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
taus90 said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

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. 

That's because the 7850M ain't a lower clocked 7850, but a much lower clocked 7770 (by over 200Mhz lower), thus only having half the CU and much less clock speed. So no wonder this chip can't even come near what a PS4 can do. It also only consumes 40W, while the GPU part in the PS4 APU should easily consume 3 times as much.

Oh, and Bulldozer is clock for clock actually really just faster than the Jaguar in Integer operations, as the FPU has to be shared between 2 cores. And games make massive use of the FPU, thus relativising the advantage in gaming for the Bulldozer. This is also the reason why it's performance was so bad compared to Intel in every single gaming bench. AMD banked upon GPU getting more GPGPU usage and thus take over most need for an FPU in the CPU and upon further parallelisation of threads (later FX were also expected to increase the core count, but AMD scrapped those plans when this didn't happen and concentrated on the APUs). I could have given a lower clock speed, though, something between 2 and 2.5Ghz for instance - but that wouldn't have changed much.

With all that said, both Perm and I came with about 50% more powerful hardware, as consoles can take more out of given hardware - but that was much more true in the past than it is nowadays

DonFerrari said: 
Random_Matt said: 

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.

Visually, the games will not look much better on next gen hardware compared to the mid-gen upgrades. That's not just due to the small gap in performance, but also diminishing returns; the more performance you have, the more performance you need to spend for a discernible difference. However, bigger RAM will go a quite some way here, as it allows for much better textures.

On the other hand, a Ryzen based CPU part will run circles around the old Jaguar CPU part, which means less code needs to be taken over by the GPU to run at an acceptable speed (which is why early this gen everything was just 30FPS; the CPU just couldn't give more), thus having more ressources for itself.

But I agree with the sentiment, and I'm sure you're not gonna be alone with that. I already predicted about 2 years ago that the next gen will have a slow start due to this, as there's simply not enough time to get enough visual distance between themselves and the Pro/X mid-gen upgrade consoles. As a result, I fear both Sony and Microsoft possibly shot themselves in the foot with the upgrades, as they are leeching sales from their still unreleased successors. Or do you think anybody who bought a Pro/X now will buy a PS5/Xbox next anytime soon? Probably not too many, even moreso with Gamestop faltering, making trade-in potentially much more difficult by that time.

Last edited by Bofferbrauer2 - on 08 February 2019

Around the Network
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?

I didn't mention anything about an APU or CPU.
But even a shitty AMD FX 6300 could probably do it.

Fact is... On the GPU side of the equation, you do not need twice the GPU performance to match a PS4.

taus90 said:

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. 

From my own comparison's donkeys years ago on this very forum (With evidence mind you, feel free to do a search for it...) the 8x 1.6ghz Jaguar Cores fell roughly in-line with a Dual-Core Core i3 Haswell running at 3ghz in total relative performance if all threads are leveraged.

At the moment though, not even my Xbox One X is doing graphics that my old Radeon RX 580 can't do... Let alone twice as good, so my point still stands... And I can compare them side by side!

...And at the end of the day, the PC gets optimizations as well, AMD and nVidia are constantly releasing new drivers which boosts performance... Microsoft is constantly releasing OS patches... And we now have more efficient API's (Vulkan and Direct X 12) which erodes the real-world performance differentials between console's low-level API's and the PC.

The Radeon 7850M is not a desktop Radeon 7850M.



DonFerrari said:
Random_Matt said:

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.

I agree.   I'm confident the combination CPU/GPU/RAM of Anaconda and PS5 will be a significant jump over X and PRO.



”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.

zorg1000 said:
"According to Yasuda-san’s prediction, the new hardware will be a high-spec console priced at less than $500. Multiple AAA titles will also accompany its launch and support sales."

That's about the safest prediction I've ever seen.

Lol, exactly. And there's really only two hard dates for a realistic launch. Late 2019 or 2020. So, you got a 50/50 shot there.

Yasuda-san should change his name to Captain Obvious.



Lol. Yasuda is just a Sony hater.
Don't trust him.



Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:

But I agree with the sentiment, and I'm sure you're not gonna be alone with that. I already predicted about 2 years ago that the next gen will have a slow start due to this, as there's simply not enough time to get enough visual distance between themselves and the Pro/X mid-gen upgrade consoles. As a result, I fear both Sony and Microsoft possibly shot themselves in the foot with the upgrades, as they are leeching sales from their still unreleased successors. Or do you think anybody who bought a Pro/X now will buy a PS5/Xbox next anytime soon? Probably not too many, even moreso with Gamestop faltering, making trade-in potentially much more difficult by that time.

Not a big problem at all.

How many PS4s sold are Pro-models? Probably less than 10%: zero percent of the 43 million PS4s sold until the Pro-launch and probably less than 20% of the 50 million units sold after that... around 8 - 10 million PS4 Pros.

How many Xbox Ones sold are X-models? Probably less than 7%: zero percent of the 30 million Xbox Ones sold until the X-launch and probably less than 20% of the 12 million units sold after that... around 2 - 3 million Xbox One X.

Many of these 10 - 13 million Pro/X buyers are early adopters and/or enthusiasts and they will switch to the next consoles quite fast.



zorg1000 said:
"According to Yasuda-san’s prediction, the new hardware will be a high-spec console priced at less than $500. Multiple AAA titles will also accompany its launch and support sales."

That's about the safest prediction I've ever seen.

Ha that was my exact thought. This guy sounds like the John Madden of game analysts.



If BC is there at the launch of a new console not 5 years in when it doesn't really matter that much, plus a TLOU2 or Ghosts of T at launch.

I plus millions more will jump right in, without hesitation.

If either of those are missing, many will be reserved and will be on a wait & see approach.



Pemalite 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?

I didn't mention anything about an APU or CPU.
But even a shitty AMD FX 6300 could probably do it.

Fact is... On the GPU side of the equation, you do not need twice the GPU performance to match a PS4.

I guess many folks forgot this (which was quite a surprise to me back then):




HoloDust said:
Pemalite said:

I didn't mention anything about an APU or CPU.
But even a shitty AMD FX 6300 could probably do it.

Fact is... On the GPU side of the equation, you do not need twice the GPU performance to match a PS4.

I guess many folks forgot this (which was quite a surprise to me back then):


 It's the 1st time I see this comparison, interesting.   So the GTX 750 Ti can perform better than the PS4 GPU ?  And what about graphics, IQ and effects ?

Last edited by Nate4Drake - on 08 February 2019

”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.