Well I bought the 970 last year in around February. I was building my first PC and I couldn't wait for the 1000 series. I'm really happy with it although some MMO shooters really eat up the framerates on higher settings. But overall I'm probably going to switch in a few years.

I'm going to guess the Vega 64 is what the PS5 is going to be rocking. Of course, I'm going to guess it'll be somewhat customized with a few advancements in tech made along the way. So, ~6.5X-7X more powerful than the OG PS4 and 3X more powerful than the Pro. Add in a much better Zen or Zen+ CPU and 16GB of RAM. I'd say that's good enough for a generation leap.

Also. AMD's Draw Stream Binning Rasterizer -was- confirmed to be disabled by AMD.

So all those old Vega FE benchmarks are not an accurate representation of performance to expect out of consumer Vega. - It is also a massive pie in the face to a few tech outlets/youtubers who stated Vega FE performance would be the same to the consumer variant.

We should see an uptick in performance. Of course, like most things that will vary depending on game.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/11680/radeon-rx-vega-unveiled-amd-announecs-499-rx-vega-64-399-rx-vega-56-launching-in-august

Eww. I hope not. It will be old and outdated by then. Vega should be more than 6.5-7x more powerful than the PS4.

As was the GPU that the PS4 used.  It needs to be if it's going to be in a $399 box.  To make the PS5 with the specs I'm expecting, a Vega 64, at least a Ryzen 1700, and 16GB GDDR6 (this would have to actually be GDDR5x if you built it now), would cost ~$900 for just those parts.  Granted you could knock maybe $150-$200 off for what Sony would pay for buying in bulk, but after all costs are considered, you would still be looking at a best case launch price of $699.  No one is paying that much for a console, as history continues to show us time and time, again.  Give it another two years and all those prices will be at least cut in half.

And I'm sure it'll be more powerful than that range I gave, but I'm just comparing Tflops to Tflops.  I realize it isn't going to be exactly like for like, but that's what most people are going to be looking at when the numbers are announced.  But, that makes it a little bit better of a generational leap.

Not enough for next gen. Every PlayStation console has had ~10 - 12x increase in CPU/GPU power and a 16x increase in RAM. What you are describing sounds like a PS4.5, as the Pro is basically a PS4.1. 

As for the OP. We are starting to reach the point when PC gaming looks interesting to me during the console cycle. I know the idea behind the Pro and the X is to stop people from going PC, but they need to offer something more high end IMO. I would love a $999.99 XBO or PS4 that can stand toe to toe with a 1800X + RX 64 PC.

I will be buying the XOX this holiday. If Sony can not deliver something next year (PS4 Premium or PS5), then I will seriously have to consider a new PC.

Eh, it will be fine ... 

Vega 10 is 484 mm^2@14nm so it'll be a long while that sort of performance will become mainstream. The only reason to prefer newer GPU microachitectures is from a feature set perspective rather than a performance perspective ... (render target reads (Gen 9), independent thread scheduling (Volta), underestimate conservative rasterization (Gen 9/Vega), or maybe even GPU software rasterization(programmable rasterization stage!)) 

PS5 wishlist should include the following ... (EUV should be cost efficient by then)

built on Samsung's 4nm MCBFETs (APU should be produced for 2021 release and should give 4x density improvement) 

20 TFlop/s 

16GB HBM (gen 3)

2 TB/s bandwidth (quad channel) 

Don't feel like we need much more DRAM capacity anymore since memory bandwidth is a big bottleneck going into the future with things such as incoherent ray traversal for ray tracing or volumetric rendering ... 

Actual game performance will be interesting to see, but the specs and prices look really good as of now. If the performance is close if not better than Pascal, AMD will have no trouble selling these cards. They just better hope Nvidia's marketing doesn't start saying "Poor Vega" soon.

Don't worry, I'm sure they'll pick whatever is the second best choice of a mobile APU for the PS5.

Every Sony PS console had a 16x jump in memory amount. Its 2MB, 32MB, 512MB, 8GB(8192MB) so 16GB is a very little change. Don’t think PS5 will have 128GB of RAM, but 16GB is nothing if XBoxOneX will have 12GB.

Not with that power consumption it won't. That's just too much for a console. They would need to bring clock speeds down to about 800-900 Mhz to tame that beast into a console, and by that point it wouldn't even have twice the power of a PS4 Pro anymore. That would probably not be enough anymore to differentiate it substantially from the Pro.

I'd rather say it will be based on Navi, Vega's sucessor. It could use 64 NCU but at a much lower clock speed (I guess around 1000 Mhz) unless Navi clocks much better than it's predecessors

Vega itself will most probably have a bumpy start, since the drivers don't even unlock all it's power and features yet. Once that is achieved, I'm sure it will compare well to the 1080Ti , but until then it will probably stay in between both 1080 models