Support NeoGAF

[ergem]

The basic idea is that if Sony is planning on releasing a handheld in the future, why not make a version of it that is not portable?

And to tie the branding together, the handheld and its non-handheld should be called the PS6 and PS6 portable. PS6 Pro will be the traditional x86 and the only one with backwards compatibility.

This strategy also solves the problem that $699 - $999 console will shrink the market.

$399 console should remain available next generation. But the branding and marketing is the end-all and be-all. By calling it PS6 and PS6 portable, people will understand that ALL PS6 games will release on it too.

PS6, PS6 Portable, and PS6 Pro will all release at the same time or at least the same quarter. Optional PS6 Pro Max available 3-4 years down the road if there is market for it.

With proper and advanced tools, Sony can perhaps make the development process between the two machines as seamless as PS5 to PS5 pro.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Sony can make a PS6 portable? And if it's even doable, only $500?

What's the current most powerful PC handheld?

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

That’s what I think they should do, and probably are.

It makes sense

*minus the RISC part, cpu will be the same as Pro

 

[ReBurn]

I doubt Sony consoles are going back to RISC.

 

[kikkis]

You can't exactly buy high performance risc cpu

 

[RCX]

Split dev resources between two different architectures.

This is one of the big reasons the vita died and why Nintendo went down the route of a single, dockable machine.

Those days are over. It's one platform standard for each manufacturer all the way.

 

[Self_Destructive]

Terrible idea.. lmao

 

[The Lunch Legend]

Excellent idea.

 

[Radical_3d]

Consoles are LTTP on making the jump to ARM, not back to RISC. That’s the architecture switch that makes sense. Also, why have two low ends for TV and portable when the concept of hybrid is already 8 years old?

 

[Fess]

Splitting the platform into 3 devices would kill the output, would end up like how it is on PS5 and VR. Cannot be done. And splitting into 2 power levels would be like Series X and S. Bad idea.

Just go with one console. Focus on delivering games on that. Price can be whatever, there is no alternative so people not already on PC will buy it, they have monopoly on high end console gaming now so just make the device great and it’ll break all sales records.

 

[namenotfound]

Whose the chip designer? GPU vendor they'll source for the RISC-V consoles and how going with AMD or any other GPU vendor for the RISC-V consoles would be cheaper than AMD for both? Still have to pay TSMC, Samsung, or Intel fab prices. 2 CPU instruction sets to target and getting developers to add support. Possibly 2 GPU instruction sets. Devs would have ship SPIR-V for final compilation or 2 sets of compiled shaders. Also the cheaper SKUs being the ones that aren't guaranteeing backwards compatibility seems wrong. All the popular free to play games and cheaper older games that go on sale. Cheaper console but terrible deal in actuality because how bad the library will be. People hype up the possibilities of switching away from x86 when it's not very transformative at all especially in devices that aren't so power constrained like a thin phone or tablet. They can switch and break backwards compatibility and not actually be any stronger than desktop AMD or Intel x86 CPUs. If the pro console were so much more powerful that it could power through an x86 -> RISC-V translator with performance to match a PS5 then RISC-V Pro console that maintains backwards compatibility would be great but still on the pricing front, would AMD have a RISC-V design for that or would it be 2 vendors someone+AMD GPU.

 

[dottme]

They will surely not split between two different architectures. It's already hard enough to get developer to optimize for PS5 and PS% Pro plus all the other platform, I can't see them spending time on RISC-V.
On top of this, while there might be chance to switch to ARM, the software environment for RISC-V is way to limited for something like a playstation to rely on it.

 

[Blank Space Invader]

 

[Brigandier]

 

[Lord Malachite]

Awful idea. The lowest common denominator will become the benchmark, and I have a significant problem with your hypothesis.

The days of the $399.99 console are gone--at least for PlayStation and Xbox if they do release new hardware. The hyper-inflation that has gripped the globe since the PS5 and Series launched put an end to that price point forever outside of Nintendo and their portable machines that are dockable.

The XSX and PS5 disc edition launched at $499.99 and did just fine at this price point. In fact, PS5 did so well that it took a good two years to be able to just walk into a store and purchase one on the spot. That same price point today is $613.70. The price of the PS5 Disc Edition in 2020 dollars is just shy of the price of the PS5 Pro in 2025 dollars. That's a massive correction. So the idea that consoles will reduce in price by over $200 does not seem to be rooted in logic, especially given we're looking at another four years of inflation between now and when the PS6 launches. With any luck, the inflation rates will cool to something much more normal. But even so, we're still looking at that price going up, not down.

We will never see a PlayStation console retailing for $399.99 again. The laws of economics are diametrically opposed to it. Come 2028, a theoretical "budget PS6" will go for $599.99. The same price that the 60GB PS3 launched at in 2006. Coincidentally, that $599.99 price point in 2006 is $945.43 in 2025 dollars. Makes the PS5 Pro see like a serious bargain.

Source: U.S. Inflation Calculator

 

[SweetTooth]

A developers nightmare.

 

[Killjoy-NL]

I dunno.

I know there's rumors of a PS portable device, but why would Sony release a dedicated portable when they have PS Portal?

Makes no sense whatsoever, business-wise.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

Seamless scaling of engines between different hardware configurations is the future, but the platforms themselves better have some architectural homogeneity. The "lowest common denominator" argument doesn't hold up anymore when machines have become so performant. We're not in the 90s anymore where a GT car with 200000 polygons looks worlds apart from a GT car with 2000 polygons

 

[IDKFA]

The basic idea is that if Sony is planning on releasing a handheld in the future, why not make a version of it that is not portable?

And to tie the branding together, the handheld and its non-handheld should be called the PS6 and PS6 portable. PS6 Pro will be the traditional x86 and the only one with backwards compatibility.

This strategy also solves the problem that $699 - $999 console will shrink the market.

$399 console should remain available next generation. But the branding and marketing is the end-all and be-all. By calling it PS6 and PS6 portable, people will understand that ALL PS6 games will release on it too.

PS6, PS6 Portable, and PS6 Pro will all release at the same time or at least the same quarter. Optional PS6 Pro Max available 3-4 years down the road if there is market for it.

With proper and advanced tools, Sony can perhaps make the development process between the two machines as seamless as PS5 to PS5 pro.

I don't see any issue.

In the PC space, developers optimise their games to run on high end to low end hardware. Why can't this same apply to the console space?

 

[rofif]

No to market segregation. Strength of console is that it’s 1?

 

[RCX]

I don't see any issue.

In the PC space, developers optimise their games to run on high end to low end hardware. Why can't this same apply to the console space?

Two completely different architectures to build games for. More dev time, more cost.

If you think games take a long time to make right now, this plan would extend it way further.

 

[kiphalfton]

Hell no. Devs then have to take into consideration the weakest link.

One console model, the end.

 

[winjer]

Two different CPU ISAs is a very stupid idea.

 

[Ronin_7]

Sony would go bankrupt with you at the helm.

 

[Soodanim]

It would be far too risc-y

 

[ergem]

That’s what I think they should do, and probably are.

It makes sense

*minus the RISC part, cpu will be the same as Pro

You can't exactly buy high performance risc cpu

A developers nightmare.

Seamless scaling of engines between different hardware configurations is the future, but the platforms themselves better have some architectural homogeneity. The "lowest common denominator" argument doesn't hold up anymore when machines have become so performant. We're not in the 90s anymore where a GT car with 200000 polygons looks worlds apart from a GT car with 2000 polygons

Two completely different architectures to build games for. More dev time, more cost.

If you think games take a long time to make right now, this plan would extend it way further.

Two different CPU ISAs is a very stupid idea.

It would be far too risc-y

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

 

[ergem]

Sony can make a PS6 portable? And if it's even doable, only $500?

Yes. By calling the rumored PS portable PS6 portable. I’m only suggesting that the branding should be homogenous.

 

[Zuzu]

I think they all need the same CPU and similar RAM arrangements to allow the games to scale more easily across devices. But I don’t know anything about hardware and software beyond a fairly low level amateur level so my opinion is pretty ignorant.

I think I like idea in principle though - a cheap option, a portable option and a performance focussed option would serve all areas of the market well if they could pull it off. But maybe the price of the lower tiers could be increased by $100 just so they’re not as underpowered compared to Pro offering. So, $499 for the base and $599 for the portable.

 

[SweetTooth]

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

I don't know what arch its gonna be, all I know is multiple game packages for same gen is a big NO NO for Cerny. He stated that in PS5Pro tech seminar.

Unless Sony manages to make one game package works for different arch somehow, and they are not strange to make crazy ideas.

 

[ergem]

I doubt Sony consoles are going back to RISC.

Consoles are LTTP on making the jump to ARM, not back to RISC. That’s the architecture switch that makes sense.

You’re probably confusing mips with risc. Sony has never used risc before.

Also, why have two low ends for TV and portable when the concept of hybrid is already 8 years old?

It doesn’t mean that PS6 portable can’t do it too. Just more options. By removing the battery and screen, they can offer the same device for $100 less.

 

[winjer]

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

Of course.

 

[ergem]

Of course.

Fair enough.

 

[Ozriel]

With Xbox hardware all but dead, you’ll never get a PS console launching at under $499.

I’d rather they optimized on specs, anyway, even if it makes it more pricey.

 

[HerjansEagleFeeder]

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

No, I'd guess ARM for handheld, x86 for home console. I think there's a higher chance of the home console building on ARM than the handheld on x86. All of these scenarios still depend on a translation layer like Rosetta 2, and Sony probably doesn't want to give up on backwards compatibility at this point. I have no idea why ARM for the "beefier" stationary devices might still be a worse choice for companies like Sony, given that you can make x86 software available on ARM without much loss in performance.

 

[SmoothBrain]

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

I would think so, too. AMD is pushing hard for mobile APUs, see Ryzen AI MAX 395 or whatever the hell it's called. Very impressive piece of tech. Seems to scale well enough with W limit. A modified version for PS6 and PS Portable seems like a good guess.

I'd think they would make the following changes:

• GDDR instead of regular DDR - assuming the performance bump is worth it
• RDNA4 instead of RDNA3.5 with modifications
• More CUs

They could then use a cut down version with less GDDR and CUs for a handheld version, as they don't need the same resolution.

 

[ergem]

Also the cheaper SKUs being the ones that aren't guaranteeing backwards compatibility seems wrong. All the popular free to play games and cheaper older games that go on sale. Cheaper console but terrible deal in actuality because how bad the library will be. People hype up the possibilities of switching away from x86 when it's not very transformative at all especially in devices that aren't so power constrained like a thin phone or tablet. They can switch and break backwards compatibility and not actually be any stronger than desktop AMD or Intel x86 CPUs.

Are suggesting that by using x86 with the weaker/portable PS6, they can maintain BC?

I understand the positives of using x86 even if it means more power hungry and becoming a bigger portable device similar to Steamdecks. But I very much doubt portable device in 2027/2028 can be BC with PS5. The portable machine will have to cut back on GPU and RAM speed I suppose.

EDIT: I think I get what you mean now. You were suggesting a similar arch and so the PS6 pro also using risc-v and then using a translation layer to be BC with PS5.

 

[RCX]

So, do you think the rumored PS portable is x86 arch?

Yes. Steam Deck, Ally etc etc.

Portable x86 is completely normal at this stage.

 

[N30RYU]

Stupid idea. Wrong reasons... so no vote

Just release one platform

 

[ReBurn]

You’re probably confusing mips with risc. Sony has never used risc before.



It doesn’t mean that PS6 portable can’t do it too. Just more options. By removing the battery and screen, they can offer the same device for $100 less.

Cell was RISC. It was based on PowerPC architecture, which was also RISC.

 

[winjer]

Are suggesting that by using x86 with the weaker/portable PS6, they can maintain BC?

I understand the positives of using x86 even if it means more power hungry and becoming a bigger portable device similar to Steamdecks. But I very much doubt portable device in 2027/2028 can be BC with PS5. The portable machine will have to cut back on GPU and RAM speed I suppose.

EDIT: I think I get what you mean now. You were suggesting a similar arch and so the PS6 pro also using risc-v and then using a translation layer to be BC with PS5.

Like Jim Keller said, ISA today has almost no bearing on performance and power usage.
It's architecture and process nodes that define those aspects.

Maintaining X86 would not only mean backwards compatibility with the PS4 and PS5, but also that the PS6 would keep sharing a lot of development tools with the PC.
And this would make game development cheaper and easier.

 

[Three]

Somewhat plausible since I can see an ARM based handheld and x86 console happening based purely on the idea that other devices like mobile and Switch would be targeted by developers too anyway. I'm not sure it's a good idea though

 

[simpatico]

$99 Pi based streaming box is more likely.

 

[Schmendrick]

Playstation S, X and DOA.
Such a great idea...........

 

[Bernardougf]

The only way to release a 399-499 machine next gen is with two skus ... one "normal" and one "pro" ...

Theres just no way to offer a generational leap over the ps5pro without keeping the price point.

I think next gen we will have one 499/599 and one 799/899 console from the get go. And no mid gen refresh.

 

[PeteBull]

ps6 gonna launch holidays 2028, 999usd, at least if we count in discdrive, and 99usd AAA games

 

[twilo99]

The best “console” hardware out there is the Mac mini M4 it’s just a shame that there are no games for it. That thing is a beast.

 

[ManaByte]

In fact, PS5 did so well that it took a good two years to be able to just walk into a store and purchase one on the spot.

On a forum with endless disingenuous takes, this one is a whopper.

You couldn't walk into a store and buy one because the sneaker barons, dipshits who have bots set up to buy up all of the Nike Jordans as soon as they're posted on the website, set up their bots to do that for PS5s (and Xboxs, but you don't mention that of course). BOTH next gen consoles were targeted by scalpers using bots. THAT'S why you couldn't walk into a store and buy one.

 

[dgrdsv]

You don't make a lineup cheaper by using three difference CPU architectures and - presumably - h/w providers. That's a sure shot to make everything even more expensive.
Also there are no particular physical or business reasons why an x86 system would cost more than RISC-V or Arm. Consume more power - sure. Be tied to a GPU vendor - yes. Being natively more expensive though no.

 

[PaintTinJr]

The basic idea is that if Sony is planning on releasing a handheld in the future, why not make a version of it that is not portable?

And to tie the branding together, the handheld and its non-handheld should be called the PS6 and PS6 portable. PS6 Pro will be the traditional x86 and the only one with backwards compatibility.

This strategy also solves the problem that $699 - $999 console will shrink the market.

$399 console should remain available next generation. But the branding and marketing is the end-all and be-all. By calling it PS6 and PS6 portable, people will understand that ALL PS6 games will release on it too.

PS6, PS6 Portable, and PS6 Pro will all release at the same time or at least the same quarter. Optional PS6 Pro Max available 3-4 years down the road if there is market for it.

With proper and advanced tools, Sony can perhaps make the development process between the two machines as seamless as PS5 to PS5 pro.

The Vita - less so the PSP because of the fidelity of that era - showed Sony that traditional AAA games don't play well for the vast majority of the consumers at that screen dimension.

So I really don't see PlayStation re-entering the handheld or hybrid market as more than a Portal level device. And I suspect they have numbers to know what type of game fidelity is played mostly on the portal, or what the local streaming on Portal vs TV time ratio is for more complex/higher fidelity games and see the same problem of trying to sell +70m handhelds to drive more game sales for their AAA publishing partners.

Despite being against PlayStation's lack of effort on console (to-the-metal quality games) this gen since their cross-gen and PC release strategy, the latter already serves those in the niche that want PlayStation AAA games on a handheld through SteamDeck and Windows ROG level handhelds, so unless they kill off that strategy fully, I don't see what their handheld strategy would gain, when it is easier to release a Lego Horizons game on Switch, and let Nintendo deal with the problem of avoiding the convergence problem of higher fidelity on small screens while giving gamers a reason to upgrade from a device(Switch) that already sits at the apex of that solution.

IMO Sony's only real angle to go portable that would satisfy their AAA single player games is an AR/VR pair of glasses plugging into the Portal. With the rear of the portal becoming a empty glasses case.

 

[Shifty1897]

Microsoft stopped competing, Sony is the only real home console maker at this point. Why would they ever charge less than $700 for a console again until competition comes along?