All Channels
Popular
730°

Will the PlayStation 4 Support 4K Resolution?

Dan writes - "4K a term that Sony used about a billion times during their CES keynote. They are trying to bring 4K blu-ray players and screens in to households. But what does this mean for their next gaming console?"

Read Full Story >>
aunonline.com
JoelT5246d ago (Edited 5246d ago )

4k stills not video, and thats a bandwidth limitation of HDMI 1.3a thats on the PS3, not the PS3 hardware itself.

Solid_Snake375246d ago (Edited 5246d ago )

Damn imagine the price of a 4k tv 0_0

bakasora5245d ago

sounds really expensive

tgh machines5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

The 4k projector costs $25,000.

http://nofilmschool.com/201...

hesido5245d ago

4k is not necessary for house viewing. There I said it. This is not even like the "640KB is ought to be enough for everybody" kind of issue. The resolution we need in typical home viewing distances, we'd need 100 inch screens or probably even more for 4K to matter over full HD material.

nveenio5245d ago

Yeah, I could see wanting more than 1080p for a computer monitor (where your face is in the screen) or large (65"+) televisions. But for the majority of viewing, it's not worth the price tag and wouldn't be until a 70" TV costs less than $1000.

Kleptic5245d ago

^agreed...I really hope the next consoles have a primary focus on full 1080 at 60fps...

the BS that the Ps3 and 360 did with 1080p was the single shat ball of this generation imo...if either console actually did full HD with 'real' retail games, there would be absolutely NO need for new hardware until years from now...

I am completely ready to throw down for a new console that does 1080p across the board on every single game...hopefully that is the primary goal for next generation...if they start pushing even more HD stuff, we'll get the same thing all over the place...i.e. not what is advertised...

badz1495245d ago

1080p on 50"+ looks insanely good and add 3D to it, and you'll see how pointless 4k sounds at the moment!

for TVs less than 40" in size, difference between 720p and 1080p is minimal, how big a screen will we need to have significant difference between 1080p and 4k then?

of course, a behemoth of a PC GPUs can run native 4k resolution across multiple monitors. I don't know about everybody else, but personally, multi-monitor annoys the hell out of me because of that borders between monitors! how can people even think that this is great is beyond me!

http://static.arstechnica.n...

4k projectors are also very expensive to boot and most people don't have the space in their house for projector setup and I don't see that changing anytime soon

Autodidactdystopia5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

Who knows if it will support 4k.

but...if it does MARK MY MOTHER EFFIN WORDS, You will only see 1080P Gaming From the device.

With Sony its always good to look at the Marketing claims they make for the previous generation
console then expect it in the current generation.

with playstation 2 they said they would push Toy Story graphics...... NAHHHH Bullshit.

with playstation 3 they said OHH our console is the only one stong enough for 1080P again Bullshit.

Now they're gonna say ps4 can do 4K good so expect that in the PS5

with ps4 expect 1080P graphics as a standard for almost good looking games and then lower than that for AAA titles. they'll just upscale to 4k and you all will be none the wiser.

also don't expect much more than 30Fps for AAA titles it would be dumb for devs to spare all that extra horsepower for 30 extra FPS it has happened before it will happen again.

ps3 promised 1080p you got 720p until recently when they needed more horsepower and they chopped line after line of resolution as low as 1120×630

Ps4 will promise 4k you will get 1080 for a portion of AAA's and then they'll slowly start to cut lines of resolution for performance and you'll end up with 1600X960 games at the end of life for ps4.

don't get caught up in the hype again.

fool you once shame on them fool you ps4 times shame..... just shame.

+ Show (6) more repliesLast reply 5245d ago
dedicatedtogamers5246d ago

If games could run at this so-called "4k" resolution, AND hold a decent framerate, AND have a reasonable leap forward in physics/draw distance, then it could be something truly incredible.

I doubt Sony would make yet another new disc format with the PS4. My guess is that they'll really push 4k resolution (because Sony has a habit of using their game consoles to push TVs, formats, etc) and make the PS4 able to play 4k resolution games.

TotalHitman5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

I don't know, they just might release a new format. Google 'Holographic Versatile Disc' or click this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wik...

In time this could succeed Blu-ray.

Although Sony doesn't support the format they might invest in it in the future.

Also, it's pretty interesting to see Nintendo supporting this format don't you think?

Mikefizzled5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

@TotalHitman That is not a commercially viable method with an insane price tag and ridiculously expensive discs this should never even be considered. Also what does it have to do with Google?

MAJ0R5245d ago

@TotalHitman
in the next 15-20 years maybe, in they next 3-5 years? hell no, $15,000 bucks (plus $180 per disk) is way too much and that price will not drop any time soon or in the near future.

OpenGL5245d ago

A single Radeon 7970 is already powerful enough to handle a lot of games at QFHD ie 4x 1080p on the PC, in a console this sort of card would easily handle anything currently on the PS3 and 360 at that resolution with extra anti-aliasing and a higher frame rate.

For the best experience gaming at a 4k class resolution you'd probably want two Radeon 6990s, 7970s, or GTX 590s. The successor to the GTX 580 should be powerful enough to handle any game currently out at 4k.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 5245d ago
just_looken5246d ago

lol i can see it now OMFG LOOK AT THE GRAPHICS yet the game has a narrow 2-3hr sp and same military bs shooter or generic mp but people will buy the tv/output device just for its looks. 6grand tv+4k output device= pointless sense we all know what happened to 3dtv prices/tech lol.ill wait till 2030 for 12k resolution heck what can our eyes handle? we may get so high resolution we may blind ourselves you never know.

Blaine5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

I'm pretty sure the real world (you know, that place outside your door) has the best resolution, and that hasn't made anyone go blind.

Brightness, on the other hand...

About campaign length: as engines evolve, they require no more work from devs to create games with more detailed environments. So there's no reason for games to keep getting shorter.

Ocelot5255245d ago

Unless you live in a movie theatre, this feature is completely pointless. 2560*1280 is really the max. above this you need a 100 inch TV to see the actual difference.

They should stick with 1080p and increase textures and other things instead IMO.

The only purpose of this is to lure dumb consumers.

tgh machines5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

Well the 4k projector costs $25,000. *edit* wrong reply.

FanboyPunisher5245d ago

NO AAA Title will run at 4K on a console, LOL.

You know the type of gpu they'd need? Ram too.
Sorry PC's will be able to with SLI/TRI but a console mabye in another two gens you'd be lucky to see that.

4K will not be present, unless its for stardust HD and other PSNetwork titles, or remakes.

4K with PS4 graphics is highly unlikely.

+ Show (4) more repliesLast reply 5245d ago
THC CELL5246d ago

Bound to aint it i just want to see what 4k looks like
cause 1080p was a huge step up.

OcularVision5246d ago

It will look crystal clear... but the smallest 4k TV is 55" and is usually at 84" so you should just reserve a wall for it.

Guwapo775246d ago (Edited 5246d ago )

Actually just advertised at CES 2012 - Panasonic has a 20.5" 4k screen.

http://www.engadget.com/201...

I really wonder if this would be worthy as a laptop screen.

kneon5245d ago

There have been 4k monitors for medical imaging for a while now in sizes starting around 26", really expensive though.

But the technology is there now to produce 8k TVs, it just may cost more than your house right now :)

dktxx25246d ago

Why would it? Consumers aren't going to have access to 4k resolutions for years. And even if they did, the human eye can't even notice 4k resolutions when your standing 10 feet away from a 50 inch TV. I can't imagine how big a TV would have to be to get the benefits of 4k resolution.

SilentNegotiator5245d ago

Years, if even in our lifetimes.

kneon5245d ago

It will be here sooner than you think and it looks amazing. Even a 50 inch would benefit, it can look almost like reality.

I've seen a 60 inch side by side comparison with 1080p and the difference was obvious even from about 8 feet away.

Yes it will be expensive at first but it was only about 15 years ago that a 32 inch hdtv cost over $25000. Within 5 years 4k will begin to be affordable.

milohighclub5245d ago

aint they getting released to the public this year???

SilentNegotiator5245d ago

@Kneon and milo

And they're going watch.....what on it, exactly? Do you really think people are going to waste time releasing films in 4000p? What medium is that realistic on? Would enough people really have a 4000p TV to watch it on? No one will be able to stream movies in 4K, we don't have physical media to realistically hold feature length (Look at public release years: VHS - 1976, DVD - 1996, Blu-ray - 2006....we won't realistically HAVE a format that advanced in 5 years, either)......they could release an "AutoBoatHome" to the public, too, but it wouldn't be street legal, couldn't get the proper licenses to operate in most waters, and wouldn't be approved of by aerial commission groups.

It took like a decade just to get a large number of people into HDTVs. And that was a 4x resolution leap (1080p....though a lot people only have 720p)....we're not going to go from 1080p to 4000p (assuming a consistency to 16:9 ratio....that's a leap of over 14 times from 2M pixels to 28 million pixels!). Not in 5 years, probably not in 20 years. It's simply incredibly unnecessary, impractical, and not cost effective (unless you have a new technology that uses about 1/100th of power that the amount current TVs use).

kneon5245d ago (Edited 5245d ago )

First off 4k is not 4000p, it's 2160p, the 4k refers to the horizontal resolution of around 4k. So it's like 4 1080p screens in a 2x2 grid, or about 4x the current HD resolution. I say about because there are several different resolutions referred to as 4k but they are all pretty close to each other.

Secondly the media exists now. Bluray BDXL holds 128Gb and is available now, the next versions will likely be in excess of 200gb.

And all your arguments about content were also made when HDTV first arrived. The pickings will be slim initially but will improve eventually.

It will be just like HDTV all over again, initially really expensive and nothing to watch, 4-5 years later the mainstream consumer can start to buy them and a few years after that it will be the default TV to buy.

SilentNegotiator5245d ago

Okay, well then I still say we're no where near jumping above 1080p. 4x1080p is still a BUTT LOAD of data and we don't have the medium for it, nor is it reasonable for streaming (which is quickly becoming VERY popular).

Do you have any idea what sort of read speeds you'd need for a 200GB disc, reading such large data sizes at a time? Most drives are only at like 15x tops. And Blu-rays have been out for almost 6 years now.

The BIGGEST issue is that we haven't even reached 1080p as an actual standard (in ownership). We aren't going to see a ship jumping in 5 or 10 years, I'd bet anything.

"And all your arguments about content were also made when HDTV first arrived"
-
I disagree. This isn't "color TV to HDTV" like before. This is "HD to HD-ier" that no one wants any time soon.

kneon5244d ago

It's only 4 times the data at maximum and we can handle that with existing tech. And they could very well adopt better compression technology for 4k bringing it down a little more.

Read speeds is also a non-issue, the PS3 bluray drive is only 2x, but only 1x is needed for 1080p so we only need to go to 4x. I have a 12x bluray drive in my PCs. I'm expecting the PS4 to have a 6-8x drive regardless of whether 4k is supported or not.

The biggest impediment to 4k media availability is whether the studios are willing to support it. Surely Sony's studios will but others might balk at the idea of giving people theater quality movies at home.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 5244d ago
remanutd555246d ago

ok sony one step at a time , first i want full native 1080P games then you can make 4k , 8k or whatever next gen will support

Nitrowolf25246d ago

well maybe the mark of 4K support could mean that all games will be able to run at 1080P then. I can only hope for it.
I want it to be capable of 1080 P at 60 FPS. Computers been doing it for years at at higher FPS and resolution, so it isn't doing anything new in the eyes of PC gamers, but for us Console players it's a pretty big step and one that we want.

Korda5246d ago (Edited 5246d ago )

4K would be very impractical from a development standpoint. Texture resolutions would have to increase by at least 4x to compensate which will mean that the PS would need MUCH more ram

Pandamobile5246d ago

4k games are out of the realm of possibility for current consoles. Most games struggle to hold a steady 30 FPS at 1280 x 720, let alone 3840 × 2160

DigitalAnalog5246d ago (Edited 5246d ago )

PS3 may support only videos and pictures at that resolution. Since the PS3 does more than just play games, the PR could "technically" interpolate the feature as long as the 4K "resolution" is support somehow and somewhat.

Show all comments (148)
80°

(For Southeast Asia) New Price Changes for PS5, PS5 Pro, and PlayStation Portal remote player

For Southeast Asia, new price changes.

Prices effective starting May 1st, 2026.

Read Full Story >>
blog.playstation.com
24d ago Replies(1)
BeHunted24d ago

Looks like PlayStation took a hit with Marathon and is now quietly adjusting prices worldwide to recover the losses

andy8524d ago

Lets be honest raising prices doesn't do that when no one's buying it. I imagine the profit it greater selling 10 times more at a lower price

Pergele23d ago

Whatever you say buddy, let's all wear the tinfoil hats.

IceKoldKilla23d ago (Edited 23d ago )

LMFAO Your comment alone says a lot more about you than anything else. When has one game not selling 10 million copies made a company raise the prices of their console? Then Xbox would be costing $5000 by now lol. You remind of the crazy drug addicts on the street rambling on about conspiracies. xD You sure you don't need a hug, buddy?

ChunkyMonk23d ago

One game that Sony payed $200 million for. lol
Also, you sure were quick to get triggered. Maybe your the one who needs a hug?

Eonjay23d ago

If nothing else, we should be united against the real issue here. AI and unnecessary tariffs that are effecting all gamers.

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 23d ago
Athlon10124d ago (Edited 24d ago )

The price increases are due to the RAM demand associated with AI and the US-Iran war. You can look to any business news website and local news to see that. Heck, even the 2026 Asus Zenbook Duo I've been eyeing has faced delays and has had a price increase of $400; that laptop has two specs. Asus is doing a staggered release with per-orders for the lower spec now and shipping in May and pre-orders for the higher spec that I'm eyeing starting in June. Basically, all computer manufactures are affected. It'll most likely start affecting smart phones too if it hasn't already. I can't remember the last time any major console maker (Nintendo, Sony, Sega, etc) increased the price of their console mid cycle outside of Microsoft just to make more profit.

S2Killinit23d ago

Its not the war. Its the RAM issue.

jznrpg23d ago

War is causing gas prices to rise. Transport of everything requires gas so the prices of those items go up as well. So it does have an impact

Athlon10123d ago (Edited 23d ago )

The blockage of the Straight of Hormuz due to the US-Iran war has affected raw components used in semi-conductor manufacturing such as bromine, aluminum, and helium. Iran had attacked the liquified natural gas (LNG) plant in Qatar which is a large producer (1/3 globally) of helium which is used in semiconductor etching. So it's the both the war and the RAM crises.

badz14923d ago

Oh no...should I get the Pro now before the price increase?

80°

Former Xbox Exec Says Developers Didn't Want a Sony Monopoly

Former Xbox executive Ed Fries comments on the early days of Xbox, the opinion of Japanese game companies, and more.

Read Full Story >>
insider-gaming.com
37d ago Replies(2)
Reaper22_37d ago

I dont think that'll ever happen. But i must say back in the day, they were definitely trying because they were more cash rich than their competitors.

CosmicTurtle36d ago

I think MS were and still are the richer company. They tried to acquire Sega back in the day (and considered doing so again more recently), they obviously bought exclusivity to Halo which was originally shown as a Mac title. I don’t think as a company MS can claim the moral high ground here. It’s a wilful lack of self awareness.

Of course Sony would try exactly the same if they had the resources, but when the PS2 dominated the industry was in a much healthier place with an abundance of great third parties.

This has been a depressing generation as far as first party decisions are concerned. The fact we are debating business plans rather than which game is better is a sad reflection of the state of things.

Darkseeker37d ago (Edited 37d ago )

There was Nintendo as well, Sony wouldn't have had a monopoly. In fact, the world would be better today if Xbox never existed in the first place. They pretty much brought all bad practices we have today. We might have gotten all of it either way, but not this early. In term of franchises, I don't think there is anything Microsoft released that would actually be missed if it didn't exist. Even Halo the world wouldn't notice if Halo didn't exist.

S2Killinit36d ago

MS was definitely a bad influence on gaming.

raWfodog37d ago

I think almost everyone will agree that a monopoly is not good for the industry. But that being said, the competition needs to be smart and strategic with their business. Simply buying up publishers and traditional third-party studios just to keep them out of the other companies reach is not a sustainable practice. That goes for all parties so don't think I'm just referring to Xbox.

I'm no business guru by any stretch of the imagination but I firmly believe that the best way to drive consumers to your software and hardware is to invest smart in your first-party studios. Give them full support and guidance in making unique, fun games that are only available to play in your ecosystem and the gamers will come.

Reaper22_37d ago (Edited 37d ago )

But first party studios aren't enough. They only make up a small portion of the industry. Without 3rd party there would be no industry for Microsoft or sony.Developing games take time and money and sometimes you gotta make moves to stay competitive.

raWfodog37d ago

Nah, I never said first-party was enough. I said it’s the ‘best way’ to drive gamers to your platform. 3rd-party is a free-for-all and there’s no guarantee that gamers will use your hardware to play the game. If you want to push your own software and/or hardware you need first-party, or at least exclusive deals with third-party studios.

SimpleDad37d ago

They Shure did a great job... 25 years later Xbox is dead.

Reaper22_37d ago

Then why be so emotional and continue to talk about it. Xbox will never die be ause it stays in so many people's head.

lodossrage37d ago

How can you even see him being "emotional" in that comment?

If anything, you're the emotional one, constantly trying to go at anyone that says anything against Microsoft. So when you call him emotional, it comes off as deflection

Elda36d ago

I own an XBSX & I can say it's becoming irrelevant out of the 3 current consoles.

37d ago Replies(2)
Show all comments (34)
40°

Sony Shows Off 20 Minutes of Crimson Desert on a Base PS5

Sony uploaded gameplay footage of Crimson Desert on a base PS5 running in what appears to be Quality Mode at a stable 30fps at 4K.

Read Full Story >>
powerupgaming.co.uk
BlazedKong63d ago

looks god awful on the base systems