... but why?
Predict: Next gen console tech (9th iteration and 10th iteration edition) [2014 - 2017]
- Thread starter Shifty Geezer
- Start date
- Status
I would bet incredible sums of ,money it wont be 2019 either. 2020 earliest. I would bet no on 2020 as well, but at least it's plausible. I'd probably say there's a (very) decent chance it wont come out in 2021 either. So, 2022 sounds about right. I exaggerate, only very slightly.
This is videogames, the one thing you can ALWAYS count on is things (games or hardware) will take FOREVER and then 6 more months for added measure.
Pretty much this. Sony obviously has a set roadmap for their next console but they are making money hand over fist right now and they havent even released all of their biggest hitters yet for the PS4.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
For any snapshot in time from now until next-gen releases the argument about them having not yet released all of their biggest hitters is going to be true.
Yet they are making good bank on PS4, but the Wii taught Nintendo a valuable lesson that it's not when you start to see sales dropping off that you start looking at designing a new console. These things take so long to design, that the internal plan for PS5 within Sony would have been fixed whether the PS4 was a runaway success or not.
What interests me also, is whether Sony will be looking to do another PS4 revision at 7nm? If they can cost-reduce the base PS4 price down to approaching PS2 EoL pricing levels, then perhaps they can see PS4 have much longer legs (especially in emerging markets) than PS3 had after the PS4 launched... a similar LTD to PS2 for PS4 may not be so unattainable.
They have a hardrive 99 dollars is impossible but maybe 149 dollars is possible 199 dollars will be possible for sure if they can have anothe PS4 revision at 7 nm...
EDIT: They will launch the PS5 as soon as possible because they learn their lesson after PS2 to PS3 fiasco, the worst offender was the 599 dollars/euros but arriving one year after the competition is difficult too...
The architecture too exotic for the multiplatform era was not very good too but not the worst offender because of PS2 success...
Tkumpathenurple
Veteran
True. The PS3 was the perfect storm of shit decisions and bad luck.
- A year later than its direct competitor, the X360.
- A worse GPU than the X360, despite that year long wait.
- The same amount memory, but a split pool and with a larger amount dedicated to its OS.
- Difficult architecture. So the advantage of the superior CPU was only ever apparent in first party games, and multiplatform games always looked worse on it.
- A worse user experience than the X360, one that meant you regularly had to wait for large chunks of time for updates to download and install.
- Inability to play music in the background or chat with friends at a system level.
- More expensive.
I loved my PS3 but, at the time, I wished that they'd used a more recent GPU architecture and another 256MB of VRAM, which I think could have fixed a lot of the above. That said, those failings taught them to build their first party portfolio and what to focus on with the PS4, which is the best console I've ever owned.
- A year later than its direct competitor, the X360.
- A worse GPU than the X360, despite that year long wait.
- The same amount memory, but a split pool and with a larger amount dedicated to its OS.
- Difficult architecture. So the advantage of the superior CPU was only ever apparent in first party games, and multiplatform games always looked worse on it.
- A worse user experience than the X360, one that meant you regularly had to wait for large chunks of time for updates to download and install.
- Inability to play music in the background or chat with friends at a system level.
- More expensive.
I loved my PS3 but, at the time, I wished that they'd used a more recent GPU architecture and another 256MB of VRAM, which I think could have fixed a lot of the above. That said, those failings taught them to build their first party portfolio and what to focus on with the PS4, which is the best console I've ever owned.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
Actually Sony had always had a strong first party portfolio. In the PS3 generation they merely built upon the strengths of what they had already established in generations prior. The big first party hits and stable of devs who seem to fairly consistently pump them out were cultivated over the course of previous gens..
So although the PS3 faced a cavalcade of sh!t early on, their investments in first party over previous generations are what really made the PS3 really come into its own.
Prophecy2k
Veteran
I may be wrong, but I'm sure they launched a PS3 at $150.
Also, wouldn't they be able to get around the HDD issue by including something like 128GB of flash on the board, like with the PS3 super slim.
With the PS4 now able to use external HDDs, they don't even need to include a HDD bay in a hypothetical super slim... meaning an even smaller console box and thus less cost on shipping and handling.
phoenix_chipset
Regular
I'm gonna bet on 2020 at the absolute latest. Sony and MS don't need to recoup losses from their console launches this time around. I could easily see it being 2019 but yes definitely not next year.
I think anything less than 256 GB would see the PS4 (and X1) as an absolute turdknuckle of a device. Individual games can hit nearly 100 GB, so with saves, the dash, video etc anything less than 256 GB would be borderline unusable and force an immediate external HDD purchase inflating the device cost. If you build around no HDD bay then you'd need an entirely different shell to accommodate 500 GB and 1TB machines that would make up the bulk of your sales.
Consoles can't afford to go backwards in terms of install space IMO, and a next gen system (basically Scorpio plus anything later) can't afford to be less than 1TB.
If Sony want PS5 to be a significant step above X1X, then late 2019 is the earliest they can possibly do it. And at that point it will be both a) expensive and b) expensive.
phoenix_chipset
Regular
One benefit of the split pool was the ps3 had more memory bandwidth except for things like alpha effects, where 360 got a free pass due to the eDRAM. There were quite a number of multiplat games that had better texture filtering and such on the ps3. Quite a few multiplats are actually better on ps3 and much more still compare favorably to their 360 counterparts. Biggest difference is 360 hardly ever got a Bayonetta, Skyrim or RDR tier port.
phoenix_chipset
Regular
Well it's going to be a large step up by default simply by having Zen vs. Jaguar. I mean, it's much more likely than them sticking with jaguar. And i'd say 12 TF would be doable by then, surely.
I wouldn't be surprised if $500 becomes the new standard launch price for consoles.
On GAF there's a sentiment (of course, almost 99% pro Nvidia forum) that Rx Vega is a complete disaster. Which, I wouldn't got that far, but it's definitely struggling. Mainly of course the issue is extreme power usage.
So some are basically saying AMD's power problems are reaching a point to handicap next gen consoles.
For the most part I think this is overblown, since consoles dont really push the bleeding edge where power use gets exponential. See Xbox One X which is a healthy 6 Tflops and integrated PSU/same size as One S.
Or for a hypothetical you could look at Vega 56, which being slightly off the top, is able to offer 10.5 Tflops and doesn't seem an extreme power hog.
BUT all that being said, is it an opening for Nvidia to get back in the race?
I guess the issues would be Nvidia's prickly/greedy reputation, and what to do about a CPU?
The CPU could only be something arm glued on, right?
I mean we see Nvidia in the Switch. Granted the running narrative there is Nvidia had a bunch of extra Tegras to offload at cost or something.
So some are basically saying AMD's power problems are reaching a point to handicap next gen consoles.
For the most part I think this is overblown, since consoles dont really push the bleeding edge where power use gets exponential. See Xbox One X which is a healthy 6 Tflops and integrated PSU/same size as One S.
Or for a hypothetical you could look at Vega 56, which being slightly off the top, is able to offer 10.5 Tflops and doesn't seem an extreme power hog.
BUT all that being said, is it an opening for Nvidia to get back in the race?
I guess the issues would be Nvidia's prickly/greedy reputation, and what to do about a CPU?
The CPU could only be something arm glued on, right?
I mean we see Nvidia in the Switch. Granted the running narrative there is Nvidia had a bunch of extra Tegras to offload at cost or something.
It's 2019 rather than 2020
- Status