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 26.87%
 
Only Base Model, $449, 10-12TF GPU, 16GB RAM 10 14.93%
 
Only Base Model, $499, 12-14TF GPU, 24GB RAM 18 26.87%
 
Base Model $399 and PREMIUM $499 specs Ans3 10 14.93%
 
Base Mod $399 / PREM $549, >14TF 24GB RAM 5 7.46%
 
Base Mod $449 / PREM $599, the absolute Elite 6 8.96%
 
Total:67
Random_Matt said:
Hardly call 1080 levels of performance high end, but fair enough.

1080 (non-Ti) is also about what I expect them to reach with Navi GPU technology. We don't know very much about them yet, but I doubt more than 40% increase over the GPU in the One X will be feasible without overheating the small console cases.



Around the Network
taus90 said:
Pemalite said:

Playstation 4 really isn't doing double the output of a Radeon 7850/560 though... But roughly the expected line, slightly better. So Carmack is certainly wrong.

I mean shit. The Radeon 7950 can do Battlefield 5 with high settings, 60fps... Which is better than the Playstation 4 and it's not anywhere near double the performance, more like 30-50%.

So u r saying an SoC equivalent to 7850 paired with Jaquar CPU technically an APU clocked at 1.6 is on par with PS4? .. and again 7950 paired with a mobile Jaquar CPU clocked at 1.6 will run Battlefield 5, High Setting, at 60fps?

Well, there's no 8-core Jaguar, but what you can do is take a Bulldozer chip like the FX-8100 and clock it down a bit. An FX-8100@2.5Ghz plus a 7950 would roughly be able to do the same numbers as a PS4 with the same settings despite not being that much more powerful



The curious thing is that first impressions mean everything. Xbone's was negative and it never really recovered from it. Wii u's was confusion and it never recovered. Switch and ps4's were hype and they are still hype. So if Sony get arrogant and do something stupid when they announce the PS4, which is definitely a possibility, then the games won't matter as much and the ps5 might be another PS3. Remember sony is the company who arguably has a worse failure in PS3 than Nintendo has in Wii U even though PS3 sold way more because Nintendo still turned a small profit by the end and stayed close to constant while Sony lost a lot in those years. So you never really know which Sony will show up for the ps5. I hope it's the one we saw at the start of the PS4 and Sony hit it out of the park since it's good for gaming. Same with neXtbox. At this point I don't really care about specs except as a tech enthusiast since games look good enough for me. But they do need to up their game in CPU instead of GPU so we can have more and smarter AI and NPCS, etc. At this point CPU is far more important for growth in my opinion but it's not as flashy as GPUs so from a marketing standpoint, it might not work but from a gaming standpoint, it's better to focus on the one defect you really have in all modern consoles



Just a guy who doesn't want to be bored. Also

If its powerfull ( more than 2* PS4 pro)and with BC at least to PS4 im ready to go up to 500€. 2020 Im ready



Kerotan said:
konnichiwa said:
Honestly I would not be surprised if they release two consoles with one being 599 with higher specs. You have a market for people who want to spend more for a 'Beefy console'

What's the point. The ps4 Pro sold big numbers despite being weaker then the X. It's just a waste of power that most devs won't take advantage of because they need to facilitate the lowest common denominator. 

This point should be stressed more, and it was a big question I wanted to ask the ones who have better understanding than me on the topic : Scalability.  

 Let's take XBox One base model and XBox One X as examples.    The biggest difference between the two is the GPU and Ram. The CPUs are quiet similar, not a big difference, apart from some optimizations and clock speed.   So what do we have in the end ?  The "core" of the game is the same, they play "exactly" the same(mechanics), also physics, AI, animations, system collision are the same.  The graphics, IQ and frame rate on the other hand see the biggest jump from the base model to X model, almost night and day.  So, basicly,   when 2 SKUs have similar CPU performance and dramatic differences in GPU and memory speed, Scalability is mostly in the graphics/IQ/frame rate department right ? Now, what if 2 SKUs have also a dramatic difference in CPU performance? How scalability can work in areas such as physics, animations, system collision, interactions with the environment, AI and game-play mechanics ? How much more complex is "scalability" in those areas ?  Can this be taken into account by the developers, is it feasible, or too complex and costy for the majority of developers ?

 In few words, it is a waste to have 2 SKUs with dramatic differences in CPU/GPU and RAM, or Devs might really take advantage of the more powerful SKU with the right development Kit and advanced scalability ?

 Any thoughts ?

 



”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.

Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
taus90 said:

So u r saying an SoC equivalent to 7850 paired with Jaquar CPU technically an APU clocked at 1.6 is on par with PS4? .. and again 7950 paired with a mobile Jaquar CPU clocked at 1.6 will run Battlefield 5, High Setting, at 60fps?

Well, there's no 8-core Jaguar, but what you can do is take a Bulldozer chip like the FX-8100 and clock it down a bit. An FX-8100@2.5Ghz plus a 7950 would roughly be able to do the same numbers as a PS4 with the same settings despite not being that much more powerful


Jaguar was AMDs old low power CPU architecture and were one of the first APUs to come with integrated GCN graphics. Even a down clocked FX 8100 is too powerful in comparison to Jaguar based mobile CPU, Jaguar 8 core is no where near to a Bulldozer 8 cores designed for high performance desktop @1.6.  At best a laptop with 7850m specs is a far better comparison and its no where near what PS4 does with same specd APU. 



Bofferbrauer2 said:
Random_Matt said:
Hardly call 1080 levels of performance high end, but fair enough.

1080 (non-Ti) is also about what I expect them to reach with Navi GPU technology. We don't know very much about them yet, but I doubt more than 40% increase over the GPU in the One X will be feasible without overheating the small console cases.

Oh I know, I discussed this with someone, and who ever thinks the grunt will be better than around that level has their heads in the clouds. We already know it's Navi 10 Lite, a 150W TDP chip, consoles will be lucky to have Vega 56 performance. Navi = Vega with 20-30% lower TDP with higher frequencies, I would say 8TF at best in PS5. Next gen will not be a giant leap, expect more mid gen upgrades.



Robert_Downey_Jr. said:
Shiken said:

I think releaseing GoT, Death Stranding, and TLoU2 as a cross gen release set (seeing how they have already been announced for PS4) and Horizon 2 as a PS5 exclusive at launch would pretty much destroy the competition.  A teaser of the next God of War would for PS5 would help drive hype as well.

 

Sony is in a very good spot as far as software line up goes IMO.  If they play their cards right, it could blow PS4 sales out of the water.

Yeah God of War, Spidey 2, and others should definitely be saved for post launch.  Sony should aim to have a big exclusive every quarter.  If they release in November like they probably will then they should have one big exclusive to go with it.  Then something in March, then something in June, then something in September, then something November again.  Just keep it scheduled.  I don't like when they roll 2 in real close like GoW and Detroit kinda did.  One ends up overshadowing the other.  If they release in September like I would want then just move em all back 2 months from what I said.  A nice steady pace

GoW and Detroit are for very different demographics, just see the 3x (or more) sales difference between them. Sure a lot of us bought the 2 and could have a little more spacing between them, but that isn't a big issue. Although on launch it is good to have space.



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

Random_Matt said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

1080 (non-Ti) is also about what I expect them to reach with Navi GPU technology. We don't know very much about them yet, but I doubt more than 40% increase over the GPU in the One X will be feasible without overheating the small console cases.

Oh I know, I discussed this with someone, and who ever thinks the grunt will be better than around that level has their heads in the clouds. We already know it's Navi 10 Lite, a 150W TDP chip, consoles will be lucky to have Vega 56 performance. Navi = Vega with 20-30% lower TDP with higher frequencies, I would say 8TF at best in PS5. Next gen will not be a giant leap, expect more mid gen upgrades.

Next gen with power near X1X is kinda pointless.



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

Nate4Drake said:
Kerotan said:

What's the point. The ps4 Pro sold big numbers despite being weaker then the X. It's just a waste of power that most devs won't take advantage of because they need to facilitate the lowest common denominator. 

This point should be stressed more, and it was a big question I wanted to ask the ones who have better understanding than me on the topic : Scalability.  

 Let's take XBox One base model and XBox One X as examples.    The biggest difference between the two is the GPU and Ram. The CPUs are quiet similar, not a big difference, apart from some optimizations and clock speed.   So what do we have in the end ?  The "core" of the game is the same, they play "exactly" the same(mechanics), also physics, AI, animations, system collision are the same.  The graphics, IQ and frame rate on the other hand see the biggest jump from the base model to X model, almost night and day.  So, basicly,   when 2 SKUs have similar CPU performance and dramatic differences in GPU and memory speed, Scalability is mostly in the graphics/IQ/frame rate department right ? Now, what if 2 SKUs have also a dramatic difference in CPU performance? How scalability can work in areas such as physics, animations, system collision, interactions with the environment, AI and game-play mechanics ? How much more complex is "scalability" in those areas ?  Can this be taken into account by the developers, is it feasible, or too complex and costy for the majority of developers ?

 In few words, it is a waste to have 2 SKUs with dramatic differences in CPU/GPU and RAM, or Devs might really take advantage of the more powerful SKU with the right development Kit and advanced scalability ?

 Any thoughts ?

 

Generally speaking, in PC games you usually have around 3x diifference in GPU workload between lowest and highest settings at the same resolution - at least it used to be like that, i haven't been doing that sort of test for quite a while.