bitbydeath
Member
This is what I expect as well, combined with a decent CPU upgrade allowing for native 4K, improved graphics and allowing AAA games to reach 60fps minimum in support of VR.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Pachter: PS5 to be a half step, release in 2019 with PS4 BC
- Thread starter bitbydeath
- Start date
This is what I expect as well, combined with a decent CPU upgrade allowing for native 4K, improved graphics and allowing AAA games to reach 60fps minimum in support of VR.
This Is most logical
Nightengale
Member
Disagree. In my opinion, PS4 Pro and Xbox One X and its future equivalent ( PS5 Pro/XB2X ) will never be the 'min-spec.' Min-spec cut-offs will be products that are the first of its family of products.
They're called PS4 and Xbox One for a reason, in that they were never meant to be treated as anything outside an extension of their product and their generation. A mid-gen product is still part of its existing generation.
2019: PS5 < - new min-spec.
2020: XB2 <- new min-spec
2022: PS5 Pro <- PS5's mid-gen
2023: XB2 X <- XB2's mid-gen
2025: PS6 <- new min-spec
2026: XB3 <- new min-spec
tldr; nothing will change, there will still be generation-like min-spec separations ( every 5-7 years ), companies now just have an excuse to sell you iterative upgrades every mid-generation that do nothing but play the same games that the min-spec platform does, but prettier.
They're called PS4 and Xbox One for a reason, in that they were never meant to be treated as anything outside an extension of their product and their generation. A mid-gen product is still part of its existing generation.
2019: PS5 < - new min-spec.
2020: XB2 <- new min-spec
2022: PS5 Pro <- PS5's mid-gen
2023: XB2 X <- XB2's mid-gen
2025: PS6 <- new min-spec
2026: XB3 <- new min-spec
tldr; nothing will change, there will still be generation-like min-spec separations ( every 5-7 years ), companies now just have an excuse to sell you iterative upgrades every mid-generation that do nothing but play the same games that the min-spec platform does, but prettier.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Every game that's possible on a Pro is possible on a Slim as well, thanks to the almost identical architecture. Same CPU, same RAM, just a more beffier GPU. Hence, it would be crazy as hell to develop a game with PS4 Pro as bottom line console.
Not only from a technical point of view, as - by the time a PS5 arrives - there will be ~80mn PS4s (OG+Slim) out there and neglecting such a massive install base would be stupid as fuck.
Last but not least, does anyone here really want that the next generation is hold back by older SKUs with custom 2013' netbook Jaguar CPUs!?
TechnicPuppet
Nothing! I said nothing!
I think they should just make it optional. Leave it up to developers to decide to support the old systems or not.
Nightengale
Member
The above will create a degree of market confusion. At a retail level, you have to introduce product boxes that has various labels of "XB2' and 'XB2 X" or "PS5" or "PS5 Pro", and then there will be a variety of SKU mixtures that could leave audiences confused.
Current setup is simple and best.
There are only PS4 and XB1 games. These games play on systems named PS4s and XB1s.
In future, there are also only PS5 and XB2 games. Those games will also only play on systems named PS5s and XB2s.
Melchiah
Member
I wouldn't be surprised if it's going to be like it was with this gen, when many of the multiplatforms were released on old systems as well for the first couple of years, while the 1st party titles only appeared on the new system.
Bitch Pudding
Member
Frankly, that's a retail problem and it's a solvable one. Digital it's not a problem at all, like today when you purchase a cross platform game there are labels for all supported platforms.
If I had to guess, maybe PS5 will offer 100% out of the box BC but devs are allowed to introduce "PS5 Upgrade DLC", analogous to today's Pro patches.
I think we need to temper expecations on the GPU side becuase of the CPU.
If Sony reach out to devs, they'll all be screaming for better CPU. And any better CPU - even a measly 4 core Ryzen - will take up way more die space than the titchy jaguars. So proportionately less die available for GPU (assuming they stick with an APU model).
Ram and HDD/SSD storage will be down to money mostly, with a bit of bandwidth in there too - what bandwidth is needed to feed the GPU spec will inform the bus width, which will influence the ram size
If Sony reach out to devs, they'll all be screaming for better CPU. And any better CPU - even a measly 4 core Ryzen - will take up way more die space than the titchy jaguars. So proportionately less die available for GPU (assuming they stick with an APU model).
Ram and HDD/SSD storage will be down to money mostly, with a bit of bandwidth in there too - what bandwidth is needed to feed the GPU spec will inform the bus width, which will influence the ram size
Theonik
Member
Ray Tracing IS a bruteforce approach to lighting.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
The bolded has been discussed and debunked. An 8 core Zen at 7nm (i.e. 2x Zen CCX) will fit into the same silicon footprint at the PS4's 8core Jaguar at 28nm.
The die area for the CPU will not be a limiting factor. The power requirements will be. So its possible we won't get "full-fat" Zen cores as you see on Ryzen products today; rather console CPU cores based on AMD's upcoming Ryzen "mobile" rangewhatever they end up being.
Disagree. The generations will be distinct. The PS5 and Xbox 4 will have their own games but will support PS4 and Xbox One games. You will see some cross gen games as usual but a PS5 title is not playing on a Pro or PS4, same for X. Backwards compatibility is how you solve the transition, not straddling two generations with minimum spec and recommended/high spec, dropping earlier hardware.
PS4/Pro and Xbox One/X will remain their own generation, 100%. Publishers can release a PS4 title that plays on a PS5 but it's just a neater cross gen release instead of selling two different boxes copies, eventually like always they will move on. PS4 releases may continue for a while but there absolutely no doubt PS5 only titles will release. You are not getting PS5 support on PS4/Pro or Xbox 4 support on Xbox One/X, that's just a disaster in the making.
You buy a PS4 game, you know what you get, you buy a PS5 game, you know what you get. You buy a PS5 to play PS5 games and PS4 games, you buy a PS4 to play PS4 games . Anything else is just confusing and a waste of time. They don't need to complicate things and they don't lose a massive user base or games catalogue or make it hard for developers, publishers. You want to make a PS4 game, that's fine, a PS5 game, that's fine. We have full PS4 BC.
Shin
Banned
Those could end up being on par with today's offerings for the desktop market, after all we're talking about 1-2 generation further.
At least I'd hope it's on par, not looking forward to games dipping below 30fps again that shit should have never happen to begin with.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
That will never stop happening, no matter how powerful they make the CPUs inside the consoles. It's a software (design) issue, not a hardware one.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
Agree completely.
Tbh, mandatory support for legacy consoles going into next-gen serves no-one. It holds back the new-gen consoles from really shining, and doesn't really offer much more to existing console owners.
As the start of this gen showed quite clearly, cross-gen games are a thing and are necessitated by the size of AAA publishing investments today. So whether Sony/MS mandate PS4/Pro/XB1/XB1X support next-gen or not, those consoles will get all the big AAA games anyway, for as long as those consoles remain relevant in the marketplace (i.e. when gamer retails spending moves over to the new-gen consoles, after they've established a big enough installed base).
In which case, mandating legacy console support only cripples the new-gen consoles in the long-run, offering nothing really of benefit to existing PS4/Pro/XB1/X owners.
I can't tell what Microsoft is doing but I do think this is how Sony will go about it. PS5 becomes the new required minimum spec when it comes out. Good chance of BC with PS4 games. But...
I think Microsoft WILL do this or something like this, it's just a question of whether it slides the Xbox One X into the min spec position or skip over it in favor of what comes after. Sony might establish PS5 as the minimum spec but give the developers the option to decide for themselves whether to keep supporting PS4 and PS4 Pro for a time, and most would in such a situation, at least for the first 18 months or so after the PS5 launches.
The confusion issue is really just an issue of branding, and it's hardly unsolvable. Microsoft is already dealing with this in the form of retail Xbox 360 games that are playable on Xbox One. It simply has both logos on the new boxes. Nintendo dealt with this with Game Boy Color games. You'd probably just see a logo somewhere on the box with pictures flatly explaining what systems a certain game is compatible with.
Effectively speaking, traditional cross-gen would just be replaced by current gen games that are patched to take advantage of the next-gen systems.
Oh there's no way they'll mandate legacy console support, but there's a chance they could allow it. I guess it's a matter of whether you consider it a PS5 game that's playable on PS4, or a PS4 game that's been patched to take advantage of PS5 whenever you play it on one.
I guess the issue this post brings up is revenue. How much revenue would AAA publishers lose from customers who normally double-dip on cross-gen games? Do that many people even do that? I guess a lot of people buy HD remasters but how many are double dippers and how many are people just playing that game for the first time? I guess it's not impossible to charge money for those next-gen patches, but if the architecture is staying the same from PS4 to PS5, is the development of a PS5 version of a cross-gen game really gonna be that different from development of the PS4 version? Might it end up being basically the same code but with some graphics settings turned up and maybe programmed for a different CPU? To me that sounds like a lot less extra work than making separate PS3 and PS4 versions of a game, meaning less expensive cross-gen development.
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
They already allow it. And considering the required game development effort, pretty much all modern multi-platform game engines current already support PS4/XB1 and their mid-gen upgrades. Deploying code on a particular platform is as easy as hitting the "compile for console X" button. Of course you will still have to QA and test each version separately, but that won't be any different if you just running the same game binary on multiple platforms; as a developer you will still need to make sure that the legacy console versions work. So in terms of development cost, it's barely much difference at all.
It wouldn't be brute force if they have special hardware features to aid in the process.
The ID Buffer is a step in that direction because they are able to track polygons in world space that's data that can be used to help with hybrid ray tracing. with PS5 they might add even more hardware that can make use of that data & they could have hardware accelerated lighting.
amstradcpc
Member
So a Vega 56.And so a performance similar to a 1070.Good luck with 4K.
GermanZepp
Member
Special features is just a vague hand wave equivalent to secret sauce. Modern rendering techniques are nothing but a collection of shorthand approximations of theoretical models that are impractical to evaluate completely, no matter what kind of dedicated hardware you throw at the problem. As we get more horsepower and flexibility in programmable pipelines its possible to chase an ideal that keeps getting more and more complex but you never get there.
Ray tracing is an evolutionary dead end with the primary advantage of being conceptually simple. There are good reasons why it isnt even used in offline rendering outside of a few specialized applications.
You can't compare a 28nm jaguar with a 7nm ryzen. My point was that the CPU will take more effective die space. If it is the same surface area as 28nm jaguar but on 7nm then it's significantly larger
When people make PC games they have to make sure it work on most PCs so they can't take advantage of things like ray tracing they can only do demos , there is also demos for tablets & phones with special hardware.
Claybook is a game that's coming to PC that's using Ray tracing
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0IqEs2_AwQ
TheThreadsThatBindUs
Member
You're not making any sense here.
Of course you can directly compare the amount of die area the CPU takes up on two console APUs. The manufacturing process only dictates the transistor density. We're comparing physical geometries on a planar APU die.
If an 28nm 8 core Jaguar takes up say, 40mm², on a 350mm² APU, and a 7nm 8 core Zen CPU takes up a similar 40mm² silicon footprint, then how is that not comparable?
Note: I think where you're getting confused is with what "28nm" and "7nm" actually mean. Essentially, these are length parameters that characterize the smallest geometries on a die manufactured by a given process—i.e. it used to be the actual size of each transistor, but that's not entirely the case anymore. So the smaller the "Xnm" number, the more transistors you can pack in a given surface area of silicon.
How is that equal to "Secret Sauce"? I'm talking about engineers knowing what's needed to aid in ray tracing & things like that & making changes to the hardware that can help with the task. The ID buffer hardware & RPM in the PS4 Pro is a good example of that they knew what they would be doing with PS4 Pro so they made changes in the hardware that would aid them.
You're missing his point - RT as a technique is a brute force approach to rendering lighting. IIRC it calculates EVERY photonic path possible in a given scene, allowing for materials properties and so on. As there are no short cuts taken to achieve the aim, and it is a faithful real-world simulator, it is very much a 'brute force' approach as it relies on an ineffecient process to render it's results.
Theonik
Member
It's slightly better than that admittedly. You start from the screen, tracing through the camera frustum into the scene so you ignore light that would never reach the camera.
funkystudent
Member
There will be a clear next gen split for both PlayStation and yes Xbox despite the whole "a console with generations" PR bullshit.
Sony has been super clear that they still see generations as a thing and that the PS4 Pro is just a more powerful PS4 so I fully expect a clean break when PS5 drops.
As for Xbox. Their messaging has been typically cloudy but I think it became obvious once they stuck with the Xbox One branding with the X and starting using the "xbox one family of consoles" line. In 3-4 years they will release a new console that isnt part of that family and all the Xbox One consoles will be left behind.
I expect BC for both console makers this time though. While I wouldnt be shocked if Sony does a Sony and messes it up somehow I think it will hurt them big time this time if they dont have it.
Sony has been super clear that they still see generations as a thing and that the PS4 Pro is just a more powerful PS4 so I fully expect a clean break when PS5 drops.
As for Xbox. Their messaging has been typically cloudy but I think it became obvious once they stuck with the Xbox One branding with the X and starting using the "xbox one family of consoles" line. In 3-4 years they will release a new console that isnt part of that family and all the Xbox One consoles will be left behind.
I expect BC for both console makers this time though. While I wouldnt be shocked if Sony does a Sony and messes it up somehow I think it will hurt them big time this time if they dont have it.
Fwiw, the ID buffer is screen space storage of polygon indexing (or, far more usefully, draw call indexing). Its intension is to aid frame to frame reprojection for temporal AA and especially checkerboard reconstruction (due to being a per sample export, not per pixel).
I cannot see any way it could be useful in ray tracing.
All hardware implementations of features do is provide slightly higher efficiency for a method which otherwise might not be able to maximize system utilization. The id buffer, as example, is just a render target that bypasses the pixel shader and exports a value per sample through the depth blocks. That's it. It's super simple but very useful in those two cases and would be *really* inefficient to emulate because it's so simple.
However no amount of hardware is going to negate the enormous computational requirements of true ray tracing or photon tracing, and because gpu software implementations are already going to be memory bound it's arguable it wouldn't actually gain much at all.
CrazyHorse
Junior Member
Why do we post this man's views? Nintendo hater.
It's not brute force if you're smart enough to create short cuts which is what I'm talking about not full on ray tracing, I'm talking about using it for shadows , reflections & so on.
Theonik
Member
You understand what it is right?
Id buffer was just an example of them doing something in hardware when they know they will need it & next generation they could do the same thing for a algorithm that would give them useful data for things like shadows & reflections
My point is that it's something that devs can use & come up with new tricks because it's there
I like smiley faces
DISSESHOWEDO
Banned
Who ever is thinking that there won't be a PS5 and XBox1x or whatever MS decides to call it, is delusional.
As for specs, MS showed that when they pay attention they can make good and quality hardware (xone x) and Sony have M. Cerny that man will create skynet, mark my words!
As for specs, I'm pretty sure they will go withthe latest and greatest both. Of course heavily customized.
As for specs, MS showed that when they pay attention they can make good and quality hardware (xone x) and Sony have M. Cerny that man will create skynet, mark my words!
As for specs, I'm pretty sure they will go withthe latest and greatest both. Of course heavily customized.
shouamabane
Member
If it plays UHD discs, I'm in. I have a PC for 4K gaming.
PS4 BC would be a huge value add. PSNow is really disappointing.
PS4 BC would be a huge value add. PSNow is really disappointing.
So tell me exactly what I have said that would make you think I don't know what ray tracing is?
....
It has taken me a long time to figure out what you are saying here.
So, if I'm understanding you right, your arguments are:
'Sony added the id buffer to make solving a very specific problem more efficient, so that means they could add full ray tracing hardware to make algorithms for shadowing and reflections more efficient'
?
And also 'developers develop new techniques over time'
?
If this is the case, then the answers to both these things should be astoundingly obvious: 'lol' and 'duh'.
FWIW, in your quote, if you are saying that the id buffer isn't screen space, then I'm sorry but you're simply wrong and you fundamentally misunderstand its purpose.
The 'world space' part in that quote obviously refers to the depth buffer.
The Hamburglar
Banned
Whatever they do I'm done with either if they release this mid gen refresh again.
ExtinctionEvent
Banned
Your rather a total cutoff with no BC? Odd.
How does a console release with not a single game you can't play on the base model affect you negatively? Just pretend it doesn't exist and your world is identical to a world in which it never happened at all.
PS4 b/c is very important this time around. We are very heavily invested in digital ecosystems now, WAY more than we were with PS3 and Xbox 360. Frequent sales with huge discounts and the ability to upgrade / expand HDD space has meant way more people have bought games digitally this gen than previously. It would be a huge fuck you to not include b/c at this point, especially as x86 means that architectures likely won't be radically different.
If Sony doesn't have PS4 b/c and Microsoft does have XB1 b/c then there will be a shit storm to rival MS' Xb1 no preowned games bollocks. We have simply gone to far into the age of digital distribution for b/c to not be a thing now. Not having it would be a big PR issue, especially if their competitor does and I fully expect MS' next numbered system to play XB1 and XB 360 games as it seems like their software b/c solution works extremely well.
Sony needs to realise that PSNow is total shit and will ALWAYS be worse than proper b/c unless you live right nextdoor to your telephone exchange and have a fibre optic connection plugged straight into your router with gigabit fibre. For the other 99% of the world a proper solution, either hardware based or using software emulation like MS have done, is going to be superior every single time due to connection speed and input latency. Games are way more complex than films, streaming games isn't going to be a viable thing until internet infrastructure advances vastly. I genuinely think we are decades away from the majority of people having an internet connection fast enough to stream games and have an experience on par with playing them on the hardware locally.
If Sony doesn't have PS4 b/c and Microsoft does have XB1 b/c then there will be a shit storm to rival MS' Xb1 no preowned games bollocks. We have simply gone to far into the age of digital distribution for b/c to not be a thing now. Not having it would be a big PR issue, especially if their competitor does and I fully expect MS' next numbered system to play XB1 and XB 360 games as it seems like their software b/c solution works extremely well.
Sony needs to realise that PSNow is total shit and will ALWAYS be worse than proper b/c unless you live right nextdoor to your telephone exchange and have a fibre optic connection plugged straight into your router with gigabit fibre. For the other 99% of the world a proper solution, either hardware based or using software emulation like MS have done, is going to be superior every single time due to connection speed and input latency. Games are way more complex than films, streaming games isn't going to be a viable thing until internet infrastructure advances vastly. I genuinely think we are decades away from the majority of people having an internet connection fast enough to stream games and have an experience on par with playing them on the hardware locally.
D
Deleted member 471617
Unconfirmed Member
I'm hoping that PlayStation 5 will be a $500 console that will last for at least five years with no mid-gen upgrading or backwards compatibility whatsoever. Spec wise, im hoping that it hits at least 8TF, has a far better up to date and current CPU since I care more about the CPU than I do the GPU, 16GB Ram or better and a 1TB SSD. Don't see PlayStation 5 being shown until E3 2020 and released later that fall.
Miniature Kaiju
Member
The only way the PS5 doesn't get a mid-gen refresh is if a manufacturing node jump fails to happen during the PS5 lifecycle. That would be a complete disaster.
PS5Pro will be a thing and will deliver more consistent frame rates, higher frame rates for select games and more powerful AA solutions, along with better textures, texture filtering, draw distance, etc.
PS5Pro will be a thing and will deliver more consistent frame rates, higher frame rates for select games and more powerful AA solutions, along with better textures, texture filtering, draw distance, etc.
Theonik
Member
So how would 'not full' ray tracing work.
KungFucius
King Snowflake
How many nodes do you think are left and what speed do you see them coming at? There are 10nm chips with 7nm on the horizon. If they Ps5 drops in 5 years it would be on 7nm. Are you that sure that 5nm will give Sony the bang for the buck of shrinking the process on an already existing product? Heck I am not even sure there will be a 5nm process. The age of Moore's law is basically ending in the next decade. Perhaps there will be a new paradigm where separate processes are developed for performance and mobile, rather than a one size fits all.