Honestly excited. I’m pretty pleased with my PS4 Pro and while I certainly don’t have any plans to go back to primarily console gaming, these all sound like steps in the right direction. They’ll need a number of good exclusives to convince me to jump from 4 to 5 when the time comes, but backwards compatibility will be a great selling point.
Comment has been collapsed.
They need to ban the use of blur in games too. That would make it perfect. But, like ps4, I will wait 5 years until they have some games worth getting, before I decide if I want to get one. I have regretted my ps4 purchase, so, I probably won't get 5, unless epic really ruins pc gaming for years to come.
Comment has been collapsed.
unless epic really ruins pc gaming for years to come
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, they are already ruining it for me, so, it's not that crazy to me. If they continue to delay releases to support their shitty launcher, getting a next gen console would be a better idea than upgrading my pc.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm all for having the option to turn off / reduce effects in games.
Motion blur, depth of field, bloom lighting, chromatic aberration, screen shake, etc.
Comment has been collapsed.
Motion blur, you mean? Well, banning it outright would be rather the overstated approach. Of course, given how strict Sony has been in restricting features such as text chatting in games due to potential negative consumer feedback [at least, I think that's the basis behind that?], perhaps we could convince them to require that developers make such graphic functions toggle-able.
In fairness, the majority of developers are reasonable and already include options for disabling such functions.
As for the rest, well.. I'll just offer them this.
Comment has been collapsed.
Option to turn it off? Yes.
Ban? No, Spider-Man is one game that uses blur well. Especially when web slinging.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yay! Better gaphics!
Which you won't be able to fully appreciate on a regular TV anyway, and 8K UHD screens are still stupidly expensive.
And another jump up in price for the actual games even if they don't really use the extra hardware, because the hardware will again be more expensive, yet sold at bigger losses that the games need to make up for. So more reason for publishers to try and play it ultra-safe with their big-budget titles (thus stagnating the gaming market even more), or stay with lower budget-stuff that can also run on a PS4 anyway, further extending the lifecycle of that system.
Comment has been collapsed.
8K is just a future-proofing thing (its basically the same as saying it supports HDMI 2.1). It'll be quite a while before developers see it as something worth making the needed sacrifices to obtain in their games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah so what's the reason to get a new playstation? Really not much.
They ran out of gimmicks, and the gap between console and pc will become less and less.
Comment has been collapsed.
I guess one good reason would be getting a playable experience for less than $300, something that you can't really do with a PC (unless for some reason Nvidia regains some sanity and starts selling mid range cards at human prices).
Comment has been collapsed.
One thing's a port that costs an extra $10 for manufacturing costs. The other is literally a promise to increase your hardware capability at least 16-32 times. I doubt it'll be a $10 upgrade. Today, this would be a $2000 upgrade.
Comment has been collapsed.
Playstation 5, huh? And here I am, still in the Wii/360/PS3 generation. :P
backwards compatibility with existing PlayStation 4 games
Between Microsoft's shared exclusivity with PC, the PS4 games being backwards compatible, and Nintendo throwing in the towel on the Wii U and rereleasing the majority of Wii U games on the Switch (and with additional features, at that), it really feels like the last generation ended up being completely skippable.
That said, I'm totally in favor of backwards compatability. After the PS2 and early generation Wiis, it looked like we were mostly losing that functionality [especially given the modern trend of re-releasing older games at inflated prices through digital stores], so it's nice to see that it's still being taken into consideration by console manufacturers
Given how unlikely I am to upgrade my PC over the next half decade, there's a fair chance I'd seriously consider the PS5 once it drops down to the $300 range [early rumors put it at a potential $499 launch price]. Much of the weight behind that consideration would be based in backwards compatability strongly enhancing the total library [of exclusives] that are available. So here's hoping they don't change their plans to include that. ^.^
Comment has been collapsed.
I'm just hoping PS5 also plays PS1/PS2/PS3 games, especially if the later two can be run at higher resolutions. PS3 emulation on PC is already pretty good so it should be doable on a new console.
Comment has been collapsed.
i still cant get over needing to pay to use the internet i pay for.
sadly when/if ff7 remake comes out i may have to buy 1
Comment has been collapsed.
4k is already questionable. 8k is complete nonsense. You will have a really hard time seeing the difference between 4k and 8k, It's just wasted processing power. They should concentrate on higher framerates and better effects, not higher and higher resolution. My guess is that we are talking about pure upscaling here, and that they don't intend to render anything in more than 4k.
Also, those are just rumors so far.
Comment has been collapsed.
The big problem with supporting higher refresh rates on consoles is that TV manufacturers went out of their way over the past decade to confuse consumers (I've seen plenty of TVs listed as 120 or 240hz that can't actually handle such input at those framerates).
Comment has been collapsed.
hz equates to how many frames a display can produce, but not how many it can accept (so a higher hz in this case would mean it creates more interpolation steps between actual frames, and/or how it doubles up frames for 3D). But up until TV manufacturers did that hz was often equated to the maximum supported framerate in terms of both input and output, thus making it confusing.
Comment has been collapsed.
True, but TVs will further improve over time. XBox One already supports FreeSync, and I believe certain TVs do as well. 60fps in every game would already be a big step up from what consoles currently have. And honestly, I don't see a reason why consoles shouldn't offer fps beyond that. We already have games that offer choices, like 4k/30 or 1080p/60. I don't see why consoles shouldn't support say 120Hz. I somehow doubt that will happen, but it would be a good development and PC ports would probably also benefit from it.
Comment has been collapsed.
I agree, 8k is complete nonsense now, but don't forget, there's a market for "the newest, coolest, etc" stuff. That's why everything is evolving fast without properly adopting something, 4k in this case. I remember, back then when HD was the new fancy stuff, I asked people why are they so desperate to buy an HD tv at the highest price since no one is broadcasting in HD, you can imagine the nonsense replied. Most of these people don't even know what these things mean and do, just that it's cool . So, hooray for 8k!
Comment has been collapsed.
8K will be complete nonsense even in 10 years. Unless they start selling 95" TVs, there's a physical limit in which you can distinguish pixels that small.
Comment has been collapsed.
I thought sports channels were very early adopters of HD?
Comment has been collapsed.
I only heard about 8k and that sounds like Emotion Engine 3.0. Maybe 5k, since 4k has been a thing for years now.
Comment has been collapsed.
8K lol. The mass consumer market hasn't even adopted 4K properly yet.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lol, you grabbed my curiosity and got me to check as well. Seems I'm also blacklisted. Haven't even seen this guy. I mean, who cares in the long run, but it's still amusing :D
Comment has been collapsed.
Heh yes same here. Completely unknown.. from the shadows they come.
CLICK ❌ 'evil laughter'
Comment has been collapsed.
Gotta give them props though. They never really give shit away themselves, yet they still think that blacklisting's some clever thing. They're basically saying "I don't agree with you, so I don't want to enter in your giveaways", even if their goal is obviously to deter people from disagreeing with their viewpoints.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh oh, me too me too.
Fun game. My theory is hatred of forum posts.
Comment has been collapsed.
lol graphics
Wake me up when they talk about, you know, videogames.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, games would be so much better without graphics! :/
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, like the PS4 didn't had an actual library of games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Besides the meme factor that's been going around since at least PS3, my point was that as long as they try to sell me their console with specs and not an actual lineup of games, they might as well try to sell me a bag of rocks.
Comment has been collapsed.
Since many games are shared between platforms, the hardware is obviously pretty important. For instance, in today's market you often get a better experience with XBox One than with PS4, since it's more powerful. That is something to consider and yet completely independent of gameplay/games.
Comment has been collapsed.
An unhealthy focus on graphical capabilities, the exact same boring controller they use since the PlayStation 2 since 2000 but with an another useless gimmick that nobody will use, and maybe keeping up with the one or two self-funded single-player high-quality games to make the fanboys justify buying a weak 300-dollar computer for 400 dollars and spending a truckload of money on the games with their ridiculous royalty fees.
So, the same things we saw with PS2, PS3, and PS4, because gods forbid the console market outside Nintendo tries to move forward a single millimeter beyond cranking up the processors a bit at each generation. (Although to be fair, this also mostly describes the research philosophy of Nvidia's and AMD's graphical card departments in the past decade, with only 2018 showing something really new.)
Comment has been collapsed.
The sad thing is, Nintendo gets flak sometimes for their innovations if said idea is not 100% perfect and/or useful all of the time.
Comment has been collapsed.
Justifiably, but this shows that they are trying to come up with things. Failing with some ideas while also having success with others is what we call innovation and moving forward. This is why I will never e fond of the Xbox since it started as a copycat of PlayStation 2 and they never really tried to come up with their own ideas beyond moving the left analogue stick to a horrible position.
(I know some people love the Xbox controller scheme, but my mind revolts when I see its asymmetry.)
Comment has been collapsed.
You must hate the Steam controller, then? :P
And for the record, I'm fully supportive of Nintendo trying 'weird' things out.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have never met a single person who ever used a Steam controller.
Comment has been collapsed.
I have 3, considering getting a 4th (so the family can play, not all for me). I have one XBox and a number of Playstation-esque generic gamepads (Logitech) - all of which are wired. I prefer the Steam controller for most things. Sometimes the right pad is funny versus a stick, but I can usually customize it as needed.... which is part of why I like it so much. I don't make the most of all the controller's features (gyro, etc) but the fact that I can and regularly customize configs is great for me.
Relating back to Nintendo, I guess I should have asked whether you liked or disliked the Steam controller, as this is an example of innovation on par with many of Nintendo's controller oddities.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, since I have no idea of how Steam's controller fares, I cannot make a comparison. All I know about it is that it seems to be their only hardware thus far that was not a commercial failure. (Remember Steam Machines?) Quite the opposite, it appears to be popular-ish.
Comment has been collapsed.
An unhealthy focus on graphical capabilities
a weak 300-dollar computer
The Schrodinger's console. It's either too much powerful or not powerful enough depending on the argument.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not necessarily. Good coding can make graphics seem pretty. The PS2 achieved superior visual representation in its time when strictly speaking its hardware was laughable compared to high-end (or even mid-range) PC GPUs. The current 8th gen is supposedly keeping on par of several-hundred-dollar cards despite using cheap AMD APUs. You can do wonders when eliminating unnecessary overhead. Just ask anyone who is dabbling with containerization in industry-grade software.
Regardless: by focus, I meant focus on marketing, on showcases. Remember PS4 and The Order 1886 as one of its big, big launch title?
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah yes i remember quite well. After all, that's what the market wants.
The point is, a console has to be powerful enough and has to be cheap and, most importantly, has to play games above everything else. The Kinect, the PSVR, the WiiU gamepad are bullshit technologies that tried to capitalize on a particular trend. I don't blame Sony for instead taking the comfortable road by asking devs what they wanted with the PS4 and providing exactly that. After all, it paid very well on this gen.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, that's because they create it. If games were made to run at 1080p/60, then there wouldn't be an issue. But they want to be cheap, they want to be the most powerful and they want to be beautiful. Fact is that you need to pick 2 of these at best.
Want to run a game at high visual settings on a cheap machine? Well, guess you're happy with running the game as fast as an Intel HD runs a modern video game.
Want to run a game on a cheap machine with good framerates? Well, then say goodbye to your visual fidelity and megaresolutions.
Want to run a game with great visuals and at great framerates? Well, bye-bye affordability.
Don't blame the consumer for bitching about the manufacturer's lies. Were they realistic with their promises and were they actually interested in pleasing their customer, then they wouldn't have this issue.
But the fact is that you'll be paying 400€ for a machine that can't run anything from its own generation at 60fps with games that are sometimes 5 times more expensive than on the PC. What's even worse, that 400€ will make you a PC that's equivalent to the PS4 Pro's power.
So yeah, maybe a company shouldn't pretend that they can do the impossible.
Comment has been collapsed.
that 400€ will make you a PC that's equivalent to the PS4 Pro's power.
Can you really make me a build that costs 400€ that outputs games at 1440p/30 with a visual fidelity similar to Uncharted 4 and Horizon Zero Dawn?
that are sometimes 5 times more expensive than on the PC
Is that really true? I got Driveclub, Uncharted 4 and Ratchet & Clank bundled with my 250€ 1TB console, i paid less than 15€ each for Killzone Shadow Fall, Wipeout Omega Collection and The Order 1886, 9€ for Uncharted Lost Legacy, 20€ for Horizon Zero Dawn GOTY, Shadow of the Colossus and 25€ for God Of War. Unless you're buying at day one, you can save up quite a lot.
Want to run a game at high visual settings on a cheap machine? Well, guess you're happy with running the game as fast as an Intel HD runs a modern video game.
Want to run a game on a cheap machine with good framerates? Well, then say goodbye to your visual fidelity and megaresolutions.
Want to run a game with great visuals and at great framerates? Well, bye-bye affordability.
Again, the Schrodinger's console.
Comment has been collapsed.
Can you really make me a build that costs 400€ that outputs games at 1440p/30 with a visual fidelity similar to Uncharted 4 and Horizon Zero Dawn?
So I started putting together a build, thinking it was a sure-fire thing here. The fact is that first it's kind of hard to compare, but even when not directly comparing, you can see some games run better on the PS4 Pro (exclusives) and some running better on the PC. (non-exclusives with some exceptions)
Personally, I went for a Ryzen 1600, GTX 1050 with 8GB RAM at 2400Mhz and I managed to barely stay in the budget. So that'll still mean that we're missing a paid-for OS. Win 10 can be unactivated (with a watermark), so I personally don't see it as an issue, but it doesn't really help either.
The only constant winner was the loading times, with the PC having a Team SSD for $29
As to the settings, it definitely started depending. With many games, it's relatively clear that the console versions are running on medium, with previous gen games running on a mixture of high and very high.
Since a console is a non-upgradable option, I also went with a less upgradable option (Would've gone with a $300 Ryzen 2400G build otherwise).
The PS4 doesn't actually run games at 1440p and instead it uses checkerboard rendering, so the game isn't actually being properly upscaled, which is the reason it can show such performance. The fact is that at 1080p, with some exceptions, PC will overall edge it out. First with the lack of a multiplayer service fee, then with the option in peripherals, then with the lack of a central server, then with the versatility for other tasks and also the bigger game library.
Mind you, the PS4 manages to play some insanely good looking games, that this PC just can't handle as well.
Is that really true? I got Driveclub, Uncharted 4 and Ratchet & Clank bundled with my 250€ 1TB console, i paid less than 15€ each for Killzone Shadow Fall, Wipeout Omega Collection and The Order 1886, 9€ for Uncharted Lost Legacy, 20€ for Horizon Zero Dawn GOTY, Shadow of the Colossus and 25€ for God Of War. Unless you're buying at day one, you can save up quite a lot.
To an extent. I definitely exaggerated here. 5 times is a ludicrous statement and it was dumb of me to make that claim. Though, it's not uncommon to get games cheaper (when looking at digital, since retail's a fickle beast and you can find almost any deal in retail from 5€ Call of Duty's newest releases to 0.50€ Borderlands GOTY.
But for example, Fallout 4 GOTY is currently available for 12€ as a digital Steam copy, while the biggest discount for a PSN code has been 30€. Shadow of Mordor was literally a dollar and Tomb Raider 2013's Anniversary Edition is 3.5€.
Though, I'm also surprised at your deals, which are very solid. Didn't expect that. Instead, I was guessing more of a last gen situation, where games retained high values for years as long as the game had been popular, thanks to the gated marketplace.
Again, the Schrodinger's console.
I mean, you have to explain this in-depth then. If false advertising is my fault and if the simple truth of hardware costing money, graphics requiring something to render it and so on are a "Schrodinger's console", then what am I saying wrong?
Comment has been collapsed.
It's a solid build, but it's lacking a blu ray drive (60€ according to local prices) and a controller (a standard controller can be found for just 20, but a Dualshock 4 sits firmly at over 40). I'd just change the 1050ti with a 570, which is cheaper and runs slightly better, but we're still at least 100€ over budget. Also here's the catch, can you use this build for over 7 years (the approximate lifespan of the typical console)?
I have a high end build from 2014 (4790k, 16 gb, R9 Nano, SSD, total cost about 1200€) and nowadays it's struggling against the badly optimized games like The Division 2 and AC Origins. If i wanted to play those games at medium quality/30 fps i'd just turn on my PS4.
Besides the PS4 Pro does indeed run (some) games at native 1440p resolution in graphics mode, leaving checkered rendering for 4K https://www.gamesradar.com/ps4-pro-confirmed-games-list/
It's that kind of marketing ploy that allows them to claim that (some) games will (sometimes) run better than the PC counterpart on the (sometimes) most powerful PS4 ever™. The point is, they never claimed that it could play everything at native 4K resolution or 1080p60 either. It's shady at best, but technically they never said something that was outright false. They even cut the "most powerful console ever" slogan after the One X came out.
First with the lack of a multiplayer service fee
A completely shit move from Sony's part, and at least Microsoft actually offers a decent online service compared to the PSN's frequent downtimes. I don't play multiplayer games on my PS4, but it's really bad nonetheless. They're not even offering decent games with the subscription.
Instead, I was guessing more of a last gen situation, where games retained high values for years as long as the game had been popular, thanks to the gated marketplace.
It is actually, but you'll need to keep an eye out for special sales or second hand games that might be sitting on the bottom of the shelf. If you are in a rush to get something, prices stay quite high nevertheless. But it's still possible to save up quite a lot if you wait for the right moment.
There's also the Playstation Hits line that offers AAA games for a MSRP of 20€/$, if you can live with the burden of a red bar on the cover.
Comment has been collapsed.
Also here's the catch, can you use this build for over 7 years (the approximate lifespan of the typical console)?
100% yeah. Most lower budget users do exactly that and have been doing so for decades. The good thing about a PC is that it won't lose support, it won't run out of games. If I were so inclined, I could still be running my GT 640 build from 2012. There would still be more games than I could ever play, even if I were playing for 24 hours a day, every day, for 2 years. No console can do it. I can even be more backwards compatible than them. There's already great emulation tools for the PS2, with a PS3 one being developed right now. In fact, you can basically emulate any console now other than the current gen and previous gen.
So yeah, that 7 years will be a cakewalk. It helps that we're running very good hardware.
I have a high end build from 2014 (4790k, 16 gb, R9 Nano, SSD, total cost about 1200€) and nowadays it's struggling against the badly optimized games like The Division 2 and AC Origins. If i wanted to play those games at medium quality/30 fps i'd just turn on my PS4.
Hard to compare the value proposition of enthusiast tech to budget options. You'll inevitably be disappointed if you think the price will carry the equivalent distance per euro. It just won't.
Also, AC Origins runs terribly on PC thanks to the DRM and bad optimization, so yeah, the consoles will be a better option. As to The Division 2? 5 years, graphical powerhouse and you wonder why it doesn't run. That's the expectations talking here again. The PS4 Pro runs the game at a 25-30fps with a load of shortcuts being taken. The lighting's on the lowest settings while everything else seems to be a mixture of low and medium. Doesn't help that the game has pop-in issues on it as well.
So yeah, a 5 year old machine that you didn't buy for the value, a game that requires a lot of processing power and is an MMO to boot. "Truth is, the game was rigged from the start."
So overall, you've got a good point with AC: Origins, but as to The Division 2, you're running the game better than the console.
As to your own rig... well, it doesn't seem to be from 2014 to start off. At best you got it in Q4 2015, based off the GPU you listed). Also doesn't help that you got screwed over a bit. You basically got the raw end of the deal with the more affordable and the nearly equivalent GTX 1060 6GB coming out less than a year later with a price tag that was a third cheaper than what you bought. I'm sorry, but you just ran into some bad luck there.
Besides the PS4 Pro does indeed run (some) games at native 1440p resolution in graphics mode, leaving checkered rendering for 4K https://www.gamesradar.com/ps4-pro-confirmed-games-list/
Looking through that list, the only games that were properly supported for higher resolutions or higher framerates were also older games (Like the Assassin's Creed: The Ezio Collection) and less demanding stuff like racing games (The Crew 2), linear shooters (like CoD: BO4) and so on.
Though, I am impressed by the 4K/60fps DMC5. They took a fair few shortcuts since the game's running on medium, but damn is it better than PCs could run it on similar stuff (I'm guessing).
Comment has been collapsed.
Aren't you glad they fund this unhealthy obsession with graphics by adding lootboxes, season passses, microtransactions to recoup the rising costs made for no good reason at all?
Comment has been collapsed.
My blind guess is that it was ditched for the same reason VR is not sticking: it makes many people physically uncomfortable and needs a headwear gimmick even to function. If they create high-definition holographic displays that can do 3D on their own, then maybe it will catch on.
Comment has been collapsed.
Very poor support, from both games and TVs. It just didn't catch on, too clunky for general use and expensive to develop.
Comment has been collapsed.
games maybe, but not TV. there are many 3d models available since years and they don't have necessarily a premium price such as the few vr headsets available.
I think that the issue is just on the second (i.e. movies and games).
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, two issues here...
8K is useless. The market is already losing passion at upgrading their resolution after the sweet-spot of 1080p. But let's just say that the market's different and they totally want to upgrade. Then why move to 8K still? There's nothing that can reliably run 8K. There's barely anything that can run 4K, as a matter of fact. Doesn't help that technology isn't on the same level as their ambitions, with 8K. Monitors in 8K barely exist. TVs in 8K also barely exist and the costs for them are around a year's rent for even the more expensive countries (7000€ for a Samsung 8K TV). We also lack visual fidelity in games for that stuff. Upscaling the resolution's fine and all, but you really need some insane detail on the visuals to make a game look great in 8K.
Second of all... motherfuckers can barely run 1080p. Maybe focus on that first. Then, when you're feeling bold, go to 4K. 8K is possible for you in around 4 generations (3 if they make some crazy leaps). Any game that runs at 1080p60fps is a game that's from the previous generation (Minecraft, Metro Redux, Wolfenstein: The New Order, Journey). It's shameful, really. And here they are, basically lying in your face, telling you that you'll get 8K. Look, you can play in 8K with an Intel HD 3000. Doesn't mean it'll run well, doesn't mean your settings will be high and doesn't mean it'll be new games.
It's as much of a scam as it really can be. Shows how Sony doesn't want to create good products for their users, but instead good marketing and profits. It's a shame, really. Would be nice if they could run a game at 1080p at 60fps, instead of at 16x higher resolution at a lower visual detail at 20-30fps for a price of 7000€ + console + games.
Comment has been collapsed.
Having skipped the PS4 and actually the whole last generation, I'm probably gonna get a PS5.
And it's good to see the thing I hate the most is being worked on......long loading times and low fps (probably if it can run 8k).
Comment has been collapsed.
8K lol this lie .
Ps4 pro has not 4k just an upscale .
Remember the promise of 1080p 60fps for ps3 :) this goal jsut reach with the ps4 pro (some games can't run 60fps on standard ps4 )
Comment has been collapsed.
It seems that, unlike the PS4, the Navi/Ryzen hardware won't be instantly outdated at launch, so there's that. Native 4K capability was pretty obvious, but retrocompatibility is a nice suprise, at least we won't have to endure endless previous-gen ports and "remasters".
8K is completely useless, but they never said that games could run at 8K; it will probably render the UI at 8K and nothing else, just like the One S boasts 4K capabilities, but not in gaming. The SSD is nice and all, but come on, it was pretty much required on a next gen machine. Nowdays a good Crucial 500 GB costs about $70. I think that this PS5 will be priced around $500 at launch, more expensive than the PS4, but with vastly improved specs than the Pro version.
However i don't get all those negative comments (besides the usual "hurr durr graphics"), overall it seems a step in the right direction. More powerful hardware based on the same x86 architecture that made PS4 games so easy to develop and port, support to the latest technologies like native 4K rendering, VR and raytracing, improvements in the audio department, retrocompatibility for PS4 games and decreased load times. It will be another option for mainstream gaming that allows people to enjoy games without spending so much for a dedicated PC and the PS4's library is full of great stuff to play.
Comment has been collapsed.
Nothing but censorship and crappy movies trying to be games. Nothing good comes from Sony.
Comment has been collapsed.
Sony is by far the worse game publisher/gaming company. EA is better then them.
Comment has been collapsed.
Easy. Sony treat devs way worse than EA does theirs. Remember Evolution Studios? Not to mention all Sony "games" are just crappy movies. The new censorship policy of Sony is just another thing to add on to the pile. Sony is cancer and needs to die!
Comment has been collapsed.
Sounds good! I might even go back to console gaming!
Comment has been collapsed.
We already know the APU powering PS5/XB2 will be an AMD based 8 core CPU either based on Zen+ or Zen 2 architecture at about 2.3 ghz max, and an Navi 10 (or so) GPU. I doubt it will be 7nm process node, so probably a 12nm chip.
Zen+/2 µarch is a MASSIVE improvement over the old jaguar µarch used in current gen consoles, so even if it sounds like a small improvement, expect at least a doubling in performance, maybe even tripple on the CPU side.
As for the GPU, we don't know how effective Navi is yet, so who knows. A doubling of the X Box One X should be in order, but probably not much more.
As for process node, it's a toss up between 12nm and 7nm. Depends on a few scenarios, but I would venture a guess of 12nm with a "slim edition" 7nm later on.
8K graphics? Lol, no. Not even close. 4K with medium/high graphics is what these consoles will focus on. Maybe even some upscaling. 4K/60hz will not be possible on the graphics intensive titles, but at least in the beginning it should trump 30fps easily. Remember these consoles will support freesync variable refresh rate over HDMI 2.1.
I expect 16GB of shared RAM/VRAM, so a massive increase in texture resolution and texture diversity is in order, like we saw when PS4 was introduced.
Oh, as for SSD's, maybe an SSHD, as in a standard HDD with some SSD buffer, like 120GB. Everything above will be a pleasant surprise.
Navi supports raytracing like all other modern GPU's on the market, but without dedicated µarch and lots and lots of diespace, it won't be anything but a weak gimmick, if even at all.
Comment has been collapsed.
I wouldn't be surprised if the console will come out with a 1 TB SSD out of the box. After all, SSD prices have got really cheap nowadays and they will be even cheaper in 2020, the current trend is a 15-20% decrease every year. Granted, it won't be a top of the line SSD, just like the PS4 uses a crappy 5400 rpm hard drive.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, I looked into it a bit more, and we might get at least 500GB of SSD. It should be possible with Sony buying for several millions of consoles. They might even solder it directly to the main board.
It seems they might go for the Zen2 µarch, which uses PCIe 4 (instead of 3 even high end pc's use today). So they might even increase the speed of NVME SSD's right now for the price. So on that part, it actually looks good. And honestly, it's about time. Those 5400rpm spinning rust are just a joke for modern gaming.
Comment has been collapsed.
Any rumours yet if it's gonna have an optical drive or if they'll go the same route as Microsoft and do download only?
Comment has been collapsed.
The blu ray drive is pretty much a given considering that it will be backwards compatible. Besides, Xbox Scarlett will feature both a driveless and a traditional model.
Comment has been collapsed.
Right... I knew it's gonna be backward compatible but somehow I didn't follow that train of thought to the end :D
Comment has been collapsed.
backward compatibility could be the only reason i buy one. other than that PCMR
Comment has been collapsed.
Whats the point of 8k graphics when 4k isn't the standard AND many games STRUGGLE with 4k60 on "modern" consoles.
This is all fluff by Sony to stand out.
Comment has been collapsed.
In short, next PS will support 8K graphics, "previously unattainable graphical fidelity and visual effects" with ray tracing, 3D audio, super fast SSDs, and backwards compatibility with existing PlayStation 4 games.
Article on Wired.
Comment has been collapsed.