Sony didn't "lie", but they sure did mislead about PS5 Pro and FPS

So... it's now coming out, less than 48 hours after the announcement, that some games, including games like GTAVI, will still be 30fps on the PS5 Pro.

What exactly are you getting for that $800? You are getting a wee bit better lighting and "some" games "may run" at 60FPS.

Miking confirmed. Poor, poor cows.

I am confused by your claim. Did Sony say all games would be 60FPS on the PS5 Pro? If true, when?

I wouldn't say they lied either.

I think they know their fans, and they worded things in a way that they would take it and run.

PS5 Pro will not run any game at 60fps that the PS5 cant already do unless its a GPU limited situation.........which is rare this gen.

The issue is Sony has a really good PR department and they keep tight control over messaging, almost to a propaganda level.........but it works.

Looking at the specs, it is NEVER going to hit that approximately 33TF number because it wont be fed enough by the 3600 cpu. This is why it needed PSSR, despite having 67% more CUs and 45% more rendering capability.

But fans wont look at that, and make excuses for the shortcomings, and Sony knows this.

I wouldn't rule out saying Sony lied about what was told but the whole presentation just wasn't compelling to say the least. I think people like Destin pointed out some of the mistakes regarding PS5 Pro and what it can do:

As a PC gamer, I know what I’m supposed to be looking for, but even then I still can’t see it. PS5 Pro is the very definition of "diminishing returns" on a console. And the differences are so small, that it doesn’t warrant the insane asking price Sony is asking for.

It's a 45% uplift in GPU performance and PSSR just replaces FSR for better image quality. It is not providing an additional boost over FSR. Games that are bottle-necked by the CPU on PS5, will continue to be bottle-necked by the CPU on PS5 Pro. Not sure what people are expecting. It is pretty basic shit. I am more intrigued by the architecture upgrades for the RT cores. Could see a nice boost in performance and fidelity in RT scenarios, but RT can also be bottle-necked by the lack of CPU upgrade.

PS5 Pro provides needed GPU upgrades, but it is not that compelling of a package at $700 since you are being forced to buy the whole system again. You are better off spending around $600 on an RTX 4070 Super for PC if you have a decent PC already. It is going to give you better performance and quality and save you $100.

Aren't most games these days GPU bound?

The Pro certainly won't miraculously make CPU bound games 60fps but, GPU tasks would still benefit quite a bit at face value. And, yeah, PSSR further helps the situation. That's not a shortcoming; it's a very deliberate decision much like FSR2 and DLSS are available on other hardware. "Oh no, they have to use this thing that they included in the hardware". Like, cmon.

That being said, I do think we need to see the performance numbers to get a better idea. I'm especially interested to see more UE5 games because those have been rough this gen.

that was the consensus across the internet before the announcement, most people were saying that the PS5 Pro is better than a 4090.

I don't think it will be an issue.. 98 percent of games will likely have a 60fps option and the ones that don't will likely have one in a patch shortly after launch. With PSSR and 45 percent power increase it won't likely be as hard to target as one would imagine. Chances are that at or near launch it may be a little bumpy at first, but they'll probably get everything ironed out pretty quickly. The PS5 already has an option to play the vast majority of games at 60fps.

Does anyone have a list of games that can't hit 60 on the PS5 already? There really aren't many already...

People act shocked that a $700 console won't hit top performance levels of $2 or 3k PCs... of course it won't, but it will be better than all other console options, and since that's where I prefer to play games the most... well, it works out well for me.

What you said is true on PC, but not consoles for the last 2 generations.

Reason? The CPU.

Look at all of the DF tech reviews on games and comparisons to PC. They use the Ryzen 3600, which is what the consoles use (the consoles are power limited also). The 3600 just isn't capable of properly feeding a 7700xt. I'm not bashing the Pro itself, more Sony's decision not to improve the CPU to better pair with the 67% increase in CUs. CPU feeds instructions to the GPU, so the IPC and capability of the CPU matters..........even more so in a closed console.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter what GPU is in a PC or console. If the CPU cant feed it, or keep it running at 100%, then it is wasted performance. That is what we call a CPU bottleneck in the PC world, and will exist with the Pro. If they did not add PSSR, then the console wouldn't be able to produce the gains that it does on older titles...........which, again, goes back to the CPU.

The better balance here would be to pair it with even a 5600 (ideally a 7600) and it would be a much more efficient console, and likely wouldn't need the PSSR for anything other than a bonus. Even the Raytracing is going to be limited by the CPU. What we'll see what the pro is games that run at 60fps on PS5, run at 60fps on Pro at higher resolution. There will be very, very few games that will run at 60fps on Pro and 30 on PS5.

Lastly, UE5 will the situation worse for consoles as it is CPU heavy since it hasn't been updated to add proper multithreading, putting that work on developers. Epic as said it is coming, but we likely wont see that for a couple of years, at least in actual games.

@BassMan said:

@dabear said:

@Pedro said:

I am confused by your claim. Did Sony say all games would be 60FPS on the PS5 Pro? If true, when?

that was the consensus across the internet before the announcement, most people were saying that the PS5 Pro is better than a 4090.

I'm not saying it's not funny, just that people were in fact, saying that.

It's Sony.....they lie

Unreal Engine 5.4 has already released with the CPU parallelization update. So, it is no longer a major issue for Unreal Engine.

In regards to PSSR, it is just an alternative to FSR for better image quality and less artifacts. So, it will have the same impact on the CPU as FSR. It allows the GPU to render at a lower base resolution to generate higher frame rate, which then puts more of a burden on the CPU.

But Sony never said that. And where did they mislead with the PS5 Pro?

So... Sony lied because people passed rumors?

Am I reading this correctly?

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

As I posted in the topic, it was a belief across the internet that was prevalent enough for people like Tom Warren to correct via X and several online articles to reset expectations. That's why I said "they didn't lie".

However, you can't tell me that the presentation was done in a vacuum at Sony and they didn't know there was a 60fps expectation.

Unreal 5.4 does increase multicore performance, but the additional features such as MetaHuman and Nanite still favor once core. Without those, sure, it runs A LOT better, but those still need to be optimized.

PSSR is slightly different than FSR in that it uses the machine learning hardware that Sony added (just a step below DLSS). FSR 3 doesn't use machine learning, which is why it is so universal. FSR3 stull uses CPU, but not nearly to the extend that ML or AI cores will.

Sony is using machine learning hardware..............which will use more CPU cycles as you stated.............on hardware that is limited by the CPU.

This also why we see current consoles struggle with FSR3 and Frame Gen, it requires more CPU resources that they simply don't have. Look at Black Myth on PS5, The First Descendant on consoles. It cant keep the game at a steady 60fps, not because the GPU isnt capable of generating fake frames, but the CPU cant keep up.

$700 hardware isn’t going to run the latest games with high graphical settings at 60fps. Folks thinking they can do that for $700 are lying to themselves

@BassMan said:

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

Great chart! Thanks for that.

sounds like it.

@dabear said:

@BassMan said:

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

Great chart! Thanks for that.

PS5 Pro is closer to a 7700XT in rasterization, as stated by Digital Foundry, it jus has better ray tracing.

7700Xt is well below a 4070Ti

But did Sony make that claim?

@navyguy21 said:

@dabear said:

@BassMan said:

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

Great chart! Thanks for that.

PS5 Pro is closer to a 7700XT in rasterization, as stated by Digital Foundry, it jus has better ray tracing.

7700Xt is well below a 4070Ti

The chart is just comparing the RX 6700 (PS5 closest equivalent) to RTX 4090. The 4070 Ti and Super are only a different colour because I clicked them before. I was not trying to use them in any comparison.

Without combing through Sony's docs, I don't know if they ever actually said "all games will be 60fps". However, sources like The Virge "should deliver 4K resolution and maintain 60 fps or greater" - Sony did not correct them.

Again, that's why I said "they didn't lie". But, they also did not set the record straight.

The Verge misunderstanding does not equate to Sony misleading. I saw the presentation and they were very particular with their claims thus the underwhelming response.

@dabear said:

@Pedro said:

@dabear said:

Without combing through Sony's docs, I don't know if they ever actually said "all games will be 60fps". However, sources like The Virge "should deliver 4K resolution and maintain 60 fps or greater" - Sony did not correct them.

Again, that's why I said "they didn't lie". But, they also did not set the record straight.

The Verge misunderstanding does not equate to Sony misleading. I saw the presentation and they were very particular with their claims thus the underwhelming response.

I'm actually going to have to agree with Pedro on this one.

The presentation basically just made the case that you'll get the graphics quality and resolution of a fidelity mode with the frame rate of a performance mode. That doesn't mean 4K 60fps or greater across the board.

Ex. The target for Warhammer 40K Space Marine 2 would be 1080p-1440p at 60fps (upscaled to 4K w/ PSSR).

@dabear said:

@Pedro said:

The Verge misunderstanding does not equate to Sony misleading. I saw the presentation and they were very particular with their claims thus the underwhelming response.

No! We can just fallback on reasonable understanding based on what was presented.

It was rumored to be around Radeon 7700, not 4090 and it ended around 4070.

@navyguy21 said:

@dabear said:

@BassMan said:

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

Great chart! Thanks for that.

PS5 Pro is closer to a 7700XT in rasterization, as stated by Digital Foundry, it jus has better ray tracing.

7700Xt is well below a 4070Ti

So, PS5 Pro is around 4070, yes

So the PS5 Pro is looking like a $800 PC that costs $700. My thing is, if you have the funds, why stop there? Spend like $1200 and blow both of those devices away. Then $1500-$2000 doubles that power, and so on and so on.

With AMD seemingly backing off on PC GPUs, and Nvidia focused on AI, we may not see next gen console tech for the normal $500 MSRP until well beyond 2028.

Ps5 pro-tatoe

Oh look, a Lem is distressed about the PS5 Pro 🤣

They all claimed in my prior thread that they weren't worried about the PS5 Pro, yet here they are all huddled together fear mongering and crying because they are so concerned. 🤣

We all know xbox fandom are liars and hypocrites and some PC guys (probably former xbox cheerleaders anyway) are tagging along.

On topic............................................................................................................................................

A quick click into the link about this NEWS suggested for the PS5 Pro reveals it just....DIGITAL FOUNDRY and...#assumptions!

When did Digital Foundry have access to PS5 Pro dev kits or hardware?

They saw GTA6 running on PS5 Pro or were given inside info from Rockstar devs?

When did Sony give them the full break down for PS5 Pro capability running any games?

Oh wait...none of that ever happened!

So, you have no real "news" about PS5 Pro, just SPECULATION from a group of PC focused performance analysis who were originally WRONG about their #assumption for performance regarding the OG PS5 and continually "SURPRISED" about the performance of the PS5 throughout the entire generation?

Fantastic source there xbox dude.

@navyguy21 said:

@dabear said:

@BassMan said:

@dabear: The funniest thing is... The 4090 still has over twice the performance of the PS5 Pro. It is 318% performance over the PS5 and not 45% like the PS5 Pro. So, it basically teabags the fuk out of it and then shits all over it. LOL

Great chart! Thanks for that.

PS5 Pro is closer to a 7700XT in rasterization, as stated by Digital Foundry, it jus has better ray tracing.

7700Xt is well below a 4070Ti

You're the most desperate and triggered xbox fanboy I've seen so far over this PS5 Pro news.

Seems you're on a holy crusade to spread the greatest amount of lies and misinformation as you can.

You're a xbox/PC dude, so PS5 Pro's existence shouldn't bother you. You're on the other side and don't have to buy it. I never made any fear mongering or downplaying comments about the Xbox One X before or during it's promotion as a superior option of the xbox side because I knew wasn't their customer base.

But it seems you're going to great lengths to downplay PS5 Pro with nonsense arguments just to feel to make yourself feel better that it's going to be a far superior gaming option to what MS has to offer. You're a sad sad fanboy.

@above_average: When the Xbox One X launched, all the 720p games went to 1080p games,

The Xbox One launched at $499, the Xbox One X launched at $500.

The performance difference between the XSX and PS5 Pro has yet to be seen, since the PS5 Pro’s performance increase seems to be quite overrated.

Everything you said in your post was reasonable until ^ the bold part which makes everything you said before rather worthless.

Try again with an actual legitimate talking point.

Suggesting something is "overrated" before you've even seen the results of that thing in practice shows your bias and or a disingenuous agenda to not have a real conversation.

@above_average: I know that the internet was a buzz with claims the Pro was going to make all games 60fps, and a lot of Sony Ponies were saying it was equivalent to a 4090.

All BS.

Literally NO ONE said PS5 Pro was equivalent to a 4090 LMFAO. Why would you even attempt to push such a obvious lie?

see...I was right about what I said in my previous post

smh

Destin, LOL

Difference aren't small, it is big actually

https://www.neogaf.com/threads/igns-new-high-bitrate-4k-60fps-footage-finally-offers-a-proper-taste-of-ps5-pros-potential.1674879/

Regarding TLOU 2 comparison

Performance mode on PS5 has lower IQ compared to fidelity mode at native 4k/30. Here you can see PSSR at work. Performance mode on PS5Pro has vastly sharper IQ at 60 vs. fidelity mode at native 4/30fps on PS5. Yeah, it's a big upgrade

Cows struggling with the bad reception the pro-tatoe got......suck it up buttercups

😂🤣

DaVillian has joined the cult crusade to slander PS5 Pro with every grifter take he can source.

Digital Found is great for ANALYSIS of content POST production. Digital Foundry, however, are NOT hardware tech experts, in the YouTube space that would be advanced engineer Michael Thompson I.E. NXG.

Even NXG choose NOT to speculate on the actual performance of PS5 Pro with specific games because any credible hardware specialist would know closed box systems with dedicated features tailored to only that box may have wildly different results compared to standard off the shelf PC parts.

More's Law is Dead leak reveal how off the mark Xbox fanboy and know nothing PC grifters, who understand nothing about creation of closed box console hardware, are on this matter.

@loudheadphones: @above_average: LOL both of you are trying way too hard. That said, I already said what I think about the Pro, so no point in me beating the horse out of it and anyone else is really hyped for it, well I hope you enjoy it when it launces😊

I will enjoy it.

More than that, I'll enjoy the mental gymnastics when from PC guys when DF makes comparisons between 5 Pro and the next nearest comparable PC hardware and then the best PC hardware (4090?) next to it which we all know DF loved to do vs base PS5.

You'll soon realize how far off your arguments were.

It's ok to prefer PC. It's ok to say you can get better on PC. It's not ok to spread misinformation about a product because you personally don't favor it.

Also, I don't accept any PC gamer criticism about lack of disk drive or any bitching over the price of PS5 Pro when the PC gamer's unanimous response for THEM upgrading and paying the increasingly excessive prices of PC hardware is ,"you gotta pay for performance". That's when I call foul and point you out for being disingenuous hypocrites.

@davillain: BTW: What is your current PC setup and components?

You will get whatever performance the console maker and developer think is good for you. Which will be crap, since console gamers prefer "better graphics" over 60 fps.

@loudheadphones said:

lol, so FF7R's image quality was "too awful" to enjoy on PS5, so we now need the PS5 Pro?

What a freaking idiot. Why did you post that?

The dynamics between a Ryzen 3600 and a 7700XT would not be the exact same as the console. Heck, you could use the exact same PS5 equivalent PC build and the PC version functions better when you start implementing something like FSR or DLSS. How does that situation turn out that way if it's hamstrung by the CPU?

Re: Ray tracing ... I'm pretty sure things don't get massively *more* CPU intensive unless you're using it for situations or purposes that require a large BVH structure. I can see most use cases with the Pro simply being able to use the existing quality of what we're seeing on PS5 at a lower frame cost which means *more* ray tracing modes etc.

Ex. They are implementing ray tracing into GT7 while racing. If it's anything like Forza MotorSport, it's a "CPU bound" game and yet here we are. Again, how is that possible when these things seemingly need more CPU performance? The Pro (I think) can boost it's CPU clocks by 10%. I guess that's enough?

It's a bit impossible to know how every game will be affected but, I do think the decisions around the Pro are heavily skewed towards GPU bound games and that sorta makes sense considering games that run well in performance *and* fidelity mode likely have no problem CPU wise and the goal is apparently to merge both back together. That definitely sucks for CPU bound games but, there are still benefits of having a beefier GPU and PSSR. Maybe they lower the internal resolution but improve image quality? We'll have to wait and see.