hanspampel
Banned
lol do you know how HUUUUUGE those chips are?
what you're suggesting ist not even possible in 2025
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Digital Foundry: If Xbox One X is $500 - How much will next-gen consoles cost?
- Thread starter Theorry
- Start date
lol do you know how HUUUUUGE those chips are?
what you're suggesting ist not even possible in 2025
Yeah Maxsoft is Nintendo's authorized scalper.
I certainly am not qualified to make any predictions about specifics about the next generation console hardware as far as teraflops, fab process/size, or anything else to that level of minutiae, but I generally agree that $399 is most likely the price that Sony is going to be targeting. Microsoft might stick with $499 depending on how well One X does for them, but I would expect $399 is more likely.
As for the hardware itself, apart from everything being some degrees of better, I couldn't say specifics other than I would expect and hope that both console makers address the bottlenecks of their current systems, namely the CPU and system storage speeds. With games 50GB+ being not uncommon and many games hitting almost double that, unless there is a HUGE drop in nand flash prices, SSDs as standard are probably out of the cards, even 3-4 years from now. Perhaps an unpopulated M.2 port for those willing to shell out for an M.2 drive, or at least a SATA controller capable of maxing the read/write speeds of a modern SSD and continued support for user replacable drives for Sony and Microsoft adding that would suffice. CPU obviously something a little beefier so that it doesn't hold the system back.
The good news is the One X and Pro are already targeting 4K in some fashion currently and because of the speed that display technology moves at, 4K will almost assuredly still be the target resolution for next gen so the price
erformance bottleneck might not hit consoles as badly as we think, even if the difference in visuals continues to deliver diminishing returns from gen to gen.
As for the hardware itself, apart from everything being some degrees of better, I couldn't say specifics other than I would expect and hope that both console makers address the bottlenecks of their current systems, namely the CPU and system storage speeds. With games 50GB+ being not uncommon and many games hitting almost double that, unless there is a HUGE drop in nand flash prices, SSDs as standard are probably out of the cards, even 3-4 years from now. Perhaps an unpopulated M.2 port for those willing to shell out for an M.2 drive, or at least a SATA controller capable of maxing the read/write speeds of a modern SSD and continued support for user replacable drives for Sony and Microsoft adding that would suffice. CPU obviously something a little beefier so that it doesn't hold the system back.
The good news is the One X and Pro are already targeting 4K in some fashion currently and because of the speed that display technology moves at, 4K will almost assuredly still be the target resolution for next gen so the price
erformance bottleneck might not hit consoles as badly as we think, even if the difference in visuals continues to deliver diminishing returns from gen to gen.LukasTaves
Member
According to Ms they are selling at cost, they feel they can do that because it's a higher end Xbox one.
Likely the next Xbox will too aim for 500, while Ps5 will be $400, unless Sony reconsiders and make Ps5 a iterative step over pro too.
Likely the next Xbox will too aim for 500, while Ps5 will be $400, unless Sony reconsiders and make Ps5 a iterative step over pro too.
jobrro
Member
I would hope the M2 slot is a trivial as an SD slot on a 3DS or Switch but with higher capacities and obviously speeds. Even now a 64GB M2 SSD could store the game you are playing the most for a rather trivial sum while keeping lesser played games on the HDD.
Crankshaft
Member
I love how so many responses are "Sony will never price above 399, they learned their lesson". Lol its so cute you guys think that. If Gaf has proven anything over the years it's that they can't predict how much anything will cost and what the average consumer is willing to pay. A couple of years from now, a console priced at 400 probably won't have a power increase worthy of being a "new" generation. Gaf will be filled with comments like, "Ps5? More like Pro 1.5"
Iced Arcade
Member
who knows, 5 years anything could happen.
Omega Kirby
Member
Gaf showing their knowledge on economics
Dee Dah Dave
Member
Half Decent Zen CPU
~15TF GPU
16 - 24GB RAM - 1TB Bandwidth
That's about where I expect next gen to come in. It's not happening for a good few years though until 7nm tech is well established and yields etc are good for mass market. Plus a console price point of 4 - 500 bucks.
Anything less isn't worth doing IMO because 4K will be the standard and on top of that we need a good graphics boost too. I think people need to settle in because IMO this gen isn't going anywhere for a good while yet.
~15TF GPU
16 - 24GB RAM - 1TB Bandwidth
That's about where I expect next gen to come in. It's not happening for a good few years though until 7nm tech is well established and yields etc are good for mass market. Plus a console price point of 4 - 500 bucks.
Anything less isn't worth doing IMO because 4K will be the standard and on top of that we need a good graphics boost too. I think people need to settle in because IMO this gen isn't going anywhere for a good while yet.
Shin
Banned
They could save costs by going with GDDR5x instead of GDDR6 (among other things).
Here's some examples:
24Gb * 32-bit = 768-bit bus (GDDR5)
24Gb * 64-bit = 1536-bit bus (GDDR5x, double prefetch otherwise 768-bit)
24Gb * 28GB/s = 672GB/s bandwidth (GDDR5, XBOX reaches it's near max with 27.1GB/s)
24Gb * 56GB/s = 1344GB/s bandwidth (GDDR5x operating at it's max bandwidth of 56GB/s)
That's more bandwidth than any consumer GPU currently available (Titan Xp = 547.7GB/s).
Old tech (2016) here we come?
Here's some examples:
24Gb * 32-bit = 768-bit bus (GDDR5)
24Gb * 64-bit = 1536-bit bus (GDDR5x, double prefetch otherwise 768-bit)
24Gb * 28GB/s = 672GB/s bandwidth (GDDR5, XBOX reaches it's near max with 27.1GB/s)
24Gb * 56GB/s = 1344GB/s bandwidth (GDDR5x operating at it's max bandwidth of 56GB/s)
That's more bandwidth than any consumer GPU currently available (Titan Xp = 547.7GB/s).
Old tech (2016) here we come?
llien
Member
If "Pro" is not just "we didn't want to miss VR train", but is there to stay, perhaps "lite" version also makes sense?
$299 - PS5 Lite
$399 - PS5
$549 - PS5 Pro
I think you overestimate inflation quite a bit.
http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-r...ic-inflation/cpi-inflation-united-states.aspx
$299 - PS5 Lite
$399 - PS5
$549 - PS5 Pro
Gemüsepizza;241123839 said:
I think you overestimate inflation quite a bit.
http://www.inflation.eu/inflation-r...ic-inflation/cpi-inflation-united-states.aspx
darkinstinct
...lacks reading comprehension.
SSD prices fall way too slow. Not even regular HDDs are falling as much as they used to, which is why we still get only 1 TB in Scorpio. The smart way is to do it like Nintendo and Microsoft, have 8 GB Flashmemory in the box for the OS and dedicate the HDD/SD card solely to games. That way you have a speedy OS and faster loading times.
As long as normal HDDs are available these will always be in consoles because they are cheaper. 32 GB GDDR6 in 2020 would cost $200. There's no way. Same goes for an APU with 16 Teraflops. Just not possible for less than $100 (not even for less than $200). Murphy's Law is slowing down, not accelerating.
The 5.6TF gpu was on the same tech.
16TF isn't impossible (much depends on the cpu), but unlikely imho.
The higher you go from there the more unlikely it gets - i don't see 20TF in 2020.
Keep in mind that part of why they're selling at cost may be due to the number of units they're producing.
Shin
Banned
We're overlooking something, components will be stronger (GPU/CPU) and they can probably get them for the same price if not cheaper than they did back in 2013.
But as RAM increases so will the price of the consoles, they can't do anything about that RAM is really expensive. 12Gb GDDR5x would be $90 already, 24Gb $180.
therealbigrich
Member
I think in the few years it would take to release a new console that it will still be 500 or maybe less. Feel like Sony won't release anything above 400 so they could wait until they can release something at that price. The question is when will they be able to release a console that can do native 4k 60 fps at ultra 90% of the time at least.
The Southern and Volcanic island lines were firebreathing monsters plus everyone was stuck on 28nm. Now add to that the Bulldozer disaster...
Any SoC from AMD in that period was not going to be optimal for consoles.
My point is that Navi+Zen3 may be a big leap from the icky Pitcairn+Steamroller of 2013.
Perhaps that may not be an option soon as the "affordable hobby" category is getting owned by mobile devices.
To differentiate, the current trend for consoles could be re-branding as premium entertainment. I think Switch isn't great for the price and can be considered a premium device.
I wish Nintendo weren't the only manufacturer showing some restraint on specs. Affordable hardware with reasonable specs should be the norm, not the exception. This conversation about mid-generation upgrades, the so-called need for 4K and the rising prices of console hardware wouldn't even be taking place if manufacturers realized that consoles were never about pushing the envelope in the first place. Sure, they got better with each generation, but they rarely did so at the expense of affordability. The successful ones didn't, anyway. That's because consoles (and handhelds) have always been about being good enough, being accessible, and having a great library of - ideally exclusive - games. For top performance at a premium price, you had arcade machines and computers.
This is not to say there can't be a high-end market for console gaming. I'm sure the lucky few who could afford a Neo-Geo back in the day loved it. But that's also because the games for that system were exclusives. If all it had was superior versions of SNES games or Mega Drive games, I doubt it would be remembered today. And I'm tired of being given the impression that high-end consoles are/should be the norm. The market shouldn't be configured in such a way that 2 out of the 3 manufacturers are going for better graphics and higher prices as their main value proposition. I liked Sony's back-to-basics approach with the PS4 after the abysmal PS3. For a while, it seemed like Sony had learned from their mistakes. But the PS4 Pro was a stupid move in my view, and it and the XOX are now trying to make us believe that 4K is this Holy Grail everybody should aspire to, when the reality is that the market, by and large, doesn't care about it all that much. Heck, give people time to buy 4K screens and to actually be able to notice the difference between 1080p and 4K before pushing it out the door, will ya?
"So what? Play with your Switch or get a base PS4/XBO!" Well, yeah. I'm just saying that this arms race is a bit frustrating and misses the point of dedicated gaming systems entirely. You'd think after the (admittedly sometimes relative) failures of the N64, Gamecube, original XBox, PSP, PS Vita and PS3, that manufacturers would get a clue, but I guess they don't. In the end, the "needs more sparks" meme - wasn't that a GAF meme btw? - is still relevant today. Well, at least in Microsoft's case I can sorta understand the rationale because of their ties to PC gaming, but still.
This is not to say there can't be a high-end market for console gaming. I'm sure the lucky few who could afford a Neo-Geo back in the day loved it. But that's also because the games for that system were exclusives. If all it had was superior versions of SNES games or Mega Drive games, I doubt it would be remembered today. And I'm tired of being given the impression that high-end consoles are/should be the norm. The market shouldn't be configured in such a way that 2 out of the 3 manufacturers are going for better graphics and higher prices as their main value proposition. I liked Sony's back-to-basics approach with the PS4 after the abysmal PS3. For a while, it seemed like Sony had learned from their mistakes. But the PS4 Pro was a stupid move in my view, and it and the XOX are now trying to make us believe that 4K is this Holy Grail everybody should aspire to, when the reality is that the market, by and large, doesn't care about it all that much. Heck, give people time to buy 4K screens and to actually be able to notice the difference between 1080p and 4K before pushing it out the door, will ya?
"So what? Play with your Switch or get a base PS4/XBO!" Well, yeah. I'm just saying that this arms race is a bit frustrating and misses the point of dedicated gaming systems entirely. You'd think after the (admittedly sometimes relative) failures of the N64, Gamecube, original XBox, PSP, PS Vita and PS3, that manufacturers would get a clue, but I guess they don't. In the end, the "needs more sparks" meme - wasn't that a GAF meme btw? - is still relevant today. Well, at least in Microsoft's case I can sorta understand the rationale because of their ties to PC gaming, but still.
I have to wonder...
If the next-gen (because that's what it is, PS4/X1 has been current gen for a long time now) consoles are so expensive that adoption is slow... what happens then?
Do they just sit around sucking wind until the price drops? Has that ever happened before? I have this vague recollection of PS1 kinda taking a while to start spinning up but I don't know if my memory matches the facts in that case (If I'm remembering right, it started to pick up steam right around the time the N64 came out)
The game factor will be important, of course, but if this generation was any indicator the first year or two is going to be nothing but cross-gen marginally improved falderal anyway. Are people really gonna want to shell out 500-600 bucks for Assassin's Creed/Far Cry/Madden/Call of Duty/Battlefield and or Front with a slightly shinier coat of paint?
If the next-gen (because that's what it is, PS4/X1 has been current gen for a long time now) consoles are so expensive that adoption is slow... what happens then?
Do they just sit around sucking wind until the price drops? Has that ever happened before? I have this vague recollection of PS1 kinda taking a while to start spinning up but I don't know if my memory matches the facts in that case (If I'm remembering right, it started to pick up steam right around the time the N64 came out)
The game factor will be important, of course, but if this generation was any indicator the first year or two is going to be nothing but cross-gen marginally improved falderal anyway. Are people really gonna want to shell out 500-600 bucks for Assassin's Creed/Far Cry/Madden/Call of Duty/Battlefield and or Front with a slightly shinier coat of paint?
FusedAtoms
Member
What's the possibility of Sony opting to launch with a standard and pro skew? Tap into the enthusiast market right off the bat and be able to have a standard cheaper hardware for casuals and people who don't care about the spec boost to bite on for a cheaper price.
In 2020:
PS4 / XBone discontinued.
PS4 Pro / XBoneX become the budget option for 4K/30fps gaming. $269
PS5 / XBoneX 2 become the (backwards compatible) 4K/60fps option. $449
A Vega-based APU with Zen cores and 16GB GDDR6 should do the trick. That leaves some room for performance improvements in the PS5 Pro / XBoneX 2X, because beyond 7nm and HBM I don't see how they can improve performance much at all, for a reasonable price at least.
PS4 / XBone discontinued.
PS4 Pro / XBoneX become the budget option for 4K/30fps gaming. $269
PS5 / XBoneX 2 become the (backwards compatible) 4K/60fps option. $449
A Vega-based APU with Zen cores and 16GB GDDR6 should do the trick. That leaves some room for performance improvements in the PS5 Pro / XBoneX 2X, because beyond 7nm and HBM I don't see how they can improve performance much at all, for a reasonable price at least.
Uno Venova
Banned
I think having two power levels off the bat is a bad idea. These companies don't even seem to like doing different levels of storage SKUs at launch like they used to in the 7th generation.
nillapuddin
Member
I'll buy a X1X for 500 this fall
I'll buy a X1X2 for 500 in 2020
For the amount of time and enjoyment I get out of these devices and the experiences they deliver, it's more than a fair price.
I can think of 2 scenarios
A.)
Xbox 2020 will be able to play everything that came before it, but Xbox One X and behind wont be able to play Xbox 2020 games
B.)
Xbox 2020 games run on a 640x480 window on the Xbox One family
I'll buy a X1X2 for 500 in 2020
For the amount of time and enjoyment I get out of these devices and the experiences they deliver, it's more than a fair price.
I can think of 2 scenarios
A.)
Xbox 2020 will be able to play everything that came before it, but Xbox One X and behind wont be able to play Xbox 2020 games
B.)
Xbox 2020 games run on a 640x480 window on the Xbox One family
I think MS has the right approach with XOX course I think it's something that serves a new gen much better than a mid gen upgrade. Just aim for the sky and take a bit of a loss to get those software and PS+ sales up early. PS3 only failed because the games didn't look any better and were often worse than 360 released a year earlier, harder to make games for and a lot of lacking features. This will never happen again so I'd definitely support a PS5 or XOX2 at $500/£450 next gen.
when you adjust for inflation snes and mega drive were around the $500 mark, stuff like Neo Geo was for the enthusiast crowd. nothing really has changed much in that regard. PS360 era was a combo breaker because those were very high end for their time, so the waters are kind of murky being only about 4 years removed from that gen
personally i'd love to pay ~$300 for a humble console experience and leave the big bucks to PC, but console is still the market's go to
Some would argue and say thats what Sony did with the Pro. And that MS went overboard with specs of One X.
Looking at the specs and prices of both, I would agree.
Sony did their 4K machine for the exact same price as the PS4 when it launched.
Next-gen consoles will cost $399. I think it will be possible to build a Zen CPU architecture based console with 4K capability in 1-2 years.
A lot of people including myself were saying that a console capable of 4K 60 FPS would not be possible for less than $600 and look at what MS was able to do.
These iterative upgrade consoles are not meant to extend this generation since they are still anchored by developers having to support the original PS4 and Xbox One hardware. They're just a way to bring technical advancements such as 4K resolution to console gamers sooner - nothing more.
A lot of people including myself were saying that a console capable of 4K 60 FPS would not be possible for less than $600 and look at what MS was able to do.
These iterative upgrade consoles are not meant to extend this generation since they are still anchored by developers having to support the original PS4 and Xbox One hardware. They're just a way to bring technical advancements such as 4K resolution to console gamers sooner - nothing more.
Kazuma Kiryu
Member
Sony learned their lesson, I expect the PS5 to be $400, and that's also why they priced the pro at $400 instead of going spec-crazy.
Shin
Banned
Retail: 499
Total BOM Cost: 499
Manufacturing Cost: 9.00
BOM + Manufacturing: 508
CPU/GPU: 150.00*
RAM: 160.00*
Power Supply: 20.00
Optical Drive: 33.00
Hard Drive: 37.00
Mechanical / Electro-Mechanical: 35.00
Other (Electronic Content): 40.00
Console Sub Total: 475
Controller: 18.00
Box Contents: 6.00
If they reduce RAM to 20Gb and can get the CPU/GPU for $100 then they save +-$80 and sell the console for $449
Total BOM Cost: 499
Manufacturing Cost: 9.00
BOM + Manufacturing: 508
CPU/GPU: 150.00*
RAM: 160.00*
Power Supply: 20.00
Optical Drive: 33.00
Hard Drive: 37.00
Mechanical / Electro-Mechanical: 35.00
Other (Electronic Content): 40.00
Console Sub Total: 475
Controller: 18.00
Box Contents: 6.00
If they reduce RAM to 20Gb and can get the CPU/GPU for $100 then they save +-$80 and sell the console for $449
hanspampel
Banned
no that was the period of a very very well running 28nm advanced process
20nm was never used for anything beside mobile phones
……forgetit
Member
The Xbox One X is the same price as the Xbox One when it launched though.
No Kinext though I guess.
Doctoglethorpe
Member
All that's really needed over the xb1x specs is a big CPU upgrade. You could do that in 2-3 years and keep it under 400 no problem.
Of course the fact hat we have these mid-gen bumps is going to make such a console a lot harder to sell, as the layman will not understand how important the CPU is.
Of course the fact hat we have these mid-gen bumps is going to make such a console a lot harder to sell, as the layman will not understand how important the CPU is.
Norwegian_Imposter
Member
How about they wait to see how the x sells. I guarantee the price of it will fuck it over
SmokedMeat
Gamer™
We have history on our side, while you have speculation. Nintendo is literally schooling Microsoft in how to sell a console to the masses, and it's not about flops and 4K.
I'm also bewildered at the number of console users so thirsty for more power, yet are afraid to plunk money down on a PC. Meanwhile you're hoping your $500 X console is replaced with another $500 model by 2020. Absurd.
gundamkyoukai
Member
It kind hard to tell how much they would be paying for ram because how much they going to buy .
The same goes for other parts which is another reason why people should not judge price on a mid gen upgrade .
velociraptor
Junior Member
I think 'next gen' should be delayed to '19/20 to keep prices lower.
Anything over $399 is going to suck.
Anything over $399 is going to suck.
Nintendo is it's own thing. They are Disney for games. You can't compare Sony and Xbox to it.
They'll always have what the other two don't. Nintendo's IPs. Different markets and the same reason Nintendo schooled Sony on handhelds.
Xdrive05
Member
Then will next gen consoles target similar specs as XBX, just at $399 and with 1080p the target resolution? That would give, let's call it four times the scene complexity and, thus, be "next gen".
I dunno. Next gen doesn't seem to make sense with 4k unless we can make the 4k rendering be several times more impressive than XBX.
Or are we just going forward with 4k being a niche Cadillac-option market and not in the mainstream tech life cycle? In which case the XBX should just be re-targeted to blow minds at 1080p and it will already be in homes by the time next gen is coming around.
I dunno. Next gen doesn't seem to make sense with 4k unless we can make the 4k rendering be several times more impressive than XBX.
Or are we just going forward with 4k being a niche Cadillac-option market and not in the mainstream tech life cycle? In which case the XBX should just be re-targeted to blow minds at 1080p and it will already be in homes by the time next gen is coming around.