When the hell are Tuesday releases going to be phased out? It makes absolutely no sense to working people, and for this who go to school. Movies release on Friday. This industry is retarded. It's just as pointless as dry summer releases, when everyone is off school.
Just like with PC, if you put too powerful a GPU in, and you have a weak CPU, your GPU has to constantly wait for your CPU to finish calculations before it can draw the next object, basically, and bottlenecking the system. If you've ever looked at GPU utilization on something like Afterburner, and you are getting horrible frame rates and you see your CPU is through the roof, but you plateau at under 60% GPU utilization(a literal straight line across the graph, for instance), this is what is likely happening. And that's what the Pro faces, I would think. Your system is only as fast as it's weakest component. Even memory can be a bottleneck.
Newby PC builders fall into this all the time; going cheap on the memory, board, and/ or CPU, and going big on the GPU.
Your mainboard must match the memory controller speeds that your CPU and RAM do, or your board is the bottleneck. Your CPU and RAM should match in this way as well, even if your plan is to get there, via, overclock....but your CPU has to be able to keep up with your GPU and be ready to issue draw calls on demand. Lots of places for bottlenecks.
@datriax: I wouldn't go that far. Sure, the incentives to own a Pro right now are little, but in another year or so it's benefits should start to be realized, once much of the 2017 titles that were developed to support it starting hitting the shelves. Actually, one of those titles comes next month(Horizon - Zero Dawn)...but we're all really waiting for Mass Effect, which arrives holiday season. In any case the Pro is a very powerful system. It's thought of us being only twice as fast as the PS4, on paper, but it's actually beyond that, due, to things such as x2 16bit precision rendering which should make the hardware much faster than any current single 32bit rendering system. I know, it doesn't make sense you'd think. Normally, the higher the bits the better, but 32bit precision is too taxing and that level of accuracy is not needed. It doubles the theoretical Teraflops to be more equivalent to 8.4TF. That makes it essentially 4 times faster than the PS4.
@Fia1: Resolution is not graphics, in fact, if the game already has bad graphics, more resolution only makes that more apparent (lol), as you can see more detail and, hence, more of the flaws. The game also doesn't support 4K. It's running 1440p and scaling up to 4K, which should be better than scaling up to 4K from 1080p, but only about 20-25% better.
@ 1440p is the sweet spot and should be where the Pro focuses its efforts. At 1440p you can have all the graphics cranked up and it will provide a cleaner, less jaggy picture. Especially with filtering turned up as well.
If Mafia III just booted the resolution, it's no wonder nobody noticed. Until you do such things as add higher anisotropic filtering, more lighting effects, higher detail textures, increased draw distance, reduce pop-in(basically, image quality boosts as well as actual graphical enhancements made)...then nobody would be the wiser.
The PS4 Pro is worth more than a mere bump to 1440p. At 1440p, the Pro can run pretty much any game that's out now, with everything cranked up to what it's worth. Including Witcher 3. Otherwise, it's not unusual to see a game get cleaned up over numerous updates; when I pop into Halo 5, it looks so much cleaner than it did upon release, and nobody ever said anything about improved graphics or image quality. It's just never talked about. The reviews pretty much covered everything upon release and anything that happens beyond that is just for the fans.
It probably just looked like a result of polishing and maturing over time. Destiny is another game that looks much cleaner than it did upon release, and nobody said anything there, either. It's just the way refinement through updates work. 1440p simply just cleans up the image when implemented on its own. It's "image quality," after all, and not graphics. Anything having to do with filtering and resolution is IQ and not consider graphics enhancements. Every game under the sun has looked better in the area of IQ than, vs, it's release version. Unless, for some reason it was dumbed down for frame rates later on, which is rare.
@theKSMM: It's not that big a difference. I use both consoles. And when I game on PC, I see little difference between 1600x900 and 1920x1080. It's a little more aliased, that's it. But if the developer does a good job on the post processing and filtering, you really can't tell at all. One game I can think of off the top of my head is Metro Last Light. It looks 1080p and if you think about it in numbers, having the upscaler fill in those last couple hundred lines of pixels I no big deal.
I slung my Pro for 321(and change), on Amazon, after the deal + my rewards points LoL. That's essentially the same cost as a retail PS4(non-Pro) model lol
I felt the Pro was a good performance to price ratio. At 2 teraflops more for Scorpio? No thanks. There's talk of an 899.99 price point. Plus, the Pro is here now. We're a year out for Scorpio. Plus, i got the Pro on a cyber Monday deal for 339.00-13.00 in rewards points lol
Kopesettik's comments