lol... this is kinda funny.

There is not a chance in hell PS5 will be a 1440p machine. Both sony and MS are going to look at what is needed to have native 4k and exceed that by a decent margin. And since they are both shopping from the same shop, they will end up with near identical hardware.

You honestly believe that the min thing that made the PS4 win the XB1 at the start of this gen is something they will suddenly not care about at the start of next gen? There is no way sony is going to allow MS be able to say True or the only 4k console fr the next 6 years. Like think about it and you see how little sense it makes.

Yikes.  You have some ridiculously low expectations for next gen.  Trust me, 4K 30/60 FPS, even if it is 4K CB to push visuals more, will be the goal for next gen.  They are already advertising 4K with the Pro and X, not aiming for 4K next gen would be idiotic.  Sure, we may have a few games that aren't the most optimized hitting 1440p, but that won't be the goal for the majority of games.  Especially not exclusives.

Yes, please.  If the PS5 can play all 4 previous consoles at launch, that will be a big point in its favor.

3) PS4 : 1.84 TFLOPS / Pro : 4.2 TFLOPS - so 2.3 x more powerful, just for clarity, but then the Pro isn't doing real 4K, to do that would need to be a bit more powerful, bringing us closer to the rumoured Xbox Skus.

4) I guess we just fundamentally disagree on the potential popularity of the lower-priced sku. I believe that there's a healthy market for a cheaper model and that a lot of gamers just don't care about 4K, not to the tune of an extra $100-$200 anyway. If MS does indeed go this route then I guess we'll see!

• Yes. In a rendering pipeline resolution is one of the things that scale proportionally. So if you are going for 4 times the rez you either need 4 times the power or 4 times the rendering time. But there are things that dont scale up at all unless a dev specifically wants them to (eg geometry). Another thing to consider is that the number you are told (eg 4.2TF, 1.8TF) doesn't mean that at any one time all of that GPU is fixed on driving rez. This is a very loose description, but say out of that 1.8TF 900Gflops was used solely for the rez part of the pipeline for a 1080p, then if you want the same game running in 4k you will need 3.6TF. 
  
  
• I agree with you here as well. I too believe there is a very healthy market for a dedicated  1080p sku. Funny thing is that those f is in forums that say its stupid are the minority. Last I checked there are still more people with 1080p TVs than there are with 4KTVs.

• Yes. In a rendering pipeline resolution is one of the things that scale proportionally. So if you are going for 4 times the rez you either need 4 times the power or 4 times the rendering time. But there are things that dont scale up at all unless a dev specifically wants them to (eg geometry). Another thing to consider is that the number you are told (eg 4.2TF, 1.8TF) doesn't mean that at any one time all of that GPU is fixed on driving rez. This is a very loose description, but say out of that 1.8TF 900Gflops was used solely for the rez part of the pipeline for a 1080p, then if you want the same game running in 4k you will need 3.6TF. 
  
  
• I agree with you here as well. I too believe there is a very healthy market for a dedicated  1080p sku. Funny thing is that those f is in forums that say its stupid are the minority. Last I checked there are still more people with 1080p TVs than there are with 4KTVs.

Double agree. Cheap hardware is fundamental to consoles. While I think the ratio will be about 50/50 with the xbox sales next generation, there's certainly a market for it.

Ps4 was the first console to be the most powerful and win a generation. Xbox is covering both bases. I think they'll dig deep and have a slightly more powerful console than the PS5 just for the brags. Much like the X.

They had a sku ready to launch along with the pro but held out on purpose just to be the more powerful console manufacturer. I can't find the article... Bloody google.

Edit :found  http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/295830/QA_With_Scorpio_rising_Phil_Spencer_looks_to_the_future_of_Xbox.php

It'll either work incredibly well and they'll get some marketshare back or consumers like average Joe and Jane will just end up confused. Though, pro and X seem to be doing fine.

We cannot assume Anaconda will be more powerful than PS5 because XBox One X is more powerful than PS4 PRO. We know why X was so powerful   ↑↑↑, and it was released one year after PRO, it cannot be an argument.

No, but we can assume that it is much more important to Microsoft than to Sony to claim these bragging rights and use them for advertising. With weaker exclusives, they need a win in overall performance and price/performance ratio this time.

• Yes. In a rendering pipeline resolution is one of the things that scale proportionally. So if you are going for 4 times the rez you either need 4 times the power or 4 times the rendering time. But there are things that dont scale up at all unless a dev specifically wants them to (eg geometry). Another thing to consider is that the number you are told (eg 4.2TF, 1.8TF) doesn't mean that at any one time all of that GPU is fixed on driving rez. This is a very loose description, but say out of that 1.8TF 900Gflops was used solely for the rez part of the pipeline for a 1080p, then if you want the same game running in 4k you will need 3.6TF. 
  
  
• I agree with you here as well. I too believe there is a very healthy market for a dedicated  1080p sku. Funny thing is that those f is in forums that say its stupid are the minority. Last I checked there are still more people with 1080p TVs than there are with 4KTVs.

Double agree. Cheap hardware is fundamental to consoles. While I think the ratio will be about 50/50 with the xbox sales next generation, there's certainly a market for it.

Ps4 was the first console to be the most powerful and win a generation. Xbox is covering both bases. I think they'll dig deep and have a slightly more powerful console than the PS5 just for the brags. Much like the X.

They had a sku ready to launch along with the pro but held out on purpose just to be the more powerful console manufacturer. I can't find the article... Bloody google.

Edit :found  http://www.gamasutra.com/view/news/295830/QA_With_Scorpio_rising_Phil_Spencer_looks_to_the_future_of_Xbox.php

It'll either work incredibly well and they'll get some marketshare back or consumers like average Joe and Jane will just end up confused. Though, pro and X seem to be doing fine.

Many factors come into the equation when it comes to the success of a Console;  PSX won its generation VS Sega Saturn and Nintendo64, and it was not the most powerful hardware; actually, if I'm not wrong, Saturn when fully pushed, could technically be more competitive overall(2D and 3D games), but much harder to develop for.  Nintendo64 was the most powerful, but it was released almost 2 years later(basicly 22 month later); PS2 userbase was already very well established, together with a "special" partnership with third-party developers; Nintendo released a console with an unusual storage format, and a bit too late, plus other factors, which have determinated the victory of Sony.

 XBox and GameCube, again, were more powerful, but they were released much later, respectively 20 and 18 months later than PS2;  even here, talking about specs and hardware is amiss, and can't be used as an argument when talking about PS4 and X1, which were released at the same time-frame, and say :"look!", the best hardware never determined the victory in the previous generations;  every generation makes history apart, and what determines or contribute to the success in a generation, could instead be irrelevant in other generations.

 360 VS PS3 was further more another scenario : 1 year head start for MS, which pulled out an incredibly powerful and friendly to develop for hardware, while PS3 was too expensive with a complex-unfamiliar architecture.   And what about Wii ? Nintendo took the casual road, and with a motion controller they have obliterated the competition for 3 years. Shall we use the "specs argument" again to validate the "SPECS DO NOT MATTER" statement when we talk about PS4 vs X1 or PS5 vs Anaconda ?  Of course specs alone means nothing, and there are so many other factors which will determine the succsess of a Console; but on the other hand, we cannot use the "SPECS DO NOT MATTER ARGUMENT" whatever is the situation, referring to other generations, where consoles were released in different time frame, and cater different audience.

 To conclude, I don't get why some are assuming that Anaconda will be more powerful than PS5, just for the brags, much like the X.    MS released XBox One X to save their face, after losing big from Sony.  So they wanted at any cost to take "something", the most powerful console, native 4K where possible and the best 3rd party experience. They had to do something to save the XBox image, and bring a breath of fresh air after a rather disappointing presentation.   We cannot assume Anaconda will be more powerful than PS5 because XBox One X is more powerful than PS4 PRO. We know why X was so powerful   ↑↑↑, and it was released one year after PRO, it cannot be an argument.