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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5 Coming at the End of 2020 According to Analyst: High-Spec Hardware for Under $500

 

Price, SKUs, specs ?

Only Base Model, $399, 9-10TF GPU, 16GB RAM 24 30.00%
 
Only Base Model, $449, 10-12TF GPU, 16GB RAM 13 16.25%
 
Only Base Model, $499, 12-14TF GPU, 24GB RAM 21 26.25%
 
Base Model $399 and PREMIUM $499 specs Ans3 10 12.50%
 
Base Mod $399 / PREM $549, >14TF 24GB RAM 5 6.25%
 
Base Mod $449 / PREM $599, the absolute Elite 7 8.75%
 
Total:80
Trumpstyle on 24 February 2019
Intrinsic said:
Trumpstyle said:
So far everything is looking good for me, Xbox two (Lockhart) will be a 1080p machine, PS5 will be a 1440p+ machine and Xbox two+ (Anaconda) will be a sub 4K machine.

Exactly how things are now between PS4, PS4 pro and Xbox one X.

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.

It's what I think will happen, game developers will target 1080p for xbox two (Lockhart) and just up the resolution for the two more powerful consoles. And if microsoft goes a premium console it should beat the PS5 just as Xbox one X does to PS4 pro.

About marketing yes I believe that will happen, Microsoft will market its console as the most powerful and the only true 4k console but not for 6 years. Very likely we get new consoles 2023-2024 which will move us to a hybrid console/pc model where console generation comes to an end.

thismeintiel said:
Trumpstyle said:
So far everything is looking good for me, Xbox two (Lockhart) will be a 1080p machine, PS5 will be a 1440p+ machine and Xbox two+ (Anaconda) will be a sub 4K machine.

Exactly how things are now between PS4, PS4 pro and Xbox one X.

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.

I don't have low expections, I'm just assuming game developers will go the easy route, the most powerful machine will have the highest ress :). But even for Sonys first party games I think they will target 4k CB or 1440p upscaled to 4k, they will need to do this to get a decent boost in graphic fidelity as for right now I expect Navi to be a dissappointment.

Last edited by Trumpstyle - on 24 February 2019

6x master league achiever in starcraft2

Beaten Sigrun on God of war mode

Beaten DOOM ultra-nightmare with NO endless ammo-rune, 2x super shotgun and no decoys on ps4 pro.

1-0 against Grubby in Wc3 frozen throne ladder!!

Around the Network
Nate4Drake on 24 February 2019
thismeintiel said:
Nate4Drake said:
PS5 Backwards Compatibility Speculation Begins Again as Sony Files Another Patent

""Sony has filed another patent for a backwards compatibility system, in theory allowing the inevitable PS5 to play games from previous console generations. At the beginning of the month, a patent registered under Mark Cerny's name was discovered, supposedly pointing to a method of backwards compatibility that would, again, in theory, let the PS5 run PSone, PS2, PS3, and PS4 titles.

The patent sparked a lot of speculation, but as we mentioned, patents don't necessarily mean that the proposed technology is going to be used. Sometimes, companies simply patent something so that the idea is safeguarded from the competition.

However, the fact that Sony has filed another patent -- published just yesterday and again, authored by PS4 system architect Mark Cerny -- lends a lot of weight to the aforementioned speculation. Just like the last patent, this one devises a system that essentially "tricks" old games into thinking that they're running on their original platforms. It certainly seems to fall in line with what's already been uncovered.""

http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2019/02/ps5_backwards_compatibility_speculation_begins_again_as_sony_files_another_patent

Please Sony !

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

It would be a big plus, and a way to secure even more the Playstation ecosystem.   I feel nostalgic sometimes, and I would play again on PS5 the best games of all previous playstation hardware, it would be a dream comes true.



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Intrinsic on 24 February 2019
Biggerboat1 said:

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.

I'm not an expert on this stuff (maybe Pemalite or one of the more technically minded guys can help us here), but my understanding is that GPU power requirements scales with resolution. So to increase the resolution from Full HD to 4K, you're gonna need 4x the power. If I'm correct then the that means there won't be any extra 'bells & whistles' between the 2 skus but just resolution bump. In fact Anaconda might struggle to hit full 4K at only 3x... 

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.


ironmanDX on 24 February 2019
Intrinsic said:
Biggerboat1 said:

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.

I'm not an expert on this stuff (maybe Pemalite or one of the more technically minded guys can help us here), but my understanding is that GPU power requirements scales with resolution. So to increase the resolution from Full HD to 4K, you're gonna need 4x the power. If I'm correct then the that means there won't be any extra 'bells & whistles' between the 2 skus but just resolution bump. In fact Anaconda might struggle to hit full 4K at only 3x... 

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.

 

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.

Last edited by ironmanDX - on 24 February 2019

HoloDust on 24 February 2019
Intrinsic said:
Biggerboat1 said:

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.

I'm not an expert on this stuff (maybe Pemalite or one of the more technically minded guys can help us here), but my understanding is that GPU power requirements scales with resolution. So to increase the resolution from Full HD to 4K, you're gonna need 4x the power. If I'm correct then the that means there won't be any extra 'bells & whistles' between the 2 skus but just resolution bump. In fact Anaconda might struggle to hit full 4K at only 3x... 

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.

 

@bold If you look up benchmarks, it's actually mostly 2-3x for 1080p to 4K UHD, depending on engine, API and GPU architecture.

Here's some of the latest for 1660Ti (link is for Metro Exodus, there are others games in review as well):

https://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/asus_rog_strix_geforce_gtx_1660_ti_review,14.html



Around the Network
Nate4Drake on 24 February 2019
ironmanDX said:
Intrinsic said:

 

  • 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.

Last edited by Nate4Drake - on 24 February 2019

”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Conina on 24 February 2019
Nate4Drake said:

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.



Nate4Drake on 24 February 2019
Conina said:
Nate4Drake said:

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.

This might be an argument !    Better they will do a great presentation and offer something more than a slogan "we have the most powerful SKU";)



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Biggerboat1 on 24 February 2019
Intrinsic said:
Biggerboat1 said:

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.

I'm not an expert on this stuff (maybe Pemalite or one of the more technically minded guys can help us here), but my understanding is that GPU power requirements scales with resolution. So to increase the resolution from Full HD to 4K, you're gonna need 4x the power. If I'm correct then the that means there won't be any extra 'bells & whistles' between the 2 skus but just resolution bump. In fact Anaconda might struggle to hit full 4K at only 3x... 

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.

 

 

ironmanDX said:
Intrinsic said:

 

  • 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.

Ok, thanks to you both for the clarification.

So I guess the conclusion is that Lockhart at 1/3 the TFLOPS would be in a decent position to run games at 1080 to Anaconda's 4K and that it wouldn't need to lose lots of 'bells and whistles' as thismeintiel suggests?



ironmanDX on 24 February 2019
Nate4Drake said:
ironmanDX said:

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.

Your misunderstanding my point. They had a 2016 system in mind that would launch along side the pro but decided to give the pro a year head start just to release a more expensive console a year later. That cost them in sales and surely, R&D.

They digged into their deeper pockets to have the most powerful console and will do so again. Why wouldn't they? It would make the saving of face this generation for nothing. They'll build upon their improving brand image moving forward.