By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sony - My estimated specs of the PlayStation 5

globalisateur on 21 April 2014
Pemalite said:
freedquaker said:

Agreed with all the points here except the final sentence. Although technically true and feasible, most TV sets are not configured with that kind of resolution but set at 1080p max. So although the consoles may be capable of such resolutions, the outputs will not be there. Let's remember the 10x increase from the PS2 era to the PS3 while the resolutions increased only within the feasible range from 480p to 720p at the time. The TV standardization is a very slow process. The standard 1080p TVs have been available for almost a decade but only gaining traction in the last few years. There is no certain standard resolution over 1080p right now other than 4K, and we need at least 10+ years to follow that kind of performance.

My point is, the next gen will either go 1080p or 4K (given current trends), and there is no way 4K will be feasible by then.

4k is already upon us and getting cheaper every day, QHD has been with us for donkey's years.
Console generations take a long ass time.

And there is benefit to running games at QHD/4k even on a 1080P panel thanks to downsampling.

So we will have to agree to disagree on this one, there were movements for a shift to 2k/4k before this generation started.

Excellent remark! Contrary to nowadays where downsampling from 1080p to 720p is not perfect,from 4K to 1080P downsampling will be perfect so even 1080p TV owners will benefit from 4K.

 

It's going to be 4K people! Listen to me: 

We can already do 4k@30fps (locked) with several typical 3D multiplatform games (Batman & NFS) with a mere 4 tflops card... 

 

Also vita 2 will have a native 1080p screen and every PS5 games will be perfectly downsampled via remote play on the vita 2 (4K -> 1080p)  like PS4 is perfectly dowsampled to Vita now (1080p -> 540p).




Around the Network
Pemalite on 21 April 2014
globalisateur said:
Pemalite said:
freedquaker said:

Agreed with all the points here except the final sentence. Although technically true and feasible, most TV sets are not configured with that kind of resolution but set at 1080p max. So although the consoles may be capable of such resolutions, the outputs will not be there. Let's remember the 10x increase from the PS2 era to the PS3 while the resolutions increased only within the feasible range from 480p to 720p at the time. The TV standardization is a very slow process. The standard 1080p TVs have been available for almost a decade but only gaining traction in the last few years. There is no certain standard resolution over 1080p right now other than 4K, and we need at least 10+ years to follow that kind of performance.

My point is, the next gen will either go 1080p or 4K (given current trends), and there is no way 4K will be feasible by then.

4k is already upon us and getting cheaper every day, QHD has been with us for donkey's years.
Console generations take a long ass time.

And there is benefit to running games at QHD/4k even on a 1080P panel thanks to downsampling.

So we will have to agree to disagree on this one, there were movements for a shift to 2k/4k before this generation started.

Excellent remark! Contrary to nowadays where downsampling from 1080p to 720p is not perfect,from 4K to 1080P downsampling will be perfect so even 1080p TV owners will benefit from 4K.

 

It's going to be 4K people! Listen to me: 

We can already do 4k@30fps (locked) with several typical 3D multiplatform games (Batman & NFS) with a mere 4 tflops card... 

 

Also vita 2 will have a native 1080p screen and every PS5 games will be perfectly downsampled via remote play on the vita 2 (4K -> 1080p)  like PS4 is perfectly dowsampled to Vita now (1080p -> 540p).


Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not.

But incase you are, downsampling can assist in greatly increasing image quality, it was actually one of the first (And also one of the best) Anti-Aliasing methods that exists.
Thus even if the majority of the market is still only playing with 1080P or 720P panels, then they will still benefit, those with higher resolution panels also benefit.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

freedquaker on 21 April 2014
Pemalite said:
freedquaker said:

Agreed with all the points here except the final sentence. Although technically true and feasible, most TV sets are not configured with that kind of resolution but set at 1080p max. So although the consoles may be capable of such resolutions, the outputs will not be there. Let's remember the 10x increase from the PS2 era to the PS3 while the resolutions increased only within the feasible range from 480p to 720p at the time. The TV standardization is a very slow process. The standard 1080p TVs have been available for almost a decade but only gaining traction in the last few years. There is no certain standard resolution over 1080p right now other than 4K, and we need at least 10+ years to follow that kind of performance.

My point is, the next gen will either go 1080p or 4K (given current trends), and there is no way 4K will be feasible by then.

4k is already upon us and getting cheaper every day, QHD has been with us for donkey's years.
Console generations take a long ass time.

And there is benefit to running games at QHD/4k even on a 1080P panel thanks to downsampling.

So we will have to agree to disagree on this one, there were movements for a shift to 2k/4k before this generation started.

And there is benefit to running games at QHD/4k even on a 1080P panel thanks to downsampling.

I did actually think about that and it's possible but it's rare in the console world, and I believe the performance is better spent elsewhere such as AA or better textures etc. But if the GPU is over-powered, why not? I am not saying impossible, I just think "improbable". We'll see, anything beyond that is speculation on both sides...


4k is already upon us and getting cheaper every day

Also true, but I am 90% positive that 4K will not be mainstream even in 10 years. It may be maaaaybeee in 30% of the homes in 10 years. Still more than half of the TVs (as high as 3 quarters) out there is not 1080p capable. Of course 1080p has a large share but not user base yet. Thanks for letting me be aware of the qHD TVs (you're always a great knowledge source, bro!), but it is practically impossible for them to be  the standard anytime soon. But this gives me a more realistic hope for qHD resolution standard in the next decade, rather than the ridiculously high 4K for anything less than 32 inch.



Playstation 5 vs XBox Series Market Share Estimates

Regional Analysis  (only MS and Sony Consoles)
Europe     => XB1 : 23-24 % vs PS4 : 76-77%
N. America => XB1 :  49-52% vs PS4 : 48-51%
Global     => XB1 :  32-34% vs PS4 : 66-68%

Sales Estimations for 8th Generation Consoles

Next Gen Consoles Impressions and Estimates

TheJimbo1234 on 22 April 2014
Turkish said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
Turkish said:
 


"Bluray is only 56mbit" LOOOOOOL, average global dl speed is 18Mbps http://www.netindex.com/download/allcountries/

And for the 3rd time: even if the "high end" allowed this, the average is too low, Sony is not gonna release a product only few can fully enjoy. Why do I keep repeating this, pay attention to my posts.

"You have a plasma and you wonder why 4k is better? *facepalm*"

Panel type vs resolution, can't believe someone is actually making a comparison between the 2

LOL

But if you got confused in all your wisdom and PhD level academic research: plasma is better than LED, which is still an inferior LCD screen but confuses many people like you into thinking it's a whole different technology called OLED.

I have a Samsung plasma from years ago, my parents bought a Philips LED TV last year, the Plasma looks much better and more natural than the LCD display. I must admit, the LCD fooled me in the store, it fools many. It looks good in store demos, the screen is so flashy and "in your face" than a plasma that people think it's better.

So you ignored the fact that the PS4 has not been laucnhed globally ergo why include everywhere, and following trends, the actual markets will reach 56mb by 2020. NICE ONE

Why the hell do Sony care about the low end? If you are on low end internet, how can you afford a new console?! Your points make no sense. As always, new products are aimed at those who are better off.

Yes - panel type is important when talking about clarity. The issue here is you really lack any knowledge on this and are not man enough to admit it and back down.

Plasma is so much better that it is being scrapped. Yup, sounds good to me. The pit falls of plasma and fall in cost of LED means plasma is dead. 

Also why are you ignoring the fact of human ability to see pixels? Admit it - 4k is useless for most people.


"PS4 has not been laucnhed globally"

It's available in 72 countries, it launched in every continent, this is a global launch lmao.

"the actual markets will reach 56mb by 2020"

Dude figures PS5 game streaming will be 56Mbit lol, for the first time he makes a bold prediction lol

"Why the hell do Sony care about the low end?"

Why the hell would they not care? Not everyone lives in the same living standard as you do, this is a very narrowminded outlook on the world.

"panel type is important when talking about clarity"

You're right, plasma is so blurry I can't see shit

"The issue here is you really lack any knowledge on this and are not man enough to admit it and back down."

 

Plasma is a much better technology than LCD, it's so good that my 4 year old plasma beats out the latest LCD tv's

Brightness is a non issue at home, only people who are in a brightly lit store get fooled by the LCD's flashy brightness. Plasma is natural, like the good old CRT screens.

I'd take a less eye popping, but natural looking TV over a TV with bad contrast, blacks that look gray, bad viewing angles, bad motion blur, bad input lag, bad color accuracy. In short: lcd is bad at everything that is supposed to be good about a TV. Plasma disadvantages are: more heat, power, not the brightest, in short: minor disadvantages that do not impact your viewing experience unlike LCD. Nasty screen technology, just nasty. Glad OLED is coming out.

 

Aw bless, you're still trying.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-18/pricey-ps4-the-most-expensive-countries-to-buy-a-playstation-4.html

Enjoying trying to buy a PS4 in some countries.

What's the bit rate of bluray? 

Low end = poor =bad market. Few companies care about poor people.

So if plasma is so good, why is it not being produced any more?

You should have stopped a loooong time ago bud.



Turkish on 22 April 2014
TheJimbo1234 said:
Turkish said:
TheJimbo1234 said:
Turkish said:
 


"Bluray is only 56mbit" LOOOOOOL, average global dl speed is 18Mbps http://www.netindex.com/download/allcountries/

And for the 3rd time: even if the "high end" allowed this, the average is too low, Sony is not gonna release a product only few can fully enjoy. Why do I keep repeating this, pay attention to my posts.

"You have a plasma and you wonder why 4k is better? *facepalm*"

Panel type vs resolution, can't believe someone is actually making a comparison between the 2

LOL

But if you got confused in all your wisdom and PhD level academic research: plasma is better than LED, which is still an inferior LCD screen but confuses many people like you into thinking it's a whole different technology called OLED.

I have a Samsung plasma from years ago, my parents bought a Philips LED TV last year, the Plasma looks much better and more natural than the LCD display. I must admit, the LCD fooled me in the store, it fools many. It looks good in store demos, the screen is so flashy and "in your face" than a plasma that people think it's better.

So you ignored the fact that the PS4 has not been laucnhed globally ergo why include everywhere, and following trends, the actual markets will reach 56mb by 2020. NICE ONE

Why the hell do Sony care about the low end? If you are on low end internet, how can you afford a new console?! Your points make no sense. As always, new products are aimed at those who are better off.

Yes - panel type is important when talking about clarity. The issue here is you really lack any knowledge on this and are not man enough to admit it and back down.

Plasma is so much better that it is being scrapped. Yup, sounds good to me. The pit falls of plasma and fall in cost of LED means plasma is dead. 

Also why are you ignoring the fact of human ability to see pixels? Admit it - 4k is useless for most people.


"PS4 has not been laucnhed globally"

It's available in 72 countries, it launched in every continent, this is a global launch lmao.

"the actual markets will reach 56mb by 2020"

Dude figures PS5 game streaming will be 56Mbit lol, for the first time he makes a bold prediction lol

"Why the hell do Sony care about the low end?"

Why the hell would they not care? Not everyone lives in the same living standard as you do, this is a very narrowminded outlook on the world.

"panel type is important when talking about clarity"

You're right, plasma is so blurry I can't see shit

"The issue here is you really lack any knowledge on this and are not man enough to admit it and back down."

 

Plasma is a much better technology than LCD, it's so good that my 4 year old plasma beats out the latest LCD tv's

Brightness is a non issue at home, only people who are in a brightly lit store get fooled by the LCD's flashy brightness. Plasma is natural, like the good old CRT screens.

I'd take a less eye popping, but natural looking TV over a TV with bad contrast, blacks that look gray, bad viewing angles, bad motion blur, bad input lag, bad color accuracy. In short: lcd is bad at everything that is supposed to be good about a TV. Plasma disadvantages are: more heat, power, not the brightest, in short: minor disadvantages that do not impact your viewing experience unlike LCD. Nasty screen technology, just nasty. Glad OLED is coming out.

 

Aw bless, you're still trying.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-18/pricey-ps4-the-most-expensive-countries-to-buy-a-playstation-4.html

Enjoying trying to buy a PS4 in some countries.

What's the bit rate of bluray? 

Low end = poor =bad market. Few companies care about poor people.

So if plasma is so good, why is it not being produced any more?

You should have stopped a loooong time ago bud.



Not sure what you're trying to prove with the price of PS4 in Brazil. The average global broadband speed is too low to stream native 1080p bluray content for the next decade, forget about streaming native 4K anytime soon. It's also not gonna happen because ISP's will not allow 10s of terabytes of data gone to streaming native content. Plasma is a superior technology to LCD, I told and acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of both technologies without bias, but are you "man enough" to accept them, or is Screen Smeari.. I mean LCD unconditionally the bestest without any faults. "But you lack the capacity to understand that." How does that condescending attitude work? The way you try so hard to act tech informed and superior is cringeworthy but amusing.

Around the Network
mind on 22 April 2014

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-03-18/pricey-ps4-the-most-expensive-countries-to-buy-a-playstation-4.html

"Enjoying trying to buy a PS4 in some countries"

~$650 in Russia..., Japan and USA don't know how happy they are.

And there is still a supply issue, which is not helping.



Nintendo 2018

English is not my native language.
Pemalite on 22 April 2014
Turkish said:

Plasma is a superior technology to LCD, I told and acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of both technologies without bias, but are you "man enough" to accept them, or is Screen Smeari.. I mean LCD unconditionally the bestest without any faults. "But you lack the capacity to understand that." How does that condescending attitude work? The way you try so hard to act tech informed and superior is cringeworthy but amusing.


That's true, Plasma in many regards is superior to LCD, but not in every case.

* CCFL LCD has better gamut and in most instances beating LED LCD and Plasma.
* LED LCD usually has the best brightness. (And CCFL+Plasma's get darker with sheer age, LED stays as bright as the day you bought it.)
* Blacks easily go to plasma.
* Contrasts more often than not goes to Plasma's, however there are LCD panels (The one's with local dimming especially) that can beat the Plasma's, but they cost a pretty penny.
* Resolution goes to the LCD easily.
* Refresh Rate... There are genuine 120hz and 144hz panels available, beyond that most people don't notice an improvement, but the nod goes to Plasma.
* Power Consumption... Hands down LED LCD territory.

Thus, there really isn't an "ideal" panel that is PERFECT for all use-cases, of course buy the best that you can afford and think of it's use-case, for instance you would be batty to throw a Plasma onto a workstation PC that only shows the same thing 24/7 due to the Plasma's image retention, my local air port discovered how quickly Plasma's become useless in such scenario's.




www.youtube.com/@Pemalite

GameAnalyser on 22 April 2014

56-64 GB would still be overkill.



Turkish on 22 April 2014
Pemalite said:
Turkish said:

Plasma is a superior technology to LCD, I told and acknowledge the advantages and disadvantages of both technologies without bias, but are you "man enough" to accept them, or is Screen Smeari.. I mean LCD unconditionally the bestest without any faults. "But you lack the capacity to understand that." How does that condescending attitude work? The way you try so hard to act tech informed and superior is cringeworthy but amusing.


That's true, Plasma in many regards is superior to LCD, but not in every case.

* CCFL LCD has better gamut and in most instances beating LED LCD and Plasma.
* LED LCD usually has the best brightness. (And CCFL+Plasma's get darker with sheer age, LED stays as bright as the day you bought it.)
* Blacks easily go to plasma.
* Contrasts more often than not goes to Plasma's, however there are LCD panels (The one's with local dimming especially) that can beat the Plasma's, but they cost a pretty penny.
* Resolution goes to the LCD easily.
* Refresh Rate... There are genuine 120hz and 144hz panels available, beyond that most people don't notice an improvement, but the nod goes to Plasma.
* Power Consumption... Hands down LED LCD territory.

Thus, there really isn't an "ideal" panel that is PERFECT for all use-cases, of course buy the best that you can afford and think of it's use-case, for instance you would be batty to throw a Plasma onto a workstation PC that only shows the same thing 24/7 due to the Plasma's image retention, my local air port discovered how quickly Plasma's become useless in such scenario's.



To me, the disadvantages of LCD are bigger than its advantages, thats why I went with plasma 4 years ago. In a store room, LCD's definetly stand out more in a brightly lit store room, making people choose them one because it looks so flashy in that instant. But in a normal living room, you will definetly not feel like the Plasma is dark, the Dynamic option on my TV actually hurts my eyes after a while lol. Power consumption is higher on plasma's, but its something I'm not bothered with. Image retention is not a problem anymore like the older plasma's, my 4 year old tv has seen lots of static images of XMB and my HTPC's desktop for hours, it eventually goes away. I hope I can afford an OLED tv in a few years, seen one in mediamarkt, so good !



Norris2k on 22 April 2014
freedquaker said:

Turkish said:

...........you were unable to predict what a next gen OS would need back in 2007. You'd probably say "OS needing more than the entire 512MB ram of the PS3 or 360? Preposterous!" ...........


The sentence here actually defeats itself and reflects and major misunderstanding of the OS requirements. Speaking of FreeBSD on PS4 in particular, the OS definitely does NOT need 3 GB RAM to operate. For all we know, it is perfectly fine with about half a gig. Sony originally wanted to go with only 4 GB, reserving 0.5 GB for the OS, and leaving 3.5 GB for the games, remember?

Given that the OS is still the same, then what happened? They were able to increase the RAM to 8 GB, and knowing that most developers & games do not need that amount of memory, they decided to RESERVE some amount of RAM to make the console

a) Future proof with upcoming features

b) They can always release some of the reserved RAM in the future with a software update, but once you release it, it's gone, you can't take it back, in order to add more multi-tasking features etc...

 

So if anything, the 3 GB reserved for the OS proves that games DO NOT NEED 8 GB. This is clear from the PC games today, there isn't a single game that uses more than 4-5 GB! The vast majority of games do not even use more than 2 GB (system), being limited to 32 bit, and only recently are we seeing a trend away from this, with the advent of the next-gen consoles.

In the past, however, this was never the case. The PC had always used more RAM than was available on the consoles. Most PC games in 2006 were already using way more than 256-512 MB RAM, which comes with 360 and PS3. So you clearly see a relative abundance of memory here, which means the next gen will not have this kind of jump. The large reserve for the OS does not mean the OSs are that hungry, on the contrary, it means Sony can afford to reserve that much RAM from the games as they simply don't need as much today.

Mark my words here, and remember how ridiculous your original claims will look by then. Things do not get just scaled up, there is always a technical REASON behind them. With your projections, there is NONE.

Technically speaking, you are mostly right, but you are contradicting yourself.

You finish with "Things do not get just scaled up, there is always a technical REASON behind them. With your projections, there is NONE.".

But you are saying yourself that currently the vast amount of memory on the PS4 has no use. You remove 3 Gb from game and it's not really big deal, most game using 2-4 Gb. You add it on the OS, but you don't really have any use for it. There is no "technical REASON" for currently scaling up the OS memory... just a vague future proof intuition that it could have some use in the future. Most OS are not heavy memory consumer at core. In fact, strictly speaking, even the graphical environment that makes most of the memory footprint is not mandatory for BSD, it's a dispensable feature. So just add an other dispensable feature like a browser in background and you have your OS reserve a lot more memory. Feature could really rise in memory use especially because in a few year the decade old limitation from the 32 bits (and limited console) period will be forgotten.