Quantcast
PS5 Coming at the End of 2020 According to Analyst: High-Spec Hardware for Under $500

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5 Coming at the End of 2020 According to Analyst: High-Spec Hardware for Under $500

Price, SKUs, specs ?

Only Base Model, $399, 9-10TF GPU, 16GB RAM 18 27.27%
 
Only Base Model, $449, 10-12TF GPU, 16GB RAM 10 15.15%
 
Only Base Model, $499, 12-14TF GPU, 24GB RAM 17 25.76%
 
Base Model $399 and PREMIUM $499 specs Ans3 10 15.15%
 
Base Mod $399 / PREM $549, >14TF 24GB RAM 5 7.58%
 
Base Mod $449 / PREM $599, the absolute Elite 6 9.09%
 
Total:66
Intrinsic said:
lansingone said:
I know this is all speculation at this point, but what is the reason for all the speculation of MS using a higher end Navi GPU? Just last year we had somewhat reliable information that Navi was being made for Sony.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/06/12/sources-amd-created-navi-for-sonys-playstation-5-vega-suffered/#3003276024fd
If that was still the case I would think it's unlikely that MS would be able to just ask AMD for the GPU they're making for the PS5, but faster.
I've noticed a lot of recent speculation has settled around MS having a faster version of Navi, and I was curious why.

Honestly.... it stems from nothing more than the existence of the XB1X.

Microsoft and leaks have confirmed that MS is working on multiple skus, but they haven't come out and said we will have the most powerful console on the market come launch. Everyone is just concluding that MS will d that because f what MS did with the XB1X. 

I tend to disagree though. Mostly because I believe that MS and sony are going to get a very very similar APU. Pretty much identical with the option to have a slightly cut down version. Its not like MS is going to wait fr sony to release the PS4 then g t AMD and say ok.... they have 72CU in their GPU, we want one with 100. The differences in power will come from clock speeds.  

What I really don't get is why people think MS will even dare come in at a price or option higher than the PS5. 

Because they will have a cheap entry point system to complement it.



Trumpstyle said:
lansingone said:
I know this is all speculation at this point, but what is the reason for all the speculation of MS using a higher end Navi GPU? Just last year we had somewhat reliable information that Navi was being made for Sony.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jasonevangelho/2018/06/12/sources-amd-created-navi-for-sonys-playstation-5-vega-suffered/#3003276024fd
If that was still the case I would think it's unlikely that MS would be able to just ask AMD for the GPU they're making for the PS5, but faster.
I've noticed a lot of recent speculation has settled around MS having a faster version of Navi, and I was curious why.

Because we had 2 reliable sources (Brad sams and Windowscentral) telling us Microsoft will launch next-gen with 2 skus. So most are expecting a 300$ and 500$ console from microsoft next-gen. We can't be sure what exactly Sony is doing but I think they will stick with one 400$ console only.

So we will probably have a similiar situation that we have now with PS4 pro and Xbox one X. The 500$ console will easily win in performance, this way Microsoft can have both the cheapest and the most powerful console next-gen.

Sony will never let this happen.  If only one SKU will be released, I doubt it will cost $399, and I doubt Sony would release a system 50% less powerful than "Anaconda" at the beginning of Next Gen.     I'm still wondering what kind of solution Sony will adopt, in response to MS two SKUs strategy.



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

lansingone said:

I agree. I think after XB1 they'll be playing every aspect of this launch safe.

I do think that unlike the start of this gen, the hardware inside will be slightly different, because AMD seems more inclined to make custom chips than before. If those previous leaks are to believed, I expect PS5 to have a Navi GPU with whatever additions Sony needed, and MS will have a pretty much equally powerful Vega based GPU. 

No. They will both be navi. And if they are both in the same die size ball park then they will both have near identical chips. In truth from a design standpoint even the chips in the base PS4 and XB1 were identical but the XB1 just used up die space for something else forcing it to have a smaller GPU. The two consoles will be much closer matched this time around. And MS knows this too, its why they are pushing so hard to buy studios because now they realize that when there is very little between you and your biggest rival the only real way to differentiate yourself is through exclusives.

Trumpstyle said:

Because we had 2 reliable sources (Brad sams and Windowscentral) telling us Microsoft will launch next-gen with 2 skus. So most are expecting a 300$ and 500$ console from microsoft next-gen. We can't be sure what exactly Sony is doing but I think they will stick with one 400$ console only.

So we will probably have a similiar situation that we have now with PS4 pro and Xbox one X. The 500$ console will easily win in performance, this way Microsoft can have both the cheapest and the most powerful console next-gen.

This is 10% fact and 90% theory.... basically it just sounds like what a fan would want or hope fr but isn't really based on anything solid or reasonable if its to be thought about properly.

This theory only works if we ignore a lot or assume a lot.

  • We expect that even though both platforms launch within 1 month of eachother, with access to the exact same tech and components and fr very similar prices MS would somehow be able to engineer hardware that is around 30%-40% more powerful..... all via a premium cooling solution?
  • We expect that sony will play it safe (more like play it cheap) as if they somehow totally are oblivious to the implications of being the "inferior" console and have been living in a bubble these last 5 years.
  • We assume that sony will somehow not be able to sell their console while taking a loss. Sony could just as easily make a $500+ console that they sell for $399. And the second they are doing that it means MS would need to make a $600-$800 console that they will in turn sell for $499. And it won't even be for anything that will show an obvious difference if noticeable at all. Its like one console being able to run the game at 45fps and the other at 38fps but both are locked to 30fps.  

 



Pemalite said:
DonFerrari said:

I believe you are the right guy to say it but why the fucking hell do they need to make OS so big on storage and ram? There isn't that much big difference from PS3 to PS4 OS imho to justify going from like 50Mb to 3.5GB that is like 70x jump while all else had less than 16x.

It infuriates me that Windows 98 was already a very competent and elegant system that we need to make Windows 10 such a hog for resources in comparison... to me it seems like even programmed obscolence. Every time you think you'll have a very fast computer because the performance of the HW is much much much better than what you had before they decide to make SW hog it for minimal improvement.

That's simple! Last generation the OS's were unloading and loading everything on demand... And ran the absolute minimum tasks in the background. (Usually just API/Driver stuff).

In the Xbox 360's case for instance... When you navigated the user interface the Xbox 360 would load in the next part of the menu tree and unload the old one... But in doing so, meant that things could take awhile to load in at times.

And then we have Multi-tasking which became a big thing during the 8th gen, especially for the Xbox One with it's old snap feature. - Either way, you can now suspend a game, jump over into Spotify and jump back again, that does cost RAM.

Plus the UI was rendered at a much lower resolution... For the Xbox 360 it would have probably been 1280x720... I wouldn't be surprised if it was 1024x768 to be honest.
It's one of the reasons why the Xbox One X isn't rendering it's UI at 4k, to save on Ram.

Fast forward to the 8th generation... And in the Xbox One's case it's running multiple Operating Systems. - The Windows 10 derived paired-back OS, the Xbox One OS and sometimes the Xbox 360 and OG Xbox OS and another OS that assists with the management of those OS's. It's actually a really intricate system... And of course isn't exactly light on RAM consumption.

In Sony's case, they are simply using more Ram to keep things cached and snappy... And even then need they need an additional DDR3 memory pool to handle things like background downloads.
On the flip side the consoles are simply doing more, higher quality voice-chat that runs at higher bit-rates, video streaming, social functionality, the works, it all consumes memory.

The bright side to this is that the next-gen OS's shouldn't be a catastrophic jump in DRAM requirements as they are already pretty full-featured... Plus next-gen consoles will likely use a derivative of the current console OS's anyway.

Intrinsic said:

No they are not. And I am not referring to underlying architecture..... yes XB1 is windows based and PS4 is FreeBSD based..... but they are not like a PC OS by function. Especially with regards t the PS4. We can argue that everything is "based on PC technology" and you will be right, but that is more to do with "PC technology" already having everything and less to do with specific use case scenarios.

Except they are like a PC OS. They use PC OS's.

They even use the exact same monolithic kernels, API's and so on.

Intrinsic said:

Hell even android can be said to be based on PC technolgy cause technically its a linux kernel. And we have PCs that run FreeBSD OS and what nt which is also where apples Mac OS is derived from.

Correct. Android is based on PC technology.
Same goes with MacOSX.

Intrinsic said:

Point though is that the PS4 OS is not like a windows OS r a Mac OS or even an android OS. Its more limited..... that could be by design or whatever but its not like you can just download exel or powerpoint and use it on your PS4. So if the PS4 S even has the underlying APIs to make those work then its just a waste of resources since it doesnt need any of that.

I never said they were carbon copies of PC OS's, but they are monolithic operating systems based on PC Operating Systems.
In the Xbox One's case, you can run allot of the same "universal apps" found on PC, including emulators.

In the Playstation 3's case it even had a full Linux OS before Sony removed it.

Intrinsic said:

Looking purely at whats capable with a PS4..... there is no concieveable reason (besides piss poor software design) as to why its OS should be taking up as much as 3GB of RAM and still be more laggy and slower than an android phone with 2GB of (slower) RAM which also happens to be capable of so much more.

It's because of the hard drive.

You need to remember that mobile phones tend to have NAND based storage with stupidly low access times... It's why an Android phone with a Quad-Core ARM A57+2GB Ram will feel snappier than a Core i9 PC+32GB of Ram with a 5400rpm mechanical hard drive.

In the Playstation 4's case though, we do need to keep in mind the extra Ram pool that is there to assist the OS with other background duties.

Mr Puggsly said:

I disagree HDD is causing the sluggish UI. However, I have suggested they should put a 64GB - 128GB SSD on the motherboard to handle all the OS functions and perhaps cache. In theory that should speed things up but I don't think it would much, I still blame CPU and optimization primarily.

I disagree that it's just the CPU.
In the PS4 Pro's case I noticed an increase in system general responsiveness with an SSD.

Granted Microsoft has done an amazing job in hiding the latency deficit with the 5400rpm drives, but at the end of the day... An SSD is still an SSD with 1-2ms response times verses a 5400rpm mechanical disks 15-20ms.

Understood your point, but it seemed to high of a jump. I get really flustered with how inneficient it seems to have an OS that seems very close to what we have had for the last 20 years but it needing so much resources to do it.

It also frightens me that they may increase it a lot for next gen again and gaming functions lose space.

Intrinsic said:
zorg1000 said:

I need a comparison between these specs and current gen specs using Dragon Ball Z characters.

Translated just for you.....

Didn't made any sense, Bradock was shitty, Broly is the legendary SSJ, gohan can be from power level 1-1500 as child to some Billions as Z-fighter (after the Z-Sword awakening).



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said: 
Intrinsic said:

Translated just for you.....

Didn't made any sense, Bradock was shitty, Broly is the legendary SSJ, gohan can be from power level 1-1500 as child to some Billions as Z-fighter (after the Z-Sword awakening).

Exactly my thoughts lol



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

BraLoD said:
HoloDust said:
I find 16GB to be too little for something that should last to at least 2026.
I remember very similar discussions back in days before PS4 was revealed, most people were dismissing guesstimates of 8GB RAM and 7970m GPU (which is more or less what PS4's GPU ended up being, with 2CUs disabled for yields).

Yup, 8GB was being completely dismissed back in early 2013 predictions mostly everywhere.

There is no way the PS5 will start at less than 20GB, no way.

$450/500, 14/16TF, 24/32GB RAM, 2TB SSHD/2TB HDD +240GB SSD that's where it'll be landing.

Yeah, Both 8GB and GPU guesstimates were heavily dismissed.
I was one of those who got it mostly right - though I failed to see Jaguar coming as CPU and completely missed about Xbox - I thought there was no way that MS would let Sony have more powerful console after success of X360, but I didn't anticipate them going full retard with focus on TV and Kinect.

As for PS5 and NextBox...well, it's really hard to tell. This is Cold War shit right here, they both want to have better console, yet GPU tech is progressing so slow, especially at AMD. In addition, though current RTX offerings from nVidia don't mean much, it's fair to expect that in 2 years max all their cards will be RT capable...so they have to worry about PC market stealing their thunder, they can't just ignore that.

So, all in all, I expect to see something similar to what happened in X360 era - its GPU had unified shaders way before ATI launched desktop GPUs with same technology...so my guess would be that both consoles will have AMDs equivalent of nVidias RT cores for ray-tracing calculations.

I think they will be failry expensive to make, and that MS and Sony will lose quite a bit in first couple of years on every console sold - 2021 would be much better year for launching, but they will force each other hand for 2020 release.



I'm REALLY trying to help the select few of you avoid preparing for something that isn't going to happen. You will not see a 32GB console, no matter how many times you use your keyboard to type: "32GB........... it's happening.........!". It isn't. At one point, I would have said no way to 24 too, but that's a more likely scenario (though that will be the ceiling, not the floor). You just aren't realistically factoring in affordability vs cost (Sony will be particular about this) and it is going to come back and bite these types of predictions hard. I could see a 24GB PS5 Pro/Xbox equivalent (probably not at launch), but that's it.

Best to be safe (16GB G6, for example) then to go in with an overprediction and then claim 'disappointment' later. I've seen it time, and time, and time again!



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
I'm REALLY trying to help the select few of you avoid preparing for something that isn't going to happen. You will not see a 32GB console, no matter how many times you use your keyboard to type: "32GB........... it's happening.........!". It isn't. At one point, I would have said no way to 24 too, but that's a more likely scenario (though that will be the ceiling, not the floor). You just aren't realistically factoring in affordability vs cost (Sony will be particular about this) and it is going to come back and bite these types of predictions hard. I could see a 24GB PS5 Pro/Xbox equivalent (probably not at launch), but that's it.

Best to be safe (16GB G6, for example) then to go in with an overprediction and then claim 'disappointment' later. I've seen it time, and time, and time again!

Besides cost what reason would you put for no 32GB?

Is it based on what you expect of CPU/GPU used not needing more than 24GB then it just being waste?

Because if just cost, it can be sold for a loss if that would really make the system better like trading some of the envelope in other stuff to put more RAM. Also it could happen just like it did with PS4, that at this moment they have 16GB on the project, but in 2 years the price of RAM shifts considerably and they can double it without over expending.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
CGI-Quality said:
~ snip

Besides cost what reason would you put for no 32GB?

Is it based on what you expect of CPU/GPU used not needing more than 24GB then it just being waste?

Because if just cost, it can be sold for a loss if that would really make the system better like trading some of the envelope in other stuff to put more RAM. Also it could happen just like it did with PS4, that at this moment they have 16GB on the project, but in 2 years the price of RAM shifts considerably and they can double it without over expending.

It's not just a simple matter of selling it at a loss, it would be massive and not worth it (remember, we're just talking RAM). You can't just throw any amount in a system and call it a day. 

24GB is tough enough to predict. Forget about 32. It isn't going to happen and there's no point in preparing for it.



                                                                                                                                            

CGI-Quality said:
DonFerrari said:

Besides cost what reason would you put for no 32GB?

Is it based on what you expect of CPU/GPU used not needing more than 24GB then it just being waste?

Because if just cost, it can be sold for a loss if that would really make the system better like trading some of the envelope in other stuff to put more RAM. Also it could happen just like it did with PS4, that at this moment they have 16GB on the project, but in 2 years the price of RAM shifts considerably and they can double it without over expending.

It's not just a simple matter of selling it at a loss, it would be massive and not worth it (remember, we're just talking RAM). You can't just throw any amount in a system and call it a day. 

24GB is tough enough to predict. Forget about 32. It isn't going to happen and there's no point in preparing for it.

Understood.

I expect Mark Cerny do a similar job on PS5 and have everything balanced that all parts complement, so if it can't do more is not because of CPU/GPU/RAM alone but all together.

If from your expectation of the system going from 16 to 24 is already a lot and 32 is pointless I see very little reason to doubt.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994