Memristers has been a long time coming, in-fact I had almost forgotten about it since it was first announced many many eons ago.

NAND is already in 14nm-16nm range, with Samsung, Hynix etc' leading the charge.
They may need to start using more expensive quad-patterning to go lower than 14nm.
There is also the option of 3D and Stacked NAND at those nodes.

Flash life span is directly associated with size and the number of writes.
The larger the capacity, the better the wear-levelling can work and the longer the drive lasts, one has to assume next generation we will be pushing past 50Gb games, so multi-terabytes will probably be required.
However, the smaller we shrink NAND the less cycles every cell can perform, it's also dependent on how mature a given node is, today's 20nm is far more reliable than it was when it was first introduced.

Keep in mind that NAND/Flash/DRAM is a 70+ Billion dollar market, there is TON of financial incentive for companies to be innovative.

In-fact RAM has a similar issue, the higher the density a DRAM chip is, the more prone to errors it becomes, hence why error checking is going to become increasingly important as time goes on.

If I had to make a logical guess then it would be that the PS5 probably would have 16 gb of ram. Anything over 16gb might be rather useless for hardware that is just used for gaming. 32gb, 64gb of ram is primarily used workstations that are geared towards video and audio editing. A digital illustrator can also make use of high amounts of ram as well.

This, I completely agree with.

I think that was pretty darn obvious, nor did I ever suggest such a thing.

It took 5-6 years for 128Mb Graphics card capacities to be phased out, fact of the matter is, the PC has never needed rapid increases in VRAM, untill now.
It was always seen as more important for faster memory than larger.
Besides, 512Mb is pretty much phased out now except for fanless HTPC cards (Aka, AMD's rebadged 5 year old Cedar cards), which are useless for any kind of gaming outside of minesweeper.

Two main things compound the issue, one is that there are rapid increases in Display Resolution, the other is that games suddenly stopped being held back by horrible antiquated console hardware, suddenly VRAM requirements jumped which has caught allot of people off guard.

If you analize the trend over the years you get this great table that took me some time to make.

On the topic, next gen should get to 128 GB, but OSs are getting more mobile ready, so I think 32 GB would be my guess in 4-5 year time and 64 GB if next gen comes in 6 to 8 years. 

GPU Bandwith increased almost 8 times, so 1,4 TB/s wouldn´t be too far away if stacked memory is arround the corner, coming next year. My guess would be a 1 TB/s bandwith in 6 years.

CPU calculation is less in PS4 than PS3 if you could use all the PS3 resources at once (you cant), Actually the throughput is amost the same from PS3 to PS4. This should be at least 2 times better on PS5.  

GPU flops increased 10 times, If it doubles in 3 years now , we can think about a machine that is 4 times as powerfull. New Maxwell and Hawaii cards have 5 Teraflops, more than twice what PS4 has and Maxwell consumes 200W. So its not insane to believe that we can have 8 Teraflops on a 100W envelope in six years

Optic Media is still blue ray. If you need more textures for new games, then you need to get a larger media, at least 2 times what we have now.

So if we have 6 years time for a new PS5 it should be 4 times what  a PS4 is now. if PS4 barelly gets to 1080p, PS5 would gets to 4K in six years. because 4K is 4 times full Hd, you need 4 times the flops, bandwith , memory and so on if you want to make it right. And that is considering that you dont change the number of bounces of lights, quality of textures, calculations, and so on. 

If they dont do a machine capable of running 4k games, then why would somebody buy a PS5. A lot of people say that there is no much difference in quality between PS3 and PS4 despite the horrible blurry textures that the PS3 has on its very little 256 MB Video memory. 

If they dont make at least a 4K capable machine, then nobody would care about a PS5. 

We need a Machine 8-16 Teraflops of GPU power, 32 GB of RAM, 512 - 1000 GB/s Bandwith to think about a future gen. 

Now, games cost 2 to 4 times more to make in full hd than in SD, I wonder how many AAA companies could afford to make games if they cost 4 times what they do now. Maybe PS5 gen would be hold back from financials and not from hardware standpoint. 

In computing that kind of reasoning doesn't always apply. In 5 to 6 years we will most likely see 32gb being the standard.

LAWLAWLAWLAWLAWL!!!! Makes me write "PS5" on my cardboard box with false spec then sell it on ebay! Nah, not gonna do it, bad deeds.

Imagine PS5 cpu comes 24 core at 0.75 GHZ.

By the way, some a friend of mine already has 128gb DDR4 ram & Core i7 extreme 8 core/16 thread on his PC rig, i have no idea what's he thinking...

No worries. Yeah they are some pretty big claims, we'll see what happens.

The PS4's CPU is indeed faster than the PS3's Cell, how anyone even disputes this...


Flops is not a definitive, nor accurate representation of a processors performance, just like "Mhz and Ghz".
Processors use more than just floating point, games and by extension game engines use more than just floating point, which means that to get a proper understanding you need to use more than just floating point in comparisons.


Games cost nothing extra to be made in Full HD compared to SD.
It's just a resolution difference, developers just make the game's engine render at a higher resolution, that's it.
The PC has only been doing it for decades. (We had Full HD in 1995, 2 decades ago.)


The main issue that is going to influence what hardware goes into the next gen is going to be costs, well and truly, don't expect $1000 PC hardware in a $400 box, I think for a complete understanding of what will be in the next gen, we will need to take a pragmatic wait and see approach to see which direction the PC heads in.

I get were you coming from. But this is wrong. While Yes, making the resoluion change isn't a big deal. Everything needed for that is what causes the expense. You aren't going to like PS1 game models in 1080 res. People are going to expect high detailed models with clothes physics, lighting, maps that have day/night cycle, bump maping, volumeteric shadows etc.

All this stuff that has improved, along with HD, takes more and more time. This is what causes production costs to keep going up. In the PS1 days. You could make Cloud's player model in a few days. He's simple textures. With 4 cylinder limbs. Now, weeks to months are needed, just so his arms and weapons don't colide with other parts of his model. He'll have full hair, clothing layers etc. to make him a real person. Everything has to be tested.

1. Not true. Well, it kinda depends on how exactly you are looking at it. If you are talking higher resolution just by increasing the pixel count on the screen, then yes, it wil cost devs nothing to output in HD as opposed to SD as long as the power is here to begin with. However, if you consider what actually making a HD game means, then you should know that t also includes using higher rez highly detailed textures. Hell, even shadow maps get more detailed. All that stuff doesn't only eat up more hardware rsources, it also takes much longer for artists to do. 
   
   Thats why HD development in its entirety is expensive. And what a lot devs was complaining about at the start of last gen and what till this day most japanese devs have not caught up with.  But in relation to what he was saying, I don't see games costing much more than they do now even when devs go t 4k development. Texture detail may go up a bit more, but not going to be a massive jump from what we have right now. 
   
   
2. This has always kinda been the case butmore so now considering how PC like whats inside the consoles are. The way I see it, is that whatever is a midrange cpu/gpu ($200-$250 CPU or GPU) on the year of the consoles release is what will be in the next gen consoles. So if by that time we have $200 GPUs that are capable of doing 4k at 60fps then that is what we will have in the consoles. My money is still on them not even bothering with that and just limiting devs to internally render their games at no higher than 1440p then have a special/custom upscaler chip that will upscale that to 4k. So while the PS5/XB2 GPUs may have in excess of 5000 shader cores, sony/ms will limit how devs use that power to gurantee 4k@60fps in every game. Whil ein truth what we all will be playing wil be upscaled 1440p at 60fps.