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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Can Sony afford to make PS5 more expensive than PS4 launch price?

 

How much should it cost?

400 45 52.94%
 
450 15 17.65%
 
500 21 24.71%
 
550 0 0%
 
600 0 0%
 
600+ 4 4.71%
 
Total:85
Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

Be assured Sony has very close ties to AMD (they even developed some Vega features together)...if rumours are true that they’ll go for a dedicated GPU/CPU Solution this time, instead of an APU, a considerable increase of power is a given. PS5 won’t be in a strange position..X1X is, since it’s too expensive for a late mid-gen upgrade and won’t be able to keep up with true next gen titles.

Generations aren’t dead and especially not because of X1X, since no one really owns the thing to make an impact. Plus it’s lame CPU will prevent it from being relevant once next gen starts rolling.

Well, the flow of what it meant to be a "Generation" is gone. Everyone is off doing their own thing, of varying power levels, and varying time slots, as for back then every console came out at the same time, or within the same window, and ended around the same time. The traditional generation is dead. Switch and One X threw a wrench in it. We can't even agree that Switch is Gen 9 because everyone has their own idea of who kick-starts a generation. 

Xbox One X really isn't in a strange position because it seems like a diversion. Microsoft knew it was a premium product for premium users, at a premium price point. But it's leagues stronger than the PS4 and the Pro...technically of course. I just really want to see the route they're going to take and hope it isn't awkward. To not be in another PS3 situation, they have to have a deal with AMD, and hopefully they do, to drive down costs on their end. And again, what gets me worried is their statements on the Switch. Are they looking to retaliate? A handheld and a home console from then would not be satisfactory at this point, can't cram a dedicated GPU card in a handheld device, at least one powerful enough.

You sre either

  1. Setting yourself up for disappointment
  2. Don't really know what you're talking about
  3. Have a very limited understanding of how the tech that goes into consoles work
  4. are buying too much into the PR misdirection MS has been spinning all gen to save face.
Or any combination of the above four.


Around the Network
Bofferbrauer2 said:
The question for me is more can they afford not to?

PS5 needs to be substantially stronger than the PS4 Pro to give a real incentive to upgrade as due to diminishing returns it needs bigger differences in hardware power for noticeable visual differences. Thus the GPU part needs at least 10-12 TFlops of raw calculating power to stand out visually over the Pro, and that doesn't come cheap. Graphic cards in that power range cost more than an entire console right now, and even by 2020 it doesn't look like their price will be under 200$ by then. Add to this the need for more RAM and a stronger CPU plus the price of all the rest of the hardware and I hardly see how a price of 399$ can be achieved without resorting to an unhealthy heavy amount of subventionning

Holiday 2020 is more than 2.5 years away..a lot can happen until then. I remember the 360 giving highend PCs a run for their money at release. And I also remember no one expecting the PS4 to have 8GB Of GDDR5 RAM back then. All I’m saying is Sony are market leader, by far, and in a great position to make some special deals. 



Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

Well, the flow of what it meant to be a "Generation" is gone. Everyone is off doing their own thing, of varying power levels, and varying time slots, as for back then every console came out at the same time, or within the same window, and ended around the same time. The traditional generation is dead. Switch and One X threw a wrench in it. We can't even agree that Switch is Gen 9 because everyone has their own idea of who kick-starts a generation. 

Xbox One X really isn't in a strange position because it seems like a diversion. Microsoft knew it was a premium product for premium users, at a premium price point. But it's leagues stronger than the PS4 and the Pro...technically of course. I just really want to see the route they're going to take and hope it isn't awkward. To not be in another PS3 situation, they have to have a deal with AMD, and hopefully they do, to drive down costs on their end. And again, what gets me worried is their statements on the Switch. Are they looking to retaliate? A handheld and a home console from then would not be satisfactory at this point, can't cram a dedicated GPU card in a handheld device, at least one powerful enough.

You sre either

 

  1. Setting yourself up for disappointment
  2. Don't really know what you're talking about
  3. Have a very limited understanding of how the tech that goes into consoles work
  4. are buying too much into the PR misdirection MS has been spinning all gen to save face.
Or any combination of the above four.

 

Nope, I just think you're delusional and you think anything that doesn't praise sony is wrong. I What did I say above that you think is "Wrong", Generations are in essence, still subjective, so nothing I can do there. And I suppose you know so much about hardware, so please elaborate my guy, I'll be here. Teach me something you think I don't know, lol. Couldn't care less about Microsoft Hardware, but what they say rings true. They're not just a game company, their history is engrained in their own software philosophy. 

Been studying technology that goes into consoles for some time, since the Magnavox actually. And it doesn't take a genius to look these things up, get off. You have a history of Microsoft and Xbox bashing, and I don't engage in that. At least not since 2013.

Last edited by Ljink96 - on 03 March 2018

Ljink96 said:
I think MIcrosoft kind of planned this. Now the PS4 has to at least match the One X is power, and I don't see components similar to the One X going down considerably in price unless a deal is made or PS4 doesn't release until 2020 or late 2019. By this time they'd have to either release a 450+ console, or something weaker than the One X at a cheaper price, or like I said earlier, they'd have to have one hell of a chip deal with AMD. But let's be honest, PS5 has probably already neared the end of development and specs would have to be based on 2016-late 2017 or early 2018 tech.

This is a really strange position for the PS5 to be in and if they really don't want to ignore the Nintendo Switch, and implement a portable option, then prices shoot through the roof as mobile chips the power of Xbox One X don't exist, and if they do they aren't in consumer electronics yet. I think their best bet is to sell a $450+ console and see where it goes from there. And considering One X isn't Microsoft's next console, it's just going to be really strange. Generations are already dead, this next "generation" will finish the notion of them off.

This kind of prediction really calls out for a sig bet, you know... Ideally really specific and really gruesome.
(I'm talking about timeline more than minute price differences... which is irrelevant to Sony vs MS hype)



Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

I'm not gonna keep going back and forth about generations, as generation as a word refers to a group of things living around the same time collectively. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_home_video_game_consoles) It's known that Gen 1 was Magnavox, Gen 2 was Atari, Coleco, FM Towns, Channel F, Intelliviosn, Gen 2 was SG 1000, Gen 3 was NES Master System, and so on. And each ended full support of software around the time of the next console release. These consoles all released around the same time, not in parallel but around the same time, and they were separated by bits until the 6th gen. Sony believing in a Generational jump in power doesn't automatically mean the status of generations is the same. Power itself doesn't determine that. If that was true The Sega 32X would have been included in Gen 5 and not 4. 

I don't necessarily like Microsoft's consoles, but them talking about the end of generations often flies over people's heads because they don't know what Microsoft is trying to say on a technical and objective level. What we're thinking is on a subjective and pathos based level. The aspects and attributes that have restricted what it meant to be a generation have been lifted. But yeah, you stick to your interpretation, and I'll go with Microsoft's.

But I digress,

Xbox One X can push true 4k, PS4 can't. IF we still believe in "Generational Jumps in power" we'd classify a jump of 480p to 720 or 1080p, technological jumps. Like I said, I don't care for Microsoft's consoles but they can do true native 4k, PS4 and Pro have to checkerboard and upscale. It's on paper stronger than the Pro and in practice. Yes...it does run into bottlenecks, but it has the hoarsepower to at least render native 4k, can't really downplay that. Any Pro game that outperforms the One X version is either poorly programmed for the One X, or devs don't want to invest in learning the hardware upgrades or making patches to take advantage of the hardware, which is understandable.

There are like 30 games running at native 4K, even 4K/60 on Pro. It’s not a generational difference at all..it’s a bit of image quality, that’s about it. In very few cases at least better textures.

You‘re also giving the X1X too much credit. Having the same CPU as they Pro it means it more often runs into bottlenecks when trying to juggle the bigger data amounts around. Of course there is a certain horsepower difference in GPU power, no one is denying that, but you also need to understand that many developers just don’t care to put a lot of extra work into an specially enhanced X1X version, as it’s the by far lowest selling console this gen..and it doesn’t seem this will change soon. Why invest time and money in something only a few people own?

You also forget, that the Pro‘s GPU is indeed more advanced, as it even uses Vega features the X1X is lacking. Optimisation can do a lot if developers take their time. Same problem as with the X1X though. Only few people own it.

I stick with my opinion...generations aren’t just not over...they’re even needed for real progression in games. I can’t wait until the long outdated tablet CPU in all current gen consoles isn’t holding us back anymore.

lol, at that point it's just a PC then, and a not so good one at that if we're keeping costs low. I think we give "generation" too much power as a progressive word in terms of console technology. 

Like I said, couldn't care less about the Xbox Brand at this point, but their feats should not be downplayed. And for now, it's the most powerful device on the market. This conversation isn't about games, or exclusives, or anything of the sort. It's about hardware and hardware costs. The CPU is a downfall of the X, but it's still able to push more pixels and at least at the same FPS as the Pro. Any issues that degrade One X performance are at the fault of the devs at this point, not the hardware and yes they have a reason not to want to put in that effort. Doesn't detract from the fact it's more powerful.

If you desire not to be held back, PCs are waiting But I get it, PS has exclusives fair enough.



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:

Nope, I just think you're delusional and you think anything that doesn't praise sony is wrong. I What did I say above that you think is "Wrong", Generations are in essence, still subjective, so nothing I can do there. And I suppose you know so much about hardware, so please elaborate my guy, I'll be here. Teach me something you think I don't know, lol. Couldn't care less about Microsoft Hardware, but what they say rings true. They're not just a game company, their history is engrained in their own software philosophy. 

Been studying technology that goes into consoles for some time, since the Magnavox actually. And it doesn't take a genius to look these things up, get off. You have a history of Microsoft and Xbox bashing, and I don't engage in that. At least not since 2013.

Praise sony? I am just gonna ignore that.

If you know anything about hardware, you'll know that generations are defined primarily by the CPU and what new thiings its going to allow. And the combined improvement of every other aspect of the hardware. 

You will also know that there is no way that the XB1X can hold its own when its still powered by the Jaguar CPU.

You will also know tjat the difference betwwen the PS4pro ad XB1X is nearly identical to the difference between the PS4 and XB1. The numbers are bigger, but generally its the same percentage wise.

You will most importantly also know that both sony and MS are not going to make their new consoles based on tech on the market today (akA 16nm fabricated chips). The new consoles will be based on 7nm chips cause thats the only way to have a generational leap over the current existing tech and still come in at $400-$500. And if you have any idea what 7nm fabrication makes possible, you wont have said any of what you said to begin with.

You will also know that there will be improvements across the board. Not just with CPU anf GPU, but memory capacity and most importantly bandwidth.

I do not bash MS. I say it as it is. Feel free to point out a single post I have made 'bashing the xbox/ms' and i will ask you if whatever i was saying wasnt true.

Funny thing is, you arent wrong about the PS5, you are wrong about next gen in its entirety, everything i haw said now will apply to the PS5 and XB2.

Now please, lets keep any personal attacks on anyones character and or motives out of this and deal with juat the facts. 



Some people are actually picking $600+. Trolling the poll or are there actually people who want to see consoles in the over $600 price range?



Ljink96 said:
Errorist76 said:

There are like 30 games running at native 4K, even 4K/60 on Pro. It’s not a generational difference at all..it’s a bit of image quality, that’s about it. In very few cases at least better textures.

You‘re also giving the X1X too much credit. Having the same CPU as they Pro it means it more often runs into bottlenecks when trying to juggle the bigger data amounts around. Of course there is a certain horsepower difference in GPU power, no one is denying that, but you also need to understand that many developers just don’t care to put a lot of extra work into an specially enhanced X1X version, as it’s the by far lowest selling console this gen..and it doesn’t seem this will change soon. Why invest time and money in something only a few people own?

You also forget, that the Pro‘s GPU is indeed more advanced, as it even uses Vega features the X1X is lacking. Optimisation can do a lot if developers take their time. Same problem as with the X1X though. Only few people own it.

I stick with my opinion...generations aren’t just not over...they’re even needed for real progression in games. I can’t wait until the long outdated tablet CPU in all current gen consoles isn’t holding us back anymore.

lol, at that point it's just a PC then, and a not so good one at that if we're keeping costs low. I think we give "generation" too much power as a progressive word in terms of console technology. 

Like I said, couldn't care less about the Xbox Brand at this point, but their feats should not be downplayed. And for now, it's the most powerful device on the market. This conversation isn't about games, or exclusives, or anything of the sort. It's about hardware and hardware costs. The CPU is a downfall of the X, but it's still able to push more pixels and at least at the same FPS as the Pro. Any issues that degrade One X performance are at the fault of the devs at this point, not the hardware and yes they have a reason not to want to put in that effort. Doesn't detract from the fact it's more powerful.

If you desire not to be held back, PCs are waiting But I get it, PS has exclusives fair enough.

I game on PC, thank you. Problem is PCs are also held back by those weak CPUs. The Jaguar was already outdated at release 5 years ago.

My 7 year old i5 is faster than the CPU in the X1X! That’s why it’s still sufficient for 99% of games.



Intrinsic said:
Ljink96 said:

Nope, I just think you're delusional and you think anything that doesn't praise sony is wrong. I What did I say above that you think is "Wrong", Generations are in essence, still subjective, so nothing I can do there. And I suppose you know so much about hardware, so please elaborate my guy, I'll be here. Teach me something you think I don't know, lol. Couldn't care less about Microsoft Hardware, but what they say rings true. They're not just a game company, their history is engrained in their own software philosophy. 

Been studying technology that goes into consoles for some time, since the Magnavox actually. And it doesn't take a genius to look these things up, get off. You have a history of Microsoft and Xbox bashing, and I don't engage in that. At least not since 2013.

Praise sony? I am just gonna ignore that.

If you know anything about hardware, you'll know that generations are defined primarily by the CPU and what new thiings its going to allow. And the combined improvement of every other aspect of the hardware. 

You will also know that there is no way that the XB1X can hold its own when its still powered by the Jaguar CPU.

You will also know tjat the difference betwwen the PS4pro ad XB1X is nearly identical to the difference between the PS4 and XB1. The numbers are bigger, but generally its the same percentage wise.

You will most importantly also know that both sony and MS are not going to make their new consoles based on tech on the market today (akA 16nm fabricated chips). The new consoles will be based on 7nm chips cause thats the only way to have a generational leap over the current existing tech and still come in at $400-$500. And if you have any idea what 7nm fabrication makes possible, you wont have said any of what you said to begin with.

You will also know that there will be improvements across the board. Not just with CPU anf GPU, but memory capacity and most importantly bandwidth.

I do not bash MS. I say it as it is. Feel free to point out a single post I have made 'bashing the xbox/ms' and i will ask you if whatever i was saying wasnt true.

Funny thing is, you arent wrong about the PS5, you are wrong about next gen in its entirety, everything i haw said now will apply to the PS5 and XB2.

Now please, lets keep any personal attacks on anyones character and or motives out of this and deal with juat the facts. 

1) Yes...let's not pretend here.

2) Like I said, if that were true, the previous generations would not have formed the way they did.

3) Never said the Xbox One X will hold its own against the Next PS Console

4) Don't know why that's important to my OP

5) And yeah, maybe Microsoft is making their console based off of today's tech. But you don't develop a console in 1 year my guy, Switch started finalizing around 2014-2015 and the tech available then wasn't the same tech available today. There has to be a cutoff eventually. One that favors performance and price. Something Sony should know all too well. The PS3 had amazing and forward thinking tech, but it was expensive and nobody knew what the hell to do with it starting out. If you want the "Next Generation" in technology, there's going to be a price that comes with it. And I don't think Sony is willing to take that price hike, especially after bragging about their 399 price when Xbox One was 599, or bragging about 299. And I even said in my original post, the only way they would have industry leading chips and smaller dies is by making an expensive console, which is the problem.

And I'm done, nothing else here to see that actually tackles hardware cost and nothing I didn't know before. Just barely scratching the surface actually. And before asking not to attack someone else, maybe not do it yourself? lol, come on. You basically called me stupid in your other post. 



Errorist76 said:
Ljink96 said:

lol, at that point it's just a PC then, and a not so good one at that if we're keeping costs low. I think we give "generation" too much power as a progressive word in terms of console technology. 

Like I said, couldn't care less about the Xbox Brand at this point, but their feats should not be downplayed. And for now, it's the most powerful device on the market. This conversation isn't about games, or exclusives, or anything of the sort. It's about hardware and hardware costs. The CPU is a downfall of the X, but it's still able to push more pixels and at least at the same FPS as the Pro. Any issues that degrade One X performance are at the fault of the devs at this point, not the hardware and yes they have a reason not to want to put in that effort. Doesn't detract from the fact it's more powerful.

If you desire not to be held back, PCs are waiting But I get it, PS has exclusives fair enough.

I game on PC, thank you. Problem is PCs are also held back by those weak CPUs. The Jaguar was already outdated at release 5 years ago.

My 7 year old i5 is faster than the CPU in the X1X!

Umm...buy a faster CPU? And um you said PCs are being held back by the CPUs (i.e. Jaguar) but then you say your 7 year old i5 is faster than the One X? Am I missing something? Just get an i9 or Ryzen 7, and a 1080TI and you should be good to go. Should be more than enough.