Pachter: PS5 to be a half step, release in 2019 with PS4 BC
- Thread starter bitbydeath
- Start date
Tempting for VR but no, my next Sony console will be the PS5.
draughn101
Member
Ok gotcha. That's an understandable take on it. Thanks for the breakdown. I can get board with that. I think we should expect backwards compatibility at this point and if we can get that, then I'm all for the hard generation change.
No thanks I already have a PS4 Pro. Bring on the PS5 as the next step.
An updated Pro with Ryzen and a better GPU would basically be a PS5. It would also be a nightmare to market as anything other than the PS5. What would they even call it?
Mr. Pointy
Member
That's why you give the OS its own DDR4 RAM pool.
I hate this notion of iterative console design.
Your proposal doesn't make any sense because it shares the same pitfalls as pro and largely makes pro irrelevant in the meantime while forcing devs to support 3 console configurations, and at that point its basically 100% a PC landscape. Which i dont think is good for the console industry
If gamers are expected to shell out for a console that plays the same games they can play on PS4 and Pro without fully taking advantage of the hardware in exclusive games, the impact will always be niche by default and not make up for any proposed hardware investments
I don't think Sony are anticipating any hot new OS features to expand the footprint any time soon, so i'd assume they have options regarding offloading processes like that to free up as much RAM for games as possible
This.
It creates no urgency to buy the new system. To sell the PS5, games must exist that are not playable on PS4, with the benefit that the PS5 also plays the PS4 games, with better frame rates and resolutions.
Developers creating games scale-able this way, like on PC, is now the focus of the console makers. Being able to monetize the back catalogue in future generations is a new income stream for both developer and the console maker.
Fess
Member
Another stop gap console?
If they go that route they need to have FC and BC going forward, PS5 games must run on it. PS5 is too close now. But then they should just go full on PC with user upgradeble hardware instead with slot in modules or something like that. A slot in $249 CPU/GPU module. Yup then I'd be up for it.
But a regular Pro-like upgrade is a big NO from me. I've had big enough problems accepting to buy an Xbox One X three years after the Xbox One launch (Sweden) because I don't know for sure when Xbox Two will arrive. And like I said earlier, PS4 Pro is mostly ignored simply because of threads like this talking about PS5 coming out in two years. Seems too shortsighted. Buying a PS4 Pro+ next year is simply out of the question when we know PS5 is coming "soon".
I think they should just take their time and do PS5 right instead. No holding back. There is no need for that. When it comes to sales there is no need for upgrades, they're already leading 2 to 1, they would win this generation even if they didn't sell another console the next 2 years. They basically have all the time in the world to make PS5 the amazing console it deserves to be. Only time will tell if Sony themselves realize this.
geordiemp
Member
You just listed what I wanted pro to be last year.
However, Pro has 2 faults, CPU and Bandwidth. Once you sort them out with enough GPU for 4K, you got a ps5 anyway.
PS4 Pro Turbo
8 Jaguar cores + 4 Ryzen cores
36CU's clocked at 1337Mhz ( 6.16TF )
$399 2018
60fps focus for TV gaming & better VR
system level frame rate doubling 30 to 60 & 60 to 120 no patches needed.
& a free bag of chips?
How could you make games double the framerate without patches when framerate is usually hard locked? Also games optimized with 30 fps on mind?
Ryzen and jaguar together in the same APU is an unnecessarily complex design that would cost a fair amount to manufacture. I could see some low power coprocessors for OS level functions on next gen consoles but a full jag and Ryzen CPU working at the same time is bonkers.
It would also completely alienate those who bought a Pro. Just wait until you can do a PS5 at this point.
System level framerate doubling is also something that would be incredibly difficult to implement since refresh rate is hard coded. The Pro doesn't even have system wide downsampling, a much more basic feature.
DAHGAMING
Kentucky Fried Controller
But thats ok as the loop can start again, with an update, a stability patch.
anothertech
Member
Ya, that would be the main issue for sure.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
You have two more years if this somewhat accurate. 6 years is a lifetime for technology these days...
StrongBlackVine
Banned
Nah. I like the idea of iterative consoles, but I think one this generation was enough.
Memorabilia
Member
So that means it'll be a full on new generation, then. Good to know.
People still prefer the regular PS4 Slim at sub 300 than Pro. I expect Sony to go safe and stay at 399$.
Still not enough. 32GB minimum for a next gen console. Next gen will last close to 2030.
Next gen consoles hopefully will have stacked ram. 2020/2021 would work for that.
StrongBlackVine
Banned
What gives you that idea? There is no way a generation is going to stretch out to decade or more. 6 or 7 years at the most.
Die shrinks are slowing down and longer/ more expensive Dev cycles. After 7nm you have 5nm then 3nm, then what? Die shrinks is what really enables performance increases for the price point. Also I said close to 2030 not 2030. 2021 + 8year gen means 2029 for next, next gen Imo.
TAJ
Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that.
There are some native 120fps games on PSVR like Trackmania Turbo (on PS4 Pro) and Polybius.
Yautja_Warrior
Member
Why is 16GB RAM not enough ?
Xbox One X is getting 4k assets with only 8-9GB's of available RAM, so even if PS5 uses 3 - 4GB for the OS, that still leaves 12 - 13GB of RAM for 4k assets.
I'm sure Xbox One X will do fine but it's unlikely to sell a massive amount because it's not aimed at the mass market, like the base Xbox One / PS4 are. Xbox One X and PS4 Pro will only account for a small amount of overall sales, as the much cheaper base systems will outsell them by a big margin.
PS5 will be aimed at mass market, so should be around the $399 price range, I don't see it being $499.
That would be the PS5.
Considering the Pro is essentially the same box with a lot more power and it doesn't use it all for unpatched titles, they're not going to be able to achieve another half step with a completely different architecture.
PS5 will be what you said with PS4 BC built in from the start, 2020. IMO.
FreedomFighter
Member
Wouldn't this put PS5 slight above XBox One X then?
When the PS5 comes out, unless it is alongside a new Xbox, it will take a shit all over what we have now, including the X.
Yea, this. Sony likes to have the more powerful console, so I think they'll do everything to get above the competition in that regard. Will, they succeed, that's another question.
Do you think Sony will be willing to take a slight loss?
4k is unnecessary, i play ps3 in a 55" TV and it looks really great. I prefer more details and visual effects on the screen with 60 fps.
If microsoft come with more exclusive and interesting games, i'll buy xbox, but i didn't like E3 M games.
For now, the best option for me is nintendo, because sony doesn't have games that interest me wihout PC version.
In mi opinion, 2019 is very late,probably i'll buy xbox or switch first.
If microsoft come with more exclusive and interesting games, i'll buy xbox, but i didn't like E3 M games.
For now, the best option for me is nintendo, because sony doesn't have games that interest me wihout PC version.
In mi opinion, 2019 is very late,probably i'll buy xbox or switch first.
I think gone are the days of loss leaders, I think manufacturers may look at close to even for consoles, trying to make most of their money through services and royalties.
The new gen of consoles will be a fun one, with both manufacturers having a bee in their bonnet over power, they may both try their best to take the crown.
Theonik
Member
I mean you understand framerate is a direct consequence of design choices. If Sony wanted they could say release 1080p120 ports of the PS2 Ratchet and Clank games for the PS4 for instance!
Personally, I still think PS5 is scheduled for 2020 or at the latest 2021. This is due to Sony wanting to release their back catalog first before heading straight to PS5, Although I still think Sony will push some of their unannounced PS4 exclusive to PS5 due to it being the same architecture. One of the most obvious titles for me that might get push to PS5 is the next Sucker Punch game, This is because we haven't seen anything from them for years after Infamous Second Son and the rumored trouble development. Now some might say wait for PSX 2017 but I giving up hope for it releasing anytime soon some might say Q1 2019 but whats the point if they can port it to a powerful system coming in a year time or maybe the rumored "2019" date.
I Also believe that The Last of Us Part II and Death Stranding will come out before PS5 due to Sony being confident that they are coming to PS4. I could see Last of Us Part II coming out Q4 2018 or Summer 2019, however, with Death Stranding I could see them having cross-gen port similar to Metal Gear Solid V and Little Big Planet 3.
I Also believe that The Last of Us Part II and Death Stranding will come out before PS5 due to Sony being confident that they are coming to PS4. I could see Last of Us Part II coming out Q4 2018 or Summer 2019, however, with Death Stranding I could see them having cross-gen port similar to Metal Gear Solid V and Little Big Planet 3.
gundamkyoukai
Member
They took a small lost on PS4 and made it back with PSN+ or with game or two.
I can see them doing the same with PS5 but nothing that they can't recover from quickly .
Also depending on currency rates and economy of scale they might be willing take a lost in certain regions .
StrongBlackVine
Banned
If this somehow did happen there will need to be two or iterative consoles. There is no way I would be content with a platform if that will around be outdated when it releases for 10 years. Even if you are on PC AAA games in general would still be stifled. Ideally generation should 5 years, but 6 or 7 is OK with long how it is taking some devs to make games(I'm looking at you Sucker Punch and Bend).
Polygonal_Sprite
Member
I'd love it but no way that's happening. Far too niche.
Sony took a loss on the PS4 at launch - the console was profitable once the buyer had a PS+ account or bought 2 games, I would imagine MS is doing the same with the X1X. It's a fairly safe model as I would imagine the vast majority of people buy a couple of titles with their console.
How do you know they were making a loss?
MS said they're not making money on the 1X. Click bait title on the article, most likely breaking even.
http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2017-06-15-xbox-one-x-selling-at-a-loss
Colbert
Banned
They make a loss on the hardware itself for the One X. But they offset that loss with the subscriptions for Xbox Live, royalties for games and revenue of online services. They don't make a loss on the One S though.
I was in the same camp to assume at $499 there would be no loss but the info I got is "loss" on hw even at that price.
Because a Sony vice-president said they were:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2...-recoup-playstation-4-hardware-loss-at-launch
hanspampel
Banned
Wasting die space does not sound like a gret plan
Shin
Banned
Conflicting statements from MS, IIRC Phil himself said they weren't making any profit or selling at a loss previously.
I agree that's how they do it these days, they "tuck" their hardware losses under services to off-set it.
With that in mind we will probably see the same for PS5/XB2, perhaps somewhere around $500 $550 for BOM, $400 retail.
It would get us a better box, maybe wishful thinking somewhat also with such a price range, not sure either of them are making money at $199 - $250 for the base model.
Another thing we should keep in mind is that 8K TV's are hitting the market, who knows if Sony goes after that in a PS5 Pro, would need more than 16Gb of system memory I reckon.
Theonik
Member
The PS3 and to a lesser extent the 360 were the last times manufacturers have really released hardware at a loss. They might not aim to profit from the hardware, but they won't be bleeding money from it either. The real problem console makers face right now is inflation. As time has gone on the pricing of systems has moved up only marginally but inflation has skyrocketed by comparison. That's even worse in software. The underlying problem is that consoles aren't marked up with inflation or cost but with what the market can bare. And well consumer incomes have stagnated and they are unwilling to fork over extra money for expensive systems. So manufacturers need to cut their costs to compensate.
Did my post really deserve to be mocked?
There are technologies available today that could greatly help reduce developer resources that are far too burdensome for our current consoles.
Real time global illumination was a oft touted feature before and during the early part of this generation. It was the answer to artists going in and spending valuable time baking light sources.
Voxel based rendering would also usher in an era beyond the traditional polygon. The power just isn't there with current gen to make this a suitable alternative to traditional pipelines.
Everyone here is so focused on numbers, but numbers won't matter if they can't produce results that convince consumers it's time to leave their current box for the next.
Cerny has been quite adamant that a next generation Playstation would be a signal of resetting the clocks. New controller, new engines, new IPs, new ambition ceilings, etc.
Theonik
Member
Architecture wise, fixed function hardware has been dead in 3D graphics since the time of the Xbox 360. New features are delivered through increasing basic GPU throughput and optimising certain workloads in silicon. (colour compression, 2x half precision floats packed in single precision operators etc etc)
In that sense you tend to see most of that in the specs as well but it's the software that dictates the game. Having said that a more powerful system would also enable new techniques regardless.
In that sense you tend to see most of that in the specs as well but it's the software that dictates the game. Having said that a more powerful system would also enable new techniques regardless.
Yes... But only if the graphical setting and game logic complexity are suitably toned down.
, Steam stats:
You do realize the gpu isn't the only component using system ram correct? It's shared between CPU and gpu. 16gb minus 4gb for the OS leaves 12gb. They will have a much better CPU for next gen, also next gen game engines will be more demanding, say it uses 4Gb. That leaves just 8GB for the GPU for NEXT GEN game engines/console that will be in full swing in 2024+. It's not enough, next gen needs minimum 32GB, we haven't even talked about bandwidth.
CyberPunked
Member
I'm pretty sure 60fps will never be a focus, people just don't care enough and it's not easy to market.