Playstation 5 specs and release date:

>that's going to barely make the cut for 4K gaming
As if that matters at all. 1080p native upsclsed to 4K is all you're gonna get with consoles. Even top end GPUs can't do 4K 60FPS on all new titles, let alone with ray tracing enabled.

>802.11ac instead of WiFi 6

Attached: 473CCC18-16AA-4C85-B690-58D3206DA1DB.jpg (700x690, 15K)

/gd/ is best board

I agree, but they're claiming they can do 4k (with 60fps), so mainstream fags are going to be super disappointed when they find out Sony is lying again

Can you even make it believable?

Take a screenshot and repost it on March 20 :)

>wifi 6
>when most people barely even have 2.4ghz let alone 5ghz LET ALONE internet speeds above ~10mb
Hahahahah
What I wanna see is latest bluetooth. Fuck everything else wireless, that's what matters.

>performance between a RTX 2070S and 2080
>2TB ssd
>only 499$
come on nigger, at least make it to look real, a 2TB ssd cost around 200-300$, and a GPU from amd would cost around the same, and is 500$ just with SSD and GPU, faggot.

Attached: 1545671535268.jpg (1000x1133, 232K)

Are they actually going to put a 4K Blu-ray player in it this time.
>Be Sony
>create blu-ray format
>don't put 4K Bluiray in PS4
>decide to revise console with PS4 Pro
>still don't update the disc drive to 4K Blu-ray

Attached: 1535367251347.jpg (640x565, 60K)

How come? Usually it’s the other way around

Larger market

All those hundred+ costing components and no USB-C, you couldn't be more fake if you tried.

Sony is working to focus internationally it seems. They've been slowly moving a lot of their top brass to California and want to focus more on the American and European markets.
I just hope they don't fully cuck out and cave into the progressive demands of California.

what I'm looking for is a
FUCKING
WIFI
ANTENNA
WHY IS THE PS4 SO BAD AT WIFI

Is it common for people to game on WiFi nowadays?
From dial up and into the ethernet era, I have always ran cables to all of my computers and consoles.
WiFi is good for YouTube, but the delay it adds to gaming is very noticeable.

Attached: etherkiller.jpg (559x282, 28K)

>Is it common for people to game on WiFi nowadays?
Surprisingly

It's much more common then you'd think.

Not every household has the layout accessible for it, not to mention those that wouldn't care about the difference between an ethernet connection and wifi so long as it gets on the internet.

That reminds me, I have this friend who used to bitch about lagging all of the time. Meanwhile he was trying to use WiFi from the opposite corner of the house, and one floor up.
It's not that hard. Even when I've lived at places that wouldn't let me drill holes, I would just run the cable out of one window, up the side of the house, and into the window of the room where it needed to be.
The difference is night and day if you are gaming. Of course if you're just doing web browsing it doesn't matter. But I would never consider gaming on WiFi as an option, even for casual play.

Attached: 1505230802364.png (997x917, 1.07M)

>different floor
every fucking time

>CPU just BARELY an improvement over ps4
Fuck, it checks out.

Those threads are cringe.

The next playstation will be an underpowered PC with okayish specs and DRM all the way, AS ALWAYS.

Did you look at that CPU? Same number of cores as ps4, similar speeds. Thats pretty ass.

I can't wait to finally play games at 60fps at 1080p.

>Custom CPU
In other words, it's a bad laptop chip and we're using the word "custom" as a misdirection.

the next evolution in gaming

Attached: @nudeobama.jpg (1538x2048, 365K)

Sounds very weak. I'll wait for PS5 Pro.

It's a bullshit larp, but to play devil's advocate those aren't the actual prices.

If Sony makes a deal with Samsung or whatever to supply 2TB SSDs and wants to order fifteen million of them a year than they're not going to be paying the same amount of money per unit that you or I do.

>599.99
>plus tip

A 2TB SSD is still expensive as fuck. A 2TB HDD, sure. But the PS5 will not have 2TB of SSD, calling it now. Screen cap this, nigger.

Attached: 1505146274709.jpg (500x372, 34K)

PC fags on suicide watch

Or anyone capable of basic high school level understanding of economics.

>be cheaper than 500US$
$1500

No fucking way they will have a 1.8ghz cpu, 3ghz less than 35w would be more than possible and cheap from now and until next year refining 7nm

Attached: 1566103256814.png (1071x799, 929K)

They'll probably use a 5-bit NAND SSD. It'll go read-only mode after a couple of game installs.

Nah. Sony doesn't pay consumer prices for the SSD part alone.

The specs matter more and more because devs keep pushing for high spec demanding visuals and AI, meaning the games, regardless of how good, run like shit on current gen consoles.

Get your woke bullshit at 4k 60ps.

It is fake and gay but Sony would buy in bulk and get a far lower price than a regular customer

Yes companies get cheaper rates for buying in bulk and cutting deals. But not to the extent you are implying, lol. Feel free to cite anything claiming they can get 2TB SSDs at some insanely low price. Otherwise you're talking out of your ass.

Remasters of PS4 games, doesnt matter if it can play PS4 discs people will still buy the remasters thinkng their somehow better.

>1.8ghz

Attached: cover3.jpg (279x377, 26K)

these fake logos and console mockups keep getting gayer and gayer somehow

Everyone in the pipeline are cutting their margins as low as possible. It isn't just bulk. It is also removing certain redundant manufacturing steps out of the equation.

>buying a censorstation

So show some numbers. Because what you are implying has never been done for any previous console. Any time a company has promised a huge leap in hardware it has always come at a higher cost to the consumer.
You are out of your element and clearly have no idea what you are talking about in practice, you just pretend to understand the theory.

Oh boy i cant wait for the third console with 0 Games at Launch.
Ps3 had nothing for the first 2 1/2 years
Ps4 had one Game with bloodborne in the first 2 years

Yet it still wins every generation. How odd.

Residence and motorstorm were good launch titles but after that it took a while

>2080 graphics performance
>less than 500US$
:)

Attached: 1556050634465.jpg (1538x2048, 360K)

BUT WHERE ARE THE GAMES?

no more gay ass load times
21st century and still loading...............

I'm sure by consolefag standards they will be convinced they have a high-end gaming PC equivalent.

Attached: 1567799548158.jpg (1552x2000, 825K)

That is a fair accessment. But explain to me how PS4 could have a built-in capture card, big GPU and 8gb of super fast ram. Back in 2013 that stuff would also cost hundreds of dollars if you used off the shelf prices.

Show me a laptop with a zen2 8 cores

>most people don't have speeds above ~10MB

MOTHERFUCKER WHAT DO YOU MEAN. I'M BROKE AS FUCK, LIVE IN FUCKING MISSISSIPPI AND I HAVE 17MB/S DOWN WITH XFINITY

at

>1.8GHz
What is this, 2002?

Attached: 1552667944399.jpg (500x616, 54K)

CPU cores don't need to be any higher than 2ghz when proper multi threaded coding is done.

GPU is handling more and more of the shit these days, as well as compute cores, PS5 will be fine

Fuck you

performance this generation has been crippled by absolute dogshit CPUs and there's only so much multithreading can do

You think ps5 has the same cpu as the ps4 or you are that fucking dumb?

Who gives a shit, you fucking nerd? video games are for retards.

not at all, I expect PS5 to use a much better CPU and that won't be a bad thing at all

>4k meme
>paid online
unless I can downgrade resolution to 1080p I'm gonna skip this and this will be the first gen I'll go PC only.
nintyfags are not part of this discussion.

>1.8GHz

Attached: 101.jpg (1462x1462, 162K)

dumbass. sony can sell at a loss for 3 years. it's not the hardware that they need to make money on. They carry a wholly different business model than nintendo, which is why they have defeated them for the past 4 generations.

SSD's cost less than HDD's to make. SSD's should actually be like 40bucks a terabyte at this point, but PC gamers being retards payed the goy prices immediatey out of the gate because they had to have the shiny shit and it's been 10 years and they're still expensive as fuck.

Once mainstream consoles get them, the prices will plummet. Just like when 40GB HDD's in 2002 used to be like 100's of dollars

This is gay and fake of course. Gddr6 ram lol no. Even at gddr4 that would be too expensive for the 600 dollar target price. Again 2tb ssd would be too expensive. 8core zen 2 not really maybe if it were mobile low tdp. For 4k you need no more than 6gb of vram. Many optimized games use barely over 3gb. You can tell op is a console peasant who doesnt understand this tech.

>ray tracing performance between a RTX 2070S and 2080
you wish SNOY

>by 2023
>implying Sony won't release a PS5 Pro by 2023
Anyone who buys a PS5 at launch after the Xbox One X and PS4 Pro fiasco is a fucking retard.

Of course not but its still too expensive. That and the vram alone would be worth more than the processor, powersupply, case and peripherals combined.

Hes right you console faggot. Howcome you guys dont understand youre own tech. It takes atleast a 100 point iq to build a pc. No wonder you nigger cant break that barrier.

I just cant see them using anything better than a 1060 and a ryzen 2600 if they want to keep humane prices.

Do you you know how much at a loss? You can tell you work retail or fastfood because this shit is chinese to you. The price of the console also includes marketing, RMAs and legal shit. So consoles still have to be super low so when they barely go over in the red marketing and the rest is included. What your suggesting would sink the price of sony stock in the nyse because it would be insolvent. Fucking nigger.

Youre thinking desktop chips. Consoles use mobile/laptop chips and the switch ultra mobile versions

Well the drive for one thing. There are many aspects not lining up in OP's post though. Because he claims a 9th gen console will have a 1.8 GHZ CPU.
But just looking at the drive it would make sense for Sony to continue to allow user replaceable drives and ship with smaller HDDs, shifting the upgrade cost to the users.
Sure the future is digital and bigger disk space is needed, but I don't see why they would go all out with large SSDs as the default storage on their units. It will just stack more on the cost.
They will sell better like the PS4 did if they just have a 500GB-1TB HDD, and allow users to upgrade themselves.
Basically having a huge SSD come with it doesnt make sense business wise. There hasn't been and drastic change in SSD prices in recent years to suggest they will some how get them at 10% the cost of current public prices. Because even at 50% the cost that would still add hundreds onto the overall cost.

I have a decent memory and early ps3's were sold at an operating loss of 100-200 euro, depending on what you were reading.

But that's apples and oranges because everything has changed now. The economy is on verge of collapse, but also sony might migrate to cloud with ps5 being the final release.. meaning securing and binding your players to the account might be more interesting. Also PSplus and online sales >>>> brick and mortar stores.

So they might actually go for an even bigger loss. It could all happen, but definitely you're the retard, and I'm the one with financial skills. I work in finance;)

How can PC fags even compete?!

laptops use standard GPUS these days just like consoles and they arent cheap.
a laptop with a 1660ti and a laptop cpu that is weaker than the desktop 2600 is over 1000€ right now.
1060 laptops are still like 800.

US and JP release but no EU? FAKE AF.

Why do you think that? It is obvious that both Sony and Microsoft are going to be using this and manufacturing of this tech, while expensive now is rapidly falling in prices and they may look to take a hit on that tech initially but as the prices lower it'll be fine. Again, this is just one element of the console but I really don't think you should look too deeply into the 2tb SSD. There have also been suggestions that they are going by some super fast embedded cache and then a regular HDD at 2TB that can reach its peak read/write through a proper interface with the cache, and then everytime you boot up the game it loads the entire game into the cache (at a faster than normal speed because of a rigid custom storage protocol that only keeps track of games as a full block of data and therefore doesn't have random access to said data as that would be useless). Nothing in this thread isn't speculation.
Yes in the answer to the other guy I gave a reasoning as to how the storage could function. But there has been a big drop in SSD prices actually. Sony and MS have already promised a custom SSD solution, so I don't see why they would betray that currently. Sony has even shown tests publicly. Why would they do that and then retract?

By pirating games without hoping that someone will jailbreak a console 5 years after the generation is over.

Attached: 1505130644769.jpg (540x534, 67K)

why can't sony hire some engineers and scientist to produce their own new affordable tech. It's 2019 jesus christ.

and only normalfags buy them, because laptops like that are consumer-predatory bullshit hunks of trash

I noticed, why the fuck are "gaming" laptops so expensive?

>because laptops like that are consumer-predatory bullshit hunks of trash
sounds like consoles.

>AI
No

Atleast a console is easily affordable

they arent mega expensive considering the parts used and the screen they come in.

>what your
what you're

Because no console company has ever magically put in a $200 part at the fraction required to fit the $500 total price tag as presented in OP's first post. You seem to think companies getting parts cheaper through backroom deals will somehow make a $200 part less than a 1/4 of the original price. There is nothing to suggest they magically have that ability unless you can provide a reason as to why you think that, beyond your gut feeling.

yeah, because they use ten year old midrange laptop parts.
and thats ignoring how you have to pay for online every month which inflates the costs beyond alienware levels.

I wouldn't use the screen anyway, too small

Don't want games to carry a challenge so little timmy might not be enjoyed. AI might ruin that.

Same thing with hiding ELO and giving everybody something in mobas

But I already gave you reasons why I don't just think it is a backroom deal. I never suggested it had anything to do with that.

>Weaj cpu again
I know this is fake and gay. But why do they keep skimping out on the cpu... It's like they want to hold back games

It would end up costing more. It's not just Sony, most technology companies safe money by using products already being produced by other companies.
Almost no modern products are made entirely in house.

4k is a fucking meme, even more so on consoles. If you have a huge-ass monitor it IS a noticeable improvement, but TVs aren't going to get any bigger and at regular TV viewing distances 4k does fuck-all for you.

Online isn't that much, it's only 50 bucks a year and you get some exclusives for "free" monthly

what does the year have to do with anything

if you arent using the laptop for its portability its a redundant machine and a home PC is way better. that much should be obvious.
the heat solutions alone make PCs way better for a static device.

how much do you think that shit costs when mass bought under high industry contracts in 4 years? how about 6, or 8?

Oohhh... aaahh.

How much do you think a ps4 costs to produce now? And ... Sony makes money on ROYALTIES. the production costs are irellevant as long as the royalties keep streaming in. Both games, online purchases and blu ray. Not to mention selling those useless 4K, 3D or 1080p screens.

I live in Washington, big ol tech state of Seattle
And guess my max speed at 100 a month, through the single provider where I live. That's right.
5 mbps. .5 upload. Everyone I know around here has just as bad.

You haven't given a reason as to why the price drop would be more significant than previous console development costs. How will Sony get a $200 part to drop more than a 1/4 of the price?

Yeah It is obvious

>hardware so good for the price pc users would buy the ps5 and dismantle it
Thank you Sony, very cool.

>only
thats 350$ you paid extra over the course of the generation, making your already garbage at launch piss4 800$ by the time the piss5 comes out.

what

it costs the same as a full retail game and the """free""" shit is stuff anyone who cared could have got on sale for $10 months ago

>2TB SATA III SSD
>Navi GPU a little bit slower than a RX 5700X
>500US$

1.8
Oh wow, prepare to get fucking steamrolled by xbox scarlet jesus christ man

Attached: 1537194371045.jpg (718x718, 205K)

Where are you getting that price? Who is selling it to you? My reason is that I don't understand why you think it would have that cost inherently.

>Dismantling a modern Sony console
The parts are so low quality, shit starts falling apart the second you look at it. Half the time the screws have alresdy fucked the thread right out of the box, not to mention them being such low quality metal that you wear them out ludicrously easy

There are little to know graphically incredible games that are any good

Good graphics are a meme.. we have barely progressed from PS2 games

True the games they give are old, but even if they give one 10 dollar game a month, that equates to

$10*12months= 120 dollars worth of games a year

>he is stuck in 2003 where more ghz equals better

they don't just fucking go to best buy to buy a gpu and stick it in their console, that's not how it works
the only thing you might be able to use is the ssd which means you'd be paying 500 dollars for an ssd

that depends on the idea that you're seriously considering spending $10 and your time playing fucking atomic ninja

How's that multi-treading performance on that overheating Intel?

That is the current average price for a 2TB SSD.
So either they pay the same price, or they cut a deal with the companies to lower costs. That is true.
But to keep the system under $500 they would need the HDD/SSD to be much cheaper than $200.
So what I am asking is how you know they can get a $200 part to be less than 1/4 (or less) the cost? There is no evidence to prove that these companies get $200 parts at such a discount. So if you believe it is possible, I want to know how you could know that information/why you believe it is possible at all?
To put a 2TB SSD in a console, the price would be well above $500 just by simple math. Either it is impossible or it will be $500 with a 2TB SSD but every other component will be shit quality - which would lead to the console flopping.

I play alot of the games they give like older call of duty, Detroit, mad Max, metal gear solid...then they also give exclusives that you can't pirate on PC like God of war.

It's a misconception that Sony rip people off on this, they just force you to get games you may or may not like

Xbones and PS3s were both sold at significant losses at launch

If I cared about being given a random selection of games for a subscription I'd just use game pass. It's infinitely better than PS+ on those terms alone. So clearly it's not about games, it's about online paywalling.

Xbone was not.

No it's not about the online. It's a mechanism for Sony as a way to distribute unpopular low selling games without giving them away for absolutely nothing. It's a very good idea

Why? Not larping but here in mexico baja cali 25mb download is 20 us dollars. For 50 usd you get 100mb download and 6mb upload. Dont you guys have 5g now might be cheaper.

So then why did the put a paywall on the online?

>It's a mechanism for Sony as a way to distribute shit games and make you pay for it
you said it pal

it was a trojan horse to get fanboy spastics like you to defend them for charging for online.

My Internet hovers around 60 down, 20-30 up when my whole family is using it during peak traffic hours, and it maxes out at over 100 down and around 40-50 up, but my cousin just down the street with the same ISP and plan is getting a max of 5 down and 1 up and no matter how many new routers he gets, cooking food in the microwave disables his wifi
Weird shit, they're probably all gonna get cancer

>14GB of GDDR6
Biggest lie possible. They're going to skimp on ram. If there happens to be that amount, it's going to be slow.
2TB SATA is going to be their high end option, if manufacturing prices by then even go down, there will likely be a 500GB version.

>produce their own new tech
Sony has always done this, and always applied a brand tax for the privilege of having made it. Then they try to build an exclusivity ecosystem around it with the rest of their products, then wonder why nobody is bothering to use it.

You niggers fall for the same pr bullshit every gen, fucking wise up you retards

Attached: Surrender your brain.png (753x1043, 1.8M)

They had to, otherwise nobody would sign up to get the games they wish to distribute

a console requires
-a case
-psu
-cpu
-mobo
-ram
-hdd
-controller
-R&D

all for that for optimally under 500$ and at a profit if possible.
considering all that the hardware cant possibly be good, even if you count in discounts from AMD and other part makers.

So then it's such a shitty deal that they needed to lock something off just to get people to pay for it?

I wouldn't say shitty, I'd say unnecessary

>samsung
Lmao

Submit your leaks to WikiLeaks if they are real or gtfo.

>Specs

Assuming this is even real; I dont care about specs. I care about features

>Will online be free again?
>Can you manage software in a simple and straightforward way again?

>>Can you manage software in a simple and straightforward way again?
god I hope for this. The Wii and 3DS got this so right.

>Muh clock speeds are everything
According to AMD, Zen1 has 40% better IPC than Bulldozer(the PS4 uses an even slower architecture based on bobcat).
Zen2 adds another 15% over Zen1.
Meaning that Zen2 CPU could easily have 65 to 75% more instructions per cycle than the PS4's Jaguar CPU.

See It also has double the threads.
Meaning thinks like physics and particle effects could run on the CPU to free up GPU utilization.

>Retard with no reading comprehension
He said the Ray tracing performance will be between a 2070super and A 2080 and the RASTER performance (traditional graphics) will be slower than a 5700xt.

The absolute cheapest 2TB SATA 3 SSD I could find(through PCpartpicker) is $199. A better model is easily close to $300.
Even accounting for economies of scale and bulk discounts I don't see how Sony could get 2TB SSDs for that cheap. If a company could sell it for significantly less while still maintaining decent profit margins they would, and they'd sell like hotcakes.
High capacity SSDs are in very high demand both for personal use and especially for servers.

That can't be real. Nobody would seriously claim those 2 look similar.

Will it have backwards compatiblity with PS4 games?

With that CPU spec. Expect another round of PR trying to convince you that Silky Smooth cinematic 30fps is "just as good" as 60fps.

Attached: 30FPS is best.jpg (1270x1623, 286K)

That’s already confirmed I believe

Why the shit CPU?

Ahh typical kiddos

>they're gonna release another console for above 500 dollars
i don't have that much money to pay for a console brother.

See and

>no USB-C port
YOU HAD ONE FUCKING JOB SONY

I dont know why they dont just sell a shit 1080p model with like half the horsepower for 300$ and a 4k model for 600-700$ Its fucking easy! FFS,and for non pc players YES its that simple , resolution its the biggest factor for fps almost directly correlated.

You also need to somehow stuff all that in a fairly small box in a way it doesn't overheat.

yeah thats part of R&D and definitely not cheap.

Again you are looking at consumer prices which is not what Sony is buying them for. There are several layers of production in between production and consumer market that Sony doesn't need to pay for. Also, in 1 year that price will still fall.
The reason why SSD's are expensive for server use is because they need to be generic SSD's that can be used for mostly any application. What makes you think that Sony can't pay approx, $150 GPU $100 CPU $100-125 SSD $100 RAM? Why do you think Sony has to pay at least $200 for the SSD when your average consumer can get it for that price?

Because $300 does not get you 1080p/60 fps. By going 4K only they can skimp out on the CPU again and get a GPU that can do 4K30.

Not enough of a boost. Games will still be 30fps and Sony marketers will be trying to convince people why it's a "Better choice for the game". We had the exact same thing with the PS4 where they even showed trailers at 60fps but the final game was 30fps.

I use wifi on my PS4, but that's only because each google wifi pod thing only has one ethernet port, and that goes to my Xbox

>$150 GPU
Okay, getting a $400 GPU for $150 would be VERY impressive and very unlikely.
>$100 CPU
Sure, it's kinda shit so why not.
>$125 SSD
A bit of a stretch but maybe. an almost 50% price slash is just way too much for a bulk discount. $140 would probably be the limit for a cheapo model.
$100 RAM
Maaaybe. Probably possible with a very good deal.

So now you've spent $475 including an absolutely insanely good deal for the GPU and great deals for everything else. You still need:
PSU
Motherboard
Case
Controller
And assembly

Assuming they sell at a $100 loss for hardware alone(which would be even greater once you factor in marketing and R&D) that means you've got $125 for all those leftovers.
That's simply not doable. Additionally, it makes no sense for Sony to spend a massive amount of their hardware budget on a 2TB SSD in the base model when a smaller SSD would provide the same performance benefits. What's way more likely is that they've got a 2TB SSHD(HDD with a small SSD for cache).

>Okay, getting a $400 GPU for $150 would be VERY impressive and very unlikely.
>Assuming they sell at a $100 loss for hardware alone(which would be even greater once you factor in marketing and R&D) that means you've got $125 for all those leftovers.
>That's simply not doable.
How does the PS4 cost $199 when the GPU alone costs $229? (it cost $349 back then)
The PS4 and PS5 don't have your average motherboard and PSU. They are manufactured specifically to only be used for gaming and not to be able to remove and replace parts. The PS5 will essentially have the same cost as a PS4 just with inflated prices for the newer inflated hardware and perhaps a few new features that I don't see costing all that much.
Just look at what the past set a precedent for.

>imagine being this low iq

Test

The PS4 launched for $399, not $199
>GPU cost $349 back then
The PS4 GPU is not a 7850. The 7850 is actually around 26% more powerful than the base PS4's GPU. The 7970 is around twice as powerful, the GHz edition is more than twice as powerful. Its performance is closer to a 7790 which launched at $149. The CPU was most comparable to a very cheap notebook model and was probably $50-$70.

So no, the PS4 did not have a $349 GPU and it cheaped out on all other components, the unified 8 gigs of GDDR5 is also much cheaper than 8 gigs of DDR3 + 2-4 gigs of GDDR5 that would be standard for gaming PCs.

Attached: PS4 GPU power.png (641x458, 33K)

1080p 60 fps is not happening is it bros?

Attached: 1568030449000.png (420x420, 208K)

MLB the show is always fun

I'll sum up the PS5 for you.

Finally hitting 1080p on most games.
24fps standard.
70 dollar games.
Paid online subscription.
4 or 5 good exclusives for the generation that get ruined by the cinematic frame rate.
You'll never play those exclusives through more than once.
A boat load of sub par multiplats, bloatware and 6/10 games.

Then the PS6 will come out.

I never claimed the PS4 launched at $199 that is its current cost.
>The PS4 GPU is not a 7850. The 7850 is actually around 26% more powerful than the base PS4's GPU. The 7970 is around twice as powerful, the GHz edition is more than twice as powerful. Its performance is closer to a 7790 which launched at $149.
This isn't actually true. You can't just use a random benchmark and determine a price for the internal chip. The PS4 is based on GCN with 18CU's 32ROPS and 8 ACE units all running at 1.84Tflops which means it has MORE stream processors than HD7850 but a bit less than HD7870 (it is literally a custom 7870 with two CU's disabled) So you are wrong. Whatever GPU in the PS4 would be more expensive than the HD7850.

>Finally hitting 1080p on most games.
PS4 Pro actually did that.

>18CU's 32ROPS and 8 ACE units all running at 1.84Tflops
>running at 1.84Tflops
>running at
You're a fucking retard and you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.

I meant to write "at 800hz resulting in 1.84Tflops".
Happy now?
You can't debunk the rest I said so now you have to grasp at any straw you can.

>Custom 8-core/16-thread Zen2 CPU at 1.8GHz
>Custom Navi GPU with 40 compute units running at 1.4GHz
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA sony are finished what the fuck is this garbage hahahaha

Well I could point out that the 7850 and 7870 are both GCN 1.0 cards while the PS4 GPU is GCN 2.0. Additionally the 7850 draws 130W, the PS4 GPU draws 75W and the 7790 draws 85W.
And the 7790 is also a GCN 2.0 card with very similar performance to the PS4 GPU. It's clearly a custom chip but its performance is closest to the 7790 and if it was sold in 2013 it would be priced around that area. The 7850 and 7870 are both cards from 2012, their value fell significantly when AMD introduced the new GCN 2.0 cards.

>consoles
>still being a consolenigger in 2019+

Attached: facebook meme.jpg (720x742, 50K)

>PS4 GPU is GCN 2.0
Source?
>Additionally the 7850 draws 130W, the PS4 GPU draws 75W and the 7790 draws 85W.
Doesn't matter. The PS4 is an APU and it is custom. Just look at the actual chip specs of the GPU instead of looking at inconsequential things that aren't important for price.
>And the 7790 is also a GCN 2.0 card with very similar performance to the PS4 GPU.
It has 4 less CU's half the ROPs and even lower performance than the PS4 GPU. I gotta call bullshit. It is nowhere near the PS4's specs.
>The 7850 and 7870 are both cards from 2012, their value fell significantly when AMD introduced the new GCN 2.0 cards.
To what?

>Custom Navi GPU with 40 compute units running at 1.4GHz with hw ray tracing( ray tracing performance between a RTX 2070S and 2080, raster performance is a little bit slower than a RX 5700XT).

Lmao.
Max you'd get is some fucking 1060-1070 level of a GPU.
And maybe 1080 (nonTi of course) for """pro""" version later.

Fucking console retards.

Attached: 1549807621045.png (372x372, 138K)

>He said the Ray tracing performance will be between a 2070super and A 2080 and the RASTER performance (traditional graphics) will be slower than a 5700xt.
Ray-Tracing makes games unplayable without DLSS.

>inb4 30 fps is just fine in 2020
Lmao.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_4_technical_specifications#APU
inb4
>hurr durr wikipedia is not a source

>to what
The 7850 fell down to $169 by October of 2012
anandtech.com/show/6357/amd-cuts-radeon-hd-7850-prices-again

By 2013 you could even get higher end aftermarket models for around $170, and that's for the more expensive 2 gig version. Since the PS4 used shared RAM the price only matters for the GPU, not the VRAM.

>Jumping from 1.6ghz to 1.8ghz
>Even the ps4 pro is faster
>GPU rivaling a gtx 2080
Kek, make it more believable user

>tfw have a modded PS2/PS3/PS4 and will just play older games until PS5 gets hacked

Anybody else?

Attached: 1514999709840.webm (640x720, 2.87M)

Is Yea Forums full of esl?
Where's your reading comprehension user?
>Jumping from 1.6ghz to 1.8ghz
>Even the ps4 pro is faster
See and There's something called instructions per cycle, Zen2 has 65 to 75% more IPC than the PS4's jaguar.
>GPU rivaling a rtx 2080
See

>inb4
>>hurr durr wikipedia is not a source
Actually, that is a fair source. The problem is just that it says GCN2.0 and then links to a source that says it is GCN1.1
>The 7850 fell down to $169 by October of 2012
So a GPU that is worse than the one in the PS4 specs-wise fell to $169.
>Since the PS4 used shared RAM the price only matters for the GPU, not the VRAM
Exactly. The ram is one part of the GPU that the PlayStation didn't need additionally so they simply didn't have to waste resources manufacturing it. Hence the price was even lower for Sony. Can you imagine how many other tiny things they could cut out of it? In fact, they could cut out every single component except the GPU chip itself.

Oof Xbox Scarlett is going to tear this thing a new one

All insider knowledge points to PS5 being significantly more powerful than the next Xbox.

name one cpnsole where the cpu is stronger than the gpu, you can't

enjoy your low framerates

More like so devs can get even lazier and put it in less effort. Lets be real, most games have barely been increasing in complexity nowadays, cause most devs just see more power as an excuse to make games cheaper.

Except no?
There has never been a generation where playstation that was more powerful than Xbox

The original PS4 was more powerful than the original Xbox One

Replied to wrong post. Meant for

No it doesn't. I've been following this from day 1 and the only information we have is some guy saying a dev told him "more flops" at this current stage of the PS5 devkit compared to the current stage of the XBS devkit. We know absolutely nothing else about the power of each console and the verified insider on retardera called "Matt" has also claimed the XBS will most likely end up more powerful. There's barely any information on final specs but the one piece of information we have from this insider on resetera says the opposite and they asslick him on there. He's also a Sony insider so it's not like he's being biased towards Microsoft either.

In some ways it is, in some ways it is slower.
But the X1X curbstomps the PS4P

>In some ways it is, in some ways it is slower.
Nope, the original PS4 was always faster.

Who the cares about specs when the fucking thing wont have any games? PS1 and PS2 were lower specced than the competition and have some of the best libraries ever. The PS4 has shit all. They're ready to put it in the ground and it still doesnt have half the worthwhile games the PS2 had

I genuinely dont understand how people get excited for new consoles anymore. It's just the same shit with what will most likely be less games

Xbox one CPU is faster
PS4 GPU is faster

Which is why you get games like Hitman 2016 which is super CPU intensive performing better on xbox one than ps4. But in games which have lots of GPU effects or target higher resolution the PS4 performs better. The xbox one x completely curbstomps the ps4 pro though.

Not true. PS4 was significantly more powerful than xbox one.
Also, before E3 this year the insiders on twitter all had the same to say about PS5 being more powerful.
Why would a Sony insider say the PS5 is more powerful if it turns out to be a lie? Besides I don't follow what they are talking about on resetera I am only going by what I see on twitter and what Colin Moriarty has said on his podcast some time ago.

>In some ways it is, in some ways it is slower.
having a 5% faster CPU doesn't make up for 50% faster GPU even slightly

>GCN 1.1
GCN 1.1 is GCN 2nd gen or GCN 2 depending on who you ask. Same for GCN 1.2 being GCN 3 and GCN 1.3 being GCN 4. The naming scheme is a bit weird like that.
If you look up specifications you'll see the 7790 marked as either GCN 1.1 or GCN 2. And the 390 will be either GCN 1.2 or GCN 3.

>7850 worse than PS4 specs-wise
Sure as hell didn't perform worse. And yes, consoles do get GPUs cheaper along with other parts. But not 50% cheaper. They get a $200 GPU for $130. Or a $180 GPU for $120. Not a $400 GPU for $150 or a $220 SSD for $100.

And since this all started from that 2TB SSD consider that there's no real way a "gaming" SSD could really be cheaper than an ordinary one. The tasks for installing and loading games are very similar to just regular operation. Sequential write and random read are what you care about. There's nothing you can cut out, SSDs aren't exactly complex either. So you're relying on ONLY the bulk discount to get a 50% price cut which is very unrealistic.

Mustards btfo

>19m PS1s sold in Japan
>23m PS2s sold in Japan
>10m PS3s sold in Japan
>8m PS4s sold in Japan
>5m Vitas sold in Japan

Japan stopped caring about PlayStation so they're doubling down on FIFA and western AAA drivel.

No they aren't, XBoxes don't sell over there either. They're just going away from console gaming entirely and switching to mobile gachashit.

It's not only that
og xbone also gives more memory to games, has a 32MB L4 cache that is absent on the PS4, has superior API/software support via DX12, etc...

>8core
>14 gb ram
fucking why
>1.8ghz
>1.4ghz
LOL

Randomly throwing nigger and faggot in your post doesn't make you blend in, Reddit.

>8cores 16threads
Fixed that for you.

The Sony insider said the Xbox is going to be more powerful. There is only one person to date who has said the PS5 is more powerful and it was in reference to the current devkits as of like 2 months ago. He said the PS5 had "more flops" after speaking to a dev about the devkits allegedly. We know from official MS sources (and Greenberg himself) that devkits for the XBS weren't even out at the time of this leak because Greenberg said in an interview afterwards they were in the process of making them and distributing them so any devkit the dev who told that journo about "more flops" was a very early prototype most likely.

Currently the single piece of information from someone who is supposedly a very reputable Sony insider says the XBS will be more powerful at release. Aside from that we have nothing else concrete to go on. There's also the whole 2ghz leak and the 2019 PS5 release rumors which if true mean the PS5 cannot be more powerful than the XBS but that's a long topic but does make sense with the information we have at hand from the komachi leaks.

8 cores and 14gb ram is overkill for gaming, especially optimized consoles. 1.4/1.8ghz is underpowered as fuck.

hyperthreading can actually slow performance if you don't use it right, and given the state of today's developers, well....

>Now idiots have to buy a seperate 4k blu ray player
>profit

>Meanwhile Switch has already passed PS4 in less than half the time
>BEFORE Pokemon and Animal Crossing

Make excuses all you want, the Vita sold like ass too. People love to pretend it was some huge success in Japan but it sold something like 5.3m units there, that's very low. Japanese consumers just stopped caring about PlayStation, sorry.

How is anyone going to handle that much power?

Attached: 1567299724513.jpg (564x496, 42K)

>1.4/1.8ghz is underpowered as fuck
Clock speeds don't matter as much as you think they do.
Besides a 1.4Ghz on the GPU is kind of the norm.

The switch is a handheld though. Japan isn't interested in home consoles anymore.

It's gonna be 128/256GB SSD and 1TB HDD

Make excuses all you want, numbers don't like.

So I'm guessing it will be backwards compatible and exclusives will be very far in between.

>So I'm guessing it will be backwards compatible

Attached: 1286769951730.png (203x197, 55K)

>1.4Ghz on the GPU is kind of the norm
No it's not, not for AMD's Navi architecture. The 5700 XT has a 1.6Ghz base clock and 1.8Ghz boost clock(which it can easily sustain indefinitely with aftermarket coolers).
Nvidia's recent cards are also around the 1.6-1.8Ghz mark.
1.4Ghz is pretty low and it will lead to performance below the 5700(non XT).

For CPUs clock speed provides a pretty linear improvement in both multi threaded and single threaded performance. It's VERY important. A Zen 2 CPU with 8 cores and 16 threads running at 1.8Ghz will likely be around 40% the power of a 3700X assuming all cores are at full load, so around the performance level of an R3 3200G or less. And that's assuming perfect optimisation, all games today still require decently high single-threaded performance and that's really going to bottleneck a CPU running at only 1.8Ghz.

What excuses? The 3DS also sold gorillions. I don't see how the Switch selling well is in any way related to Japan "doubling down on FIFA and western AAA drivel". The switch has very few western AAA games.

>If you look up specifications you'll see the 7790 marked as either GCN 1.1 or GCN 2. And the 390 will be either GCN 1.2 or GCN 3.
Fair enough.
>Sure as hell didn't perform worse.
Depends on what metrics of performance you are going for. It already has at least 5gb of ram available which is more than 7850
>no real way a "gaming" SSD could really be cheaper than an ordinary one.
But it isn't an Alienware branded gaming SSD. This is a custom made unit by Sony.
>But not 50% cheaper. They get a $200 GPU for $130
Dude. Source.
>Sequential write and random read are what you care about. There's nothing you can cut out, SSDs aren't exactly complex either.
You can cut out everything else than sequential write and random read. Also, you can design your hardware around if it needs to read a lot or if it needs to write a lot (usually it doesn't need to write a lot for gaming). SSD's have look-up tables that use some extra hardware to make sure everything runs in order, that can either be replaced by parts that doesn't need to manage all circumstances. An example of this is a Sony patent from not so long ago for an SSD.
>freepatentsonline.com/y2017/0097897.html
I recommend reading in the 'Summary' section.

The US is a big place.
Internet coverage was progressing well with local competition for a while. But the competition never really spread.

Let's say you live in bumfuck Missouri. All it takes is a large ISP opening up there and suddenly everyone has it because it's a necessity. No incentive for a local ISP because of upfront cost of opening, and you open in an area with no new buyers. Most rural internet is boomers, they don't upgrade, they gladly pay 200 for 5mb because they know nothing else.

Toss in lobbying and just how rich major ISPs are, and rural areas are FUCKED. Maybe 10% of rural areas have competition, almost alaays merely where californians that moved to the country work from home and demand high bandwidth.

Maybe in 10 years the government will wake up and subsidize ISP competition. It's not a monopoly, it's an expensive as fuck business to enter, it's a need for almost all people so first ISP to open in an area wins every customer, etc.

Attached: 1551158655813.png (650x650, 10K)

>Aside from that we have nothing else concrete to go on
We have nothing concrete to go on period.
I am only talking about what the confirmed insiders said around E3 time.

Nice 4K bluray player

Well this "Matt" guy is extremely highly regarded by resetera and he said both consoles will have hardware RT after some people were questioning whether Sony will have hardware or software RT and he's been verified as an insider over there so he obviously knows his shit. If he is able to tell us the PS5 will have hardware RT and the mods have verified that he does know his shit and then he says the XBS is going to be more powerful, I have no reason not to believe him.

>2TB SATA III SSD
That alone is $700 lol

>resetera
its nothing

Not how it works. Anyone can be verified and how would he have access to both consoles? I get that you are talking about the devkits probably. I am just saying I have seen information to the contrary.

Maybe they can, but you're naive if you think that they'll sell at the same price

>Sony marketing has already ramped up hard to damage control dismal specs
Another 7 years of 30fps incoming

>source
Price of EDSFF SSDs obviously. They're specifically designed for servers and only sold to companies, usually in bulk. 7 cents per gigabyte is generally a very good deal on those and that would get you 2TB for $140.
>You can cut out everything else than sequential write and random read
SSDs are not that complex. You can't just "cut out" random write and sequential read to save costs, you still need the same amount of flash memory which is going to be the same in almost all cases.
>look up tables
Mapping and look-up tables can be configered to favour certain tasks over others, sure. But this isn't going to reduce costs, it's going to increase performance. And you can't use increased performance to reduce costs because you have a cost floor induced by the price of the flash memory itself.
That link you posted relates to a controller design and would in no way reduce the cost of NAND flash memory.

To you maybe and I don't particularly like a lot of the posters there either but there are loads of people who have industry links there and if this guy who has been making these claims about PS5 hardware RT and XBS power has been verified and made an active moderator on there then I can only believe he is the real deal. It's a very tightly run forum where you can be banned for simply disagreeing with someone so I don't believe they'd make some liar a verified insider and mod unless he's legit.

What evidence can we even have to the contrary when the consoles are over a year away and final hardware clocks and even stuff like RAM isn't even finalised. All we can go on is devkits.

they ban people for not aligning with their politics.
they dont even give a shit about videogames.
all the actual insiders that used to be on neogaf fucked off years ago.

So exactly how backwards is this thing compatible?

I wouldn't expect anything except ps4 (and the ps2 games you can download on ps4)

So it'll have the specs my PC has now. Good to know.

>Price of EDSFF SSDs obviously. They're specifically designed for servers and only sold to companies, usually in bulk. 7 cents per gigabyte is generally a very good deal on those and that would get you 2TB for $140.
I asked about the GPU.
>Mapping and look-up tables can be configered to favour certain tasks over others, sure. But this isn't going to reduce costs, it's going to increase performance.
>That link you posted relates to a controller design and would in no way reduce the cost of NAND flash memory.
It can reduce cost if they use non-rewritable storage for the look-up tables. They could do this simply because it is in a console.
But even so, $140 would be absolutely doable for a console because they could cut-out the requirement for blade interface compatibility and whatever the server computation business requires.
They could also go a different route which is what I initially proposed about using the NAND flash as a cache at around 256gb and then they can just use a standard HDD for whatever they want.

Based.

Thank you, I will continue with the mid-tier PC that I have invested in and built, and will only continue to improve for less money than a PS5, which will have only a handful of shitty exclusives when I can get most everything else on PC with better Ghz, RAM, and storage options, ultra-convenient Internet access, mods, past console gen emulations, editing software, word processors, and the works, while older exclusives are best left for the dusty PS3 that I love because PlayStation peaked with the PS3.

You fucking frame-locked cinematic experience A-list actor-loving Kojima-suckling God Of War 4 is superior to everything shills.

There's not much publicly available info to set a precedent for bulk discounts on gaming GPUs. However there's some data from the mining boom where Amazon offered a 5% discount for bulk over 100, up to about 10% on bulk over 1000.
Sony would obviously be needing these in the millions but I think it's very reasonable to assume they wouldn't get a discount higher than AMD's gross margins(pic related). Huge bulk heavily reduces operating costs and potentially increases operating margins but those can't ever go above gross margins.
Sony selling the PS4 at a modest loss makes sense. AMD selling Sony APUs for a loss makes zero sense. Assuming AMD still wants to make some kind of profit the biggest discount would probably be around 30%.
>It can reduce cost if they use non-rewritable storage for the look-up tables
That would lead to very negligible cost savings
>They could also go a different route which is what I initially proposed about using the NAND flash as a cache at around 256gb and then they can just use a standard HDD for whatever they want.
So an SSHD and not an SSD.

Which I mentioned in my first reply as a far more likely option for a console.

Attached: AMD margins.jpg (587x558, 38K)

>$500
>It's happening again
OH NONONONONONONONONONO

Attached: GIANT ENEMY CRAB.png (709x397, 403K)

Attached: Freddy Francesco.jpg (298x247, 49K)

RIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDGE RACER!

What is IPC

That is a terrible logo. No one would know what it means.

get out of Yea Forums you nigger

>user post ps5 specs yesterday
>DF post this today:
youtube.com/watch?v=fzPo7gu-fTw

hmmm

Really makes you think doesn't it

Something no consolekek really understands and throws around random numbers provided by marketing.
Just like teraflops or memory size. Remember when people were creaming their pants over EIGHT(8) GIGABYTES OF GDDR5 MEMORY in the PS4?

amazon.com/Intel-660p-2-0TB-80mm-978351/dp/B07GCLLKDC/ref=mp_s_a_1_7?keywords=2tb ssd&qid=1568130510&s=gateway&sr=8-7

Also consider at least 50% discount for bulk orders and it will cost much less than you thought.

>inb4 qlc ssd
You are delusional if you believe sony puts something else inside. It is the perfect storage technology for a console, ultra cheap, very fast and less durable than traditional technologies, so you have to buy another one just a few years after the warranty expires, when you write to it more than 400tb

>So an SSHD and not an SSD.
>Which I mentioned in my first reply as a far more likely option for a console.
Not entirely. The SSD would be embedded on the board and the HDD would be just like the one in the PS4 (with current day standards ofc).
It would still be separate SSD's and HDD's.

Still slower than my 2080ti and 2700x at stock clocks
Pointless remember when consoles used to use high end hardware that's wasn't off the shelf?
The x360 ps2 gc n64 and dc all had besboke custom hardware that want available in pc hardware side for years now they've been using off the shelf shit for over 8 years it's a joke
Fuck cucksoles

That makes even less sense. A 2TB unified SSHD could somehow be marketed as a 2TB SSD if you squint really hard.
A 256GB embedded SSD with a 2TB HDD really wouldn't.

No one is saying that it will be marketed that way. We just know for a fact that the PS5 will have an SSD. It wouldn't be inaccurate to put "2TB" on the box.

From the OP:
2TB SATA III SSD
That's not really ambiguous.
If you want to discard that why not start discarding all the other specs that seem a bit high like the 352-bit memory bus(the 5700XT is 256-bit, as is the RTX 2080).

No one need censorship SJW onions toster

Already outdated

So what I took away from that 57xt 3x faster than the xbox one x gpu assuming it hits the 2ghz core clock on a mature 7nm process

Another thing it didn't get into was dxrt performance (for obvious reasons) which will be huge this gen

Well, that portion was just speculation. I feel that the OP's specs are rather alien.
14GB GDDR6 memory with a 352-bit bus? Weird amount of memory and looks like a slightly cut-down bus-width (from something insanely big)
Why put emphasis on SATA III?
1.8ghz CPU? Why is it clocked lower than PS4Pro's CPU?
Why include info on a generic Ethernet and Wi-Fi?
The announcement date also seem way far back. I believe the PS4 was announced in February and then released November.
I think the entire OP is questionable.

>not start discarding all the other specs that seem a bit high like the 352-bit memory bus
You have to take in count both the RXT 2080 and RX 5700XT have 8GB of memory, OP listed 14GB(the more the memory the higher the memory bus needs to be to feed that memory) also OP said the bus is shared between the GPU and CPU so it make kind of sense for it to be high.

>Why put emphasis on SATA III
Probably because SSHDs don't do NVME
>I think the entire OP is questionable.
So why spend so much time arguing how Sony could magically obtain 2 TB SSDs for $100 or less? We both clearly know that's not happening and that a full-on SSD is unlikely.

I never said that they would be able to do it for $100 or less. I just said that it wouldn't be impossible to have that in the next-gen PlayStation.

>14GB GDDR6 memory with a 352-bit bus? Weird amount of memory and looks like a slightly cut-down bus-width
The RTX Titan can managed 24GB of GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus just fine.
>1.8ghz CPU? Why is it clocked lower than PS4Pro's CPU?
Because and Zen 2 instructions per cycle are much higher than PS4's jaguar.
So even the clock speed is lower it will be much faster than the PS4 Pro Jaguar CPU.

The only thing im interested in. Backwards compatibility. Will it ONLY be backwards with Ps4... or maybe the others as well.Because it is backwards with ps1-ps4: Then its a instant day 1 purchase.

>gamecube
>A powerpc CPU similar to those in a mac and an AMD GPU
>this is somehow not "off the shelf parts"

Wel to be fair it had a bespoke drive and soc setup so it was hardly off the shelf.
I don't count the ps3 because it was a clusterfuck the cell was the worst CPU/apu/gpu ever and was so weak they scrambled to shove a rtx aka 78gt in there as amd told them to go jump
Would have been weird back then if things went the other way and they both used the same gpu between x360 and ps3

> $150 GPU $100 CPU $100-125 SSD $100 RAM
This is your own price breakdown.
>I just said that it wouldn't be impossible to have that in the next-gen PlayStation
It also wouldn't be "impossible" that you'll win the lottery. It's just really improbable.
Looking at the historic example of the PS4(which didn't sell at a loss since sony was in deep shit) expect specs comparable to a low-midrange gaming PC. I wouldn't really expect a 5700XT level GPU either, that housefire is not exactly console-friendly considering their very limited cooling.

>The RTX Titan can managed 24GB of GDDR6 with a 384-bit bus just fine.
That didn't answer the question. Why are the specs so fucking weird?
>So even the clock speed is lower it will be much faster than the PS4 Pro Jaguar CPU.
That didn't answer the question. The size on the die will likely be the same relatively. But that would mean the clock could be way higher as a result. Why would they shrink the CPU chip to 7nm but not increase the clock? It would almost be free performance. The PS4 CPU is already low power.
>(which didn't sell at a loss since sony was in deep shit)
It did sell at a loss. I recall them saying that everyone had to buy a game and sign up for a year of PS+ before they were even.
>expect specs comparable to a low-midrange gaming PC
That is what they said last time but the GDDR5 and GPU in PS4 wasn't mid/low for the time at all.

>GDDR5 and GPU in PS4 wasn't mid/low for the time at all
GDDR5 is 2007 tech user, not exactly top of the line in 2013. And 8 gigs of unified GDDR5 wasn't really better than 8 gigs of dedicated DDR3 system memory and 2-4 gigs of dedicated GDDR5 video memory.
The GPU was pretty midrange at the time, definitely worse than an R9 270 or GTX 760, midrange cards that launched before the PS4.
The CPU was absolute trash even for the time. So overall on the low end of midrange for that year.

>Why would they shrink the CPU chip to 7nm but not increase the clock?
Probably because they want to keep the CPU TDP as low as possible? Consoles come in small boxes remember, you can't have a 95W TPD CPU and a 175W TPD GPU in a small box.
I guess is that a Zen2 chiplet running that low will have a TDP of about 15-25W and the GPU about 165 to 175W to make a 200W package in total.

The pro has a 150W GPU as does the X1X. The RX 5700 is 180W so I'd expect a scaled-down console APU version to be around 150W as well.
That's about the limit of what you can get away with since even if you have a more powerful PSU you can't really cool them efficiently in such a small form-factor without the fans getting ridiculously loud.

OP already said is a weaker RX 5700XT running at 1.4GHz(instead of the 1.6GHz base of the PC part) but it has HW raytracing so that ramps up the TDS.

>wasn't really better than 8 gigs of dedicated DDR3 system memory and 2-4 gigs of dedicated GDDR5 video memory.
Yes, it was. 8gb of 5.5ghz memory was an eye-opener at the time. None of the developers predicted it.
>definitely worse than an R9 270 or GTX 760, midrange cards that launched before the PS4.
R9 270 came out around the same time as PS4 and GTX 760 absolutely failed vs PS4. It could barely even run the call of duty game that came out at the time without huge framerate issues. Even Xbox One outperformed it.

*TDP

The 760 was faster than the 270, what are you on about? And they could both run CoD: Ghosts just fine as long as you weren't doing ultra with high MSAA, which the PS4 definitely wasn't doing either. Not to mention that the PC port of Ghosts was notoriously badly optimised, Advanced Warfare is a much better example.

>8Gb of 5.5Ghz memory
Even the 270X had 5.5Ghz memory. The 280 had 6Ghz memory, it wasn't anything revolutionary. And it wasn't 8 gigs of VRAM, it was 8 gigs of shared memory. It didn't start some revolution for texture size either since trying to do 4K textures just wouldn't work with the base consoles.
Separate system and video memory is definitely better than shared since shared memory effectively halves throughput and GDDR5 memory just isn't great for CPUs.

>Even the 270X had 5.5Ghz memory. The 280 had 6Ghz memory, it wasn't anything revolutionary.
Tell that to the devs who all thought and expected it would be half that right up until they announced it at the reveal event.
>And it wasn't 8 gigs of VRAM,
It is 5.5gb of ram for games [insert GTX970 joke here]. Few cards had that much ram of that speed at the time.
>Separate system and video memory is definitely better than shared since shared memory effectively halves throughput and GDDR5 memory just isn't great for CPUs.
I don't think this is true. Shared memory lets them traverse the same data much faster than otherwise.

>devs keep pushing for high spec demanding visuals and AI,
>AI
lol

>I don't think this is true
You can think what you want
>traverse the same data much faster than otherwise
What the fuck is this even supposed to mean? Traverse data? A shared memory bus that has to handle both RAM and VRAM is going to hit its limit sooner than 2 buses, each dedicated for system and video memory. This is not up for debate.
There's also no advantage to having it all in the same location, video memory is on the video card right next to the GPU die, there's basically no added latency. Additionally, GDDR5 RAM is optimised for texture streaming that's why it comes with such a large bus(256 bit is common these days) but it has a much higher latency than SDRAM. Frequency is not the only decider of performance for CPUs, latency is extremely important especially in games. Unified RAM means you have to deal with both a shared bus that has to handle more on its own and higher latency RAM for the CPU. It is objectively worse, there's a reason PCs don't do it.

>Tell that to the devs who all thought and expected it would be half that right up until they announced it at the reveal event.
How does this matter when comparing it to a midrange PC at the time? The devs expected even lower specs for the console, who cares?

the clocks speeds make sense
i wanted the cpu clcck speeds to be higher, but it seems sony is really expecting devs to go all in on properly programming for the the amd cpu's, ram is high because devs want to create ram hungry games to impress the lemmings, the rt hardware will probably be the most interesting thing about this gen

>A shared memory bus that has to handle both RAM and VRAM is going to hit its limit sooner than 2 buses, each dedicated for system and video memory. This is not up for debate.
It is when in a console. On a PC I would agree because it doesn't have an OS that would consider anything in this regard.
They actually use the GPU in the PS4 for game logic in some games. Heck Dreams uses it to calculate edits in the loading screen/non-graphics related.
>Frequency is not the only decider of performance for CPUs, latency is extremely important especially in games. Unified RAM means you have to deal with both a shared bus that has to handle more on its own and higher latency RAM for the CPU. It is objectively worse, there's a reason PCs don't do it.
If this was true then why did developers specifically ask for a shared memory pool? Also, shallow bandwidth is something devs actively optimize for already. You forget that this is a console. Sure the GDDR5 is close to the GPU die in a PC but you have to remember that it is an APU. What is the benefit of splitting them up? In fact, they were able to retroactively give developers an additional 1GB of flex ram just with a firmware update. If it was split, then that extra 1GB would have been dedicated to CPU related tasks for no good reason. Also, they get to cut the cost of the bloat in having separate memory buses.
>How does this matter when comparing it to a midrange PC at the time? The devs expected even lower specs for the console, who cares?
Because they weren't low spec for the time. You just compared it to future GPU's like 270 and 280 and claimed "it wasn't anything revolutionary" Apparently it was.

>future GPUs
The Rx 200 line launched in October of 2013. The 270 specifically launched on November 13th, while the PS4 launched on November 15th. They were for all intents and purposes contemporary, not future GPUs.
>On a PC I would agree because it doesn't have an OS that would consider anything in this regard
Doesn't change the fact that 2 buses will always be faster than one.
>devs specifically asked for shared memory
Because it makes it MUCH easier to work with when you don't have enough memory overhead for both CPU and GPU like a PC would. A low-end gaming system would have 8 gigs, most gamers even back then were running 16 gigs for system, which is way overkill but DDR3 memory was insanely cheap in those days(unlike nowadays due to the RAM shortage). 4 gigs of VRAM is also still enough for 1080p gaming. The fact that it's easier to work with given the constraints doesn't mean it's better.
>What is the benefit of splitting them up
System optimised memory for the CPU, texture streaming optimised memory for the GPU, along with not having to share one memory bus with a maximum width.
>They actually use the GPU in the PS4 for game logic in some games
PC games do this too sometimes. Shared memory has absolutely nothing to do with it. Productivity software heavily relies on GPU acceleration but still mostly uses system memory. Shared memory is a workaround for low memory systems, not an improvement.

Attached: PS5 is alive but has no games.jpg (1199x674, 171K)

>They were for all intents and purposes contemporary, not future GPUs
Right but that GPU didn't have as much speedy memory as the PS4.
>Doesn't change the fact that 2 buses will always be faster than one.
But somehow still not what devs prefer and more rigid.
>A low-end gaming system would have 8 gigs, most gamers even back then were running 16 gigs for system
I don't think you know what most gamers have then. You'd be shocked to see what they are using even nowadays.
>4 gigs of VRAM is also still enough for 1080p gaming
But it was also rather expensive. You had to buy an overpriced version of the card for that shit, not to mention it would still be less fast memory than what the PS4 had available.
>The fact that it's easier to work with given the constraints doesn't mean it's better.
Quality over quantity. You can get more done with talented developers than with brute force hardware. This should be common knowledge at this point.
>System optimized memory for the CPU
Yet somehow this tablet tier CPU in the PS4 is able to do rather complex physics, AI and amount of draw calls no equiv PC CPU can do.
>texture streaming optimised memory for the GPU
Which isn't a bottleneck currently according to the devs.
>along with not having to share one memory bus with a maximum width.
Which is fine since they learned from the gen before how to optimize for that effectively.
>Shared memory is a workaround for low memory systems, not an improvement.
That depends on what it should be an improvement on.

And in practice you'll only get 70% of that performance because it'll be another fucking housefire

Attached: ps4 housefires.png (1682x396, 43K)

You're in too deep, you read too many hype articles without actually understanding what hardware actually does.
>Right but that GPU didn't have as much speedy memory as the PS4.
6000Mhz>5500Mhz
And the PS4 never used 5.5 GB for just video memory, that would be stupid considering it can't even do 1080p60.
>But somehow still not what devs prefer and more rigid.
More... rigid? I don't even... you clearly have no idea what a memory bus even does.
>what devs prefer
irrelevant
>You'd be shocked to see what they are using even nowadays.
What people use in CSGO/dota machines is irrelevant, those aren't midrange gaming PCs.
>Quality over quantity. You can get more done with talented developers than with brute force hardware. This should be common knowledge at this point.
How is this even slightly relevant to the power of the machine itself? It just isn't. The PS4's unified memory isn't "higher quality", it's actually lower quality.
>Yet somehow this tablet tier CPU in the PS4 is able to do rather complex physics, AI and amount of draw calls no equiv PC CPU can do.
No PC CPU existed that was so weak. But even i3s could play multiplats at 30 FPS(the consoles were also at 30), 8th gen games are very easy on CPUs. Hell, you could probably run a lot of 8th gen games at 60 with a shitty i3.
>Which isn't a bottleneck currently according to the devs.
Irrelevant. This is about hardware power, not what some devs think.
>Which is fine since they learned from the gen before how to optimize for that effectively.
They learned how to magically expand the memory bus width? Someone call AMD and tell them the 4096bit bus on the Radeon VII was totally pointless, you can just expand it via software!
>That depends on what it should be an improvement on.
No, it doesn't. Dedicated system and video memory will always be better if you can afford to have enough of both. Even midrange PCs can do that.

>And the PS4 never used 5.5 GB for just video memory,
It doesn't need to. But it can which is the important part.
>that would be stupid considering it can't even do 1080p60.
Now im starting to think you are just a troll.
>More... rigid? I don't even... you clearly have no idea what a memory bus even does.
How were they going to allow that extra memory to be unlocked and ready for use for whatever the devs decide then?
>irrelevant
Not really no.
>What people use in CSGO/dota machines is irrelevant, those aren't midrange gaming PCs.
They are low range. But they are so far below PS4 that calling PS4 lowrange is like calling a Lancer Evolution a Lada.
>The PS4's unified memory isn't "higher quality", it's actually lower quality.
It is more memory at higher quality. The CPU latency is negligble.
>Irrelevant. This is about hardware power, not what some devs think.
No. It is only about gaming performance and nothing else. Devs want gaming performance, not benchmark performance.
>No PC CPU existed that was so weak. But even i3s could play multiplats at 30 FPS(the consoles were also at 30)
Not all of them. Actually far from all of them. There are way more 60fps games this gen than any gen prior.
>They learned how to magically expand the memory bus width?
No. They learned how to minimize their memory footprint.
>Someone call AMD and tell them the 4096bit bus on the Radeon VII was totally pointless, you can just expand it via software!
The only application for Radeon VII's ram is literally high FPS 8k+ video rendering.
>Dedicated system and video memory will always be better if you can afford to have enough of both.
Not if you want consistent performanc- oh wait PC's don't need consistent performance. They need more brute strength. Consoles don't because the devs actually cater their systems and engines for it.

>It doesn't need to. But it can which is the important part.
Why is that important...ever? Not being able to do 1080p/60 means you'll never need 4K+ textures and that's what really takes up your video memory. 4 gigs is still perfectly fine for 1080p.
>How were they going to allow that extra memory to be unlocked and ready for use for whatever the devs decide then?
By just having enough system memory and video memory? What even is this question, 2 buses will always be faster.
>It is more memory at higher quality. The CPU latency is negligble.
But it's not higher quality. PC GPUs had better memory and PC CPUs had memory better for CPUs. The reason people never switched to GDDR5 isn't cost, some people easily drop 2.5K or more on a gaming rig and productivity workstations are way more than that. GDDR isn't even that much more expensive anyway, people would want to switch if it was better and you'd have GDDR5 memory sticks and motherboards compatible with them. GDDR5 is straight up worse as system memory compared to DDR3, let alone DDR4.
You seem to think that 5500Mhz memory was some insane breakthrough when even GPUs from 2010 like the 6970 had 5.5Ghz memory. By 2013 even midrange GPUs were hitting that with truly top-end models going way above it.
>There are way more 60fps games this gen than any gen prior.
Source? The vast majority of the PS2's library is 60 FPS. And any game pushing physics or graphics on the PS4 was 30(with drops).
>No. They learned how to minimize their memory footprint.
And this is relevant to bus width becauuseee? It would just help with the amount of memory you need, wouldn't really help with a bottleneck.

A mere year after release the PS4 was already running sub-1080p 30 FPS, with drops. 8th gen was by far the weakest console generation ever, the PS3 was actually quite a powerful machine when it released, so was the OG Xbox.

I mean when you are looking at the absolute worst PS4 ports and drawing your conclusion like that I can't do anything but conclude you are deluded m8.

>absolute worst PS4 ports
I mean... you only have to look at the actual hardware to conclude it's a low-midrange machine.
Not to mention most first-party titles run at 30 FPS with drops so porting has nothing to do with it.

4K players are drm and licensing locked, most standard PC Blu-ray drives can read 4k discs no problem, no upgrade required.

Simply not true.

didn't they sold the ps4 at loss?

God of War - 30
Horizon zero dawn - 30
Spiderman - 30
Uncharted 4 - 30
The Last Guardian - 30
Blooborne - 30
RDR2 - 30
Persona 4 - 30

Discounting stuff like TLOU remastered(which is a PS3 game) almost all PS4 exclusives run at 30. Name at least 5 PS4 exclusive games that aren't remasters that run at 60.

bruh devs have gotten shit at optimizing, no game released on current gen has acutally taken it to the limit

Uncharted 4 multiplayer
Gran Turismo Sport
All of the VR games (also stereoscopic)
6 different MLB: The Show games
Of the exclusives on the standard PS4.

does bloodborne have unlocked framerate in the pro?

UC4 MP doesn't run at 60 FPS though. And it's like... half a game, the game overall doesn't run at 60 because the SP is locked to 30.
>MLB: The show
Only 3 of them are PS4 exclusive.
So that's... 4 games in total. And 3 of them are EA sports games that realistically nobody gives a fuck about. Really shows how few games actually get 60 FPS on the PS4 when you have to start pulling out EA sports. All of the big "system sellers" are 30 FPS.

>Only 3 of them are PS4 exclusive.
Nope. Unless you are talking about the fact that some are on PS3 as well. They are separate games with different engines.
>So that's... 4 games in total. And 3 of them are EA sports games that realistically nobody gives a fuck about.
Why are you lying? MLB is not from EA you fucking idiot. That is a Sony first-party studio.
>Really shows how few games actually get 60 FPS on the PS4 when you have to start pulling out EA sports.
I could also pull out all of the niche japanese games from some obscure listing on wikipedia but they aren't first party so they could release somewhere else tomorrow.
>All of the big "system sellers" are 30 FPS.
>UC4 MP doesn't run at 60 FPS though
I think we are done here. You are clearly trolling.

>2020
kek nice legacy hardware you have there sony

>Uncharted 4 multiplayer
900p with drops. Unable to stay consistent
>Gran Turismo Sport
unstable FPS on base console and in 4k mode on Pro. Only locked 60fps in 1080p mode on pro
>All of the VR games (also stereoscopic)
Lower than 720p on base. Blood and Truth runs two 540p buffers
>6 different MLB: The Show games
lol sports

Attached: Pointyheadstation 3.jpg (748x1728, 186K)

>game runs at 30 FPS for the most important portion(singleplayer)
totally a 60 FPS game! You can't take the 1080p singleplayer and 60 FPS multiplayer and claim it's a 1080p/60 game, it never actually runs like that.
>MLB is not from EA
whatever, might as well be. It's a baseball game that even Americans don't care about with a yearly release schedule. Also if they're on the PS3 they're not PS4 exclusive.
>I could also pull out all of the niche japanese games from some obscure listing on wikipedia
I mean... yeah? The kind of games that even toasters run at 144 FPS. Well, when they actually give you an unlocked framerate option. Otherwise you just sit there with your GPU clocks at idle level and your fans at the lowest RPM.
The PS4 hardware was too weak for its time, same for the Xone. That's why the half-gen upgrades were needed in the first place. If you have to pull out sports games and obscure japanese games to show that your console totally isn't underpowered you're not looking very confident.

Why does your PC have a 4k bluray drive? Even the external ones cost as much as a used Xbox One S.

>I just hope they don't fully cuck out and cave into the progressive demands of California.
What the fuck have you been smoking, man? They've done that for a long time now.

My router has 4 ports and I have 6 home consoles that need it. I use ethernet for the ones I use in multiplayer but still.

Attached: 1567367768501.png (547x386, 130K)

I don't have one, all I said was that tons of regular Blu-ray drives read 4k discs, there's no physical tech difference, only the encoding on the discs is different.

>mainstream fags are going to be super disappointed when they find out Sony is lying again
Just slather some chromic aberration, bloom, and motion blur on a clumsily upscaled image, and the average Joe won't even notice.

With a price like that, I have to wait for drop later in its life, which is a shame.
Guess I'll have to take the words from you guys. BTW do we have words for backwards compatibility?