The side-by-sides are definitely diminished returns compared to earlier gens where hardware bumps had very noticeable gains.
I am sure the performance is measurably better than the base PS5, but I don’t think it’s $200-plus-separate-disc-drive better.
I also found the game choices they used for some of these comparisons to be odd picks. Sure you have “Made for PS5” exclusives like the new Ratchet and Clank, Returnal, and Spider-Man 2, but they also heavily showcased:
The Last of Us Part 2
God of War: Ragnarok
Ghost of Tsushima
Horizon: Forbidden West
Control
All of those are last-gen games that received PS5 enhancements. Being on a base PS5, I already feel like I am getting the “better” experience compared to the default for those games, so why upgrade?
Well, as a PC gamer, there’s a bunch of settings you can turn on from “last Gen” games to make them look better. Just because they ran on those machines doesn’t mean you were getting the best version. If you’re playing on console you’re never getting the best version. This newer one can just turn on more settings and a higher resolution and framerate than the previous ones. I wish they’d let players decide what settings they want themselves, but sadly that’s not happening on console anytime soon I don’t think.
Chasing the “best version” is a fool’s errand, though. Unless you’re buying top-of-the-line hardware every cycle, you’ll never have the best. And even then, there are games that seem to target future hardware by having settings so high not even top-end PCs can max them out comfortably, and other games that are just so badly optimized they’ll randomly decide they hate some feature of your setup and tank the performance, too.
Everyone has their threshold for what looks good enough, and they upgrade when they reach that point. I used my last PC for 10 years before finally upgrading to a newer build, and I’m hoping to use my current one as long as well.
But just based on the displayed difference in performance between the base PS5 and the PS5 Pro, it doesn’t seem like a good investment for what benefits you get. It’s like paying Apple prices for marginally better hardware, and with overpriced wheels disc drive sold separately.
For sure, trying to max out everything is a bad idea. You can always have from FPS and higher resolution, for example. My point is just that “last Gen” doesn’t mean anything. The previous console versions couldn’t max the games out if they had graphics options. The game being older doesn’t mean it doesn’t take advantage of more advanced setting with better hardware.
I think chasing high graphics settings in general is a dumb idea. My favorite games are low fidelity indie games that do interesting things (right now Ostranauts, but also Factorio, Dwarf Fortress, and so many others). The games that max out my hardware are generally worse games. If you’re selling your game based on graphics then you aren’t selling it based on gameplay. I know console players generally seem to care about “realistic” graphics more, but it’s a fool’s errand.
Man, this is true now, but this conversation makes me very nostalgic for the good old days of the 1080Ti, where PC games were absolutely a "max out and forget" affair.
Sure, that was because monitors were capped out at 1080p60, by and large. These days people are trying to run 20 year old games at 500fps or whatever. But man, the lack of having to think about it was bliss.
What do I do with my PS5 discs if I buy the Pro one day? Are they just unusable? Will I be able to get a digital copy for free since I already paid them for the disc they stopped supporting?
It seems like there’s no sane migration path from PS5 with disc drive to the PS5 Pro.
I personally find it pretty horrendously insulting they put out a “Pro” console that can’t play the fucking game discs unless you pay them for an additional accessory.
Not a console gamer, but I’m sure they looked at the statistics and saw most players don’t buy a physical disk anyway. Why make the machine more expensive for an accessory that probably isn’t being used. On my computer I haven’t had a physical disk drive in probably 15y and haven’t ever thought that I needed one.
Well, sure, but that's also because on PC I can choose to buy DRM-free games and have guaranteed backwards compatibility for the foreseeable future. Plus it's not a closed system based on a console that launched with a drive. People (me included) already own PS5 discs, not from a previous generation, but from this one. It's bad enough that I need to keep my PS3 around to play PS3 games, it'd be absurd to not be able to play PS5 games I already own because the thing is physically unable to ingest them out of the box.
So yeah, for people in that position the Pro is a hundred bucks more expensive than it says on the sticker, which is already a ridiculously high number.
I do feel for Sony's PR teams. Trying to explain the concept of visual improvements in 4K over Youtube's increasingly vaseline-smeared compression is an impossible task.
It’s a pity SONY didn’t have any games to announce alongside the new console. There is nothing or there I feel like I need more power to play, and I already completed games they demoed, sometimes years ago.
The PS5 Pro console will be available this holiday at a manufacturer’s suggested retail price (MSRP) of $699.99 USD, £699.99 GBP, €799.99 EUR, and ¥119,980 JPY (includes tax). It will include a 2TB SSD, a DualSense wireless controller and a copy of Astro’s Playroom pre-installed in every PS5 Pro purchase. PS5 Pro is available as a disc-less console, with the option to purchase the currently available Disc Drive for PS5 separately.
The big question mark for me is that not only does it cost 800 euros, it does NOT come with a disc drive. There is no version of it with a disc drive like the PS5, you have to buy it as an accessory. I guess physical games really are going away.
Sadly not an option for console. I don’t own a PS5 currently but when I did own consoles I would trade games and buy used all the time, it’s a shame this might not be possible next generation.
I know it’s not an option for consoles. Since the 7th gen, it was always moving in this direction. It’s probably one of dozens of reasons that PC overtook consoles in market share.
We’ve been there basically since the PS4/XBONE made it clear the focus was on common architectures and software toolchains so that the majority of games could be multiplatform by default.
The issue is what it always has been. People are afraid of managing drivers and software and likely have horror stories about Windows and hate the average Linux evangelist with a passion. Whereas consoles “just work”
And price wise? A good gaming PC that will last you a generation or two tends to cost about what a console+refresh SKU does. AND you generally want to wait until a few years after the start of a console generation to buy that GPU (time blurs but I want to say RTX was the big thing when the PS5 launched and now it is upscaling). Which makes it even harder to sell because you are telling people to save up even more AND to wait.
Much like “The year of Linux gaming”, it is the kind of thing that some people claim is constantly happening and the rest of us acknowledge is unlikely to ever happen en masse.
the difference is at least you can see it in more real time numbers. Xbox is clearly a dying brand, which leaves Sonys home console sales for now (~60M) and the switch as a handheld device. Devs are already starting to port everything on PC, and 1st party game development rate has gone down a lot. 3rd party devs are also starting to abandon console exclusively/timed exclusively over time (capcom making the next monster hunter simul release on pc instead of a year and a half cadence, square enix backtracking on making final fantasy a timed exclusive due to not enough sales)
Japan is completely flipping its old image of PC being the device for porn addicts of years past and starting to heavily buy into pc too, which is why Valve went to attend Tokyo gameshow to pitch the steamdeck for japanese handheld players(which remain the majority of console purchases in japan)
Devs have been porting (or originating) everything to PC since the PS4/XBONE era. So a decade or so? And first party development is lower across the board (excluding all the stuff Microsoft was doing before they stared culling studios left and right) because first parties are expected to release CoD level games rather than cool and fun platformers (Astrobot aside). NOBODY is doing Last Of Us level games en masse.
But basically you are describing the paradigm that MS have arguably been working toward since the start of the current generation. The idea that it doesn’t actually matter what hardware you buy so long as you buy the services/games of one of the platform holders. If you REALLY love Halo? Get an XBOX. If you REALLY love The Last Of Us? Get a Playstation. With the rest being third parties. It… just so happened that Microsoft bought most of the big name third parties and are figuring out how to balance “CoD prints money” with “We want to sell xboxes”.
But that still leaves what box you buy. And, in that regard, consoles are still going to appeal to “gamers” more than a desktop ever will. Especially as more and more kids become adults who don’t even like laptops because EVERYTHING they do is on a tablet.
As for Japan: The key there is not “Steam”. it is “Deck”. Japan has ALWAYS loved handhelds. In large part because the cities don’t have a lot of space for a giant TV and an entertainment center that can fit however many cubic meters the PS5 Pro is at this point. And a bigass desktop PC is also going to be a major space issue when so many people are used to a laptop while they sit in a chair or whatever. And while I do think the Steam Deck is going to do wonders to increase PC market share in Japan, I still don’t see it significantly overtaking consoles for “gamer gaming” as it were and to instead be more slotted in the mobile space and indie games like Stardew Valley that run perfectly fine on ultrabooks.
im not saying consoles have 0 appeal and wont have buyers, its just that their market is in real time, decreasing while on pc has increased, especially post covid. with the advent of streaming, more and more people are shifting over to PC because of it. im not saying consoles are dead as in 0 sales, but the market is forever going to decrease for it, as more people get into pc, and those countries that cant afford to already got into mobile gaming (mobile gaming accounts for more than 50% of the profits of game sales)
I mean, console sales decreased in the 80s and never went back up, right?
The reality is that a lot of people haven’t migrated from the previous gen. Partially because of supply chain issues from COVID. Partially because of economic uncertainty.
Stuff goes in waves. Time will tell. But in terms of “core” gaming, consoles still continue to dominate the “casual” market. And I suspect we are more likely to see “core” gaming going away in favor of mobile than for PC to suddenly dominate at the AA/AAA level.
the problem is the covid supply chain ended a while ago and console sales havent drastically picked up since then. the PS5 has been orderable direct from sony for quite a long while now, and shortly after in stores. physical game sales (something console users champion, has gone way down (according to sony, only 30% of their users buy physical now)
Yeah. Almost no one I know buys physical anything anymore. Kinda sad to see it go. We really need to instill some better laws around ownership of digital goods.
That’s wild. I have had one or two work out around the same price. Like I bought the SMT V Steelbook or whatever cause I wanted that sick art on the case 👌
Laws aren’t going to help keep the price down which is also an issue apart from the digital ownership. It’s always cheaper to buy physical games as they go on sale. What’s stopping Sony from selling PS Exclusive for $100 only in their store?
Are we going to get restricted to only buying from Sony store or is Best Buy going to sell me a box with a digital code?
I think this shift will be the end of me buying newer games, period.
I am that person who doesn’t ever buy digital. I have not bought a single digital game thus far (I haven’t pirated a game since like 2006, either). I have certainly played some, like with the PS+ subscription I got for a year when it was pretty cheap, but I wouldn’t buy them because I can’t be sure I own them, and there’s really no way to transfer the license to resell them.
If I can’t buy physical media, I simply won’t buy the games. Maybe I’ll use subscription services now and then, but more likely I’ll either find a way to play free or won’t play them at all and find other stuff. I want the physical media because I’m poor, and having the option to sell them in a pinch is important to me if I’m going to shell out a significant amount for something I’ll probably only play once, particularly since there won’t be a used game market to reduce my spend. I haven’t had to sell my games in a very long time, so I have some 400 discs, but it’s something of a savings option that inflates alongside currency, and sometimes much more.
I was very close to getting a digital PS5, but I still need the drive for my old PS4 games and movies. If I were just getting into Sony now though, I imagine the story would be different.
No disc drive and no fucking vertical stand/mount.
And yeah. Sony actually tried to “kill” physical games years ago with the PSP Go (?). But that was still when Gamestop and Best Buy were power houses and there was a lot of threats of “okay. We will give all the good shelf space to MS and Nintendo” and that went away fast.
But now brick and mortar are basically dead and everyone is periodically pissed at Amazon because they did an unsanctioned 2 dollar discount on a new game. So we are seeing the return.
In theory it annoys me because the playstations have always been okay-good media players and I have one of the gundam breakers on a physical disc because that was the cheapest way to get all the DLC. But for higher end digital media we are missing the codecs (because money) and physical digital media as a whole is going away. So… probably the right decision to wean people off it.
That said: Charging extra for the fucking vertical stand is just insane since a lot of us had tv stands that cannot fit the PS5 horizontally. But also, considering this looke like it is a bit taller/longer, it also can’t fit it vertically so… Even more reason to build a new HTPC over the next few years.
Remap, but also Rob Zacny (so you can never tell how much is actually a bit), did a REALLY good bit where they immediately priced out the new Remarkable with all the expensive attachments and… it is still (probably) cheaper than a PS5 Pro with a disc drive and a stand.
No. Its a tablet. Marketed toward Professionals because of its focus on handwritten notes and sketches and the kind of thing where even the people who swear by it acknowledge it is insanely expensive and not something people should really buy.
Recurring theme on Remap but it very much highlights what category the ps5 pro is in. Same with comparing it to an apple vision pro.
They can still kind of kill physical games with good service. The whole “honey rather than vinegar” argument.
That’s what happened with the PSVita. While overpriced game cartridges existed, most of its lifespan people were buying its games digitally which worked great for indie developers that didn’t have a budget for physical releases.
I mean… that is what happened on PC. I know people forget we exist, but basically anyone who was “a gamer” back in the early 00s embraced digital distribution and Steam for a reason. Because after the third time that you have done four disc swaps and entered three 30 character keys to play Neverwinter Nights 1? That shit gets REAL old. Same with needing to be aware of what order to install what patches so as to not brick Dawn of War: Soulstornm and have to reinstall everything.
Contrast that with double clicking something in fricking Impulse and then waiting 30 minutes for it to install.
Which is kind of what you described with the Vita. Nobody wanted to have to carry two or three UMDs with them anywhere they want (let alone the rise of indie games that never had a digital release). Tinfoil, but I strongly suspect Nintendo made a big deal about not licking cartridges so that the Jeff Gerstmanns of the world would… lick that shit. Which led to the meme and people wanting to buy cartridges.
My memory may be hazy, but I recall the mainstream acceptance of the digital distribution model on PC as more of an early 2010’s thing. People hated Steam at launch, having yet another launcher you had to download which was basically just DRM for Half-Life 2 and Counter-Strike.
It wasn’t until their marketplace opened up and they offered very attractive sales that people came around to it eventually.
As someone who buys expensive games, games I’m excited for, or just franchises I’m invested in, the death of discs is going to really make me reevaluate my gaming. I’ll probably at least wait for a sale for every single game if I can’t have a physical copy.
Almost all of my digital purchases are cheap games.
The game is rendered at a lower resolution, this saves a lot of resources. This isn’t a linear thing, lowering the resolution reduces the performance needed by a lot more than you would think. Not just in processing power but also bandwidth and memory requirements. Then dedicated AI cores or even special AI scaler chips get used to upscale the image back to the requested resolution. This is a fixed cost and can be done with little power since the components are designed to do this task.
My TV for example has an AI scaler chip which is pretty nice (especially after tuning) for showing old content on a large high res screen. For games applying AI up scaling to old textures also does wonders.
Now even though this gets the AI label slapped on, this is nothing like the LMMs such as chat GPT. These are expert systems trained and designed to do exactly one thing. This is the good kind of AI that’s actually useful instead of the BS AI like LLMs. Now these systems have their limitations, but for games the trade off between details and framerate can be worth it. Especially if our bad eyes and mediocre screens wouldn’t really show the difference anyways.
The game is rendered at a lower resolution, this saves a lot of resources.
Then dedicated AI cores or even special AI scaler chips get used to upscale the image back to the requested resolution.
I get that much. Or at least, I get that’s the intention.
This is a fixed cost and can be done with little power since the components are designed to do this task.
This us the part I struggle to believe/understand. I’m roughly aware of how resource intensive upscaling is on locally hosted models. The necessary tech/resources to do that to 4k+ in real time (120+ fps) seems at least equivalent, if not more expensive, to just rendering it that way in the first place. Are these “scaler chips” really that much more advanced/efficient?
Further questions aside, I appreciate the explanation. Thanks!
Rendering a 3D scene is much more intensive and complicated than a simple scaler. The scaler isn’t advanced at all, it’s actually very simple. And it can’t be compared with running a large model locally. These are expert systems, not large models. They are very good at one thing and can do only that thing.
Like I said the cost is fixed, so if the scaler can handle 1080p at 120fps to upscale to 2K, then it can always handle that. It doesn’t matter how complex or simple the image is, it will always use the same amount of power. It reads the image, does the calculation and outputs the resulting image.
Rendering a 3D scene is much much more complex and power intensive. The amount of power highly depends on the complexity of the scene and there is a lot more involved. It needs the gpu, cpu, memory and even sometimes storage, plus all the bandwidth and latency in between.
Upscaling isn’t like that, it’s a lot more simple. So if the hardware is there, like the AI cores on a gpu or the dedicated upscaler chip, it will always work. And since that hardware will normally not be heavily used, the rest of the components are still available for the game. A dedicated scaler is the most efficient, but the cores on the gpu aren’t bad either. That’s why something like DLSS doesn’t just work on any hardware, it needs specialized components. And different generations and parts have different limitations.
Say your system can render a game at 1080p at a good solid 120fps. But you have a 2K monitor, so you want the game to run at 2K. This requires a lot more from the system, so the computer struggles to run the game at 60 fps and has annoying dips in demanding parts. With upscaling you run the game at 1080p at 120fps and the upscaler takes that image stream and converts it into 2K at a smooth 120fps. Now the scaler may not get all the details right, like running native 2K and it may make some small mistakes. But our eyes are pretty bad and if we’re playing games our brains aren’t looking for those details, but are instead focused on gameplay. So the output is probably pretty good and unless you were to compare it with 2K native side by side, probably you won’t even notice the difference. So it’s a way of having that excellent performance, without shelling out a 1000 bucks for better hardware.
There are limitations of course. Not all games conform to what the scaler is good at. It usually does well with realistic scenes, but can struggle with more abstract stuff. It can get annoying halos and weird artifacts. There are also limitations to what bandwidth it can push, so for example not all gpus can do 4K at a high framerate. If the game uses the AI cores as well for other stuff, that can become an issue. If the difference in resolution is too much, that becomes very noticeable and unplayable. Often there’s also the option to use previous frames to generate intermediate frames, to boost the framerate with little cost. In my experience this doesn’t work well and just makes the game feel like it’s ghosting and smearing.
But when used properly, it can give a nice boost basically for free. I have even seen it used where the game could be run at a lower quality at the native resolution and high framerate, but looked better at a lower resolution with a higher quality setting and then upscaled. The extra effects outweighed the small loss of fidelity.
It started as good tech to make GPUs last longer, but now is a crutch that even top notch hardware like a 4090 needs to actually achieve playable performance with ray tracing at high resolutions. And that hardware is already way overpriced, imagine the price of something that could do it natively.
The price increase is insane. That does not seem to scale in comparison with what you’ll get in return over a regular PS5, especially if you’re gonna be forced to buy the digital editions from the PS store, which are outside of the sales often the most expensively priced versions too, I’ve practically only bought second-hand discs for my PS5 because of that.
So either games will start running at higher framerates on real 4K, like 60FPS and up. Or developers will get lazy and stop bothering to optimise for the older generation of PS5, which will then be an excuse to upgrade to the more expensive edition to play at 4K and/or 60FPS.
I really hope the latter won’t be a thing for the sake of both players and game development, there’s been enough unoptimised shit lately and I hope we can move forward again.
Yeah I’m afraid that stuff like GTA6 might run like absolute dogshit on the old PS5, because they will see the opportunity to make use of the better hardware to sell the 4K and 60FPS. No doubt even Sony will try to push this, trying to sell more of these Pros.
I do hope we will move forward, but I think money and greed will play too much of a role in this. We don’t even really need a PS5 Pro right now, looking at the current line-up of games that run fine on the old PS5, even in 4K and 60FPS, as long as developers spend the time to optimise their games instead of throwing everything on to raytracing (which I find is still in a very experimental phase).
I don’t know if It turns out that I was stupid for not buying the original PS5 or holding out for a Pro one even from back then.
I was looking forward to this a lot because I could get the better version from day 1 and have a lot of games to play from taking and borrowing my brother’s disc games.
I guess I’ll get the XBSX for GTA VI when it comes.
Not like holding out matters now, they just raised the price in Japan for the 3rd time, second wind said the controller got 5 dollars more expensive, you can only save with used nowadays.
Not really on topic, but AI upscaling is no joke. It’s actually very useful and saves alot processing power. Same with the extra fps, making a 30fps into a 60fps with ease.
FSR doesn’t use AI hardware. The original comment is overselling it a bit, but something AI-driven like DLSS does offer substantial (if slightly blurry) framerate gains.
No game should be running down at 60fps these days, especially with any sort of upscaling. Native performance should be the only measured metric, no need for shortcuts when hardware is as good as it is.
soooo…all 13 games they showed in the release trailer. Coincidentally, also about 90% of all “next gen” exclusive titles. I guess it’s not surprising that games compatible with the PS4 are not getting PS5 Pro upgrades, but it also kind of highlights how Sony has barely taken advantage of the base PS5 as-is.
theverge.com
Aktywne