Topic: PS5 Rumour and Speculation Thread

@JohnnyShoulder I think the chances of a Pro will depend more on the power of the PS5 and, to a degree, what MS do next. 8k gaming I think is unrealistic in consoles for the next 5yrs at least. 8k is 4x 4k and 16x 1080p. Unless some technology comes out that really boosts GPU performance (get more out of the floating point instruction than they do now) or they can build GPU's with much more power relatively cheaply, I can't see 8k being targeted by consoles for a while.

The jump up from full HD requires roughly a 4x jump in GPU to get 4k and would need a 16x jump to hit 8k. The X at 6tflops isn't enough to do 4k consistently and I wouldn't be surprised if the PS5 is around 8tflops. That maybe adequate for most games - not at 'ultra' settings but at decent settings to do 4k so in theory, you may need 32tflops for 8k - 4x 8tflops to give 4x the resolution. You may need a lot vRAM too.

I think its much more likely that we will see higher frame rates - frame rates greater than 60fps rather than increases to resolution. With HDMI 2.1, you can get 4k/120 HDR and Game VRR (Freeync 2.0), the TV's should be able to cope with any 'frame rate' smoothly - not just 30/60fps. Games could target 80 or even 100fps or unlocked between 80 and 100fps with no 'judder or screen tear because the frame rate always matches the screen's refresh rate.

I wouldn't be surprised though if the PS5 is looking to deliver 4k/60 in those games that are 30fps on current hardware. Maybe games like CoD could have an 'unlocked' frame rate and rely on VRR or capped to 60fps option for older TV's but I think they will look more at targeting 60fps to have that edge (as well as more consistent 4k) over the X. IF and its a big IF Sony feel the need to make a Pro - either because some games can't do full 4k/60 (as games do seem to need more resources over time) or because MS are offering (upto) 4k/120 with its 'next box', then Sony could make a PS5 Pro to deliver a higher standard 4k visual and higher frame rates. As you know, graphics are not just resolution - but a combination of multiple visual settings of which resolution is just one of those. It may be that the PS5 may still have to settle for dynamic scaling and 'medium/high' visual settings, limitations on draw distances etc that a 'Pro' boost could improve without necessarily needing to go above 4k.

As games now are offering 'enhanced' visual modes, the PS5 could for example be delivering 'enhanced' visual modes with dynamically scaling 1600-1800p but on a Pro, these are full 4k and the 4k mode instead of running at 50-60fps, now runs at 100-120fps. It makes more sense to me than looking to make a 8k 'PS5 Pro' in the next 4-5yrs - assuming we see a PS5 in the next year or two so a Pro 3yrs later.

Just get rid of the touch pad and the light in the controller and I'll probably buy a PS5 anyway. Next generation I might hop on the train a bit later, though. Just wait until a price drop or maybe even an updated version.

I kinda regretted buying the PS4 this early. The later models (2014) had better build quality. And I'm probably going to have to buy a new TV first to really enjoy the PS5 graphics probably.

I care about the quality of life things, like controller durability and such, a lot. Graphically I'm okay with whatever, as long as most multiplats get released on it.

And I think @themcnoisy also made a good point. I'm going to need to watch for whatever they're doing in the games department. Right now I trust them delivering quality games, though.

Still feel like talking about PS5 is a bit premature. Around 2014/15 I thought for sure we'd be seeing a new console in 2018 or 2019 but now I'm thinking 2020 or maybe even 2021. The PS4 has just now started to really hit its stride as far as high quality games that aren't remasters, and it has more on the way. There's also the fact the console saw it's biggest year ever in terms of hardware shifted in 2017. While I expect that will slow down over the next few years, I don't think the drop off will be so great that Sony has to panic and release the PS5 earlier than it wants to. I guess we'll see.

@Gamer83 My take is that it all depends on how the XboneX does. If it starts to surge and eat away some of the market share, then Sony will probably pull the trigger and push the development of PS5 sooner. If OneX continues to struggle, then I agree that Sony can take their time.
Personally I’m rooting for a couple more years. Like @Kidfried , I would need to get a fancy HDR 4K TV first, and I need a little time before I make that investment anyways, and hoping the price of the TVs drops beforehand.
Within the next 1-2 yrs, I do think I might make the smaller investment into the PS4Pro for the sheer fact of getting the boosted performance enhancement, but I don’t know. I just love my vanilla PS4 so much as is!

I too would need get a new tv to experience hdr and 4k and would probs be after i get a next gen console. Currently the improvements that the X and Pro have aren't enough to entice me to buy one (a console and tv).

@BAMozzy @JohnnyShoulder @Th3solution @Gamer83 @Kidfried

I believe that once cheap 4k TVs have lower input lag they will easily outstrip full hd tvs then we are in business! My 4k tv is terrible really, it looks great in 4k hdr but my tv cant cope and starts skipping frames and stuff, its a strange one for sure. I often end up dropping back to 1080p without hdr. Its better in 4k no doubt but I would much rather the next gen of consoles has no pop in which is seemingly in every 3d game I own and does my head in!

Thats next gen for me - no pop in and limited aliasing all at 4k!

@themcnoisy Yes, that's exactly why I'm holding off. Buying a reasonably priced 4K tv until now... you're still kind of an early adopter. We'll probably see the really good ones release shortly, hopefully!

I don't care much about 4K to be honest myself, but HDR is something I am really hyped for.

And pop-in is such a good criticism. At this point in time I'm getty pretty tired of it. In some games it's just so bad. I've been playing Mafia 3 recently and...

Well, just look at the gif (https://gfycat.com/gifs/detail/OblongSpitefulCrayfish). I didn't make it, but it has happened to me as well.

I think any new reasonably priced 4k tv should be ok these days. Personally i wouldn't go for anything in the budget range of models.The early ones were a bit problematic for gaming. Apparently HDMI 2.0 is the thing to look out for support 60 fps.

@JohnnyShoulder I only use my TV to use the PS4 on (don't even have a TV subsccription), so find it hard to justify anything above the 400-450. I just checked and prices have become a lot better over the past few months.

Who knows, I might buy one soon then. I still need a lot of new electronics in general, so we'll see when.

@Gamer83 You say games are hitting their stride where as I see games as being to big, too complex and even limited by the the current generation of consoles. Game development is being held back because the current consoles have such weak and lame CPU's. Games like AC:Unity flopped on console because the CPU was too weak to handle the density of the AI in the game and therefore had bottlenecking at the CPU which in turn affected the frame rate. Just Cause 3 struggled on console because of the physics based destruction and all those explosions were too much for the weak CPU to cope with and thus bottlenecked and resulted in poor frame rates.

We are also entering the 4th year of 4k now too and the momentum is gaining all the time. Games are built to 4k standards and have been for years yet we still don't have a PS console for the 4k era. Don't try and tell me the Pro is because that, at best, is a 1440p console - a half way step. All the games you can mention are having to be compromised to run on any Playstation - inc Exclusives. Naughty Dog wanted to bring Uncharted 4 out at 60fps - but couldn't. Even then it does have a few minor issues with pop-in and a bit of frame rate drops (particularly in the market shoot out scene). Infamous was also looking at 60fps (can't hit that consistently with a Pro either) but the bottlenecks in CPU prevented that. Look at how many games have to use Dynamic Scaling and unlocked frame rates just to run with a modicum of consistency. That is indicative of the consoles being under-powered for the current market.

If games were 'hitting' their stride as you say, then they would be running at the optimum standards the console offers without compromise. Just because we are seeing a lot of good games in development doesn't mean that the consoles themselves are just hitting their stride. Games are already to big, too complex etc to run on the limited hardware - hence we get games that can't hit Full HD consistently or locked frame rates. Devs have to use 'dynamic scaling, chequerboard rendering etc just to get their games working adequately. That's after scaling back on resolution, capping frame rates at 30fps, scaling back on visual settings etc from their original vision etc.

Even a PS5 I doubt would deliver all the games at the level to which developers are building the games. I bet some won't run at a 4k/60 with max settings but at least they won't need to scale them right down to 900p/30 with low-medium settings....

All the while, more and more people are upgrading to 4k TV's. I agree that the Xbox One X is also having to compromise on games before you bring that up but its not compromising as much as other consoles. Its better placed to deliver 4k than Sony are. Its not about the 'past' or how well they have done, its about bringing the present to their audience. Name 1 AAA developer that isn't building games to 4k standards? As much as I am looking forward to some of Sony's exclusives, I would much prefer to play them at 4k/60 than 1440/30 - the way the Devs probably built them to be before reducing them down to fit on the consoles.

Anyway, the point still stands the the current gen are holding back devs and limiting their design choices, having to compromise a lot and delivering 'inconsistent' (visual and frame rate) games. That is indicative of the need for a new generation - let alone the fact that 4k is growing much faster than HD did.

@Kidfried Sorry about the rushed post, i was coming to the end of my lunch break and had to quickl post something.

By the time the next gen machines come out you will most likely be able to get a decent 4k hdr tv for that price.

My current Sony tv was about £650 - £700 RRP, paid less than that as i got a good deal as a new model was being ushered in. My previous tv was an LG whic probs cost £350. Can't see me going back to that price range as the Sony is so much better in every way. Everyone comments on how good the picture is and its not even 4k.
@BAMozzy It does feel that Sony and MS cheaped out with some of the innards for the PS4 and XBO. But they both probs had a price point to aim. And with Sony that was really important for them to come out with a relatively low price point as they made that mistake with the PS3 with the Blu Ray drive.

@JohnnyShoulder Post didn't feel rushed to me at all, haha. I'm not saying this as a fanboy, but Sony TV's really are my favourite. The contrast and the depth of the colors on the TV's are much better than most other brands.

I have a Samsung telly myself; it's fine, but it just never blew my mind like that.

@JohnnyShoulder You have to remember that in 2013 we were in a financial crisis. Analysts were predicting the death of consoles and the fact that in dark, economic times, the one thing that suffers most is 'leisure'. People who are struggling aren't going to spend £400 on a 'leisure' device when they have bills to pay, food to put on the table, unsure if they will have a job that can even pay for the basics let alone a 'console' for 'leisure'.

Both Sony and MS had to do something though as the PS3/XB360 wouldn't play all the games in development - games like Watchdogsm Batman Arkham Knight, Witcher 3, Division etc all due out in the next year or so.

They couldn't invest and build a console that may well have been £500+ (not including Kinect, Camera but a 'console' with controller) to deliver Full HD, 60fps but they also had to ensure that the console represented enough of an upgrade - at least visually - to even stand a chance of selling. As such, bith really scrimped on the CPU knowing that by at least going a bit bigger on the GPU, the visual difference from 720p to 900/1080p as well as the more impressive lighting, reflections etc, higher polygon counts, more particles etc would look 'flashy' compared to the games we were playing. By cutting right back on the CPU, essentially using a CPU for 'mobile' devices, they could at least make PS3/XB360 games look like 'next' gen visually - even if they had to scale back on frame rate performance.

Both Sony and MS knew they had to make a iterative hardware at some point - to keep up with the games. That also shows that they knew they had to make the PS4/XB360 with limitations and that they certainly weren't built to last the duration of the predecessors. Sony also knew the market was going to become more complicated with commercially viable 4k TV's releasing months later and VR likely to hit during this phase. MS maybe forgiven for not knowing 4k was that close or VR for that matter as they don't make either TV's or VR but Sony turned up at CES just a month or so after the PS4 launched with a range of 4k TV's that launched a few months later.

I know that maybe not many here have 4k TV's and are OK with the games not even delivering the full HD and solid performance. However for us with 4k TV's, and I have owned 1 for nearly 4yrs now, the PS4 (and XB1 especially) require so much upscaling to fit on a 4k screen. A 1080p game on a 4k screen requires the same upscaling as a 540p game would on a 1080p TV. That kind of visual performance makes it like playing a PS2 game on a full HD TV. The PS3, at around 600-720p is equivalent to a PS4 Pro on a 4k screen but with PS2 equivalent visual settings. The X is 'technically' better than the XB1 on a 4k screen because at least the games require less upscaling to 4k than the XB1 needs to hit 1080p.

I don't know anyone that would prefer to play say Last of Us 2 at PS2/PS3 visual standards by choice on their PS4 and if a PS5 was available that delivered not only full HD and 60fps, they would prefer to play on that. Chances are, when I come to play it on my Pro (if the PS5 isn't out), I will have to make do with sub 1440p resolution, lower quality visual settings than a 'true' 1440p game should have and make do with 30fps. That's the equivalent to a 4k TV owner, that's how much upscaling is needed to fit the screen properly. Those PS4 owners with 1080p may be alright with 900-1080p visuals - not much upscaling, textures and settings built and set for HD, maybe not overly happy with 30fps but its better than nothing. Happy to put up with declining visual standards in general (lower resolutions, lower visual settings with decreasing draw distances etc) because at least the games are still playable on the console - even if they are nowhere near as good as the devs made them to be. The mentality is like saying we don't need blurays and a bluray player because we have a DVD player and the films are still releasing on DVD.- don't need 5.1 because they have 'stereo' and that's 'good' enough.

Seriously, if you play in 4k HDR, then you want 'every' game in 4k SDR. If you play at 60fps, 30fps feels slow and cumbersome, less responsive and can take a while to acclimatise - then you play at 60fps and it feels so much better

Heres a thought. Bear with me here.

4k tv has 4×1080p screens -

You could literally buy a 60 inch tv and have a quadrant for each player for coop and you can play all online games this gen as couch coop.

Thats a selling point surely.

@themcnoisy but how powerful would the console have to be to run 4x instances of the same game at the same time? Or alternatively how well optimised must the game be? Even Mario Kart drops to 30fps with 3 or more players.

Not worth it considering coach co-op just isn't that popular, especially 3 or more payers.

@themcnoisy A game like Mantis Burn Racing - which is Native 4k and offers co-op, will split the game down into 4 x 1080p for local multi-player. You do have to sacrifice 60fps though if you play 3 or 4 player local MP.

Personally I have NO interest in couch co-op at all - pointless for me and I would rather all the 'power' going to make the full screen 4k image as awesome as possible at 60fps preferably - not have to make sacrifices as each 'screen' has its own viewpoint and calculations. A simple thing like a explosion would need to calculated from up to 4 different viewpoints, all the physics from each perspective etc. Its virtually running the game at up to 4x albeit with decreasing visual quality - not just resolution either - bit shadow quality, ambient occlusion, lighting, anti -aliasing etc. Its why a game like Mantis Burn Racing can't run 4x1080p screens at 60fps and has to drop down to 30fps to use the extra 16.6ms time for all the extra calculations its needing to do and can save time by lowering the quality a bit in some areas knowing the size is reduced too. On a 60" TV each screen is 30" and I bet most don't sit a lot closer to compensate.

Of course if its in the interest of the game, the PS5 could offer more 4x1080p couch co-op games and with a decent CPU, may not have to compromise on the frame rates either

@Kidfried I always thought Sony tellys were too expensive for me but it has certainly opened my eyes. Certainly the best TV I've owned

@BAMozzy Never been to keen on split screen myself either. Always preferred the full screen couch multiplayer games like sports, fighting games (Tekken, Mortal Kombat, etc). And Bomberman

@JohnnyShoulder @BAMozzy @kyleforrester87

Ok then how about this;

You can play all this gens games on 1 PS5 but it has 2 hdmi ports so you can set up 2x tvs next to each other!

Give me a job Sony you would all be gazillionaires with me in charge!

@themcnoisy but.. 1 PS5 is still doing all the work, same problem. Are you thinking?

Edit: although you did mention this gens games so more likely perhaps!

@themcnoisy You mean like the old skool lan multiplayer sessions that used to happen, but minus the multiple consoles?

Sorry to rain on your parade, but i don't see thay happening.

I think all that is fading away which is why you don't much split screen options in games anymore. Maybe on PC but i don't remember the last i heard of someone doing that.

Plus it doesn't sound that convenient having to lug another tv round to someone else's house. TV screens are big enough these days i don't really see the need to add another one into the mix.