Sony PS6, Microsoft neXt Series - 10th gen console speculation [2020]

Just about done with theorizing what I think 10th-gen systems could bring, but I'm gonna put up some ideas of what I think Sony might do over the next few years first, and then Microsoft stuff for next few years. Helps with setting up what I'm thinking the 10th-gen systems will build off of.

[SONY]


[PLAYSTATION 5 SLIM]

>Physically scaled down version of PS5

>5nm process

>Lower power consumption

>Slight clock boost (from 2.23 GHz GPU to 2.5 GHz)

>11.52 TF

>64 ROPs

>64 Shader Cores (per CU)

>144 TMUs

>8 prims/clock

>4 tri/clock

>160 Gpixels/sec

>360 Gtexels/sec

>20 Gpolys/sec culling

>10 Gpolys/sec rasterization

>Increase GPU L2$ size (8 MB vs PS5's 4 MB)

>Some tuned hardware changes to Primitive Shaders and Geometry Engine

>Fundamentally incorporates PS5 architecture elements for BC in an RDNA 4-derived design

>Changed memory: 16 GB GDDR6 as 8x 2 GB, 16 Gbps (64 GB/s) modules providing 512 GB/s on 256-bit bus

>Redesigned SSD; standardized M.2 form factor, 8 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe 5.0 with CXL integration, small
improvements/tweaks to various coprocessors, decompression bandwidth adjusted to 28 GB/s hardware cap.
Custom in-house SSD in M.2 form factor with 12-channel interface, but can be swapped out easily with
3P SSDs.

>Capacity increase to 1.536 TB

>Embedded 64 GB of NAND exclusive to OS for housing OS files, firmware patches etc. Interfaced to
I/O block as 2x NAND devices, 2 channels each. The OS *does* use the installed SSD; this private
pool is present for permanently storing OS and system files, updates etc. so when user swaps out SSDs
the contents can be easily reinstalled on the new drive.

>Digital-only

>Optional PS-branded disc drive module also available for users who still want
physical game support ($59.99 MSRP)

>$349.99 MSRP (digital version), $399.99 (disc module bundle; limited availability in select markets)

> $499.99 (digital version & PSVR 2 bundle)(2025 holiday bundle)

>Will be used to phase out original PS5 production by late 2025

>Late-2024 Release

[PLAYSTATION.STREAM]

>Soft replacement/product divergent of PS.Fold and PS5 Slim

>N5P process

>Built around technology features to be found in PlayStation 6

>Native spec capabilities on par with PS4 Pro (~ 4.2 TF), with feature sets and technologies based on
upcoming AMD Zen and RDNA generations (Zen 8, Zen 9; RDNA 7)

>Very small form factor, comparable to PS.Fold, just slightly larger

>No built-in screen or dedicated controls

>1 TB storage as custom USB slot-based "micro-storage" drive over USB Gen 4 2x2 (2.4 GB/s) interface

>Scaled-down version of PS5 Slim I/O block hardware (hardware decompression limit of 9.6 GB/s, reduced
I/O silicon performance for cost/heat/cooling/size considerations, etc.)

>8 GB HBM3 @ 5.2 Gbps, 128-bit I/O, 83.2 GB/s per module in 4-Hi stack for 332.8 GB/s on 512-bit bus

>Will be compatible with PSVR Gen 3 devices (to be introduced late 2027)

>2nd SKU with bundled Entry-level PSVR Gen 3 unit and controller planned for 2028 @ $299.99, to
fully replace PS.Fold with rebranding to PS.Fold-2

>$249.99 MSRP

>Mid/Late-2026 release

[MICROSOFT]

[SERIES.M]

>Streaming-focused small-box device for Gamepass & Xcloud on non-smart TVs
via connection through USB

>With smart TVs, can also connect wirelessly via WiFi 6

>Can be used as a wirelessly paired streaming client with Series X and S systems
for local game access and content sharing

>Extremely small form factor

>Compatible with existing Seagate expansion cards

>Includes 128 GB Seagate expansion card; replaceable

>2x USB Type-C ports (1 front, 1 rear)

>Compatible with XBO and Series controllers


>$99.99 MSRP

>Strategically meant as replacement for Series S (Series S production
will be phased out by late 2024)

>Early-Fall 2023 release

[SERIES 17]

>Mid-gen upgrade for Series X

>RDNA 4-based

>52 CUs

>208 TMUs

>2.635 GHz clock

>80 ROPs

>64 Shader Cores (per CU)

>17.538 TF (44% increase over Series X)

>548 Gtexels/sec

>548 G.BVHI/sec

>210.8 Gpixels/sec

>21 Gpolys/sec culling

>10.54 Gpolys/sec rasterization

>Introduction of 4 modified ML-accelerated "mega cores" based on CDNA
architecture designs integrated into the Shader Arrays, one for each
Shader Array. Precursor to "Task Acceleration Engines" (10th-gen
systems)

>Backwards-compatible with Series X & S expansion cards

>Simple back M.2 port (NVMe Gen 5, PCIe 4.0 x4-CXL) for SSD expansion

>Comes with 1 TB SSD, 8 GB/s bandwidth

>Reworked I/O sub-system; hardware decompression limit increased to 24 GB/s

>Internal SSD and an expansion card can be used simultaneously

>Support for Wifi 6 included

>Added support for VR via included USB Gen 4 2x2 port in Alt Mode with
GPU/APU modification for support

>20 GB GDDR6+ (offshoot of GDDR6X; developed by Micron) as
10x 2 GB, 20 Gbps (80 GB/s) modules, for 800 GB/s on 320-bit bus

>Zen 4-based CPU with a few Zen 5 features mixed in

>Digital-only

>Approved 3P external disc drives will be supported via USB connection over
one of the USB Type-C ports

>Mid-2024 release

>$499.99 MSRP

>Replaces Series X at the high-end

[SERIES X-R]

>Revision for Series X

>Same specifications as Series X

>Lower power consumption

>5nm process

>No disc drive (digital-only)

>Smaller form factor

>Will be used to phase out Series X by late 2024 (Series 17 will be available by then)

>Will become the mid-end of Series family by late 2024

>$399.99 MSRP

>Late-2022 release
I dont see a slim PS5 having any increased performance in terms of the CPU and GPU clocks. It would be much more economical for them to simply build a smaller affordable model that can retail for between $299 to $399. That would be an instant hit greater than any other model on the market. Also a PS5 pro model would make more sense for higher specs to enable higher fps and resolution. Such a machine retailing for $499 would be a hit as well.

On the other hand, I think with how powerful the Series X is, a cheaper slim model retailing between $299-$399(disc and discless model) would make more sense in 3 years. They may not be incentivized to hit the $299 price point due to the existence of a Series S, unless they can sell that one for even lower at say $199.

Otherwise you're onto something with a mid gen refresh for the Series X as well. I initially didn't think it would be necessary but if there is some marketable advantage from a PS5 pro model then MSFT would be incentivized to have one as well. But since these machines are marketed as 4K raytracing machines it would be interesting to see how mid gen refreshes(if made) will be marketed.
 
Sony never improved the performance of a slim version. They'll do that for the Pro version.

That was Old Sony tho ;). And technically speaking, they kind of have slightly improved performance in slim-style revisions. The PS One had some slight perf. improvements over the earlier PS1 systems. I believe it was somewhat similar with some of the later PS2 revisions. Nothing major, but small, subtle perf. bumps here and there.

PS4 gen was something different because of the advent of 4K TV and PSVR becoming a thing. PS4 and XBO were somewhat anemic for their day so beefy mid-gen refreshes were a necessity. I don't think a shift like that is going to happen this gen, but using a PS5 Slim revision as a means of some easy working-in of PS6 design concepts here-and-there and some bumps in performance in areas could be on the table.

If it means keeping the prices low on both production/assembly and MSRP, and saving money on the production pipeline by not splitting the volumes between two SKUs of wildly different performance caps, I think it fits Sony's business strategy better. But hey, could be very wrong on that, guess we'll have to see.

I dont see a slim PS5 having any increased performance in terms of the CPU and GPU clocks. It would be much more economical for them to simply build a smaller affordable model that can retail for between $299 to $399. That would be an instant hit greater than any other model on the market. Also a PS5 pro model would make more sense for higher specs to enable higher fps and resolution. Such a machine retailing for $499 would be a hit as well.

On the other hand, I think with how powerful the Series X is, a cheaper slim model retailing between $299-$399(disc and discless model) would make more sense in 3 years. They may not be incentivized to hit the $299 price point due to the existence of a Series S, unless they can sell that one for even lower at say $199.

Otherwise you're onto something with a mid gen refresh for the Series X as well. I initially didn't think it would be necessary but if there is some marketable advantage from a PS5 pro model then MSFT would be incentivized to have one as well. But since these machines are marketed as 4K raytracing machines it would be interesting to see how mid gen refreshes(if made) will be marketed.

PS5 Slim has been tricky for me to picture because on one hand, Sony has done (slight) perf enhancements with prior Slim models going back to even PS1 gen. But on the other hand, I did somewhat consider what you and @Globalisateur are saying WRT costs. At the same time, I was of the mind that costs would also be exacerbated in doing two production lines (one for a "true" Slim, one for a Pro), and the R&D on a Pro model potentially being returned less in terms of profits due to lower volume of sales of Pro units (going by PS4 Pro sales vs. PS4). Interesting trade-offs there indeed.

I kind of think of Series S as a middle-point just until Microsoft can get something like a streaming box 100% to their liking, as it and Series S would be serving the same casual market anyway, and the streaming box could be produced and sold for cheaper. But like a Series X revision, it might be a few years off. I think for such a streaming model tho Microsoft want to push that a bit sooner, while a Series X revision could come later.

At first I was thinking a One-X style mid-gen refresh for Series X would be unnecessary, too. But since Microsoft named these Series, I'd hope they'd want to maximize that ;) . A new top-end model at the same price bracket as Series X is today, while a Series X revision can take the mid-end slot and a streaming-focused device can replace Series S (in time) taking the low-end spot, covers their basis pretty well until 10th-gen perhaps.
 
Last edited:
That was Old Sony tho ;). And technically speaking, they kind of have slightly improved performance in slim-style revisions. The PS One had some slight perf. improvements over the earlier PS1 systems. I believe it was somewhat similar with some of the later PS2 revisions. Nothing major, but small, subtle perf. bumps here and there.

PS4 gen was something different because of the advent of 4K TV and PSVR becoming a thing. PS4 and XBO were somewhat anemic for their day so beefy mid-gen refreshes were a necessity. I don't think a shift like that is going to happen this gen, but using a PS5 Slim revision as a means of some easy working-in of PS6 design concepts here-and-there and some bumps in performance in areas could be on the table.

If it means keeping the prices low on both production/assembly and MSRP, and saving money on the production pipeline by not splitting the volumes between two SKUs of wildly different performance caps, I think it fits Sony's business strategy better. But hey, could be very wrong on that, guess we'll have to see.



PS5 Slim has been tricky for me to picture because on one hand, Sony has done (slight) perf enhancements with prior Slim models going back to even PS1 gen. But on the other hand, I did somewhat consider what you and @Globalisateur are saying WRT costs. At the same time, I was of the mind that costs would also be exacerbated in doing two production lines (one for a "true" Slim, one for a Pro), and the R&D on a Pro model potentially being returned less in terms of profits due to lower volume of sales of Pro units (going by PS4 Pro sales vs. PS4). Interesting trade-offs there indeed.

I kind of think of Series S as a middle-point just until Microsoft can get something like a streaming box 100% to their liking, as it and Series S would be serving the same casual market anyway, and the streaming box could be produced and sold for cheaper. But like a Series X revision, it might be a few years off. I think for such a streaming model tho Microsoft want to push that a bit sooner, while a Series X revision could come later.

At first I was thinking a One-X style mid-gen refresh for Series X would be unnecessary, too. But since Microsoft named these Series, I'd hope they'd want to maximize that ;) . A new top-end model at the same price bracket as Series X is today, while a Series X revision can take the mid-end slot and a streaming-focused device can replace Series S (in time) taking the low-end spot, covers their basis pretty well until 10th-gen perhaps.

I think the Series S is their streaming box. If a customer is willing to buy it despite it not having a disc drive, it means they most likely can use xCloud or whatever cloud gaming features. A discless Series X model and a slimmer Series X with a disc drive are almost garaunteed at this point. The latter would be a slimmer cheaper to produce Series X with higher margins and the former would be an even smaller cheaper to produce model with higher margins. Thats why I always wondered the benefit of the Series S since in three years there would be models of the Series X almost if not at the same cost as the Series S. It will be interesting to see how MSFT positions it as the PS5 prices drops closer to the Series S. In 5 years it won't be difficult to get a PS5 at or below $300. So the Series X needs to compete with that.
 
Sony never improved the performance of a slim version. They'll do that for the Pro version.

I know I already responded to this earlier, but I actually found some evidence to support my point on this. Below's a snippet from a Wiki entry regarding PS1 revisions:

At the same time the GPU was upgraded to utilize smoother shading, resulting in overall better image quality compared to earlier models, which were more prone to banding;[2] additionally, performance for transparency effects was improved, resulting in less slowdown in scenes using this effect heavily. This Rev. C hardware first appeared in late 1995 and, unlike in Japan, was not marked with a model number change in NTSC-U and PAL territories - SCPH-1001/1002 systems can have either revision, as the change happened between revisions of the PU-8 mainboard.

And that was only a year after the original PS1 came out in Japan (December 1994).

So, there's some precedent. I've done some thinking and maybe they would still stick with RDNA 2 and Zen 2, just bringing the design forward to 6nm or more likely 5nm. However, things related to changing out the RAM, doing a slight clock boost and possibly retooling the storage interface to simplify it...all of those have some precedent in one way or another dating back to even the PS1.

There's a decent chance they could do a PS5 Slim with some slight spec boosts , slightly faster GPU and CPU, somewhat more RAM bandwidth, a redesigned SSD that's basically the PS5's internal design on an M.2 form factor and still compatible with 3P drives. And they can probably do this for release by 2024 (maybe even late 2023) at a cheaper price ($299 - $399 depending on disc drive/no disc drive). At least IMO.

I think the Series S is their streaming box. If a customer is willing to buy it despite it not having a disc drive, it means they most likely can use xCloud or whatever cloud gaming features. A discless Series X model and a slimmer Series X with a disc drive are almost garaunteed at this point. The latter would be a slimmer cheaper to produce Series X with higher margins and the former would be an even smaller cheaper to produce model with higher margins. Thats why I always wondered the benefit of the Series S since in three years there would be models of the Series X almost if not at the same cost as the Series S. It will be interesting to see how MSFT positions it as the PS5 prices drops closer to the Series S. In 5 years it won't be difficult to get a PS5 at or below $300. So the Series X needs to compete with that.

The thing about Series S as the streaming box is that I don't think it represents the floor for what a Series-based streaming box can be insofar as cheaper production costs and lower barrier of entry WRT price. IIRC, MS are losing money on Series S unit sales carrying that design forward with some slight cuts here and there, I don't see how they can reduce the BOM too much lower while still providing it as a 4 TF system with a CPU similar to Series X's and same 512 GB storage capacity, etc.

That's the main reason I see a purely streaming-focused Series coming. Plus, there's always Apple and their Apple TV. There's always been rumors here and there that Apple could be positioning a serious entry into the core gaming space leveraging Apple TV and Apple Arcade. They definitely have the financial muscle to do it, and they've made more inroads with some notable devs much better than Google ever did. Microsoft can't compete with a more gaming-focused Apple TV with Series S, it'd just be too much over the TV in pricing. They need something with much lower production costs, smaller form-factor, and can hit into the $100 MSRP barrier while either breaking even, incurring only a very small loss or even a small profit on each unit sold.

I agree with the notion that anyone buying Series S will invariably use it for Xcloud and other streaming stuff; my perspective on it though is that for the mass casual market a Series S, as-is, is probably still too high a price entry and Microsoft can't reduce the price any further on the model unless they redesign it for purely streaming purposes. That means no native play of Series S ports, essentially, and likely reducing the internal storage even further. At that point why not simply rebrand it as something like Series.M while at it and phase out the Series S because, by the midpoint, you can also redesign that smaller Series X that will be cheaper, and can more or less get somewhere around serving as the mid-tier entry in the product ecosystem, and push with a more powerful mid-gen refresh to serve the high-end.

Everything else you mention is very sound and I think we're mostly on the same page with a lot of this; I've even come around to rethinking about Sony shifting a PS5 Slim design to RDNA 4/Zen 5 or whatnot, since at that point it probably pushes the edge of what is affordable and makes sense R&D-wise for a slim revision, even if said revision can be given a bit more juice with small spec bumps here and there. I know I was saying a Series X revision being around $399 but I guess depending on how pricing for various things go they could possibly hit around $299 for that, have a high-tier mid-gen refresh (Series 17) at $499 and an entry-model box (Series M) at $99, to cover all of those segments. If Sony doesn't feel as much a need for a new high-tier mid-gen refresh that can give them a Slim around $299 - $349.

While Microsoft could probably risk losing money on a $299 Series X discless slim revision, if they feel volume on the entry-level model product (which would cost them only very small loss per unit or no loss or slight profit) and high-tier model (which perhaps sells for slight profit or at worst break-even) are large enough to cover some incurred losess on a cheaper mid-level revision, they might justify the costs and just price a Series X slim revision at $299 after all. It depends a lot on timing, though. If they release it in 2023, regardless when Sony would release their hypothetical PS5 Slim, Microsoft would likely not price a Series X slim revision to $299 until 2024 holiday season.
 
The thing about Series S as the streaming box is that I don't think it represents the floor for what a Series-based streaming box can be insofar as cheaper production costs and lower barrier of entry WRT price. IIRC, MS are losing money on Series S unit sales carrying that design forward with some slight cuts here and there, I don't see how they can reduce the BOM too much lower while still providing it as a 4 TF system with a CPU similar to Series X's and same 512 GB storage capacity, etc.

That's the main reason I see a purely streaming-focused Series coming. Plus, there's always Apple and their Apple TV. There's always been rumors here and there that Apple could be positioning a serious entry into the core gaming space leveraging Apple TV and Apple Arcade. They definitely have the financial muscle to do it, and they've made more inroads with some notable devs much better than Google ever did. Microsoft can't compete with a more gaming-focused Apple TV with Series S, it'd just be too much over the TV in pricing. They need something with much lower production costs, smaller form-factor, and can hit into the $100 MSRP barrier while either breaking even, incurring only a very small loss or even a small profit on each unit sold.

I agree with the notion that anyone buying Series S will invariably use it for Xcloud and other streaming stuff; my perspective on it though is that for the mass casual market a Series S, as-is, is probably still too high a price entry and Microsoft can't reduce the price any further on the model unless they redesign it for purely streaming purposes. That means no native play of Series S ports, essentially, and likely reducing the internal storage even further. At that point why not simply rebrand it as something like Series.M while at it and phase out the Series S because, by the midpoint, you can also redesign that smaller Series X that will be cheaper, and can more or less get somewhere around serving as the mid-tier entry in the product ecosystem, and push with a more powerful mid-gen refresh to serve the high-end.

Agreed. They could as well ship a usb stick or no hardware at all tbh like Stadia. Just the controller. Will be interesting the route they take. Was saying more like offering Series S users the chance to stream games at higher resolutions and fps since the console requires good internet to use it.


Everything else you mention is very sound and I think we're mostly on the same page with a lot of this; I've even come around to rethinking about Sony shifting a PS5 Slim design to RDNA 4/Zen 5 or whatnot, since at that point it probably pushes the edge of what is affordable and makes sense R&D-wise for a slim revision, even if said revision can be given a bit more juice with small spec bumps here and there.

Looking at the size of the PS5, the PS5 slim will simply be a much smaller version of the current PS5 and the PS5 pro if made, will also be a much smaller version of the current system. So both systems will be smaller than the current hardware. So for the slim model, no need to upgrade the hw in any meaningful way in terms of performance. They could keep the specs the same and sell it for $299. Especially since its only 700GB of space. The Pro could simply retail for $499 and offer higher resolution and higher fps with improved hardware but still in a smaller package.


While Microsoft could probably risk losing money on a $299 Series X discless slim revision, if they feel volume on the entry-level model product (which would cost them only very small loss per unit or no loss or slight profit) and high-tier model (which perhaps sells for slight profit or at worst break-even) are large enough to cover some incurred losess on a cheaper mid-level revision, they might justify the costs and just price a Series X slim revision at $299 after all. It depends a lot on timing, though. If they release it in 2023, regardless when Sony would release their hypothetical PS5 Slim, Microsoft would likely not price a Series X slim revision to $299 until 2024 holiday season.

In three years the processor in the Series X won't be as ground breaking as it was on launch last year. They'll be able to ship a small cheap console for below $399 similar to the size of a One S or Series S size for a disc only model($299). Only issue I see is the cost of DRAM. But at large volumes they can lock in some good deals. Think about it. A discless slim Series X would just be the same size as the Series S in three years. The highest cost would be the RAM, the processor maybe and 1TB of storage. But in 3 years that sounds more than possible. And it will likely be on 5nm or 3nm.
 
Agreed. They could as well ship a usb stick or no hardware at all tbh like Stadia. Just the controller. Will be interesting the route they take. Was saying more like offering Series S users the chance to stream games at higher resolutions and fps since the console requires good internet to use it.

The only potential issue with a USB stick-only is how the wifi reception would possibly be gimped, and for streaming, you need good wifi reception, including the built-in antennas. A USB stick would probably be too small or maybe they could fit that stuff in there and make it "work" but it'd look a bit...grotesque xD? It's definitely something in their plans but probably a bit further off like 2024 or later.

That is a good bullet point WRT Series S but I think Microsoft could be better served in the future by upgrading their marquee hardware for higher-quality Azure streaming in the cloud (via a high-end mid-gen refresh upgrade) and pair down a Series S-style design into something that doesn't have to natively run 1440p60 games locally, but have enough horsepower for high-quality streaming.

And I think that might also require adding support for Wifi 6 instead of Wifi 5, but that's just a wild guess.

Looking at the size of the PS5, the PS5 slim will simply be a much smaller version of the current PS5 and the PS5 pro if made, will also be a much smaller version of the current system. So both systems will be smaller than the current hardware. So for the slim model, no need to upgrade the hw in any meaningful way in terms of performance. They could keep the specs the same and sell it for $299. Especially since its only 700GB of space. The Pro could simply retail for $499 and offer higher resolution and higher fps with improved hardware but still in a smaller package.

I guess that is a potentially good approach; still questioning if Sony will honestly consider a PS4 Pro-style refresh for PS5 though. The market and business factors just aren't necessarily the same for them as they would be for Microsoft, i.e no massive TV resolution shift like 4K or need for more processing power for VR because the base system was gimped in that respect. So I'm still of the opinion that Sony will just focus on mainly streamlining the PS5 design for a Slim model with some slight performance spec bumps.

However, with that said, I did rethink some parts of my PS5 Slim specs. Mainly, before I was saying they'd upgrade the RDNA and Zen architectures but now I don't think they would seek to do that TBH. So, still RDNA 2 and Zen 2-based, which saves a lot on BOM for redesign costs. That also could allow them to go to 5nm more readily and get the power consumption reduction benefits, that gives enough room to upgrade some of the clocks perhaps. They could also either keep RAM capacity and bandwidth the same but I honestly think they'll want to leverage the full 512 GB/s the PS5 design already technically supports at the hardware level.

I can see two tiered models/SKUs: one with the same 825 GB of storage the PS5 already has, same RDNA2/Zen 2 design, 11.52 TF, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB/s bandwidth, redesigned SSD to pluggable M.2 card and mostly same I/O hardware (can also swap out the included storage with a 3P drive easily) for $299. Then maybe also provide a different model with 1.5 TB or 2 TB of storage but everything else stays the same, for $399.

In three years the processor in the Series X won't be as ground breaking as it was on launch last year. They'll be able to ship a small cheap console for below $399 similar to the size of a One S or Series S size for a disc only model($299). Only issue I see is the cost of DRAM. But at large volumes they can lock in some good deals. Think about it. A discless slim Series X would just be the same size as the Series S in three years. The highest cost would be the RAM, the processor maybe and 1TB of storage. But in 3 years that sounds more than possible. And it will likely be on 5nm or 3nm.

Dunno; one of the reasons Microsoft developed Series S is because they don't foresee the same price reductions of generations past. A Series X that could be $299 in 2024 would adhere to the older expectations. The only reason I can even potentially see a PS5 Slim at $299 around 2023/2024 is due to the fact that they will very likely have higher volume of console sales compared to Microsoft (by what ratio I don't know, but I think it'll be a smaller ratio than it was 8th-gen, by a decent amount) so that might give them a buffer to justify a lower-price SKU, plus they could also technically limit the volume of production on a $299 PS5 SKU to drive attention to the $399 model, and just produce the $299 SKU in higher volumes during Black Friday and Christmas shopping seasons.

I agree that a Series X slim model would definitely be smaller of course, and discless as well. RAM capacity would probably stay at 16 GB though. 1 TB storage, yeah, that sounds good too. I think they might go with 5nm because I think both they and Sony will want to save 3nm for 10th-gen systems (plus 3nm would be more expensive than 5nm at that point anyhow). Only thing I don't really see happening is a $299 price point for a Series X slim model; $399 seems likely, or perhaps $349 at the lowest. They can drop the price though during holiday sales or by the year after its introduction. It would, effectively, be serving as their mid-tier option in Series hardware ecosystem ("Series M" at the entry-level, "Series X-R" at the mid-level, "Series 17" at the high-end).
 
I guess that is a potentially good approach; still questioning if Sony will honestly consider a PS4 Pro-style refresh for PS5 though. The market and business factors just aren't necessarily the same for them as they would be for Microsoft, i.e no massive TV resolution shift like 4K or need for more processing power for VR because the base system was gimped in that respect. So I'm still of the opinion that Sony will just focus on mainly streamlining the PS5 design for a Slim model with some slight performance spec bumps.

I agree about not needing a pro version since the console is powerful enough to support "4k". Higher GPU clocks are definitely out of the window for any PS5 variant though.




However, with that said, I did rethink some parts of my PS5 Slim specs. Mainly, before I was saying they'd upgrade the RDNA and Zen architectures but now I don't think they would seek to do that TBH. So, still RDNA 2 and Zen 2-based, which saves a lot on BOM for redesign costs. That also could allow them to go to 5nm more readily and get the power consumption reduction benefits, that gives enough room to upgrade some of the clocks perhaps. They could also either keep RAM capacity and bandwidth the same but I honestly think they'll want to leverage the full 512 GB/s the PS5 design already technically supports at the hardware level.

I can see two tiered models/SKUs: one with the same 825 GB of storage the PS5 already has, same RDNA2/Zen 2 design, 11.52 TF, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB/s bandwidth, redesigned SSD to pluggable M.2 card and mostly same I/O hardware (can also swap out the included storage with a 3P drive easily) for $299. Then maybe also provide a different model with 1.5 TB or 2 TB of storage but everything else stays the same, for $399.

Definitely plausible they will do different storage sizes. Cheaper NAND prices will likely help with this. I think with the way the system currently is, its the best. You can put different length SSDs. They just have to figure out the cooling like Microsoft did.


The only potential issue with a USB stick-only is how the wifi reception would possibly be gimped, and for streaming, you need good wifi reception, including the built-in antennas. A USB stick would probably be too small or maybe they could fit that stuff in there and make it "work" but it'd look a bit...grotesque xD? It's definitely something in their plans but probably a bit further off like 2024 or later.

That is a good bullet point WRT Series S but I think Microsoft could be better served in the future by upgrading their marquee hardware for higher-quality Azure streaming in the cloud (via a high-end mid-gen refresh upgrade) and pair down a Series S-style design into something that doesn't have to natively run 1440p60 games locally, but have enough horsepower for high-quality streaming.

And I think that might also require adding support for Wifi 6 instead of Wifi 5, but that's just a wild guess.



I guess that is a potentially good approach; still questioning if Sony will honestly consider a PS4 Pro-style refresh for PS5 though. The market and business factors just aren't necessarily the same for them as they would be for Microsoft, i.e no massive TV resolution shift like 4K or need for more processing power for VR because the base system was gimped in that respect. So I'm still of the opinion that Sony will just focus on mainly streamlining the PS5 design for a Slim model with some slight performance spec bumps.

However, with that said, I did rethink some parts of my PS5 Slim specs. Mainly, before I was saying they'd upgrade the RDNA and Zen architectures but now I don't think they would seek to do that TBH. So, still RDNA 2 and Zen 2-based, which saves a lot on BOM for redesign costs. That also could allow them to go to 5nm more readily and get the power consumption reduction benefits, that gives enough room to upgrade some of the clocks perhaps. They could also either keep RAM capacity and bandwidth the same but I honestly think they'll want to leverage the full 512 GB/s the PS5 design already technically supports at the hardware level.

I can see two tiered models/SKUs: one with the same 825 GB of storage the PS5 already has, same RDNA2/Zen 2 design, 11.52 TF, 16 GB RAM, 512 GB/s bandwidth, redesigned SSD to pluggable M.2 card and mostly same I/O hardware (can also swap out the included storage with a 3P drive easily) for $299. Then maybe also provide a different model with 1.5 TB or 2 TB of storage but everything else stays the same, for $399.



Dunno; one of the reasons Microsoft developed Series S is because they don't foresee the same price reductions of generations past. A Series X that could be $299 in 2024 would adhere to the older expectations. The only reason I can even potentially see a PS5 Slim at $299 around 2023/2024 is due to the fact that they will very likely have higher volume of console sales compared to Microsoft (by what ratio I don't know, but I think it'll be a smaller ratio than it was 8th-gen, by a decent amount) so that might give them a buffer to justify a lower-price SKU, plus they could also technically limit the volume of production on a $299 PS5 SKU to drive attention to the $399 model, and just produce the $299 SKU in higher volumes during Black Friday and Christmas shopping seasons.

I agree that a Series X slim model would definitely be smaller of course, and discless as well. RAM capacity would probably stay at 16 GB though. 1 TB storage, yeah, that sounds good too. I think they might go with 5nm because I think both they and Sony will want to save 3nm for 10th-gen systems (plus 3nm would be more expensive than 5nm at that point anyhow). Only thing I don't really see happening is a $299 price point for a Series X slim model; $399 seems likely, or perhaps $349 at the lowest. They can drop the price though during holiday sales or by the year after its introduction. It would, effectively, be serving as their mid-tier option in Series hardware ecosystem ("Series M" at the entry-level, "Series X-R" at the mid-level, "Series 17" at the high-end).

I think TSMC fabs will be on 3nm by 2023 for Apple products. So 3nm or 4nm for Microsoft and Sony's products in 2024 isn't impossible. 5nm will be old by 2024. A discless model of the Series X in a size similar to the Series S for below $400 is very possible by 2024. Maybe $299 is a bit of a stretch but I agree $349 is definitely possible. then $399 for a disc model. Although I think if Microsoft goes with extra Series consoles besides the X and the S they will seriously confuse consumers. Beyond 2025 a $300 Series X is definitely possible I may say even likely.
 
I agree about not needing a pro version since the console is powerful enough to support "4k". Higher GPU clocks are definitely out of the window for any PS5 variant though.

Mmm, I dunno. If the power consumption reduction benefits from using a mature 5nm node process by 2023/2024 are big enough, plus slight refinements in RDNA 2/Zen 2 designs that can save even more power, power reduction from using more power-efficient GDDR6 modules (even if they're higher-clocked), consolidating the SSD interface to a single slot instead of internal drive + expansion slot, etc....then that gives them a decent amount of room for a modest clock increase all in a smaller case design.

That's also expecting that the case design is redesigned as well, something that only somewhat resembles the PS5's visual design but is more focused on peak thermal heat dissipation/management (I think the current PS5 could have better heat dissipation if some of the visual aesthetic wasn't put ahead of practicality of the design).

Definitely plausible they will do different storage sizes. Cheaper NAND prices will likely help with this. I think with the way the system currently is, its the best. You can put different length SSDs. They just have to figure out the cooling like Microsoft did.

Yeah, that is another option for sure. The only other major reason I suggested them redesigning the internal SSD into an M.2 pluggable card is due to the somewhat nasty issues with some PS5 units where the internal drive keeps getting corrupted and the database has to be rebuilt, and the possibility that the onboard NAND can fail so you're just sitting there with a bunch of dead chips on the motherboard anyway.

By redesigning it to consolidate the drive into a singular multi-length M.2 SSD port coming installed with a redesigned version of the internal drive (they'd probably need to simulate some way to interpret the 12 channel design, via multi-channel NAND setups and some tweaks to the I/O hardware and flash controller), it also helps reduce the power draw of the unit and they can cut the wattage of the PSU down further meaning a cheaper PSU. It all eventually adds up.

I think TSMC fabs will be on 3nm by 2023 for Apple products. So 3nm or 4nm for Microsoft and Sony's products in 2024 isn't impossible. 5nm will be old by 2024. A discless model of the Series X in a size similar to the Series S for below $400 is very possible by 2024. Maybe $299 is a bit of a stretch but I agree $349 is definitely possible. then $399 for a disc model. Although I think if Microsoft goes with extra Series consoles besides the X and the S they will seriously confuse consumers. Beyond 2025 a $300 Series X is definitely possible I may say even likely.

For sure 5nm will be old by 2024, but the reason I was speculating the mid-gen refreshes could be 5nm is because apparently Sony's already put in production requests with TMSC for 5nm in 2023. Seen a few other people discuss this; out of their whole product line there's really just one product that might fit the need for that and most likely that product is PS5. As well, we can't forget that the smaller and newer the node process, the more expensive it will be, even if it's basically the same design being carried forward. If 5nm is relatively cheap by 2023/2024 then that's actually very good for Sony and Microsoft WRT mid-gen refreshes on 5nm, because it means less competition from other companies for the 5nm wafers, and the process will be more refined so they could potentially squeeze out even more power consumption reduction benefits on 5nm with some refinements to Zen 2/RDNA 2 design specs on a mature 5nm process.

So there's a lot of financial reasons to motivate sticking to 5nm for mid-gen refreshes, in addition to the power consumption reduction benefits. 3nm may actually be overkill for mid-gen refreshes in that respect xD. In terms of the Series X refresh, $299 definitely is a stretch for launch but as you say towards the end of your post for 2025 and beyond it should be no problem. I still don't think a disc-based model will exist in the "normal" way though; they can save so much on BOM by cutting out the disc drive, and for those who really want it, just partner with a Blu-Ray disc drive manufacturer who makes external drives that connect over USB Type-C and bundle those in with higher-SKU "disc" Series X revision units. Saves a lot of costs and more.
 
Mmm, I dunno. If the power consumption reduction benefits from using a mature 5nm node process by 2023/2024 are big enough, plus slight refinements in RDNA 2/Zen 2 designs that can save even more power, power reduction from using more power-efficient GDDR6 modules (even if they're higher-clocked), consolidating the SSD interface to a single slot instead of internal drive + expansion slot, etc....then that gives them a decent amount of room for a modest clock increase all in a smaller case design.
You don't get as much improvement in performance per watt due to the breakdown in Dennards Scaling. It would be wiser for Sony to maintain 2.23GHz clock for the GPU. You can already see issues with PS5's GPU for a considerable amount of consumers. Why would they take such a risk again when they can simply get more transistors in a smaller area(more compute units). The PS5 is already larger, weaker and louder than the Series X. I think they would be smarter to create a PS5 slim with the same specifications but considerably smaller. Then a PS5 pro that is smaller than the OG PS5 as well but with higher number of GPU compute units and maybe better CPU. This would be more than enough to play 4K games at higher resolutions and would be the most powerful console. Seeing just how good a deal the Series X is, a smaller model would be good. But I can see them creating a competitor to the PS5 pro if Sony made one.

For sure 5nm will be old by 2024, but the reason I was speculating the mid-gen refreshes could be 5nm is because apparently Sony's already put in production requests with TMSC for 5nm in 2023. Seen a few other people discuss this; out of their whole product line there's really just one product that might fit the need for that and most likely that product is PS5. As well, we can't forget that the smaller and newer the node process, the more expensive it will be, even if it's basically the same design being carried forward. If 5nm is relatively cheap by 2023/2024 then that's actually very good for Sony and Microsoft WRT mid-gen refreshes on 5nm, because it means less competition from other companies for the 5nm wafers, and the process will be more refined so they could potentially squeeze out even more power consumption reduction benefits on 5nm with some refinements to Zen 2/RDNA 2 design specs on a mature 5nm process.

Interesting. We'll have to wait and see.

In terms of the Series X refresh, $299 definitely is a stretch for launch but as you say towards the end of your post for 2025 and beyond it should be no problem. I still don't think a disc-based model will exist in the "normal" way though; they can save so much on BOM by cutting out the disc drive, and for those who really want it, just partner with a Blu-Ray disc drive manufacturer who makes external drives that connect over USB Type-C and bundle those in with higher-SKU "disc" Series X revision units. Saves a lot of costs and more.
Not so sure about the external drive unless they made it themselves. I don't recall any console company ever allowing third party external drives (piracy reasons!)
 
You don't get as much improvement in performance per watt due to the breakdown in Dennards Scaling. It would be wiser for Sony to maintain 2.23GHz clock for the GPU. You can already see issues with PS5's GPU for a considerable amount of consumers. Why would they take such a risk again when they can simply get more transistors in a smaller area(more compute units). The PS5 is already larger, weaker and louder than the Series X. I think they would be smarter to create a PS5 slim with the same specifications but considerably smaller. Then a PS5 pro that is smaller than the OG PS5 as well but with higher number of GPU compute units and maybe better CPU. This would be more than enough to play 4K games at higher resolutions and would be the most powerful console. Seeing just how good a deal the Series X is, a smaller model would be good. But I can see them creating a competitor to the PS5 pro if Sony made one.

It's true what you say in reference to Dennards Scaling but RDNA 2 has shown some pretty good perf. gains with high clocks as-is, some of the GPUs can even get 2.4 GHz and this is all on N7/N7P. We can assume that the PS5 currently draws around 210w - 225w IIRC for the whole system, so I'm guessing the APU itself is around the 185w-195w range and of that the GPU around 160w - 170w. You get 30% power consumption reduction on N5 so that brings GPU down to 112w - 119w @ same clock and RDNA 2 design. But shifting to a more mature N5 process means there could be some additional benefits, though maybe slight, through TSMC and also maybe AMD making some slight changes here and there to squeeze more performance from the same design, so it might leave a bit of wiggle room for higher clocks on a Slim revision.

But that said, it wouldn't be too much, so my 2.5 GHz could've been too aggressive; I think they'd have to switch at least to an RDNA 3 design to pull this off and by then you are redesigning big chunks of the APU (potentially; there were modest changes from RDNA 1 to RDNA 2 in some areas and drastic ones in others), while still needing enough of the old design present for BC. So I guess a PS5 Slim, if they want to focus more on the main issues to target in improving on base PS5, would maybe keep the same 2.23 GHz clock or just go for something slightly higher than that, but sit around 2.3 GHz at which point it probably isn't worth doing because none of the main performance metrics would get notable boosts with that small an increase.

There is the option of designing a larger GPU for a Pro model that would bring a perf boost while still keeping the clocks around base PS5 level, and I guess that's an option. I just don't see the business motivations for Sony doing it though: it'd incur more costs, and that Pro model would sell only a sliver of the base model's sales. Also, there's no "4K TV" or "PSVR" style shift on the horizon, and base PS5 already seems developed with PSVR2 in mind. So if they don't increase the Slim revision clocks like I speculated earlier, I don't think they'd do anything else for a Pro model, and just look into increasing the RAM bandwidth instead and redesign/simplify the SSD setup. They could do 2 SKUs tho still; one with the 825 GB storage and another doubling the storage amount and having a (bundled, external 1P Sony-branded) Blu-Ray drive in the package for $100 more. And, technically, there's an off-chance that Sony could have designed PSVR2 to have some processing capability of its own, although maybe for post-processing if anything, maybe for partial framebuffers? This is really a stretch on my part though, I'm just having fun playing what-ifs on that point :p.

Like I was saying before, it's more likely Microsoft develop a "Pro" style mid-gen refresh; not because they'd need it to compete with Sony per-se, but because I think it will benefit Azure-powered Xcloud streaming and Azure compute-side tasks even more than Series X in the future. Make it capable enough to stream 4 Series S game instances simultaneously, and that leads to higher-quality stream fidelity for GamePass Xcloud players at certain tiers. Sony may not feel as much a need to answer that with a PS5 Pro because they technically didn't need a PS4 Pro to compete with the One X (or even the threat of ever-more-powerful gaming PCs) going by the ratio of sales for PS4 Pro compared to base PS4. In fact, I'm starting to think that in lieu of a Ps5 Pro, Sony's replacement for that this gen is whatever they have going with PSVR2, I think that's going to be a nice surprise in terms of what tech they pack inside, etc.

Not so sure about the external drive unless they made it themselves. I don't recall any console company ever allowing third party external drives (piracy reasons!)

Yeah that's a good point; Microsoft are generally pretty open with providing means of 3P accessories working on their systems but disc drives are something else. Even if they limit compatibility to ROM-only drives there's the chance users can root hack the drivers somehow to recognize unauthorized discs (they'd have to probably do something with Xbox OS too to do this but that's probably something Dev Mode could ironically allow I guess), and Microsoft seem more willing to make Xbox-branded peripherals themselves these days so...they could and likely would make the drive themselves (and also make it compatible with Windows on PC, obviously ;) ).
 
In over 20 years of only having 1 choice in internet providers my datacap is still lower than it was years ago. It started at 2TB during trials years ago (decades) with non-enforcement, it was dropped to 1TB when cap measuring was enforced and it took a international pandemic and tons of bad pressure on social media and the news in order for them to bump it from 1TB to 1.25TB. Fuck these monopoly internet providers. Seriously. Fuck these monopolies.

I can't tell if you want a more capitalist presence due to the lack of competition in your area, or a more socialist one due to the lack of enforced regulation on lifting the data caps.
Unfortunately, it seems you're getting none of either.


It's true what you say in reference to Dennards Scaling but RDNA 2 has shown some pretty good perf. gains with high clocks as-is, some of the GPUs can even get 2.4 GHz and this is all on N7/N7P.
Just so you know, the RX 6700XT reviews are going live and those chips are actually averaging at 2.55GHz with some 3rd party cards doing stable overclocks up to >2.8GHz.
RDNA2 is way past the PS5's 2.23GHz at this point, and those clocks seems to be closer to what we should expect on mobile dGPUs.

And according to Bondrewd, higher clocks than these on RDNA2 were targeted at some point, for both the PS5 and the RDNA2 dGPUs.
RDNA3 on N5P seems to be targeting for 3GHz+ on higher-binned parts.

Whatever work AMD's Zen engineers did for RTG to increase clocks, it seems to be working quite well.
 
I can't tell if you want a more capitalist presence due to the lack of competition in your area, or a more socialist one due to the lack of enforced regulation on lifting the data caps.
Unfortunately, it seems you're getting none of either.
.

I'm not even sure. Simply having a choice would be a start. Its extremely disappointing with all the handouts already given to various companies for service and infrastructure upgrades only to have them not provide anything at all or even let them rot away. The local telephone company (AT&T) doesn't even provide DSL service in this town. It's quite depressing all around.

Perhaps a hybrid mix, where the infrastructure is provided to everyone then they can pick what policies they'd like to have by shopping for providers. Not to different from how electricity is handled.

Anyways, to get this back onto topic ... I still see next-gen physical consoles people own in their homes in the 2025/2028 timeframe.
 
It's true what you say in reference to Dennards Scaling but RDNA 2 has shown some pretty good perf. gains with high clocks as-is, some of the GPUs can even get 2.4 GHz and this is all on N7/N7P. We can assume that the PS5 currently draws around 210w - 225w IIRC for the whole system, so I'm guessing the APU itself is around the 185w-195w range and of that the GPU around 160w - 170w. You get 30% power consumption reduction on N5 so that brings GPU down to 112w - 119w @ same clock and RDNA 2 design. But shifting to a more mature N5 process means there could be some additional benefits, though maybe slight, through TSMC and also maybe AMD making some slight changes here and there to squeeze more performance from the same design, so it might leave a bit of wiggle room for higher clocks on a Slim revision.

But that said, it wouldn't be too much, so my 2.5 GHz could've been too aggressive; I think they'd have to switch at least to an RDNA 3 design to pull this off and by then you are redesigning big chunks of the APU (potentially; there were modest changes from RDNA 1 to RDNA 2 in some areas and drastic ones in others), while still needing enough of the old design present for BC. So I guess a PS5 Slim, if they want to focus more on the main issues to target in improving on base PS5, would maybe keep the same 2.23 GHz clock or just go for something slightly higher than that, but sit around 2.3 GHz at which point it probably isn't worth doing because none of the main performance metrics would get notable boosts with that small an increase.

Yeah the focus for a slim is simply to provide a cheaper console but with good margins for Sony. Increasing processor clocks increases power consumption exponentially so its really not necessary for a PS5 slim. Maybe what they may be able to do is completely eliminate amd shift such that the PS5 slim has fixed clocks 2.23GHz GPU and 3.6GHz for the CPU. They need the slim console to sell at or below $350 while having better margins than the OG console. Those things would sell like hot cakes.

There is the option of designing a larger GPU for a Pro model that would bring a perf boost while still keeping the clocks around base PS5 level, and I guess that's an option. I just don't see the business motivations for Sony doing it though: it'd incur more costs, and that Pro model would sell only a sliver of the base model's sales. Also, there's no "4K TV" or "PSVR" style shift on the horizon, and base PS5 already seems developed with PSVR2 in mind. So if they don't increase the Slim revision clocks like I speculated earlier, I don't think they'd do anything else for a Pro model, and just look into increasing the RAM bandwidth instead and redesign/simplify the SSD setup. They could do 2 SKUs tho still; one with the 825 GB storage and another doubling the storage amount and having a (bundled, external 1P Sony-branded) Blu-Ray drive in the package for $100 more. And, technically, there's an off-chance that Sony could have designed PSVR2 to have some processing capability of its own, although maybe for post-processing if anything, maybe for partial framebuffers? This is really a stretch on my part though, I'm just having fun playing what-ifs on that point :p.

To be honest I was also in the camp that pro versions wouldn't make sense this gen because they wouldn't be as easy to market as the previous gen's pro versions. And I still think so, but if they can get higher margins on a pro console then they might just do it. Imagine a PS5 pro released 3 years from now, with a GPU roughly equivalent to a 6800XT and a better CPU, while being considerably slimmer. If retailing at $499, it could be marketed as pro model that offers higher fps at 4K. With this they'd simply discontinue the current PS5 and sell a PS5 slim($300-$349) and a PS5 pro($499-$549). Games would be designed around the PS5 slim(so also working on the OG PS5) and scaled up to the pro version for "higher performance". If the pro doesn't pan out then they can simply sell a slimmer PS5 with higher margins. $399 for disc model and $299-$349 for the discless model. This would be a huge hit. Only concern is the cost of DRAM and NAND.

Like I was saying before, it's more likely Microsoft develop a "Pro" style mid-gen refresh; not because they'd need it to compete with Sony per-se, but because I think it will benefit Azure-powered Xcloud streaming and Azure compute-side tasks even more than Series X in the future. Make it capable enough to stream 4 Series S game instances simultaneously, and that leads to higher-quality stream fidelity for GamePass Xcloud players at certain tiers. Sony may not feel as much a need to answer that with a PS5 Pro because they technically didn't need a PS4 Pro to compete with the One X (or even the threat of ever-more-powerful gaming PCs) going by the ratio of sales for PS4 Pro compared to base PS4. In fact, I'm starting to think that in lieu of a Ps5 Pro, Sony's replacement for that this gen is whatever they have going with PSVR2, I think that's going to be a nice surprise in terms of what tech they pack inside, etc.

Yeah they'll probably need those SoCs for their cloud gaming initiatives.
 
I think TSMC fabs will be on 3nm by 2023 for Apple products. So 3nm or 4nm for Microsoft and Sony's products in 2024 isn't impossible. 5nm will be old by 2024. A discless model of the Series X in a size similar to the Series S for below $400 is very possible by 2024. Maybe $299 is a bit of a stretch but I agree $349 is definitely possible. then $399 for a disc model. Although I think if Microsoft goes with extra Series consoles besides the X and the S they will seriously confuse consumers. Beyond 2025 a $300 Series X is definitely possible I may say even likely.

Your a touch pessimistic with your TSMC timelines, they are entering risk production of 3nm this year, and then entering full production next year. In 2023 they will be ending 2nm risk production and starting to ramp up 2nm full production
 
Maybe what they may be able to do is completely eliminate amd shift such that the PS5 slim has fixed clocks 2.23GHz GPU and 3.6GHz for the CPU.
Why would they take out smart shift? That would probably kill the yields with virtually no gains in performance.
Adopting variable clock rates with a threshold on power consumption was probably one of the better ideas of this generation and they're most probably going to get adopted by both console makers on their next consoles.


To be honest I was also in the camp that pro versions wouldn't make sense this gen because they wouldn't be as easy to market as the previous gen's pro versions. And I still think so, but if they can get higher margins on a pro console then they might just do it.
VR may change things at least on Sony's side, and they can also market the next-gens as having more raytracing, and/or UE5 demo graphics at 60-120FPS.
 
Your a touch pessimistic with your TSMC timelines, they are entering risk production of 3nm this year, and then entering full production next year. In 2023 they will be ending 2nm risk production and starting to ramp up 2nm full production
I was being conservative tbh. But thanks for pointing that out. So probably 3nm iPhones by 2024. I heard their going to be 4nm next year. And wonder what node PS6 and the next Xbox will be on...
 
I was being conservative tbh. But thanks for pointing that out. So probably 3nm iPhones by 2024. I heard their going to be 4nm next year. And wonder what node PS6 and the next Xbox will be on...
the biggest mystery is what they will call the sub nanometer processes, boasting that your the first to a 950 picometer process seems a bit of a let down after all this nanometer naming
 
Why would they take out smart shift? That would probably kill the yields with virtually no gains in performance.
Adopting variable clock rates with a threshold on power consumption was probably one of the better ideas of this generation and they're most probably going to get adopted by both console makers on their next consoles.



VR may change things at least on Sony's side, and they can also market the next-gens as having more raytracing, and/or UE5 demo graphics at 60-120FPS.

Interesting about the VR! Wonder how powerful the console would need to be to support VR.

You have a point though! I had confused things. A slim PS5 would still need to use AMD-shift. It's the PS5 pro that may simply get rid of it. If you can get better silicon that can handle the high GPU clocks in such a small box then why implement AMD shift? You could have more compute units running at 2.23GHz fixed. From what I've heard developers say, they prefer fixed clocks like on the Series X. I wouldn't be surprised though if something similar to AMD shift is implemented on the PS6 and next Xbox (for obvious reasons) but so far the fixed clocks from the Series X have provided better overall performance.
 
I can't tell if you want a more capitalist presence due to the lack of competition in your area, or a more socialist one due to the lack of enforced regulation on lifting the data caps.
Unfortunately, it seems you're getting none of either.



Just so you know, the RX 6700XT reviews are going live and those chips are actually averaging at 2.55GHz with some 3rd party cards doing stable overclocks up to >2.8GHz.
RDNA2 is way past the PS5's 2.23GHz at this point, and those clocks seems to be closer to what we should expect on mobile dGPUs.

And according to Bondrewd, higher clocks than these on RDNA2 were targeted at some point, for both the PS5 and the RDNA2 dGPUs.
RDNA3 on N5P seems to be targeting for 3GHz+ on higher-binned parts.

Whatever work AMD's Zen engineers did for RTG to increase clocks, it seems to be working quite well.

That's very good news! So it's actually very possible they could do a PS5 Slim design on 5nm and clock the GPU up (I gave 2.5 GHz as an example) while still getting much better power consumption performance than what they have currently. I wasn't crazy after all xD.

I'm actually pretty surprised at how aggressively AMD are able to push GPU clocks so soon. 3+ GHz for RDNA 3 without overclocking would be very good, I'm curious how far they can push the clocks with future architecture iterations, particularly for new consoles while keeping respectable power consumption targets.

Yeah the focus for a slim is simply to provide a cheaper console but with good margins for Sony. Increasing processor clocks increases power consumption exponentially so its really not necessary for a PS5 slim. Maybe what they may be able to do is completely eliminate amd shift such that the PS5 slim has fixed clocks 2.23GHz GPU and 3.6GHz for the CPU. They need the slim console to sell at or below $350 while having better margins than the OG console. Those things would sell like hot cakes.

Good points here as always, tho with the info @ToTTenTranz provided in their post apparently there's a LOT of wiggle room for clocks on RDNA architecture. If PC RDNA 2 cards are able to hit around 2.8 GHz already with overclocks on 7nm EUV, does that necessarily make a PS5 Slim with a more modest upclock on the GPU (say to 2.5 GHz) on 5nm look like such a tough thing to pull off while still enjoying the power consumption reduction benefits, more refined 5nm node process, and higher margins? It gives some hope ;)

True that increasing the clocks even a tad will exponentially increase power consumption and thermals (though the relationship between those two isn't 1:1, either), but we can kind of look at the....6800 I believe (that's the 40 CU RDNA 2 GPU correct?), see what power consumption and thermals are for that clocked at 2.5 GHz, and reduce power consumption costs by 30% to give a rough estimate of what a PS5 Slim at those clocks would hit at. Knock a bit more off of that, actually, because you'd have 4 less active CUs and no IC, bringing more savings on the power consumption and thermals.

I'm not so sure Sony will actually want to do away with variable clocks; one of the benefits of that vs. fixed clocks (and, we can look at PCs as an example for this benefit too) is that for games where clocks have an impact on extracting better performance, powering through with clocks at their peak will basically give "free" boosts to performance for those games. We've seen this already with several 3P games on PS5 relative to Series X. The drawback of course is, it's a pain on thermals because you're always running at peak clocks except when load forces downclocking, but if base PS5 is still sitting at decent power consumption amounts even with the implementation, it would seem desirable to continue with it in a Slim. Plus, removing it for a Slim would screw things up majorly for PS5 games coding with variable frequency in mind, it'd probably be too big of a design shift to be worth implementing.

To be honest I was also in the camp that pro versions wouldn't make sense this gen because they wouldn't be as easy to market as the previous gen's pro versions. And I still think so, but if they can get higher margins on a pro console then they might just do it. Imagine a PS5 pro released 3 years from now, with a GPU roughly equivalent to a 6800XT and a better CPU, while being considerably slimmer. If retailing at $499, it could be marketed as pro model that offers higher fps at 4K. With this they'd simply discontinue the current PS5 and sell a PS5 slim($300-$349) and a PS5 pro($499-$549). Games would be designed around the PS5 slim(so also working on the OG PS5) and scaled up to the pro version for "higher performance". If the pro doesn't pan out then they can simply sell a slimmer PS5 with higher margins. $399 for disc model and $299-$349 for the discless model. This would be a huge hit. Only concern is the cost of DRAM and NAND.

I didn't consider the prospect of extract higher profit margins from a Pro margin into it, that's definitely something they could use to justify it. But will the fanbase bite if they don't see the benefit outside of it just being a "Pro" model? Sony could run the risk of looking greedy IMO if they tried it without giving the hardware a purpose. I guess it would keep them at parity with Microsoft if Microsoft does a Series X mid-gen upgrade too but, again, it's not like the PS4 Pro sold gangbusters in the first place. I'm sure it was profitable for Sony but by a large amount? Likely not.

So if they want to try a "Pro" PS5 model, I'm guessing they'd just rather go with increasing the storage capacity. I would've said in the past that another factor for maybe doing a PS5 Pro would've been to keep PS gamers from drifting to PC but, again, there was little drift during the PS4 Era and I don't think PS4 Pro was the reason why seeing that it did a paltry number of lifetime units compared to base PS4. Plus, Sony seems more open to doing PC ports of their games, if the purpose of the consoles is to essentially keep selling software in the ecosystem they can save on R&D costs and production/distribution costs and encourage more support for their releases on PC (probably through EGS) by just handling ports that way that are enhanced say a year or so after the PS5 versions.

That encourages the hardcore fans to double-dip on PC more readily, entices PC players more, and allows them to push enhanced versions that can leverage powerful setups (more powerful than whatever PS5 Pro they could develop and release) to show off what the 1P teams can do with that type of hardware. Those who want the games Day 1 still have to buy on PS5 (or PS5 Slim), and porting them to PC with enhanced copies isn't going to impact the vast majority of PS gamers as that majority of mainstream gamers who simply choose to play on console out of convenience regardless. Tho some of this depends on the nature of Sony's deal with Epic on EGS, though EGS already gives a much bigger cut to publishers on it versus Steam or GOG tbf.

Node process for PS6 and Next Xbox is very interesting. Been thinking for a long time it'd be N3P. Why? Because you still get a lot of performance increase from that at console-appropriate TDPs, AMD's architecture seems very friendly with high clocks, it'll be a very matured and cost-effective node by 2026/2027/2028, and hardware accelerators will probably benefit from having that surplus in budgets.

For sure 2nm or maybe even smaller than that will be around by time of 10th-gen but I don't think 10th-gen systems actually need much smaller than N3P to be substantial jumps over the 9th-gen systems. And that's not a slight at PS5 or Series X; they're beasts. But 10th-gen will have its own needs to satisfy and I think both Microsoft and Sony will want to save on costs where they can. Very mature and less expensive N3P vs. more expensive and less mature 2nm or sub-2nm, which looks more attractive for a console when you've already got GPU architectures playing super-nice with high clocks on even 7nm, and advent of hardware accelerators coming into the picture in future iterations to intelligently give big boosts in performance without need for massive TF increases?
 
Perhaps a hybrid mix, where the infrastructure is provided to everyone then they can pick what policies they'd like to have by shopping for providers. Not to different from how electricity is handled.

Telephone/DSL providers were required to do this in the US ... and it didn't quite work out. The increased competition from multiple providers lead to a reduction in DLS subscription prices, but that's the only good thing that came out of it. Unfortunately for DSL, this reduced revenue income for the telco meant they had less money available to put into R&D much less infrastructure (fiber, for example) in less populated areas. This then snowballed in the wrong direction when Cable providers used their higher subscriptions and revenue to increase R&D and infrastructure expenditures to bring higher and higher speeds to more and more people. As a result, DSL has been mostly marginalized everywhere in the US except for some major cities where the telcos can afford to roll out high speed fiber.

OTOH - it has worked relatively well in Japan, but then Japan has little to no cable TV internet presence, so it's just the landline telco's competing with the OTA (wireless) telco providers for internet service. Thus, reduced revenue due to competing providers using their landlines hasn't lead to a disastrous downward spiral for DSL like it has in the US.

Anyways, to get this back onto topic ... I still see next-gen physical consoles people own in their homes in the 2025/2028 timeframe.

At this point, I'm not even sure when "next-gen" consoles will come out. Without some sort of breakthrough WRT memory and semi-conductors, there isn't going to be much available for a 2025/2028 console to use to claim a large "next-gen" leap. This gen had to a bit sideways to attack some low hanging fruit (storage speeds) as well as fledgling RT capabilities.

I'm not seeing huge breakthroughs WRT semi-conductors so CPU and GPU advances are likely to be relatively modest. That leaves RT, but that is also reliant on semi-conductor progress. I'm not sure if there's anything on the horizon WRT to cheaper and faster memory technologies so I'm just assuming we'll get faster memory, but also more expensive or same cost memory. Which doesn't leave much there for consoles if they want to maintain a sub 500 USD price point.

Perhaps the "next-gen" will be forced to increase console prices by 50-100% in order to realize a significantly large increase in capabilities such that they can be considered "next-gen".

It's tempting to think of better VR as a potential low hanging fruit, but we also need significantly more powerful consoles as well as significantly smaller, lighter headsets (probably without cords) and more capable (resolution, FOV, etc.) headsets in order for VR to get to a point where the mainstream console buyer to feel like they not only want one but can afford to buy one (in addition to the console hardware itself). Oh, which means the headsets also need to come down significantly in price. This all seems to be a bit much of an ask, I think.

IMO, this generation has laid the foundations for what some of us have termed "rolling" generations. I feel that's the way forward at least until there's some sort of breakthrough WRT computer and graphics processing and the cost comes down that more incremental updates that sell to the enthusiasts will be what's introduced as new.

This then means that the console makers will then focus more on the games than the hardware to keep people in their ecosystem.

Regards,
SB
 
Back
Top