PS4K "Neo" Specs Revealed

Darren

Moderator
Staff member

Highlights:

CPU
AMD Jaguar 1.6GHz 8 Core - PS4
AMD Jaguar 2.1GHz 8 Core - PS4k

RAM
24% increase in bandwidth
512MB more is now usable...?

GPU
14% boost in clock speed
18 compute units to 36 compute units in PS4K
2.3X increase in Teraflops
Potentially an AMD GPU Polaris 10 or Tonga R9 380 architecture, not quite clear

Should be interesting to see where this goes.
 

beers

Moderator
Staff member
Feels kind of shafty that there's already console revisions.

2.3x increase in teraflops between 18->36 CU and a 14% clock speed bump is almost exactingly linear to remain on the current technologies/architecture.
 
Last edited:

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
Feels kind of shafty that there's already console revisions.

Well, when you launch a game console that's supposed to last 4-5 years with the GPU power of a 7850... that tends to happen. They pretty quickly hit the limit as far as hardware is concerned with this most recent generation. That combined with the rise of 4K displays and VR tech, stuffs being pushed along quickly and they're getting left behind.

So the PS4 has been out like 2.5 years and they are releasing a 'new/better' version now?

Ouch...

I think there's a new Xbox One coming out too. The PS4 was faster than the Xbone to begin with too.
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
Wow! thats brutal..but really, investing in a machine that you can't upgrade is kinda buyer beware I suppose.
I may be wrong, but IIRC the PS3 and Xbox 360 were pretty high end hardware at the time considering. A triple core running at 3.2GHz was in the 360, and in 2006 that's nothing to shake a fist at. I think I even remember hearing they sold them at a loss initially because the hardware was so expensive to produce at first. They went on to be one of the best and longest lasting consoles. Hell GTA V runs on a 360, which is a pure feat given the massive scope of the game and it's running on a hardware for 7 years prior and a measly half gig of RAM.

I remember when the specs for the PS4/XBone were unveiled and I was just like "really?" I had a 7850 at the time, arguably the same as the PS4 and was already thinking about upgrading. Dropping a mid range card into a console that's supposed to last several years isn't exactly a recipe for success. That and the clock speed on the Jaguar chip is only 1.6GHz and an AMD processor no less?! I mean, we all know their core efficiency isn't that great. Hopefully this new iteration lasts longer and doesn't gimp those that bought the PS4 hoping it to last for many years.

Hopefully this gives AMD some operating income to beef up their product line since they're making all the hardware again. :D
 

spirit

Moderator
Staff member
The 360's GPU was based on the Radeon X1900 series I believe and the PS3's on the GeForce 7900 series, both of which were high-end DX9 cards available at the time. So yeah the mid-range 7850 or 7870 that's used in the PS4 is a little disappointing. No wonder it's time for an upgrade. Maybe if they'd used a 7970-like GPU it would have lasted longer. I mean, AMD are still selling the 7970 today as the 380X (and they sold it as the 280X for the previous generation).
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
The 360's GPU was based on the Radeon X1900 series I believe and the PS3's on the GeForce 7900 series, both of which were high-end DX9 cards available at the time. So yeah the mid-range 7850 or 7870 that's used in the PS4 is a little disappointing. No wonder it's time for an upgrade. Maybe if they'd used a 7970-like GPU it would have lasted longer. I mean, AMD are still selling the 7970 today as the 380X (and they sold it as the 280X for the previous generation).

380X, while similar in performance and design, is not the 7970/280X.

The 280X was a straight rebadge and slight clock bump, the 380X is based of the Tonga architecture (like the 285 and 380) and is a little bit different.

But your point still stands, the 7970 performance bracket is still right in the sweet spot for 1080p gaming today. The 7870/270X in the PS4 is getting to be a bit on the dated side, although I'd say the CPU holds it back more. When I temporarily was running a 7870 I still ran GTA V on high settings at 1440p and usually 40-60FPS. That's nowhere close to what the PS4 can do.
 

spirit

Moderator
Staff member
Whether the 380X is a 7970 or not, it performs pretty much identically to one. So if they had used a 7970 in the PSF4 instead of a 7850 or a 7870 then maybe it would have lasted a bit longer since the 7970 and the 380X still performs well at 1080p.
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
Whether the 380X is a 7970 or not, it performs pretty much identically to one. So if they had used a 7970 in the PSF4 instead of a 7850 or a 7870 then maybe it would have lasted a bit longer since the 7970 and the 380X still performs well at 1080p.

But your point still stands, the 7970 performance bracket is still right in the sweet spot for 1080p gaming today. The 7870/270X in the PS4 is getting to be a bit on the dated side, although I'd say the CPU holds it back more. When I temporarily was running a 7870 I still ran GTA V on high settings at 1440p and usually 40-60FPS. That's nowhere close to what the PS4 can do.

I wasn't disagreeing with your point at all and you're absolutely right. The performance offered by a high end card in 2012 is still plenty for 1080p gaming at highish settings on PC. Had the PS4/Xbone come with a high end card they'd still do fine (maybe with a CPU to match). Since the PS4 is on a mid range GPU from 2012 they're already suffering. Final Fantasy I know runs below 30 FPS semi consistently and most games target 30 FPS.

I was just nitpicking your AMD architecture differences. :D Don't worry, they make zero sense anyway and with the amount of rebrands and minor tweaks they do these days they're impossible to keep straight.
 

spirit

Moderator
Staff member
I noticed Just Cause 3 was lagging pretty hard on the Xbox One. They should've really used stronger CPUs and GPUs from the get-go with these consoles like they did with the previous generation.
 

Shane

Super Moderator
Staff member
If its even possible,Do you guys think it would have been a better route to sell an "Add" on box or something that you can connect to the current PS4 to give it 4K abilities,Rather that doing a revision and those that have a 4K TV will have to fork out for the new console..sure they can sell their existing PS4 to fund the new one but now the current PS4 wont be worth as much. :/

Im more than happy with my PS4,Uncharted 3 remastered looks amazing on it and i only have a standard 32" LCD 100Hz TV..and i have no plans to move to 4K TV yet.
 

beers

Moderator
Staff member
If its even possible,Do you guys think it would have been a better route to sell an "Add" on box or something that you can connect to the current PS4 to give it 4K abilities
If they included a PCIE slot you could crossfire something with the iGPU. From a form factor perspective it isn't entirely viable.

Currently it's pretty anemic from all perspectives, although the PS4 a lot less so than the XB1. It becomes complex to upgrade when you need additional performance on both the CPU and GPU portions.

I was hoping they'd spring for a Zen type of setup and use Polaris technology, but that doesn't seem to be the case. We'll probably see another PS4 release in ~2 years after the PS4K Neo thing as the hardware coming out this year should be significantly faster than what exists currently.
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
I was hoping they'd spring for a Zen type of setup and use Polaris technology, but that doesn't seem to be the case. We'll probably see another PS4 release in ~2 years after the PS4K Neo thing as the hardware coming out this year should be significantly faster than what exists currently.

Problem with doing something like that is that Sony doesn't want to make the performance gulf between the PS4 and PS4K overly significant or they might as well just start a whole new console generation. The fact that it's supposed to be a "better" version of the PS4 rather than the replacement only serves to hold it back.

Maybe it's just because I've gotten way more into PC's than I was a few years back but consoles just seem like an all around weak choice for people wanting to do gaming. Computers are vastly superior in hardware, obviously, but they're becoming more and more accessible in usability and price also. Buying consoles just seems like a bad idea these days, especially if it's going to be viable for 3-4 years max.
 

Geoff

VIP Member
I remember reading that Microsoft and Sony were looking to incrementally upgrade their consoles, instead of waiting a decade to release a completely new one. It does make sense, I mean if someone wants to buy a PS4 now why should they spend hundreds on outdated hardware? Then on the other hand, not needing to look at game requirements was one of the biggest selling points of consoles over PC.
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
I remember reading that Microsoft and Sony were looking to incrementally upgrade their consoles, instead of waiting a decade to release a completely new one. It does make sense, I mean if someone wants to buy a PS4 now why should they spend hundreds on outdated hardware? Then on the other hand, not needing to look at game requirements was one of the biggest selling points of consoles over PC.

Yeah I'd gotten that vibe also. The appeal of no game requirements is definitely a factor for consoles I'd think but if they're going to do the incremental approach they need to allow exclusives. As in games that are only available on the PS4K due to hardware needs. From a developer point of view it's frustrating to have to sacrifice visual quality to run older hardware (PS4) while also making the more powerful version (PS4K) look identical to maintain "fairness". You hurt both by tying them together because you'll have games running poorly at or below 30 FPS while you'll be holding back the capabilities of the PS4K.
 

beers

Moderator
Staff member
Sony doesn't want to make the performance gulf between the PS4 and PS4K overly significant or they might as well just start a whole new console generation.

Eh, from a consumer perspective there's little difference between having to pay $400 for upgraded console X, or having to pay $400 for 'next-generation' console y.

I think the cost breakdown has shifted from the old 'take a loss on the console and recoup in games' to 'take a profit on both', so it seems like there's a new incentive to just sell more consoles than there used to be, hence using cheap hardware and having a shorter lifecycle.
 

Darren

Moderator
Staff member
Eh, from a consumer perspective there's little difference between having to pay $400 for upgraded console X, or having to pay $400 for 'next-generation' console y.

True. I was more thinking in terms of keeping your PS4 customers in good faith, particularly if they just bought it and/or can't afford the PS4K. I'd be pretty ticked off if I bought a PS4 semi-recently and then had Sony be all like "Oh yeah we haven't really talked about this much but we're going to be releasing a new console within the year. Yours is now useless." Since they've stated that the PS4 will play all games the PS4K can, they're kind of covering themselves on that front but also holding the PS4K back.

To me all of this is irrelevant really, just interesting to see how they progress. My main interest with consoles is just seeing the hardware they end up using as it usually has an impact on graphics quality on all platforms.
 
Top