| Intrinsic said: Whats possible, really all just comes down to tech available. You have to try and look at tech as not just how much power the GPU can have, but everything in the box. The GPU, CPU, Ram, board, power draw and most importantly....cost. What was possible in 2016 allowed for the incremental jump we saw from a PS4 to a PS4pro. It also allowed for the shrink we saw from the PS4 to the PS4s. Basically, if sony launched the PS4 in 2016, what we have with the PS4pro is what it would have been for the most part. And the PS4's size compared to last gen was all due to sony and MS seemingly deciding to drop the loss leading business model. One that typically would have meant them making seperat CPU and GPu, which would also have meant they would have had significantly more powerful consoles than they launched with in 2013, but also significantly more expensive too. Enlarge them for 14nm? It really doesn't work that way. Take the PS4 APU; on a 28nm process it has a 20 CU GPU on the chip (of which only 18 of them are activated). The polaris GPU that the PS4pro is based on has 36 CU. If they made a 36 CU GPU at 28nm the power draw and heat dissipation would be so vast they would need a PC sized gaming case to house everything. And the GPU alone would cost at least twice as much. And it really makes zero sense to release a 14nm box when 7nm tech is either available or right around the corner. Don't forget that these consoles are designed to last for 6+ years. They will wait. You seem to think that releasing at a specific time is more important than releasing with the right combination of tech. It doesn't. If Veag20/Navi starts trickling into the market in 2019 but have very high yeild issues, trust me... they will wait. Even if it means them waiting till 2021. Why would sony aim to hit 8-10TF when if they just waited 6-12 months they could use even less money to hit 14-16TF? Again, don't forget that these consoles are expected to last 6+ years. Incremental updates and all? everything is still tied to the weakest sku in the range. So having a great starting point is always a good thing. Look at it this way. 2 fab process advancements results in new generation hardware. PS3/360 started at 90nm. In their case a two fold jump goes from 90nm to 45nm to 28nm. At 28nm we get new generation. Same thing now, 28nm to 14nm to 7nm. At 7nm we get new generation.Only difference now is that for the first time in console history, that middle jump (going from 28 to 14nm) didn't just mean we get slimmer cheaper consoles. It also meant that they could make more powerful versions of the same consoles. But the difference between base PS4 and what could be the PS5? Is like an almost 8 times jump in computational power. 1.8Tf to 16TF. Thats what you call a next gen upgrade. And its not happenning just because sony is trying to go for more power, its happenning cause in 2020 or so, thats the kinda power they will get by default when trying to build a box in the $400 price range. |
My points were more so based on what if scenario's. I agree waiting for the newer smaller node makes the most sense, but if XB were to try and jump ahead and take a more PC like route, which they might be doing, then they could force PS to try and get PS5 out sooner, just like how the 360 pushed PS3 to launch asap. I realize XB isn't magic and can't make a 10Tflop console in a One S sized box any sooner than PS can, but XB has shown they are more willing to put visual appearance and some money aside to try and get their product out front (Excluding Mattrick and DRM,AOL,Kinect).
| Intrinsic said:
Look at it this way, If sony and MS were to make a 10-12 TF console in 2020, it would be the equivalent of them going out of their way to make underpowered hardware. Or unless of course they wanted to come in at a $250 price point. |
If you added SSD cost to that, added VR capabilities built directly into the console, and added a 4k bluray player and full 4k capability all around, you wouldn't be all that far off the $399 price point PS has been shooting for. That could maybe even lead into a $499-$599 VR bundle with the headset. I get the feeling that PS is going to try and focus on VR more with PS5 since most agree putting all development costs into more performance is going to lead to diminishing returns as the upgrades/gens continue.
