Analyzing Sony’s PlayStation 4 Pro Hardware Reveal: What Lies Beneathby Ryan Smith on September 8, 2016 8:00 AM EST
A few months ago near the start of E3, Sony made an interesting revelation: that they would be releasing a higher performing PlayStation 4 console. A console intended to complement the standard/slim model, this faster PlayStation would be an unusual – if unprecedented – mid-generation update of sorts for Sony’s console family. Previous generations of consoles have offered add-ons, but a significantly faster model is something else entirely.
In any case, after much speculation and a fair bit of analysis on how the PlayStation 4 ecosystem would work with multiple models, in an event in New York City this afternoon, Sony announced the new console. Dubbed the PlayStation 4 Pro, it would sit alongside the newly launched slimmer PS4 (an original PS4 with a die shrunk SoC) as a premium, more powerful entry in the PlayStation 4 family. The console is intended to cover a spectrum of use cases for Sony, including 4K TV support, HDR, better VR performance, and higher fidelity graphics on today’s 1080p TVs.
As AnandTech is not a gaming website, I’m going to skip the gaming ramifications. Instead, let’s do what we do best and dive into the hardware.
PlayStation 4 Pro: AMD’s Next Semi-Custom SoC Win
A bit to my surprise, Sony actually released some basic specifications about the underlying hardware. The information is similar to what we were given close to the PS4 launch, but at the same time I wasn’t expecting this information until we were closer to the PS4 Pro’s November launch.
|Sony PlayStation 4 Spec Comparison|
|PlayStation 4 (OG)||PlayStation 4 (Slim)||PlayStation 4 Pro|
|CPU Frequency||1.6GHz||1.6GHz||> 1.6GHz|
|CPU µArch||AMD Jaguar||AMD Jaguar||AMD Jaguar|
|Shared L2 Cache||2 x 2MB||2 x 2MB||2 x 2MB?|
|GPU Cores||1152 (18 CUs)||1152 (18 CUs)||2304 (36 CUs)?|
|Peak Shader Throughput||1.84 TFLOPS||1.84 TFLOPS||4.20 TFLOPS|
|System Memory||8GB 5.5 Gbps GDDR5||8GB 5.5 Gbps GDDR5||8GB ? Gbps GDDR5|
|System Memory Bus||256-bits||256-bits||256-bits|
|System Memory Bandwidth||176.0 GB/s||176.0 GB/s||176.0 GB/s?|
|Optical Drive||6x BD||6x BD||6x BD|
With a focus on increased performance, the heart and soul of the PS4 is a new, higher performance SoC from AMD. One of AMD’s semi-custom design wins for H2’16, Sony has released certain details that help paint a useful, though not quite complete picture of what this SoC can do.
On the CPU side, Sony is not officially discussing clockspeed. However they have confirmed that it is still an 8 core Jaguar design like the original PlayStation, so there are no additional CPU cores in play. Furthermore the CPU clockspeed has been boosted by an undisclosed amount, so total CPU performance has increased.
While I have some ideas on what those numbers may be, it does depend in part on how much work AMD put in on the semi-custom stage of the design process. The newer manufacturing process – which I believe to be TSMC’s 16nm since that is AMD’s regular semi-custom fab partner – certainly delivers some benefits. But at the same time the Jaguar architecture was not originally designed to scale to very high clockspeeds – keep in mind that this was a low power architecture to begin with – so there are frequency bottlenecks besides simple silicon limits. For reference, the fastest desktop Jaguar desktop processor topped out at 2.2GHz. Unless AMD has done any major reworking of Jaguar for Sony, that is about as good of a guess as we can make, short of Sony confirming any numbers.
Meanwhile on the GPU side, things get a lot more interesting. The PS4 Pro’s SoC features a far more powerful integrated GPU, more than doubling the rated performance of the original PS4. Overall the PS4 is rated for 4.2 TFLOPs, versus 1.84 TFLOPs on the original console. In terms of raw throughput, this is to AMD’s current-generation mainstream discrete GPUs, offering throughput somewhere between the RX 470 (4.9 TFLOPs) and the R9 380X (4.0 TFLOPs).
The significant increase in GPU performance is easily the biggest selling point of the new console, and is the cornerstone of Sony’s plans to pitch the console as a higher fidelity alternative to the stock PS4. This includes both higher quality rendering (e.g. more objects, better shadows, etc) and higher framerates, but also higher resolutions as well as part of Sony’s greater push to make the PS4 Pro synonymous with 4K.
As far as the GPU configuration goes then, officially we don’t have anything to work with besides the raw throughput. Clockspeeds and CU counts are both very good questions right now, as the jump to 16nm will have improved both AMD’s ability to pack in more CUs in a given area, and, at least to some extent, rev up the clockspeeds. So how AMD has opted to balance these factors is an interesting question.
Given that GPU throughput has increased by 2.3x, my hunch is that AMD has pushed both aspects. A straight doubling in the CU count coupled with a modest (14%) increase in the GPU clockspeed would reach the stated performance numbers without too radical of an alteration of the GPU architecture. But there’s a lot of wiggle room here; it could just as easily be 34 CUs at a higher clockspeed, for example. A wider design favors power efficiency – which is always a boon in a console – but as 16nm is still a newer process, it’s a chip yield risk.
Meanwhile, it’s important to note here that as we’ve seen in the discrete GPU space, shader throughput is not everything. Shaders are indeed frequently the biggest bottleneck to GPU performance, but they are hardly the only one. One way or another AMD has greatly increased the shader throughput of their SoC, but rather they’ve increased the unit counts on any other aspects remains to be seen. Whether they’ve added additional geometry units or ROPs could significantly influence the performance of the console, as it’s going to be relatively harder to fill up those expanded shader resources if these other resources weren’t similarly expanded. At the same time we don’t know anything about how the GDDR5 memory is clocked; I think it’s a safe bet that it’s clocked higher since the original console was only at 5.5Gbps, but even 7Gbps memory would only be 27% more memory bandwidth to feed a much wider GPU. In short, it’s best not to assume that all aspects of the GPU have been doubled, and consequently that the real world performance advantage for the PS4 Pro is not going to be quite as great as the GPU specs indicate.
On that note, while Sony is pitching the console for 4K video and gaming, Mark Cerny was rather clear that to reach 4K gaming, they expect developers to make significant use of both spatial and temporal anti-aliasing/reprojection.to reach 4K. In other words, most of the time the console won’t actually be rendering games at 4K. This makes a lot of sense; all else held equal, the PS4 Pro needs to fill 4x as many pixels with a GPU that’s (at best) 2.3x as powerful.
This means that the number of games that natively render at 4K is by necessity going to be relatively few. Games could still render at resolutions over 1080p (e.g. 2560x1440), giving them more fidelity than current 1080p games, but various upscaling/reprojection methods will have to close the gap to 4K. Given that even the best PC GPUs have only recently reached the performance level to render the necessary 8.3Mpixels without significant quality compromises, and we’re likely a generation (or more) from consoles being able to reach that same level.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
tipoo - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - linkEh, I can't play Bloodborne on my PC. I'd like to, but I can't. So both machines have uses.
Wolfpup - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - linkI think they're both great. I'm still quite amazed by PS4 graphics, and I was amazed by Xbox 360 class graphics for YEARS. (And am kind of amazed that I'm finally no longer amazed LOL)
owan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link"Anandtech is not a gaming website"
I guess thats why we don't see GPU reviews anymore? I forgot that everyone I know builds PCs for things other than gaming and not the other way around.
Dr. Swag - Friday, September 9, 2016 - linkMaybe it's not that they don't do GPU reviews anymore, but that it takes time to write the best GPU review of any site on the Internet?
I suggest you read this if you haven't already: http://www.anandtech.com/home/about/
owan - Monday, September 12, 2016 - linkSorry, but reviews 2+ months after launch means that the review has become irrelevant. People who wanted one early didn't get the benefit of a review, and people who wait have a lot more info to choose from. I've been reading AT for over a decade... they were the most useful when they provided quality articles in a *timely* manner. PcPer publishes articles when NDA lifts and they're quality reviews... so why can't AT be bothered to attempt the same? I'd wait a week or two, but MONTHS is absurd. I just wish they'd give up the charade and admit that they don't care anymore rather than stringing loyal readers along
ToTTenTranz - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - link"For reference, the fastest desktop Jaguar desktop processor topped out at 2.2GHz."
Actually, the A8 7410 Carrizo-L will "turbo" up to 2.5GHz.
Sure, that's a "Puma", though the difference between Jaguar and Puma should (arguably) be little more than the implementation of a "Turbo" mode and higher clocks due to 28nm being more mature.
tipoo - Friday, September 9, 2016 - linkI wonder if the iterative consoles are a bit more puma-ish since the core is largely compatible. Though, consoles aren't the best place for Turbo Boost, consistent performance is more important.
Azusis - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - linkNo UHD BluRay player? Why? Seems like such an oversight.
If I have a 4K TV and want to take advantage of it I can:
1) Buy an Xbox One S for $299 and get updated games and play 4K blu rays on my new TV,
2) Buy a PS4 Pro for $400, a UHD BluRay Player for $300, and now I'm out more than twice as much money as grabbing an xbox.
JeffFlanagan - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - linkAnd then replace the XBox One S with Scorpio when it comes out for >1080p gaming?
Sony probably skipped the UHD Blu-Ray player because they expect streaming and downloads to replace plastic discs. It already has for many of us. I own a couple of BluRay players, and have only used them a couple of times. My HD and 4K content comes via the Internet.
doubledeej - Thursday, September 8, 2016 - linkStreaming content isn't anywhere near the quality of disc-based content.