PlayStation 5 - Now with FAQ in OP.

shuffles03

Mark Cerny has been showing off the dev kit:

https://www.wired.com/story/exclusive-sony-next-gen-console


PS5 FAQ:
https://blog.playstation.com/2020/11/09/ps5-the-ultimate-faq/#sf239758641

Thrill

Backwards Compatible
Still using Physical Media
8 Core AMD Processor
Radeon Navi GPU (Supports upto 8K resolution)
SSD and More Storage (Spider-Man loads times from 15 seconds to 0.8)
Raytracing

Skerries

maybe it will have 4k Blu Ray if they are supporting physical media

Jurgen The German

Skerries wrote: »

maybe it will have 4k Blu Ray if they are supporting physical media

I'd say that's a given.

BloodBath

8k? Haha not a fecking chance. The highest spec PC's can barely do 4k/60 in the latest games.

8k is 4 times the pixels of 4k. It won't be possible in the next 10 years on the highest spec PC's never mind a €500 console.

Maybe the playstation 10 could do it.

jones

It'll be 8K output for netflix/media etc not a danger it'll be gaming at 8k unless its very basic tetris like gaming. They are just playing the media by even mentioning 8k i suppose.

I have to say i never get the buzz surrounding backwards compatablity i like it in theory but have you ever tried to go back and play older generation games? They usually look muck. I like the ability to do it but in reality i'll never use it. Definitely be a 4k bluray on board be surprised if there wasnt. HDMI 2.1 seems a given as well.

Sounds very promising it'll be 2020 at the earliest so interesting times ahead. I'm due a new TV around 2020/21 so good times ahead.

Roar

The K wars are the new Bit wars

32 bit/64 bit, 4k/8k, who cares once the games are good?

jones

PS going by the details revealed this will be a dear system

F1ngers

jones wrote: »

PS going by the details revealed this will be a dear system

Stick a €1 a day into the PS5 jar and you won't have to add too much to it by the time it's released.

BloodBath

€500 tops especially with Microsoft pushing an almost identical system and the death sentence that is an overpriced console.

A 7nm APU with those specs in late 2020 is really not going to cost that much. €200-250 per unit cost price for large volume orders at the most. Likewise 1tb ssd's will be well under €100 by then. Cost price for large volume probably closer to €50. A further €100-120 or so for the memory. The rest of the system would be well under €100.

Varik

Would say the SSD is a faster smaller one used as a caching drives, no need for TB just to store a game that isn't being used. Since it's AMD it'll be StoreMI/Fuzedruve which means upto 256GB of solid state and option of 2GB of ram.

CastorTroy

When they say PSVR will be compatible with it, I wonder if it can be used on PS5 games or if the next one would work on PS4 games.

Like with Nintendo, you can use a Wii Pro Controller on Wii U but only to play Wii games. And the Wii U Pro controller can't be used to play the Wii games via the Wii U

Cyclonius

jones wrote: »

It'll be 8K output for netflix/media etc not a danger it'll be gaming at 8k unless its very basic tetris like gaming. They are just playing the media by even mentioning 8k i suppose.

I have to say i never get the buzz surrounding backwards compatablity i like it in theory but have you ever tried to go back and play older generation games? They usually look muck. I like the ability to do it but in reality i'll never use it. Definitely be a 4k bluray on board be surprised if there wasnt. HDMI 2.1 seems a given as well.

Sounds very promising it'll be 2020 at the earliest so interesting times ahead. I'm due a new TV around 2020/21 so good times ahead.

We could see 8K for games, but that would just be an upscaled image, such as the checkerboard rendering used by the PS4 Pro, in the vast majority of cases (i.e. unless the game was very, very basic, as you say).

8K support isn't necessary now, but might be a useful thing to have for when 8K TVs start picking up sales volume in the early to mid 2020s. If the PS5 follows the standard Playstation lifecycle laid down by the PS2 (approximately 7 years as the flagship console, before being replaced), then it has to bring Sony up to 2027 before it's replaced by a successor model.

Sure, you might have a PS5 Pro in the meantime, but the PS4 Pro, and XBox One X, were arguably more necessary this generation than previous ones, given the more modest components used in the construction of the base consoles. The Zen 2 CPU that will be used in the PS5 will be a far more powerful component, than the equivalent Jaguar CPU in the PS4. If the next gen consoles are less constrained, then there wouldn't be as much of a need for a mid-gen upgrade, and therefore it might make more sense to offer more support from the off.

That Sony will also be trying to push 8K TVs more and more in the next couple of years, and would also likely want to future-proof the console as much as possible (with Google Stadia coming down the line), would also be compelling reasons for them to offer some 8K support. It's an extra selling point they can stick on the box, regardless of how useful it is right now.

BloodBath

Varik wrote: »

Would say the SSD is a faster smaller one used as a caching drives, no need for TB just to store a game that isn't being used. Since it's AMD it'll be StoreMI/Fuzedruve which means upto 256GB of solid state and option of 2GB of ram.

It will 100% be a 1TB NVME SSD on the base model. Possible more if there are other variants.

The days of HDD's for gaming are over when games are 50-100gb in size. Especially the slow ass noisy 2.5" HDD's they have been using in consoles for years.

Mr Crispy

Ryzen 2 will bring with it PCIe 4.0. Could be where the supposed SSD improvements are coming from?

BloodBath

BloodBath wrote: »

It will 100% be a 1TB NVME SSD on the base model. Possible more if there are other variants.

The days of HDD's for gaming are over when games are 50-100gb in size. Especially the slow ass noisy 2.5" HDD's they have been using in consoles for years.

1TB is not enough in a next-gen console. PS4 launched with 500GB. Pro launched with 1TB. PS5 will need 2TB minimum.

I think we see a hybrid solution.

2TB of SSD will be pricey, even next year. And it's not an efficient way to spend money - SSD only benefits the game currently being played. If you've got a 2TB SSD then 1.9TB of that expensive storage is going to waste at any given moment.

And even for a single game: at any given time most of the game files will not benefit from SSD. Cut-scenes, audio files, campaign levels which you cannot reach for a few hours etc.

SSD for 90% cold data storage is just a huge waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere. And console design is all about penny-pinching and spending money in the right places.

It makes more sense to have a large 2.5" HDD for cold storage and a small SSD cache to speed up the game(s) you are currently playing. Both could be user upgradable.

A content-aware system-controlled (or game-controlled) caching solution can be much smarter than anything we have seen previously. It won't be like the current dumb hybrid drives which require a few loads to learn what should be cached. If it's content-aware it could cache what it needs ahead of time.

Inviere

Darch Nemesis wrote: »

Ryzen 2 will bring with it PCIe 4.0. Could be where the supposed SSD improvements are coming from?

I'd say so yeah, if fits with the "faster than anything available at the moment" pitch. I'll be glad to see the back of magnetic storage too, while it's great for capacity, it's just dog slow at the data throughput needed for cutting edge these days.

My concern for the above solution is capacity though. 4k assets are bloody huge (100+ GB on average). Sony traditionally use uncompressed textures too, so if the drive is 1TB or less, it's going to fill up worryingly fast. Consider the size of a base game, plus the 4k assets, you could be talking 150GB per game. I'd also wonder how upgradability is handled in terms of the SSD, can you just pop in a bigger drive? Probably not if it's NVME based because you'd need bare access to the mainboard most likely.

My biggest concern of all though, is that they're throwing a lot of buzzwords out there like Raytracing. If we're talking about a game running in true 4K (not an upscaled 'lie' that relies on adaptive resolution, motion blur, etc), combined with raytracing, with full hdr....that's a LOT to ask of a €500 console with an APU at its heart. This means more than likely to achieve these things, we'll still be looking at 30fps I really want this next gen to finally break away from the sub-60fps, and use 60 as its baseline.

jonerkinsella

jonerkinsella wrote: »

2020. The 21 is only end of production for the 4. 20 ties in with previous release intervals of Playstation generations.
Check back in two years to see if my prediction is correct

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=107119368&postcount=48

If only I could predict the future Lotto numbers:P

Anywayzz,

If Sony release a bundle with VR gen 2 for €700, I'll be all over it. I don't think it'll happen though.
I'm happy at the cost point prediction of €500 with the current spec predictions with the 2tb M.2 (which I am confident it will have, smaller, cooler, more efficient system).
I do not think the PS5 will have a 4k Blu-ray player. The media is dead already. I have a 4k player at home for the last year+ and I've turned it on about 4 times. 4k players are so cheap now that anyone that wants one, would have bought one by now.

I sold my PSVR as I got sick of the cables, the VR2, wireless solution is what I have been waiting for.

BloodBath

Deleted User wrote: »

1TB is not enough in a next-gen console. PS4 launched with 500GB. Pro launched with 1TB. PS5 will need 2TB minimum.

I think we see a hybrid solution.

2TB of SSD will be pricey, even next year. And it's not an efficient way to spend money - SSD only benefits the game currently being played. If you've got a 2TB SSD then 1.9TB of that expensive storage is going to waste at any given moment.

And even for a single game: at any given time most of the game files will not benefit from SSD. Cut-scenes, audio files, campaign levels which you cannot reach for a few hours etc.

SSD for 90% cold data storage is just a huge waste of money which could be better spent elsewhere. And console design is all about penny-pinching and spending money in the right places.

It makes more sense to have a large 2.5" HDD for cold storage and a small SSD cache to speed up the game(s) you are currently playing. Both could be user upgradable.

A content-aware system-controlled (or game-controlled) caching solution can be much smarter than anything we have seen previously. It won't be like the current dumb hybrid drives which require a few loads to learn what should be cached. If it's content-aware it could cache what it needs ahead of time.

No chance.

Microsoft already confirmed a 1tb ssd in theirs.

Sony will be the same. There will I'm sure be an option of higher capacity's. Maybe even a second slot for adding additional storage.

BloodBath

BloodBath wrote: »

No chance.

Microsoft already confirmed a 1tb ssd in theirs.

Sony will be the same. There will I'm sure be an option of higher capacity's. Maybe even a second slot for adding additional storage.

With large next-gen games and back-compat (so you already have a library on day one), 1TB of total storage (regardless of type) will seem ridiculously small for a next-gen console. Unlikely.

It'll be 2TB at a minimum. Could be a 4TB sku at launch even.

2TB or 4TB of mega-fast, mega-expensive flash for 90% cold storage makes little economic sense. Although flash prices are falling, it's still 6-8x more expensive per GB than HDD and that will not have changed much by 2020 (might be 5-7x).

Their system architects will ask the question: is it worth spending 5x as much for all-flash storage when 90% of the data is cold ? No, it's not.

Tiered storage is the obvious solution, it's the way things are done in the data centre. Enough flash storage to cache the game(s) you're currently playing. No need to have the entire library sitting on flash.

Oafley Jones

Having to deal with 8K assets and the poor state of infrastructure around the world, I can't see physical media going anywhere on the PS5. 1TB drives similarly seem incredibly small. Hybrid drives, do seem to make more sense in terms of cost/performance, which is what consoles are all about really.

Inviere

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Having to deal with 8K assets and the poor state of infrastructure around the world, I can't see physical media going anywhere on the PS5. 1TB drives similarly seem incredibly small. Hybrid drives, do seem to make more sense in terms of cost/performance, which is what consoles are all about really.

I can guarantee you now, the PS5 won't be rendering games in real time true 8k.

BloodBath

Deleted User wrote: »

With large next-gen games and back-compat (so you already have a library on day one), 1TB of total storage (regardless of type) will seem ridiculously small for a next-gen console. Unlikely.

It'll be 2TB at a minimum. Could be a 4TB sku at launch even.

2TB or 4TB of mega-fast, mega-expensive flash for 90% cold storage makes little economic sense. Although flash prices are falling, it's still 6-8x more expensive per GB than HDD and that will not have changed much by 2020 (might be 5-7x).

Their system architects will ask the question: is it worth spending 5x as much for all-flash storage when 90% of the data is cold ? No, it's not.

Tiered storage is the obvious solution, it's the way things are done in the data centre. Enough flash storage to cache the game(s) you're currently playing. No need to have the entire library sitting on flash.

You can keep saying this but there are multiple reasons not to use HDD's in any shape or form. Noise, size, loading and install times and heat.

They are finished for gaming. You know you can install and uninstall games a lot quicker on SSD right? You don't need to have your entire library stored on the system. With SSD's you can also have an install running in the background while you play a game so there's no down time. You can manage your current game library a lot better.

Why would you completely bottleneck the system with a ****ty multi platter 2.5" HDD? You wouldn't if you had any sense even if using SSD caching.

Microsoft confirmed 1TB SSD storage, so have Sony. There will be tiered options with larger capacity's and the option to upgrade yourself. SSD storage is getting cheaper every year. I'm a PC gamer and I only have around 5% of my game library installed at any 1 time. You don't need 4TB of storage. 1TB is definitely enough for a base system with rotation of your currently played games.

J. Marston

Roar wrote: »

The K wars are the new Bit wars

32 bit/64 bit, 4k/8k, who cares once the games are good?

I feel like we're at the point of diminishing returns with graphics anyway.

BloodBath

J. Marston wrote: »

I feel like we're at the point of diminishing returns with graphics anyway.

People have been saying that for years. There's still a long way to go.

Inviere

J. Marston wrote: »

I feel like we're at the point of diminishing returns with graphics anyway.

Ray tracing is a bit of a game changer in terms of your usual year-on-year update. It comes with a serious performance price though, which is why I feel to implement real time ray tracing on a console, the target will unfortunately be 30fps.

BloodBath

At best there will be 1 ray tracing feature per game using ray tracing for something simple like 3d audio.

We're a long long way off full real time ray tracing of the entire scene.

Varik

J. Marston wrote: »

I feel like we're at the point of diminishing returns with graphics anyway.

Whatever about "graphics" in general which I think can always be improved, I think it's true for resolution.

A PC display at a foot or 2 away with some larger screens ye, 8k might be beneficial. But there's a limit to what normal people will want in TV screen size, a 50" TV at a normal distance anything above 4k isn't going to worth it.

Inviere

BloodBath wrote: »

At best there will be 1 ray tracing feature per game using ray tracing for something simple like 3d audio.

We're a long long way off full real time ray tracing of the entire scene.

Agreed, it's not really feasible on a €500 console. This will more than likely be a partial implementation of it.

Retr0gamer

Varik wrote: »

Whatever about "graphics" in general which I think can always be improved, I think it's true for resolution.

A PC display at a foot or 2 away with some larger screens ye, 8k might be beneficial. But there's a limit to what normal people will want in TV screen size, a 50" TV at a normal distance anything above 4k isn't going to worth it.

Although divisions in sony are quite separate there will be a mandate to shift screens from their home entertainment division.

Inviere

Retr0gamer wrote: »

Although divisions in sony are quite separate there will be a mandate to shift screens from their home entertainment division.

DVD & Blu Ray being past examples of tech shift by-proxy as a result of Playstation consoles.

BloodBath

BloodBath wrote: »

there are multiple reasons not to use HDD's in any shape or form. Noise, size, loading and install times and heat.

Noise, heat & physical size of a 2.5" HDD are neglible.

You know you can install and uninstall games a lot quicker on SSD right? You don't need to have your entire library stored on the system.

Keeping rarely accessed data on slow/cheap storage and moving it to fast storage when necessary...guess what you just described? Now if only you didn't have to manually faff around deleting and re-installing games...

Why would you completely bottleneck the system with a ****ty multi platter 2.5" HDD? You wouldn't if you had any sense even if using SSD caching.

An unplayed-in-months game sitting on HDD does not "bottleneck the system".

I'm a PC gamer and I only have around 5% of my game library installed at any 1 time.

That doesn't sound great. You should look into tiered storage (eg StoreMI).

Varik

tiered storage on console would be much easier, on PC you've millions of independent files that are frequently needed and would be moved on and off the faster SSD or RAM for AMDs version. Console version would be more predictable, developers could even assign tiers themselves.

Considering Cerny said that the SSD "that it has a raw bandwidth higher than any SSD available for PCs", it's not going to be a multi TB SSD if this is true for any reasonable price.

BloodBath

Deleted User wrote: »

Noise, heat & physical size of a 2.5" HDD are neglible.
Keeping rarely accessed data on slow/cheap storage and moving it to fast storage when necessary...guess what you just described? Now if only you didn't have to manually faff around deleting and re-installing games...
An unplayed-in-months game sitting on HDD does not "bottleneck the system".
That doesn't sound great. You should look into tiered storage (eg StoreMI).

Right you love that system. I get it. Watch both console manufactures use NVME SSD's. If you want to store more, add more storage. Simple. You don't need to store your entire library on the console. 5g is going to bring high speed internet to more and more people. The cloud is there to get what you want when you want. Storing everything locally is a thing of the past. You aren't running a data centre.

Considering Cerny said that the SSD "that it has a raw bandwidth higher than any SSD available for PCs", it's not going to be a multi TB SSD if this is true for any reasonable price.

Consoles will have PCIe gen 4. That's all that means.

Mr Crispy

Some speculation re: hardware, if you're into that kind of thing...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qU0V5OcHE_4

gimli2112

I would expect TLOU2 to launch this gen and then they will double dip so eejits like me will buy the shinier version again next gen.

dudeeile

TWO pre-orders, I hear it's worse than smoking these days.

marcbrophy

gimli2112 wrote: »

I would expect TLOU2 to launch this gen and then they will double dip so eejits like me will buy the shinier version again next gen.

That's what was done with the original one!
Released 5 months before new hardware, and then the shiny re-release about 9 months after launch

CastorTroy

Was listening to this week's Game Scoop on IGN and they were saying when interviewing people at e3 about upcoming games their job will be to ask if the game will be current, next or cross gen.
This was brought up in regard to Death Stranding but will apply to all games

Deedsie

marcbrophy wrote: »

That's what was done with the original one!
Released 5 months before new hardware, and then the shiny re-release about 9 months after launch

I recently sold my ps4 pro. Ill be waiting for the last of us 2 to release on the PS5 before purchasing it. Maybe a new GTA will have been announced by then

marcbrophy

Deedsie wrote: »

I recently sold my ps4 pro. Ill be waiting for the last of us 2 to release on the PS5 before purchasing it. Maybe a new GTA will have been announced by then

You will probably have to avoid spoilers for a while with that wait, but you'll get the best version of it in the end

gimli2112

gimli2112 wrote: »

I would expect TLOU2 to launch this gen and then they will double dip so eejits like me will buy the shinier version again next gen.

Hopefully there's just the one version and it gets a (free) enhancement patch on PS5. Less money for publishers though so perhaps an unrealistic hope..

Mr Crispy

An anonymous developer has allegedly leaked info on reddit, regarding the load times/storage system in the PS5 devkit. It should go without saying to take this with a pinch of salt.

After the wired article my colleagues and I assumed that Sony had just put a PCIe 4 SSD into the PS5 and then called it a day (as PCIe 4 SSDs would be faster then current PC SSDs so it would fit their claim). I mean, the SSD came unexpected for us already since we were expecting at most a solution like Apples Fusion drives for cost reasons. Because of our PCIe 4 SSD expectation we were skeptical how much the SSD could decrease load times in PS4 titles played on the PS5.

For context: our current gen game (PS4, XBO, PC) loads around 40% faster when replacing the PS4 Pro HDD with a SATA SSD (~42 sec. vs. ~25 sec.). If we run our PC build in combination with an M.2 NVMe SSD we only see around 7% faster load times compared to the PS4 Pro with SATA SSD even though the NVMe SSD is ~6 times faster. But it get's even worse, when we take the Samsung PM1725a PCIe card from our build server to run the PC build on we only see 0-3% faster load times compared to an NVMe SSD, which shows that there are diminishing returns since current game IO has to assume HDDs as the baseline. Because of that we only expected similiar load time reductions for PS4 titles when played on the PS5. But we were proven wrong.

Together with our devkit (nothing from Microsoft yet) we received information material which was front and center about how they continue to strife to make the life for developers easier, in order for us to deliver better games faster to the players, and how that is a continuation of the ground work layed by architectural decisions taken in the PS4. The material is not only about new games though, but also about how the PS5 can help current gen games to take advantage of it's features - especially it's advanced storage solution. Apparently they have analyzed the IO behaviour of current gen games and baked the essence of it into what they call a high bandwidth cache controller, which can then map PS4 IO commands into optimized commands for their new storage solution were appropiate (without having to make changes to the game). And it shows, our unchanged game running on the devkit loads around 32% faster then our PC build on the PM1725a. But the material further states that in order to take full advantage of it the game will have to be patched, and I can't wait to see how fast our game will load once our software engineers have made source code changes to take full advantage of the fast storage.

This is obviously a throwaway account that I will delete in a few days... I have no technical data to share and I will not tell my position or company size like other "leakers" do as that could pinpoint me. Which is why I also disabled private messages. Just wanted to share that Sonys storage solution is a true next generation leap and that it will also greatly benefit PS4 games when played on the PS5 - even if the developers don't release patches for their games.

FAILSAFE 00

I wonder will the PS5 sell well over the first few years.

Will people here be rushing out to get a PS5 or will many of you be happy with your PS4 Pro and some of you might upgrade from the standard PS4 to the Pro instead of buying PS5.

There are almost 100 million PS4 units sold. God of War sold only 10 million copies. Great sales but out of 100 million its a drop in the ocean. I think we will see games launched on PS4 for a few more years. Its difficult to turn your back on the gigantic PS4 playerbase.

This argument also applies to the Xbox One X but I'd say its far more relevant to the PS4 playerbase given its size.

EoinHef

If the PS5 back compatibility works as well as it should i dont see a reason to delay the purchase.

If it doesnt id be sticking with the Pro for a bit. In saying that im not that impressed by the Pro,im hoping the PS5 will be a more substantial upgrade.

jones

Definitely jump ps5 move my pro to the bedroom

Potential-Monke

I'd like to say I'll wait for a while and not get a launch model, but realistically, unless some massive monetary requirement is needed for something else on release of the PS5, I will probably pick one up.

Beersmith

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I wonder will the PS5 sell well over the first few years.

Will people here be rushing out to get a PS5 or will many of you be happy with your PS4 Pro and some of you might upgrade from the standard PS4 to the Pro instead of buying PS5.

There are almost 100 million PS4 units sold. God of War sold only 10 copies. Great sales but out of 100 million its a drop in the ocean. I think we will see games launched on PS4 for a few more years. Its difficult to turn your back on the gigantic PS4 playerbase.

This argument also applies to the Xbox One X but I'd say its far more relevant to the PS4 playerbase given its size.

10 copies aint much alright!

EoinHef

My god,roll on PS5 and SSD's,this copying lark takes way too long:(

murphyebass

FAILSAFE 00 wrote: »

I wonder will the PS5 sell well over the first few years.

Will people here be rushing out to get a PS5 or will many of you be happy with your PS4 Pro and some of you might upgrade from the standard PS4 to the Pro instead of buying PS5.

There are almost 100 million PS4 units sold. God of War sold only 10 million copies. Great sales but out of 100 million its a drop in the ocean. I think we will see games launched on PS4 for a few more years. Its difficult to turn your back on the gigantic PS4 playerbase.

This argument also applies to the Xbox One X but I'd say its far more relevant to the PS4 playerbase given its size.

About a year and a half to two years after launch is the sweet spot for the likes of Argos etc selling off launch models cheap.

I got the ps4 about 18 months after launch for €215 with Killzone.

Upgraded to a pro when GameStop were doing a ridiculous offer.

My OG model at that point was sounding like a jet engine. Surprised it didn’t blow up tbh.

Edit... plus there’s generally very few games worth playing at launch never mind the ridiculous cost at that point. A couple of years later there’s sales, goty editions etc..

EoinHef

If the PS5 has full backwards compatibility with PS4 games the launch games wont matter much to a lot of people.

Ill be buying it day one of its lives up to the rumors and has backward compatibility.