The difference between the original PlayStation 4 and the PlayStation 4 Pro isn't just the price and the specs. Sure, the PlayStation 4 Pro is the higher-end product, but this guide is for those torn between the two to show the real key pros and cons.
Sekiro: Shadows Die Twice (or in the writer's case, definitely more than twice) is a Soulsborne type Action-Adventure Game by the annoying but legendary studio, FromSoftware. At first glance, Sekiro is similar to Bloodborne or any Souls series but in fact, they are not nearly identical. The writer wrote his first impression of the game after playing it for 24 hours and in this article, he'll break it down even further to constitute his review of the game.
DF: "With PlayStation 4 Pro on the market and Xbox One X to follow, Microsoft and Sony's R&D focus is inevitably going to shift towards the next wave of machines. Questions surround the kind of generational leap that's possible in the next couple of years, and how much these new machines will cost."
i really wonder what kind of game could be pushed with a ryzen cpu... even if the next gen would be 499 (which considering inflation is possible) the game would just be stunning.
Replies(10)Replies(5)
The One X should have this cpu in it especially for $500 dollars imo. A lot of gamers thought Microsoft was going to add this to the One x
I feel like the One X is not worth $500 dollars because of the old jaguar laptop cpu. Should be $450
"I feel like the One X is not worth $500 dollars because of the old jaguar laptop cpu. Should be $450"
They redesigned the cpu. Doubled the cache ( over the pro), increased the speed etc. So yes its old tech, but it has been reworked to make it better. In addition the gpu itself outperforms the 1060, 480 and 580. The closest pc gpu is the 1070 ( which should outperform the X). So to keep up on a pc you would need a gpu that costs almost the same price.
The manufacturing costs for ms themselves are equal or greater than the console cost.
@sd11
Actually, in terms of horsepower, the X1X is comparable to a GTX 1060 or RX 580. More memory in a GPU does not equate to more power. A GTX 1060 or RX 580 are comparable to the GPU in the X1X, but they have less memory.
http://www.pcgamer.com/here...
@arnon yes but you will never get the same level of performance out of a pc gpu. Consoles are always more efficient so it will outperform a 580/1060.
It was digital Foundry who stated the closest was a 1070.
Ryzen replacing Jaguar in the XOX, even if feasible in hardware cost, would have changed the nature of the system entirely. It was meant as an upscaling of the current (8th) console generation, not as a new gen. XO games would not work right out of the box on the XOX if it featured an entirely different CPU. Games would need modifying or porting individually. That was never going to happen mid-gen.
Great video from the DF. It explains in detail why the weak CPU in current consoles holds the games back. You can up the resolution and the prettying of graphics in general, but the games themselves can't be much more complex or alive than the previous generation's.
@sd11
"yes but you will never get the same level of performance out of a pc gpu. Consoles are always more efficient so it will outperform a 580/1060.
Lol what? That must be why consoles always outperform PCs right? I'm kidding, they don't, ever. But that's to be expected when you're spending half, or a third of the cost of a gaming PC.
"It was digital Foundry who stated the closest was a 1070."
Not sure where you found this, but it is most certainly not comparable to a GTX 1070. In fact, typing in xbox one X vs PC on Google results in the top articles stating that it is comparable to a GTX 1060 or RX 580. The only person I have seen state that the X1X is comparable to a GTX 1070 with 16 GB of RAM is an ARK developer.
The X1X, as shown in this article, has a high memory bandwidth but a low clock speed, which means the X1X's GPU bandwidth will be bottlenecked. Whereas the GTX 1060 has a lower bandwidth than the X1X, but a much faster clock speed, which means the GPU can take greater advantage of that bandwidth.
https://www.vrfocus.com/201...
@arnon.
So for the first time in console history are you saying that a console gpu will perform on an equal footing to its pc counter part. This has never happened. Look at the xbox 1 and ps4. Both consoles outperform their pc equivelants. It has always been the case that you step up a tier. Why do you assume this has changed? Xbox X will outperform games on a pc using the 480, 580 and 1060 due to the architecture and optimisation that occurs on consoles. As was mentioned by Corrios below " on consoles they go to the metal".
A few quotes from digital Foundry regarding xbox x.
"The bottom line is that Scorpio's six teraflops will almost certainly go a lot further than an equivalent PC part."
"Out of interest, we tested Forza 6 Apex with similar settings at 4K on GTX 1060, 1070 and 1080. Frames were dropped on GTX 1060 (and a lot of them when wet weather conditions kicked in), while GTX 1070 held firm with only the most intense wet weather conditions causing performance dips. Only GTX 1080 held completely solid"
"From what I've seen so far, there is some evidence that Scorpio's true 4K performance could pose a challenge to the likes of Nvidia's GTX 1070 and AMD's Fury X-class hardware."
Whatever the game changer is, I just hope the end results is 4K native, 60FPS, HDR, and SSDs.
If next gen needs a couple extra years for that to happen, I'd be more then happy to wait it out.
Whatever ensures competitive prices, reliable hardware, and preferably full backwards compatibility (which shouldn't be hard with everyone going X86)
SSDs will NOT happen in the next 10 years, maybe if we're lucky they'll develop some kind of caching method(no idea how it would work though, as it'd still have to load off of a HDD). Considering 4K will require 2-5TB HDDs, SSDs in that range would run $2-3K. They're NOT dropping to $50 in the next 10 years.
The only hope we really have is of a 7200RPM SSHD if we're lucky. Or if more games will support a user-installed SSD, but we're not getting this stock nex-gen.
Dont count on native 4k pal. Most likely devs willl continue to use checkerboarding and other methods as they can push the graphical settings with it.
SSDs will not happen. Manufacturers will opt for cheaper, higher capacity drives. 60fps across the board won't happen either, 30fps will still be a thing.
Well it must be a game changer. Remember when XboneX was DEFINITELY going to have this CPU and definitely be a next gen console lol?
This is a very nice video. Next gen the biggest jump will be the CPU. They show us that the rysen 1700 at 3. GHz is 2 or 3 times more powerfull then the current jap cpu on the sony and Microsoft machines.
DF show us that the diference in power could be even bigger, because on console they go to the metal. That would be amazing. First in terms of rez, the video shows us a HUGE diference to the crappy and old mobile jag, then we get much better AI, phisics and so on.
I really hope that both companies used some kind of Rysen CPU with 8 or more cores, because in terms of GPU there are many choices.
If Sony and MS decide to go the AMD route again they may do another APU as it is cheaper, and easier to maintain temps in the small form factor consoles come in.
Raven Ridge is AMDs next line of APUs consisting of 4core 8thread Ryzen CPU and Vega GPU. In 3 years time these may be cheap enough to manufacture and sell in a console, and by cheap enough i mean production yields as Vega is having issues (tho that is mainly due to HBM2 having yield issues as well, and i don't see that coming to consoles for a little while).
Whatever the case a proper CPU should be the focus for next gen.
As I understand it Raven Ridge won't actually be using HBM.
I'm not sure that HBM2 supply has actually been the delay issue. I know a lot of people say it is, but AMD has said it's not. I tend to side with the people that say the delay was on the software side, drivers and software just weren't ready. There have been some pretty credible studies that have shown that Vega FE isn't actually using several of the promised hardware features because they have yet to be enabled by divers.
yeah you make a valid point. Drivers could be holding Vega back, and the FE edition is pretty much proof of that. Let's just hope the Driver team can get something ready for end of July/beginning of August when RX Vega (hopefully) drops.
oh are they now? well that is very interesting. I have been considering on updating my HTPC, and Pinnacle Ridge sounds perfect.
We need 15 teraflops from GPU just for great vr and 4K experience so...yeah there is plenty of room for gpu's to get better, but also CPU
i think that we would get 12 TF TBH. it'll also be about the same jump as the one between ps3 and ps4 i think
It's about timing. 1080ti @2000mhz is ~14 TFlops (about 17 AMD TFLops) and it's not even Volta.
Also people need to realize that whatever resolution you want is a moving target.
What ran 1080/60 in 2005 was 1/10th of what is needed in 2017 for 1080/60. Same thing will happen for 4k and VR. What is needed for various resolutions and framerates will continue to go up as developers add better IQ.
Whatever the case is, the CPU is clearly the bottleneck in PS4/XB1/XB1S/Pro/X1X.
In some cases up to halving framerate.
I think we get back to the $399 price point. But we will move to Zen. But that time we will be swing 7nm parts. If rumors are true that Ryzen hits over 80% on their yields the chips will be cheap. I think we might even get a low powered Threadripper. I'd love to see a 16 core CPU and 12-15 teraflop GPU. Threadripper is currently believed to be made at a cost of $120-40 per chip at 14nm. AMD's quarterly reports a few months after launch will tell us if that's true. If profits are way up, it's true. That is if the chip is popular and does sell for $850.
I don't see there being a rush to 8k so the power will go to gameplay, physics and AI. We'll get 4k and a steady 60fps on all games. The most interesting thing to me is the possibility of what could be done with the AI built into the Zen processor. It seems to me that developers will use that AI in quality control and transfer what it learns to the end user AIs. It would be kinda like the old VIP system from 2k football that learned a players tendencies and adjusted to it. The AI would learn the things that cause crashes and prevent them from happening as well as predicting what the user will most likely do next and use the consoles assets in the most efficient way for that.
The on chip AI could also greatly increase replay value as well as adjusting difficulty. It could make adjustments to the games AI enemies to match your playing style or bump up difficulty in real time. Or completely reset the games AI approach after you complete the game to give you a new experience with replay.
Next generation will be the golden age of consoles.
Replies(3)I would hope so, and I definitely see WHY we need to get to $399.
But every year that goes past, a $399 console gives you less. It would be fantastic if AMD/Nvidia get better yields. That would definitely help.
To make a 360/PS3 powerful device in 2020 would be like $1200. (and I mean in terms of relative performance for the time)
Wages aren't going up, but due to money printing and bailouts the currencies of the world are depreciating.
That's not going to stop, the world is printing more money every day in 2017 'after the crisis (even if we're still in it)' then we were at the 'height of the crisis in 2009'. Just wait until this biggest bubble in the history of the world pops. How much more do they print past the most ever they currently are?
That's why we get cheaper consoles. $399 in 2005 was like $270 in 2013, which would be like $199 in 2020. Give or take. But real inflation is 3-4x higher then that reported.
Sony and MS are hit hard by these policies because the end user can only afford what they can afford. That's why we get low-medium end tech from years earlier in our consoles.
Heck when the next collapse happens, it might even delay launch of the consoles, just like Sony and MS said that it did last time. 2019 is probably a pipe dream. 2020-2021 might be too early.
The next crash might will likely be far worse than any previous crash because it will most likely be a currency crash. The US has been driving on fumes since the seventies and is long overdue for a major correction. The old empire staple of attack another country to boost your economy is about to run its course.
We're fighting over oil because old money won't accept that it's time has past. The people have gone from not being a part of it to not getting it to not caring anymore. The Middle East is a mess with Saudi Arabia calling others terrorist so they can sell more oil. And Russia has reawakened and isn't backing down from efforts to surround it and force it to roll over.
Our poor schools have leaked into the White House and Putin is almost single handedly running us in circles. More and more countries are switching to other currencies for oil and the US still can't sell much more than weapons, movies and music to the rest of the world. Plus we have companies and a government so stupid they believe a consumer economy can survive if most of the people are retired, under employed or unemployed. Winter is coming.
Very good points here from both of you. If we get a delay to 2020-2021 it's because of a change of landscape in the economy, as well as lower yields. Sad on both ends, but I can dream with a 2019 release regardless- truth be told though, AMD will likely run into some delays like they are currently, and console jumps just aren't what they used to be. Adjusted for inflation we should be able to afford $499-699 consoles and get another worthy bump, but the economy is so shit it's laughable to sell a console at that price. Inflation has gone up but not wages. Too bad.
If we didn't have these issues just imagine what these consoles would be running. Previous jumps were 20-40x the power. We'd have graphics many couldn't distinguish from real life in some games. Hell, some might consider them better because of art-styles and fantastical landscapes.
Back to reality- at least AMD is making some improvements now with Ryzen/Vega. We might not be getting the 20-40x increase at a cheap price, but I'd love to see what a 5x increase will look like with twice the RAM and a processor capable of more physics and more steady framerate. Since I value art style as much as graphics, Gen 9 may be a golden age for me. Depending on which devs max it out.
Omni, I don't think AMD is running into problems. I think they're tweaking. I think they are taking what they've learned from Pro and X and adding it to Zen+. This wouldn't be the first time. Remember they released an APU based on the PS4 design. I think they are going to use a lot from X.
AMD was supposed to release their APU in the first quarter of this year. Now it's going to be a year late. We know Ryzen yields are great. Vega is late too but the power went up some in later roadmaps. That's why I believe they are tweaking.
When new consoles come out, if that's in 2019-20, I don't think yields will be an issue. I think the fabrication process being used for 7nm is based on the 14nm process. That is part of AMD's plan to offer better price to power ratios than Intel and keep undercutting them. Also by dropping under them on die size. Intel doesn't expect to go 7nm till 2022. So AMD uses die size to counter process and their process to counter price.
So basically Intel better have a huge war chest saved or they're screwed. They've blown their roadmap counterpunching this year. They changed to tic toc toc but are already on a fourth or fifth toc. They're losing market fast on desktop and will soon on laptop and tablet. I also believe they will take heavy losses on server. They gave up on mobile and Qualcomm is going to make a huge move on laptops and tablets. There won't be much space for Intel. And if Intel has a major miss on estimates, they may hide a lot of it, it means AMD pricing is causing them to take a hit on their bottom line. Because if Intel was gouging so they could payoff vendors, now they can't gouge, make payoffs and are losing market in every segment. Enough of a perfect storm to sink most companies.
dcbronco
That's all very good news and thanks for the insight. Nex-gen is sounding a little brighter the more AMD progresses, and I'll definitely have to make my next PC build AMD because of it. I've currently got a Skylake i5 which is decent but I got one that doesn't overclock. I'll definitely go Ryzen+/Navi in 2019 and put the i5 in an HTPC build. I wonder if Ryzen+/Navi will be used in the next consoles as well, considering they're already working on it.
I think they'll go back to the previous generation GPU formula. Vega will be cheaper and offer the power they will be looking for. They will add Navi upgrades but I believe Navi will be a brand new architecture so I'm not sure what limits that will cause. But GPUs will be 7nm at that point too so 12 teraflops on the old architecture at size should allow for the sub $150 APU they want. I don't think we will see another console take a loss per unit again.
By 2020 desktop GPUs should be at 25 teraflops. So 12 on a console is reasonable. We could also see dual GPUs finally hit consoles. Like something where they add a discrete GPU through Infinity Fabric kind of like the setup with Epyc with dual chips. So you could have the APU from X pushing strictly graphics coupled with a GPU geared towards physics and AI. You figure if you add Ryzen to the X APU in three years it's still cheap and gives you 4k/60 in most games. Add a specialized discrete GPU and offload all AI and physics to it and that APU should hit 4k/60 on all games and we get huge boost in AI, physics and environments.
Bump up to a 16 core Threadripper and you really get a beast with 8 cores on the APU and it's work and the other 8 focused on the rest and the other GPU. But if you look at Epyc, that setup allows for CPU cores to focus on wherever the need is. So 12 Zen cores can focus on the discrete GPU.
I also think the cost would remain pretty low since this would be old tech by then.
Omni, I was on Beyond 3d last night and a thread there reminded me of something. I never took into consideration the difference in the size of cores. Zen is much bigger than Jaguar. Threadripper couldn't work. The chip would be huge. That means fewer per wafer and that dictates cost. Threadripper is overkill anyway. Maybe Microsoft will just do their own CPU based on Zen. Plus who knows where things are going. Having cash available might take AMD back to Skybridge and we could see a x86/ARM hybrid. Four Zen cores and eight ARM cores.
Windows Central: I spoke to a developer from Ubisoft working on that game and inquired about the version parity between PS4 Pro and Xbox One X. He told me that Assassin's Creed Origins will be 4K at 30 FPS on both the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro,
This is what people have been saying. Big multiplatform games for the most part will be much the same, with likely less fps and resolution drops on XOX than Pro. It'll be Microsoft's own games, like halo, Forza and Gears that will make the console shine.
Time will tell but I reckon we will see a few examples where the differences are more obvious. Who knows though; we'll see.
Anthem might be that game in the multiplatform space. That said, Microsoft's first party simply can't compete with the likes of Spider-Man and God of War.
Whatever you say 😁 by the time we know the difference PS5 and Xbox two will probably be around the corner. Again the Jaguar cpu is to weak and not powerful enough this gen but people are still in denial.
I will still say multiplatform will be almost same on both Pro and X... Its only the Exclusives that will shine
We will for sure not see the same kind of difference X1 ps4 original.
Pro is an amazing piece of tech for that price.
Too bad for xbox fanboys that the difference isn't noticeable from the start.
Multiplats from the big studios will differ in more ways than just resolution. You only need to take a cursory glance at the PC space to see that.
The lowest common denominator is crucial for the core design of the game, but the elements that are scalable (assets, textures, and a wide array of features we'll just call "visual effects") are built for the top end of the spectrum and scaled down for the respective platforms. Scaling the Xbox One X down to the same level as the Pro wouldn't make a lick of sense.
"Too bad for xbox fanboys that the difference isn't noticeable from the start."
And it won't be noticeable to Sony fanboys now...even though some games ALREADY have DOUBLE the frame rate and 4K res and additional graphical fidelity over Pro. 😊
When the games come out sources like Digital Foundry will do their thing. Only this time we will see a segment of the forums all of the sudden not care about those differences.
The target is 4K but one system will hit that target more than the other, plus other graphical and performance gains. If these things are of no interest to you then I guess the PS4 Pro, Xbox One X and the PC market aren't that interesting to you either.
Lol
I like that you're in denial
the reality is why on Earth would these developer spend all this extra time to try to make one specific version better when it's also the one with the very least install base in the first place?
Basically the vast majority of developers are simply just going to use Pro settings which is making this existence of the system even more irrelevant. Looks like Sony was correct all along to make the pro price friendly because they already knew that the extra Hardware was going to be irrelevant to the vast majority of developers as we're seeing right now with the Xbox One X.
So who's stupid enough to pay more money for the same settings to also get less games?
@EDMIX
"Basically the vast majority of developers are simply just going to use Pro settings"
In today's episode of making things up..
Yeah probably with ms first party games it's just too bad there's so few of them
I think it is a pretty obvious notion that most 3rd party games (especially ones coming this year) are likely going to be close in paper spec between Pro and X. I have zero doubts X will run smoother / more consistently hitting the target especially when you look at some of the really poor Pro Boost implementations we have seen from some companies. 2018 likely will be very different with a year of XBOX dev kits being out in the wild vs just a few months so far (reports are dev kits started getting sent out in January this year). I think that valley of what both boxes can do will grow next year. Does that truly matter? that is the question to ask and for most on N4G who have their flag poll planted the answer is no.
Scared of of the xb1x? You guys keep telling yourselves that if it makes you feel better. There power difference between xb1x and pro are smaller then the differences between xb1 and ps4.
So there maybe differences but it's highly unlikely that you will even be able to notice them without side by side comparisons and being very nit picky. 😁
Framerate and resolution targets might be the same, but that doesn't mean the two versions will actually look and perform the same. The framerate may be more stable in one version, while the other frequently drops below 30fps. Both console versions use dynamic resolution scaling, so it may turn out that one version drops below 4k most of the time while the other doesn't. Moreover, resolution is far from being the only aspect defining graphical quality. Things like shadow quality, draw distance, texture quality, ambient occlusion quality, antialiasing and effects are some of the areas where there will likely be differences between the various versions of the game. Almost certainly the relative quality will end up like this: PC > XB1X > PS4P
You wont be able to tell the difference with the naked eye you will need DF to tell you whats what trust me on that
Anyone thinking about getting a PS4 Pro should hold out until the XBOX release, the value is going to plummet and you'll be able to get Pro's a dime a dozen on craigslist.
I hate to say I told you so but...
Microsoft has over promised on native 4k.
So much about Destiny 2 and reason that Sony paid Bungie for parity. Now, MS has a marketing deal with AC Origins and look where we are now
In before "We all know that Sony secretly paid Ubisoft before the MS deal was struck."
Thank god Anthem wasn't with Sony's marketing .. Or else few section would have complained and blamed Sony for checkerboard rendering ...
@thekhurg,
Ha ha thanks! Coffee almost shot out my nose when I saw your post. Funny as hell...
Even if they're the same resolution and FPS, parity will be impossible, simply because one system will always have more power and always be more stable running titles. In addition, there are other graphical effects that might be dialed up on one system compared to the other. Doesn't mean games are gonna look bad on either system, people just whine a lot. This gen has had so many pretty multi-platforms, you never really "lose".
That's a fair point, but those really haven't either. I mean, look at Crackdown...and Sea of Thieves, while it has a pleasant art style, is nothing ground breaking technically.
But gears forza and halo are all shined out. To much rinse and repeat.. This is Goin to be a tough battle for Microsoft.. All sony has to do is drop the price of the pro when the X comes out and it's definitely a wrap..
It will run the same output, but not the same graphics settings, more RAM means Higher res textures, further draw distance, water effects, etc.
Being 4k 30fps on both consoles is fine but if they aren't adding other graphical features to the 1X version then they aren't making the best version for each console which sucks
'The developer told me that both versions use dynamic resolution scaling to maintain frame rate stability, so more intense scenes might see the 4K resolution drop below momentarily to keep the game running smoothly. He said that the Xbox One X version's resolution would most likely drop below True 4K far less often, and perhaps not at all when compared to the PS4 Pro, but also that the differences would be "imperceptible to the human eye."
True 4k and dynamic 4K for all but no flying 4k
Wait til you hear about "Real 4k", bringing the best picture quality to UHD screens, using a native pixel count render through advanced software processing to emulate the 4k format. Nothing is realer than "Real 4K".
*last line must be read with EA sports guy voice.
perhaps not at all = perhaps Native 4K... Guess we'll see what it is upon release.
we will have to see if both versions are rendering at the same base resolution before being checkerboarded up to 4K.
Why do I keep seeing you make comments like this?
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but this game is said to be using a dynamic resolution technique. That's different than 4K CB, is it not?
Based on the Xbox website, it is different.
https://news.xbox.com/2017/...
To MS, 4K Ultra HD is a game with a 2160P frame buffer output.
"A game has a 2160p frame buffer output. That includes Native 4K, Checkerboarding, and Dynamic Resolution."
ahh, my bad. I thought for some reason it was being upconverted via checkerboard rendering.
I believe DF said it was using both, CB and dynamic resolution, basically dynamic CB....
Yep Aenea, it's dynamic Checkerboarding, with the Pro version dropping a lot and the 1X version perhaps not at all... which would essentially make 1X Native 4K.
Let's not forget how many people trolled MS for having dynamic rendering on XB1, when all of us said it wasn't even really noticeable. It seems the tables have turned as much with Sony fans as with MS fans, huh.
What do you mean?
They have to render at the same resolution to achieve 2160 checkerboard.
Edit:
2160 Checkerboard requires the same base resolution regardless of platform. I'm not talking about upscaling.
nope. The game could be rendered at 1800p before being upscaled via checkerboard to 2160. Or the game could be rendered at 1440p before being upscaled. Just because the end result is the same number doesn't mean that they both started at the same number.
But in this case, I think Cryptcuzz is right and they are using a dynamic resolution.
Still don't know how checkerboard rendering works, huh?
There is no base resolution, there's just a target resolution...
------
"nope. The game could be rendered at 1800p before being upscaled via checkerboard to 2160"
That's impossible! That only works with upscaling, not checkerboard rendering...
You target a resolution, say 2160p, you create a 2160p framebuffer, then divide that framebuffer in 2x2 pixel squares and then render half of the squares (and thus pixels), which ones are being rendered switches every other frame in a checkerboard pattern. Then the current and previous frame are combined with several techniques. If there was no movement for example between the two frames it IS native 2160p, if there was movement then movement data is used to make a calculation of how the pixels from the previous frame are placed into the current frame. On the PS4 Pro there's the ID buffer that can track 3d objects, their edges, etc. in the scene, this helps with determining movement, but also helps to only smoothen the edges of objects with AA.
I hope you thus now understand that you can't just take a native 1800p frame and turn that into 2160p using these types of methods...
The Pro has GPU customisations in there to do this (one of them is the ID buffer), not sure if the One X has any. I do know that the ID buffer and the CB implementation that's build into the GPU of the Pro is a Sony custom thing and AMD is allowed to use it, but only in PC components, not console ones. Tho am sure MS thought of something else to help with this.
Yeah, it's sort of an upconversion, but not in the traditional sense, also always uses exactly half of the pixels as the target resolution. But it would also not be correct to stat that it's half the resolution then with the way it works. It is a rather ingenious way to get higher resolutions with less GPU power...
Replies(1)
Grow up man you act like a child, people on this sight do nothing but take shots and attack the people that do not support the console of their choice AKA SONY..........
"AKA SONY" You just said that people take shots & pointed the finger at PS4 owners, not to mention it's after you said "Grow up man you act like a child".
The allure of the cheap prices for a basic PS4 and PS4 Slim are far too tempting to ignore
No matter what you choose in the end both are great options, but if you have a 4k tv and the extra 100 bucks get the PRO, but if you have a full HD like 90 % of the world including me and want to save some extra dough get the PS4,also right now there are freaking good promotions of the normal PS4 with lots games included just need to do a little bit of store checking ;)
I have both the pro and the regular PS4 and a game at 1080p all I can say is if you can afford the extra money for the Pro and it's not going to hurt you financially spend it because the games that do support it are very noticeable and I can say that honestly because I have the pro setup on my gaming TV in the basement and the regular set up on the family room TV and I will play games like OverWatch on both and the difference is substantial and they're both 1080p sets
I have a 4k tv so I cant speak for those who dont, and the Pro has been awesome! A must if you own a 4k tv!
Pro.
Seriously if you are that poor and the extra $100.00 is an issue you probably should just save your money and buy neither.
Otherwise for less than the price of two games you get twice the storage and twice the power. Even on a 1080p TV you get a noticeable upgrade in visuals. Kind of a no-brainer.