nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

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

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

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?

[Deleted User]

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.

[Deleted User]

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.