New PS5 Specs

Truth be told, we got screwed this time around. If we be honest, we are not getting the visuals that most of us were expecting, the visuals are not as good as we were told they would be.

So, with this next-gen debacle we see an under-powered PS4 and a very under-powered XBOX ONE: i don't care about what we got for the price-point blah blah, the fact is we are not getting the visuals we were led to expect, both consoles are struggling to pull-off high-powered visuals effortlessly.

Driveclub proves my point, we see reasonable graphics quality but the game had to be scaled back to 30fps to achieve it. And other games that actually run at 60fps have hyper-compressed textures to achieve this, showing soft smudged surfaces lacking sharpness and realism, especially when compared to the PC versions of the same game.

Compromises are taking place by the developers in an effort to achieve 60fps on these consoles, and even then we are seeing hyper-compressed textures and a lack of resolution density in the polygons, so we need advice and input from gamers and pros and enthusiasts alike as to what the specs should be in the PS5 and next XBOX so that we can put this dismal saga well and truly behind us.

I will start the ball rolling with a general description of what i expect even though i'm not a spec geek...

1: 4K resolution at 60fps always achievable, and all while running full onscreen effects with maximum texture detail

2: No onscreen aliasing visible at all

3: Super-low compression ratios, at least half the amount of compression they're using now

4: 64gig GDDR5 RAM

5: New generation ATI graphics chip running at 1.4 gHz and with new native algorithm routines built-in on-chip

6: 8gig of auxilliary ESRAM

7: 2.1 gHz Hexacore New generation Jaguar CPU

8: 2 Terabyte SSD

9: $799

If anyone can add to this with more in-depth tech talk please go ahead and say so; in fact, tell Sony what they need to give us next time around to achieve our expectations. As far as i'm concerned we need the PS5 yesterday, not in 3 more damn years!!

And we know Microsoft won't make the same mistake and lose the spec war next time around, so hopefully they might listen to our feedback this time...

Lol at those specs and you are wanting those now, Jesus what is this? :D :D :D :D

OK, I want it to have: 8k resolution support, 1 TB of GDDR10 RAM, 10 TB SSD, next-next-next-gen Elephant CPU with 64 cores at 7 Ghz, NVIDIA GPU at 10Ghz, super energy efficiency. Games should be running at 8k at 240 frames per second in 4D. All for $200.

The console's slim revision better have a proper hologram feature.

A 2TB SSD alone cost $799 atm. Not to mention even the 980Ti can't achieve 60fps at ALL times at 4k resolution and that card is $600. Maybe in 10 years.

I think holograms are the next big thing when PS5 releases.

You left out the most important spec of all...

...Cupholders, we need cupholders with the future-gen.

@codec7: Or you could just enjoy playing video games. There have already been a number of quality titles this gen, and many more are coming. I'm sorry to hear you're so disappointed. The only advice I have to give is simply to try and let go of your preconceived expectations and GAME ON BABY.

fully agree with this. i don't know when so many gamers got so obsessed with meaningless numbers but it's a pretty sad trend. just enjoy the games

You people obviously don't realize just how cheap companies can purchase hardware components, especially when they buy in bulk. At least this time around another 4gig of GDDR5 ram would only have cost Sony another $25, and a slightly higher spec'd GPU would have maybe been about $35 more, so then these two things alone would have solved the issues which developers are having to tweak the **** out of the game engine to try and achieve 60fps with reasonable graphics. I would rather Sony had upped the ram and GPU spec slightly for minimal extra cost and just increased the retail price accordingly, then added the 1 terabyte HD and we would have only been paying another $100 but would have had noticeably better graphics, plus no-compromise storage-space. Too many ****-sticks making the decisions at these companies, that's the real problem!

Would still be way too expensive with your given specs, besides consoles aren't meant to cost $800,

@codec7: you can't be serious... how the heck are you a console gamer? if you want such specs you would need to build a $3000+ rig. the clincher was your $800 price point lol... i think ps4 has more than enough power under its belt. if you don't agree, say bye bye to console gaming and move on with your life. what nonsense.

Yes they are! What planet are you living on?? The PS3 debuted at retail for $1000 LOL. I don't think you know. Do i need to repeat myself? The PS5 is half the cost the PS3 was. So, if Sony spent another $25 to provide the PS4 with an extra 4gig ram, and upped the capabilities of the GPU for an extra $35, there would be no issues for the developers, we would be approaching PC visuals, but no, some fuckwit at Sony wanted to deprive us for some god forsaken reason, stupid perceived price-point; they are idiots!

This was meant to be the console to end all consoles, TRULY NEXT-GEN, and being honest, the expectations from gamers were high, and Sony could have ensured, actually guaranteed top-tier next-gen visuals for a few dollars more. My older friends see me gaming on my PS4 and they are not impressed at all, they see the same old shit we've been seeing for years already, but they are rightly expecting to see near CGI realism, especially in this day and age, because these days everything is whizz-bang wow, and graphics are mean't to be very near true-to-life, even non-gaming older adults expect onscreen visuals to look true to life now, so they are somewhat underwhelmed and quite unimpressed, saying... huh? That doesn't look all that impressive, looks no more impressive than the old Nintendo days quite frankly, just a tad more realism but nothing special, still plastic visuals, quite disappointing.

Thus, i am mad as hell. Like i said, we have to live with this shit another 4 years, 'average' garbage, you have to be kidding me Sony? How dare they suit their bottom-line over our reasonable expectations. All we're really seeing currently from the PS4 is a slight step-up from the XBOX 360, that's not acceptable, in fact, that's very fucking disappointing.

If everyone here were to be honest, the graphics are not what were were led to believe, but that's because Sony fucked us, and agreed with Microsoft on a price-point, those corrupt assholes clearly colluded, and to our detriment, and just to suit their pockets. They abandoned the primary objective, NEXT GEN VISUALS, Sony abandoned it, so **** themQ. I would rather give those wankers at Microsoft my money next time, knowing that i will get a decent controller and superior spec to win next time around, because you can bet your bottom dollar that Microsoft isn't gonna make the same mistake twice. This fiasco of Sony beating Microsoft's useless incompetent ass has brought shame on Microsoft, perceived and real.

While i'm here, the PS4 controller sucks shit! And... the battery time is atrocious. How could Sony make such idiotic incompetent decisions? One hour of wrenching with a hardcore shooter and my fingers and hand joints are literally aching and bent out of shape. How could they ****-up so badly on such an easy basic thing as the design of the controller? Did they not do any damn basic tests before finalizing this shit? It's a fucking joke, and don't tell me it isn't, because it is. But now go hold the XBOX ONE controller and there's a big sigh of relief. How can the monkey apes at Sony not have the common sense to design a hand controller properly for such an essential purpose, any hardcore wrenching with First Person shooters and my hands are aching? Fucking incompetence, never mind semantics, just call a spade a spade, fucking incompetence and pigheaded insolence. Never again Sony, never again. My first time ever buying a console from you, but NEVER AGAIN!!!

I stopped reading right there mate.

This is a good example of the degradation of the industry. Though many of the users aren't taking OP seriously, and they shouldn't, the unfortunate thing is that graphics whores like this represent a bigger part of the gaming community than you think.

Remember when 6th gen graphics finally nailed 3D graphics and they were no longer blocky but had the modern look we all know and love? Yeah, graphics could've stopped increasing then and I'd still be happy. Maybe if gamers started caring more about GAME DESIGN instead of GRAPHICS developers would make less shitty fucking games. **** people like you, seriously, you think Ocarina of Time needed those specs to be a masterpeice? How about Symphony of The Night? Or Super Metroid? Or Metroid Prime? Or God Of War? Or Halo Combat Evolved? Or Perfect Dark? Huh? Go **** yourself.

Instead of appreciating the amount of texture detail achievable at the sufficient 30FPS that the new hardware allows, or the smooth games that run at 60FPS with the amount of stuff going on that wouldn't have ever been possible in the past, lets just complain. It's people like OP who are never satisfied that are vermin to this industry. No words could explain the utter disgust and hatred I have for filth like this. Go watch a fucking movie if it isn't REALISTIC enough for you.

Edit: Didn't even read many other comments, this is directed only at the OP, offense intended

First off, lmao, secondly, if you obviously care about graphics sooooo much why are you playing on console?

You need to chill out. Big time. First of all, while swearing is allowed - within reason - your language in that last tirade is approaching Code of Conduct violation. Second of all - as was discussed on the other thread on this same topic (ahem) - you don't seem to have a good handle on programming and graphics technology and what it takes to render a game, in real-time, with CGI realism.

Let's try this on for size: if the PS4 is so awful, and it's just a matter of more power, how come PC exclusives don't have CGI realism? Because even with Titan X's the computational load of what you want is pushing it. You want 4k 60fps blah blah blah for 800 dollars (and not just the resolution and framerate, but CGI quality to boot!?!?), but even THAT isn't reasonable. Setting aside the fact that consoles flop at that price point, even an $800 console would fall so far off the mark from what you are expecting.

At the end of the day - your expectations were too high, you clearly didn't research the product before buying (any gameplay videos readily available online could have saved you from spending money on "such an inferior product"), and here you are basically screaming at your keyboard about how awful Sony is and how you want tech for $400 that you think you could get at $800 but really you could barely brush at $3,000. It doesn't make sense

@codec7: I don't know where you are from but where I'm from a PS3 costed 600$ when it came out and it didn't sold out. Too expensive compare to the X360 and of course the Wii came out not so long before and it didn't even had the chance to touch the shelves.

Every super expensive consol flopped hard.

If you're gonna complain about visuals & how consoles are such a disappointment, then just buy yourself a good PC & hog it to your TV if monitor isn't your thing.

@codec7: the only honest thing you have said is that the battery life on the ps4 controller is not very good. i agree. maybe a firmware of sorts will improve it... or another controller will be released down the line with better battery life. if not, live with it.

i think you have lost all sense of what it means to be a real gamer in how you put specs above all else. you are more concerned with numbers than games. you sound like a pc elitist through in through so i find it hard to believe you were ever a console gamer to begin with. you have also failed to realize what makes consoles special. the exclusive games that are in the pipeline on ps4 will be industry leading games and there will be no other platform to play them on. an extra 30fps or slight improvement to the visual fidelity would not make them any better. just to be clear, while most games can run at a higher frame rate and greater level of visual fidelity on a high end pc, not all do. in addition, regarding the price, you need to put the matter into perspective when comparing the cost of a high end pc to a ps4. you keep making apples to orange comparisons despite there is a $2000 difference in the price. you cannot gloss over what fantastic art design, storytelling, voice acting and overall polish can do for a game (that may be running on less powerful hardware). we are seeing cutting edge graphics on ps4 (character models in the order: 1886 and uncharted 4) that cannot be found even on high end pc's. you know why? because there are no exclusive pc games that fully take advantage of the hardware in the same way nor are there pc-specific developers with the budget of an uncharted game. in other words, there are no dedicated first party developers on pc that are pushing the envelope in the same way as sony's first party developers. the motion capture in uncharted 4 for example is second to none. if 4k/60 means so much to you, for your own sake, leave console gaming, throw down $3000 on a pc and call it a day (though i highly doubt that would make you any more happy than you are now).

As says Wikipedia... "The PS3 was released in the UK & Ireland, the rest of Europe, and Australia & New Zealand on March 23, 2007 with a retail price of £425 €599."

WHICH WAS $1000 Australian!!! And $800 US!!!

The GPU in the PS4 is costing Sony $74, and the ram is costing them $56. Just imagine what ATI would have given them for double that $148, and then if Sony doubled the ram $106. That means for another $130 we could have had graphics equivalent to a PC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Like my initial point explained, seeing as the PS3 came-out at $1000 and that sold by the truck-load, then this time around we would have been more than happy to pay $630 instead of $500, and thus if Sony had used their useless fucking brain, for a little extra money we could have had truly next-gen visuals, but now we're stuck with this mediocre fucking garbage for another 3 years because Sony and Microsoft agreed on a price-point, and TO OUR DETRIMENT!! Are you people smoking meth in here or something??? None of your replies make any sense at all. If graphics don't matter THEN WHY THE **** DID YOU PURCHASE THE PS4, why aren't you still using the PS1 bitch!!!! Graphics don't matter, right??? Idiots!!! I'm so sick to death of hearing people talk out of their useless fucking ass!!

@codec7: I know your conversion is right but the reality is, UK and Australia pay a lot , a lot more for what we pay. a PS3 was 600$ CAD when it came out in 2006 in Canada. Our money was on par with the US and so we didn't pay more. Even if the UK pound is worth more than a US$ they pay a lot more for their product because it cost more to get it there ... same thing with Australia.

No the PS3 didn't sell very well until the 4th or 5th revision of the model when the slim came out. Before that the first model costed too much compare to the 360 even if it could play PS2 games and Blueray for a fraction of the price of a Blueray player back in those days. Sony removed the PS2 playback and removed some USB port and stuff to save cost. Then they put out the slim and then everything changed for Sony.

the PS360 lived since at least 2004 and still alive nor ... I bet the PS4/X1 will have a long life too. It seems only Nintendo kept the 4/5 years schedule.

Well the PS4 isn't that much better than the PS3 to me, we won't have that much of a jump in graphics for now on... and even then ... The difference between the first year PS3 again last year PS2 games ... there isn't that much difference. In a few years we will really see what the PS4/X1 can do.

Also ... the PC still play the same crappy games as consol have so ... their so superior graphics and FPS mean nothing, polishing a turd is still a turd.

PS5 better have a holodeck or I'm Doug and I'm outta here!

I don't think we got screwed. Although is it too much to ask for a game to run at 1080p/60fps? It is 2015....

Edit// Nevermind, guess I really don't need to be mean. I hope you have a good life because what you are stressing over is ridiculous.

Although you were being sarcastic, i still deemed it humour! Yes, i laughed when i red <that's how it should be spelled) that because it was genuinely funny!

FTR i've just been trying to make my point because i reckon we got stiffed, i'm not trying to disrespect the situation in this forum. Gamespot has been quite tolerant and mature about my bad language, so kudos and respect to Gamespot and the moderators, thus i will back-off and tone it down and won't make a habit of it, but i am pissed about what has happened. I had such high hopes for the PS4, i wasn't quite expecting CGI, but Sony had a good opportunity to significantly up the ante 7 LONG FUCKING YEARS AFTER PS3!!! But really, we barely moved beyond PS3 and XBOX 360 graphics, no wonder i'm pissed!! And there's no excuse for this debacle, that's why i'm fuming.

In a nutshell, to sum-up... "For a little more money, if Sony wasn't so reticent and reserved about their approach, and showed a bit more balls, we could have had noticeably better graphics for minimal hit on our pocket. They fucked-up, and Microsoft fucked-up even more!" But how did they both ****-up? They colluded, that's how!! < Assholes!

Here's hopping the developers are able to compensate for this circumstance and extract the PS4's full potential and give us slightly better visual candy in the near future, but i'm still pissed!

Rant finished. Back to sanity! No more swearing.

PS: Anyone who thinks "The Order 1886" has got supreme graphics is deluded, you need glasses! Can't you see how it is pre-rendered static stuff with no wow-factor? They tried a new technique but they didn't fool me, it's a bluff. Either i need a new TV or you people need glasses. The graphics on COD: Ghosts looked better than "The Order 1886"! Go look at the scene in COD:Ghosts, in space with the space station, even those graphics look better than the crap in "The Order 1886" < not to mention that it's a stagnant crap game anyway. I stopped playing it by level 2, it's sitting on my shelf and i won't be playing it, i'll be selling it. I don't tolerate bad game design these days, there's no excuse for it. I should have known better when i saw the retail games store piled high to the roof with second-hand copies of it within only a few days of it's release! Heads-up, the reviews at Metacritic are a scam, it's rigged! That website is a scam.

I'm playing God of War Ascension at the moment, tried some other PS3 games before that and was almost shocked how they looked. Crysis with its sub HD resolution, Prototype 2 ( play this after Infamous: SS, good LORD!) and finally GoW:A. The graphical jump PS4 made is enough to keep me satisfied and Infamous SS made even my HC hermit brother gawk at the graphics. Your expectations for this gen were out of this world man.

@codec7: no one here ever said the order: 1886 is a great playing game so your argument doesn't say anything.. however, it pushes some incredible visuals, there is no denying that. you are underplaying the beauty there... you will be hard pressed to find better looking games on pc, be it the environments or the character models. and why would you say microsoft and sony colluded? do you think microsoft would accept being on the shitty end of the stick if they knew that sony's specs would one up them? how about their online-only business strategy which burned them once they realized sony would have nothing to do with their warped vision? it is obvious neither party had any clue what their plans were. as usual, you are FAR off the mark with your theories.

Thank you for enjoying my post. :)

I was shooting more for comedy than any type of jaded, cynical type attitude you see around here.

Regarding the other stuff, I feel ya man. To each their own I say! :P

The thing is the jumps in gfx back them where actually big enough to add much visual stimulation and feel like your playing something new each console release until now.

But I'm not going to get mad about it, I will still enjoy games like witcher 3 MGS5. Im hoping FF15 is going to feel at least somewhat as revolutionary as FF7.

@codec7: Man what the hell , you want a 799$ console ?

Do you know one of the biggest reasons PS3 sales lacked last generation ? Yes , its price.

People that living in high salaries countries should understand that there are too many countries out there with low salaries. And dont come up with the " small markets are irrelevant sales wise " because if you add 5-6 small markets all together .. it makes one big one ... then if you add all small markets together you easily can have some tens of millions of consoles.

There many european countries with salaries between 250$ to 580$ per month basic salary. Then in Asia is the same thing more or less. Hell in America there are countries with such salaries or lower ( Argentina / Brazil etc ).

And you asking for a 800$ price ? You want even worse results than PS3 so you can have 4k and 2TB SSD ? Naaah , ill pass the idea even if i agree with your statement of PS4/X1 feel underwhelming a bit.

@codec7: LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL wait for 2022 for PS5.

Best reply in this entire thread. You just made me realize why Sony and Microsoft had to do it at a price-point, and now i can be at peace and enjoy my PS4.

Lmao.

So much unjustified anger in one thread.

OK, I want it to have: 4K resolution support. 64gbs of GDDR5 RAM. 1 TB SSD, next gen Jaguar CPU with 4 cores at 2.1gHz. ATI GPU at 1.4gHz and new generation low-level Mantle API, 4gig auxiliary SDRAM. Dedicated processor on-chip for anti-aliasing not affecting main GPU performance. All games guaranteed to run at 60fps in 2D with low-compression and high-resolution textures/polygons. All for $999.

That will be totally doable in 3 years time; then all of you will be saying... Wow! Wow, look at that, the graphics, sooo coool, amazing! And then in 3 years time when it comes, i will be in here reminding you that you reckon good graphics don't matter LOL...

Good graphics matter to me lol, that's one of the reasons I bought the thing. You buy a PC if you want 4K, be prepared to spend some serious cash though.

The ones in here who reckon we are getting much better graphics than the previous PS3/XBOX 360, maybe you need to look again. The specs on the PS4 are light-years beyond the previous generation consoles, but then as i've been saying, the graphics we are getting are not a whole lot better, so something is wrong with this situation. The developers have had 2 years now and still no improvement on PS4, so something is definitely wrong. Take a look at the following Youtube video and look how the PS4 and XBOX ONE are barely showing much increase over the PS3 and XBOX 360...

Youtube > "GTA 5 Graphics Comparison - PS4 / Xbox One / PS3 / Xbox 360"

That much GDDR5 alone would exceed $799.... Not to mention the rest of that nonsense you posted... You need a reality check...

It was never meant to be a total overhaul, try again.

@nyadc: This nonsense you posted shows you have no idea what you're talking about. Sony is paying $74 wholesale for the current 8gig ram in the PS4. That means $296 if they were to put-in 64gig of it. And because 64gig would constitute a bulk-buy of sorts, then Sony would probably only end-up paying $275; but then in 3 years time when the PS5 comes out, the price for 64gig GDDR5 will have dropped to roughly $199 wholesale. So we see that you are too hasty in your comments and not thinking properly before you reply. Now remember, 3 years from now all the components will be much cheaper so then add $75 for 4gig auxiliary SDRAM and we have $275 for all the ram. Then $180 for the GPU and $150 for the CPU and we're at $605. Add $250 for the SSD and $150 for everything else and we're at the $999 mark. Totally doable! Do your sums. We can buy a Panasonic or LG Blu-Ray player today for $50... Capiche?? Such a player involves ram, cpu, gpu, motherboard, powersupply, optical-drive, chassis blah blah... we only pay $50 and yet both the retailer and manufacturer still make a profit... DO YOU UNDERSTAND NOW??? The profit margins on things are HUGE. The manufacturer buys bulk components and cheap as chips, dig me? Forget your faulty brainwashed thinking, you're a sheep, use your brain! There is no reason why in 3 years time when hardware components have reduced significantly again in price that we can't have a full-blown PS5 for $999. Wake-up!

throwing more RAM that does little to performance yet retaining that shitty jaguar CPU that will hold back any competent GPU ?

@codec7: 64gb of ram is beyond useless for a purely gaming purpose. The reason "some" pc have so much more ram than the 8th gen console is that pc uses software that can "benefit" from it photoshop, video editing etc.

The ps4 is 0% bottlenecked by ram its bottlenecked firstly by the gpu (most important part for gaming) secondly by the cpu but not as much.

If you care so much about graphics you should think about building a pc PC & A/V Hardware fyi if you actually want 4k now you're going to be spending thousands!

Here are some video one ram enjoy also a great youtube channel for learning about pc.

Well good! By the looks of it all we need is a slightly more capable GPU and some added SDRAM for good measure on-chip, then double the GDDR5 memory to 16gig and Sony will be able to give us 4K at 60fps easily and for a low price. Surely they could have done that this time around and we would have been smokin hot already for true next-gen, and for not much extra dollars... Arrgghhhh, stuff you Sony and MicrosoftQ!!

Ideally it should run the typical TV's native resolution @ 60 fps.

But lets be honest, no one will buy an expensive console, and most people who buys Consoles don't care or don't know about specs.

I would like a decent quad core processor. I would like around 16 gigs of stacked Ram. A decent GPU, and a 2 TB drive, although mechanical is the most realistic one.

An optical drive, MUCH better sound output, and a much improved network infrastructure.

Fact is that no console maker will be willing to take a huge financial hit from making the hardware, which they will struggle to make back in the first 4 years of its lifecycle.

We will likely never see a truly powerful console again, and I suspect that there is a large likelihood that we will simply see consoles as a service, streaming content running off the TV you might have (or phone, what not) With the TV able to connect to a controller. A future I fear tbh. But expecting a console to manage to rival a PC? nah not likely again, Hurt both MS and Sony last time, so it would be stupid of them.

It all depends when the PS5 is coming out. The PS4 came out in 2013 and is using a 2009 GPU. so if the PS5 comes out in say... 2023, we could assume it will be using a 2019 model GPU. Still 4 years behind.

Maybe the "Steam" consoles will offer better graphics than this garbage. The "Steam" consoles have the latest hardware.

BTW, Sony in a recent interview admitted that the world is not yet ready to accept streaming/downloading only, so the PS5 console is a definite, but after that the next consoles will be streaming devices. Sony will have a mega supercomputer at their end sending everything in real-time to our TVs while we use the controller.

You need like SLI 980tis and a bad ass processor to get 4k/60fps... More like a massively more capable GPU.

Better not bother, this guy is clueless + he has too much money to be wanting a 1000$ console.

The industry is losing focus and the people are losing intelligence. Idiocracy and a full on dumb down in terms of upgrades at inflated price increases is in full effect over the last 9 or so years.

No, hes a troll.