Support NeoGAF

[DeepEnigma]

As you said the first PS5 titles will likely be artifictially limited to just run on Next Gen.

If they dont add in any ray tracing capability now Sony is unlikely to add it mid gen refresh ... so no ray tracing for 6 years.

That is not certain. DICE has shown their engine can run with or without those features. Let us say for the sake of argument that the PS5 does not have dedicated hardware features for RT out of the box, that is not to say they will not have it as an extra incentive of the hypothetical "Pro" model to take advantage of those assets.

 

[onQ123]

Doubters must not realize that GPU's/APU's/SoC's are becoming MIMD & more suited for Ray-tracing now

The best thing about having Ray-tracing hardware in a closed console is that smaller studios can make really good looking games without breaking the bank.

 

[SonGoku]

That is not certain. DICE has shown their engine can run with or without those features. Let us say for the sake of argument that the PS5 does not have dedicated hardware features for RT out of the box, that is not to say they will not have it as an extra incentive of the hypothetical "Pro" model to take advantage of those assets.

Right they could work with all the main engine creators so that rtx features can be toggled on the pro revisions on a engine level without much work needed on the developers end

 

[demigod]

Ill buy whatever i want when i feel its right. I can see why people might not bother upgrading from a ps4 pro to an xbox one x because the upgrade is limited. Even if the upgrade from the xbox one x to the new gen consoles isnt much i still will prob upgrade. Lets be serious though for the industry and for game development it would be far better to have a generational leap .. not just a ps pro 4.5 or and xbox one x 1.5.

Lol you’re too predictable. You question why people want next gen to come out due to miniscule upgrade but the fact is you’ll be getting the next xbox day 1 even if its a small upgrade.

Stop talking out of your ass like you know the specs under the hood for next gen. Next gen will be better just due to the fact that these consoles won’t be held back by the jaguar cpu.

 

[SonGoku]

Lol you’re too predictable. You question why people want next gen to come out due to miniscule upgrade but the fact is you’ll be getting the next xbox day 1 even if its a small upgrade.

Stop talking out of your ass like you know the specs under the hood for next gen. Next gen will be better just due to the fact that these consoles won’t be held back by the jaguar cpu.

tbh i expect minimum 13tf and 24gb ram for a proper generational jump

 

[thelastword]

Nvidia's image reconstruction is significantly more advanced than checkerboarding.

Image enhancement has existed for than a minute, so has image reconstruction. All we are seeing here is an application on photos, which still lose detail after cleanup and becomes a tad blurry in some scenarios. Let's see an in-game comparison first vs traditional AA or even higher rez CB with TAA. Checkerboarding has already proven it's worth, that technology can only get better and it's all done on your hardware with no external hookups or links necessary.

Of course, CB will most likely improve a great deal with Vega 7nm and Navi and if it could be a standard feature on all upcoming AMD cards, that would be swell. So I'll take 8K CB games downsampled on PC and still play at a high clip, all native to my hardware...

Yet, I think with NV going the full RT route, where it still can't prove how impressive the tech is or show how playable it will be, at the rez which we are driving into (4k and up), then they focused on the wrong things. Clearly it doesn't "just work" because we would have a full RT game to demonstrate instead of cutoff sample size demos and a dlss version of infiltrator. If you think that infiltrator looked a tonne better than the demo originally shown, then sigh.......Yet, please be aware that DLSS is mostly being pitched as an AA/IQ enhancer or alternative, so since there is no DLSS on GTX1080, they run Infil with max AA on that card, so hence your framerate uplift on the GTX 2080, coupled with whatever architectural uplifts exists therein.

Moreover though, we have to see a proper analysis before making such claims as you have. If anything, I think AMD now has a chance to topple NV. If they can offer a 20.9TF 7nm Vega for the holidays to compete for the 4k high fps crowd, that's a huge win for them. They can start pushing their own GPU-OPEN Radeon Rays, and expand it even more with Navi at a silicon level like NV. Yet, I don't think AMD should necessarily follow NV's vision with RT, though still offer their solution nonetheless. On the flip, they can go for physics hardware on Navi or even Ai, whilst still pushing 4k 60fps on their hardware for the coming generations.....

So yes, if AMD goes Physics/Ai and maintains the upward transition into 4k rez and 60fps and NV goes Raytracing, which compromises rez and fps, which would you choose? Not forgetting AMD can push and improve on CB vs DLSS on the framerate front, whilst maintaining great IQ just the same. If you're playing BF, are you more interested in seeing reflections off a "soon to be dead soldier's eye"...or are you more inclined towards a high resolution at high framerates with much better physics or Ai......This GPU battle have finally got more interesting.....that's for sure.....

 

[onQ123]

Image enhancement has existed for than a minute, so has image reconstruction. All we are seeing here is an application on photos, which still lose detail after cleanup and becomes a tad blurry in some scenarios. Let's see an in-game comparison first vs traditional AA or even higher rez CB with TAA. Checkerboarding has already proven it's worth, that technology can only get better and it's all done on your hardware with no external hookups or links necessary.

Of course, CB will most likely improve a great deal with Vega 7nm and Navi and if it could be a standard feature on all upcoming AMD cards, that would be swell. So I'll take 8K CB games downsampled on PC and still play at a high clip, all native to my hardware...

Yet, I think with NV going the full RT route, where it still can't prove how impressive the tech is or show how playable it will be, at the rez which we are driving into (4k and up), then they focused on the wrong things. Clearly it doesn't "just work" because we would have a full RT game to demonstrate instead of cutoff sample size demos and a dlss version of infiltrator. If you think that infiltrator looked a tonne better than the demo originally shown, then sigh.......Yet, please be aware that DLSS is mostly being pitched as an AA/IQ enhancer or alternative, so since there is no DLSS on GTX1080, they run Infil with max AA on that card, so hence your framerate uplift on the GTX 2080, coupled with whatever architectural uplifts exists therein.

Moreover though, we have to see a proper analysis before making such claims as you have. If anything, I think AMD now has a chance to topple NV. If they can offer a 20.9TF 7nm Vega for the holidays to compete for the 4k high fps crowd, that's a huge win for them. They can start pushing their own GPU-OPEN Radeon Rays, and expand it even more with Navi at a silicon level like NV. Yet, I don't think AMD should necessarily follow NV's vision with RT, though still offer their solution nonetheless. On the flip, they can go for physics hardware on Navi or even Ai, whilst still pushing 4k 60fps on their hardware for the coming generations.....

So yes, if AMD goes Physics/Ai and maintains the upward transition into 4k rez and 60fps and NV goes Raytracing, which compromises rez and fps, which would you choose? Not forgetting AMD can push and improve on CB vs DLSS on the framerate front, whilst maintaining great IQ just the same. If you're playing BF, are you more interested in seeing reflections off a "soon to be dead soldier's eye"...or are you more inclined towards a high resolution at high framerates with much better physics or Ai......This GPU battle have finally got more interesting.....that's for sure.....

In a closed box I would take the ray-tracing hardware

 

[llien]

AMD went "all out" 7nm, PS5 in 2019 is very likely:
AMD CTO: 'We Went All In' On 7nm CPUs

 

[Lort]

Lol you’re too predictable. You question why people want next gen to come out due to miniscule upgrade but the fact is you’ll be getting the next xbox day 1 even if its a small upgrade.

Stop talking out of your ass like you know the specs under the hood for next gen. Next gen will be better just due to the fact that these consoles won’t be held back by the jaguar cpu.

I dont see why you have an issue with me buying a next gen console when it comes out. Im sure most people here will upgrade their consoles when it comes out.. a lot of people here want is a significant upgrade. Else its not really next gen is it?

If the consoles are so held back by Jaguar why are there so few PC games that dont have console ports. Its pretty simple twice the cpu means twice the AI or twice the frame rate .. everyone wants twice the frame rate for 60 fps. Ghost recon wildlands and far cry 5 already require top end cpus to ensure they arent cpu limited when doing 60 fps.

There isnt going to be any revolution in gaming just because the cpu is faster. A little better AI, few more graphic particles and 60 fps and that is it.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Graphics are good already, no need to add ray-tracing, it will only complicate development, making games longer to develop and more costly. We just need stable performance and good games. Enough with the annual mediocre installments we had this gen and games that are just graphics and average gameplay.
I would prefer less and better games than the situation we have now.

 

[Grinchy]

I'd be happy if next-gen barely increased the visuals we have now but focused completely on fluid dynamics and full destructibility. More interaction with the world is way more appealing to me at this point than the same games we've been playing for 10 years with slightly cooler lighting and textures.

 

[Eteric Rice]

I'd be happy if next-gen barely increased the visuals we have now but focused completely on fluid dynamics and full destructibility. More interaction with the world is way more appealing to me at this point than the same games we've been playing for 10 years with slightly cooler lighting and textures.

They won't. They believe they need high end graphics to sell. In some cases that may be true, but I think games like Fortnite, LoL, WoW, etc prove that it's not always the case.

 

[sandkiller]

AMD went "all out" 7nm, PS5 in 2019 is very likely:
AMD CTO: 'We Went All In' On 7nm CPUs

The practical effect is that 7nm processors will provide "double the performance per watt of energy expended in a previous node."

 

[onQ123]

I'd be happy if next-gen barely increased the visuals we have now but focused completely on fluid dynamics and full destructibility. More interaction with the world is way more appealing to me at this point than the same games we've been playing for 10 years with slightly cooler lighting and textures.

Raytracing hardware would increase the chances of devs using volume rendering which would give you what you want.

 

[GermanZepp]

I'd be happy if next-gen barely increased the visuals we have now but focused completely on fluid dynamics and full destructibility. More interaction with the world is way more appealing to me at this point than the same games we've been playing for 10 years with slightly cooler lighting and textures.

I agree ! I believe that, if we look closely to the Sony and in overall the e3 2018 games, we can "extrapolate", an might peek the future. For instance, Sucker punch Ghost, shows a LOT of movement in everything, trees, grass, crops, thousands of leaves, clothes and like, nails the atmosfere with the lighting and clouds. I expect that to be more common next gen. In TLOU part 2 we can see an amazing level of craftmenship in animation. Death Stranding, photorealism in characters and environment. I want, like you a more appealing but ultimately interactive playground, i'm tired and bored of climbing in designed paths, i want, like you, destruction and fluid dynamics, deformation of materials, stuff that provide new or more fun gameplay oportunitys.

 

[Darius87]

Graphics are good already, no need to add ray-tracing, it will only complicate development, making games longer to develop and more costly. We just need stable performance and good games. Enough with the annual mediocre installments we had this gen and games that are just graphics and average gameplay.
I would prefer less and better games than the situation we have now.

Actually quite opposite with ray-tracing devs don't need to focus anymore on lightning shadows, reflections, other things... assuming that they have good inplementation of ray-tracing, the problem for now that is not worth it, just like any other tech it needs to mature for wide adoption for games.

 

[mckmas8808]

tbh i expect minimum 13tf and 24gb ram for a proper generational jump

I close to your numbers. I want a next-gen console to have at least 12.1 TF and 24 GBs of RAM. I just can't see why a next gen system would have say 16 GBs of RAM.

Raytracing hardware would increase the chances of devs using volume rendering which would give you what you want.

What is volume rendering and why is it important going forward?

 

[GermanZepp]

What is volume rendering and why is it important going forward?

I don't have any idea, but i imagine like is a "simpler" in time but more expensive in resources solution like, you put the sun in the sky and choose the time of the day, and the raytraicing do the rest. So you can aliviate the stuff related to lighting and focus on the other. XD
EDIT: I´m very wrong

 

[onQ123]

I close to your numbers. I want a next-gen console to have at least 12.1 TF and 24 GBs of RAM. I just can't see why a next gen system would have say 16 GBs of RAM.



What is volume rendering and why is it important going forward?

I don't have any idea, but i imagine like is a "simpler" in time but more expensive in resources solution like, you put the sun in the sky and choose the time of the day, and the raytraicing do the rest. So you can aliviate the stuff related to lighting and focus on the other. XD
EDIT: I´m very wrong

Y'all never heard of Volume rendering? Voxels , Point clouds & so on. Say if a Zombie game is made using a form of volume rendering the bodies could be made with all the insides of the human body so if you're bitten or if you shoot the zombie with a shotgun the body would be able to show the results. sure you can fake it without volume rendering but with volume rendering it can be dynamic.

 

[mckmas8808]

Y'all never heard of Volume rendering? Voxels , Point clouds & so on. Say if a Zombie game is made using a form of volume rendering the bodies could be made with all the insides of the human body so if you're bitten or if you shoot the zombie with a shotgun the body would be able to show the results. sure you can fake it without volume rendering but with volume rendering it can be dynamic.

Oh okay yeah I heard of voxels (Resogun says hi). I would love some devs to have access to more volume rendering then.

 

[GermanZepp]

Y'all never heard of Volume rendering? Voxels , Point clouds & so on. Say if a Zombie game is made using a form of volume rendering the bodies could be made with all the insides of the human body so if you're bitten or if you shoot the zombie with a shotgun the body would be able to show the results. sure you can fake it without volume rendering but with volume rendering it can be dynamic.

Voxels like in Resogun? I kinda understand. EDIT: Oops, almost the same post. Now i will add some more.

 

[Ar¢tos]

Actually quite opposite with ray-tracing devs don't need to focus anymore on lightning shadows, reflections, other things... assuming that they have good inplementation of ray-tracing, the problem for now that is not worth it, just like any other tech it needs to mature for wide adoption for games.

Of course they would, even more than with GI!
They can't just turn raytracing "on" and be Done. If there is more than one reflective surface/object on screen they will reflect/refract each other in an almost infinite loop if devs don't fine tune the Ray tracing implementation constantly in a game, bad implementations of Ray tracing can hog all the resources and severely impact performance. You can't just allow light to act in a game like it would in real life unattended.

 

[SonGoku]

Graphics are good already, no need to add ray-tracing, it will only complicate development, making games longer to develop and more costly.

actually besides the added realism one of the main advantages of rt is that it takes less work to implement than faking it, so its actually the opposite of the situation you describe.

Having said that, im part of the camp that thinks rt is not console ready yet, maybe for the pro revision

I close to your numbers. I want a next-gen console to have at least 12.1 TF and 24 GBs of RAM. I just can't see why a next gen system would have say 16 GBs of RAM.

Yep, 16gb will limit the scope of next gen games
People who think 16gb is enough are thinking on the current gen scope, a new gen raises the bar way higher

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

Image enhancement has existed for than a minute, so has image reconstruction. All we are seeing here is an application on photos, which still lose detail after cleanup and becomes a tad blurry in some scenarios. Let's see an in-game comparison first vs traditional AA or even higher rez CB with TAA. Checkerboarding has already proven it's worth, that technology can only get better and it's all done on your hardware with no external hookups or links necessary.

AI based image reconstruction is beyond anything that came before, and can be improved even more, there is constant research in the area. It can even imagine and insert high resolution fine detail where it didn't exist before, if it is appropriate. It is conceivable it could eventually take even a 1080p image and upscale to 4k while creating tons of fine detail out of thin air.

There have been DL solutions trained to take low rez photo and create a high rez one.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

actually besides the added realism one of the main advantages of rt is that it takes less work to implement than faking it, so its actually the opposite of the situation you describe.

Having said that, im part of the camp that thinks rt is not console ready yet, maybe for the pro revision

Yep, 16gb will limit the scope of next gen games
People who think 16gb is enough are thinking on the current gen scope, a new gen raises the bar way higher

It would be interesting to see what advantages ray tracing has besides reflection resolution compared to voxel based global illumination. There are voxel based global illumination solutions with high resolution reflections, and voxel based lighting may benefit from the algorithms used by companies like atomontage and euclideon.

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

Yep, 16gb will limit the scope of next gen games
People who think 16gb is enough are thinking on the current gen scope, a new gen raises the bar way higher

Wait what games need more than 16gb of ram to run properly?

 

[SonGoku]

Wait what games need more than 16gb of ram to run properly?

Current gen games don't, just like last gen 2gb vram was all you needed

 

[demigod]

Yep, 16gb will limit the scope of next gen games
People who think 16gb is enough are thinking on the current gen scope, a new gen raises the bar way higher

Why do you need more than 16gb? You realize only some nvidia cards are 11gb right. Even the 2080 is 8gb. 8gb for the gpu, 5gb for the os and 3gb for streaming would be enough. Anything more than 16gb for next gen is overkill.

 

[Lort]

actually besides the added realism one of the main advantages of rt is that it takes less work to implement than faking it, so its actually the opposite of the situation you describe.

Having said that, im part of the camp that thinks rt is not console ready yet, maybe for the pro revision

Yep, 16gb will limit the scope of next gen games
People who think 16gb is enough are thinking on the current gen scope, a new gen raises the bar way higher

Oh for sure 16 gig will limit the scope .. the xbox one x has 12 gigs of ram right now and its obvious the difference its made for high resolution textures.. some games like ghost recon wildlands would look even better with more ram for textures right now. Once you add in bigger worlds and some more AI you want 32 gigs to be baseline. 4 gigs was comon for pcs when ps4 came out and imagine if it was still limited to that! Pcs have 16 gigs right now and 8gigs for textures.. so 24 gigs is common right now.

 

[SonGoku]

Oh for sure 16 gig will limit the scope .. the xbox one x has 12 gigs of ram right now and its obvious the difference its made for high resolution textures.. some games like ghost recon wildlands would look even better with more ram for textures right now. Once you add in bigger worlds and some more AI you want 32 gigs to be baseline. 4 gigs was comon for pcs when ps4 came out and imagine if it was still limited to that! Pcs have 16 gigs right now and 8gigs for textures.. so 24 gigs is common right now.

24gb is my "conservative estimation" in case 32gb its not feasible in 2020/2021. Yep ideally we'll get 32gb, i just use 24gb in terms of minimum expectation for a proper next gen jump.


and better textures is just the tip of iceberg, everything would improve with games designed with ample amount of ram in mind

 

[SonGoku]

Why do you need more than 16gb? You realize only some nvidia cards are 11gb right. Even the 2080 is 8gb. 8gb for the gpu, 5gb for the os and 3gb for streaming would be enough. Anything more than 16gb for next gen is overkill.

Why did we needed more than 2, 3 and 4GB in 2013? Same discussion back then, what could possibly use 8gb? Even the GTX 680 is 2gb. 2gb for the gpu, a high end gpu mind you.

We dont for games designed for current gen, thats the point, next gen jump brings a paradigm shift in development and scope
By the time next gen consoles reach midlife cycle, 16b will be even more limiting than 512mb was for PS360 back then

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Why do you need more than 16gb? You realize only some nvidia cards are 11gb right. Even the 2080 is 8gb. 8gb for the gpu, 5gb for the os and 3gb for streaming would be enough. Anything more than 16gb for next gen is overkill.

System memory or GPU size? They are two different things. Most PC's now recommend 16GB of system memory.

 

[LordOfChaos]

Wait what games need more than 16gb of ram to run properly?

Remember that this is shared between GPU and CPU assets on consoles. When we say 16GB is enough on PCs, that's also with a separate 2, 4, 6, maybe 8GB graphics memory on the video card.

 

[Omega Supreme Holopsicon]

We should pay an eye to vega 20 7nm this december, its price, profitability, availability or scarcity and memory amount. Assuming it uses an improved HBM, it will tell if HBM has matured enough and hint at whether it might be usable for consoles. HBM3 will potentially be cheaper than what vega 20 will use, so it may be possible if manufacturing issues have been resolved.

 

[Kagero]

I'd be happy if next-gen barely increased the visuals we have now but focused completely on fluid dynamics and full destructibility. More interaction with the world is way more appealing to me at this point than the same games we've been playing for 10 years with slightly cooler lighting and textures.

I agree 100%. We still have a long way to go when it comes to micro details like per object physics and cloth/ skin deformation. Instead of giving us better resolution through graphics. Give us more convincing worlds to play in. With this said, I do see a benefit to ray tracing as it does make the world more immersive. i just don't feel the sacrifice in CPU is worth it at this point.

 

[Panajev2001a]

Why did we needed more than 2, 3 and 4GB in 2013? Same discussion back then, what could possibly use 8gb? Even the GTX 680 is 2gb. 2gb for the gpu, a high end gpu mind you.

We dont for games designed for current gen, thats the point, next gen jump brings a paradigm shift in development and scope
By the time next gen consoles reach midlife cycle, 16b will be even more limiting than 512mb was for PS360 back then

Even a lot of offices PC’s, and I am talking about for IT/development jobs, are still on 16 GB of RAM and cost a lot more than a console... it would be fun to have a much cheaper console box with a lot more memory than my laptop .

Seriously though, we will need to see what is possible and how much limiting it would be if the jump to 24-32 GB only happened in the mid generation upgrade or if we would get a PS6 in 4 years or so.

 

[Panajev2001a]

System memory or GPU size? They are two different things. Most PC's now recommend 16GB of system memory.

Developers do know most people do not run a custom Windows instance tuned left, right, and centre to use the least amount of RAM possible (and not having lots of programs running in the background).

 

[jonnyp]

Graphics are good already, no need to add ray-tracing, it will only complicate development, making games longer to develop and more costly. We just need stable performance and good games. Enough with the annual mediocre installments we had this gen and games that are just graphics and average gameplay.
I would prefer less and better games than the situation we have now.

You're mistaken. It will lead to developers being able to focus more on gameplay and level design without having to worry about fiddling with lighting, shadows etc for every scene. But I think games running 60K at 4K with raytracing is a few GPU generations away at this point so I hope they don't waste GPU die space on PS5 or next Xbox on RT cores.

 

[SonGoku]

Even a lot of offices PC’s, and I am talking about for IT/development jobs, are still on 16 GB of RAM and cost a lot more than a console... it would be fun to have a much cheaper console box with a lot more memory than my laptop .

Seriously though, we will need to see what is possible and how much limiting it would be if the jump to 24-32 GB only happened in the mid generation upgrade or if we would get a PS6 in 4 years or so.

Min spec 24gb is absolutely needed for next gen base consoles, for the scope of the games. Pro revisions upgrade won't cut it since games will be developed with base consoles in mind.

Going with 16gb for next gen, is the equivalent of going with 2gb for ps4. I don't think comparing to off the shelf pc parts is indicative of what they will use, 8gb ddr5 was just as unthinkable back then

 

[Louis Cyphre]

Min spec 24gb is absolutely needed for next gen base consoles, for the scope of the games. Pro revisions upgrade won't cut it since games will be developed with base consoles in mind.

Going with 16gb for next gen, is the equivalent of going with 2gb for ps4

That's overkill. Consoles are not PC's and running applications like Adobe. I would suspect 12GB is what we will end up with. We are not going to see some revolutionary PS5 or next Xbox. It will be a a next step up from the Pro and X. Nobody is going to want to have a system over $500 and Sony will try and keep prices at $399. How much is 24GB of memory now going to cost you?

 

[SonGoku]

That's overkill. Consoles are not PC's and running applications like Adobe. I would suspect 12GB is what we will end up with. We are not going to see some revolutionary PS5 or next Xbox. It will be a a next step up from the Pro and X. Nobody is going to want to have a system over $500 and Sony will try and keep prices at $399.

There's nothing revolutionary about 24GB, its actually the minimum spec for a next gen jump
You are thinking in current gen games scope, that's why you think its overkill.
To even entertain the idea of 12gb is laughable, and makes me think you're just looking for a reaction with such claims. Chances of it being 12gb are just as low as it being 64gb

How much is 24GB of memory now going to cost you?

Same dilemma as last gen people were so sure 8gb was impossible and OVERKILL, what could developers possibly do with that much memory right? You see they were thinking of last gen game development when making their guesstimates.
2gb was all we were gonna get, 4gb absolutely best case scenario if we where lucky.

 

[DeepEnigma]

It will be at least 16GB for next gen. Bare minimum.

 

[LordOfChaos]

That's overkill. Consoles are not PC's and running applications like Adobe. I would suspect 12GB is what we will end up with. We are not going to see some revolutionary PS5 or next Xbox. It will be a a next step up from the Pro and X. Nobody is going to want to have a system over $500 and Sony will try and keep prices at $399. How much is 24GB of memory now going to cost you?

That wouldn't even be a capacity bump over the X. Staying at 12 is way too pessimistic imo.


"Looking back over our conversation, Cerny laid out what he considered necessary for a new console generation. He discussed a move to a new CPU architecture (retaining x86 CPU architecture as a possibility, albeit one that still poses compatibility issues with existing PS4 games), increased graphics capability, significantly more memory, the IO required to feed it, along with the sheer mass storage required to house these advanced new titles."

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-could-sony-release-ps5-in-2018-in-theory

Saying that and then only meeting the X years later doesn't sound right at all. Then there's also per chip density increases.

 

[Caayn]

For memory, keep in mind that memory hasn't actually become cheaper since this generation has started. Which hasn't happened before. Unless prices drop before the designs are set in stone this will cause issues when trying to fit an >2x increase(for example) of memory into the budget.

 

[Clear]

There's nothing revolutionary about 24GB, its actually the minimum spec for a next gen jump
You are thinking in current gen games scope, that's why you think its overkill.
To even entertain the idea of 12gb is laughable, and makes me think you're just looking for a reaction with such claims. Chances of it being 12gb are just as low as it being 64gb

Same dilemma as last gen people were so sure 8gb was impossible and OVERKILL, what could developers possibly do with that much memory right? You see they were thinking of last gen game development when making their guesstimates.
2gb was all we were gonna get, 4gb absolutely best case scenario if we where lucky.

Realistically though, noone expected such a huge amount of space reserved for the system. PS4 to this day allows 5.5Gb, so assuming the reservation size remains relatively static, 12Gb would still represent a very substantial increase. 16Gb seems more likely though not neccesarily of a uniform spec. 12fast +4 slower ram might be an option.

 

[Louis Cyphre]

There's nothing revolutionary about 24GB, its actually the minimum spec for a next gen jump
You are thinking in current gen games scope, that's why you think its overkill.
To even entertain the idea of 12gb is laughable, and makes me think you're just looking for a reaction with such claims. Chances of it being 12gb are just as low as it being 64gb

Same dilemma as last gen people were so sure 8gb was impossible and OVERKILL, what could developers possibly do with that much memory right? You see they were thinking of last gen game development when making their guesstimates.
2gb was all we were gonna get, 4gb absolutely best case scenario if we where lucky.

Since last gen ram prices have gone up, so I will ask again how much is 24GB? Sony is done absorbing major losses on hardware and have found the sweet spot to be $399. Are you suggesting 24GB of DDR3 ram? What's next, at least a 2TB SSD drive?

That wouldn't even be a capacity bump over the X. Staying at 12 is way too pessimistic imo.
"Looking back over our conversation, Cerny laid out what he considered necessary for a new console generation. He discussed a move to a new CPU architecture (retaining x86 CPU architecture as a possibility, albeit one that still poses compatibility issues with existing PS4 games), increased graphics capability, significantly more memory, the IO required to feed it, along with the sheer mass storage required to house these advanced new titles."

https://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-could-sony-release-ps5-in-2018-in-theory

Saying that and then only meeting the X years later doesn't sound right at all. Then there's also per chip density increases.

The PS5 will have a much better CPU, that's a given. I'm just looking at this from a realistic point of view of what they can do while remaining affordable. I'm expecting a GTX 1080 level of performance and a Ryzen 5 comparable CPU. Consoles can get more out of it as they are far more efficient.

 

[onQ123]

http://www.polyphony.co.jp/publications/

 

[DeepEnigma]

http://www.polyphony.co.jp/publications/

This is pretty much a confirmation at this point I would think, but we shall see. I do know they did the same thing for tessellation and the PS3 supported this later on with a slight hit to framerate, and the PS4 built on it with even more advanced techniques in the hardware.

So if PD has this panel, it can almost be confirmed as a lock, for now.

 

[onQ123]

This is pretty much a confirmation at this point I would think, but we shall see. I do know they did the same thing for tessellation and the PS3 supported this later on with a slight hit to framerate, and the PS4 built on it with even more advanced techniques in the hardware.

So if PD has this panel, it can almost be confirmed as a lock, for now.

KillZone also used Ray-tracing on PS4 so I expect PS5 to have some hardware features to accelerate ray-tracing even more

 

[SLoWMoTIoN]

http://www.polyphony.co.jp/publications/

2019 seems even more likely now...