I'm gonna say 32 GB or 64 GB, 131 GB Seems way to high.

I've had 6 GB on my laptop for the last 4 years and it's only starting to get out of the normal now.

1- How anyone even disputes this? ask Ubisoft. In their benchmarks showed in the game developement conference in Europe they show that PS3 CPU is faster than PS4. Cerny made the PS4 with powerfull programable graphics to be able to do physics tasks with gpu in a couple of years, there are plenty of interviews about that. 

http://gamingbolt.com/ubisoft-discovers-that-ps4-gpu-is-twice-as-powerful-as-xbox-one-gpu

2- Game cost a lot more to develop in HD because of times and resources, even Nintendo is having issues. 

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/125716-Nintendo-Underestimated-the-Cost-of-Going-HD

3- Of course cost will matter and consoles will not be able to reach PC level, because of power consumption, high end configurations, high price and so on. 

The computing power measure for games today is Teraflops, like it or not. Mostly because GPUs calculations are measured that way. Mostly teorethical Teraflops like I wrote above, but some make real world teraflop capability, like the ubisoft graphs.

http://gamingbolt.com/ubisoft-discovers-that-ps4-gpu-is-twice-as-powerful-as-xbox-one-gpu

Of course we do nothing with calculations only, thats why I put bandwith, Gpixels/s, Gtexels/s too. 

But again, would somebody buy a console that increases only from 1080p to 1440p? I wouldnt buy anything if it does not give you native 4k. Now, of course there will be some making 1440p games at 60 fps, but several companies will say, ohh i rather make it at 4K , because it looks so great and its native with 30 fps. Same as today with 800-900p 60 fps or 1080p with 30 fps in several games. Anyway, you need 4 times the computing power. 

Also we have to see how many people buy 4k TVs. If very few does, then 1440p consoles can be a reality, but what does it changes if you are looking on a 1080p display? 

--------------------

Last generation Nintendo made a cheap console The Wii, with horrible hardware performance, SD resolution and the greatest innovation in motion control. It attracted all the casual gamers and won the last gen 100 millon to 83. 

It seems that nobody cares about the wii mote, kinect or move any more, did anybody see any popular game showed in last E3 for new controls?

Casual gamers started gaming on mobile devices, or play still with the wii.

This new gen Gamers are choosing the best performing console. So if Sony and Microsoft believe that  they need the fastest machine for winning, maybe they will make it for 4K native. but who knows.

As new consoles are x86 compatible, we might see a new race starting. We might even get to see a  premium PS with more hardware and resolution, with games compatible with PS4 running at lower resolution, but thats just silly speculation.  

The resolution doesn't cost a thing, not a cent.
It's the assets that costs, those same higher-quality assets would also see benefits even if a game isn't at "HD".

Converesly, games have historically always increased the quality of the "graphics" despite being limited at certain resolutions.
For instance the jump between the origional NES and the PS2 had the same resolution ceiling, yet there is a stark difference in graphics.

Converesly, running a PS3 at PS2 levels of resolution, there is a stupidly large difference in fidelity still.
Again, resolution itself, costs nothing to implement, it's not the sole contributer to graphics, far from it and people's focus on that "magical number" needs to change, I could argue that contrast plays a far more significant role than resolution in better image quality.

The cost of a games development is always going to increase because we, as consumers demand ever increasing levels of graphics quality, regardless if you run at 640x480 or 1920x1080, it's just easier for people to blame resolution.

No offense, but Ubisoft doesn't know which way it's going anymore, their insane, ludicrous claims in the past have been incredibly humorous.
Their track record even recently, more so, that link also has no *real* technical information either.

As for the Cell vs Jaguar.
Yes, Cell is going to be more powerfull at Iterative Refinement Floating Point mathematics, however you throw Integer at it and it suddenly turns into a 486 DX66, it's not going to have peak performance with everything, always, that's why the Cell is slower.

If I were to create a proper analogy... Think of them as Cars, travelling down a highway, Jaguar will sit happily at 100 kilometers per hour constantly, never changing in speed(As it's equally adept, regardless of the math/instructions that are being used.), while the Cell will travel down the highway at 50 kilometers per hour, sometimes thanks to Wind Direction, Air Temperature, Traffic levels, Road and Tyre quality and fuel levels it can accellerate to 150 kilometers per hour, but because conditions change constantly cannot maintain that speed for very long.
And because of such, Jaguar will always reach the end of the highway first.

There is so much wrong with this...

So are you saying that FLOPS is all you need for an ACCURATE and DEFINITIVE comparison between completely different processing architectures?
If you answered yes, then please leave this thread, no really, please leave and never speaketh to me again.

@Bolded: I've alredy read that several times but I wouldn't be so sure about it.

Remember that we are talking about consoles here, which connect to TVs that will be either FullHD or 4K, not inbetween. With that in mind, why would developers target a resolution of 1440p and upscale that to 4K when it makes more sense to target FullHD resolution and have a perfect scale of 4x to 4K?

you have a point. I am just generally talking though. But the point I am really trying to make is that i feel the way consoles accomplish 4k will be from hardware upscaling. The PS4 has about 1100 GPU shader cores. I can just see the PS5 having no more than 4000 to 5000 shader cores but games being internally locked down to 1080p@60fps then upscaled to 4k for those that have the tvs to support it.

I hope I am wrong though.

Shaders aren't everything. Just looks at Nvidia's 980/970 cards, both chips have less of... well, basically almost everything but ROPs, and yet they outperform the 780Ti/780 respectively.

As for what will happen with the next consoles, time will tell, I guess.

Yeah I cant see the next consoles hitting 4K, not natively. Like others have said, it will more likely be 1080p still, scaled up to 4K for those with compatible TVs but with a fair amount of post processing going on to really give the 1080p image a boost. Regards to the Ram in the next gen, I don't think it will be that much of a boost if I'm honest. 32GB absolute max.

What they need to concentrate on is a better way of storing games in the first instance. This gen so far is a joke. Games supplied on Blu Ray but then the whole lot is copied to the hard drive. Space running out left right and centre when basically its just lazy on the dev part. There is no reason that I can think of for a game like Last Of Us as an example to drag over all the movie files to hard drive. These could be played quite happily off the Blu Ray drive and save what, 25GB space on the hard drive? I'm sure this is going on with every other game as well to some degree.

I know shaders aren't everything. But In case you haven't noticed I am not trying to be very very technical. I know all about ROPs, TMUs and everything else that goes into marking a GPUs performance. But in the spirit of keeping everything simple, I am only focusing on the one part of the GPU that everyone talks about; Its shader cores(amd)/stream processors(nvidia) which is used as the primary market of a GPUs expected performance.

Ideally, what any dev would want to do is actually render every cutscene in game and and not just in engine. That way the game comes in in an overall smaller package. For now, some devs (eg ND) render cutscenes in negine then store them on the disc like a video file so while said video file is being run for the gamer the game loads up the upcoming leveling in the background. Its pretty much a very good loading scene. moving the entire game over to the HDD including the video files just helps streamline the dev process. Now, everyone pretty much uses the blu-ray drive as nothing but an initial storage and concurrent security medium.

With next gen I would expect significant improvements in the storage media I/O. Basically how the storage medium is connected to system memory.  I think in the next 6 years nand storage will be a lot cheaper and be the norm, so it wouldn't be out of it having 2TB SSDs in consoles by then. I also feel that consoles will complete ditch the SATa interface for data transfer too.

It will probably have a little less RAM than the average contemporary gaming PC.