Sony announces the $700 PS5 Pro with a larger GPU, advanced ray tracing, and AI upscaling
www.theverge.com
The PS5 Pro has better specs for the most demanding games.

$700, and the side by sides look barely different, from my perspective. The chat seemed to have the same opinion.

  • sigmaklimgrindsetEnglish
    4·
    4 months ago

    Yeah, idk why Ps4 has no backwards compatibility. PS3 (fat) was backwards compatible with PS 1+2, and PS5 is backwards compatible for PS4. I didn’t buy a PS4 for that exact reason, and was lucky enough to get my hands on a PS5 during launch to play all the PS4 games I missed.

    With all the niche Japanese games I like slowly coming to PC, I probably won’t buy a new console ever again. (As an aside, if anyone has a spare fat PS3 they’re willing to sell for parts…)

    • wiccan2@lemmy.worldEnglish
      10·
      4 months ago

      The lack of backwards comparability is because of the large difference in architecture.

      The PS2 was a128 bit custom processor, the PS3 had PS2 hardware in the original fat versions to achieve backwards compatibility, it was dropped to reduce the price.

      The PS3 was a 64 bit (I think) custom PowerPC processor.

      With the PS4 Sony switched to x86_64 processors making the console essentially a PC with bespoke custom hardware. The PS5 is the same but better speced components as the tech moved on. That’s why the PS4 & 5 are compatible, they are essentially using the same architecture.

      Microsoft is a similar story but they went all in on emulation of their old consoles which is why only certain games are allowed, they only allow the ones tested to work with the emulator.

      • sigmaklimgrindsetEnglish
        3·
        4 months ago

        The PS3 was a 64 bit (I think) custom PowerPC processor.

        Thanks for jogging my memory, I completely forgot how different the PS3 architecture is compared to the other PlayStations and also the 360. Same reason why emulation for it is so hard (and why MGS4 has no modern ports 🥲)

    • burgersc12@mander.xyzEnglish
      3·
      4 months ago

      It just feels so anti-consumer and everyones forgets about it and they just happily pay for content which can no longer be owned only rented.

      • sigmaklimgrindsetEnglish
        2·
        4 months ago

        I agree. One of the few reasons I still stuck to consoles is because I could buy the physical games and have it on my shelf forever. That’s going the way of the dinosaurs, and while I love that things are more accessible via Steam or whatever, I can’t let my friends borrow my games, or pass it along to someone else to enjoy if I didn’t like a game as much.

        I also just love collecting and displaying game cases and steelbooks and stuff. That’s rarely a thing anymore, either.

    • bigmclargehuge@lemmy.worldEnglish
      2·
      4 months ago

      The PS3 fat could only read PS2 disks because it had stripped down PS2 hardware included. It was effectively a PS2/3 combined. This was part of what drove the cost up, so they gutted that hardware from the slim.

      PS4s can’t read PS3 disks because the PS3 used a bespoke PowerPC based chipset that was a colossal pain in the ass to develop for. So for the PS4 to have backwards compatibility, they would have had to either A, include PS3 hardware in the PS4 (expensive) or B, create an efficient software translation layer/built in emulator (see “pain in the ass”).

      From what I have heard, they smartened up with the PS5. It’s basically just a faster PS4. At it’s core, it’s based on very similar hardware, so it’s easy to make PS4 games run without issue, but the boost in performance allows games designed specifically to take advantage of it.