Status
Not open for further replies.

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
The mistake some of you are making when you say November 2019 is too early is that you are basing that opinion on how you feel now and not in 21 months when it would actually release.

21 months is ageeeeeeeeeeees.
The release? You have to announce the thing first.

So next February, when you haven't had TLoU2, or Death Stranding, or Cyberpunk, or Ghost of Tsushima, or Project Re Fantasy, or Final Fantasy VII, hell Rockstar won't have even announced GTA6 yet, you're going to want to get blue balled on next-gen?
 

Silencerx98

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,289
The mistake some of you are making when you say November 2019 is too early is that you are basing that opinion on how you feel now and not in 21 months when it would actually release.

21 months is ageeeeeeeeeeees.
Or you know, some of the tech minded guys are actually doing research into fabrication processes and development roadmaps and conclude Fall 2020 is the best time for the PS5 to release and provide a "proper" generational leap over current gen in visuals. Not everyone in this thread base their opinions on "feelings"
 

Sanctuary

Member
Oct 27, 2017
14,253
Can't believe the PS4 was released in 2013. Other than Bloodborne, the first few years were pretty much a drought. Last year was the first really good year in terms of releases, and some think a new system will be out in 2019? Riiiiiight. 2017 - 2019 will probably be the peak years for the PS4.
 

thuway

Member
Oct 27, 2017
5,168
I still am double minded about a 2019 release. On the one hand you could easily see 2019 because technology would be available, on the other hand, there's no folly in waiting. Their is such a thing as saturation and being there too early.

Right now, I like what I'm hearing about Sony selling a screen to allow Remote Play. Gimme an OLED, 6.5 inch, with virtually zero bezels.
 
Oct 26, 2017
7,981
This might be a stupid idea, but could a custom designed modular screen also be a route to a new VR headset? But maybe glass covered screens impede the quality too much in comparison to all-in-ones, I'm not sure.
 
Oct 28, 2017
279
Fuck 4k hope that's not the main selling point for PS5 waste of potential horsepower that can be used towards many other aspects towards the game. At best efficient 4k methods like checkerboarding etc instead otherwise pushing native 4k will push 3rd party devs to prioritise native 4k more while less graphical and performance for games
4k is now the standard for TV, so no point at all in making a system for the end of 2019 that can't do native 4K and when i say Native 4k i don't mean with a hamstrung system (like your alluding to) that needs to cut resources in other areas to achieve that like what the X is doing now.

PS5 will be powerful enough to achieve Native 4k without compromise as will nextbox if MS stay in the console space.
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
I imagine the specs will be weaker than my current PC rig, which is a GTX 1070, 16gb of Ram and a i7 7700k.

If its 399? most definitely. I don't know how AMD flops compare to Nvidia flops, but the GPU will most likely be around 10tflops, the RAM anywhere from 16GB to 24GB, and its just my opinion, but even a Zen 2+ mobile chipset with 8 cores is going to be below that intel CPU.

However, this potential PS5 will still be vastly superior to most PC's on the market despite not being high end. just like PS4 was when it launched.
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,981
Australia
4k is now the standard for TV, so no point at all in making a system for the end of 2019 that can't do native 4K and when i say Native 4k i don't mean with a hamstrung system (like your alluding to) that needs to cut resources in other areas to achieve that like what the X is doing now.

PS5 will be powerful enough to achieve Native 4k without compromise as will nextbox if MS stay in the console space.

This is a meaningless phrase. The Pro can also do "native 4K without compromise" on certain games, like Wipeout". There will always be compromise, it just comes down to what devs want to focus on and not what the box is capable of. For many devs, even a really powerful PS5 won't give them the graphics they want at native 4K and 60fps, so something will have to be cut down - and based on what we've seen, the best thing to cut might actually be native resolution, though they'd probably choose 30fps instead. I'm hoping for different modes with different framerates.
 

HalStep

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,392
i've been dipping in and out of the thread so don't know if it has been covered.

i'm probably going to need a new tv soon so i was thinking about future proofing as best i can with 4k and hdr.now unless i'm mistaken the ps4 pro needs the tv to do hdr-10 for it to work,what are the thoughts for PS5?

will they just stick with that one option or offer more ummm.....standards ??????
 

jdstorm

Member
Jan 6, 2018
7,587
VR is such a tiny subsegment of a console base, I think it would be pretty dumb to pitch PS5 as "unlock true potential of VR".

New generations of hardware need to justify their existence. New gen, New experience is a good guide. For instance PS1 gen was the first set of 3D games, PS2 first gen twinstick controls became standard, PS3 rise of online play, and then this gen was about pushing graphical fidelity and slightly under done VR. Without VR or a controller upgrade what's the reason for next gen to exist?


It would be a great "meh" for so many people.

Innovation is about giving people what they dont know they want yet. Split controlers are good and allow for better experiences in preexisting games. They arent just a VR thing.




PSVR2 should not be a big focus for launch.

Agreed. The sticker shock would be too much. But having experiences that justify the PSVR 1.0 purchase made by millions of customers that are inline with the direction Sony are taking their playstation brand is smart.

Compromising everyone's controller in favor of VR would be bad too. Leaving a portion of the users behind wouldn't be a problem if that part wasn't the majority.

Kinect 2 and xbox one are a good example of failure.

Nothing is being compromised though. Split controls would still have 2 sticks (but hopefully a steam controller style pad instead, with a pressure sensor for analogue input) and a plearhora of buttons with a more ergonomic placement scheme . If you ignore the motion control potential, its basically an improved version of the Xbox One elite controler that can be held more comfortably.
 

ApeEscaper

Member
Oct 27, 2017
8,726
Bangladeshi
I imagine the specs will be weaker than my current PC rig, which is a GTX 1070, 16gb of Ram and a i7 7700k.
Not saying its secret sauce but console optimisation exists which can bring more out of the hardware whereas PC has to more brute force the game played on it so it pushes up the console hardware, while there are driver optimisation on PC it won't be as optimised compared to a game developed on a singular hardware console
 

Silencerx98

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,289
I imagine the specs will be weaker than my current PC rig, which is a GTX 1070, 16gb of Ram and a i7 7700k.
You do realize that GPU is just very slightly better than the GPU in the XBX? Yep, PS5 will be around the same power as the XBX, here we go with this nonsense again...

Not saying its secret sauce but console optimisation exists which can bring more out of the hardware whereas PC has to more brute force the game played on it so it pushes up the console hardware, while there are driver optimisation on PC it won't be as optimised compared to a game developed on a singular hardware console
Optimization is a wildly misunderstood term in gaming forums. Devs don't necessarily have more juice to squeeze out of console hardware than they do from equivalent PC hardware, but rather games are built around the strengths and weaknesses of the console hardware. Earlier this gen, the i3 and 750Ti combo was able to keep up with the PS4 in many multiplatform titles because games were not yet built to overcome the weak Jaguar CPU's which bottlenecked performance on the PS4, but as time went on, that PC combo failed to keep up and today no one even mentions it anymore. This is a very simple explanation, but this is really what "optimization" is more about
 
Last edited:

M.Bluth

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,332
why dont you elaborate a little
Well, the GTX 1070 is soon going to be a two year old card, ~6.5tflops, 8 gigs of GDDR5 memory that's at 256GB/s if I'm not mistaken.
Like Silencerx98 said, the Xbox One X isn't that far off already, so I don't know in what universe is a 10TF chip like you suggest coupled with a decent Zen2 CPU isn't going to exceed that build. (and if I'm gonna bet, we're getting better than those figures)

Temper your expectations, sure, but to expect such low performance would necessitate both Sony/MS and AMD going out of their way to make exceptionally and unnecessarily low-performing hardware
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
Well, the GTX 1070 is soon going to be a two year old card, ~6.5tflops, 8 gigs of GDDR5 memory that's at 256GB/s if I'm not mistaken.
Like Silencerx98 said, the Xbox One X isn't that far off already, so I don't know in what universe is a 10TF chip like you suggest coupled with a decent Zen2 CPU isn't going to exceed that build. (and if I'm gonna bet, we're getting better than those figures)

Temper your expectations, sure, but to expect such low performance would necessitate both Sony/MS and AMD going out of their way to make exceptionally and unnecessarily low-performing hardware

Well like i said, i don't know how AMD flops compare to Nvidia flops regarding the 1070 specifically, but Nvidia's "6.5tflops" is not anywhere near the same as AMD's "6.5tfops". You'd need a stronger AMD GPU to reach that 1070. And i don't know how much stronger that is.

And like i said, an i7 is pretty powerful. Regardless of the specifications of the Zen CPU the PS5 has, its gonna be hard pressed to beat that i7 due to its mobile orientation, heat and power requirements among some other things.

There will still be trade offs. But i'm sure at the very least the RAM capacity will be equal or better, and bandwidth is sure several times higher than Pro
 

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
I really question the value of massively more rendering performance. I know a lot of people firmly believe we have a long, long way to go, but I just don't see it. I just started playing Beyond Two Souls on PS4 this evening, and it looks staggeringly good.

Beyond_Two_Souls_20180225222213.png


That's a PS3 game ported to PS4, in the most untouched manner imaginable. Just basically bumping the resolution.

Screen_Shot_2018_02_25_at_23_10_51.png


Here's a yet to be released PS4 game running on the PS4 Pro, and it's a cutscene, not a random gameplay shot like I grabbed from Beyond. And this is Naughty Dog, in-house with ICE team. This should be as good as it ever gets on the Pro.

Yeah, it's better, like 20% better? 25%?

We're so deeply within diminishing returns at this point in purely rendering assets it's unreal.
 

Silencerx98

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
1,289
I don't appreciate the tude, dude.

It'll probably be on par with Xbox One X's GPU then.
*face palm*

Oh, well, go on ahead, I guess. I just said having a GPU on par with the XBX's is the dumbest thing I heard in this thread a few days back and now we have a second guy saying the same thing. I think it's beneficial for the discussion in this thread if most participants actually take the time to do research on hardware before pretending like they know anything
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
I really question the value of massively more rendering

performance. I know a lot of people firmly believe we have a long, long way to go, but I just don't see it. I just started playing Beyond Two Souls on PS4 this evening, and it looks staggeringly good.

That's a PS3 game ported to PS4, in the most untouched manner imaginable. Just basically bumping the resolution.

Here's a yet to be released PS4 game running on the PS4 Pro, and it's a cutscene, not a random gameplay shot like I grabbed from Beyond. And this is Naughty Dog, in-house with ICE team. This should be as good as it ever gets on the Pro.

Yeah, it's better, like 20% better? 25%?

We're so deeply within diminishing returns at this point in purely rendering assets it's unreal.

That's being overly picky and choosy with your screen-captures.

To begin with, we'll always need increases in GPU rendering power to allow for more things on screen and to allow the engine to keep up with the rendering of objects. Just because you can't discern the improvements to specific character models yourself between two different games(there are plenty), one example of which you took from a game not even released yet from a compressed video capture is irrelevant.

I mean, i could just as easily likely make a comparison between RDR(a finished product) and RDR2(a game not released yet) as to why increases in GPU power are necessary, but i won't as its a flawed and dumb comparison to make.
 

skeezx

Member
Oct 27, 2017
20,378
Can't believe the PS4 was released in 2013. Other than Bloodborne, the first few years were pretty much a drought. Last year was the first really good year in terms of releases, and some think a new system will be out in 2019? Riiiiiight. 2017 - 2019 will probably be the peak years for the PS4.

while i don't think it'll drop in '19 for lots of reasons it's not the most ridiculous stretch. like you touched on the first few years of a console are generally barren and tend toward enthusiast type that wouldn't be chafed by "ps5 has no games"

i think it'll play out similar to ps2 --> ps3 where the ps2 was still chugging along for the most part when ps3 launched (hopefully without he $599 lol bomba stuff this time)
 

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
That's being overly picky and choosy with your screen-captures.

To begin with, we'll always need increases in GPU rendering power to allow for more things on screen and to allow the engine to keep up with the rendering of objects. Just because you can't discern the improvements to specific character models yourself between two different games(there are plenty), one example of which you took from a game not even released yet from a compressed video capture is irrelevant.
It's being in no way picky. I took a random screenshot whilst playing Beyond, and I took a screen grab from literally the frame most evocative of the Beyond screenshot from the trailer.

And yeah, it's not released, UC4 looked worse when it released from when we first saw it. Maybe this will look better, maybe it will look worse, I'd wager it looks pretty much the same. And even if it does change, it will be so subtle as to only further prove the point that it's not some colossal jump in the first place.
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
It's being in no way picky. I took a random screenshot whilst playing Beyond, and I took a screen grab from literally the frame most evocative of the Beyond screenshot from the trailer.

And yeah, it's not released, UC4 looked worse when it released from when we first saw it. Maybe this will look better, maybe it will look worse, I'd wager it looks pretty much the same. And even if it does change, it will be so subtle as to only further prove the point that it's not some colossal jump in the first place.

Again, the comparison your making and your opinion about how the games look is irrelevant to the point your actually making, that we don't need GPU rendering increases because you think the fidelity of the games look close. That is not how the advancement of hardware or technology works.
 
Last edited:

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
Again, the comparison your making and your opinion about how the games look is irrelevant to the point your actually making, that we don't need GPU rendering increases because you think the fidelity of the games look close. That is not how the advancement of hardware or technology works.
You're*

And it matters a great deal, there's a very real limit to the accuracy in which you can produce and render assets. Rendering more assets, like a vista in Red Dead is obviously much more demanding, of course, but there's a cost limitation to how good you make those assets to begin with, and the value to the customer of doing so.

Do people care that Life is Strange, a PS4 game, looks massively inferior to Beyond, a PS3 port? No, I don't believe they do. Is it a driving factor in market performance? No, I don't think it is. So is it a worthwhile use of hardware costs? I question if it is or not.
 

Inuhanyou

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
14,214
New Jersey
You're*

And it matters a great deal, there's a very real limit to the accuracy in which you can produce and render assets. Rendering more assets, like a vista in Red Dead is obviously much more demanding, of course, but there's a cost limitation to how good you make those assets to begin with, and the value to the customer of doing so.

Do people care that Life is Strange, a PS4 game, looks massively inferior to Beyond, a PS3 port? No, I don't believe they do. Is it a driving factor in market performance? No, I don't think it is. So is it a worthwhile use of hardware costs? I question if it is or not.

Your moving away from your original argument. Life is strange looks the way it does because it intentionally is going for an art style. It is not focused on realistic rendering in the first place. It has no place in the conversation.

Like i said in a previous post, i could easily throw out an example to the contrary where there is a gulf the size of a canyon between two different titles separating current gen and last gen. So what does it really matter?

If we're being pedantic about it...Quantic dream was the development team most focused on cinematic positioning in the entire console industry last generation. They attempted to push character modeling and environmental detail to its limitations on the PS3 and 99% of games models and environments never looked anywhere close despite being of the same generation(to be fair, it launched at the very end)

The fact that this generation, games look similar to your eyes as that, from genres not even related to the ones Quantic dream specialized in might be considered a counter point to yours..
 

Adobe

Member
Oct 27, 2017
378
2020 the earliest. They should release a ps4 pro s(lim) with 4k bluray in the meantime tho
 

StereoVSN

Member
Nov 1, 2017
13,620
Eastern US
As long as Sony has proper full backwards compatibility for PS4 in PS5 releasing in 2019 would be fine. They can continue selling PS4 and PS4 Pro as lower cost machines, move PS5 into higher tier and vast majority of games will still run on PS4/Pro in 2019-2021 or so. This will be easier for the publishers vs PS4 launch and everything then was cross-gen as well. Since we are in a fairly standard x86 architecture now, there is no reason for Sony not to do that.

The big concern is of course whether or not 7nm will be available for full production then and also what MS will be doing as well as if there is a major technological jump in 2020 that could be had. Sony wouldn't want to release a console in 2019 and have MS leapfrog it substantially in 2020 if that is the case. For Microsoft, since they do have Xbone X, they could (and probably will) wait till 2020, or at least that's highly likely.

I think late 2019 release could do pretty well, it would be 6 years after PS4 release and if Sony plays their cards right, PS4 can sell for years after PS5 release to budget markets. Again, that does presume backwards compatibility (not necessarily frontward compatibility mind you as that would be on various publishers).
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,178
Somewhere South
If we're being pedantic about it... Quantic Dream was the development team most focused on cinematic positioning in the entire console industry last generation. They attempted to push character modeling and environmental detail to its limitations on the PS3 and 99% of games models and environments never looked anywhere close despite being of the same generation(to be fair, it launched at the very end)

The fact that this generation, games look similar to your eyes as that, from genres not even related to the ones Quantic Dream specialized in might be considered a counter point to yours..

I feel that the only way to properly quantify and compare advancement in graphics, here, is by using Beyond, as it was originally, vs. Detroit. That's the only way to properly gauge how much impact the underlying tech might've had.

The big concern is of course whether or not 7nm will be available for full production then and also what MS will be doing as well as if there is a major technological jump in 2020 that could be had. Sony wouldn't want to release a console in 2019 and have MS leapfrog it substantially in 2020 if that is the case.

If 7nm hits full production and is available for Sony to use it in 2019, there won't be a major technological jump in 2020. Assuming Sony plays super conservative with their clock speeds and power envelope, like they did with the Pro, worst case scenario is Microsoft pushes it like they did with the X and get a similar boost in perf but at a higher cost.
 
Last edited:

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
Your moving away from your original argument. Life is strange looks the way it does because it intentionally is going for an art style. It is not focused on realistic rendering in the first place. It has no place in the conversation.

Like i said in a previous post, i could easily throw out an example to the contrary where there is a gulf the size of a canyon between two different titles separating current gen and last gen. So what does it really matter?

If we're being pedantic about it...Quantic dream was the development team most focused on cinematic positioning in the entire console industry last generation. They attempted to push character modeling and environmental detail to its limitations on the PS3 and 99% of games models and environments never looked anywhere close despite being of the same generation(to be fair, it launched at the very end)

The fact that this generation, games look similar to your eyes as that, from genres not even related to the ones Quantic dream specialized in might be considered a counter point to yours..
And you're missing the entire point I was making.

Lets say you're Mark Cerny, and whoever else collective decides what PS5 is. You're not designing the PS4-2, the industry isn't where it was back when the PS4's specs were finalised. You have to decide where your money is going. You need to build a $400 box, out November '20. How much you spend on GPU performance versus things which more developers and gamers benefit from is wholly important. You could push pure graphical TF, or you could spend the money elsewhere, where it will benefit more of the industry and more of the players. PS5 shouldn't be designed so that TLoU3 can look better than anything else, it's wasteful, and not going to benefit 90% of the industry that are not trying to compete in that regard. Most games, asset wise, don't even match a PS3 port right now, let alone will be pushing way beyond the best the PS4 can offer next time around.
 

Servbot24

The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
43,460
The mistake some of you are making when you say November 2019 is too early is that you are basing that opinion on how you feel now and not in 21 months when it would actually release.

21 months is ageeeeeeeeeeees.
I will never feel like spending $500 on a new console just to have deal with yet another crappy launch line up. Push PS5 back as far as possible imo. PS4 is getting great games.
 

Socky

Member
Oct 27, 2017
361
Manchester, UK
With regards to PSVR working on PS5, although nothing is certain, it's hard to see how Sony can claim to have system-wide BC if they don't support PSVR games on their new system.
 

StereoVSN

Member
Nov 1, 2017
13,620
Eastern US
PS4 Pro slim is even less likely than a late 2019 PS5 IMO.
It's extremely likely if Sony can cut production cost which they may be able to do depending on the available tech then. 4K Blu-Ray is unlikely though, IMO, as that could be PS5 differentiation for Sony.

I will never feel like spending $500 on a new console just to have deal with yet another crappy launch line up. Push PS5 back as far as possible imo. PS4 is getting great games.
What if PS5 could play new PS4 games at 60FPS at 4K "High Setting"? They could easily release PS5 in 2019, publishers would ramp up graphics/AI/etc... like they do on PC and people could still play same games on PS4/Pro. This happens every day of the week on PCs.

I think it all depends on the tech being ready vs price point. If Sony could release $400 console in late 2019 on 7nm process without incurring heavy loss with Zen2 Custom APU, it would make a lot of sense to do so and perhaps beat MS by a year to market.

Edit: Supporting PSVR would make a lot of sense and would almost be mandatory. That way they can still sell PSVR 1 during 2019 and come out with PSVR2 in say 2020. Plus they could support PSVR1 games with higher fidelity/FPS/etc... on PS5.
 
Oct 27, 2017
20,797
As long as Sony has proper full backwards compatibility for PS4 in PS5 releasing in 2019 would be fine. They can continue selling PS4 and PS4 Pro as lower cost machines, move PS5 into higher tier and vast majority of games will still run on PS4/Pro in 2019-2021 or so. This will be easier for the publishers vs PS4 launch and everything then was cross-gen as well. Since we are in a fairly standard x86 architecture now, there is no reason for Sony not to do that.

The big concern is of course whether or not 7nm will be available for full production then and also what MS will be doing as well as if there is a major technological jump in 2020 that could be had. Sony wouldn't want to release a console in 2019 and have MS leapfrog it substantially in 2020 if that is the case. For Microsoft, since they do have Xbone X, they could (and probably will) wait till 2020, or at least that's highly likely.

I think late 2019 release could do pretty well, it would be 6 years after PS4 release and if Sony plays their cards right, PS4 can sell for years after PS5 release to budget markets. Again, that does presume backwards compatibility (not necessarily frontward compatibility mind you as that would be on various publishers).
I feel like they will get rid of Pro and stick with slim or super slim PS4 at $200 ish and ps5 at $400

Selling a middle ground sku, that doesn't appeal to 4K enthusiasts or budget gamers, that is more "4K ready" than the $200 model but Less 4K than the $400 model (PS5) seems dumb and too much.

They'll want people to look at Ps5 as a leap coming from PS4's 1.8TF, not Pro's 4.2 too.

Why buy a $300 Pro if PS5 is out, has a future of exclusive games and will play PS4 games with all Pro enhancements and more?
 

BitsandBytes

Member
Dec 16, 2017
4,576
It's extremely likely if Sony can cut production cost which they may be able to do depending on the available tech then. 4K Blu-Ray is unlikely though, IMO, as that could be PS5 differentiation for Sony.

It isn't when to achieve a Pro slim would require a 7nm shrink and I can't see Sony taking the time and hundreds of millions of $ to have AMD redesign the APU again as well as doing PS5 too. Pro just isn't a mass market seller like PS4 and ROI isn't there.
 
Oct 27, 2017
7,178
Somewhere South
Cerny was awarded a patent on a backwards compatibility testing mode. Patent was published in May 2017 and awarded two weeks ago.

Probably just a PS4Pro thing, but there are some interesting details to it: for instance, there are a bunch of tests designed to try and disrupt timings; some tests deal with changing thread behavior, like you'd find with HT/SMT; increasing memory latency; behavior with higher than expected CPU clocks; etc.
 

BreakAtmo

Member
Nov 12, 2017
12,981
Australia
With regards to PSVR working on PS5, although nothing is certain, it's hard to see how Sony can claim to have system-wide BC if they don't support PSVR games on their new system.

Well, strictly speaking it would be possible for the PSVR games to be compatible with PS5 but run only on the newer PSVR2 headset. Would be dumb, though.
 

StuBurns

Self Requested Ban
Banned
Nov 12, 2017
7,273
With regards to PSVR working on PS5, although nothing is certain, it's hard to see how Sony can claim to have system-wide BC if they don't support PSVR games on their new system.
That's an extent of BC loss I think most users would be accepting of. All Move games too, obviously. I'm not aware if the positional tracking of the controller is OS level, I would presume it was, in which case, if Sony have a next-gen tracking system, the OS could handle that in regards to BC titles.

But even if not, even if the PS5 allows you to play PS4 PSVR titles, it seems very unlikely they would allow PSVR2 titles to work on the original headset.
 

Gemüsepizza

Member
Oct 26, 2017
2,542
4k is now the standard for TV, so no point at all in making a system for the end of 2019 that can't do native 4K and when i say Native 4k i don't mean with a hamstrung system (like your alluding to) that needs to cut resources in other areas to achieve that like what the X is doing now.

PS5 will be powerful enough to achieve Native 4k without compromise as will nextbox if MS stay in the console space.

Native 4K needs twice the GPU power compared to 4K CB, and the difference between those resolutions isn't that big. That's why devs will probably stick to 4K CB or similar techniques, and use the GPU power for other things. The main reason we are seeing native 4K games now on Xbox One X is because it is an easy way to make use of the additional GPU power. But for new games build from the ground up with new hardware in mind, it's not a good idea to use so much power for resolution. I think we might even see more games running at 4K CB / 60fps than there will be games running at native 4K / 30fps. Of course 4K CB / 30fps will probably be even more common than those two, depending on Sony's strategy regarding the CPU.
 

~Fake

User requested permanent ban
Banned
Oct 27, 2017
4,966
I already very impressive with ultraslim Ryzen 5 2500U.
If ps5 get a desktop Ryzen second generation all the fps problems will be gone.
 

StereoVSN

Member
Nov 1, 2017
13,620
Eastern US
I feel like they will get rid of Pro and stick with slim or super slim PS4 at $200 ish and ps5 at $400

Selling a middle ground sku, that doesn't appeal to 4K enthusiasts or budget gamers, that is more "4K ready" than the $200 model but Less 4K than the $400 model (PS5) seems dumb and too much.

They'll want people to look at Ps5 as a leap coming from PS4's 1.8TF, not Pro's 4.2 too.

Why buy a $300 Pro if PS5 is out, has a future of exclusive games and will play PS4 games with all Pro enhancements and more?

It isn't when to achieve a Pro slim would require a 7nm shrink and I can't see Sony taking the time and hundreds of millions of $ to have AMD redesign the APU again as well as doing PS5 too. Pro just isn't a mass market seller like PS4 and ROI isn't there.

Good points above. Yeah, on the second thought, it would make sense to kill off Pro if PS5 can come out for $400 and is fully backwards compatible. If PS5 is $500, then a $250ish Pro could make some sense. It certainly will be interesting to see what happens but yeah, I do agree that most likely we'll have base PS4 (maybe Super Slim version) for say $180 and then $400 PS5 (if they can hit that price point).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.