PS5 Pro vs PS5: Full Tech Specs Comparison

"Is PS5 Pro more powerful than PS5?" 😆

Well let’s hope developers use PSSR and not just stick with FSR, which they can do.
As to be Pro Enhanced you don’t have to use PSSR Which means you can still get stuck with FSR.

Will be interesting to see on these new patches what they do.

You seem to be comparing PS5 Pro's dimensions with the old PS5 (not slim, which is smaller) - but at the same time you say a drive is sold separately for the digital.
Also, isn't the current price €549 in EU?

I got fomo over the PS5 Pro and caved in my ordering one on Curry's. I was surprised I could still pre order one for launch day on Thursday but happy about it.

The problem is not the specifications, but how they will be used, for how much and how long.

I just wanna play MH Wilds at 60fps without it looking like a blurry mess

This is just the weirdest generation for sure. I remember when I came from PS3 and saw Destiny for the first time on the PS4, I was blown away! When God of War made it to PS4, again I was amazed at the quality. I just haven’t seen a game on PS5 that couldn’t have been done on the PS4 yet. Granted, it’s great to see a console get a game running at 60fps and 4K, but the actual look of the games aren’t really anything more than what has been seen for the last 10 years or so. If a game came out on the PS5 Pro that runs at 30fps because it is such a graphical monster, that would actually be good (and probably GTA6), but right now there isn’t really a reason for myself personally to want to pay out £800 ( since I would also need a disc drive) to have a console that runs PS4 or PS5 games at their highest quality, since they are just clearer looking versions of PS4 games essentially..

It honestly feels like everything the pro is being advertised to do is what they told us the base PS5 would be able to do when it was coming out. I feel so cheated 😅

Is it not 33teraflops???

@Bionic-Spencer Couldn't disagree more. Potato PS4 versions no longer did it for me after about five minutes of Demon's Souls Remake on launch day. Sure, Horizon Forbidden West is an impressive PS4 game and pretty much the same as the PS5 version, but the PS5 version is a clear generational leap over it.

You can approximate newer games on PS4, but that's always been true with older hardware. That said, no one looked at say the Amiga or ZX Spectrum versions of Street Fighter 2 and said "imma buy those instead of the SNES or Megadrive versions".

@get2sammyb Right on the money. I'm also gonna treat it like a new GPU, which is to say I'm not gonna run out and buy every new one released and will slum it with the older hardware until there's a proper leap.

@Bionic-Spencer I'm pinning my hopes on Naughty Dog. Last of Us on PS3 still looks better than most games on PS4 while Last of Us 2 still looks better than most games on PS5. Have hopes their next 'new' game on PS5 will look better than most games on PS6 in the future, but as @get2sabbyb said, its wishful thinking and more a sign of the times than hoping a specific dev gets more out of the machine.

Something that people may overlook is the dedicated OS RAM. It could meaningfully improve the base system functionality, making everything more snappy, not to mention freeing up all the 16GB of system RAM for the games.

One of my favorite upgrades from the PS4 to the PS4 Pro was the notably better experience from booting up and using the interface. Admittedly, the base PS5 interface is no slouch, so it may not be as dramatic.

Really looking forward to getting my Pro later this week!

Nearly as excited about it as I am for the 1.6 update for Stardew finally dropping later today. 😀

@0niguy from digital foundry

But it's the 16.7TF of GPU compute performance that is new information. Sony has not actually given any kind of TFLOPs number for the PlayStation 5 Pro, but prior leaks have suggested around 33.5TF - a somewhat exaggerated number that arrived with AMD RDNA 3 architecture with its dual issue FP32 functionality. Sony's confirmation of 16.7TF suggests that the dual issue FP32 support is not in the PlayStation 5 Pro - not that this is too much of a big deal as it has very, very little impact on gaming performance.

@Bionic-Spencer this generation unlike previous generations has focused so much on cross generation titles. A majority of the present library for PS5 and the Xbox Series titles is cross generation. So no real leveraging of the current generation of consoles. But the games there were developed for this generation of consoles look nice and justify the current crop of consoles. Hopefully the next four years of PS5 and Xbox series consoles we will see great games that define this generation.

@Darylb88 not particularly surprising - it’s the most expensive Sony console of all time even including the original ps3 and accounting for inflation (£697 for the higher tier model and with a disc drive). It’s also launching with the same base ps5 cpu and still at a time when economic prosperity and job security is an ongoing issue.

I don’t think it’s going to be difficult to source a ps5 pro at any point in time unless Sony drastically cut back production levels.

@get2sammyb
We know that but with the patch upgrades they might as FSR is already there in place.

@Banjo- It will be used to play games for as long as it's viable.

You need to list on the chart that the RAM is faster and there is more bandwidth.

Well I'm glad Sony haven't gone with AMD's hugely misleading dual compute numbers as they're basically irrelevant for gaming. I'm looking forward to putting it through its paces on Thursday, not only with Pro enhanced games but how it will smooth over performance in stuff like Robocop or the RE Remakes RT modes

I'll be picking up a Pro. After selling my digital I'll end up spending about $400 for a Pro. Can't wait! Hopefully ESO gets a Pro upgrade.

Strange thing is that when the PS5 came out in 2020, the top of the box stated 8K (for whatever that's worth). Now, four years later, the top of the box states 4K. Lol.

@Romans12 never said 8K games though

@get2sammyb Sure, but not having those generational leaps while having the most expensive console hardware in history just don’t go well together, it’s all just diminishing returns now, you used to get a $300 console and get a generational leap with it, even PS4 Pro at $399 was noticeable as we went from 1080p to 2K/4K.

But now the improvements are negligible, my takeaway from Cerny’s presentation was that most games wouldn’t make you choose between performance and quality mode but no, most games still make you choose and you literally have to zoom in to notice any difference.

I'm going to buy two PlayStation 5 pros so I can fly into space

@IOI I guess you're purposely ignoring inflation because the PS5 Pro barely scrapes in to the top 10 most expensive when taken in to consideration.

@IOI you don’t have to zoom in to notice a difference I’m currently playing dragon age about 7/8ft from a 55” OLED and it looks a much softer image flicking between performance/quality. Is it worth buying a new machine for? Depends on the person but it’s easy to see a difference at my viewing distance

@IOI but it's not the most expensive console in history..the neo geo was and had the most expensive games too.

What's "SSD2" (in the PS5 Pro Internal Storage cell)? Should it just be "SSD"?

Also, why not mention the weight of both Digital Edition and Standard Edition in the PS5 column?

No one seems to be reporting on the fact that the specs that were leaked a good deal back where wrong in terms of GPU power. Those Leaks stated 33 teraflops.

In the unboxings we now know that the official manual for the Ps5 pro states it's only a little more than 16 teraflops. Only 4 more than the xbsx and 6 more than the base ps5...

Why does this matter? It doesn't lol, none of this does.
However, consider this: you have continued to be blasted with marketing and the fan human defenders give reasonings such as the idea that an equivalent pc GPU/setup could not be made for the the Ps5 pro asking price and Thus it's a valid price point.
That rational was based on those leaked/assumed specs.... However the actual speed rating puts it an entire line of gpus lower than what those compatisons/rationales were based on.

Gee..... I wonder why Sony didn't correct that pre release, or even release official specs at all during that time...

@LowDefAl Which makes it even stranger. You would think they would be advertising that on the box, like they did in 2020. Especially if it's being experimented with two games.

@Andy22385 Well, it's a gaming console. What in the hell do you think "8K" would be advertising? Lol.

Missing the power consumption of both.

@Keyblade-Dan yeah it's become glaringly obvious why people are now calling the base PS5 the "PS5 Amateur" vs the PS5 Pro.

@NoHope 390 watts if my memory serves, from Eurogamer.

@IOI the official presentation was absolutely awful and it didn't help they focused on first party gamws which are highly polished. You certainly don't have to zoom in to notice the difference on third party.

@KundaliniRising333 those 17TF are more capable that 35TF in different architecture. It doesn't tell the full story

@Romans12 video? You'd have to pretty special to expect 8k games on a £359 console when PCs 5x as expensive can't do it

@AhmadSumadi Good on you supporting a Xbox brand with your PlayStation.

But hey, you got ONE trophy on Outlaws and that was an 7/10 apparently from that enriching experience but what do I know because I saw smart enough not to drop cash on a brand

@IOI
Most expensive? You must be new around here...
Even the original 1977 VCS was $199 which is $1,048 with inflation.

All the people saying ps5 pro isn’t close to being the most expensive console in history are doing so by comparing gaming systems from decades ago that weren’t mass market and were very much enthusiast/early adopter products before consoles became mainstream.

The Xbox one and Xbox one x is a far better comparison point. The one x launched with 4x the gpu power of the original system, a slightly higher clock speed cpu, twice the hard drive space and 12gb gddr5 ram up from 8gb ddr3 on the base console. Arguably a far bigger upgrade over the base console than that of the ps5 pro. The Xbox one launch for £429.99 in 2013 and the one x launched for £449.99 four years later in 2017.

If the only way you can defend the pricing of the ps5 pro is to cherry pick enthusiast/early adopter examples from history than you’re inadvertently conceding that it is too expensive.

It is the second most expensive console in the history of mainstream gaming when you account for inflation. You’d have to go all the way back to the sega Saturn launch to find a higher priced mainstream console.

Also, for those who will say it is enthusiast, it isn’t. PC is the enthusiast space. Consoles are not enthusiast by virtue of the fact that they do not offer the absolute best experience on the market in terms of power and performance when ignoring price. They are a mainstream, plug and play solution.

@Trojan man went to check my trophies lol. Do I need to file a restraining order?! Like, why are you so mad at how I spend my cash, bro?! You should not be so emotional about this.

Since Sony announced that GPU performance of PS5 Pro increased by 67% from standard PS5, 10 TFLOPs + 67% = 16.7 TFLOPs. That’s expected GPU performance of PS5 Pro.

@AhmadSumadi Ironic considering you're so hung up from me replying. Also, anyone can just look at what you "played" and do a search and get results. I just same shocked that an hour of "gameplay" was enough to warrant a review.

I'm just giving you better advice how to blow your cash. You wanna be stupid about it? Go for it. Now go play those games for more then an hour or something.

@AfroMario I'm going to buy two PlayStation 5 pros so I can fly into space

Save some money & buy the Xbox Series S and you will have a whole starfield to yourself, lol.

Honestly, that's some fantastic advice!! Thanks 😊

Wait so the Pro is slightly smaller and lighter? that's quite the surprise

@Neither_scene It's the fastest console on sale, of course it for enthusiasts. You don't have to have it, you can play most things quite happily on a base PS5.

Comparing it with a PC is a bit pointless if you really just want something hooked up to your main TV and surround system in a family environment where it's used by multiple people.

As for the constant moaning about the price, you either think it's worth it or you don't. Not sure why so many keep on about it.

Some people already got their hands on the Pro and they're already posting performance videos on YouTube (with framerate and frametime counter, just like Digital Foundry). Alan Wake 2 (which already got the Pro patch on October 22nd) can't hit a locked 60fps at a internal resolution of 864p (vs the 847p of the base console) when playing as Saga Anderson in Cauldron Lake (the same spot the base PS5 struggled to hit 60fps) and Elden Ring doesn't run at a locked 60fps too, even on Limgrave, so i presume Liurnia of the Lake and the whole DLC area will be worse

@KundaliniRising333 Spot on. We've been comparing prices to being a bit under a base 4070. In reality it's equivalent to a $300 4060 you can get for $250. Ouch! Actually in AMD terms is worse than the $260 RX7600 you can get for $200 but with a better scaler. Double ouch. It may be better than a PS5 but it's still terribly below even bottom barrel PCs.

@Northern_munkey There's a certain irony in comparing the PS5 Pro to a Neo Geo without a hint of irony... 😂

@NEStalgia I don't like to defend the PS5 Pro, but I've noticed in some recent posts you've cited it as being equivalent to a 4060.

That's not accurate. In fact, ironically, it's the base PS5 that's closest to a 4060. From Nvidia's current GPU lineup, the 4060 is the closest, and in some recent DigitalFoundry benchmarks, the PS5 did perform almost on par with a 4060. Which makes sense, as they are both between a 2070 Super and 2080 and the PS5 always performed similarly to those two.

I don't think it's as good as a 4070 either, but it's much closer to a 4070 than it is to a 4060 or even 4060 ti.

It's pretty much an RX6800 with much better image reconstruction.

@Raffles PS5 is closer to 2070 or 3060, not 4060. I've previously compared pro to 4070, expecting from the leaks and Cerny it would be close but just below 4070. But at 16.x tflops it's very marginally better than a 4060 (15.x tflops) only. That's shockingly lame. We've been thinking 33 this whole time!

The discussions that @windxtravelerx posted about screams 4060 territory as well

@NEStalgia Almost all the benchmarks DigitalFoundry have done on the PS5 has put it significantly above the 2070 in everything apart from raytracing. Generally in 2070 Super territory, and in one or 2 games matching a 2080. Which is again, in line with a 4060. The base PS5 is not quite as good, but close to a 4060.

Yes if you only look at TFLOPS the PS5 Pro is in 4060 territory, but there's more to performance than just TFLOPS.

Look at the ROG Ally for example. On paper it has twice the TFLOPS of the Series S, but due to the terrible memory bandwidth, it's not as good as SeriesS in real world performance.

The 4060 has 15 TFLOPS on paper, but its memory bandwidth isn't even close to the PS5 (272 vs 448 gb/s), so despite the compute advantage, it has ballpark PS5 performance.

To further prove it's not as simple as TFLOPS - the RX 6800 is about 40% faster than a 4060, despite on paper having more or less the same TFLOPS. That's due to a huge advantage in memory bandwidth, and pixel/texel throughput.

@NEStalgia Check this out, a recent GPU comparison DF did with the PS5, and afaik the only one directly comparing the PS5 to a 4060. The PS5 actually outperforms the 4060 in Plague Tale Requiem. The PS5 is on par with the 2070 Super in Avatar, and in Alan Wake Quality Settings the 4060 is only 6% faster, so very much the same class of GPU.

https://youtu.be/PuLHRbalyGs?si=5wuISr31gr8Bx8yN&t=697

As you can see, the PS5 is a far closer match to a 2070 Super and 4060 than a base 2070, and the PS5 Pro (as silly as I think it is, costing £800 with disc drive etc), is significantly better than a 4060.

@NEStalgia no there's not..the neo geo was over £300 more at launch and the games were £100 upwards..as you guys like to adjust for inflation etc,etc,etc...🤔

@Raffles All very true and until the spec reveal today we've all been going by the 4070-ish comparison card based on Cerny quoting 40%, so if that is proving true then you're correct, the original estimate is not affected by today's reveal.

Can brag about that power all you want but it's still going to be held back by base PS5 because it's all going to be enhanced patches nothing more.

They're is no way they would make 2 different versions because of cost, but PS5 has been held back my PS4 since it's launch. PS4 is still doing great PS6 will be held back by PS5

@Keyblade-Dan Thank you. Likewise.

Hope they do a Horizon Forbidden West like Horizon Zero Dawn.

@NEStalgia A quick update on the power discussion - it's looking like neither of us were quite correct, and the truth is somewhere in the middle

Based on DigitalFoundry's first couple of benchmarks, it's looking like the GPU the PS5 Pro is closest to is the 2080ti. Not even quite as good as a 3070.

Sure enough it's a good 20% faster than a 4060, but it's about 15% slower than a Radeon RX 6800 - which is what it appeared closest to on paper.

Bit disappointing tbh, and not as good as it looks on paper. I thought it would be at least better than my 3070, but it's looking like it's not quite as good. I knew a 4070 would be better, but I at least thought it would be close. It's not close, the 4070 is several tiers above.

If you've got one and you're happy with it, it's all good, some of the enhancements like GT7 look really good, but I do think Sony's got a bit of a cheek selling it for this price, £800 including disk drive.

It's basically a 2080ti. The 2080ti was a beast when it came out, is still really good, but is a 6 year old GPU at this point.

@Raffles very very interesting results! Glad you followed up! Initially from the leaked specs and Cerny statementsI think all of us thought 4070. Then the printed specs looked 4060ish. But this reality is pretty meh for that price. Better than a $300 GPU, worse than a $500 all for $700.. yeah it's the whole machine but still... The CPU remains poor anyway. Not matching a 6800? Oof.

I suppose they have a market for it and that's a market that likes "better" but doesn't really care if it's that much better and its willing to pay high premium for convenience. IDK, consoles really have to rethink their specs and pricing going forward. This isn't going to be sustainable with hardware like that for pieces like this forever.

@NEStalgia I pretty much agree with all that.

A new PlayStation that's only about 30% faster than the PS5 for £700/£800? It just feels a bit wrong tbh.

I know parts have gone up and all that, but for some perspective - the PS4 pro had a massive 2.3x more compute power over the PS4, with more memory bandwidth too. For the same price as a PS4

Even if that value proposition is not realistic in today's tech climate, I can't help but think they could have offered a LOT better than 30% faster for a relatively extortionate price in console terms.