DF built a PS Neo = not even close to 2x PS4's performance

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-we-built-a-pc-with-playstation-neo-gpu-tech?utm_source=eurogamer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=net-daily

comparing ps4 neo target to neo target below its an average framerate increase of 67%, this means that if not bottlenecked by a tablet CPU (as they used an i7) the same games, settings and resolutions the PS4 can run at 30fps the neo will run on average 50fps

..."It's not as crazy as it sounds. The leaked graphics specifications for PlayStation Neo are a match for the latest AMD graphics core, codenamed Polaris, released to the public recently in desktop GPU form as the Radeon RX 480. We're looking at 36 compute units based on 'improved' AMD Graphics Core Next (GCN) architecture - just like the RX 480. The difference comes in terms of clock-speed. The RX 480 runs at a maximum 1266MHz while Neo's GPU runs at 911MHz - a necessity for a small, closed box system."...

..."While there's not a direct equivalent to PlayStation 4's GPU in the Radeon line-up, the Pitcairn GPU found in the Radeon HD 7850, R7 265 and R7 360 is close enough. PS4 has two extra compute units, but they run at 800MHz. We have a Sapphire R7 265 in hand, running at 925MHz - down-clock that to 900MHz and we have a lock with PS4's 1.84 teraflops of compute power."...

..."In our Face-Offs, we like to get as close a lock as we can between PC quality presets and their console equivalents in order to find the quality sweet spots chosen by the developers. Initially using Star Wars Battlefront, The Witcher 3 and Street Fighter 5 as comparison points with as close to locked settings as we could muster, we were happy with the performance of our 'target PS4' system. The Witcher 3 sustains 1080p30, Battlefront hits 900p60, SF5 runs at 1080p60 with just a hint of slowdown on the replays - just like PS4. We have a ballpark match, and we would expect to see similar on our 'Neo' set-up."...

..Let's cut the BS. The Neo was created to support PSVR. Sony realized that the PS4's hardware was not where they needed it to be to support this new add on. Sure, most games will receive a slight boost in resolution and frame rates, but it's purpose is to serve the PSVR.

Saw this earlier, was really interesting.

Basically came down to Devs making a choice between upscaling to 4k or using that extra power to run at 1080p and Ultra PC settings. I hope most devs go with the max settings, would love for PS4 games to include better AA and have some Ambient Occlusion.

i think those results are very bad, its disapointing for gaming in general as ps neo wont push the bar (lower bar) to much for all different hardware platforms

what we should spect is a 2x increase in performance every 2 years, this makes a 5 years console cicle with about 6x the performance of the previous generation at the same price point, has been this way for decades, same on pc hardware, in the case of neo we are getting a 67% increase in 3 years, and scorpio will be a 100-120% (compared to ps4) increase in 4 years (should be 200% or 3x performance), so there is no reason for any of those consoles to cost more than 350 dollars, in fact they will give higher profit margins at 350 dollars

None of this should be surprising and is in line with what everyone who has some knowledge of this stuff has speculated.

Damn, damage control already?

Agreed. Then Scorpio was spoken about and they said, well we paraded power so we cant reveal this and be dwarfed at E3 so lets pull it, imo. I don't plan on buying a new console until well into 2018 personally. I am going to upgrade my PC this fall, have already gotten a beast of a Surface tablet. It is playing Gears Ultimate and QB with no issues.

PS Neo was a waste of time and resources.

I'd much rather see the Neo's extra power be used to squeeze more out of a 1080p standard than waste that power and upping the resolution. Same for the Scorpio. Focusing on a 4K machine is a waste of a major upgrade IMO.

lmao multiplats on Playstation. lmao amgamer, giovela, and cashangry.

I knew the neo was a mistake for my Sony. Still, I will support them through thick and thin. I still buy blank Sony minidiscs from Japan to support their endeavors.

I knew the neo was a mistake for my Sony. Still, I will support them through thick and thin. I still buy blank Sony minidiscs from Japan to support their endeavors.

so basically OP has no critical thinking skills

@funk21312: you have issues lol I hope thato was a joke

Kinda sad tbh. Think Sony are a bit lost with this one. Perhaps they will move it to next year so they can make an actual jump?

I've said before Neo is a big misstep for them. Its not powerful enough to be a big improvement for games but it will make just enough of a difference to annoy a lot of existing PS4 owners that Sony is releasing this after only 3 years.

Please buy one to support Sony.

They really cant with the PSVR and requirements set for devs for games releasing October onward. This thing was set in motion months and months ago before the rumors.

No, I also have a ton of UMDs that I occasionally watch.

By Richard Leadbetter

This should says it all... This is the same dude who claim 900p vs 1080p was massive when he was comparing BF4 on PS4 vs PC,but when he was comparing XBO vs the PS4 some how no one could tell the difference and the gap was smaller than the number suggest.

This ^^ is the same guy who ran all those secret sauce article for MS on 2013 trying to make seen like the gap between the PS4 and xbox one was nothing.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-can-xbox-one-multi-platform-games-compete-with-ps4

Is not the first time he trows a helping hand to MS.

Look at that Tomb Raider comparison in reality the gap was as big as 30FPS at the same resolution so DF guess is not always right using other hardware to represent both consoles,in fact they could have use a 7850 to represent the PS4 and a 7790 downclock or even the 7770 which was almost spot on flop wise with the xbox one.

And guess what, no one cares about that, they care about the numbers, and the numbers are not boding well.

It's getting double the frames in almost every game? Would that not be considered 2X the performance.

@Quicksilver128: Uhh... Did you not read the OP? It doesn't double the frames in ANY of the games.

Lern 2 read.

@babyjoker1221: first of all learn to spell learn ,it's not lern.

Second of all witcher 3 went from 33 to 64 which would be 2X.

It's his only argument. He's felling a bit of the butthurt right about now so he has to fashion an argument where none exist. It's actually quite pathetic.

Double would be a 100% increase in frames, when compared at 1080p between the PS4 and Neo target it's only an average increase of 67% across the seven games tested, which means its performance is 33% shy of doubling the framerate overall.

I've been waiting and waiting for this Neo to come out so I can finally get into Ps4 gaming, so any improvement over the original is great for me.

Uh no, that's still only a 93% increase...

That's actually a little lower than 2x.

OT, I don't really see a problem? Are people fake raging because it's not as powerful as a hypothetical Scorpio?

@dynamitecop: It's most likely CPU bound. It could still able to run games in 1440p and it could probably Max anything at 1080p.

I don't doubt that, but 67% overall is a far cry from a 2X performance increase, it's 2/3 of where it should be.

No wonder why Sony till this day is hiding it and was a no show at E3.

@dynamitecop: but wouldn't it only be a 67% boost in 1080p? If you take into account the extra assets it can push and higher res.. in some cases it would be 2X.

Any demanding game runs at only 30 fps and not even close to Ultra, you swore up and down for Vanilla PS4 this would not be the case. This is history repeating itself.

It doesn't matter how many essays you write or how many posts you make, you were wrong for years and years for PS4. Now you'll be wrong for years and years for Neo, which won't give 60fps at 4k.

So basically Neo is going to be underperforming, just like PS3 and PS4 did......and not even reaching close to a gaming PC yet again. Fifth tries a charm.

What? I don't think you fully understand what you're saying here, in not one instance did it hit 2X performance, the closest it got was a 93% increase and the lowest was 40% increase.

These tests are conducted running the identical settings, it can't even hit a 100% performance increase with the same settings let alone with higher settings.

If this is indicative of what Neo is capable of, it's a total bust. As someone else has said, it's clear that this console was created for PSVR operation, this is no mid generation refresh, Scorpio is.

@dynamitecop: I know what I'm saying and it makes perfect sense. If you took TW3 and maxed all setting it would probably run at about 12 fps on a PS4. The Neo could hit a solid 30 or more. The NeO setup won't take anywhere near the hit on frames because it has plenty of GPU overhead. The test DF did (using identical settings to test framerate) is going to show the limitations of the CPU.

@leandrro: Where's Doom Vulkan?

Unlike MS's Scorpio, Sony didn't substantially increase memory bandwidth for NEO.

comparing ps4 neo target to neo target below its an average framerate increase of 67%

The average frame rate increase roughly matches effective memory bandwidth gap i.e. 1.6X or 60 percent increase

NEO's 224 GB/s / PS4's 140 GB/s = 1.6X or 60 percent increase

Scorpio has "more than 320 GB/s of memory bandwidth"...

Polaris 10's memory compression booster of 1.36X...

Polaris 10's memory bandwidth efficiency of 75.78 percent.

(320 GB/s x 0.7578) x 1.36X = 329 GB/s

Microsoft did their homework and increase Scorpio's raw memory bandwidth.

The cost to do 4K right now means either Sony has now delayed the Neo or its coming out this year and it be marketed as a 1080p 60 frames console ie Playstation 4 upgrade. I just interested to see the direction they take?

Damn sony lied, Neo marketing was all a bunch smoke an mirrors

I remember Sony said this was twice the power of the ps4 in a interview.

No its not sony DF did the math already your parts doesn't add up to twice the performance to real tech's on the ground doing the testing don't say something if its not true you just called out and look horrid

Neo was never going to be able to do 4K native this year. Neo just needs enough power to do 1080p 60 frames at ultra settings, if Neo does that Sony was not lying.

yeah but were living in a 4k world my mom has a ultra hd tv from years ago. I don't understand what the big deal is. My dad had 4k tv years ago as well and hes cheap as hell where are you people living what country or planet are you people on?

Sony never promised 4K so you can't hold that against them. They said the Neo was just an upgraded PS4 , the specs reflect that.

@loe12k:

60fps is more difficult to achieve for the NEO than 1800p/4k @ 30fps. They'll need to push the bottleneck onto the GPU to get the best bang-for-buck. Consoles rarely do 60fps since the human eye can't see above 24fps. >_>

Sony has only announced the Neo is coming. We don't know for sure the hardware its using? What is certain it will not be 4K console if its releasing this year, the cost would be crazy. MS had to wait till 2017 to see the cost go lower.

@loe12k:

Methinks that it will be "4k" in the same sense that XO/PS4 are "1080p". So medium/high mix for settings and 1800p upscale.

I was under the impression these were the specs and it will be launching this October:

So basically, we get a PS4.5 this year and next year we get the Xbox 2. Sounds good to me--hell I'm already on the GTX 1070. Time to put that GPU to work since all games are using the consoles as a baseline.

HDMI 2.0 standard was created on Sep 2013.

HDMI 1.4 4K HDTV would be limited to 30 hz/ 30 fps.

yea I want to pull the trigger on a maxed out Surface Book in preparation for Xbox Play Anywhere titles but I'm gonna try and hold off to see if they reveal a Surface book 2 in April..

as a side note, @tormentos thinks that Surface PCs aren't full PCs and can't run the same apps/games at the same quality as a full PC.. apparently the versions of Gears Ultimate and QB youre playing on Surface are different versions than what can be found on PCs.. you're playing watered down "Surface versions" of those games according to him..

Surface Tablets are full X86-64 PCs with Intel IGP in a tablet form factor.

Personally, I'm waiting for 14 nm FinFET AMD FX-8800p APU replacement i.e. doubling the CU count from 8 to 16.