Rumour: PS5 Devkits have released (UPDATE 4th April: Rumoured Specs)

For those wanting a SSD I just hope you’re cool with 500gb or 1TB models again next gen. No way they are putting 2TB SSDs in the PS5 unless it’s going to cost 600 bucks or more.
 
I can see where Sony is heading.
PS5 in 2019, a bit early but it is 6 years after PS4. $399 with backward compatibility, a pure gaming console. Strike while PS4 is beloved still.
Say XB2 launch in 2020, Sony will lose the specs war but gain the user base.
Then in 2022, we will probably have PS5 Pro and that will regain the graphics lead for Sony for that generation.

Unless MS wants to abandon the XB1X early, then they will keep playing catch up to Sony for next gen.
Exactly and this cycle will continue until hardware iterations get to the point of diminishing returns and hardware power doesn’t matter anymore which will happen sooner than most think.

For those wanting a SSD I just hope you’re cool with 500gb or 1TB models again next gen. No way they are putting 2TB SSDs in the PS5 unless it’s going to cost 600 bucks or more.
I think most people are asking for an SSHD which seems incredibly reasonable.
 
I think the next gen will start at the end 2020 at the earliest if it's 2021 that is fine with me. I'm happy with what Ps4 Pro and X1X are offering at the moment. I would like the next gen to be a substantial leap on all fronts. I have no problems waithing
 
But PS4 and XONE were $100 more in price then Wii U. If PS5 is $600, sure, we can see a good leap. But that aint gonna happen.
In this situation, people think that PS5 will cost $100 LESS then X1X. How will they provide a good leap without taking a good loss?

They also had 500GB hard drives & Blu-ray drives that the Wii U didn't , Wii U with 32GB was $349 vs PS4 with 500GB for $399. PS5 might be able to cut GDDR5 & use cheaper memory & so on that could let them hit $399 with a lot more powerful console than Xbox One X.
 
The Wii U’s cpu was more advanced with far less MHz. Had that been the cpu in the 360 from day one it probably would have seen some late PS3-like quality graphics earlier on and we’d may not even see Sony compete. Most of what we see with the Wii U third parties are rushed ports but BotW does actually play decent. Look what Nintendo did for BotW.

More advanced is a little dubious. It had the benefit of being several fabrication nodes down from when the 360 was designed, but it was very much PowerPC 750 (CL?) cores with added tags for more cache, multicore support, and the few extensions added when they first used that core in the Gamecube. Three of those at some of the highest clocks the 750 has run at, and with a short pipeline it was a pretty efficient processor, but I wouldn't use the term advanced, even if its old short pipeline and modern fabrication plant allowing for the 1.2GHz clock speed made it better in most ways than the Xenon at 3.2.

I'm also not that sure the PS3 did anything particularly undoable...Certainly late stage games used the Cell heavily, but it was often making up for how lackluster the RSX was compared to the Xenos with its unified shaders, unified memory pool, and eDRAM. It was more a function of how much budget they gave first parties to prove what the PS3 could do and really polish everything, had they made the same effort and been 360 exclusive devs, who knows.


Ahh the 7th gen battlegrounds, maybe it's because I'm an o l d b o y now but things never felt as exciting as poring over the specs in 2005-2006 again.
 
On the other side of the coin not whatever the industry pitches as good for everyone is good for anybody but itself... remember distal distribution being heralded as just the same as physical distribution, but just much cheaper because reasons? Yeah... hence why I get right of resale and pay less for games in general when I buy them physically on Amazon (brand new) instead of digitally. It turns out the industry was lying ;)... surprise...
I never believed that bs. Physical has always been cheaper, not counting steam sales back then(which stopped happening). Why would i pay full price when i can get games for 20% off from Best Buy? Physical games drop fast as well whereas digital are always MSRP. Hell even in Europe physical is less than digital. Not sure why people are comparing CDs. CDs died because of ipod and itunes where you can buy singles for 99cents instead of $20+ for the album. Blockbuster died to Netflix due to Netflix rental being cheaper, not because of their streaming which didn't happened until later.
 
  • Navi based GPUs poised to strike Q4/2018 (yeeehaaaa if true, very unexpected)


Been thinking about that one...7nm Vega is yet to come before 7nm Navi. Even if it comes out in this quarter, that's a strangely small market gap between them. Makes me wonder if it'll be more like 7nm Vega with some Navi features borrowed from the future pipeline, like the PS4 and PS4 Pro GPUs both did (i.e 8 ACEs a while before GCN 3 in the late 2013 PS4, Vega texture compression in an otherwise PS4-ey GPU in the Pro).





Some 7nm stuff from AT. 7nm FF should start production this quarter, while 7nm EUV is Q2 2017 with further enhancements and long awaited EUV.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11337/samsung-and-tsmc-roadmaps-12-nm-8-nm-and-6-nm-added/2

Really really hope it at least waits for gen 1 7nm, 70% die area savings, and either 30% more power or 60% lower energy use (and heat output), all with a compounding effect on performance potential.
 
Last edited:
More advanced is a little dubious. It had the benefit of being several fabrication nodes down from when the 360 was designed, but it was very much PowerPC 750 (CL?) cores with added tags for more cache, multicore support, and the few extensions added when they first used that core in the Gamecube. Three of those at some of the highest clocks the 750 has run at, and with a short pipeline it was a pretty efficient processor, but I wouldn't use the term advanced, even if its old short pipeline and modern fabrication plant allowing for the 1.2GHz clock speed made it better in most ways than the Xenon at 3.2.

I'm also not that sure the PS3 did anything particularly undoable...Certainly late stage games used the Cell heavily, but it was often making up for how lackluster the RSX was compared to the Xenos with its unified shaders, unified memory pool, and eDRAM. It was more a function of how much budget they gave first parties to prove what the PS3 could do and really polish everything, had they made the same effort and been 360 exclusive devs, who knows.

Ahh the 7th gen battlegrounds, maybe it's because I'm an o l d b o y now but things never felt as exciting as poring over the specs in 2005-2006 again.
Right there with you, in my office we poured over the specs and I was all in favor of the unified shader model while the counter argument was the multi core cell. My argument that the OoOE extensions on the xenon cores and unified shaders would allow more flexibility in 360 games. You actually had two very different and interesting architecture philosophies which straddled the line between PC and game console. In a way these two consoles were he proving ground for much of modern computer philosophies today.

I think the upcoming generation will be similarly interesting but not on the hardware front. As they move to have more consistency with PCs it will be interesting to watch the platforms transition to services and the different ways they go about the process.
 
I think the next gen will start at the end 2020 at the earliest if it's 2021 that is fine with me. I'm happy with what Ps4 Pro and X1X are offering at the moment. I would like the next gen to be a substantial leap on all fronts. I have no problems waithing

As long as any new system is forward and backward compatible (and I believe they will be) give me a new console every 2-3 years. I have a 4K tv that would love gaming in 4K 60 FPS. As long as the new games work on the old systems why is a new system a bad thing this or next year?
 
I can see Sony releases a 500 $ ps5 fully backward compatible with ps4 and discount the pro to 300 $ so the pro will be their entry level system going forward
Is that a smart move? Wont that reduce casual takeup as its more expensive than current ps4? If they sell a lot then they will cut into ps5 sales .. seems a very confusing market now.
 
Not where I am. And not for the last 18 years or so.

Is all fibre. Even the actual phones here are voip rather than using a phone line.
In my country elderly people get nearly free landlines so they can call for help even when there is a powercut (because of fires, storms, etc).
VoIP phones need electricity to work (and its quite a challenge to get elderly people to master mobile phones).
Not everybody lives in cities, there are people living in more remote areas everywhere in the world, and those like to play games too.
 
In my country elderly people get nearly free landlines so they can call for help even when there is a powercut (because of fires, storms, etc).
VoIP phones need electricity to work (and its quite a challenge to get elderly people to master mobile phones).
Not everybody lives in cities, there are people living in more remote areas everywhere in the world, and those like to play games too.

Oh I know. Just saying. I don't actually know a single person with a land line. Even my partners grandparents use Skype and mobiles.

And I live in a pretty small city (smaller than most towns in the UK)
 
Oh I know. Just saying. I don't actually know a single person with a land line. Even my partners grandparents use Skype and mobiles.

And I live in a pretty small city (smaller than most towns in the UK)
The day everyone has the minimum throughout and latency guarantees that people in Singapore or South Korea get fine... we can talk about it (... and people do not get throttled), but U.K. effective speeds are nothing to scream about IMHO.
 
Having seen what happened between the PS4 and the XB1, I'd beg to differ.

The sweet spot is under 399. Anything more than that it won't sell. And we have seen this with the PS3 and the XB1, PS4Pro, XB1X
I disagree with that statement.

The problem with the PS3 and the XB1 was that they were more expensive, but actually they weren't better consoles. When you pay more, you expect a better far more powerful system, but the PS3 was on par with the Xbox 360 and the XB1 was even worse than the PS4.

I'm sure the market would react well to a expensive console if that money goes into a far better hardware than the competition.
 
The day everyone has the minimum throughout and latency guarantees that people in Singapore or South Korea get fine... we can talk about it (... and people do not get throttled), but U.K. effective speeds are nothing to scream about IMHO.

Oh I know. I think the average is about 15mb. I'm on the basic package on my isp which is 100mb. It was 50 but they bumped everyone up last year and got rid of the bottom package.
 
what % more powerful we talking over the X?

PlayStation 5 GPU alone should be ~2 times Xbox One X GPU.

The CPU jump on the other hand will totally embarrass the Jaguar CPU in the Xbox One X. With Zen 2 in PS5, you could be talking about 6X processing power jump over XBX or perhaps even more!

The high end PS4 games (Horizon, God of War, Uncharted) are very GPGPU dependant.(they need to be since Jaguar is not much help in this area)

Of course PS5s Navi-based APU will also have GPGPU capabilities but combined with the raw power of a Zen 2 CPU and you should see some gnarly graphics, animation and world simulation that an Xbox One X could never come close to.

The 2x GPU jump is only one element of the equation.
 
Last edited:
PlayStation 5 GPU alone should be ~2 times Xbox One X GPU.

The CPU jump on the other hand will totally embarrass the Jaguar CPU in the Xbox One X. With Zen 2 in PS5, you could be talking about 6X processing power jump over XBX or perhaps even more!

The high end PS4 games (Horizon, God of War, Uncharted) are very GPGPU dependant.

Of course PS5s Navi-based APU will also have GPGPU capabilities but combined with the raw power of a Zen 2 CPU and you should see some gnarly graphics, animation and world simulation that an Xbox One X could never come close to.

The 2x GPU jump is only one element of the equation.
Don't forget the custom stuff that Sony/AMD add too. Just look at the extras they put in at the hardware level on PS4 Pro. A few features from future AMD GPUs will no doubt make it into PS5.
 
What's sad about any new console is that no matter how powerfull the CPU/GPU are, From Software will never use the full hardware potential and will always make amazing games with a few weird technical issues and not as visually beautiful as other 3rd party developers manage to create :'( (i guess it is impossible to have it all...)
 
Idk why people think it will be zen 2 at this point...
It will certainly be some variation/custom of Zen and the main reason I think it might be Zen 2 is because AMD made a point of announcing the design for it to be complete at CES which means it was done sometime last year.

For me this would mean it could be used in the PS5 APU but it might not be. We'll see.
 
What's sad about any new console is that no matter how powerfull the CPU/GPU are, From Software will never use the full hardware potential and will always make amazing games with a few weird technical issues and not as visually beautiful as other 3rd party developers manage to create :'( (i guess it is impossible to have it all...)
I don't know about that. Some console games like Horizon Zero Dawn, Uncharted 4 and Forza 7 can go toe to toe with any 3rd party game I've seen on a technical level, IMO.
 
If Ps5 gets released this year I expect it to have an APU with the same capabilities of a Vega 56 and a 8 core, low clocked Zen chip at 499$. I don't expect the jump to be big compared to X1X.
 
Last edited:
I disagree with that statement.

The problem with the PS3 and the XB1 was that they were more expensive, but actually they weren't better consoles. When you pay more, you expect a better far more powerful system, but the PS3 was on par with the Xbox 360 and the XB1 was even worse than the PS4.

I'm sure the market would react well to a expensive console if that money goes into a far better hardware than the competition.
Oh. Hahaha. From Software. Missed that part.
Well, Bloodborne does look nice and with the the 4K cleanup treatment you can see a lot more of what even Dark Souls had and has to offer :).
 
Last edited:
The problem with the PS3 and the XB1 was that they were more expensive, but actually they weren't better consoles. When you pay more, you expect a better far more powerful system, but the PS3 was on par with the Xbox 360 and the XB1 was even worse than the PS4.
Not really. The PS3 was better then the 360, but the blueray drive pushed the cost so high that it was not perceived as a good bargain. Add to that that developers had to work harder to get the PS3 fully working, it was a real stuggle.

The XB1 was indeed inferior, but what really drove the cost higher was the Kinect: people didn't need/want that contraption, and didn't want to spend more money just to look silly in front of the TV (PS: I used to that kinda stuff on the Amiga back in the days)
 
Not really. The PS3 was better then the 360, but the blueray drive pushed the cost so high that it was not perceived as a good bargain. Add to that that developers had to work harder to get the PS3 fully working, it was a real stuggle.

The XB1 was indeed inferior, but what really drove the cost higher was the Kinect: people didn't need/want that contraption, and didn't want to spend more money just to look silly in front of the TV (PS: I used to that kinda stuff on the Amiga back in the days)
This is so debatable it's still being debated 12 years after that war started lol. The blu ray drive was an advantage, but outside of a few games using multi disk on 360, you could rarely see any impact on texture quality. That was because the RSX was so lackluster compared to the Xenos, with its fixed pixel and vertex shaders not being able to be used 100% in any workload like a unified shader design and no fast eDRAM. There was also no unified memory pool, there was a link between RSX and Cell but some paths were rather slow, Cell writing to GDDR3 at just 4GB/s, RSX reading from XDR at just 10.6GB/s (and I can't find where a developer said in the real world these figures were a LOT lower), so clearly not the same as one unified pool (plus eDRAM making bandwidth hungry ROPs not hit the main pool). Also keep in mind the blu ray drive was much slower than DVD at the time, so even if it could store more perhaps games didn't load in that much more for load times.

And even at the end of the struggle when developers could really use the Cell, most of the time the SPEs were tied up making up for how crappy RSX was, pre-culling scenes and taking on vertex work and so on. And for all the budget working it well took, I'm still not completely sure those one-hand-count of games couldn't have run on the 360 with as much budget and first party talent poured in. And let alone that cross platform almost always won on 360, with a few titles when really optimized the shit out of on PS3 looking equal.

Imo the most ideal 7th gen would look a lot like a 360 with blu ray, and maaaybe for interest, Xenos on the GPU with Cell as a processor to see what it could do when not making up for a poor GPU. Sony chose a GPU-ey CPU right when the world would start moving to GPU compute.



Ahh, one thing is for sure, hardware won't be as interesting as the 7th gen again, with both 99% likely to choose different cuts of AMD APUs with similar generation CPUs and GPUs.
 
Last edited:
Not really. The PS3 was better then the 360, but the blueray drive pushed the cost so high that it was not perceived as a good bargain. Add to that that developers had to work harder to get the PS3 fully working, it was a real stuggle.

The XB1 was indeed inferior, but what really drove the cost higher was the Kinect: people didn't need/want that contraption, and didn't want to spend more money just to look silly in front of the TV (PS: I used to that kinda stuff on the Amiga back in the days)
Meanwhile Microsoft had to pay licence fees to Sony for using Bluray in their Xbox 360 console :D
 
This is so debatable it's still being debated 12 years after that war started lol. The blu ray drive was an advantage, but outside of a few games using multi disk on 360, you could rarely see any impact on texture quality. That was because the RSX was so lackluster compared to the Xenos, with its fixed pixel and vertex shaders not being able to be used 100% in any workload like a unified shader design and no fast eDRAM. There was also no unified memory pool, there was a link between RSX and Cell but some paths were rather slow, Cell writing to GDDR3 at just 4GB/s, RSX reading from XDR at just 10.6GB/s (and I can't find where a developer said in the real world these figures were a LOT lower), so clearly not the same as one unified pool (plus eDRAM making bandwidth hungry ROPs not hit the main pool). Also keep in mind the blu ray drive was much slower than DVD at the time, so even if it could store more perhaps games didn't load in that much more for load times.

And even at the end of the struggle when developers could really use the Cell, most of the time the SPEs were tied up making up for how crappy RSX was, pre-culling scenes and taking on vertex work and so on. And for all the budget working it well took, I'm still not completely sure those one-hand-count of games couldn't have run on the 360 with as much budget and first party talent poured in. And let alone that cross platform almost always won on 360, with a few titles when really optimized the shit out of on PS3 looking equal.

Imo the most ideal 7th gen would look a lot like a 360 with blu ray, and maaaybe for interest, Xenos on the GPU with Cell as a processor to see what it could do when not making up for a poor GPU. Sony chose a GPU-ey CPU right when the world would start moving to GPU compute.



Ahh, one thing is for sure, hardware won't be as interesting as the 7th gen again, with both 99% likely to choose different cuts of AMD APUs with similar generation CPUs and GPUs.
oh there is one other possibility besides AMD, and that is Nvidia. Nvidia already provides the GPU used in the Nintendo Switch. I don't have any inside information or anything, just Nvidia moving to consoles with the Switch. that is two big gaming markets they've got now: Nintendo and PC. I don't know, but I'm certain they would like to expand their market penetration even further, just like with any business. I think it's a 50/50 split chance Nvidia would be used in either next-generation Xbox or PlayStation, or even both. actually that is a bit more complex than just a 50/50 coin toss, but you get what I'm saying hopefully. component suppliers can change, and although I'm sure AMD would like to be in next-gen consoles as well, Nvidia has the fab expertise to handle anything Microsoft and Sony throw at them. in fact, I would say they have even better relationships with the fabs than AMD does!
 
Last edited:
oh there is one other possibility besides AMD, and that is Nvidia. Nvidia already provides the GPU used in the Nintendo Switch. I don't have any inside information or anything, just Nvidia moving to consoles with the Switch. that is two big gaming markets they've got now: Nintendo and PC. I don't know, but I'm certain they would like to expand their market penetration even further, just like with any business. I think it's a 50/50 split chance Nvidia would be used in either next-generation Xbox or PlayStation, or even both. actually that is a bit more complex than just a 50/50 coin toss, but you get what I'm saying hopefully. component suppliers can change, and although I'm sure AMD would like to be in next-gen consoles as well, Nvidia has the fab expertise to handle anything Microsoft and Sony throw at them. in fact, I would say they have even better relationships with the fabs than AMD does!
PS5 dev kits have AMD cards in them and you expect nVidia to win the PS5 contract?

Am I reading you right?

And if so, how will PS4 backwards compatibility work on nVidia hardware?
 
Last edited:
PS5 dev kits have AMD cards in them and you expect nVidia to win the PS5 contract?

Am I reading you right?

And if so, how will PS4 backwards compatibility work on nVidia hardware?
I thought that was just an unconfirmed rumor? have you seen these supposed PS5 devkits?

and backward compatibility should be no large hurdle, these are both just video cards, or GPUs not cards. I doubt PS5 will have any slots at all for any kind of cards, it's all just integrated components.