You won't be able to tell the difference between PS4 Pro games and 'proper' 4K

A deep-dive into the genius of the Pro with Mark Cerny, the genius who made it.

[madmonkey01]

most people know this already, and when the scorpio has titles doing the same thing eve more people will come to realise the power required for native 4k over chekerboard rendered 4k is better used elsewhere.

[affrogamer]

I second that from first hand experience seeing a native 4K PC and an upscaled PS4 Pro game side by side!

[GtR35olution]

It will be very hard to tell the difference in ps4 pro 4k games and native 4k games but i know a lot of fanat-X will say they see the difference clearly. Horizon zero dawn in 4k on ps4 pro looks so amazing and i cant wait to play that game

[Eonjay]

Well, most of us wont even get that far until we decide to upgrade to 4K anyway... Does it make sense that I am more interested in the Pro than a 4K TV with all the benefits of games on PRO. Plus I had a PS4 since day one, So I think I have used it enough to warrant an upgrade... My tv? Not so much. Upgrading a console after 3-4 years isn't that bad. Upgrading a TV should be like once every 10 years in my opinion But back on topic here, What people aren't saying is that Checkerboard looks like 4K because it is 4K. Like in reality. But because its not native, there can be artificts that so far seem really hard to detect without looking super close.

[starrman1985]

However on a 45"+ screen, side by side, you will definitely notice the difference! You can notice the difference between 900p up-scaled to 1080p and 1080p.

However, when are you really going to play games side-by-side.. 4K up-scaled will still look really impressive and in all honestly HDR is a far more breathtaking difference.

These articles annoy me though, to the untrained eye you probably wont notice the difference but if you went and actually looked for it you would. Noway a £350 console can pump out the same graphical fidelity as a £1500 desktop. I am not bashing Sony though, because I would much rather invest in a PS4 pro, but the differences are definitely there.

[freshslicepizza]

So when the PS5 comes out will he change him mind once again like he did with throttling the Pro in the first place?

[TruM0607]

But I remember a time not too long ago that the difference between 1080p and 900p was ASTRONOMICAL. Ohhh how the times change.

[yeahokwhatever]

@starrman1985

checkerboard rendering != upscaling. Comparing upscaled 900p to checkerboard makes 0 sense.

[GamingIVfun]

I agree, I have a very good PC and PS4 Pro holds up really well against it.

[starchild]

I've compared a few games side by side too and I can see a difference.

That said, checkerboarding does produce pretty nice results in most cases.

Techniques that are effective generally spread among developers and become ubiquitous. I expect we'll be seeing plenty of checkerboard rendering on all three platforms (PC, PS4 and XB1). Those resources are better spent on other aspects of the graphics and to achieve smoother, more consistent framerates.

[Army_of_Darkness]

The pc basement race will try really hard and act like professional pixel counters to attempt to spot the difference, the the xbots will just talk shit about pro not doing native 4k unlike the Scorpio that they all have yet to see in action lol!
As for me, I have a pro and a LG HDR 55"4KTV that seems to make every game look amazing as is so I'm sure anything above 1080p will be an eyegasm for me :D good times!

[game4funz]

Same has been said about upscaled 1080p and so on and so forth.
The fact is the image will be clearer with native. Less artifacts.

To claim you do not see a difference is one thing...this can vary from person to person but to say there is no difference is factually false.

I suppose its easier or feels better to perhaps claim there is no difference. To each his own.

[fr0sty]

It will depend on the size of your TV. A 50 inch TV will resolve the difference between 900p and 1080p from about 8 feet away. You can see the added sharpness. The same size TV at 4K, you're going to need some razor sharp vision, well beyond what most adults have, to see from the same distance away from the TV.

[freshslicepizza]

4k allows you to sit closer on larger screens. It's hilarious now seeing Sony on the defensive when it comes to a real midcycle upgrade.

[Guyfamily999]

What some people are forgetting is that resolution improvements on paper compared to real image quality improvements aren't a flat line. On paper, the difference between 900p and 1080p is the same as 1800p and 2160p. However, while I could see the (resolution, not graphics, just resolution) difference between a game like Battlefront (900p on PS4) and infinite warfare (1080p), I find it very hard to discern between the clarity of The Last of Us at 1800p vs 2160p. 1800p doesn't look like some blurry mess. I've got perfect vision and sit close to my TV, I think it's just a matter of diminishing returns.

[JackBNimble]

You can keep talking for another 10 months or so Moldy because talk is all you delusional Scorpio fanatics got.
We'll see what MS really has next holiday season.

[rainslacker]

There's a point of diminishing returns which will play a factor, and with the kind of techniques being used here it won't really matter. Unless one has a super cheap 4K TV, the differences are going to be marginal or practically non-existent. LG, Samsung, Sony, and some Vizio's have great picture quality and upscaling or image processors which make even crappy sources look great.

I'm sure the fan boys will go around acting like they can spot every difference, but I'm pretty sure they won't actually be able to relay what those differences are until Digital foundary points them out. I've noticed most of the people around here who discuss such things tend to be rather vague when discussing comparisons. I also know that the visual difference between 900 vs 1080 is much more pronounced when upscaled than we'll see with the topic of this article.

In the end it won't matter on the fan boy side, because most games on Scorpio aren't going to be native 4K either.

[Christopher]

TIL that I have superior vision than most adults.

[mark_parch]

exactly just like you can't tell the difference between 900p upscaled to 1080p and 1080p native

[Wallstreet37]

I know when i finally bought an xbox one S and played battlefield 1 lol i was like wtf is this, the resolution difference was startling to me. Same as 1080p ps4og cod infinite to pro infinite. Ppl saying aint no difference are insane.

[Sparta07]

@ mark, you can actually. the difference between 900p to 1080 is more noticeable then what sony is doing with the PRO ( upscaling ).

[yeahokwhatever]

You can easily see the difference. However, the checkerboard rendering technique used on the PS4 Pro is NOT the same as just upscaling. If it was, why do it at all? Derp.

[Princess_Pilfer]

"Most people" are wrong. In actual fact I can tell the difference. It's not hard, the upscaling blurs everything slightly. This is most easily noticed with sharp edges. Corners of walls, bullet hole decals, the edges of swords or grass, ect. It also has trouble with particle effects, it likes to pixilate them which may or may not be noticable depending on how long they're on screen.

You are half right though. When you're dealing with the power that the PS4 pro (and most PCs for that matter) have, the power necessary to render in 1800p is usually better used elsewhere, same with 1440p on particularly demanding games. I'll take 1440p or 1080p at max settings/60fps (even with more traditional upscaling) over anything above that at 30fps with settings turned down almost every time.

[rainslacker]

So, because you can tell the difference, it means most people are wrong?

Not saying you're wrong, because what you state is true, but it's one of those things you have to look for, and it's one of those things most people don't spend copious amounts of time dwelling on.

It can make a difference if it's extremely pronounced, and even be distracting, but about the only time people really sit there trying to find differences, is when they watch comparison videos. Most people do not play two copies of the game at the same time, nor do they sit there and say, "that corner is a bit blurier" while playing a game.

The reality of the situation is though, that a higher quality image upscaled to 4K generally still looks better than a lower quality image at native 4K. There is much more to image quality than the resolution, and the higher the resolution goes, the less noticeable the differences become when comparing the differences in pixels on the screen.

[Princess_Pilfer]

If people say "you can't tell the difference" then yeah, they're wrong. I can.

No, I don't actually. I know what native 4k looks like, I know what isn't being rendered at native 4k. I don't need a side by side comparison to be able to see it.

The reality is also that a 1080p or a 1440p image with all the effects maxed out looks better than an 1800p or a 4k image that has effects turned down (and plays at half the framerate,) and that you wouldn't want their checkerboard rendering working on a 1080p or 1440p image because the bluryness it causes would be incredibly pronounced.

[Guyfamily999]

I find it very, very difficult to tell the clarity difference between TLoU at 1800p vs at 2160p (and I sit literally like 4 feet from my TV). Obviously it's there, but is it worth rendering 44% more pixels? I'd say that power is better spent elsewhere. In all honesty I'd choose 1440p60 over 2160p30.

[Xb1ps4]

Yet it's ssoooo easy to see a difference between xb1 and PS4 games since launch... a lot of you ppl are so one sided that it's a joke at this point..

[G20WLY]

There's a world of difference.

It's not to do with fanboyism, it's just biology; the human eye has finite capabilities.

[Xb1ps4]

@g20wly

"A world of difference"

My point exactly.... ppl see a world of difference between xb1 and PS4 until (1) it's not a PlayStation with the top graphics and or(2) they can't see the point in a 4K tv cause it's no time a big enough jump...

My goodness "gamers" are so damn finicky they don't know what they want.... just say it all you want is a playstion.. stop acting like you are a gamer at heart..

[G20WLY]

That's not what I meant at all. *sigh*

[madmonkey01]

well its a fact that the difference between the xb1 and ps4 will be more noticble to chekerboard rendered 4k or native 4k,

[Christopher]

***most people know this already,***

No, no, and no. Most people don't "know" this, they just want to believe it. You can tell the difference between native 4k and checkerboard 4k. Anyone who says otherwise is trying to sell you 900p at 1080p or the like.

Seriously, stop saying stupid stuff like this. Please?

[XanderZane]

Another opinion piece. Mark Cerny didn't say anything like that. Unless you have 2 4K HDTV with HDR support, you're not going to be able to compare them properly. Are there PC monitors and Graphic Cards that support HDR yet? There will be some differences obviously, but like 1080P upscale, it probably won't be huge. Where the difference will be in the performance of the games.

[GamingIVfun]

The difference is going to be so minor that its not going to make any difference as far as resolution goes, the place the the scorpio is going to have an advantage is with effects and draw distance but even that will be very minor, it's not going to be night and day difference by no means on anything.

[joab777]

No kidding! They look so damn good already on a 4k TV. Hell, I like the simple upscale the TV adds to some games like TW3.

My concern lies less with this and more with getting great software. 2017 looks bright, and hopefully we keep going!

[FyBy]

I cant agree more. Scorpio power can be used in high fidelity vr games.

[S2Killinit]

It's not an opinion when digital foundary already confirmed this.

[DeadSilence]

Unless you are Digital Foundry and even they admit Ps4 Pro Resolution is amazing.

[SpinalRemains138]

Yes, and to that end, based on customer value; dollars per pixels, checkerboard is the perfect compromise.

We also have to remember that SONY probably pondered all pros and cons of each given scenario and they most likely overwhelmingly voted in favor of this method due its phenomenal visual results at a cost effective hardware plan.

[Bigpappy]

All I am hearing is : don't worry about Scorpio. PS-PRO is just as good.

We shall soon see if they is no difference

[Eonjay]

For all the effort that Microsoft is putting in to get ahead on the power front, I am sure they can produce a more powerful machine. The thing that the Xbox fanbase was downplaying at the start of the gen is now their only hope. And all the thing they were saying was more important (exclusives) no longer matter at all. It is fair to say that the whole lot (both sides) are full of hypocrites. But even so, the vast majority of gamers follow the games.

[ILostMyMind]

How we shall soon see if both will use the same upscaling technique?

[Princess_Pilfer]

No, not unless you're Digital Foundry. Unless you know what actual native 4k looks like. Again, it's not a hard difference to spot. Does it look good? Yes. Is it distinguishable from 4k at normal viewing distances? Yes. It softens everything.

[Neonridr]

Obviously it really depends on what base resolution we are starting at, but it is definitely getting harder and harder to distinguish since you would need to either be sitting very close to your screen or have a very large one to begin with to be able to distinguish individual pixels for it to matter.

If the game is 1800p upscaled to 4K that is one thing.. but if it's like 1200p there's still a sizeable gap there to true 4K.

[Sparta07]

@ Neo, agree.
Think the minimum should be 1800p.

[Princess_Pilfer]

Not really. You don't have to "distinguish individual pixels," it shows up most obviously as ( and I keep repeating myself here) as slightly blurred edges. If you can spot the difference between FXAA and SMAA or no AA, you can spot the difference between their upscaling and native 4k. Ask PC gamers and there is a good chance they'll tell you that they can spot the difference.

[Neonridr]

I understand that. But sitting 10+ feet away from a TV it's a little hard to notice blurry edges around pixels when you are looking at the screen.. We aren't talking about the difference between 720p and 1080p here.

1800p to 2160p is going to be damn near impossible to tell for the average gamer.

PC gamers are always different because you only sit a few feet from your screen, so different things are always going to be noticeable.

But an 1800p image, upconverted via checkerboard rendering to 2160p is still going to look amazing, and you'd be hard pressed to see the differences.

[Princess_Pilfer]

I PC game a good 8-10 feet from my TV. (Wireless mouse.) I can still see the difference.

It's not blurry edges around pixels. That's not even a thing, pixels are the little color shifting squares that make up your TV display. It's blurry edges. Like, of things, in the game. Where there would normally be a hard line of color (say, a white wall) to whatever is beyond the wall (say, a park) there is instead a slight fade because the computer has to guess what color the unrendered horizontal lines should be based on what's near by so it renders several more rows of the white and fades into the background.

Thing is, it would actually be *harder* for me to tell the difference between 1800p and native 4k than it is to tell the difference between 1800p with their upscaling and naitive 4k. The fancy upscaling has a particular set of tells (including said blurry edges) that give it away. Regular upscaling doesn't have the same tells so it's less obvious when it's only minor upscaling.

Again, no, I wouldn't. The difference is obvious. It will look good, no argument there, but I am not hard pressed to see the difference.

[rainslacker]

I build graphics tools by trade, and I'm pretty well versed on what to look for. I can notice a difference and state what technique is being used nine times out of ten. Even with that, the differences between a 4K native image, and one using checkerboarding or straight upscaling can be pretty miniscule compared to 720/900 vs 1080. A lot of this has to do with the way the image is rendered. If the image is rendered using more quality on textures, effects, lighting, etc, then upscaled, the actual differences can be next to nothing, and often times even look better to the end user than one that renders lower quality on aforementioned rendering aspects at 4K.

Our company performed some pretty extensive testing on this, sans the checkerboarding techniques, and there are other studies out there which did the same thing, mostly funded by companies that deal with graphics or gaming, and without fail, the end result is the upscaled higher quality render beats out the native 4K render at lower quality.

I think given the power needed to achieve native 4K at what is considered standard levels of graphics for AAA nowadays, Sony found a good compromise. It has it's drawbacks, as the videophile is going to sit there and say that it's not as good, but the average consumer isn't going to notice, or maybe even care, when they start factoring in the price of the system itself.

With the Scorpio, the devs would likely be better off using that extra power for even higher quality renders, and using upscale techniques to give a better image for the time being. At 6TF, the native 4K image isn't going to look as good as the upscaled one to the layman, and if the Scorpio is sitting on the shelf at a higher price, then it's going to be like the consumer when they're looking at a Samsung or Sony TV. Sony may have a slight edge, but Samsungs are significantly cheaper. Except in this case, the PS4P version may actually look better overall, thus making it much more attractive.

I think devs for Scorpio will likely do the choice scenario though for native 4K or higher quality/better performance upscaled, as it seems like a suitable compromise so people can choose what's important to them. I personally prefer quality over frame rate for instance, beause I can't tell a big difference between 30 vs 60. So I tend to go with better image quality.

[Aenea]

But don't forget that checkerboard rendering isn't actually upscaling. I know many people disagree but it is fundamentally different. It also means that with this it's less noticeable than with actual upscaling...

[theXtReMe1]

I agree with everyone else here. Even the games, like Hitman, that are running at 1440p and upscaled, look incredible. Youd be hard pressed to tell the difference between them and native 4K. Especially at TV viewing distance. Ive been extremely impressed by everything Ive seen running on Pro. Even the native 1080p games that have been given graphics upgrades, like Paragon, look great.

At the Pros price point, youd be hard pressed to build a PC to do the same. We are getting an early glimpse at the future of gaming, as will Scorpios purchasers next fall. We are very lucky to be able to experience this kind of clarity now, especially with HDR, instead of waiting for the next generation. Which we now know, we are going to be spoiled by.

As I said in another article, those on the fence shouldnt be... as, the Pro is amazing, with or without a 4K TV. Especially now, that every game is seeing the benefits of the more powerful hardware... patch or not.

[kevnb]

1440p is already a really high resolution, but unfortunately most tvs dont support it. This is why we need some good up scaling.

[ONESHOTV2]

"At the Pros price point, you'd be hard pressed to build a PC to do the same"

and let's not forget a PS4 can not do half the things a PC can so a higher price is justified becuase of more features or more use.

[Princess_Pilfer]

No I wouldn't. The games look good, but the difference is plain. Soft edges are the most obvious indicator.

No, you wouldn't. The Upscaling can be done by the game on PC (ubisoft has done it a couple times) so you could get a relatively weak PC and get the same effect, with the same upscaling. This should do the trick for 415 USD. didn't even have to go find a sale. https://pcpartpicker.com/li...

[Hroach616]

Well said all! I have a large 4k tv and everything pspro enabled looks amazing. Regardless of the settings you choose.
I'm just surprised the comments are so civil for the moment

[kevnb]

Cerny didn't make the ps4 pro, people keep acting like he designed all the tech and put it all together himself. He was the lead architect on the project, which is still a huge deal but lets dial it back a little please.

[SpinalRemains138]

Checkerboard 2160p is phenomenal. I enjoy it quite a bit and have never once thought "I wish this were genuine."

[Fishy Fingers]

So essentially no point releasing more powerful hardware then, just upscale it and no one would any the wiser...?

Obviously it's going to depend on your base native resolution. Something like 1440/1800 is going to look MUCH better than 1080 (and honestly more impressive than labelling it as 4k checkerboard). Upscaled or not. But taking a 1080p image for example and upscaling it to 4K is indistinguishable from native 4K? No.

[Nyxus]

Have you checked the article? They literally say what the Pro does goes way beyond upscaling.

[Fishy Fingers]

I know it does. But like I said, I can see this being accurate (of sorts) when the base resolutions are high (which again I find listing the native resolution waaaaay more impressive than hiding behind 'checkerboard 4K'). But I question the ability to literally double the native resolution and it still remain indistinguishable. Or why would devs even pushing for the higher resolutions? Just stick at 1440p and checkerboard, boom, more FPS and no one can even tell.

Again, having experience with PC hardware and what you can squeeze out of it I find 1800p INCREDIBLY impressive for a £350 machine, more so than (checkerboard) 4K* on the box.

*not actually 4k but I promise you can't tell, honest.

[SpinalRemains138]

Absolutely not. That is not what the Pro does, nor the article implies.

[Aenea]

With checkerboard rendering there is no native resolution to list... They could mention the number of pixels rendered per frame and what comes out at the end when displayed tho...

"Just stick at 1440p and checkerboard, boom"

Not possible, again, checkerboard rendering is not (old fashioned) upscaling and can't be used on fully/natively rendered frames of any size. With checkerboard rendering they target a certain resolution, say 2160p, then it will render half of the pixels each frame, alternating which pixels in a checkerboard pattern, then overlaying current half frame with the previous half frame with help from all kinds of other info, for instance to help find edges of 3d objects making the softening of edges way, way less visible than with a traditional upscale.

This is what they are saying is difficult to distinguish, they aren't talking about traditional upscaling 1080p to 2160p...

[XStation4pio_Pro]

i mostly agree with that... but it s still depends on rez. a ps4 pro game running at 1800p will still produce a bit of aliasing on bright edges even when upscaled to 4k but a true native 4k pretty much does away with that altogether. regardless, games running on the ps4 pro at higher than 1080p (and even in 1080P) still look way better than they do on the base ps4. in fact i loaded up Battlefront the other day (which has not been patched) on my Pro and the resolution was almost jarring after spending all my time in UC4 and other patched games

[andrewsquall]

You most certainly will but it depends on how large the display is. A 40 inch 4K TV isn't going to give much of an indication as 1080p already looks great on this size of display.

Its like playing COD Ghosts on a 28" display on Xbone and PS4, 720p and 1080p respectively. You won't really see the difference. Its when you start to go up to 37" displays that the difference shows. Go even further to 50" displays and the difference is staggering between the 2.

Then you might still say "but it doesn't change anything gameplay wise", well it certainly did on games like The Evil Within on Xbone that is a very blurry mess most of the time where you can't see clearly into the distance in the game. There are going to be games on Scorpio that will have slightly sharper versions than PS4 Pro because it will be hitting a higher end of the "checker boarded" resolution.

[MetalNCarnet]

I have a 4k gaming PC and a PS4 pro. I ran Deus Ex on both of them at the same time and kept flipping the video sources on my TV. After staring at them for a few minutes, I have come to the conclusion that I can't tell the difference in resolution technique at all. I think that when people hear the word upscaled, they think that's bad. Honestly, if the devs would just lie to you and say the game is native 4k, you wouldn't know.

[SpinalRemains138]

How large is your display? I'm just curious. I only have a 43" and I can't tell the difference. Some say larger displays show the discrepancy.

[MetalNCarnet]

I have a 55" Vizio. 2016 model.

[Fishy Fingers]

How did you configure the PC settings? I can set PC to match console resolution and it should still look better due to the higher settings.

Also, you bought the same game for both? :/ sorry but seems it's not just my fingers that are fishy.

[MetalNCarnet]

Fishy Fingers -- I'm talking resolution only, not the graphics. Of course the PC version still looks better, I'm not a stupid fanboy.

[Fishy Fingers]

Exactly. So what settings did you choose on the PC to best represent the console? How do you know they were indicative of the console build? Useless comparison without that info. Might as well submit it as as gamingbolt 'comparison'.

[ONESHOTV2]

Norad6--- oh right i should take advice from someone who has no source to back up his claims lol try again

[MetalNCarnet]

Wake up on the wrong side of the bed this morning?

[G20WLY]

^That's every morning lol

[rainslacker]

I think 99% of the people wouldn't know. Particularly a lot around here that state they can tell the difference.

However, if they lied, they'd be caught, and then suddenly, everyone who didn't realize it before, suddenly knew all along.

It's a vicious cycle.

There is no reason for them to lie though. To the end user, most won't be able to tell the difference, and most of those people don't care either way. I think even around here, most of the people that harp on it for console war purposed don't care either, because the current level of graphics for this gens games haven't been an issue with them so far.

Heck, most of them would probably be impressed with the TV doing the upscaling if they have a decent TV, because it can look phenominal in itself, but I'd wager a lot of people making a big deal about it don't actually have a 4K TV, nor now how disjointing it is when they watch their first upscaled 1080 source on it. For me, it was Force Awakens with my 55" Samsung, and it was like watching real life.....with that video camera gloss to it.

[starchild]

But some people are more perceptive than others. I've had people swear to me they couldn't notice screen tearing in a game and it was blatantly obvious to me. Another example would be people that claim not to notice the frame pacing issues in Bloodborne, while for many of us it's very noticeable.

[Bladesfist]

The people who did not notice those issues before the patch just have to be blind or something. I'm not sure how it is after the patch, not played it in forever but it was so immediately noticeable for me. I spend most of my time gaming at 144hz+ though so maybe my eyes have been trained or something.

[joed2605]

that's because you're using temporal antialiasing and the sharpen filter on pc. If you turn it off you get a much better looking image because its naturally sharp and theres very minimal aliasing at 4K. The AA and sharpening is only there because itd look bad at 1080p without

[ONESHOTV2]

yawn another on and let me explain 1440p- 1800p is not 4k do you want me to repeat it. and let's not forget 1400-1800 with sub par graphics so come again which one looks better ?

[SpinalRemains138]

Look up. That's the point of the discussion going over your head.

[sullynathan]

You actually can.

Again, N4G users are saying that they can't tell 1440p from 4K. Good job with the disagrees, keep it coming.

[alb1899]

That is exactly what I said with 1080p and 900p but everyone here was making a party for that and saying that will buy all non exclusive for ps4 because of this.....Now is time for Xbox to shine with the Scorpio and now you tell me that it doesn't matter that you almost won't see the difference......Jajajaja

[bluefox755]

It's very difficult to tell the difference between 1800p upscaled to 4k and native 4k, especially at a regular view distance. If you are sitting very close and have an eye for that stuff, you can probably tell, but otherwise it's gonna look just as good to most players.

[Kingcorey13]

Visually it's a much smaller difference than the difference between 720 and 1080

[WickedLester]

Facts! In fact, if I could get better performance with a 1080p display, I'd choose that over 4K.

[OC_MurphysLaw]

I hate articles like this because it brings out all the "Oh but I can tell" quotes. I am confident the PS4 Pro will deliver very nice visuals over its time and they will be comparable to 4k native in a positive way.

[Princess_Pilfer]

I hate comments like this because they are used to dismiss the fact that the claim being made in the article is factually incorrect and people can not only see the difference, but tell you exactly what the difference is.

If you can't tell, good for you. We can.

[opinionated]

"You can't tell the difference between generic cereal and name brand"

"You can't tell the difference between Dr Pepper and diet Dr Pepper"

This is often said and often wrong.

[sullynathan]

It's way too easy to tell the difference between diet shit and the original

[Christopher]

This. Only, please note, in this instance, it's not Sony saying it but the author.

[zarbor]

People see what they want to see, so coming here and saying you don't see any difference is useless. 4K is useless if you don't have at least a 65inch or bigger. So if you don't have that size TV seeing differences is rarely possible.

Additionally, someone will always be able to see the differences. I couldn't see difference in several PS4 vs XB1 games yet folks with laser vision could somehow clearly see the difference. If you want to justify your purchase of a PS4 Pro by claiming there is no difference, no one cares but obviously there is a difference vs 4K. I'm sure someone will be pointing it out soon.

[BigGamersSmallTalk]

The narrative honestly changes to whatever Sony has...it's really unbelievable. The entire basis of this generation (including Sony's own advertising) was that native resolution was the big thing. Yoshida even Tweeted out differences in resolution in a picture. He said 1080p made you a better gamer ect

Now with Xbox Scorpio coming and capable of native 4K resolutions, all of a sudden upscaled games that aren't native are good enough? Digital Foundry gave PS4 games the "win" in face offs when that version had more grass! Both at 1080p mind you...

I've heard the Xbox One called the 720p box, the 900p box ect.... This site, and all major sites ran resolution in the ground.... When I said there's no real difference between 900p and 1080p game..I was called a fanboy, liar ect.. But now there's no difference between native 4K and 1400p or 1800p? GET REAL! The hypocrisy is insane.

[TheOptimist]

Looooool wut.... Whoever said that 1080p made you a better gamer was downright stupid lmfao....

There is a reason we have Esports CSGO players playing at 4:3 aspect ratio (800x600 res) against gamers who play at 1080p at international levels. Resolution doesn't make you a better gamer and it was a straight bs from whoever said this and spread the misinformation

[BigGamersSmallTalk]

Sony's Yoshida and Mark Cerny said it! http://www.gamespot.com/art...

[r2oB]

He is taking their quote out of context. The article he references is mainly speaking on the difference between 1080p and 720p (PS4 vs PS3), to which there is a noticeable difference. And regarding the "better gamer" comment, he was referring to the ability to see details better due to the higher resolution and better accuracy because there are more pixels (hit boxes can be defined better perhaps?). Shuhei's opinion is that these factors will help the gamer when playing games.

[TheOptimist]

@BigGamers

Hahahahahahaha... The idiocy is astounding lmfao

@r2oB
Regardless of context, resolution does not make anyone a better gamer, it is just pure eye candy.

Also seeing details better does not make you a better gamer. I know because I have been there. Took me 3 months to transition from Distinguished Master Guardian (800x600) to 1080p and yet went down in skill rank to Master Guardian Elite

[r2oB]

The same can be said about the opposition. First resolution didn't matter, now to them it does. It goes both ways. Personally, I think it's pointless to compare the PS4 Pro to the Scorpio because it hasn't released yet. Whether it will be the "native 4K gaming machine" Xbox fans are hoping for remains to be seen. Especially considering the leaks about the Scorpio incorporating the same upscaling tech as the PS4 Pro, and it being at the discretion of the developers on how to utilize the machine. It may end up being a premium console, at a premium price, using checkerboard rendering for 90% of AAA games.

[BigGamersSmallTalk]

I've always said it doesn't matter, it was the morons and Sony who were hyping it up.
As for Scorpio, they have options to do what they want, all first party will be native 4K though. Also, developers asked Microsoft for a true 4K native machine, so trying to take "options" in a whitepaper from last E3 as reasoning that most or many developers will checkerboard is nonsense. Devs want their games to run and look the best, no matter what. If a game can be native 4K on Scorpio, it will be.

[BigGamersSmallTalk]

http://www.gamepur.com/news...

Please stop acting as if Yoshida never pushed resolution. Here's more proof that he definitely pushed that nonsense from the start. Funny how it doesn't matter now, right?

[Christopher]

One guy's opinion = everyone's narrative?

Am I okay taking the biggest Xbox One troll and turning them into the "narrative" around Xbox One/Scorpio?

Agree that the guy who is saying this is wrong, though.

[BigGamersSmallTalk]

http://www.gamepur.com/news...

How many ads have Sony run talking up native 1080p ? http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/pl...

Every major site has done resolution comparisons, from IGN to Gamespot. And nobody was saying how 900p to 1080p wasn't a big deal. Now, resolution isn't a big deal because Scorpio is coming. So funny when people can't see what's right in front of them...lol

[Christopher]

1. How many ads has MS run saying the Xbox One S is a 4k machine? Ads on both sides are misleading as heck sometimes. How many times has someone on either side said something controversial to point out a failure of the other side? Often. People are stupid and people make poor comparisons that can come to bite them on the ass.

2. Actually, a good number of sites claimed 900p to 1080p wasn't a big deal. But, also, more sites are not saying that 4k is a bigger deal than upscaling than otherwise. This ONE PERSON'S OPINION does not make it MOST SITES. Again, I think you missed my part about taking the view of the minority to support a narrative, which can be done on both sides (just think if we took everything MrXMedia said as the defacto point of view of the Xbox side).

3. For most people, resolution has always been a big deal when it comes to comparisons. Most people said that 900p is fine. Most people agree that 1080p is better. Most people also agree that 1080p/60fps is even better. Most people also agree that native 4k is better than 4k upscaling on any machine. That is most people. This article is not most people. You are attempting to create a narrative out of this to suit 'everyone'. It's hyperbolic and annoying. And, no, you're not the only person to do it, you just do it a ton to suit your bias, which is evident and annoying.

[Liqu1d]

You can certainly see a difference if you have good eyesight.

[Elda]

Loving my PS4 Pro!

[bolimekurac]

so now fauxK is ok as a standard. so we went form 4k to fauxK

[Athos]

If you cant tell the difference, you are either in denial, have a crappy 4k TV or a crappy PC. The difference is obvious to me, the PS4 Pro is softer on the edges and honestly 4K at anything under 60fps is a waste of power. I have a PS4 Pro and enjoy it, but I am not a fanboy so I can see the difference as I dont wear the goggles.

[andibandit]

We should go back to 640p and do checkerboard

[riibhu]

Clearly most people seem to have shitty eye sights. Or it's that they don't want to see the difference. Anyway you can clearly see the differences.

[MasterCornholio]

Nice article. I'm glad that checkerboarding works well.

[gamesndames]

Except its not native 4k and it will be when Scorpio drops. I'd rather wait a few months for that

[Christopher]

Even MS says that all its games won't be in native 4k...

[Bolts]

The difference between 30 FPS and 60 FPS however is night and day.

[Aenea]

It's funny that many people don't seem to have noticed that the article is not talking about traditional upscaling and how good/bad it is to see the difference between upscaling and native.

Nope, it's talking about checkerboard rendering, geometry rendering and how the ID buffer is used to achieve something that IS difficult to distinguish from natively rendered images.

I know it's a popular notion to call these rendering techniques 'upscaling', fact remains that it's actually not. Even if you want to call it that, one can't deny that it's done in a totally different way and at a totally different moment in the rendering pipeline.

[Christopher]

Umm... No.

Checkerboard rendering is just specifying the type of upscaling being performed. It is still upscaling. And, it is easy to tell which is upscaled and which isn't. Just as easy to tell this as it is what is 900p and what isn't. Perhaps you can't tell the difference, much like how some people couldn't tell a game was 900p, but that doesn't make it a universal truth. There are obvious factors you can look for to tell the difference.

The question is whether a person who never sees native 4k next to upscaled 4k cares considering they are seeing something they think is good already. That's pretty much me on this 'mid gen upgrade' cycle to being with. I'm happy with PS4/XBO level of graphics. I don't need 4k until it goes completely native or possibly even beyond.

[Aenea]

Ehmm, no....

Checkerboard rendering is not a mere upscaling. With upscaling you render at a certain normal resolution and at the end before sending it out to the display device it stretches the image to the destination resolution.

Checkerboard rendering doesn't work like that, so calling it the same thing as upscaling is not correct.

Sure, you can tell which is upscaled and which isn't if you look closely enough, but have you compared a native 4k screen with a checkerboard rendered one? Since the techniques are so different and give different results you can't just go out and say that since you can see the difference between native and upscaled you will also see the difference between checkerboarded and native...

[Christopher]

***Checkerboard rendering is not a mere upscaling. ***

Stop trying to elevate a better form of upscaling to more than just upscaling. No one is saying it's crappy, but it's still upscaling, which means it's not the same as native 4k.

***With upscaling you render at a certain normal resolution and at the end before sending it out to the display device it stretches the image to the destination resolution. ***

There are a variety of ways to upscale that result in a similar function, but not all of them just stretches the resolution. Hardware upscale tends to do just that. Software upscaling, which is what includes checkerboard methodology in upscaling, use various approaches from filling in pixels using algorithms (similar to checkerboard and a few others) to enhanced AA algorithms and more.

It is upscaling, it's just a more advanced form of upscaling. You saying it's not upscaling is attempting to ignore what upscaling includes or to elevate it as being more than upscaling. It's not more than upscaling, which would be native resolution, but it's also far from the worst form of upscaling.

[rainslacker]

In technical terms, if the rendering technique happens during the pipeline render and within the frame buffer, which checkerboarding does, then it's not upscaling. Upscaling is the process of adding pixels to an already processed image during the post-process or completely outside the frame buffer through auxillery hardware. In the case of checkerboarding, and I'm going to assume MS spatial whatever-they-call-it, it's using multiple frames to extrapolate a bigger frame. It's a different technique to derive the result, but in essence, the two lower resolution frames can be thought of as the textures which make up the final frame.

I often say upscaling due to convienance, but the reality of it is that it is not. Not on a technical level, or by the layman definition of upscaling.

When it comes to such things, the actual native resolution is whatever is output from the frame buffer, and in this case, it'll be output at 4K. So, Sony could go all out and say it can render native 4K, and not actually be culpable for misleading marketing. They aren't though, and that's probably a good thing considering how convoluted the whole spec is already.....which admittedly, Sony's TV division didn't help with.

I think it's possible to tell a difference. The real question is, is how pronounced those differences are.

Personally, despite being able to tell the differences myself, I have never let it bother me. From my experience, the vast majority of gamers outside the hardcore fan boy space, don't care as much either.

Keep in mind, that the checkerboard technique can be used post process, and be considered an upscaling technique, but in this case it's not. It's heavily built into the render pipeline to achieve better results...much better than you'd get through standard upscaling. OTOH, I feel the differences in upscaling from high resolutions to 4K make it hard to notice differences. assuming comparable levels of graphics quality, 4K upscled will look better than straight 1080, checkerboard pipeline renders will look better than 1080, and native 4K will look better than checkerboarded. However, the higher up the resolution food chain you go, the less noticeable the differences become.

[Bladesfist]

@rainslacker You can be perfectly correct with your wording and still deemed to be misleading. False advertising is what you are thinking of. Misleading advertising just means any advertising which makes claims that are likely to give customers the wrong understanding of the quality or price of something. Read customer, not graphics engineer.

For example I could render a 1080p image to a 4k framebuffer with no scaling (black borders) at all and say it was 4k. I'm pretty sure it would be deemed misleading if I sold it as native 4k.

[Aenea]

"Stop trying to elevate a better form of upscaling to more than just upscaling. No one is saying it's crappy, but it's still upscaling, which means it's not the same as native 4k."

Well, it's not actually upscaling, but even if you want to still call it that, the results of checkerboard rendering are less easy to spot than traditional upscaling, you even say so yourself "... a better form of upscaling...".

And my original post was about many a reply here saying things that made clear they themselves were talking about traditional upscaling and how well they can spot it while the article is not talking about traditional upscaling at all!

Also, software upscaling can also stretch the resolution in the same fashion a hardware scaler can. . If the upscale technique doesn't have any information to use other than the original frame it's traditional upscaling, that they scaler, software or hardware based, then can add ways to soften the artefacts doesn't matter, it's still upscaling. That is something you can see way better than sparse/checkerboard rendering.

I know, it's not native, but it's not a black and white, either, or, thing, you have traditional upscaling, rendering techniques like checkerboard rendering and you have native. To write it in a way many people here get it:
native 4k > rendering techniques to achieve 4k > upscaling from higher than 1080p to 4k > upscaling from 1080p or lower to 4k

Problems arise with that notion when you add in the fact that those rendering techniques can be used to reach resolutions that are not 2160p, some PS4 Pro games for instance use checkerboard rendering to get to 1800p and then they do a traditional upscale, this method is of course worse than checkerboard rendering at 2160p but better than only traditional upscaling...

To just say that it's not native so it is upscaling is rather simplistic.

@rainslacker

Thanks for that!

BTW, MS calls it 'sparse rendering'.

[Christopher]

***In technical terms, if the rendering technique happens during the pipeline render and within the frame buffer, which checkerboarding does, then it's not upscaling. ***

Yeah, it is. The upscale process happens after the full frame image is compiled by the GPU and goes through another software process to be upscaled from that image as well as the previous frame. This process does not happen at the same time as the original compiling of a single frame but is done after a frame is compiled and then emulates an upscaled image from the last two frames using software upscaling.

What you think is happening (I guess?): GPU processes frame and checkerboard at the same time, posts 1 frame of image to the screen.

What happens: GPU processes frame, checkerboard process happens to combine elements of current and past frame to create an upscaled frame which is sent to the screen.

That last part, where it compares two fully processed frames is the upscaling. It is outside of the standard process of creating a single frame image. It has to be due to it creating an upscaled image based on two frames.

***Upscaling is the process of adding pixels to an already processed image during the post-process or completely outside the frame buffer through auxillery hardware.***

Incorrect. It is the process of adding pixels post the GPU process of a single frame, which is what happens here. That's why it's specified as software upscaling since it happens in the same GPU and buffer rather than via hardware (typically chip-based TVs). There is no specification that limits upscaling to only that which is handled completely outside of the GPU processing. Upscaling is adding pixels to a GPU processed frame, that is exactly what happens on the PS4.

By your logic, the upscaling that happens on the XBO currently is also not upscaling because it also happens within the frame buffer. It is software-based upscaling, just on a much simpler level than that of what Sony is and what the Scorpio will use.

[rainslacker]

@Blade

That is true. But in this case, I don't feel that Sony is being misleading. At least not with those who really watch this stuff daily like us. Maybe their more mainstream marketing is more misleading, but I haven't really been watching that.

@Chris

Except that's not what's happening in checkerboarding. It's using multiple frames, of a lower resolution, to then extrapolate a full frame image within the frame buffer.

Rendering, at it's very core has multitudes of process effects applied to it to achieve various things, from lighting, depth, texture quality and effects, and even resolution.

The way you're trying to explain it, that would mean there isn't a single fully native 4K render in existence because I can't think of any rendering algorithm that renders each pixel one by one. Even the most powerful consumer level GPU chips are not capable of doing this in real time at even 30fps(more like 1 frame every 10 seconds at 4K), and they all rely on process effects to make it a reality.

I'm not thinking anything is happening. I know what's happening. Two frames are used to create a single frame. That is what is coined as checkerboarding. This technique can be used as an upscaling technique, but it technically only becomes upscaling when it's done post process, not within the frame buffer itself. The output from the frame buffer is 4K native. There is no differentiation between software and hardware at this point, because software is just a set of instructions for the hardware to execute. That's just how the rendering pipeline is considered when looked at from a technical level.

It's mostly technical symatics though, and I'm not trying to discredit you or anything since your comment is insightful and fair, but on a technical level, it is not upscaling.

I'm not going to argue over the context of the word though, because for the most part, it can be considered an upscale of a lower res image, or two in this case. I was merely stating the official technical side of things, and I will admit that even in the development houses, upscaling would be a common term to use to describe it, because when it's discussed, the context is understood, and it's simpler than sitting around bickering about what it technically is, or using the full name of the process(alternate frame rendering)....so basically, it's not done as a fan boy thing.

Anyhow, notice how it's discussed by Sony? It's called checkerboard rendering, not checkerboard upscaling. The two things are distinctly different, although essentially the same process, which in itself have multiple ways to achieve the same thing. Doing it within the frame buffer is faster, and typically derives better results at less cost to hardware resources. Rendering is never a simple thing when you look at all the techniques involved.

That said, to my knowledge, the upscaling in the X1 is done post process. Post process can still be within the GPU itself. Pre process is anything that happens within the frame buffer, with the process being the actual output. The X1 itself upscales after it's output from the frame buffer, and before being sent to the system for output, hence, technically, upscaled, and not native.

[Christopher]

***Except that's not what's happening in checkerboarding. It's using multiple frames, of a lower resolution, to then extrapolate a full frame image within the frame buffer. ***

You're confusing the process, and that is what is happening. Those full frames are fully processed and then go through an additional process. That additional process is the software upscaling.

What I explained above is EXACTLY what happens. I even mentioned that it uses one past frame and one current frame to process the upscaling.

***but on a technical level, it is not upscaling. ***

It absolutely is. It is completely outside of the bounds of the in-game engine and processes the frames after the engine has generated them.

Agree to disagree, but you are attempting to sell something as being a part of the inherent in-game engine process of creating a single frame when that is just not true. Anything outside of that is upscaling, and that's where checkerboard occurs.

[wheatley]

My subscription to Digital Foundary's YouTube channel will give me the best info on that claim.

[TeamIcoFan]

Tis the law of diminishing returns. Most people sit roughly 5 or 6 feet away from their TV on a big comfy couch, and at that distance, as you go higher, the difference in resolution becomes harder to spot.

[senorfartcushion]

A deep dive into the pro and the genius who made it?

Wow, sycophantic much?

[OrbitingTheOrb]

It still doesn't change the fact that Scorpio WILL be more powerful than the PS4 Pro. If the rumors of the system having 12gb of ram are true, it will be able to push games a good bit farther than PS4P.

So what if it checkerboards the same way the PS4 does. The games will still look better, run smoother, and be able to do HDR in a more effective way, and it will be able to push more effects without bogging down. You may not see native 4K games all the time, but you will see more games running at 60fps than the competition.

Sony fanboys are so desperate to downplay the Scorpio.

[CP_Company]

and what are you going to play on that powerful scorpio? :D games? what games? even if you will have few,they going to run better on PC,true 4k and ultra settings and 60fps :) so good luck living in delusional world.

[Master of Unlocking]

It's really amazing that a console that costs a third to a fourth of the price of a 4K-capable PC manages to come this close to it. Incredible.

[emty]

certainly PSfanboys won't see a difference...LOL

[Smokingunz]

Utter bs! Only Sony fans approve of this nonsense. There is a huge difference between native 4k and upscaled 4k, the ps4 pro isn't nearly as powerful to even produce 4k, the games barely don't even look any different from the base ps4, stop lying to the people cerny,also, the Scorpio will be a more powerful and capable machine that will deliver true 4k to all games as well, the pro is a joke and that's why a lot of people didn't buy it.

[abra511]

read the damn thing
pspro doesnt just upscale
and the scorpio will not play everything in 4k

[CP_Company]

you are the joke.don't be so delusional,xbox main head Spencer said that scorpio will play just some games native in 4k,so stop saying what you do not know,okey? or you know better then the main man in xbox? :D
and tell us more about scorpio? how much powerful it is going to be? :D because you are main man responsible for scorpio creation :)

[Donnie81]

The pro is wayyyyyy better than I thought it would be, not even gonna try to lie. But I think there are a few telling signs here and there. Go play tlou remastered and click between the 1800p unlocked frame rate mode and the click it back to the 4k 30 frames mode and look at Joel's face, you can tell. Nothing major though and for 400$ its a tremendous value. Besides the super cheap boxing it comes in the system oozes quality. But he is probably right most people aren't gonna knit pick the gorgeous graphics enough to see any difference.

[LastCenturyRob]

Would rather games render at 1440p with locked 60fps and graphics set on ultra than native 4k with lower fps and/or lighting and effects.

[abra511]

we already knew that
but still we want native 4k just because

[Tsar4ever01]

Wow, I find it shocking. That with everybody concentrating & debating on the tech of Checkerboard Rendering, I didn't notice a single comment mentioned off the article on a technical milestone as far as consoles hardware goes. Nobody notices or care that the PlayStation 4 Pro is the first console EVER to have "DUAL" GPU's running in crossfire. Last time I checked, only desktop PC's utilize multiple gpus in SLI/CrossFire.

[Hendog1981]

I feel sorry for those whose eye sight cant tell the difference between native 4k and checkerboard/upscalled/fake4k. i'll admit that fake4k is a good technique but there is a noticible difference between it and native especially on larger 4k TV's. This guy needs to remove lips from Mark Cerny's sphincter.

[alfcrippinjr]

its another marketing gimmick that all
if we could up scale the ps4 with a up scalier you would not see much difference

[BenRC01]

Once vr really takes off no one is gonna care about 4k/8k hdr etc. I haven't switched on my gaming 4k hdr set since getting psvr.

[Brisco]

Hahaha..

[BenRC01]

My 1080p panny plasma still looks better at 1080p than my new 4k hdr Samsung.

[Yohshida]

What happened to 2013-2015? Everyone could clearly see 900-1080p difference. The problem here isnt the Resolution itself, 4k textures and other settings available on PC is something you will clearly miss.

[Brisco]

Hahaha, the media! The difference is gonna be immense!

[_LarZen_]

It's not as black and white as that... Sure if the game is rendering at a native 1800p then the jump up to 2160p is not that big. But as soon as the resolution gets lower the difference gets quite big.

[paulomoreira]

Sony and Microsoft are such a lucky companies they have a lot of people trying to sell the products for them , buy the one u like more and dont try to put down the tech only because its not the one of your choice ,u are only stopping the advance of change .

[feedthereaper]

If your idea of a good time is counting the pixels and comparing resolutions on a screen, you lose the entire reason for owning a games console in the first place, and should take up Plane Spotting or something instead!

[joed2605]

While I much prefer my GPU power going towards framerate, shadow quality, reflections and antiialiasing (I don't need amazing graphics just not blurry or distracting artifacts such as stairstepping) the difference between 4K native and upscaling techniques such as temporal reprojection and checkerboarding is quite evident in movement because it makes the game have issues such as ghosting or jagged edges like that of interlaced video. I don't mind my games being only 1080p or 1440p as long as the image is clean and not upscaled. I don't see the point in upgrading to 4K until it becomes a standard and games can be handled at that res without compromise. I like getting good looking games but I much prefer playing games like Quantum break, watch dogs 2 and rainbow six siege without the upscaling. Downsampling is a much better use of GPU power than upscaling or checkboarding in my opinion.

[KakashiHotake]

You can barely tell the difference between PS4 Pro and proper PS4 games.

[_LarZen_]

Said no one ever that owns a 4K HDR TV.

[masso9112]

Problem is my TV is only 1080p and 39" inches or maybe less I don't remember... So...

[kdmitchell_toh]

I dunno. I see massive differences when I play RoTR on the PS4 Pro and what I see when playing it in true 4K on my PC.

I still say I'd rather that power be used for a consistent 1080p60fps with all the bells and whistles. But I seem to be in the minority.

[Onixg5mer]

Only if you play on console only.

[Cobra951]

Most people won't be able to tell the difference between 1080p and proper 4K.

[TheOptimist]

WellI have not seen 'feaux'K first hand, only seen 4K, but I can tell the difference between 'feaux'K and 4K on a 1080p 60 fps YouTube video. Pretty sure I'll be able to make it out in real life.

[shaneybow]

I wonder if devs will start implementing sparse rendering/checkerboard rendering into PC titles? Resident evil has interlaced rendering and an FPS jump happens when its selected... fingers crossed

[BeenThereDoneThat]

I have a 65" 4k Samsung HDR TV. Everything looks better on it. Setting the TV to "Game Mode" to turn off all TV processing to decrease input lag, then flipping back and forth between the Pros "modes" on lots of games. I can see a slight difference, but it's nothing drastic. Most of my family sees even less than I do. None of the games I've played have bennefitted from the increased resolution. But perhaps as more and more games come out we'll see some 4k visual benefits added to the gameplay. The regular PS4 already has smooth, clean graphics, but the increase in frame rate is very noticeable, and for that alone I love my Pro. I can't wait for the new firmware update to open up higher frame rates for more of my games. That's my .02 cents

[raggy-rocket]

Maybe, but there'll be games where scorpio is 4k and ps4 pro won't be. Why are people pretending every game is gonna be some form of 4k on both. Just unrealistic.