How many gig do you think the PS4 ad XB1 are using for their OS right now?

100% fake.
They wouldn't use full on AMD hardware and then also use DLSS which is an Nvidia fabricated term.
Another thing. PS4 uses 3.5gb for OS how the hell are they fitting the OS for the next gen (which will most likely be using 4k everything for the OS) within 2gb? Not happening.
One last thing is the "ray tracing extensions" How does that make ANY sense? Extensions? What does that mean?
Simply put, the wording is way too verbose and explicit. It is like a dense goldmine of facts about the next PS5 that has "don't leak me" written all over it. There is 0.00000000000% chance that this could ever be real. Some of the contents are just vaguely educated guesses on what might be in the pipe-line for a next gen playstation.
I would believe it if it started mentioning specifics like what features will be in NAVI akin to the new features that the PS4Pro introduced that later showed up in the AMD line-up of desktop GPUs.

TL;DR its 100000000000000000000000% fake

Not anymore they don't. They use PC derived hardware with maybe a couple of extra tricks sprinkled on.

Consoles leverage low-level API's. - Which maybe closer to the metal the PC Vulkan/Direct X 12 API's, but that bridge is closing.
No developer codes to the metal anymore, that would be an insane task considering how complex hardware and software is these days.

Sorry to say... Wrong here as well.
Windows 10 will happily chug along with 2GB of Ram.

The Xbox One OS is actually multiple OS's and the Playstation 4 OS needs an extra amount of DDR3 on top of the GDDR5 it gobbles up to do it's "thing".
Expect 3GB-3.5GB of Ram usage for the Xbox One/Playstation 4 console OS's and their background tasks... And maybe 1-2 CPU cores (Plus additional ARM CPU cores in the Playstation 4's case.)

If anything... Not only does Windows do more on the PC, but it also seems to be a little lighter as well.

The Xbox One isn't doing anything that a Radeon 7770 would be expected to do?
The Playstation 4 isn't doing anything that I wouldn't expect out of a Radeon 7870?

The Xbox One X hasn't shown me anything that an RX 580 can't do either.

Most console games have significantly dialed back on expensive rendering techniques in order to prop up resolution or framerate.

But hows about that Ray Tracing that PC is doing?

Source?

It's kinda hard to stuff up the specifications anyway.
We know what AMD's roadmap is... We know what AMD's hardware is going to be.
We have an understanding of where various parts are going to be priced...

And we can leverage that to guesstimate what is going into the consoles.

The OS does more than just run applications.

Microsoft and Sony will not be buying CPU's off a shelve, it will be a semi-custom SOC design... Thus making your pricing redundant.
The most logical choice will be a single CCX. - So 6 cores.

Or they might use a mix a 7nm and 14nm.

Don't think M.2 is going to happen... Unless they load it down with a ton of shitty QLC NAND.
I think a mechanical disk is still the way to go.

You cannot buy an APU with the PS4 CPU + PS4 GPU. 

Just because the different chips on the APU die are derived from chips sold on discrete desktop hardware, doesn't mean it isn't highly customized and extremely optimized.

The mere reality of the APU design in the PS4 makes it able to be optimized way more than most other computer hardware out there. The unified memory is an example.

I recall a lot of leaked pics of PS4 being fake.

Yeah teachers aren't what they used to be.

Correct, depending on how many TF it ends up at overall. The higher the clocks the lower the CU count most likely, if it's going to fit in launch PS4 sized shell for cheap. If it can run at 1500MHz and hit around 10TF, that'll be pretty impressive.

I'm not, since it will probably be semi custom. 7nm apparently is still fairly expensive compared to 14nm, but I guess that could change between now and mid 2019. A custom 6 core CPU/APU would also mean more dies per wafer, so that would also save some on cost to manufacture. Still doesn't seem like it'll be cheap, or near as cheap as Jaguar would have been.

20 available to devs, 24 overall. My bad. I would think PS would follow the XB1 8GB to XB1X 12GB RAM approach (minus DDR/eSRAM) instead of PS4 to Pro when it comes to next gen. That would more easily allow the 16GB for devs at launch, then maybe 24GB for devs mid gen.

It's not so much that I think it can't hit 1500MHz, I just find it hard to believe it's going to do so, with a high CU count, at around 10TF, in a PS4 sized console. Maybe it will, and if it does, that'll be something to boast about, if the cooling system is remarkably quieter this time around that is.

Since XB1, and more so XB1S. XB1 was just a horrible design all around if your looking at a console consumer product. Phil even said they made sure XB1X resembled them so people would know they have compatibility.

That's another reason why I think it's not Zen 2. I would say as low as 8TF and as high as 12TF, if it's going to launch around late 2019. I myself however assume 10 since it seems to be the middle ground. I would much rather have a beefier CPU portion than GPU if it requires meeting a certain price point. Slightly better PS4/Pro graphics are fine as long as they lock it at 60FPS when devs want more than 30.

If PS5 uses 7nm at launch, they have to hope that 5nm isn't more than 3 or 4 years afterwards for a slim or upgrade though. Intel still stuck on 14nm makes me wonder. Pro and slim got 16nm chips fairly early, but those were from TSMC. AMD was using GloFo and 14nm. Mind you, AMD is now going to use TSMC for the majority if not all Zen 2, 7nm chips, so it's hard to say, depending on if PS5 uses Ryzen, +, or Zen 2.

M.2 might make sense based on the leak info. You could have a 2TB HDD model, and a 1TB M.2 model, and let the customer choose if they would rather have more storage or more speed. The customers who buy the 1TB model could then simply spend another $50 to $100 on a 4TB+ external HDD if they want more space for cheap. They could probably also spend more and get a 2TB to 4TB (or larger in the future) 2.5" internal HDD to keep things sleek and simple. Whoever buys the 2TB HDD model, may even be able to wait a year or two for M.2 prices to go down, while storage goes up, and install one themselves for more speed.

1. I am aware that they won't be buying hardware off the shelf. But like you have already said these consoles are as close to off the shelf hardware as consoles have ever been. Simply looking at whts out there wll paint a clearly good picture of what can or will be possible. A 6 core 12 thread cpu sounds more like it though.
   
   
2. I think they will go with the M.2 "interface". They will definately still be using SATA based SSDs but over an NvME M.2 interface. Its just future proofing and it takes up less space. No point putting a 2.5 SSD drive in there cause they cost the same as the sata basedm.2 drives. I think a mechanical drive will be prohibitively slow for the next gen consoles. Too much of a bottleneck to build into hardware that could very well be around till 2027. And by 2020 the can probably get SATA based M.2 drives of about 1TB fr under $40. 
   
   A mechanical drive just doesn,t make any sense with the direction the entire industry is going right now.  

You don't need to?

It is not "Highly customized".
There is no secret sauce.
There is no capabilities of the PS4 SOC that cannot be done on PC.
The PS4 SOC isn't punching significantly above it's weight from comparable PC hardware.

Nah.
PC has unified memory.
The PC has APU's which exceed the base Playstation 4. I.E. Ryzen 5 Pro 2400G.

It's nothing special.

Difference is... There is no component consolidation or bulk buying to reduce price.

Yeah. But consoles don't care about industry direction.
They care about price/performance.

Mechanical drives still have the advantage in that regard, especially as game sizes continue to blow out... Forcing the requirement of multi-terabyte storage solutions.
Mechanical disks are also sufficient enough from a performance perspective as well for asset streaming into DRAM, provided they are sustained reads.

Keep in mind... Even by PC standards even the Xbox One X is using a slow mechanical disk.

There is a shift to QLC NAND at the moment which will apply cost pressures to mechanical disks... However. They are lacking in the performance department... And thus require an ample amount of DRAM and SLC NAND to fix the performance issue QLC NAND inherently brings.

That's just it. It's a balancing act between CU counts and clockrate... Get the right balance and you get an optimal performance/power consumption/die space target.

It's not overtly difficult to best even the Xbox One right now with mid-range hardware... 7nm should be able to increase that gap substantially.

Hopefully the hardware is more impressive than a 3640@1500mhz chip... Especially if we want to look at Ray Tracing which is inherently a compute limited issue.

Newer fabrication processes are always more expensive than the older ones. Up to a point.
The larger the chip is, the more expensive it becomes... And the more sense it becomes to fabricate it at a smaller process.

However... AMD's approach is to de-integrate parts of the chip that doesn't scale downwards to smaller geometry's anyway and get cost savings that way, might be something that next-gen takes on.

Zen itself though is actually a very tiny tiny core. We are looking at 44mm2 for a quad core Ryzen 1 CPU @14nm. Or 11mm2 per core.
It's not as small as Jaguar though which is 3.1mm2 per core @ 28nm... But you also don't need 8 CPU cores+extra ARM cores (PS4 only) as it has more available CPU time to handle everything.

Jaguar was cheap, but also extremely nasty.

Ryzen on 7nm will be more tenable for next gen though from a costing point... Plus the consoles can consolidate parts of the chip (I.E. Sharing L2/L3 caches, I/O etc') between the GPU and CPU cores anyway.

Xbox One X is a "premium" consoles with a higher price tag to match... Thus it could afford the wider memory bus in conjunction with more PCB traces and memory chips.
For a base console which is meant to drop to low price points, I just don't see anything more than 16GB being feasible.

Yes, you do if you want that same optimization potential.

The PS4 SOC IS punching above its weight significantly from comparable PC hardware. It is why most 3rd party devs aren't able to make a game that looks better than the first party games on the same system and even better on PC.

They are only able to make the game runs kinda bad on PS4 (in comparison to first-party titles) and then really well on PC. And that is because they have invested on a graphics architecture that has to just work reasonably well on a console while also working reasonably well on PC, and that results in PC always being better under those circumstances.

There is a reason why Quantum Break ran so poorly on PC, and that is because its engine was initially programmed to be highly optimized for the Xbox One hardware, and then the PC, in turn, had to run it in a very inefficient way.

I don't think you understand. It is the reality of the Windows OS and their graphics API's that are in the way of letting PC's utilize APU's the same way the console (not sure about Xbox's because they recently mandated all games be made for PC as well) API's make it possible. It is a question of design not processing power. If graphics engineers are able to pull off a certain feature for their engine by utilizing the highly unified structure of the console hardware, then they wouldn't be able to get the same performance on the equivalent PC hardware. Some features done in console games are simply not as efficient on PCs.

Not only that, but the mere reality of being able to work on a fixed platform where you can literally calculate all of your engine features in their best and worst case scenarios allows for developers to pick the exact techniques that are best for the hardware and also perfectly budget the performance of said hardware. Not possible on PC.

It is simply a fact.  I mean the proof has been out there for a long time. Just look at the Sony first party games. They keep getting better and better looking as time goes on, on the same hardware. How else would this be possible?