24:34
It feels like we're just getting started with the Xbox Series X and S and the PS5. I'm not ready for PS6. This was one of the most popular comments on a short video we made the other day, and honestly, I can see why. Ready or not, I think the PS6 will come out, but even Sony doesn't know when right now. This is not a case where they say: "we do not comment on rumors and speculation." Their CEO officially stated that they have not yet set a release date. Now many are still pointing to 2027, but that's the big question right now. And we have n't even gotten to the really complicated stuff yet. How much will it actually cost? In a world where GameStop is asking $1,400 for the PS5 Pro, that's probably a lot. But I think the main question is not
when or how much, but what the PS6 will actually be like. I'm starting to think that the important console is not the successor to the PS5, but the continuation of this one. In February, we released a video called "Sony Can't Make a PS6." The basic idea was that in 2027, the PS5 would be 7 years old, the same amount of time as the Sony was publicly talking about its next generation with Project Amethyst, but a huge problem loomed on the horizon. In early 2026, the RAM crisis began to spiral out of control, and it made perfect sense to consider delaying the PS6 to allow the situation to stabilize. There have been reports that Sony is considering pushing the PS6 to 2028 or even 2029. And I said that this was the right decision. I mean, who really
needs a new console right now? I think most people would agree with me. It seems like the PS5 is finally gaining momentum. GTA 6 feels like this defining moment. That is, the generation has finally arrived. Meanwhile, we're seeing rumors that Nvidia's next generation of graphics cards is being significantly delayed due to AI developments and the RAM crisis. I just look around and think: who exactly is making Sony rush? Xbox? Over the past year, they've released big games like Forza, Halo, and Gears on the PS5. Of course, I don't know if we'll see many Xbox games on PlayStation in the future, but still, the PS5 was selling great in February, and the memory crisis was
very uncertain as to how long it would last and how severe it would be. It was quite logical to just wait. Waiting allows the market to hopefully stabilize. Unfortunately, this " let's hope" was too optimistic. It's just wild to see how much things have changed even in a year. First, it is clear that the RAM crisis is not a short-term problem. In July, the CEO of SK Hynix, one of the major memory suppliers, said he expected 2027 to be the worst year in the industry's history in terms of supply. He expects supply to lag behind demand long after 2030. The situation has continued to deteriorate throughout this year, and all the conversations I've
had with people in the industry point to one thing: there is no hope on the horizon. So while I do think Sony was initially considering delaying the PS6 to wait it out, and I personally still have some hope for that, I think the window of opportunity is now closed, because waiting at this point means releasing consoles when memory will be even more expensive than it is today. If 2026 has taught us anything, it's that it makes sense to buy things in advance, since their prices are likely to increase over time, not decrease. And to Sony's credit, they continue to support the PS5 quite well. I mean, just last week they released QSSR, a light-weight version of PSSR scaling with the PS5 Pro. This is designed specifically to work efficiently on the base PS5, and it
really makes a big difference. Even if it also serves as a convenient excuse to update your PS5's firmware to fix the pesky jailbreaks that are spreading. This is just a side benefit. Meanwhile, development on the PS6 continues. Rumors indicate that the main chip is already practically ready, and test samples are most likely already undergoing testing in Sony's lab. You can't force AMD to develop a custom chip for you without real money and a commitment of tens of millions of orders. It's not something you can say, "Oh, really, never mind." Uh, can I just pay you for all those chips you made, well, I don't know, in a few years or something? I will pay. Don't worry. "This is at
Bungie's expense." Oh, it's too early. Sorry. As for me, of course, it's possible that we'll have to wait a while see the PS6, but the train has already moved. At this stage, it is very difficult to apply the brakes. And to a large extent this is due to the fact that everything has changed very seriously on the Xbox side. Barely a week after our PS6 video, Phil Spencer left Xbox, and the whole mood changed. Asha Sharma took over, and this year we spent a lot of time covering topics like the Xbox reboot, the return of exclusives, and more. One of the main topics is Project Helix, the next- generation Xbox. At the GDC conference, the Xbox team shared the first details. It will also use a custom AMD chip, and the
first dev kits will ship from 2027. Now you don't have to rely on rumors about this. AMD's CEO has directly stated that the chip for Helix will be released on schedule in 2027. Asha recently said at an Xbox event that they are moving to a " family of devices" for the next generation and that "we will of course have a great console first, but we also know that a lot of gamers want to play on the go." I wink. Now, if you're willing to dive into the world of rumors for a moment, the Helix is supposedly going to be significantly more powerful than the PS6.
Approximately 40% difference in "raw" teraflops. I already mentioned this in a recent short video. It's not that simple. Teraflops are like horsepower in a car. Bigger is better, but if I put an F1 engine in a Prius, I'm unlikely to outrun Max Verstappen. And is greater productivity really important? I mean, the Xbox Series X is a little more powerful than the PS5, but you're unlikely to notice it in most games. And there is an almost direct analogy for such a difference in performance. This is an Xbox One X, and yes, it's been on my lap this whole time. On paper, it was 43% more powerful than the PS4 Pro it
competed with, and yes, it was better. Games usually ran at a higher resolution, and the difference was noticeable. So, maybe not huge, but it was definitely a better console. But it didn't matter. The PS4 still massively outsold the Xbox in sales, because while higher performance is always good, people don't buy consoles for the choice between 1440p and 1800p. The last few generations of PlayStation have been almost unstoppable compared to the Xbox, and a more powerful chip won't change that. What's important is that despite all the very, very many stupid decisions the PlayStation team has made, in the end, it's such an obvious choice for gamers, and Xbox has been trying to catch up for years. And besides, productivity doesn't
tell the whole story. When the PS4 was getting ready for release, there were persistent rumors that it would be more powerful than the Xbox One, and that's exactly what happened. But the Xbox's advantage was supposed to be that it had twice the RAM, which was true until the very last moment, when Sony increased the PS4's memory to 8GB, matching the Xbox One and gaining a complete advantage. A cheaper, more powerful console that was better at literally everything. To win, you need enough productivity and the real secret to success-the right price. The problem is that this time, getting the price right may simply be impossible. So, if the whole answer is " set the price right," then what exactly is the right price for the PS6? I mean,
the history of the PS5 is one of constant price increases. The PS5 Digital cost $399 at launch. Now it's $600. And that's nothing compared to the PS5 Pro. It started at $700 and now costs $900 at the recommended price. And even at that price, they are impossible to find in stock. If you go to GameStop, they're currently asking $1,400 for a used PS5 Pro, but only $1,330 if you have Pro member status. Sure, this is GameStop acting like GameStop, but there's a lesson here. People are willing to pay $1,000 or more for the PS5. More importantly, some people are ready. The RAM crisis has forced Sony to limit production depending on how much memory they can get their hands on. And GTA 6 will not start itself. You won't even be able to play GTA 6 on the "
PlayStation for the poor." I do n't think so. Okay, I just want everyone at home to know: I have my PS5 from the first batch, and I'm not going to upgrade it because I don't care. Okay, that was a joke. We're allowed to joke, right? No. So see what's the matter. Any prediction about how much the PS6 will cost is absolute guesswork at this point I doubt even Sony has decided on this yet. But I wouldn't be surprised if we saw a price tag close to a thousand dollars. Although we've seen Sony do this before. When the PS3 came out in 2006, adjusted for inflation, the 60 gigabyte model cost effectively a thousand dollars. Today, people are clearly paying a thousand dollars for a PS5 Pro. But while there are people willing to spend
big bucks on a console, it's definitely not the level of a hundred million units that PlayStation has sold over the past few generations. A thousand-dollar console is not the place to start a successful generation. That is, why would developers even create true next- generation games if only a fraction of PlayStation users will have what is essentially a PS5 Pro. Pro-er? But I barely know her. So, if the base PS6 is a console for a narrow circle of enthusiasts, at least until RAM prices stabilize, what's left? Well, maybe something like this. And no, not PS Portal itself, but imagine if it was actually good. That's good. Whoever says this is good is deceiving themselves, but the idea is sound.
The concept of this idea is sound. So, to be clear, I'm not talking about the rumors about an OLED version of PlayStation Portal supposedly coming soon. Portal itself is essentially just a streaming device, which is perfectly acceptable, but for anything else you need a PS5 or a cloud service. But that being said, it's selling pretty well, and I think it's obvious that a lot of gamers would want a portable PlayStation. Maybe we should call it, I don't know, PSP for short? Just thinking out loud. And who would have thought, rumors point to exactly that-a true portable PS6. So Sony was actually preparing the ground for this publicly.
It is assumed that it is designed so that games that support power saving mode can run on the portable PS6 without any problems. And given the huge success of the Switch and Switch 2, is it any wonder that Sony is considering creating another portable PlayStation? In many ways, this is also borrowed from the Xbox strategy. The bright spot of the current generation for them was the Series S-you know, the affordable one, well, that used to be affordable. The idea is that the portable PS6 will be equipped with 24 GB of RAM- double the amount in the Switch 2, and noticeably more than the 16 GB in the PS5. Of course, this isn't ideal for keeping the price down, but I think it's important for a true next- gen experience. The focus on a portable
device seems quite logical to me. After all, let's not forget that Sony sold a lot of PSPs, and although the Vita wasn't a huge success, there's no doubt that portable gaming is booming right now Still, even at a price of $500, Nintendo said they are now actually selling the Switch 2 at a loss. This is entirely possible when you own a console and can count on lifetime revenue from games and subscriptions to subsidize the hardware. There's no reason why Sony can't do this, at least to some extent. AMD already makes chips for gaming handhelds, so game support for PS4, PS5, and of course PS6 should be much more realistic. With the money they'll save by equipping it with a smaller chip, as well as less RAM and SSD than the full PS6. This should
easily offset the additional costs of the screen, battery, and other portable components. As for the cost of the portable PS6, again, it's hard to make predictions, but I'm willing to bet that it will be closer to the Switch 2 than the Xbox Ally X. I really, really hope so. So, here's what I would do if I were Sony. Release a full-fledged PS6, set any price, and a few years later release a budget model, the PS6 Slim. But the real focus should be on the portable version. Imagine marketing the portable as the regular PS6, and the big console as the PS6 Pro from the start. I think people would be willing to spend a lot more on a PS6 Pro than a boring old regular PlayStation.
The main thing is that games are developed first for the portable PS6, and then scaled to the PS6 Pro. Much like how current games need to take into account the capabilities of the Xbox Series S. And yes, I understand that everyone is angry about Sony killing physical games. So, what kind of nonsense is this? But here's the thing: for a portable device, I think most people will understand it. Or maybe they could bring back the UMD. Or, you know, Switch-style cards. Look, I can dream, right? So, the PS6 will likely arrive in 2027. How much will it cost? Hmm, a lot. But I think the real key to success is what the PS6 will actually look like. If they put everything on a thousand dollar console. Sure, they'll sell something, but it'll be a much
more niche generation, and that almost guarantees that the PS5 will be with us for a very, very long time. However, if they bet on a portable version, not as a younger sibling, but as the main PS6 console, I think they might have something going for them. But let me know if this is all just wishful thinking, and should Sony just stick with the PS5 for another half decade? Let me know in the comments below, and if you liked it, be sure to subscribe to the channel and click that bell. Sorry, friends, but I'm going to enjoy the PS penis alone. You can enjoy it with friends too. But it seems to me that this is mostly a single-player game.
Ideally. Wait, no. Maybe it's not really. Hold on. No, no. This.this makes perfect sense. Good? Yes, yes. Okay, I just want to make sure people don't misunderstand what I'm trying to say here. No. No one will ever get it wrong.
