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

Forums - Sony Discussion - Sony: PS5 not due out before April 2020

TranceformerFX said:
HollyGamer said:

No, some insider said Sony 7nm chip will be available in Q3 2020 https://www.digitimes.com/news/a20190416PD205.html

Sorry bro, but it turns out that you were wrong and the "insider" was full of shit. They're coming in 2019:

https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2019/05/amd-to-launch-new-7nm-navi-gpu-rome-cpu-in-3rd-quarter/?amp=1

The insider mentioned The PS5 chip , not the entire Navi lineup.



Around the Network
twintail said:
DonFerrari said:

That didn't prevent MS to rush X360 launch about 1 year to get a leg up against PS3.

https://venturebeat.com/2008/06/13/interview-with-microsofts-robbie-bach-part-2-on-xbox-360/

according to this, they didn't. 

Besides its a different situation. Sony doesn't need to rush anything, but they could very well just be lying about the release date too. 

So you are saying the RROD isn't fruit of rushing, but pure incompetence?



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

https://venturebeat.com/2008/06/13/interview-with-microsofts-robbie-bach-part-2-on-xbox-360/

according to this, they didn't. 

Besides its a different situation. Sony doesn't need to rush anything, but they could very well just be lying about the release date too. 

So you are saying the RROD isn't fruit of rushing, but pure incompetence?

It took nearly a year before these reports started actually becoming a real thing, and even then it was unclear how widespread the problem actually was. MS didn't know what the problem was for a good few months.

Hindsight is 50/50 but they would have required a whole year of extra testing to test for something they would not have even been anticipating in the first place.

They thought they had a readily functioning console from the tests they had done and thought it was ok to launch. Its not about rushing, or incompetence, just bad luck. 



twintail said:
DonFerrari said:

So you are saying the RROD isn't fruit of rushing, but pure incompetence?

It took nearly a year before these reports started actually becoming a real thing, and even then it was unclear how widespread the problem actually was. MS didn't know what the problem was for a good few months.

Hindsight is 50/50 but they would have required a whole year of extra testing to test for something they would not have even been anticipating in the first place.

They thought they had a readily functioning console from the tests they had done and thought it was ok to launch. Its not about rushing, or incompetence, just bad luck. 

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

It took nearly a year before these reports started actually becoming a real thing, and even then it was unclear how widespread the problem actually was. MS didn't know what the problem was for a good few months.

Hindsight is 50/50 but they would have required a whole year of extra testing to test for something they would not have even been anticipating in the first place.

They thought they had a readily functioning console from the tests they had done and thought it was ok to launch. Its not about rushing, or incompetence, just bad luck. 

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.

How about veeeery bad luck and...


  ?        



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")
A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.
TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW! 
 


Around the Network
DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

It took nearly a year before these reports started actually becoming a real thing, and even then it was unclear how widespread the problem actually was. MS didn't know what the problem was for a good few months.

Hindsight is 50/50 but they would have required a whole year of extra testing to test for something they would not have even been anticipating in the first place.

They thought they had a readily functioning console from the tests they had done and thought it was ok to launch. Its not about rushing, or incompetence, just bad luck. 

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.

You are citing a game informer survey of 5000 of it's own readers who may not even have provided accurate responses due to zero accountability?

That is far from an accurate measure on anything, but i guess when you believe in baseless conspiracy theories, anything constitutes fact. 



DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

It took nearly a year before these reports started actually becoming a real thing, and even then it was unclear how widespread the problem actually was. MS didn't know what the problem was for a good few months.

Hindsight is 50/50 but they would have required a whole year of extra testing to test for something they would not have even been anticipating in the first place.

They thought they had a readily functioning console from the tests they had done and thought it was ok to launch. Its not about rushing, or incompetence, just bad luck. 

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.

Yea, the 360 was definitely a poorly designed system.  I think rushing it out to launch to be ahead of the PS3 had something to do with it.  It took them several chipsets to finally solve RROD completely.  It probably wasn't the smartest idea to make the console concave, causing heat to stay right next to the chip.  And then you had the lack of any DVD drive stabilization, which resulted in scratched discs, even if the system wasn't touched.  If you did touch it, it would destroy the discs.  Power-wise it was good, but when it came to reliability in the first couple of models, and disc drives for all models, it sucked.



thismeintiel said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.

Yea, the 360 was definitely a poorly designed system.  I think rushing it out to launch to be ahead of the PS3 had something to do with it.  It took them several chipsets to finally solve RROD completely.  It probably wasn't the smartest idea to make the console concave, causing heat to stay right next to the chip.  And then you had the lack of any DVD drive stabilization, which resulted in scratched discs, even if the system wasn't touched.  If you did touch it, it would destroy the discs.  Power-wise it was good, but when it came to reliability in the first couple of models, and disc drives for all models, it sucked.

It wasn't poorly designed per-say.
It was actually extremely well designed... They had the right combination of CPU and GPU to provide the best bang-for-buck performance they could for the price, whilst being easy to develop for... Which paid off all generation long.

Visually the console wasn't bad to look at either with it's concave design with removable faceplates and swap-able HDD.

They just didn't do appropriate testing to iron out the bugs. - The DVD drive issues is largely the OEM at fault, Microsoft should have chosen a different model or manufacturer... Again, lack of deep thorough testing rather than poor design.

Sony's console was a step up though in almost every aspect, one could argue it was over-designed which brought in a ton of feature creep.



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

twintail said:
DonFerrari said:

Sorry, bad luck doesn't explain 50% fail rate.

You are citing a game informer survey of 5000 of it's own readers who may not even have provided accurate responses due to zero accountability?

That is far from an accurate measure on anything, but i guess when you believe in baseless conspiracy theories, anything constitutes fact. 

Yes let's ignore the plenty of reports showing it was about 50%, the plethora of people that had over 6 X360 purchased...

Pemalite said:
thismeintiel said:

Yea, the 360 was definitely a poorly designed system.  I think rushing it out to launch to be ahead of the PS3 had something to do with it.  It took them several chipsets to finally solve RROD completely.  It probably wasn't the smartest idea to make the console concave, causing heat to stay right next to the chip.  And then you had the lack of any DVD drive stabilization, which resulted in scratched discs, even if the system wasn't touched.  If you did touch it, it would destroy the discs.  Power-wise it was good, but when it came to reliability in the first couple of models, and disc drives for all models, it sucked.

It wasn't poorly designed per-say.
It was actually extremely well designed... They had the right combination of CPU and GPU to provide the best bang-for-buck performance they could for the price, whilst being easy to develop for... Which paid off all generation long.

Visually the console wasn't bad to look at either with it's concave design with removable faceplates and swap-able HDD.

They just didn't do appropriate testing to iron out the bugs. - The DVD drive issues is largely the OEM at fault, Microsoft should have chosen a different model or manufacturer... Again, lack of deep thorough testing rather than poor design.

Sony's console was a step up though in almost every aspect, one could argue it was over-designed which brought in a ton of feature creep.

So well designed that half failed and took several revision to correct.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Azzanation: "PS5 wouldn't sold out at launch without scalpers."

DonFerrari said:
twintail said:

You are citing a game informer survey of 5000 of it's own readers who may not even have provided accurate responses due to zero accountability?

That is far from an accurate measure on anything, but i guess when you believe in baseless conspiracy theories, anything constitutes fact. 

Yes let's ignore the plenty of reports showing it was about 50%, the plethora of people that had over 6 X360 purchased...

Then show us this plethora of reportz that exist