18 ms·

Sony reveals PlayStation 5 details

182 points by davidbarker 8y ago

CodeSheikh 8y ago
What is a "3D audio"?
- bsagdiyev 8y ago
  Disclaimer: I am an SIE employee, but this is my opinion and how I understand it from the article description. It may not be correct. It sounds like this will be similar to the way some other sound card manufacturers have created "3d audio" in that you won't need something like a 7.1 system to be able to better portray where exactly a sound is coming from. Stereo headphones will be able to give you a more immersive feeling by having audio be more directional instead of a general area (i.e. left speaker or right speaker).
  - jamescostian 8y ago
    I've always wondered, which is better: a 7.1 system or stereo headphones with "3d audio"? And if 3d audio is so great, why doesn't everyone just use stereo speakers (maybe with a subwoofer)?
    - bsagdiyev 8y ago
      I can't really give an answer to that one. I haven't gamed with a 7.1 system and generally just wear headphones when I do. I'm sure some people do use stereo speakers, but headphones are almost a given for professional gaming since it shuts out environmental noise to hear quiet noises in game. Paired with 3d audio it would probably just give better situational awareness. As to how well it will work, I can't answer that.
    - jvolkman 8y ago
      Listen to some binaural audio samples with headphones. You can't get that effect with stereo speakers since they're too far away from your ears. https://youtu.be/aQH-jwE_kfo https://youtu.be/aQH-jwE_kfo
      - justinclift 8y ago
        This doesn't make sense to me. I've used 7.1 and 5.1 systems that have very good stereo imaging, and being able to place sounds clearly on one side or the other like that... didn't seem unusual.
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
      To do it properly I think it does need to be headphones, and they should track your head orientation too. Speakers are much less fussy and a lot nicer in a theater setup, but without feeding directly into your ears you need to actually surround yourself with audio sources (possibly bouncing some with a sound bar).
    - jdietrich 8y ago
      > I've always wondered, which is better: a 7.1 system or stereo headphones with "3d audio"? Stereo headphones all the way. You only have two ears; they can only ascertain direction based on a) the amplitude and phase differences between the sound reaching each ear and b) the frequency and time-domain filtering effects of your outer ear. These effects can be very accurately emulated using a physical head model or digital signal processing. Properly recorded and mixed binaural audio will provide the most convincing spatial effect, because your eardrums can't tell the difference between a binaural recording and actually being in an acoustic environment. >And if 3d audio is so great, why doesn't everyone just use stereo speakers (maybe with a subwoofer)? Your living room isn't an anechoic chamber, so you're hearing both the sound of your speakers and the reverberation of your room. You can tell that you're listening to two sound sources positioned in front of you, because that room reverberation provides substantial spatial information about your actual acoustic environment and degrades the spatial information of the recording. You can mount speakers really close to your ears, so you only hear the sound of each speaker with one ear without the colouring effect of your listening environment; we call such an arrangement "headphones".
      - justinclift 8y ago
        > Stereo headphones all the way. I've done both, and (for me) it's the opposite. You're probably right for "accuracy of sound", but when gaming having a bunch of powerful speakers making sound effects gives a better "experience". :) eg You can feel decent sized speakers with your whole body, which you're missing when using just headphones
        jdietrich 8y ago
        >I've done both, and (for me) it's the opposite. Headphones provide a worse spatial experience than stereo speakers where the source material has been mixed for speakers; the equation becomes significantly different with flexible spatial formats like Dolby Atmos. >You can feel decent sized speakers with your whole body Using headphones with a subwoofer is a workable (albeit highly antisocial) option. You can't feel frequencies above about 150Hz, which is comfortably within the bandwidth of most headphones. You can also fit a low-frequency transducer to your chair, which will provide a similar feel to a powerful subwoofer without annoying the neighbours. https://soundshaker.com/ https://soundshaker.com/ Speakers are undoubtedly more convenient and more practical for shared listening, but headphones provide a simply unmatched price-to-performance ratio; to get the best out of a pair of speakers, you need to spend at least as much on acoustic treatment to control the resonance of your listening environment.
    - justinclift 8y ago
      I've gamed with 7.1 systems (with good speakers - JBL Pro LSR 305 studio monitors), and with decent headphones. Headphones are much better than cheapo speaker setups, but a good 7.1 (or even 5.1) system gives a better experience. I'd probably put it down to being able to feel the noise with your whole body :) with good speakers, rather than the ears-only noise from headphones.
    - falcolas 8y ago
      7.1 for positional audio. Your ears are sensitive to the direction of sound in more than just left and right. They can also determine front from back, and up/down (for sounds in front of a person). Headphones simply can't mirror that effect, and you can tell this by simply turning your head while wearing them. If the soundscape doesn't change, it's not going to be accurate in terms of position.
    - jplayer01 8y ago
      Given the choice, I'd always pick the 7.1 system. I've been forced into playing primarily headphones because of where I live, but it pales in comparison with my old 7.1 setup. There's just something about the whole room being filled with sounds and vibration that you feel with your whole body that can't be replicated by headphones. If I ever get to live in a house again, first thing I buy is a good 5.1 or 7.1 system.
      - theandrewbailey 8y ago
        I just bought a house. Before turning on my PC (or even plugging it in), I set up my 7.1 system, including mounting most speakers to the living room walls. I swear that it sounds better than it did similarly set up at the old place (and that's not "it's better because I own it" sentimental BS).
        jplayer01 8y ago
        I believe it. There are a lot of small environmental details that make a big difference to sound quality and how sound bounces around a room. Wall/floor material, distance between the speakers or to the listener, distance from the walls, ceiling height, etc. It's the kind of thing people will spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to get just right.
- snvzz 8y ago
  I believe they're refering to binaural recordings and synthetised 3d audio effects[1]. Specifically, it's likely about the inclusion and use of TrueAudio[2], its current encarnation (TrueAudio Next) or a successor of that. On my own experience with Sennheiser HD600 headphones, these effects can sound real to the point of tricking my mind. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binaural_recording https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binaural_recording [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_audio_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_audio_effect [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_TrueAudio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_TrueAudio
  - corysama 8y ago
    Use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics for internal processing then output as binaural stereo. 3D audio! External speakers can approximate binaural audio to a passable degree.
    - snvzz 8y ago
      Speakers can be nice, but nothing matches the control over each ear and the low distortion of good open headphones.
- jayd16 8y ago
  Traditionally, you have a movie with 2, 5, 7 channels of surround sound to create a 3d soundscape. Artists can manually place sound in those channels. The view perspective is set in stone when you're filming so its easy to place exactly what you want. In games, you usually have mono sound emitters placed in a 3d world and dynamically mix the sound channels but its still mono sound sources. You hear the same sound in all the speakers but only at different volumes. 3D audio most likely refers to newer audio systems that work with binaural of other multi channel sound sources that account for source and listener position and forward direction. These are getting popular because of VR. Its much easier to mix an ambient soundscape as 3D audio and drop it into a game than to place many emitters. You can also get some binaural effect now with current sound pipelines (VR games do it) but my guess is in this gen its most likely done with code in the CPU instead of hardware acceleration.
Konnstann 8y ago
A lot of the things they revealed about the Ps5 don't really "wow" me. The system better be backwards-compatible, consoles these days are pretty much more custom PCs, there shouldn't be a problem with backwards-compatibility. Switching to SSD is also a no-brainer, getting better load times as a result of using better hardware isn't that big of an accomplishment, and you could get that performance increase even with a Ps3 if you swapped out the drives iirc.
- bryanlarsen 8y ago
  The article confirms it will be backwards compatible. The lack of a wow factor is a good thing, IMO. When they try too hard we get weird stuff like the Cell architecture.
- suby 8y ago
  It's going to be backwards compatible with the PS4 according to the article.
- asark 8y ago
  What's the appeal of 8K? Is the support just there for some future VR plans? I already have my couch about as close to my 55" 4K TV as is reasonable, and can barely tell the difference between 1080p and 4K video. If I had an absurdly large TV (70"+) and didn't move my couch back yeah, 4K'd be a clear improvement. But 8K? Why?
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    For a game, with this amount of GPU power, there's not a tremendous benefit to an 8k screen. It's good to be future-proof, and if you are at a desk you can pretty easily get a screen where the difference is notable. And people are making 8k content, so you want to support playing that on your flashy high-end machine. But the important part would be the implications for VR. And also that if it can output 8k@60, then it can output 4k@veryhigh.
  - glhaynes 8y ago
    Meanwhile, HDR makes a massive difference, but laypeople seem to be pretty familiar with the term "4K" while very few know about "HDR". A testament to the power of numbers in marketing.
Tokiin 8y ago
Great to see we're finally getting an SSD by default in consoles. The only thing I'm worried about with this is the fact that high capacity SSDs are more expensive and with a push towards more digital storefronts, I'm wondering how this will work for the users. Then again, it's also a wonderful chance to push streaming, so there is that too.
- nicoburns 8y ago
  SSDs have come down in price a lot recently. You can get a 1TB (SanDisk) SSD for £109 https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-SDSSDA-1T00-G26-Internal-Speed-Write/dp/B07D998212/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-SDSSDA-1T00-G26-Internal-Sp...
  - gambiting 8y ago
    Samsung 1TB 860 QVO is just £90 on Amazon
- freehunter 8y ago
  I think consoles are a perfect fit for a fusion drive like in some Apple models. I have tons of games on my Xbox that I'm not going to play any time soon, but don't want to delete. They can be swapped to the hard disk, while games I play more often get loaded onto a smaller SSD.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    You probably don't want the drives combined for that, though. You want the active game to be fully loaded onto the SSD. So at that point of needing a pretty big SSD, make the console less expensive by only having the SSD, then let the user plug in a cheap external hard drive. Five minutes to transfer a game is pretty reasonable.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- save_ferris 8y ago
  not to mention vendors typically sell the hardware at a loss (or at least they used to), and make up those losses via higher margins on content and service sales. I'd be curious to know if that's still the case.
snvzz 8y ago
Wired has another article[0], with more detail, supposedly exclusive. [0] https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/ https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/
- atomi 8y ago
  In regards to the hardware, don't believe the hype until you see it.
  - elsonrodriguez 8y ago
    What are you talking about? The Emotion Engine literally taught me about the value of friendship and love.
  - foobarbazetc 8y ago
    I mean... we kind of know what a Ryzen / Navi system will do today. I’m excited. ;)
  - radicaldreamer 8y ago
    Especially when it comes to Sony...
- george_perez 8y ago
  Yeah, that's what The Verge is quoting from. It's in the opening sentence.
  - SkyMarshal 8y ago
    OP should have posted the original source then.
arprocter 8y ago
Interesting to see how/if the cable companies respond to the resolution wars - last time I checked the only one offering 4k was DirecTV, with everyone else still at 1080 Newer stuff upscaled from 1080 generally looks fine to my increasingly middle-aged eyes, but content filmed on older cameras looks awful at 4k (Law and Order springs to mind)
- fullshark 8y ago
  When the tech demos in stores made the main use case how clear newspaper text looks in 4k instead of 1080p i realized we probably had reached the end of the TV resolution S-curve.
  - melling 8y ago
    Guess they should have shown you the larger color space? https://nofilmschool.com/2013/07/4k-uhd-color-space-gamut-frame-rate https://nofilmschool.com/2013/07/4k-uhd-color-space-gamut-fr... Personally, I'd like a nice large wall size screen where I can "spread out my work" and read it. Throw in a Minority Report interface so I'm not stuck with a mouse and keyboard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFeCgoep1c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFeCgoep1c
    - teddyh 8y ago
      > Personally, I'd like a nice large wall size screen where I can "spread out my work" and read it. > Throw in a Minority Report interface so I'm not stuck with a mouse and keyboard: Remember the gorilla arm. http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/gorilla-arm.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/gorilla-arm.html
      - melling 8y ago
        Sure. That was almost 2 decades ago. We've given it some more thought. https://atap.google.com/soli/ https://atap.google.com/soli/
        8y ago
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
e1ven 8y ago
The inclusion of ray tracing hardware is interesting to me, and sounds like good news to Nvidia, who has been pushing ray tracing as part of their RTX cards. Even though this uses a custom GPU, if consoles don't support ray tracing, PC games are unlikely to be designed for it, since most games have cross platform releases. It's also interesting to me that they're supporting the existing PSVR - The new hardware will really help it have some amazing experiences, and it suggests they're decoupling their VR products from the console releases.
- notTyler 8y ago
  Ray tracing hardware being included kind of worries me actually. Unless they're selling it at a loss I can't see it being below 500 dollars with the prices of ray tracing capable cards being as high as they are. As far as PSVR, the herculean amount of effort required to get something in the vein of backwards compatibility going between PS3 and PS4 makes me think it was designed from the ground up to work with basically everything PS4.
  - pwthornton 8y ago
    Almost all video game consoles are sold at a loss -- sometimes a huge loss in the first few years. Making money on console hardware has never been the name of the game. Every game sold for a Playstation comes with a licensing fee. It's in Sony's best interest to sell as many games as possible, which often means selling consoles at a loss. Sony and other hardware makers also sell a lot of accessories, which often have huge margins too. The online services they sell also have big margins. Selling hardware at a loss is one reason that consoles have always punched much higher graphically relative to price. If the PS5 comes out for $500, it probably cost Sony around $700 to make it, and this is with getting massive volume discounts (guaranteed CPU and GPU contracts over several years with huge volumes of orders coming in) that your PC can't get. And then because consoles only have one CPU and GPU combo to program to, you can get a lot more out of the hardware than you can with a PC. This is why when the PS5 and the new Xbox launch, it'll probably give you better fidelity than a much more expense gaming PC -- and it will only get better visual fidelity for years to come as developers learn to exploit the architecture better.
scoutt 8y ago
It seems fine and a reasonable step forward, unless "The last of us 2" is released as a PS5 exclusive only.
- overcast 8y ago
  I hope so. The first one was one of the greatest gaming experiences of my entire life. I don't want any tech watered down to support both consoles.
  - fetus8 8y ago
    Given how incredible the first game looked on the PS3, and it's performance, I have a feeling that if TLOU2 is a multi-generation release, Naughty Dog will pull it off without having to water it down technically. We've seen game-play, and it looks insane as is already, and supposedly that was on PS4... Naughty Dog is the studio who can pull it off, on both PS4/PS5, or just PS5.
phil248 8y ago
It appears that next year Sony will be releasing a console with similar specs to the PC I purchased last year. One key difference being that while the PS5 will be backwards compatible with PS4 games, any PC is backwards compatible with virtually every PC game ever made. If there's a case to be made for purchasing a next gen console instead of a gaming PC - other than artificial reasons like exclusive titles - I'd like to hear it.
- ricardobeat 8y ago
  What are the parts in that PC that can do 8K with ray tracing? To start with, you’re probably looking at $399 vs $2k.
  - frou_dh 8y ago
    The PS5 rendering games at 8K as a matter of course is not going to happen. We always get outlandish supercomputer hype preceding every console generation. It's a story as old as time!
    - ricardobeat 8y ago
      Neither will a PC, that's what I wanted to know about from the previous commenter.
      - Dylan16807 8y ago
        The claim was that the PC has similar specs to the actual console, not the hype ghost of a console. I believe it does, but I bet they didn't pay $500. I'm sure "8K" in practice just means "HDMI 2.1"
- fetus8 8y ago
  Not sure that Exclusive Titles is an artificial reason. Some of the best games I've experienced have been released/published by Sony and their first party studios. The quality, story, characters, and graphically fidelity are often unrivaled by their contemporaries. God Of War(2018), Horizon Zero Dawn, the Uncharted series, and Shadow of the Colossus (remake) are some of my favorite releases of this generation. I'll gladly plunk down $400+ for their next gen console for more games like that, I don't focus on the tech specs, but rather the experience their platform provides.
cjf4 8y ago
Interesting that while Microsoft and now Google are building platforms that are de-emphasizing local hardware, Sony recognizes this as an opportunity to differentiate by focusing on how great their box is. Their was a passing reference to a "cloud strategy", but there hasn't been as much evidence as their competitors. This will wind up making for the most interesting console generation since the 32/64 bit era, since the platform differences go beyond hardware specs and release date. M/G's platform/subscription approach seems to be more in line with where the world is going, but remains to be seen if the timing's right.
- kbody 8y ago
  Sony had their cloud gaming phase back on 2012 when they acquired Gaikai for $380m. Not sure what happened with them, maybe it was before its time.
  - lukebitts 8y ago
    It's the technology behind Share Play, isn't it?
  - maxfurman 8y ago
    Gaikai became PS Now, which streams a selection of PS3 games on demand
  - gambiting 8y ago
    PlayStation Now is still a thing, you can subscribe to play lots of PS3 and PS4 games on it, they run on Sony's servers and are streamed to your local device.
    - ascagnel_ 8y ago
      Not anymore -- while they still offer that feature, it's downplayed in favor of a Netflix-style rotating library of games that are downloaded and run on local hardware.
      - 8y ago
russellbeattie 8y ago
I wonder if the 3D Audio system will include special hardware like the PSVR which changes the sound based on the angle of your head? If so, it could be pretty awesome, as that system is incredible for increasing immersion. If not, then it's really only a minor improvement except to those with acute hearing.
BLanen 8y ago
8K is such an insane waste of processing power.
- ihuman 8y ago
  I wish they make it run at a stable 60fps instead. You have to have a large screen or sit close to the screen in order to benefit from 4K. I can't imagine how large or close a 8K screen needs to be for any benefit at all.
  - kec 8y ago
    If the hardware is even capable of 8k30 it should be able to do rock solid 4k60, let alone 1080p60
- slantyyz 8y ago
  It's a nice spec to make it sound future proof, but I am guessing the ability to run at max visual settings at 4K60 will be the criterion most people will judge the GPU on.
- albertgoeswoof 8y ago
  Why?
- Narishma 8y ago
  Why? Just because the console can output at 8K doesn't mean games will. The PS3 supported 1080p output but you can probably count on one hand the number of games who rendered at that resolution.
sneakernets 8y ago
Nice to see that Sony is still dedicated to hardware, knowing that streaming is a pipe dream in the USA, and will continue to be so in the coming years.
fisherwithac 8y ago
After reading the more detailed Wired article, I can assuredly place myself in the "cautiously optimistic" car of the hype train for the PS5 (I myself own a PS4 Pro that I've been happy with). There are a lot of solid boxes that Sony's ticking: backwards compatibility with the previous generation, sticking with physical game copies instead of moving towards a "games-as-a-service" cloud model, updates to hardware that justify the new console's number increment, releasing devkits early to get game devs on board with said hardware, etc. That being said, as others have mentioned, the support for 8K stupifies me. As far as I understand it, 8K displays are only just now becoming commercial, and only for the highest buyers. I'd much rather have higher, consistent framerates. Ray-tracing, I'm indifferent to. If they can make it work, great, more reflective windows and puddles for all. If not, then perhaps game devs can choose not to implement it. Shame there will be no additional information on this at E3. Makes me wonder if they're saving their winning hand for a future round of poker, so to speak. Edit: spelling
- abrawill 8y ago
  8K output support doesn't really cost much so I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't matter to most of the GPU internals. Games will internally run at whatever resolution they think results in the best quality/responsiveness/fluidity/development-cost trade-off, supporting 8K doesn't change anything there.
  - fisherwithac 8y ago
    Fair enough. My concerns were more rooted in performance than the cost of the console itself. But the performance gains they reported by switching to an SSD would more than likely trump anything lost by supporting higher resolutions.
    - awill 8y ago
      there's nothing 'lost' by supporting higher resolutions. It will render internally at (say) 4k, and upsample to 8k.
    - abrawill 8y ago
singhrac 8y ago
How long have consoles used almost exclusively AMD hardware? It seems like Xbox One/PS4 were the first generation this was true, is there any lock-in in this market? How many consoles are sold vs. desktops and laptops?
- theandrewbailey 8y ago
  Depends on how you define AMD and exclusively. This is the first generation that AMD has got both a CPU and GPU into successful mainstream consoles. The Wii, Wii U, and Xbox 360 have an ATI GPU (from before AMD bought ATI). Going back further, the Gamecube has an ArtX GPU (from before ATI bought ArtX).
theandrewbailey 8y ago
Given that the current Playstation and Xbox are based on (more or less) the same AMD platform, is it reasonable to expect that the next Xbox will too (with an identical feature set)?
- wmf 8y ago
  Yes, it is rumored that PS5 is Zen 2 + Navi and Xbox Scarlett is also Zen 2 + Navi. That leaves room for different RAM, different numbers of CUs, different accelerators, etc. but they're expected to be pretty similar.
  - kristianp 8y ago
    And who's first to market, and is cheaper.
tus87 8y ago
> the new console isn’t just a spec-boosted upgrade of the PS4, like the PS4 Pro was. Has any of Sony's next-generation consoles just been "spec-upgraded" versions of previous ones? What a weird comment.
- britch 8y ago
  I read it as a clarification that they were not writing about a PS4 Pro V2, but actually, truly the PS5.
  - tus87 8y ago
    > We’ve known for a while that Sony is working on its next-generation PlayStation console — call it the PlayStation 5 for lack of a better name When you say it's next generation and deserving of the title PS5....whatever.
- wmf 8y ago
  We're getting into nitpicking here, but what is the difference between a PS5 that is a spec-boosted upgrade of the PS4 and a PS5 that is fully backwards compatible with the PS4 yet still "next generation"? They're both AMD+AMD.
- robdachshund 8y ago
  That's an odd comment because it is just a new iteration of the same architecture- it's an x86 computer. A new os and other bells and whistles doesn't change that. Its just going to use a better SOC.
llbowers 8y ago
Is there any prediction on the future of stand-alone gaming consoles with 5G and streaming games(e.g., Google Stadia) coming soon? While I'm not really much of a gamer now I spent a lot of my childhood playing video games and the thought of dedicated home game consoles going the way of arcades makes me sad. I think I'll finally pick up that Switch I've been planning on...
- srmatto 8y ago
  There's a rumor that a new switch is due any week now for what its worth.
- freeflight 8y ago
  The thing is Stadia does nothing new, StreamOn comes to mind just like pretty much every major player in the industry running their own thing, even Nvidia. Granted: If anybody can make it work, it's gonna be Google, but I'm still quite skeptical. For many consumers network bandwidth and traffic volume are still very real issues, and there's not that much Google can do about that on a global scale, at least in the short time-frame. Long-term they would have to roll out Google fiber on a global scale and pretty much go into the ISP business with full commitment, which I just don't see happening because Google fiber is dead.
wazoox 8y ago
8K doesn't make sense, anywhere. I'm middle-aged, and I can't at 2 meters distinguish 4K from 1080p. Nobody in the world can see the difference between 8K and 4K. It's a shameful waste of resource and ridiculous planned obsolescence. In fact, it should probably be forbidden for wasting precious resources for no good reason.
- dasloop 8y ago
  No matter the screen size?
  - whamlastxmas 8y ago
    How many people are going to play their PS5 in an IMAX theater?
- debug-desperado 8y ago
  The more pixels you throw at font rendering, the better. It also allows for cleaner upscaling from lower resolutions. However, those two uses are needed more on computer monitors, not TVs. You are right that most folks with 50-65" TVs at 2-3 meters don't benefit from anything higher than 1080p.
- F-0X 8y ago
  Exactly. I would prefer they directed their budget somewhere other than graphics for this reason. The switch still plays most games at only 720p I believe, but this is more than sufficient for enjoyable games. I think 4k is a waste of memory, let alone 8k.
- s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
  VR I think?
mncharity 8y ago
Why 8K? Perhaps VR. VR can be bandwidth intensive. VR immersive-gaming low-end headsets are 60 fps, and high-end are 90 fps. And I've been told 120 fps is a noticeable "like butter" improvement on 90 fps. So a 8K@30 might mean 4K@120. VR lenses piss away pixels. With a current 1440x1440/eye, you might get only a ~500 pixel circle of crisply clear pixels. So if you want screen-comparable resolution you're all set now... if that screen is a 1980's VGA IBM PC. With this wastage, 5K/eye might let you render virtual 1080p screens. A headset providing both wide fov and this year's "high" resolution would be about 4K/eye. And I'm thinking about modding a narrow-fov drone headset (less lens blur) with two 4K panels, because I'm tired of waiting for the game-focused VR HMD market to get around to screen-comparable resolution. "But won't 8K require an insane graphics card?" No. The old generation of VR headsets was doing brute force. Foveated rendering greatly reduces GPU load. And frankly, even without it, I've run a VR desktop (non-immersive low-fps with camera-passthrough) on a WMR HMD using a crufty old laptop's integrated graphics. GPU isn't a blocker for higher resolution HMDs.
- freeflight 8y ago
  Doubtful, afaik consoles use hardware upscalers for high-end resolutions like 4k because the hardware would struggle with natively rendering such resolutions, as even PC hardware does.
rixrax 8y ago
I’ve been on Xbox since the first Xbox. But I think I’ll switch over to PS when this one comes out! Why? Because Xbox UI has been deteriorating from bad to completely unusable. Like infuriating! I mostly use it to watch Netflix, prime and occasionally run Kodi and media player and play CoD or some other game. Would it be possible to always have these <10 titles on startup screen? Of course no, you may get a couple of most recent ones, but then you have to navigate to apps (which must be impossible to find if you don’t know where it is), select all my apps, or games and finally find what you needed. <\rant>

182 points by davidbarker 8y ago

CodeSheikh 8y ago

What is a "3D audio"?

bsagdiyev 8y ago
Disclaimer: I am an SIE employee, but this is my opinion and how I understand it from the article description. It may not be correct. It sounds like this will be similar to the way some other sound card manufacturers have created "3d audio" in that you won't need something like a 7.1 system to be able to better portray where exactly a sound is coming from. Stereo headphones will be able to give you a more immersive feeling by having audio be more directional instead of a general area (i.e. left speaker or right speaker).
- jamescostian 8y ago
  I've always wondered, which is better: a 7.1 system or stereo headphones with "3d audio"? And if 3d audio is so great, why doesn't everyone just use stereo speakers (maybe with a subwoofer)?
  - bsagdiyev 8y ago
    I can't really give an answer to that one. I haven't gamed with a 7.1 system and generally just wear headphones when I do. I'm sure some people do use stereo speakers, but headphones are almost a given for professional gaming since it shuts out environmental noise to hear quiet noises in game. Paired with 3d audio it would probably just give better situational awareness. As to how well it will work, I can't answer that.
  - jvolkman 8y ago
    Listen to some binaural audio samples with headphones. You can't get that effect with stereo speakers since they're too far away from your ears. https://youtu.be/aQH-jwE_kfo https://youtu.be/aQH-jwE_kfo
    - justinclift 8y ago
      This doesn't make sense to me. I've used 7.1 and 5.1 systems that have very good stereo imaging, and being able to place sounds clearly on one side or the other like that... didn't seem unusual.
  - Dylan16807 8y ago
    To do it properly I think it does need to be headphones, and they should track your head orientation too. Speakers are much less fussy and a lot nicer in a theater setup, but without feeding directly into your ears you need to actually surround yourself with audio sources (possibly bouncing some with a sound bar).
  - jdietrich 8y ago
    > I've always wondered, which is better: a 7.1 system or stereo headphones with "3d audio"? Stereo headphones all the way. You only have two ears; they can only ascertain direction based on a) the amplitude and phase differences between the sound reaching each ear and b) the frequency and time-domain filtering effects of your outer ear. These effects can be very accurately emulated using a physical head model or digital signal processing. Properly recorded and mixed binaural audio will provide the most convincing spatial effect, because your eardrums can't tell the difference between a binaural recording and actually being in an acoustic environment. >And if 3d audio is so great, why doesn't everyone just use stereo speakers (maybe with a subwoofer)? Your living room isn't an anechoic chamber, so you're hearing both the sound of your speakers and the reverberation of your room. You can tell that you're listening to two sound sources positioned in front of you, because that room reverberation provides substantial spatial information about your actual acoustic environment and degrades the spatial information of the recording. You can mount speakers really close to your ears, so you only hear the sound of each speaker with one ear without the colouring effect of your listening environment; we call such an arrangement "headphones".
    - justinclift 8y ago
      > Stereo headphones all the way. I've done both, and (for me) it's the opposite. You're probably right for "accuracy of sound", but when gaming having a bunch of powerful speakers making sound effects gives a better "experience". :) eg You can feel decent sized speakers with your whole body, which you're missing when using just headphones
      - jdietrich 8y ago
        >I've done both, and (for me) it's the opposite. Headphones provide a worse spatial experience than stereo speakers where the source material has been mixed for speakers; the equation becomes significantly different with flexible spatial formats like Dolby Atmos. >You can feel decent sized speakers with your whole body Using headphones with a subwoofer is a workable (albeit highly antisocial) option. You can't feel frequencies above about 150Hz, which is comfortably within the bandwidth of most headphones. You can also fit a low-frequency transducer to your chair, which will provide a similar feel to a powerful subwoofer without annoying the neighbours. https://soundshaker.com/ https://soundshaker.com/ Speakers are undoubtedly more convenient and more practical for shared listening, but headphones provide a simply unmatched price-to-performance ratio; to get the best out of a pair of speakers, you need to spend at least as much on acoustic treatment to control the resonance of your listening environment.
  - justinclift 8y ago
    I've gamed with 7.1 systems (with good speakers - JBL Pro LSR 305 studio monitors), and with decent headphones. Headphones are much better than cheapo speaker setups, but a good 7.1 (or even 5.1) system gives a better experience. I'd probably put it down to being able to feel the noise with your whole body :) with good speakers, rather than the ears-only noise from headphones.
  - falcolas 8y ago
    7.1 for positional audio. Your ears are sensitive to the direction of sound in more than just left and right. They can also determine front from back, and up/down (for sounds in front of a person). Headphones simply can't mirror that effect, and you can tell this by simply turning your head while wearing them. If the soundscape doesn't change, it's not going to be accurate in terms of position.
  - jplayer01 8y ago
    Given the choice, I'd always pick the 7.1 system. I've been forced into playing primarily headphones because of where I live, but it pales in comparison with my old 7.1 setup. There's just something about the whole room being filled with sounds and vibration that you feel with your whole body that can't be replicated by headphones. If I ever get to live in a house again, first thing I buy is a good 5.1 or 7.1 system.
    - theandrewbailey 8y ago
      I just bought a house. Before turning on my PC (or even plugging it in), I set up my 7.1 system, including mounting most speakers to the living room walls. I swear that it sounds better than it did similarly set up at the old place (and that's not "it's better because I own it" sentimental BS).
      - jplayer01 8y ago
        I believe it. There are a lot of small environmental details that make a big difference to sound quality and how sound bounces around a room. Wall/floor material, distance between the speakers or to the listener, distance from the walls, ceiling height, etc. It's the kind of thing people will spend tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars to get just right.
snvzz 8y ago
I believe they're refering to binaural recordings and synthetised 3d audio effects[1]. Specifically, it's likely about the inclusion and use of TrueAudio[2], its current encarnation (TrueAudio Next) or a successor of that. On my own experience with Sennheiser HD600 headphones, these effects can sound real to the point of tricking my mind. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binaural_recording https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binaural_recording [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_audio_effect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/3D_audio_effect [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_TrueAudio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_TrueAudio
- corysama 8y ago
  Use https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambisonics for internal processing then output as binaural stereo. 3D audio! External speakers can approximate binaural audio to a passable degree.
  - snvzz 8y ago
    Speakers can be nice, but nothing matches the control over each ear and the low distortion of good open headphones.
jayd16 8y ago
Traditionally, you have a movie with 2, 5, 7 channels of surround sound to create a 3d soundscape. Artists can manually place sound in those channels. The view perspective is set in stone when you're filming so its easy to place exactly what you want. In games, you usually have mono sound emitters placed in a 3d world and dynamically mix the sound channels but its still mono sound sources. You hear the same sound in all the speakers but only at different volumes. 3D audio most likely refers to newer audio systems that work with binaural of other multi channel sound sources that account for source and listener position and forward direction. These are getting popular because of VR. Its much easier to mix an ambient soundscape as 3D audio and drop it into a game than to place many emitters. You can also get some binaural effect now with current sound pipelines (VR games do it) but my guess is in this gen its most likely done with code in the CPU instead of hardware acceleration.

Konnstann 8y ago

A lot of the things they revealed about the Ps5 don't really "wow" me. The system better be backwards-compatible, consoles these days are pretty much more custom PCs, there shouldn't be a problem with backwards-compatibility. Switching to SSD is also a no-brainer, getting better load times as a result of using better hardware isn't that big of an accomplishment, and you could get that performance increase even with a Ps3 if you swapped out the drives iirc.

bryanlarsen 8y ago
The article confirms it will be backwards compatible. The lack of a wow factor is a good thing, IMO. When they try too hard we get weird stuff like the Cell architecture.
suby 8y ago
It's going to be backwards compatible with the PS4 according to the article.
asark 8y ago
What's the appeal of 8K? Is the support just there for some future VR plans? I already have my couch about as close to my 55" 4K TV as is reasonable, and can barely tell the difference between 1080p and 4K video. If I had an absurdly large TV (70"+) and didn't move my couch back yeah, 4K'd be a clear improvement. But 8K? Why?
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  For a game, with this amount of GPU power, there's not a tremendous benefit to an 8k screen. It's good to be future-proof, and if you are at a desk you can pretty easily get a screen where the difference is notable. And people are making 8k content, so you want to support playing that on your flashy high-end machine. But the important part would be the implications for VR. And also that if it can output 8k@60, then it can output 4k@veryhigh.
- glhaynes 8y ago
  Meanwhile, HDR makes a massive difference, but laypeople seem to be pretty familiar with the term "4K" while very few know about "HDR". A testament to the power of numbers in marketing.

Tokiin 8y ago

Great to see we're finally getting an SSD by default in consoles. The only thing I'm worried about with this is the fact that high capacity SSDs are more expensive and with a push towards more digital storefronts, I'm wondering how this will work for the users. Then again, it's also a wonderful chance to push streaming, so there is that too.

nicoburns 8y ago
SSDs have come down in price a lot recently. You can get a 1TB (SanDisk) SSD for £109 https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-SDSSDA-1T00-G26-Internal-Speed-Write/dp/B07D998212/ https://www.amazon.co.uk/SanDisk-SDSSDA-1T00-G26-Internal-Sp...
- gambiting 8y ago
  Samsung 1TB 860 QVO is just £90 on Amazon
freehunter 8y ago
I think consoles are a perfect fit for a fusion drive like in some Apple models. I have tons of games on my Xbox that I'm not going to play any time soon, but don't want to delete. They can be swapped to the hard disk, while games I play more often get loaded onto a smaller SSD.
- Dylan16807 8y ago
  You probably don't want the drives combined for that, though. You want the active game to be fully loaded onto the SSD. So at that point of needing a pretty big SSD, make the console less expensive by only having the SSD, then let the user plug in a cheap external hard drive. Five minutes to transfer a game is pretty reasonable.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
save_ferris 8y ago
not to mention vendors typically sell the hardware at a loss (or at least they used to), and make up those losses via higher margins on content and service sales. I'd be curious to know if that's still the case.

snvzz 8y ago

Wired has another article[0], with more detail, supposedly exclusive. [0] https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/ https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console/

atomi 8y ago
In regards to the hardware, don't believe the hype until you see it.
- elsonrodriguez 8y ago
  What are you talking about? The Emotion Engine literally taught me about the value of friendship and love.
- foobarbazetc 8y ago
  I mean... we kind of know what a Ryzen / Navi system will do today. I’m excited. ;)
- radicaldreamer 8y ago
  Especially when it comes to Sony...
george_perez 8y ago
Yeah, that's what The Verge is quoting from. It's in the opening sentence.
- SkyMarshal 8y ago
  OP should have posted the original source then.

arprocter 8y ago

Interesting to see how/if the cable companies respond to the resolution wars - last time I checked the only one offering 4k was DirecTV, with everyone else still at 1080 Newer stuff upscaled from 1080 generally looks fine to my increasingly middle-aged eyes, but content filmed on older cameras looks awful at 4k (Law and Order springs to mind)

fullshark 8y ago
When the tech demos in stores made the main use case how clear newspaper text looks in 4k instead of 1080p i realized we probably had reached the end of the TV resolution S-curve.
- melling 8y ago
  Guess they should have shown you the larger color space? https://nofilmschool.com/2013/07/4k-uhd-color-space-gamut-frame-rate https://nofilmschool.com/2013/07/4k-uhd-color-space-gamut-fr... Personally, I'd like a nice large wall size screen where I can "spread out my work" and read it. Throw in a Minority Report interface so I'm not stuck with a mouse and keyboard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFeCgoep1c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7SFeCgoep1c
  - teddyh 8y ago
    > Personally, I'd like a nice large wall size screen where I can "spread out my work" and read it. > Throw in a Minority Report interface so I'm not stuck with a mouse and keyboard: Remember the gorilla arm. http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/gorilla-arm.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/G/gorilla-arm.html
    - melling 8y ago
      Sure. That was almost 2 decades ago. We've given it some more thought. https://atap.google.com/soli/ https://atap.google.com/soli/
      - 8y ago

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

e1ven 8y ago

The inclusion of ray tracing hardware is interesting to me, and sounds like good news to Nvidia, who has been pushing ray tracing as part of their RTX cards. Even though this uses a custom GPU, if consoles don't support ray tracing, PC games are unlikely to be designed for it, since most games have cross platform releases. It's also interesting to me that they're supporting the existing PSVR - The new hardware will really help it have some amazing experiences, and it suggests they're decoupling their VR products from the console releases.

notTyler 8y ago
Ray tracing hardware being included kind of worries me actually. Unless they're selling it at a loss I can't see it being below 500 dollars with the prices of ray tracing capable cards being as high as they are. As far as PSVR, the herculean amount of effort required to get something in the vein of backwards compatibility going between PS3 and PS4 makes me think it was designed from the ground up to work with basically everything PS4.
- pwthornton 8y ago
  Almost all video game consoles are sold at a loss -- sometimes a huge loss in the first few years. Making money on console hardware has never been the name of the game. Every game sold for a Playstation comes with a licensing fee. It's in Sony's best interest to sell as many games as possible, which often means selling consoles at a loss. Sony and other hardware makers also sell a lot of accessories, which often have huge margins too. The online services they sell also have big margins. Selling hardware at a loss is one reason that consoles have always punched much higher graphically relative to price. If the PS5 comes out for $500, it probably cost Sony around $700 to make it, and this is with getting massive volume discounts (guaranteed CPU and GPU contracts over several years with huge volumes of orders coming in) that your PC can't get. And then because consoles only have one CPU and GPU combo to program to, you can get a lot more out of the hardware than you can with a PC. This is why when the PS5 and the new Xbox launch, it'll probably give you better fidelity than a much more expense gaming PC -- and it will only get better visual fidelity for years to come as developers learn to exploit the architecture better.

scoutt 8y ago

It seems fine and a reasonable step forward, unless "The last of us 2" is released as a PS5 exclusive only.

overcast 8y ago
I hope so. The first one was one of the greatest gaming experiences of my entire life. I don't want any tech watered down to support both consoles.
- fetus8 8y ago
  Given how incredible the first game looked on the PS3, and it's performance, I have a feeling that if TLOU2 is a multi-generation release, Naughty Dog will pull it off without having to water it down technically. We've seen game-play, and it looks insane as is already, and supposedly that was on PS4... Naughty Dog is the studio who can pull it off, on both PS4/PS5, or just PS5.

phil248 8y ago

It appears that next year Sony will be releasing a console with similar specs to the PC I purchased last year. One key difference being that while the PS5 will be backwards compatible with PS4 games, any PC is backwards compatible with virtually every PC game ever made. If there's a case to be made for purchasing a next gen console instead of a gaming PC - other than artificial reasons like exclusive titles - I'd like to hear it.

ricardobeat 8y ago
What are the parts in that PC that can do 8K with ray tracing? To start with, you’re probably looking at $399 vs $2k.
- frou_dh 8y ago
  The PS5 rendering games at 8K as a matter of course is not going to happen. We always get outlandish supercomputer hype preceding every console generation. It's a story as old as time!
  - ricardobeat 8y ago
    Neither will a PC, that's what I wanted to know about from the previous commenter.
    - Dylan16807 8y ago
      The claim was that the PC has similar specs to the actual console, not the hype ghost of a console. I believe it does, but I bet they didn't pay $500. I'm sure "8K" in practice just means "HDMI 2.1"
fetus8 8y ago
Not sure that Exclusive Titles is an artificial reason. Some of the best games I've experienced have been released/published by Sony and their first party studios. The quality, story, characters, and graphically fidelity are often unrivaled by their contemporaries. God Of War(2018), Horizon Zero Dawn, the Uncharted series, and Shadow of the Colossus (remake) are some of my favorite releases of this generation. I'll gladly plunk down $400+ for their next gen console for more games like that, I don't focus on the tech specs, but rather the experience their platform provides.

cjf4 8y ago

Interesting that while Microsoft and now Google are building platforms that are de-emphasizing local hardware, Sony recognizes this as an opportunity to differentiate by focusing on how great their box is. Their was a passing reference to a "cloud strategy", but there hasn't been as much evidence as their competitors. This will wind up making for the most interesting console generation since the 32/64 bit era, since the platform differences go beyond hardware specs and release date. M/G's platform/subscription approach seems to be more in line with where the world is going, but remains to be seen if the timing's right.

kbody 8y ago
Sony had their cloud gaming phase back on 2012 when they acquired Gaikai for $380m. Not sure what happened with them, maybe it was before its time.
- lukebitts 8y ago
  It's the technology behind Share Play, isn't it?
- maxfurman 8y ago
  Gaikai became PS Now, which streams a selection of PS3 games on demand
- gambiting 8y ago
  PlayStation Now is still a thing, you can subscribe to play lots of PS3 and PS4 games on it, they run on Sony's servers and are streamed to your local device.
  - ascagnel_ 8y ago
    Not anymore -- while they still offer that feature, it's downplayed in favor of a Netflix-style rotating library of games that are downloaded and run on local hardware.
    - 8y ago

russellbeattie 8y ago

I wonder if the 3D Audio system will include special hardware like the PSVR which changes the sound based on the angle of your head? If so, it could be pretty awesome, as that system is incredible for increasing immersion. If not, then it's really only a minor improvement except to those with acute hearing.

BLanen 8y ago

8K is such an insane waste of processing power.

ihuman 8y ago
I wish they make it run at a stable 60fps instead. You have to have a large screen or sit close to the screen in order to benefit from 4K. I can't imagine how large or close a 8K screen needs to be for any benefit at all.
- kec 8y ago
  If the hardware is even capable of 8k30 it should be able to do rock solid 4k60, let alone 1080p60
slantyyz 8y ago
It's a nice spec to make it sound future proof, but I am guessing the ability to run at max visual settings at 4K60 will be the criterion most people will judge the GPU on.
albertgoeswoof 8y ago
Why?
Narishma 8y ago
Why? Just because the console can output at 8K doesn't mean games will. The PS3 supported 1080p output but you can probably count on one hand the number of games who rendered at that resolution.

sneakernets 8y ago

Nice to see that Sony is still dedicated to hardware, knowing that streaming is a pipe dream in the USA, and will continue to be so in the coming years.

fisherwithac 8y ago

After reading the more detailed Wired article, I can assuredly place myself in the "cautiously optimistic" car of the hype train for the PS5 (I myself own a PS4 Pro that I've been happy with). There are a lot of solid boxes that Sony's ticking: backwards compatibility with the previous generation, sticking with physical game copies instead of moving towards a "games-as-a-service" cloud model, updates to hardware that justify the new console's number increment, releasing devkits early to get game devs on board with said hardware, etc. That being said, as others have mentioned, the support for 8K stupifies me. As far as I understand it, 8K displays are only just now becoming commercial, and only for the highest buyers. I'd much rather have higher, consistent framerates. Ray-tracing, I'm indifferent to. If they can make it work, great, more reflective windows and puddles for all. If not, then perhaps game devs can choose not to implement it. Shame there will be no additional information on this at E3. Makes me wonder if they're saving their winning hand for a future round of poker, so to speak. Edit: spelling

abrawill 8y ago
8K output support doesn't really cost much so I wouldn't worry about it. It doesn't matter to most of the GPU internals. Games will internally run at whatever resolution they think results in the best quality/responsiveness/fluidity/development-cost trade-off, supporting 8K doesn't change anything there.
- fisherwithac 8y ago
  Fair enough. My concerns were more rooted in performance than the cost of the console itself. But the performance gains they reported by switching to an SSD would more than likely trump anything lost by supporting higher resolutions.
  - awill 8y ago
    there's nothing 'lost' by supporting higher resolutions. It will render internally at (say) 4k, and upsample to 8k.
  - abrawill 8y ago

singhrac 8y ago

How long have consoles used almost exclusively AMD hardware? It seems like Xbox One/PS4 were the first generation this was true, is there any lock-in in this market? How many consoles are sold vs. desktops and laptops?

theandrewbailey 8y ago
Depends on how you define AMD and exclusively. This is the first generation that AMD has got both a CPU and GPU into successful mainstream consoles. The Wii, Wii U, and Xbox 360 have an ATI GPU (from before AMD bought ATI). Going back further, the Gamecube has an ArtX GPU (from before ATI bought ArtX).

theandrewbailey 8y ago

Given that the current Playstation and Xbox are based on (more or less) the same AMD platform, is it reasonable to expect that the next Xbox will too (with an identical feature set)?

wmf 8y ago
Yes, it is rumored that PS5 is Zen 2 + Navi and Xbox Scarlett is also Zen 2 + Navi. That leaves room for different RAM, different numbers of CUs, different accelerators, etc. but they're expected to be pretty similar.
- kristianp 8y ago
  And who's first to market, and is cheaper.

tus87 8y ago

> the new console isn’t just a spec-boosted upgrade of the PS4, like the PS4 Pro was. Has any of Sony's next-generation consoles just been "spec-upgraded" versions of previous ones? What a weird comment.

britch 8y ago
I read it as a clarification that they were not writing about a PS4 Pro V2, but actually, truly the PS5.
- tus87 8y ago
  > We’ve known for a while that Sony is working on its next-generation PlayStation console — call it the PlayStation 5 for lack of a better name When you say it's next generation and deserving of the title PS5....whatever.
wmf 8y ago
We're getting into nitpicking here, but what is the difference between a PS5 that is a spec-boosted upgrade of the PS4 and a PS5 that is fully backwards compatible with the PS4 yet still "next generation"? They're both AMD+AMD.
robdachshund 8y ago
That's an odd comment because it is just a new iteration of the same architecture- it's an x86 computer. A new os and other bells and whistles doesn't change that. Its just going to use a better SOC.

llbowers 8y ago

Is there any prediction on the future of stand-alone gaming consoles with 5G and streaming games(e.g., Google Stadia) coming soon? While I'm not really much of a gamer now I spent a lot of my childhood playing video games and the thought of dedicated home game consoles going the way of arcades makes me sad. I think I'll finally pick up that Switch I've been planning on...

srmatto 8y ago
There's a rumor that a new switch is due any week now for what its worth.
freeflight 8y ago
The thing is Stadia does nothing new, StreamOn comes to mind just like pretty much every major player in the industry running their own thing, even Nvidia. Granted: If anybody can make it work, it's gonna be Google, but I'm still quite skeptical. For many consumers network bandwidth and traffic volume are still very real issues, and there's not that much Google can do about that on a global scale, at least in the short time-frame. Long-term they would have to roll out Google fiber on a global scale and pretty much go into the ISP business with full commitment, which I just don't see happening because Google fiber is dead.

wazoox 8y ago

8K doesn't make sense, anywhere. I'm middle-aged, and I can't at 2 meters distinguish 4K from 1080p. Nobody in the world can see the difference between 8K and 4K. It's a shameful waste of resource and ridiculous planned obsolescence. In fact, it should probably be forbidden for wasting precious resources for no good reason.

dasloop 8y ago
No matter the screen size?
- whamlastxmas 8y ago
  How many people are going to play their PS5 in an IMAX theater?
debug-desperado 8y ago
The more pixels you throw at font rendering, the better. It also allows for cleaner upscaling from lower resolutions. However, those two uses are needed more on computer monitors, not TVs. You are right that most folks with 50-65" TVs at 2-3 meters don't benefit from anything higher than 1080p.
F-0X 8y ago
Exactly. I would prefer they directed their budget somewhere other than graphics for this reason. The switch still plays most games at only 720p I believe, but this is more than sufficient for enjoyable games. I think 4k is a waste of memory, let alone 8k.
s_y_n_t_a_x 8y ago
VR I think?

mncharity 8y ago

Why 8K? Perhaps VR. VR can be bandwidth intensive. VR immersive-gaming low-end headsets are 60 fps, and high-end are 90 fps. And I've been told 120 fps is a noticeable "like butter" improvement on 90 fps. So a 8K@30 might mean 4K@120. VR lenses piss away pixels. With a current 1440x1440/eye, you might get only a ~500 pixel circle of crisply clear pixels. So if you want screen-comparable resolution you're all set now... if that screen is a 1980's VGA IBM PC. With this wastage, 5K/eye might let you render virtual 1080p screens. A headset providing both wide fov and this year's "high" resolution would be about 4K/eye. And I'm thinking about modding a narrow-fov drone headset (less lens blur) with two 4K panels, because I'm tired of waiting for the game-focused VR HMD market to get around to screen-comparable resolution. "But won't 8K require an insane graphics card?" No. The old generation of VR headsets was doing brute force. Foveated rendering greatly reduces GPU load. And frankly, even without it, I've run a VR desktop (non-immersive low-fps with camera-passthrough) on a WMR HMD using a crufty old laptop's integrated graphics. GPU isn't a blocker for higher resolution HMDs.

freeflight 8y ago
Doubtful, afaik consoles use hardware upscalers for high-end resolutions like 4k because the hardware would struggle with natively rendering such resolutions, as even PC hardware does.

rixrax 8y ago

I’ve been on Xbox since the first Xbox. But I think I’ll switch over to PS when this one comes out! Why? Because Xbox UI has been deteriorating from bad to completely unusable. Like infuriating! I mostly use it to watch Netflix, prime and occasionally run Kodi and media player and play CoD or some other game. Would it be possible to always have these <10 titles on startup screen? Of course no, you may get a couple of most recent ones, but then you have to navigate to apps (which must be impossible to find if you don’t know where it is), select all my apps, or games and finally find what you needed. <\rant>