I´ve been reading the post about PS5 release date. And that made me think about the future of PS.

Let asume, as most analysts and people guess, that PS5 would be released 2020 or 2021. With a 7nm fabrication process, and enough power for 4k 30fps gaming. 

4k TVs will have a much larger installed base. Usually 50% is quoted by 2020. 

Now, in this gen of console wars, hardware is about teraflops and graphic resolution (Im not talking about soft, exclusives, policies, etc, just hardware)

Every one can see that graphic quality gets better in every gen , but the jump gets smaller and smaller.

Let say you want to draw a ball. from a square ball to an octogon, 4 sides to 8 sides, there is a really big difference. from 8 to 16, you can  still see a big difference. Now from 16 to 32... you are still doubling the graphic output, but 16 sides looked pretty round and while 32 is better, is not a big jump from what you had before. 

now, lets see how console graphic resolution had increase over time.

let start with PS2. We used to play it on a TV with 640 x 480p resolution. That was = 0,3 megapixels per frame.

Now PS3. HD TVs arrived and Most games were played at 1280 x 720p. That was = 0.92 megapixels per frame.  3 times more graphic power output.

on PS4 most games run at 1080p. 1920 x 1080p. That is 2,07 megapixels per frame. So its 2 times more graphic power output, but we have to consider also much better quality lighting and textures too. (Im not considering ps4 pro, but its arround 2 times PS4 and 2k real resolution, 4k checkboard)

PS5 needs to be 3840 x 2160. A 4k native console. So If we want it to handle the same games with the same shading and lighting as ps4, no improvement, just 4k native resolution for the same game. it needs  8,3 megapixels per frame. 

If we consider that PS4 is close to 2 teraflops for 2 megapixels per frame, then we would need a at least a 8 teraflop machine for 8 megapixels.

And we can have that by 2019-2020. Xbox one X is 6 Tf and just lauched.

Now remember that as I explained with the square to the 16 sides ball, the jump in resolution awesomeness was less from ps3 to ps4 than it was from ps2 to ps3 and it will be less from ps4 to ps5 and even less if they lauch a PS6. 

Let say that the next jump is a 8k TV (some are starting to be on sale). 8K TVs will be selling well in 5 years and 4k will be mainstream by then. 

What would a console need to handle in order to mantain the SAME QUALITY in graphics but with 8k resolution?

It would need 33 megapixels per frame!!!

thats 4 times 4k. Or a machine capable of close to 33 teraflops!!!. 

Now, you can say, they can still reducing process fabrication of transistors and get there but:

PS3 cell processor was fabricated on a 90 nm process. That means each transistor was 90 nm in size.

PS4 Pro APU was fabricated on a 16 nm process and most likely PS5 will be fabricated with 7nm transistors.

1 nm is the size of 10 Hidrogen atoms. So we are talking sizes of 70 atoms for a transistor. They don´t have much room left for miniaturization.

Its getting more time and its harder to make smaller transistor fabrication processes. And because of Quantum Mecanic laws, the performance gains they are getting are also smaller. So it will take a really long time to get to let say 3 nm and really really expensive.  If the way of making processors doesn´t change, there is going to be a wall soon. 

Now there are some other factors that will affect change. People get confortable at a certain degree of quality. It´s what I called the mp3 effect. 

CDs sound better than mp3, but mp3 is good enough and more convinient. I guess a lot of people will still buy 4K tvs, but at a slower pace than when they bought Full HD TVs. 8K tvs will have an even slower pace. Also lots of people will believe that 4k is just enough for them. 

Developement costs

Even Nintendo said that getting into HD was  way more expensive than developing for SD. 

4K AAA are even more expensive. Developers are facing a problem with it. So they sell DLC , implement microtransactions, etc. How much would developement cost increase for 8k?

Streaming

I hate streamed gaming. Latency is an issue, you ought to have an awesome internet conection,and what you get is compressed video with less quality than native gaming. It will come right,  but it ´ll take a while. Not every country is US or European. Not every city in US or Europe has great bandwith, so I guess there will be a PS6. Gaming as a service will become a standar but not yet. Maybe after PS6. 

VR

VR needs 90 fps or more to be playable. On PS4 pro you have full HD shitty graphics VR gaming. So its half the resolution of the console (2k aprox). With a 4k native console you would be able to play VR on 2k. With a 8K console, you would play shitty VR in 4k. (I say shitty because VR games have less quality than not VR caused by the framerate needed, example Driveclub) 

SUMMARIZING ALL:

PS5 will be a 4k native capable console.

FOR A PS6 TO HAVE A REASON TO EXIST , it should be a 8k console. Even at 8k we´ll have diminishing returns in graphics. 

8k would need 4 times more graphic power than 4k , 33 Teraflops and for that it would need a fabrication process that will take a really long time, years, to be ready.  Also the console needs to have that graphic power mantaining size, watt output and weight.

People won´t be jumping for 8k TVs, some will find it not necesary. It will take also more time to be mainstream. 

Game developement will take more time and money. 

Such console would cost a lot. People dont want to pay more than 500 USS for consoles and not more than 60 USS for games.

Even with all of the above, some people just won´t care for more resolution anymore.

CONCLUSION:

PS5 will launch and it would take a really long time for it to be replaced. The lifecicle of the console will be the longest of any PS. I think at least 9 years with a lifecicle of 16 years.  Of course there can be upgrades, like with the PS4 pro for better scalling to 8k, like a PS5 pro 8k checkboarding or VR 2 stuff. 

Of course I can be wrong, but for that companies need to change the way they make CPUs and GPUs to get better performance faster or there has to be a VR fever so high that millons of people pay more for beast consoles and companies fight for 4k on each eye at 90 fps. Not there yet.

There also can be a new console with the same resolution, but would it make sense? If the console is powerfull enough to have real global illumination, raytracing or something game changing like that in order to have a reason to exist, then it would be capable of hitting 8k with todays graphics anyway. If not, it wouldn´t make any sense. 

Thoughts?

VR is reason for PS6 irrespective of if TVs ever move on from 4K.
I'm saying that as being against VR personally (it seems like drug).
But this is a sales site and all. PS6 could also be hybrid ala Switch.
Basically there's plenty of other improvements besides 4K->8K.
And sure, next node after 7nm will be crazy advanced, but so what?
Saying it's more expensive is absurd, the point is cheaper/performance.
Otherwise all budget PCs would be on 90nm or worse, but they're not.
There's also potential adjacent advancement like optical computing.

Will it though? I think people underestimate how much resources you truly need to achieve 4k30fps and have an accompanying generational leap in fidelity.

No it's not about teraflops.
That's just advertising fluff so that one company's platform looks better than another and people who don't know any better take that number and run with it without any understanding of it's implications in relation to hardware capability.

This has happened many times in the past. - Like with bits or ghz.

And just like "bits". - Flops isn't an accurate denominator in determining the complete hardware capability of a console.

Correlation doesn't equate to causation. You are drawing a false equivalency which is a logical fallacy. Aka. Wrong.

It doesn't need to be anything. Like every other preceding console generation, resolution will be completely up to the developer.

The Playstation 4 isn't even a true 1080P console, many games operate at 900P. Or 1600x900 rather than the full 1920x1080 resolution.

The Playstation 3 had games than ran at sub 720P resolutions.

In-fact the base Playstation 4 supports HDMI 1.4, so in theory it could do 4k30fps if sony/developer allowed it and the visuals were dialed back.

The time frame of when the Xbox One X launching is ultimately irrelevant.
If the technology doesn't exist in the PC's mainstream, then it's never coming to a console, it is simple as that.

As for flops, again. It is a useless denominator, you can have a graphics processor with less flops outperform a graphics processor with more flops. It's stupid and nonsensical because games actually need more than just flops to render a scene.

Are you sure about that? 14nm finfet is actually based on the 20nm planar process.
Don't fall for the "nm" marketing angle that fabs push out, they fluff up the numbers to make themselves look good.

You should try checking out the individual BEOL and FEOL sizes sometime at each geometry size, you might walk away a little surprised.
And that is the reason why Intel has typically held the fabrication edge... Because even though Global Foundries has a "12nm" process, Intels 14nm+++ likely has the edge still.

7nm is a given.

Citation needed.

DRAM/NAND have taken note of this. So instead of going smaller, they went taller.

More exotic materials like Carbon nanotubes and using triple/quad-druple patterning will go a ways to get us to smaller geometry sizes.

That's just simplified rhetoric. Building a game for SD or HD costs exactly the same, the PC you can take any old game and drive it's resolution from 480P all the way to 8k, it's just a resolution change often exposed by a configuration file if it's not listed in the games settings.

It's building the assets that look great at higher definition that costs.

The real issue is likely the publishers. They consistently post ever-increasing-profits numbering in the Billions, they are not doing it as hard as you think they are.

Why should 8k be a requirement for the Playstation 6?

There is a focus on efficiency right now, not brute force with graphics. Consoles are simply at the mercy of the PC's development cadence on this front.

Sure it would make sense. More to graphics than resolution.

Game engines are already leveraging global illumination and ray tracing to an extent where it makes sense and where the hardware affords such an approach.

Since it will probably the last traditional console I think you are right.

You will likely be right. Even now a PS5 is hard to justify. The days of console ganerations as we know them is coming to an end. I believe the future will be yearly optional upgrades, with ecosystems that span across multiple form factors. Major leaps in platform will only happen once a decade or more when serious changes in tech are finally made. Quantum leaps in CPU, GPU, RAM, Memory, Networking, ect. don't happen every 5 years, and without a leap in all of those fields, and others there is not really a next gen, just a more polishd version of what is already available.

Looks like we got a new console fan who tries himself at technology and then fails. I hope you take Pema's numerous advice.

OT: Could very well be. But does it really matter?

I think OP is the opposite of right. With the market moving faster and faster and static products having to resort to more and more extra features, accessories, revisions and bells & whistles, cycles will become either shorter and more intense, or they will be eliminated, in principal at least. PS2 came out, dominated and rode the hem of a massive, global paradigm shift in games development, as well as the steer towards more western-centric games and gaming. It was the perfect storm with the perfect market conditions, and the slow penetration of HD TV in the beginning, as well as the UHD format wars and fairly slow start of blu-ray and HD-DVD helped it a whole lot.

In short; I disagree completely.

Just curious. So, do you think we are going to see 3 to 5 year cycles where we get devices that are not true genrational leaps, but rather make minor advances in resolution, frame rate, and OS responsiveness? Are you thinking that we are basically heading towards a future where consoles are basically the Smartphone of the home theater world?

I am just curious at this blistering rate, where do devs aim when they develop their games? It is one thing to develop a Phone title with a small group in a few months, but when you are looking at a project that takes 500 people and 4 - 6 years, a reliable baseline is much more important. 

That is why I think AAA gaming has to have a hybrid of generations, and the yearly optional upgrades. A base system that sets the development standards for a decade gives everyone a set target, and allows projects to stay on focus.

Perhapps with the massive amount of work going into scalability on both game engines/tools, and CPU/GPU tech, they can just aim for a midline target, and scale up and down as needed. Maybe a set baseline is no longer needed. 

Whatever the case, it is by far the most interesting time in the 25 years I have been following the gaming industry. So many ways companies, could go, and so much potential for failure, or complete domination of the industry. Going to be interesting to see how the next decade plays out.

Yes you're right. I predict 2020 a PS5, 2025 PS5 Pro, 2030 streaming only PS6 = end of gaming for me. And that's okay.

It will be, simply because by that time (2025-2030), there won't be any new traditional consoles, just subscription based streaming services. PS5 very likely won't have a physical disc drive, and it will be used as default device for Playstation Now until Sony decides to go multiplatform way.