run on the consoles and these claims are not devoid of reason. So let's just let the devs do their magic :)

BTW, is there any word from Sony on supersampling? Will the pro console support it across all games? If so, even that alone can be worth at least considering getting the new hardware, even with a 1080p TV.
 
Some say that's a miracle the game can run on the consoles and these claims are not devoid of reason. So let's just let the devs do their magic :)

BTW, is there any word from Sony on supersampling? Will the pro console support it across all games? If so, even that alone can be worth at least considering getting the new hardware, even with a 1080p TV.

its up to the devs, the only obligation they have is that one single game should work on both classic ps4 and pspro, nothing beyond that

if the devs gonna support it or not will depend on its success, if the install base is too small its not worth it, if its sell it might be worth it, i guess sony will pay some devs to make 4k patches for pspro to drive sales early on
 
and dont mistake PSpro 4k with PC native 4k , what PSpro is doing is an upscale from 1440p (2560x1440) to 4k, while you're truly rendering straight into 4k naitvely for PC (3840x2160) wich cost way more horsepower

If I understand it right, the PS4 Pro renders only half of the pixels of a 4K resolution frame using a checkerboard pattern (where each "tile" of the checkerboard is 2x2 pixels, in other words, within one line, 2 pixels are rendered, then 2 are not, then 2 are rendered again, and so on). And the missing pixels are extrapolated from those that have been rendered. If this process is purely spatial, then it can indeed be considered a form of upscaling. Although as far as I know it can also alternate the checkerboard pattern between frames, in that case it is more like a form of interlaced display, where alternating halves of the picture are rendered in even/odd frames, and it has in theory full resolution for still images. Of course, in practice you also get artifacts.
 
That would be my interpretation as well. I'm surprised the term "4Ki" hasn't been coined yet. The concept is similar to what Remedy did for Quantum Break on Xbox One, I think. Except they worked entirely upwards from 720p,having to compensate for some heavy particle effects and whatnot. The way I understand it is that the PS4 Pro, both practically and percentage-wise, is actively rendering A LOT more "target res" pixels than QB's approach. Although technically, native 4K IS possible on PS4 Pro. The Last Of Us Remastered, for instance, was shown being rendered at a native 4K. No real surprise there, given that it's a last-gen upgrade.

I really like how Cerny sold it, though. He talked about how "brute forcing" 4K, a.k.a. actually rendering it natively, would prove too taxing for current console hardware, thus being unattainable from a cost standpoint. It was just exquisitely worded. He noted that there was indeed a difference with native 4K, but they're able to approximate it to an impressive degree. It's the perfect mix of marketing and truthfulness.

Digital Foundry seemed pretty impressed by it. They say there's a bit of a difference with native 4K in terms of overall sharpness, but that the improvement in image quality overall is staggering enough to consider it a worthy upgrade.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-three-hours-with-playstation-4-pro
 
The concept is similar to what Remedy did for Quantum Break on Xbox One

No, it's not that similar. QB renderer stored last 4 frames in a buffer and then analyzed them in terms how each pixel has changed during those frames, with that data it tried to predict the values of "missing" pixels, thus trying to "reconstruct" the image, not just mix those pixels together. As for the result, it was good, but definitely not like native 1080p image and had a lot of artefacts to boot. Thumbs up for trying though.

Also, this technique actually seems quite promising, as the image analyzing algorythms will improve it might yield results very close to native resolutions.
 
Here's that digital foundry video which was referenced above. If you don't want to watch the whole thing, the basic take way is that the PS4Pro accomplishes what Sony set out to do (approximate a 4K experience at a reasonable price), but the major hurdle is going to be educating the consumer.

[video=youtube;pUb63Dc7-Bw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUb63Dc7-Bw[/video]
 
No, it's not that similar. QB renderer stored last 4 frames in a buffer and then analyzed them in terms how each pixel has changed during those frames, with that data it tried to predict the values of "missing" pixels, thus trying to "reconstruct" the image, not just mix those pixels together. As for the result, it was good, but definitely not like native 1080p image and had a lot of artefacts to boot. Thumbs up for trying though.

Also, this technique actually seems quite promising, as the image analyzing algorythms will improve it might yield results very close to native resolutions.
Whoops. I didn't know that. The actual technical details of this process were kinda lost on me when QB released. Thanks for clarifying. I had no idea the tech was this advanced, quite frankly.

(As a side note: with QB not selling well and Microsoft hinting at no sequel for it, I really hope Remedy put that Northlight engine to work on a multi-platform game. That engine has so much potential.)

@Pug.:
Thanks! That video's much more informative than the article on some levels. It's not easy to showcase a new technology when people have to walk into a TV store in order to "get" it. It's a similar problem with VR.
 
Yup, I guess that's that, then. With two games in development, it doesn't exactly come as a surprise. CD Projekt's done plenty of amazing things with this game already, so I can't begrudge them this. Still, I REALLY wanted it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom