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

Forums - Sony Discussion - PS5 Confirmed Backward Compatibility

EricHiggin on 19 April 2019
thismeintiel said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

That article has some interesting info indeed.  Here is what I get from a business perspective.

Pros:
-Disc based
-Backwards Compatibility

Cons:
-Powerful (pricey?)
-VR is going to be a priority
-Not releasing this year

So far PS5 is not doing too hot.  It is looking kind of like the PS3, but it may be too early to tell.  If they are smart they will do an early 2020 release, and maybe the VR is mostly talk.  We'll see.

This is nothing like the PS3.  The PS3 was an incredibly expensive console to make. Supposedly, $800+ to make and was sold for $499 as the entry price, meaning Sony was losing over $300 per console. A lot of the price came from pushing the new Blu-ray tech, not from any powerful GPU.  Sure, the Cell was powerful, but because it was 100% custom and hard to develop on, gamers didn't really see the results of that extra $200 the PS3 coat over the 360.   For a year or more, 3rd party games actually looked worse on the more powerful system.

This won't happen with the PS5. Sony is waiting til next year for prices to fall. If they price it at $499, which isn't so bad with 14 years of inflation added in since the PS3, I doubt they would have to subsidize it more than $100.  It's also using slightly customized off the shelf parts, based on the same architecture as the PS4. If it's $50-$100 more than the XB2 because it's more powerful, gamers will see the results day one.

The only way PS dares try another PS3 priced $599 console, is if these Lockhart and Anaconda rumors are mostly true and PS5 follows suit. Based on the rumored specs you would expect Lockhart around 4TF for $299, and Anaconda at max 12TF for $499. Since PS likes their $399 price point, they could offer a base PS5 at around 6TF for $399, and a no compromises native 4k model at max 14TF for $599. (The exact TF isn't crucial for each model as long as the arrangement between them all stays the same) 

Now PS hasn't really said anything as of yet to make me think they will be launching two home consoles at once, but having one with a weaker GPU and smaller storage etc, would more easily allow for the $399 sweet spot, and if XB is doing it there's no reason PS can't either. While there could be a bunch of reasons why Cerny never mentioned RAM or GPU specs, I can't help but wonder, what if there were two PS5 SKU's and they were more like the XB1 models, where the premium version has a little more RAM and a much higher performing GPU than the base model?

Now if PS were actually going to offer a weaker base model 'home console', I would think this is less likely, and that a Switch like docking device was more likely. Neither of which are near as likely as a single subsidized SKU like we're used to.



Around the Network
Conina on 19 April 2019
Mr Puggsly said:

I don't feel running games off a HDD was done out of necessity. The PS3 was able to run games directly from a BD disc, so did the Wii U (likely BD tech). Therefore its not crazy to assume PS4 and X1 could have as well especially with their faster drives. 

The (maximal) speed of the PS4 BR-drive is 3x of the PS3 BR-drive, but many games have grown a lot more than 3x the size.

For installing they are fine, since thats a long sequential loading scenario, but playing games directly from the optical drive, the jumping around to dozens/hundreds of different points on the disc and speeding up / slowing down the disc every few minutes is very stressful for the mechanics (and noisy).



Trumpstyle on 19 April 2019
Pemalite said:
taus90 said:

I feel he think it some insider who leaked some PS5 info :D 

Pemalite: Also Just because something was introduced few years but didnt take off doesnt, mean cant be brought back on a better Hardware? (VR), even Sony has been Using 3D audio with different techniques and Ray tracing will be the new thing Not to forget Sony did recently acquire Audiokinetic

P.S. I wont be surprised if HZD2 Ai will use ray tracing collision detection.  

I meant things like the drive configurations and so on that everyone is commenting on without us actually having all the facts.

There is still allot of unknowns at this point.... Like how powerful the console is going to be which everyone seems to be throwing ideas around on. (Like dedicated Ray Tracing hardware and 80 CU's.)

Edit: I didn't like what I posted so I'm removing it

Last edited by Trumpstyle - on 19 April 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!!

Mr Puggsly on 19 April 2019
Conina said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I don't feel running games off a HDD was done out of necessity. The PS3 was able to run games directly from a BD disc, so did the Wii U (likely BD tech). Therefore its not crazy to assume PS4 and X1 could have as well especially with their faster drives. 

The (maximal) speed of the PS4 BR-drive is 3x of the PS3 BR-drive, but many games have grown a lot more than 3x the size.

For installing they are fine, since thats a long sequential loading scenario, but playing games directly from the optical drive, the jumping around to dozens/hundreds of different points on the disc and speeding up / slowing down the disc every few minutes is very stressful for the mechanics (and noisy).

I've read faster but I can't find a source that gives me an exact speed. Either way the PS4 and X1 were designed to install games, so that would explain why they may have went with a slower drive. I'm arguing its possible they could kept games running off discs, but that wasn't the goal.

I believe they went to installing games on a HDD because its less work and faster loading is possible. In practice, its a shame games seem to load more this gen. I've argued before when developers get access to better hardware there seems to be trend of becoming less efficient.

Last edited by Mr Puggsly - on 19 April 2019

Recently Completed: 
River City: Rival Showdown for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Conina on 19 April 2019

4K-Textures need around 3 - 4 the bandwith/filesize than 2K-textues... additional the areas get bigger and the LOD gets enhanced, so more objects with more detailed textures are visible. Bigger games do not automatically mean less efficiency.



Around the Network
Cerebralbore101 on 19 April 2019
thismeintiel said:
The_Liquid_Laser said:

That article has some interesting info indeed.  Here is what I get from a business perspective.


Pros:
-Disc based
-Backwards Compatibility


Cons:
-Powerful (pricey?)
-VR is going to be a priority
-Not releasing this year


So far PS5 is not doing too hot.  It is looking kind of like the PS3, but it may be too early to tell.  If they are smart they will do an early 2020 release, and maybe the VR is mostly talk.  We'll see.

This is nothing like the PS3.  The PS3 was an incredibly expensive console to make. Supposedly, $800+ to make and was sold for $499 as the entry price, meaning Sony was losing over $300 per console. A lot of the price came from pushing the new Blu-ray tech, not from any powerful GPU.   Sure, the Cell was powerful, but because it was 100% custom and hard to develop on, gamers didn't really see the results of that extra $200 the PS3 coat over the 360.   For a year or more, 3rd party games actually looked worse on the more powerful system.

This won't happen with the PS5. Sony is waiting til next year for prices to fall. If they price it at $499, which isn't so bad with 14 years of inflation added in since the PS3, I doubt they would have to subsidize it more than $100.  It's also using slightly customized off the shelf parts, based on the same architecture as the PS4. If it's $50-$100 more than the XB2 because it's more powerful, gamers will see the results day one.

Yeah that just adds another thing to my list of why $600 will be fine. PS5 will be $600 because it will be $600 worth of pure power. Blu-Ray pulled up the price, in the same way that Kinect pulled up the price of XB1. 



Bofferbrauer2 on 20 April 2019
jason1637 said:
Cerebralbore101 said:

8 GB of RAM for the OS would be a bloated OS. No thanks. Switch's OS is the best OS, because it boots up instantly, just plays games, and only takes up 300 KB of space. 

But the switch OS is missing a lot of features compared to the PS4. With the rumored changes to PSN I could see the PS5 taking up maybe 4-6gb. 8 would be too much though.

Not even Windows, with all it's functions, is coming close to using that much RAM. If a console OS would take that much, it's really wasteful programming. 4GB okay, 6 is already pushing it, but 8 is absolutely out of question.



The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454 List as Google Doc:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aW2hXQT1TheElVS7z-F3pP-7nbqdrDqWNTxl6JoJWBY/edit?usp=sharing

The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/ 

Free Pc Games thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/248138/free-pc-games/1/

Pemalite on 20 April 2019
Bofferbrauer2 said:
jason1637 said:

But the switch OS is missing a lot of features compared to the PS4. With the rumored changes to PSN I could see the PS5 taking up maybe 4-6gb. 8 would be too much though.

Not even Windows, with all it's functions, is coming close to using that much RAM. If a console OS would take that much, it's really wasteful programming. 4GB okay, 6 is already pushing it, but 8 is absolutely out of question.

To be fair... The Xbox One was doing multi-tasking via snap (Now gone), Kinect and running multiple Operating Systems all at once via Virtualization, so Microsoft actually got allot of usability out of only 3GB, it's still more memory than Windows 7 will use though.

Sony tends to be a little less efficient on the OS front, it's Microsoft's expertise after-all...
But the Playstation 4 still needed a separate 256MB/1024MB DDR3 memory pool and separate ARM processor for background tasks and even still necessitated the need for 3.5GB of GDDR5 Ram for front-end stuff. - Not sure if they have given back that extra .5GB of Ram yet though?

The issue is... Microsoft and Sony need to make forward projections on Ram requirements for 10~ years, 3GB was a massive amount in 2013 for an OS, background tasks, apps... Today? Not so much. My Phone has more Ram.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Bofferbrauer2 on 20 April 2019
Pemalite said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

Not even Windows, with all it's functions, is coming close to using that much RAM. If a console OS would take that much, it's really wasteful programming. 4GB okay, 6 is already pushing it, but 8 is absolutely out of question.

To be fair... The Xbox One was doing multi-tasking via snap (Now gone), Kinect and running multiple Operating Systems all at once via Virtualization, so Microsoft actually got allot of usability out of only 3GB, it's still more memory than Windows 7 will use though.

Sony tends to be a little less efficient on the OS front, it's Microsoft's expertise after-all...
But the Playstation 4 still needed a separate 256MB/1024MB DDR3 memory pool and separate ARM processor for background tasks and even still necessitated the need for 3.5GB of GDDR5 Ram for front-end stuff. - Not sure if they have given back that extra .5GB of Ram yet though?

The issue is... Microsoft and Sony need to make forward projections on Ram requirements for 10~ years, 3GB was a massive amount in 2013 for an OS, background tasks, apps... Today? Not so much. My Phone has more Ram.

Your phone doesn't need nearly as much for the OS. That's for the Apps, especially games, to use.

Also, 3GB wasn't even massive in 2013, Win 8.1 already used about as much, and that came out first.



The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454 List as Google Doc:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aW2hXQT1TheElVS7z-F3pP-7nbqdrDqWNTxl6JoJWBY/edit?usp=sharing

The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/ 

Free Pc Games thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/248138/free-pc-games/1/

Pemalite on 22 April 2019
Bofferbrauer2 said:
Pemalite said:

To be fair... The Xbox One was doing multi-tasking via snap (Now gone), Kinect and running multiple Operating Systems all at once via Virtualization, so Microsoft actually got allot of usability out of only 3GB, it's still more memory than Windows 7 will use though.

Sony tends to be a little less efficient on the OS front, it's Microsoft's expertise after-all...
But the Playstation 4 still needed a separate 256MB/1024MB DDR3 memory pool and separate ARM processor for background tasks and even still necessitated the need for 3.5GB of GDDR5 Ram for front-end stuff. - Not sure if they have given back that extra .5GB of Ram yet though?

The issue is... Microsoft and Sony need to make forward projections on Ram requirements for 10~ years, 3GB was a massive amount in 2013 for an OS, background tasks, apps... Today? Not so much. My Phone has more Ram.

Your phone doesn't need nearly as much for the OS. That's for the Apps, especially games, to use.

Also, 3GB wasn't even massive in 2013, Win 8.1 already used about as much, and that came out first.

The thing with Android/iOS/Windows is that allot of their Ram consumption is due to caching and background tasks.
Thus my phone can and does use more than 3GB for just the OS.

Windows 8.1, heck even Windows 10 will happily run on 2GB of Ram if it's backed by an SSD.




--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--